New defeat in court for Monsanto, the multinational controlled by Bayer that produces the Round Up, a herbicide based on glyphosate. It will have to compensate a couple who have become ill with cancer as a result of using their products for over 30 years.
He is about to end up run over, his mother saves him
New defeat in court for Monsanto, the Bayer-controlled multinational that produces Round Up, a glyphosate-based herbicide. It will have to compensate a couple that you are sick with tumor after using their products for over 30 years.
It is the third consecutive time that Bayer-Monsanto has come out of court with a conviction. This time the sentence comes from Oakland, in California, where the judges have established a very heavy penalty for the multinational: it will have to compensate a retired couple, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, with more than 2 billion dollars.
More specifically, Alva will receive 18 million in compensation while 1 billion is the amount established for punitive damages; Alberta, on the other hand, obtained 37 million in compensation and 1 billion in punitive damages.
According to the jury, husband and wife allegedly fell ill with cancer after using glyphosate for over 30 years. This substance would in fact, according to the court, a "significant factor" in the onset of the disease which specifically is the non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
In the trial in question, which began at the end of March, the prosecution managed to convince the jury that Monsanto products were crucial to the couple's health problems but also that the studies manipulated by the multinational have obscured the real risks.
Monsanto intends to appeal this ruling, arguing among other things that Alva and Alberta Pilliod have had a long history of diseases known to be substantial risk factors for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Therefore, they say glyphosate has nothing to do with it.
The same intention to challenge the decisions of the courts was also announced for the two previous sentences that similarly condemned the multinational to pay very high amounts in compensation for the damages caused by the use of their products. Bayer hopes for a reversal of the situation given that, as he wrote in a note regarding the last sentence, the decision taken:
"Is in direct conflict with the decisions of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the consensus of the global health authorities, according to which glyphosate products can be used safely and are not carcinogenic"
Bayer claims that decades of studies by the company and independent scientists have shown that glyphosate and Roundup are safe for human use. There is also recent support from a study conducted in France which claims that the glyphosate is not carcinogenic, or at least not like red meat and cured meats.
Despite the desire to oppose the convictions, in reality it seems that the multinational is more likely to propose a settlement to the plaintiffs. Meanwhile, Bayer-Monsanto's situation becomes increasingly critical. Already the two previous verdicts of the jury had caused sharp drops in the shares of the company.
Shareholders blamed top management for the Monsanto acquisition and inherited litigation, which wiped out about $ 33 billion from Bayer's market value since the jury's first verdict.
Will Bayer regret this acquisition?
Read also:
- 'Glyphosate is a determinant of cancer'. Bayer defeated again in court
- The trial of the terminally ill patient against Monsanto accused of having covered the cancer risk of glyphosate begins
- Monsanto appeals against the conviction of compensation for a terminally ill cancer patient
