| We have lots of recent news coming out of the United States, France, Germany, Canada, India, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK, and the Caribbean, but we are going to start our latest Review in what might seem an odd place â not with Bayerâs toxic products, the main focus of this Review, but BAYERâS BUSINESS PROBLEMS. Why? Because their acquisition of Monsanto, and with it, Monsantoâs terrible toxic legacy, has reduced Bayer to a struggling, heavily debt-burdened, loss-making company whose products are facing increasing critical scrutiny (LATEST RESEARCH), public and political hostility (GLOBAL RESISTANCE), and tens of thousands of costly challenges in the courts (see LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS and MORE TOXICS). All of which has trashed Bayerâs share price and left it seriously short of capital. Hence the company is not in a position to settle the many outstanding lawsuits and is facing increasing calls from investors to break itself up. The nightmarish cul-de-sac in which Bayer finds itself parked is key to understanding the desperate hardball legal and political manoeuvres the company is currently engaging in. As it seeks to call in favours from its friends in high places to try to shut down as much of the litigation as it can, the danger is that if it succeeds in its goal of gaining immunity from legal redress, not just Bayer, but also other pesticide makers will be the beneficiaries, making the deadly impact of this industry cause for even greater concern. As Nathan Donley, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, told the New Republic, âA company that has no fear of liability is a very scary thingâ (POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS). BAYERâS BUSINESS PROBLEMS
Last year Bayer made a net loss of almost $3.2 billion, reports The Economist. Its sales fell by 6%. It has torched 70% in shareholder value since June 2018, when it completed its acquisition of Monsanto. The $63 billion that Bayer splurged on acquiring Monsanto turned out to be just a down payment. Roundup-cancer lawsuits have forced Bayer to disburse $9.5 billion in settlements and set aside a further $6 billion for more payouts. The deal also saddled the company with stomach-churning debt. It owes creditors a net â¬35 billion. So how can it undo that dealâs toxic legacy? Bayerâs CEO says he doesn't want to break up the company, at least not yet. He has trimmed dividends by 95% to the legal minimum for the next three years and announced large job cuts. Given that the companyâs share price fell after he unveiled his plan, investors may think that amputation is in order after all, says The Economist.
In a desperate effort to save money, a âsignificant reduction in workforceâ is underway at Bayer as part of a painful restructuring. Ninety job cuts have already been announced at the companyâs US headquarters in New Jersey, with many more layoffs likely to follow. Marc Tüngler from Deutsche Schutzvereinigung Wertpapierbesitz (DSW), Germany's leading association for private investors, believes that such an overhaul will be a major challenge. âThe path could not be more painful and strenuous,â he told Deutsche Welle, âbut perhaps this is the only path Bayer has leftâ. Many investors, though, clearly have little faith in the approach that Bayerâs CEO, Bill Anderson, is taking, and have sent Bayerâs shares tumbling to their lowest level in 19 years, following Andersonâs decision to ditch immediate break-up plans for the company. LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS
As we reported in Review 565, in early February a three-judge US Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected Bayerâs argument that federal regulatorsâ approval of Roundup shielded the company from being sued under state law for failing to warn consumers of the productâs risks. Now Bayer has asked the full 11th Circuit Court to reconsider, for the second time, the three-judge panelâs ruling that it couldnât shield itself from Roundup-related lawsuits by invoking the legal doctrine of preemption, in which federal law overrides, or preempts, state law. Several other US appeals courts have previously ruled against Bayer in similar lawsuits after reaching exactly the same conclusion as the three-judge panel. On 5 March 2024 in Californiaâs Sonoma County Superior Court, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their own case against Roundup manufacturer Bayer-Monsanto after two days of testimony in a jury trial. Bayerâs lawyers promptly claimed this as âa major victoryâ, but the legal news portal Lawyers and Settlements suggests it was anything but. The plaintiffsâ attorney told The Press Democrat that his clients asked for the dismissal, but he declined to elaborate. Lawyers and Settlements says this has the hallmarks of âtake the money and runâ. âSure sounds like the Bayer lawyers looked at the testimony so far and decided itâd be cheaper to hand the plaintiff a bag of money