About 30,000 claims contending that Roundup caused non-Hodgkin's lymphoma are currently unsettled. Mike Mozart / CC BY 2.0
Bayer's $10 billion settlement to put an end to roughly 125,000 lawsuits against its popular weed killer Roundup, which contains glyphosate, hit a snag this week when a federal judge in San Francisco expressed skepticism over what rights future plaintiffs would have, as the San Francisco Chronicle reported.
<p>The $10 billion settlement does not actually need judicial review and is set to move forward. The issue is that $1.25 billion from the settlement does need a court order to be approved. That part deals with future lawsuits by <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/cancer" target="_self">cancer</a> patients who have not yet gone to court and by others who have not yet been diagnosed. The U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria said in an order Monday that he had questions about the legality and fairness of the agreement and was "tentatively inclined" to reject it, as the <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/SF-judge-questions-Bayer-s-1-25-billion-plan-15391982.php" target="_blank">San Francisco Chronicle</a> reported.</p><p>In a court filing on Monday, the judge described a plan to create a class action for future litigants as problematic, and he set a July 24 hearing date to address the matter, as <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-07/bayer-s-roundup-cancer-settlement-plan-hits-snag-as-judge-balks" target="_blank">Bloomberg</a> reported.</p>
<p>"We appreciate the judge's order raising his preliminary concerns with the proposed class settlement, which we take seriously and will address" at the hearing, Chris Loder, a U.S.-based spokesman for the Germany-based chemical and pharmaceutical giant Bayer, said in an interview.</p><p>Chhabria said he "is skeptical of the propriety and fairness of the proposed settlement." He raised concerns about the creation of a scientific panel to decide whether the key ingredient, glyphosate, causes cancer and whether the agreement unfairly limits potential plaintiffs from suing, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/business/roundup-lawsuit-settlement.html" target="_blank">The New York Times</a>.</p><p>Right now about 30,000 claims contending Roundup caused non-Hodgkin's lymphoma are left unsettled. Some lawyers in the U.S. have vowed to file another wave of new suits that could add tens of thousands to the logjam of existing cases, according to Bloomberg.</p>
<p>"Thankfully, Judge Chhabria has seen the ruthless plan as an outrageous attempt to deprive every future victim of Monsanto's killer Roundup of their right to fair and full compensation and to a jury trial," Tom Kline and Jason Itkin, plaintiffs' attorneys for users of the weedkiller who haven't settled their suits, said in an emailed statement to Bloomberg on Tuesday.</p><p>Bayer has lost a series of high-profile multi-million dollar cases for Roundup's role in causing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in people who used the Monsanto brand herbicide. That series of losses has seen investors flee from Bayer since it acquired Monsanto for $63 billion in 2018.</p><p>To stem the tide of suits, Bayer insisted that the protection against future suits is a linchpin of the current settlement. Without it, the bulk of the $10 billion deal has the potential to fall apart, according to The New York Times.</p>
<p>In addition to the $8.8 billion to $9.6 billion to cover about 95,000 cases, $1.25 billion was set aside to finance the scientific panel and assist impoverished Roundup users with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. As The New York Times described, that panel would then decide whether glyphosate caused cancer and, if so, what exposure level was dangerous. Both Bayer and claimants would be bound to accept the findings in future litigation.</p><p>New York-based lawyer Hunter Shkolnik opposed the novel class-action idea from the onset. He described it as "nothing more than a legally infirm, backroom deal to protect Monsanto rather than compensating Roundup cancer victims," in an emailed statement to Bloomberg.</p>
<p>Judge Chhabria asked on Monday whether it was lawful to remove judges and juries from the equation and to shift the question of whether Roundup caused cancer to a panel of scientists.</p><p>According to The New York Times, he also noted the three previous multimillion-dollar verdicts and asked, "Why would a potential class member want to replace a jury trial and the right to seek punitive damages with the process contemplated by the settlement agreement?"</p><p>Furthermore, Chhabria also worried that the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/science/">science</a> on glyphosate's cancer-causing properties is still evolving. That led him to question whether it would pass legal muster to have claimants bound by one study that didn't find toxicity when a future, more rigorous study may find the opposite, as Bloomberg reported.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Judge Blocks California From Putting Cancer Warning on Roundup ... ›
- Bayer Settles Roundup Cancer Suits for Over $10 Billion - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
One of the largest civil settlements in U.S. history will still allow Bayer to sell Roundup without adding any cancer warnings. Mike Mozart / CC BY 2.0
In one of the largest civil settlements in U.S. history, Bayer agreed Wednesday to pay more than $10 billion to resolve around 95,000 cases claiming its glyphosate-based weedkiller Roundup causes cancer.
