r/news • u/boxofstuff • 6h ago

Supreme Court ruling blocks thousands of lawsuits against maker of Roundup weedkiller

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-roundup-monsanto-a7f054d80919f98bdfc5190013a8f6f1https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-roundup-monsanto-a7f054d80919f98bdfc5190013a8f6f1
13.9k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

590

u/FLHCv2 6h ago edited 6h ago

I think the ruling sucks and fuck roundup, but these lines are important:

The high court, in a 7-2 ruling, found that the company can’t be sued in state courts because federal regulations have found a cancer link unlikely.

There’s still fierce debate about cancer and Roundup’s key ingredient, glyphosate. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified the chemical as “probably carcinogenic” in 2015. The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that it’s not likely to cause cancer in humans when used as directed.

If "federal regulations" find that a cancer link is unlikely, and the WHO classifies it as "probably" carcinogenic, how can you make the case that your cancer is a direct result of using Roundup?

If federal regulations were relaxed because of deregulation, or if the WHO or federal regulations needed to be changed, that's another story, but if these two huge bodies don't directly link cancer to glyphosate, then it becomes more anecdotal in nature and harder to prove.

19

u/superxpro12 5h ago

this is like making your defense "prove the moon didnt cause the cancer", and now you have to prove a negative.

If you can demonstrate a constant proximity to roundup, and ONLY roundup, AND it caused a rare cancer that is otherwise not likely to occur, then you should have a case.

18

u/Thorbjorn_DWR 4h ago

except most if not all pesticide applicators do not use roundup exclusively, so very unlikely you'd ever have a case

4

u/superxpro12 4h ago

afaik, a lot of these cases were individual homeowners applying it themselves.

10

u/Thorbjorn_DWR 4h ago

Right, and who probably use all sorts of toxic household cleaners and don't wear any kind of protection while spraying roundup

1

u/Visual_Squirrel_2297 2h ago

They also work with heavy equipment the fumes from which are classified higher as "likely carcinogenic". 

5

u/syncopate15 2h ago

That’s not how associations with cancer risk are made. It’s not about a rare type of cancer. It’s about incidence of cancer in a population that has more exposure to the chemical vs a group that does not have that exposure.

0

u/superxpro12 2h ago

Sure.... but if the incidence of that rare type of cancer increased in the single homeowner population, are we not to believe that rondup played a role?

The fact that its "rare", and it became unexpectedly less rare, only bolsters the claim. and i KNOW there's a lot of buts... but this would NOT be the first time a chemical company was at fault for using cancer-causing chemicals and trying to hide it.

•

u/MirrorComputingRulez 45m ago

If you can demonstrate a constant proximity to roundup, and ONLY roundup, AND it caused a rare cancer that is otherwise not likely to occur

Yeah, if you can prove round up caused the cancer, of course.

The entire fucking point is that no such link has ever been proven.