and put the case behind them,â one Press Democrat reader commented. In other words, Bayer had no hope of winning, so they paid heavily to make the case go away so they could claim it as a win. A Philadelphia judge has upheld a $175 million Roundup verdict against Monsanto. Judge James Crumlish III of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas rejected Monsantoâs challenge to the verdict, about a month after the judge shut down the companyâs efforts to boot him off the case (as we reported in Review 565). The judge was critical of Monsanto's tactics and not only upheld the $175 million verdict against the company, but added a further $2.3 million in damages for delay. He sharply criticized Monsanto for âaggressively blaming the court and plaintiffâs counsel for the outcomeâ. In a second case, Philadelphia judge James Crumlish III has upheld another Roundup-cancer verdict against Monsantoâs post-trial challenge, rejecting their claim that insufficient evidence was presented that Roundup caused the plaintiffâs cancer. He disagreed with Monsantoâs argument that the plaintiffâs failure-to-warn claim was barred because Roundupâs label had been approved by the EPA. He also granted the plaintiffâs request that Monsanto pay about $44,000 extra in delay damages. A Missouri judge, while refusing to grant Monsantoâs post-trial requests that he order a new trial or throw out the entire verdict, did agree to slash the $1.5 billion punitive-damages portion of a Roundup-cancer award to just over $600 million. The reduction was entirely expected because the US Supreme Court has said punitive damages must be proportional to the compensatory awards underlying them and has limited punishment judgments to ten times actual damages, and the judge reduced the punitive damages to meet the Supreme Court threshold.
After being hammered over the last four months with Roundup-cancer jury verdicts against it totalling about $4 billion, Bayer is said to be looking to shut down all litigation via the âTexas Two-Stepâ bankruptcy tactic. This bankruptcy manoeuvre gets its name from the use of a Texas state law that lets companies split their assets and liabilities into separate units, then place the unit loaded with liabilities into bankruptcy to drive a global settlement. âThe pursuit of this strategy looks like a strong sign that the company is more interested in delay than honouring the legal rights of cancer patients or a comprehensive settlement at a fair price,â said Melissa Jacoby, a University of North Carolina law professor and bankruptcy expert. Though a federal appeals court and a US bankruptcy judge in New Jersey have shot down previous attempts by another company to use a unitâs Two-Step bankruptcy case to persuade the plaintiffs suing it to settle, the strategy still âallows defendants to shut down all tort litigation indefinitelyâ, Bloomberg reports. POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS Bayer is lobbying state legislatures to shield it from future lawsuits and to annul at least some of the 50,000 claims that are currently active, the New Republic reports. Since January, bills to shield pesticide manufacturers from lawsuits have been filed in three states where Bayer has a major corporate presence: Missouri (where Monsanto is headquartered), Idaho (where it has a phosphate mine and processing plant for making glyphosate), and Iowa (where it has a manufacturing plant that makes large amounts of Roundup). Daniel Hinkle, an attorney with the American Association for Justice, who works with trial lawyer associations throughout the country, predicted that if these bills succeed, Bayer will push similar legislation in a number of other states next year. As the agrichemical giant lays groundwork to fend off Roundup litigation, its use of a playbook for building influence in farm state legislatures has the potential to benefit pesticide companies nationwide. At the same time, the pesticide industryâs trade association CropLife America is working hard to pass a federal law that would bar states from passing their own laws that restrict pesticide use based on risks. Civil Eats provides an excellent detailed report that includes some particularly telling quotes. One is from a Republican legislator in Idaho: âWeâre sacrificing our future for the present. I donât think giving lifetime immunity to multi-billion-dollar pharmaceutical companies was on our constituentsâ bingo card when they sent us here.â (For more on whatâs happening in Idaho, see below.) The Modern Ag Alliance, set up and led by Bayer, claims to be an organisation of key agricultural stakeholders fighting to protect âUS farmersâ access to the crop protection tools they needâ in the face of âglobal food shortagesâ. But the key reason for its existence seems to be voicing support for legislative solutions (see above and below) that stop pesticide victims being able to sue the manufacturers, who will be able to hide behind EPA approval. The Alliance is encouraging farmers to contact their legislators to share their support â âThe future of farming in America may depend on it!â