<p>The deal will still allow Bayer to sell Roundup without adding any warnings, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/business/roundup-settlement-lawsuits.html" target="_blank">The New York Times reported</a>. It comes after three juries in early, high-profile trials awarded more than $2.4 billion to plaintiffs who developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma after long term Roundup use.</p><p>"Even Bayer's billions can't magically make glyphosate's well-documented links to cancer disappear," <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> (CBD) senior scientist Nathan Donley said in a statement reported by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jun/24/bayer-109bn-settlement-monsanto-weedkiller-roundup" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>. "Bayer only settled after three multi-million-dollar verdicts over the past year from jurors who, unlike the EPA, wisely put more trust in the safety assessments of independent scientists than in <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto" target="_self">Monsanto</a>/Bayer's confidential reviews of its own product."</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Even as they settle, <a href="https://twitter.com/Bayer?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Bayer</a> officials continue to deny Monsanto’s glyphosate herbicides cause cancer. “The extensive body of science indicates that Roundup does not cause cancer, and therefore, is not responsible for the illnesses alleged...”<a href="https://t.co/45xQPai62f">https://t.co/45xQPai62f</a></p>— carey gillam (@careygillam) <a href="https://twitter.com/careygillam/status/1275864794734768129?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p>The debate over Roundup's safety is ongoing, The New York Times explained. In 2015, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer said that glyphosate could "probably" cause cancer, but other regulatory bodies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), have ruled it safe. However, critics point out that many of these safe rulings were based on studies provided by Monsanto, the company that developed and sold Roundup before it was <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/bayer-monsanto-merger-2575082668.html" target="_self">acquired</a> by Bayer in 2018.</p><p>Per the terms of the settlement, the question of Roundup's safety will now pass to an independent "Class Science Panel," <a href="https://usrtk.org/uncategorized/bayer-settles-u-s-roundup-dicamba-and-pcb-litigation-for-more-than-10-billion/" target="_blank">U.S. Right to Know (USTK) reported</a>. The panel will decide if Roundup use can cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma and at what levels of exposure. Both Bayer and any future plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit will be bound by its findings. Until those findings are released, a process likely to take years, plaintiffs cannot bring any claims or seek punitive damages.</p>
<p>In the deal, Bayer earmarked $8.8 billion to $9.6 billion to settle 75 percent of current cases and $1.25 billion for any future claims. The three cases already decided by juries, currently in appeal, are not included.</p><p>Both plaintiff lawyers and Bayer celebrated the agreement.</p><p>"After years of hard fought litigation and a year of intense mediation I am glad to see our clients will now be compensated," Mike Miller of the Miller law firm told USRTK.</p>
<p>Bayer, meanwhile, seemed eager to escape the shadow cast on the company after it acquired both Monsanto and its legal challenges. Bayer's stock price plummeted after the three juries ruled against it, The New York Times pointed out.</p><p>"First and foremost, the Roundup™ settlement is the right action at the right time for Bayer to bring a long period of uncertainty to an end," Bayer CEO Werner Baumann said in a <a href="https://media.bayer.com/baynews/baynews.nsf/id/Bayer-announces-agreements-to-resolve-major-legacy-Monsanto-litigation" target="_blank">statement</a>.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Bayer has reached a series of agreements to resolve major legacy Monsanto litigation in the U.S. <br>Learn more: <a href="https://t.co/crqNTLIkVd">https://t.co/crqNTLIkVd</a></p>— Bayer AG (@Bayer) <a href="https://twitter.com/Bayer/status/1275833690984198145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p>However, not all the plaintiffs bringing claims against Bayer agreed to the settlement. The company still faces at least 30,000 claims, according to The New York Times.</p><p>"This is nothing like the closure they're trying to imply," Fletch Trammell, a Houston-based lawyer who represents 5,000 of the people bringing those claims, told The New York Times. "It's like putting out part of a house fire."</p><p>Also on Wednesday, Bayer settled two other lawsuits inherited from Monsanto, The Guardian reported. First, it will pay $400 million to settle claims related to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/dicamba">dicamba</a>, another herbicide that can drift to other crops and kill them.</p><p>"The settlement announced today is an important step to making things right for the farmers who just want to be able to put food on the table of America and the world," lawyer Joseph Peiffer of Peiffer Wolf law firm, which represents farmers with dicamba claims, told USRTK of the second herbicide settlement.</p><p>Bayer will pay a further $820 million to settle "most" claims related to PCB, a toxic chemical that Monsanto produced until 1977 that contaminated U.S. water supplies, The Guardian reported.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Man Who Developed Cancer After Roundup Use Awarded More ... ›
- Trump's EPA Backs Bayer's Appeal in Roundup Verdict Appeal ... ›
- More Monsanto Roundup Cancer Trials Expected to Be Postponed ... ›
- Former Monsanto CEO Ordered to Testify at Roundup Cancer Trial ... ›
- Roundup Cancer Settlement Hits Snag With Judge Over Future Plaintiffs' Rights - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A ruling that permanently bars California from affixing a cancer label to Roundup is separate from ongoing civil suits that claim glyphosate caused blood cancers. Mike Mozart / CC BY 2.0
A federal judge in California ruled on Monday that the state cannot put a cancer warning on the label of the popular herbicide Roundup, as The Associated Press reported.
