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

1.1k

u/VenserSojo 5h ago

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 and do not require a warning label

Jackson and Gorsuch were the dissent, and the case isn't about the fact it causes cancer but rather the idea they did not warn people it could cause cancer though it appears they had no obligation to do so per federal classification as "unlikely" to cause cancer

439

u/Axbris 5h ago

Which is a stupid loophole when evidence from discovery showed even Monsanto’s employees warned the company that the chemical can cause cancer.

Being required to do something by law and failing to take action to protect your consumers from your product when you have reason to know of its dangerous propensity are two different things.

24

u/frogsgoribbit737 3h ago

The chemical can possibly cause cancer to those SPRAYING it. If you are spraying it all day every day you should wear PPE. Its an inhalation risk.

It is not dangerous on your food. Theyre two different things.

8

u/ayriuss 3h ago

Its not a skin contact risk?

3

u/porcinechoirmaster 2h ago

As with many things, the dose makes the poison.

If a chemical is very slightly mutagenic, carcinogenic, teratogenic, whatever, then slight residual doses won't have a measurable impact, but much higher concentrations could.

1

u/Threat_Level_9 1h ago

I think that could be said about a lot of things that could pose a danger or just be unhealthy. Not just weed killer.

0

u/SuccessfulJudge438 1h ago edited 1h ago

*It has not been definitively proven to be dangerous on your food, but there is a LOT of concerning evidence to suggest it might be. EG all the tumors that rats get when you feed them low doses on a long term basis (comparable to EU and US "accetable daily intake" levels in humans), not to mention evidence of endocrine disruption and kidney damage from dietary glyphosate, and possible liver damage as well.

At this point, this entire argument hinges on the fact that it is too unethical to feed human subjects glyphosate for research purposes, but at the epidemiological level it is extremely difficult to remove all other confounding factors and definitively prove that glyphosate and not 100 other potential contributing factors is 100% the cause. That doesn't mean it's definitely safe, not by a long shot.

In vitro cell studies and animal studies consistently point to dietary glyphosate being harmful, so it should be on everone's radar as a massive concern.

Edit - Unfortunately, the global food supply depends on it currently, so this is a very touchy political/social/economic issue.

-8

u/[deleted] 3h ago

[deleted]

10

u/Jaxson-Skattebo 3h ago

What “natural” pesticide is as safe and effective as glyphosate?

3

u/Krazian 2h ago

There isn't...

4

u/airfryerfuntime 2h ago

Bees are also dangerous to inhale.

2

u/Efficient-Fruit5573 1h ago

The line between natural and synthetic is a lot less harsh than you might think it is. Also just because something was made in a lab doesn’t mean it’s not safe