In March, Iowaâs Senate Appropriations Committee approved Bill 3188 â a bill that Bayer has lobbied for and helped to write, which gives legal protections to pesticide manufacturers over their failure to adequately warn consumers about the potential health risks associated with use of their products. In April, the bill (Senate File 2412) was adopted by the Iowa Senate. In order to appease Republicans, these liability protections do not apply to Chinese state-owned companies â a move targeting Syngenta, which is owned by ChemChina. A bill with the same approach is currently sitting in Iowaâs House Ways and Means Committee (after being notably rejected by the House Agriculture Committee), waiting to see if the industry can garner enough support to pass the legislation in both houses. Tommy Hexter, Democratic candidate for Iowa House District 53 and rural organiser and educator with the Iowa Farmers Union, asks in the Des Moines Register: Will Iowans continue to elect legislators who are funded by agribusiness associations that listen to industry needs only and continue following the certain death trap of chemicals and pollution? Hexter points out that Iowa has the fastest-growing cancer rates in the nation and the largest use of Roundup. He says the Iowa Association of Justice points out that the claim that Americans can rely on EPA labels to guarantee safety is easily disproved when you note that it was not until March 2024 that EPA banned asbestos after nearly 70 years of scientific studies demonstrating that it causes harmful lung diseases. He also says, âThe argument that farmers are in support of this legislation is untrue. I testified as a representative of the Iowa Farmers Union, and I was confidently able to claim that we hadn't received any member support for this bill and that our organisation supports the ability of our farmers to seek relief for pesticide injury.â An Associated Press piece on Bayer's attempts to get lawmakers in key states to protect it from legal redress reports concerns that the legislation could also stifle any product liability claim, and not just those for pesticides, since most such lawsuits rely on the failed-to-warn claim. It also quotes John Gilbert, a farmer on the board of the Iowa Farmers Union, as saying of Bayerâs bill, âNo amount of perfumeâs gonna make it anything but a skunk.â Bayer and Monsanto have collectively poured over $530,000 into the campaign coffers of Iowaâs state-level politicians since 2002. From 2002-2018, Monsanto donated $456,641.95 to state-level politicians and Bayer has chipped in $80,250 since 2018, according to Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board records. Some of the biggest recipients include Gov. Kim Reynolds; former Gov. Terry Branstad; current Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Mike Naig; Naigâs predecessor, the late Bill Northey; Iowa House Speaker Pat Grassley; and former Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal. Bayer has multiple crop science plants in Iowa, including one in Muscatine that manufactures Roundup. In Idaho a Senate committee narrowly voted Bayerâs bill down, but Civil Eats reports that âa new version of the bill was then introduced in the House, with small tweaks meant to get some of the doubting lawmakers on board. However, it was scheduled to be presented in a House committee in early March, when, to everyoneâs surprise, lawmakers deleted it from the agenda hours before the meeting started. Then, a slightly modified version was introduced in the Senateâ. The bill was originally introduced by Idaho Senator Mark Harris, a Republican who represents Soda Springs, where Bayer operates a 540-acre processing plant to manufacture glyphosate. Rather than make his own case for giving pesticide companies immunity from claims of health harms, he turned his time over to James Curry, Bayerâs deputy director of state and local government affairs. A nearly identical bill to the ones introduced in Iowa and Idaho â with wording supplied by Bayer â was passed by the Missouri House of Representatives on 17 April. The bill, which, like the others, would protect pesticide companies from claims they failed to warn that their product causes cancer, passed in a voice vote despite some bipartisan opposition. The legislation needs one more vote in the House before advancing to the Senate for further consideration. At a national level, the Environmental Working Group says that over 140 US mayors, lawmakers and other officials from over 30 states are standing together to urge Congress to reject legislation that would limit longstanding state and local pesticide safety rules. Theyâre joined by hundreds of members of Congress and 185 environmental, health and agricultural organizations. They are concerned that if some members of Congress get their way, pesticide makers could undermine