<p>The world's most widely used weed killer has faced nearly 125,000 lawsuits by plaintiffs who claim their non-Hodgkins lymphoma and other forms of blood cancer were caused by repeated exposure to Monsanto's signature product, which is now owned by the German chemical and pharmaceutical giant Bayer AG.</p>
<p>Since Bayer bought Monsanto, the spate of lawsuits and their legal fees have weighed on Bayer and made the company lose 40 percent of its value. To try to contain the damage, Bayer made a verbal agreement to settle 50,000 to 85,000 cases in May, awarding plaintiffs anywhere from a few thousand dollars to a few million, according to <a href="https://fortune.com/2020/05/25/bayer-roundup-cancer-lawsuit-settle/" target="_blank">Fortune</a>.</p><p>Those lawsuits have been aided by a <a href="https://www.iarc.fr/featured-news/media-centre-iarc-news-glyphosate/" target="_blank">2015 finding by the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer</a> (IARC), which said that <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate" target="_self">glyphosate</a>, the chemical in Roundup, is a probable human carcinogen.</p><p>Despite that categorization, U.S. District Judge William Shubb called California's cancer warning misleading and said the state's label is not backed up by regulatory findings, according to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/u-s-court-blocks-california-cancer-label-on-bayers-roundup-weed-killer-idUSKBN23T38Y" target="_blank">Reuters</a>.</p>
<p>Regulators around the world have determined Roundup, or glyphosate, to be safe, even though the IARC labeled it a probable carcinogen. That includes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa" target="_self">EPA</a>). Late last year, when a judge reduced an $80 million jury award, the EPA filed papers in court that fully and unequivocally supported Bayer's claim that <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate" target="_self">glyphosate</a> does not cause cancer, as <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-epa-backs-bayer-2641674057.html" target="_self">EcoWatch</a> reported.</p><p>Since the EPA and its European counterparts have not found a connection between glyphosate and cancer, the judge said the state could not require the company to put a cancer warning on its label, according to the <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Judge-prohibits-California-from-putting-cancer-15358663.php" target="_blank">San Francisco Chronicle</a>.</p><p>Shubb said the state, under Supreme Court rulings, cannot require a private company to change its label or say anything about its products unless the statement is "purely factual and non-controversial," as the <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Judge-prohibits-California-from-putting-cancer-15358663.php" target="_blank">San Francisco Chronicle</a> reported.</p>
<p>The ruling, which permanently bars California from affixing a cancer label to Roundup, is completely separate from the ongoing civil suits that claim glyphosate caused blood cancers, according to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/u-s-court-blocks-california-cancer-label-on-bayers-roundup-weed-killer-idUSKBN23T38Y" target="_blank">Reuters</a>.</p><p>So far, juries in three trials have ordered the company to pay billions after concluding that the product did cause cancer. Plaintiffs alleged that Bayer manipulated studies and deceived the scientific community to make glyphosate seem safer than it actually is, according to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/u-s-court-blocks-california-cancer-label-on-bayers-roundup-weed-killer-idUSKBN23T38Y" target="_blank">Reuters</a>.</p><p>Bayer has consistently denied those claims and has insisted that glyphosate does not cause cancer, and it got help on Monday when Shubb said, "the great weight of evidence indicates that glyphosate is not known to cause cancer," as <a href="https://apnews.com/cf17840fc93b59f68751de92b5d4de9a" target="_blank">The Associated Press</a> reported.</p>
<p>As the <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Judge-prohibits-California-from-putting-cancer-15358663.php" target="_blank">San Francisco Chronicle</a> reported, the lawyers for the plaintiffs in the jury trials that have awarded cancer patients over $200 million argued that the EPA's insistence that Roundup does not cause cancer is spurious since there was evidence the company had unduly influenced the federal agency and had "ghost-written" purported research studies on the product's safety.</p><p>In the case, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra proposed to reword the label warnings to include both the IARC and EPA findings and a reference to a website for further discussion, but the judge unequivocally rejected that compromise, according to the <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Judge-prohibits-California-from-putting-cancer-15358663.php" target="_blank">San Francisco Chronicle</a>. Becerra's office said it would review the ruling and plan its next step.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- More Monsanto Roundup Cancer Trials Expected to Be Postponed ... ›
