Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 10:39 AM Mar 2019

Jury Finds Roundup Caused Cancer


In the continued attack on the courts and other institutions of law, a fairly mundane evidentiary ruling and an admonishment from a judge about that prior ruling was, among the DU legal brain trust, proof-positive of the generalized corruption and untrustworthiness of the federal courts:

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/10142274480

A few weeks ago, despite a mixed bag of rulings for or against either side, as is normal in litigation, an attorney for the plaintiffs in the primary Monsanto RoundUp litigation decided to violate a pre-trial ruling, and was rebuked by the judge for doing it.

This, naturally, meant the judge was bought-off, the fix was in, and the usual litany of accusations intended to erode and undermine confidence in the rule of law generally.

The silence from those quarters is deafening, now that the jury has ruled on the first phase of the trial - causation:

https://abc7news.com/society/sf-jury-rules-monsantos-roundup-caused-sonoma-co-mans-lymphoma/5206462/

San Francisco jury rules Monsanto's Roundup caused Sonoma Co. man's lymphoma

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/bayer-shares-slide-after-latest-roundup-cancer-ruling-idUSKCN1R02O3

Tuesday’s unanimous jury decision in San Francisco federal court was not a finding of Bayer’s liability for the cancer of plaintiff Edwin Hardeman. Liability and damages will be decided by the same jury in a second trial phase beginning on Wednesday.

...

Bayer had claimed that jury was overly influenced by plaintiffs’ lawyers allegations of corporate misconduct and did not focus on the science.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria called such evidence “a distraction” from the scientific question of whether glyphosate causes cancer. He split the Hardeman case into two phases: one to decide causation, the other to determine Bayer’s potential liability and damages.

Under Chhabria’s order, the second phase would only take place if the jury found Roundup to be a substantial factor in causing Hardeman’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The jury found that it was on Tuesday.


25 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jury Finds Roundup Caused Cancer (Original Post) jberryhill Mar 2019 OP
Killing us softly...for profit. Guilded Lilly Mar 2019 #1
So true - Roundup is sprayed on many crops pre harvest womanofthehills Mar 2019 #9
They're advertising Roundup like crazy on TV now. lagomorph777 Mar 2019 #2
They always advertise heavily in springtime. nt. Mariana Mar 2019 #20
Good malaise Mar 2019 #3
Lock who up? jberryhill Mar 2019 #4
No one but one can hope that yjose who profit from murder for profit malaise Mar 2019 #5
I'll never understand why Bayer bought Monsanto FakeNoose Mar 2019 #6
I'm not taking a side, but maybe... NeoGreen Mar 2019 #7
I require a lot of pedants jberryhill Mar 2019 #24
I only notice... NeoGreen Mar 2019 #25
There was a Roundup ad on cilla4progress Mar 2019 #8
I'd hardly trust juries to draw scientific conclusions. Ron Obvious Mar 2019 #10
What would be the right way? jberryhill Mar 2019 #11
Peer-reviewed Scientific Journals Ron Obvious Mar 2019 #12
+1 juries have problems with science andym Mar 2019 #13
The same kind of journals that push the climate change nonsense? Dr. Strange Mar 2019 #14
Independent peer-review tipped the scale in the former school groundskeeper case Brother Buzz Mar 2019 #19
I'd like to see something else tried. Hard to see how that will happen. eallen Mar 2019 #15
I'm afraid I agree with you Cal Carpenter Mar 2019 #23
Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2019 #16
Who should I sue for the cancer I had? Archae Mar 2019 #17
I was in Lowe's a week ago and there were huge displays of Roundup. panader0 Mar 2019 #18
But there's money to be made. Mariana Mar 2019 #21
I was just at Lowes and they had LOTS of Roundup and knock-offs of Roundup. spanone Mar 2019 #22

womanofthehills

(8,925 posts)
9. So true - Roundup is sprayed on many crops pre harvest
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 11:48 AM
Mar 2019

just to make sure we don't miss our daily Roundup dose.