state and local governmentsâ right to adopt rules that protect communities from exposure to toxic crop chemicals. Theyâre looking to make their case during debates over this yearâs farm bill and federal agency funding. These pesticide manufacturers want to limit states and localities from passing and enforcing additional requirements for warnings and information related to pesticides, bending the rules so that people sickened by exposure to these chemicals canât seek any remedies. Pending House and Senate bills in the US Congress would achieve the companiesâ goal. If you're in the US, please take action at the link above. Beyond Pesticides has launched a legal case to counter the nationwide campaign by chemical manufacturers aiming to shield themselves from liability cases related to pesticide products. Winona LaDuke, the American economist, environmentalist and writer, has written a scathing condemnation of Bayer, saying that its response to concerns about Roundup is not to fix the problem but to try and squash liability. âAs we watch Bayer peddling dangerous things and limiting liability, maybe the ethics of Bayer might need another review,â LaDuke writes, and she details some of Bayerâs corporate involvement with the Nazis. Thereâs more on Bayerâs extensive catalogue of corporate crimes here. GLOBAL RESISTANCE One hundred and fifty advocacy groups have petitioned the Spanish government for a transition to pesticide-free agriculture in the wake of a recent study which found levels of glyphosate that âfar exceedâ the legal limits in Mar Menor, Europe's biggest salt water lagoon. A documentary on Dutch TV has revealed that the Dutch farm minister Piet Adema wanted a ban on glyphosate but the Dutch cabinet would not agree to it because of another ministerâs concerns that a ban would undermine the credibility of the Dutch pesticide regulator Ctgb. Ademaâs concerns about the safety of glyphosate were based among other things on conversations he had with professor of neurology Bas Bloem (Radboud University), the world's leading expert on Parkinsonâs disease. The Netherlands abstained in the final European Union vote on the renewal of glyphosate in Europe for another 10 years. The Dutch parliament had twice called on the Dutch government to vote against renewal. Almost 300 scientists also called on the governments of both Belgium and the Netherlands to vote no to glyphosate. They pointed out that regulators at both the EU and national levels work within an outdated protocol that strongly favours research commissioned by industry over independent science. The Dutch pesticide regulator Ctgb played a leading role in the European Unionâs regulatory assessment of glyphosate, but in the recent Zembla documentary on Dutch TV, experts say Ctgbâs glyphosate assessment shows bias and âsystematically explained awayâ research evidence that glyphosate can cause cancer. Despite repeated scientific and environmental warnings, world leaders are sleepwalking into a pesticide-fuelled nightmare, warns Saboto Caesar, the Minister of Agriculture for the Southern Caribbean nation of St Vincent and the Grenadines, in an article in Newsweek. âMy home country of St Vincent and the Grenadines took the bold step to prohibit glyphosate in a bid to protect our citizensâ health and promote climate resilience. I am now issuing an urgent rallying cry for similar â and global â action against these poisons,â the minister writes. Although Mexico continues to resist US and Big Ag pressure to back down on its GMO ban, it has now postponed its glyphosate ban, which was due to start in April 2024, until other options for weed control are found, reports Carey Gillam. Gillam notes that in 2019 Thailand similarly backed down from a planned glyphosate ban after pressure from US officials and industry actors. West Fraser (WF), one of Canadaâs largest forestry companies, has announced that not only are they not using glyphosate any longer, but they halted its use in British Columbia in 2019, and all other herbicides too. The company is instead using a variety of other non-chemical techniques. The news has been welcomed by Stop The Spray BC, which has been campaigning for years to end the use of glyphosate by companies working in British Columbiaâs forests. Most herbicide spraying planned throughout Maâamtagila territory and neighbouring Kwakwakaâwakw Nations â on northeast Vancouver Island, Canada, and adjacent islands â did not proceed in 2023. This comes after Ma'a̱mtagila and other Kwakwakaâwakw chiefs, band council members, elders, as well as the public and environmental groups, opposed plans to spray glyphosate throughout previously logged forests. âGlyphosate is a pervasive herbicide, threatening the intricate web of life that sustains the land and diminishing biodiversity. It undermines the Maâamtagila peoplesâ deeply-rooted medicinal food harvesting traditions, which are essential to our well-being,â said Gigame Mak'wala, Chief Rande Cook of Ma'amtagila First