- Trump's EPA Backs Bayer's Appeal in Roundup Verdict Appeal ... ›
- California Scientists: Safe Level of Roundup Is 100x Lower Than ... ›
- Judge Says Public Doesn't Need Cancer Warning Label - EcoWatch ›
- Roundup Cancer Settlement Hits Snag With Judge Over Future Plaintiffs' Rights - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Support Ecowatch
Weeds dying in a soybean field impacted by dicamba spraying. JJ Gouin / iStock / Getty Images
A federal court overturned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval of dicamba Wednesday, meaning the controversial herbicide can no longer be sprayed in the U.S.
<p>The product, originally designed by <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto" target="_self">Monsanto</a>, is opposed by some farmers and environmental groups because it can drift when sprayed, damaging <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife" target="_self">wildlife</a> and other crops.</p><p>"Today's decision is a massive win for farmers and the environment. It is good to be reminded that corporations like Monsanto and the Trump Administration cannot escape the rule of law, particularly at a time of crisis like this," lead counsel George Kimbrell of the <a href="http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/1881/p/salsa/web/common/public/signup?signup_page_KEY=10186" target="_blank">Center for Food Safety</a> told <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/court-orders-epa-approvals-of-bayer-dicamba-herbicide-vacated-says-regulator-understated-the-risks/" target="_blank">U.S. Right to Know</a>. "Their day of reckoning has arrived."</p>
<p>The Center for Food Safety sued the EPA together with <a href="https://nffc.net/" target="_blank">National Family Farm Coalition</a>, <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> and <a href="http://www.panna.org/" target="_blank">Pesticide Action Network North America</a>. The groups argued that the EPA broke the law when it ruled on the safety of a kind of dicamba designed by Monsanto to be sprayed widely over crops genetically engineered to be resistant to the herbicide. This method means the dicamba can drift to other, non-resistant crops.</p><p>The herbicide is believed to have damaged 3.6 million acres of soybeans in 2017, and more than 1 million in 2018, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-03/bayer-s-dicamba-registration-pulled-by-court-on-herbicide-s-risk" target="_blank">Bloomberg News reported</a>.</p><p>The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the EPA "substantially understated the risks" of the herbicides and also "failed entirely to acknowledge other risks," according to U.S. Right to Know.</p>
<div id="35797" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="77896b9baa08d7fa5905f98e506d5e7f"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1268328882094116872" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The court found @EPA refused to estimate the
amount of dicamba damage, characterizing such damage as “potential” an… https://t.co/ev2bah3opD</div> — carey gillam (@carey gillam)<a href="https://twitter.com/careygillam/statuses/1268328882094116872">1591228144.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>One of the risks the EPA failed to acknowledge was the "enormous social cost to farming communities" where the herbicide's use "has turned farmer against farmer, and neighbor against neighbor," the court wrote, according to Bloomberg. A farmer was shot and killed because of a dicamba-related argument in Arkansas in 2016.</p><p>The ruling impacts the dicamba-based herbicide sold by <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/bayer" target="_self">Bayer</a>, which acquired Monsanto in 2018. It also prohibits the use of BASF's Engenia and Corteva Agriscience's FeXapan, <a href="https://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN23B0JA" target="_blank">Reuters reported</a>.</p><p>Bayer told Reuters that the ruling impacted a 2018 EPA approval that expires in December and that it is currently at work on a new 2021 approval.</p><p>"Depending upon actions by the EPA and whether the ruling is successfully challenged, we will work quickly to minimize any impact on our customers this season," Bayer said.</p>
<p>The ruling comes around four months after a jury ruled against Bayer and BASF and in favor of a Missouri farmer who said the companies' dicamba products destroyed his peach orchard, according to Bloomberg.</p><p>That was the first of around 140 pending dicamba suits awaiting trial.</p><p>The dicamba suits are not the only suits Bayer inherited when it acquired Monsanto, Reuters pointed out. Wednesday's dicamba decision came days after arguments were heard in an appeal of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/jury-finds-monsanto-liable-in-the-first-roundup-cancer-trial--2595446068.html" target="_self">first</a> case to go to trial over whether or not the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate" target="_self">glyphosate-based</a> weedkiller <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/roundup" target="_self">Roundup</a> causes cancer.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Bayer and BASF Ordered to Pay $265 Million to U.S. Peach Farmer ... ›