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)
2. They're advertising Roundup like crazy on TV now.
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 10:53 AM
Mar 2019

They must have gigantic cesspools full of it to get rid of before it's banned (by the next administration, of course).

FakeNoose

(33,598 posts)
6. I'll never understand why Bayer bought Monsanto
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 11:08 AM
Mar 2019

Now they own all the liability this company created with their terrible products. Bayer was actually a good and profitable company, but this will take them down the tubes.

NeoGreen

(4,031 posts)
7. I'm not taking a side, but maybe...
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 11:08 AM
Mar 2019

...the "those quarters" crowd differentiated between a decision by a judge and a decision by a jury.

It is possible that the judge was "bought off", so to speak, and yet the jury was not and found causation without undue/outside/judicial influence.

Plus, I see it as pedantic to say that a finding of roundup causation <=> a finding that Bayer is liable.

Apparently, all that we are waiting for is the jury's assessment of the $ value of that liability.

However, in parting I will submit that maybe this post is my Exhibit A on how to be pedantic.

cilla4progress

(24,978 posts)
8. There was a Roundup ad on
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 11:31 AM
Mar 2019

Joy Reid's podcast recently.

Some also have slightly kinky ads for IKEA bedroom furniture (Kama sutra)?

New thing, these ads on MSNBC podcasts. Other podcasts have had them for awhile.

 

Ron Obvious

(6,261 posts)
12. Peer-reviewed Scientific Journals
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 12:07 PM
Mar 2019

Which juries could then use to award damages.

Ideally, this sort of research would be conducted in universities, but I agree that the corporate influence on university research is far too great.

Still, juries aren't competent to draw these sorts of conclusions.

andym

(5,458 posts)
13. +1 juries have problems with science
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 12:29 PM
Mar 2019

because lawyers for both sides try to get pliable citizens who understand science poorly and keep people with scientific knowledge off juries, especially in cases dealing with science or medicine.

Brother Buzz

(36,609 posts)
19. Independent peer-review tipped the scale in the former school groundskeeper case
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 01:16 PM
Mar 2019

And it was these independent and peer-reviewed works that convinced the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization to determine that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen. In the wake of that WHO finding, California added glyphosate to the state’s list of cancer-causing chemicals.

What's not selling in the courts is Monsanto's in-house studies. And after this second case, the floodgate of litigation, or whatever those lawyers call it, is wide open, and you can bet your bottom dollar Monsanto will move mountains to try the cases outside California.

Will it play in Peoria?

eallen

(2,958 posts)
15. I'd like to see something else tried. Hard to see how that will happen.
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 12:48 PM
Mar 2019

The groups most interested don't want rational reform. Those who do don't have much political leverage.

You're right, of course, that no one should take a jury decision as meaning diddly with regard to a science question.

Cal Carpenter

(4,959 posts)
23. I'm afraid I agree with you
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 02:33 PM
Mar 2019

To be clear - I think it is extremely likely that Roundup does cause cancer. I don't know the current scientific perspective on this, but the truth lies in science, not a jury. I'm guessing it is pretty clear scientifically or the jury wouldn't have come to this conclusion, but that's not necessarily the case in other, hypothetical situations like this.

Using a jury decision itself as evidence or proof that "Roundup causes cancer" is just like the anti-vaxxers using the Vaccine Injury Court settlements as proof that vaccines cause autism or whatever else.

I think this is likely a good result for this case (haven't followed it closely so it is hard to have a strong opinion) but I think one needs to be careful not to use this jury decision as their main argument that Roundup causes cancer.

Response to jberryhill (Original post)

panader0

(25,816 posts)
18. I was in Lowe's a week ago and there were huge displays of Roundup.
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 12:59 PM
Mar 2019

I couldn't believe it.
The problems with Roundup have been known, perhaps not proven, for
a long time.

Mariana

(14,870 posts)
21. But there's money to be made.
Wed Mar 20, 2019, 02:11 PM
Mar 2019

Most people who buy that crap pick the Round-up brand, even though the store-brand glyphosate weedkiller costs MUCH less.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Jury Finds Roundup Caused...