Nation. Sign the notice to the Canadian government asking for a ban on glyphosate and other pesticides in logging. RESEARCH Drawing on his research, Prof Michael Antoniou explains how glyphosate herbicide exposure can affect our health. He also explains how we can minimise our exposure to this and other pesticides in a podcast interview hosted by two functional medicine doctors. Regulators have assumed that sufficiently low doses of toxic chemicals are safe. But in a new report, scientists from the Endocrine Society and the International Pollutants Elimination Network have criticised how regulators determine the toxicity level of chemicals â and suggested that for a staggering array of common compounds, no dose may be safe. The report points to mounting evidence that a wide array of compounds, including pesticides such as glyphosate, play an insidious role in chronic disease. These compounds are known as endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) because their size and shape resemble the messenger molecules, or hormones, that human and animal bodies use to govern a wide range of physical systems. It is known, the report says, that glyphosate or glyphosate-based herbicides alter the expression of sex hormones, even at low levels. Studies have found that women in agricultural regions of Indiana were more likely to give premature birth; that pregnant women in Ontario exposed to glyphosate were more likely to miscarry; and that the children of pesticide applicators were more likely to have âneurobehavioral deficitsâ. Le Monde has managed by threatening legal action to force the French food and health safety agency ANSES to publish a report kept secret for eight years. The previously unreleased report judges that the tests used by regulators to evaluate the genotoxicity (DNA-damaging effects) of commercial formulations of glyphosate are insufficient. In a new study screening the impact of three different pesticides (one insecticide, one fungicide, and one herbicide) at three different concentration levels on large benthic foraminifera â single-celled shelled organisms found on reefs â researchers found âeven the lowest doses of the fungicide and herbicide (glyphosate) caused irreparable damage to the foraminifera and their symbiontsâ. Foraminifera are considered bioindicators of coral reef health. A recent field study carried out in Martinique showed a reduction in biodiversity of 21% in average species richness in banana plots frequently treated with glyphosate. Plots treated with glyphosate had fewer species of soil fauna on average and lower total numbers of individuals in all links in the food chain. Predators dropped in abundance by -54% and detritivores (invertebrates that feed on plant debris) by -23% in the plots most frequently treated. The study also shows glyphosate favours exotic species over native species in soil invertebrate communities. This result is important for the conservation of biodiversity because invasive exotic species are one of the major factors in the erosion of biodiversity on a global scale. Glyphosate is sometimes used to combat invasive exotic plants in natural environments, which could prove counterproductive and have repercussions on other organisms such as soil fauna. In other words, using glyphosate to attack invasive plants could favour invasive invertebrates. A new study looking at US adults has found a positive linear association between the level of glyphosate in their urine and the fatty liver index â a good predictor for the presence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). This comes hard on the heels of another recent study suggesting low-dose chronic glyphosate exposure increases diet-induced NAFLD. Animal studies also confirm low doses of glyphosate increase the risk of fatty liver disease. Prof Michael Antoniou discusses these animal studies in the podcast, How glyphosate is damaging your health.. Transgenic dicamba-resistant soybean and cotton were developed to enable farmers to combat weeds that evolved resistance to the herbicide glyphosate. However, according to a new and uncompromising article from US scientists, âThe dramatic increases in dicamba use these crops facilitated have led to serious problems, including evolution of dicamba-resistant weeds and widespread damage to susceptible crops and farming communities. Disturbingly, this pattern of dicamba use has unfolded while the total herbicide applied to soybean has nearly doubled since 2006. Without substantive changes to agricultural policy and decision making, the next âsilver-bulletâ agrotechnology will likely be no more than another step on the transgene-facilitated herbicide treadmillâ (see MORE TOXICS for confirmation of this). Exposure of the stingless bee â a vital neotropical pollinator â to imidacloprid, pyraclostrobin, and glyphosate, either alone or in combination, impairs its walking activity and fat body morphology and physiology, a new study has found. The fat body is vital