- Trump's EPA Backs Bayer's Appeal in Roundup Verdict Appeal ... ›
- 'Dangerous Drift-Prone Pesticide' Threatens Millions of Acres ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Dicamba is having a devastating impact in Arkansas and neighboring states. A farmer in Mississippi County, Arkansas looks at rows of soybean plants affected by dicamba. The Washington Post / Getty Images
Documents unearthed in a lawsuit brought by a Missouri farmer who claimed that Monsanto and German chemical maker BASF's dicamba herbicide ruined his peach orchard revealed that the two companies knew their new agricultural seed and chemical system would likely damage many U.S. farms, according to documents seen by The Guardian.
<p>The lawsuit, which awarded the Missouri farmer $265 million, showed that Monsanto intentionally hid the risks involved in its plans and calculated how to profit off farmers worried about damage to their crops. The documents also show Monsanto's efforts to stymie tests from third-party labs to make sure there was no data that concerned regulators.</p><p>In fact, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/monsanto-crop-system-damage-us-farms-documents" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reports that some employees joked about sharing "voodoo science" and hoping that they stay "out of jail."</p><p>The issue revealed by the documents was about dicamba and a new crop system from the two companies that addressed farmers' growing concerns that weeds resistant to Monsanto's <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate">glyphosate</a> weed-killer, Roundup, were taking over croplands.</p>
<p>The new system allowed farmers to plant dicamba-resistant soybeans and cotton. Then farmers could spray dicamba over their fields and kill everything that had developed a resistance to glyphosate, according to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/monsanto-crop-system-damage-us-farms-documents" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>.</p><p>The documents, which date back to 2009, show that Monsanto and BASF, despite assuring regulators that their system would prevent drift to neighboring farms, were aware that their system could have catastrophic consequences, as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/monsanto-crop-system-damage-us-farms-documents" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reported. It seems the companies were aware that farmers would likely use older versions of dicamba, which easily turns into vapor and carries away to neighboring farms that were not protected, ruining thousands of acres of crops. Dicamba is particularly volatile and likely to carry away in hot weather.</p>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.agjournalonline.com/news/20200307/lawsuit-floodgates-have-been-opened" target="_blank">AgJournal</a>, dicamba can start to vaporize and drift away three days after it has been applied.</p><p>The revelations from the successful $265 million lawsuit come amidst a deluge of complaints in several states. Regulators in Indiana, a soybean-intensive state, have been overwhelmed for the past three years by complaints that dicamba drift has ruined farmers' profits. According to <a href="http://www.therepublic.com/2020/03/01/dicamba_dilemma_herbicide_causing_hoosier_farmers_state_regulators_big_problems/" target="_blank">The Republic</a> in Columbus, Indiana, "Even small amounts of dicamba hitting unintended crops can lead to a 30% to 40% yield reduction, agricultural experts said. That can mean a $180 loss per acre, or $100,000 for a medium-size farm."</p>
<p>In Missouri, complaints about dicamba misuse have grown into a backlog of more than 600 cases. The Missouri Department of Agriculture had no cases of dicamba complaints in 2017, but was inundated with 595 cases by the end of 2019. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, before dicamba-resistant crops existed, approximately 231,000 pounds of the herbicide was spread every year. In 2017, Americans used more than 10 million pounds on cotton and soybean crops, as <a href="https://www.newstribune.com/news/local/story/2020/mar/02/hundreds-wait-to-have-dicamba-complaints-resolved/818982/" target="_blank">The News Tribune</a> in Missouri reported.</p><p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/monsanto-crop-system-damage-us-farms-documents" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reported that Monsanto predicted this damage would happen. A 2015 document showed that Monsanto estimated that dicamba damage claims from farmers would total more than 10,000 cases, including 1,305 in 2016, 2,765 in 2017 and 3,259 in 2018.</p><p>"The documents are the worst that I've ever seen for any case that I've worked on," said lawyer Angie Splittgerber, a former tobacco industry defense attorney, as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/monsanto-crop-system-damage-us-farms-documents" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reported. "So many of them put things in writing that were just horrifying."</p>
<p class=""><em>Editor's note: This article has been updated with respect to a correction published in The Guardian on March 31. Internal emails described in the third paragraph were from both BASF and Monsanto, according to The Guardian.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Bayer and BASF Ordered to Pay $265 Million to U.S. Peach Farmer ... ›
- Missouri's Largest Peach Farmer Sues Monsanto for Losses From ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A French farmer sprays glyphosate herbicide on a cornfield on March 21, 2019 in Saint-Leonard-des-Bois, northwestern France. JEAN-FRANCOIS MONIER/AFP via Getty Images
A new investigation revealed that Monsanto funneled money to secretly fund academic studies that warned of catastrophic consequences to farmers if glyphosate was banned in the UK, according to research from the German watchdog LobbyControl, as The Guardian reported.
<p>The two studies in question come from 2010 and 2014, which was before the German chemical and pharmaceutical giant Bayer bought Monsanto in 2018. Upon learning of the secret funding, Bayer said the failure to disclose it violated the company's principles, according to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/12/revealed-monsantos-secret-funding-for-weedkiller-studies-roundup" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>.</p><p>"This is an unacceptable form of opaque lobbying," said Ulrich Müller at <a href="https://www.lobbycontrol.de/initiative/" target="_blank">LobbyControl</a>, as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/12/revealed-monsantos-secret-funding-for-weedkiller-studies-roundup" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reported. "Citizens, media and decision-makers should know who pays for studies on subjects of public interest. The studies also used very high figures for the benefits of glyphosate and for possible losses in case of a ban. These extreme figures were then used to spin the debate."</p>
<p>However, the authors of the two studies said that the funding did not influence their findings. The <a href="https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/resinf/opm/2010/00000021/00000006/art00008" target="_blank">2010 study</a>, called <em>How Valuable is Glyphosate to UK Agriculture and the Environment?</em> touted glyphosate for "a wide range of benefits to users." It said that glyphosate binds to soil and rarely leaches into groundwater. It does mention that glyphosate is sometimes found in surface water, but far below levels that would register as toxic. It then goes on to discuss how a ban of glyphosate would upend UK farming and gardening.</p><p>The <a href="https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/resinf/opm/2014/00000025/00000005/art00007;jsessionid=224saa9i9qtui.x-ic-live-01" target="_blank">2014 study</a> followed a similar line of reasoning. The study, titled <em>Glyphosate Use on Combinable Crops in Europe: Implications for Agriculture and the Environment</em>, also mentioned that glyphosate is highly water soluble and does not readily leach into soil or water and is found in less than 1 percent of water samples. It then goes on to assess "the value of glyphosate use across wheat, winter barley and oilseed rape in Europe."</p>
<p>And yet, one of the lead researchers Sarah Wynn said the funding did not influence her research. She told <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/12/revealed-monsantos-secret-funding-for-weedkiller-studies-roundup" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>, "As with other companies in our field, it is entirely normal for external organizations to fund research studies. However, it has always been our core principle that our research is never influenced in any way by those that fund us."</p><p>Wynn and her colleagues, unsurprisingly, came down in favor of continued glyphosate use. The research concluded, "the loss of glyphosate would cause very severe impacts on UK agriculture and the environment," as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/12/revealed-monsantos-secret-funding-for-weedkiller-studies-roundup" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reported. In the 2014 study they concluded that Europe would see a 20 percent fall in wheat and rapeseed production if glyphosate were banned.</p><p>Other researchers came to a different conclusion, noting that farming practices would change. The Andersons Centre at Oxford Economics challenged the conclusion of the Monsanto-funded studies.