for energy storage, metabolism, and immune response regulation, and so is critical to the overall health and survival of native bee populations. A new public relations and crisis communications study tracked 10 years of data and used big data analytic tools to capture shifts in how Bayer-Monsanto and the public discussed a complex legal situation regarding the widely used Roundup herbicide â and how those dynamics related to stock price. The bottom line? When the company took an aggressive stance, its stock price dropped. MORE TOXICS Bayerâs latest GMO seed is a strain of corn (maize) engineered to be sprayed directly with a record mixture of FIVE different herbicides. The Washington DC-based Center for Food Safety (CFS) warns, âIf it gets the greenlight from USDA, this new âvaporiserâ corn will be planted all over our farms, then drenched with two of the most volatile, damaging herbicides ever invented â dicamba and 2,4-Dâ â in addition to glufosinate (banned in the EU), quizalofop and glyphosate. CFS says, âThe impact on our pollinators and farmland could be devastating. Corn is the most widely grown crop in the US, planted on about 90 million acres each year. And it already accounts for 40% of the pesticides used on farms!â To stop this GMO corn sending pesticide use further skyrocketing, CFS asks those in the US to urgently submit their objections to USDA, as it is only accepting comments for a few more days. In a powerful recent article, Bill Freese of the Center for Food Safety lays out how dicamba has been wreaking havoc on farmers, rural communities and the natural world for seven long years since it was approved for spraying on GMO soy and cotton. Just one teaspoon of this herbicide over an acre of tomato plants is enough to stunt their growth. It vaporises while being sprayed, but also can evaporate from plant surfaces and soil days after. Once the vapour is airborne, it forms clouds that drift long distances to kill or injure virtually any flowering plant in its path. Dicamba has drifted rampantly from GMO fields, damaging millions of acres of non-dicamba-resistant soy. Wave after wave of dicamba vapour drift has killed fruit trees. Vegetable farms and gardens have been devastated. Trees in natural areas have suffered. And beekeepers have reported steep drops in honey production. The only real solution to weed resistance, says Freese, is less reliance on herbicides and abandonment of the GMO herbicide-resistant crop systems that are such potent promoters of weed resistance. More use of cultural techniques like complex crop rotations and cover crops also suppress weeds. In February of this year, a federal court in Arizona vacated the registrations of dicamba for over the top use on GMO crops. But despite that, the EPA said it would still allow millions of gallons of dicamba to be sprayed this upcoming growing season, just as it did when dicamba was preciously banned by a US appeals court in 2020. But even if the EPA doesnât attempt to reauthorise dicamba use again for next year, the pesticide regulation expert Chuck Benbrook warns that although that would stop the problematic widespread applications of dicamba on GMO soybeans in the Midwest, many farmers will just switch to GMO soybeans tolerant to 2,4-D, which will mean more of the same. Vermont was the first to sue over polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Chicago followed. Then a Washington state jury slapped Monsanto with an $857 million verdict. All say Monsanto was aware of the adverse effects of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) years before they were banned. âWe have evidence Monsanto knew that its PCB products were causing long-lasting harm and chose to continue to make money off poisoning Maineâs people and environment,â says Maineâs Attorney General. âI am taking action to demand that Monsanto pay for the harm it knowingly caused our state.â The lawsuit cites internal Monsanto memos acknowledging PCBs were ânearly global environmental contaminants leading to the contamination of human food (particularly fish), the killing of some marine species (shrimp), and the possible extinction of several species of fish-eating birds.â Monsanto allegedly justified continuing to sell PCBs despite the concerns because there was (in Monsanto's own words) âselfishly too much Monsanto profitâ. Damages are sought for injuries and contamination, and to clean, monitor and mitigate 400 miles of Maine rivers and streams and 1.8 million ocean acres impaired by PCBs. East St Louis is alleging the old Monsanto plant in Sauget polluted its town, and itâs seeking what could potentially be billions of dollars in fines. It accuses Monsanto of hiding what it knew about the toxic effects of PCBs. âDespite its early knowledge of the dangers associated with PCBs, Monsanto embarked on a decades-long campaign of disinformation and deception in order to prolong the manufacture, incineration, and disposal of PCBs in East St Louis and thereby