</p><p>In <a href="https://cropprotection.org.uk/media/1139/oxford-economics-summary-report-final.pdf" target="_blank">its report</a> on a glyphosate ban in the UK, it said, "The Andersons Centre believe that this may be rather high given the mitigation efforts and the rotational changes discussed elsewhere. A similar process has been undertaken for all the major crops grown in the UK, using the best available data and knowledge of industry experts."</p><p>The 2010 and 2014 studies were instrumental in the lobbying efforts of the National Farmers Union and others to successfully campaign against a European ban of glyphosate in 2017, as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/12/revealed-monsantos-secret-funding-for-weedkiller-studies-roundup" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reported. The new revelations have spurred the National Farmers Union to note the source of the funding on its glyphosate information.</p><p>The National Farmers Union was not alone in using the research. Industry lobbyings groups the Glyphosate Task Force (now renamed the Glyphosate Renewal Group), <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20150106072502/http://www.glyphosate.eu/economical-importance-glyphosate-herbicides-european-agriculture-case-studies-uk-and-germany" target="_blank">also used</a> <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20150106072502/http://www.glyphosate.eu/references-chapter-benefits-0" target="_blank">the research</a>, as did the <a href="https://cropprotection.org.uk/media/1139/oxford-economics-summary-report-final.pdf" target="_blank">Crop Protection Association</a>, according to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/12/revealed-monsantos-secret-funding-for-weedkiller-studies-roundup" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>.</p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Monsanto Roundup Cancer Trial Postponed in St. Louis, Bayer Stock Climbs
09 January
Health + Wellness
The compound of German chemicals and pharmaceuticals giant Bayer in Berlin on March 20, 2019. ODD ANDERSEN / AFP via Getty Images
By Carey Gillam
A highly anticipated Roundup cancer trial set to start later this month in the St. Louis area has been pulled from the docket, a court official said on Wednesday.
<p>The trial, which was to pit a woman named Sharlean Gordon against Roundup maker <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto" target="_self">Monsanto</a> Co., was to start Jan. 27 in St. Louis County and was to be broadcast to the public. Notably, Gordon's lawyers planned to put former Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant on the stand. St. Louis was the home of Monsanto's corporate headquarters until the company was purchased by Bayer AG of Germany in June of 2018.</p><p>In taking the trial off the calendar, the judge in the case has ordered that a status conference be set for a month from now, said St. Louis County Court spokeswoman Christine Bertelson.</p>
<p>The Gordon trial was already postponed once – it originally was scheduled for August. It is one of several trials that have been postponed in the last several months as Bayer attempts to find a settlement to the mass of claims filed against Monsanto by people stricken with non-Hodgkin lymphoma they claim was caused by exposure to Monsanto Roundup and other <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate" target="_self">glyphosate</a>-based herbicides. Bayer officials have said that Monsanto is facing more than 42,700 plaintiffs in the U.S.</p><p>Gordon developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after using Roundup herbicides for 25 years at her residence in South Pekin, Illinois, and has suffered extensive debilitation due to her disease. Gordon's stepfather, who also used Roundup at the family home, died of cancer. <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Sharlean-Gordon-v.-Monsanto.pdf" target="_blank">The case</a> is actually derived from a larger case filed in July 2017 on behalf of more than 75 plaintiffs. Gordon was to be the first of that group to go to trial.</p>
<p>Monsanto and Bayer have denied that Monsanto's herbicides can cause cancer, and assert the litigation is without merit but is being fueled by greedy plaintiffs' attorneys.</p><p>According to sources close to the litigation, <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto-roundup-trial-tacker/more-monsanto-roundup-cancer-trials-expected-to-be-postponed/" target="_blank">discussions are underway</a> to postpone more Roundup cancer trials, possibly including one set to start Jan. 21 in St. Louis City Court. Attorneys for Monsanto and for the plaintiffs in the upcoming January trials declined to comment.</p><p>Shares in Bayer hit a 52-week high and were up close to 3 percent Wednesday. Investors have been pushing the company to find a way to avoid future trials and to settle the litigation.</p>