preserve the considerable profits PCBs generated for the company,â the city states in its lawsuit. The Illinois Attorney Generalâs office is also suing Monsanto and its successor companies, alleging pollution from the Sauget plant and deceit surrounding the dangers of PCBs in a separate federal lawsuit out of the Northern Illinois District Court. Monsanto and General Electric (GE) engaged in a âcriminal corporate actionâ through a secret 1972 deal that allowed the companies to keep profiting from the sale and use of dangerous PCBs despite knowing they were harmful, according to a lawsuit filed by a small town awash in PCB contamination. The Town of Lee, located in western Massachusetts, accuses the companies of creating a âcatastrophic disasterâ for residents by polluting the area with PCBs, which have been linked to cancer and other human health problems. The lawsuit says Monsanto knew about the danger of PCBs but went on producing them for years. âIt was withheld from the public, they had studies done of employees with the names of the employees redacted, but the cancer rates were through the roof.â Having lost its bid to end the city of Seattleâs lawsuit over PCB contamination, which alleges Monsanto engaged in decades of deception regarding the harmful effects of PCBs, Monsanto is now trying to exclude evidence related to its alleged negligence in the design, manufacture, and sale of PCBs. The case is expected to go to court in September. In a satirical article published in Le Monde, researchers Marc Billaud, Julie Noirot and Pierre Sujobert, who are concerned about the massive release of toxic substances into the environment, expose the rhetoric used by certain industries to defend their hazardous activities. The scientistsâ âsimple tools for selling poisonâ include:
* Emphasise hidden intentionality â your critics may advance their views with science, but dismiss these troublemakers as activists, secret ideologues, or even terrorists!
* Use intimidation: Make yourself feared. Surround yourself with a host of lawyers threatening suits for defamation and stir up trolls to saturate social media. Have no qualms about tarnishing the scientific reputation of your opponents. Aim low, slander in all directions.
* State your noble purpose. Enriching yourself doesnât play well with detractors, so claim youâre fighting world hunger (if you sell pesticides). Youâre also safeguarding the jobs of those who make your poisons. So now you look like a humanitarian concerned about social issues! France has a compensation fund for farmers and other victims of pesticides who use them professionally, but nothing for local residents who may have been harmed. So lawyer and former French environment minister Corinne Lepage has launched a class action lawsuit for those living less than 150m from farm fields who have become ill due to the pesticides used in their locality. Labour will end exemptions for bee-killing pesticides that have already been outlawed in the EU but which the UK government has continued to approve for four years in a row, the shadow environment minister said. In March the UK government authorised the use of the neonicotinoid thiamethoxam on sugar beet crops â against the advice of its own scientists, who said it would pose a threat to bees. Prof Dave Goulson, a bee expert at the University of Sussex, has warned that one teaspoon of the chemical is enough to kill 1.25 billion honeybees. The failure of the US-based chemical company Dow to provide remedy to victims of a deadly gas leak from a pesticide plant in India that resulted in the deaths of more than 22,000 people has created a âsacrifice zoneâ in which 500,000 more continue to suffer, Amnesty International has said in a new report published ahead of the 40th anniversary of one of the worldâs worst industrial disasters. Issued before Dowâs Annual General Meeting of shareholders on 11 April, Bhopal: 40 years of Injustice shows that the human rights-based case for justice and reparations for Bhopal survivors has never been stronger. The Bhopal pesticide plant was owned by Union Carbide, which Dow purchased to gain full control over Carbideâs assets and benefits. But because Dow has tried to walk away from Carbideâs liabilities, Amnesty is calling on companies and states to consider withholding business from Dow until it recognises its human rights responsibilities and takes meaningful and rapid action to redress the catastrophic and lasting harms. Amnestyâs report also highlights how the US government, through sometimes covert lobbying, pressured the Indian government to allow American nationals to escape criminal justice and assisted in efforts to frustrate and delay extradition efforts and the serving of court summonses on Dow. .................................................................. We hope you’ve enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible by readers’ donations. Please support our work with a one-off or regular donation. Thank you! |