<p>In the three Roundup cancer trials held so far, unanimous juries have found that exposure to Monsanto's herbicides does cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma and that the company covered up the risks and failed to warn consumers. The three juries awarded a total of four plaintiffs more than $2 billion in damages, but the trial judges in each case <a href="https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/toxic-tort-law/monsanto-roundup-lawsuit/monsanto-roundup-settlement/" target="_blank">have reduced the awards</a> significantly.</p><p>No damages have yet been paid as Monsanto appeals the verdicts.</p><p>Bayer's annual shareholders' meeting is set for April 28 and analysts said investors would like to see either a settlement of the litigation by that time, or at least meaningful progress in containing the liability. Bayer's <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/business/monsanto-roundup-cancer-verdict.html" target="_blank">stock took a dive</a>, losing billions of dollars in value, after the first jury verdict in August 2018, and share prices remain depressed.</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto-roundup-trial-tacker/st-louis-monsanto-roundup-trial-postponed/" target="_blank">U.S. Right to Know</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Monsanto Cancer Ruling Sparks Backlash Around the Globe ... ›
- Glyphosate Spin Check: Tracking Claims About the Most Widely ... ›
- More Monsanto Roundup Cancer Trials Expected to Be Postponed ... ›
- Former Monsanto CEO Ordered to Testify at Roundup Cancer Trial ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Activists stage a flash protest organized by the international movement Attac at the offices of Bayer in Paris on March 14, 2019. PHILIPPE LOPEZ / AFP via Getty Images
Update, Jan. 8: On Wednesday, St. Louis County Court spokeswoman Christine Bertelson confirmed that one trial set to start Jan. 27 has been officially postponed with no new trial date yet set. That trial was to pit a woman named Sharlean Gordon against Monsanto.
By Carey Gillam
Discussions are underway to postpone one or more highly anticipated Roundup cancer trials set to start in January, including trials scheduled for St. Louis, the former hometown of Roundup herbicide maker Monsanto Co., according to sources close to the litigation.
<p>Court dockets still show trials <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto-papers/" target="_blank">scheduled for later this month</a> in St. Louis and in California courts, and court officials say they are still planning for the trials to take place on the designated dates. But multiple legal sources said the opposing sides were nearing agreements that would put off the trials by several months, if not longer. Attorneys for Monsanto and for the plaintiffs in the upcoming January trials declined to comment.</p><p>The talk of trial delays is not unexpected. Bayer AG, the German company that bought Monsanto in June 2018, successfully negotiated the <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto-roundup-trial-tacker/speculation-over-settlement-soars-as-roundup-cancer-trial-postponed/" target="_blank">postponement of several trials</a> that had been set for the fall of 2019 after losing each of the three trials held to date. Each involved plaintiffs who claimed their cancers were caused by exposure to Roundup and other Monsanto <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate" target="_self">glyphosate</a>-based herbicides.</p><p><a href="https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/toxic-tort-law/monsanto-roundup-lawsuit/monsanto-roundup-settlement/" target="_blank">The juries </a>found not just that the company's herbicides can cause cancer, but that Monsanto knew about the risks and hid the information from consumers. Bayer has estimated more than 42,700 people have filed claims in the U.S. against Monsanto, which is now a wholly owned unit of Bayer.</p><p>Bayer and a team of plaintiffs' attorneys have been pursuing a potential settlement of the litigation that could amount to well more than $8 billion, the legal sources said.</p>
<p>Bayer has been particularly uneasy about trials scheduled for St. Louis, where former Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto-roundup-trial-tacker/former-monsanto-ceo-ordered-to-testify-at-roundup-trial-in-person/" target="_blank">has been subpoenaed to testify</a> and the trial of plaintiff Sharlean Gordon was to be broadcast to the public. In the three previous trials, all held in California, Monsanto executives have given testimony through depositions and have not had to take the stand in front of juries.</p><p>"Trial postponements make perfect sense right now," said Susquehanna Financial Group analyst Tom Claps. "I believe that it is in everyone's best interest to stay out of the courtroom at this time, especially when negotiations seem to be progressing in a positive manner."</p><p>Amid the maneuvering, more cases continue to stack up. Lawyers for Monsanto were in court Monday in Independence, Missouri to set a schedule and trial date for a newly filed lawsuit brought by a woman suffering from non-Hodgkin lymphoma she claims she developed due to her residential use of Roundup.</p><p>Gregory Chernack of the Washington, DC-based Hollingsworth law firm, one of Monsanto's long-serving defense firms, told the judge in Independence that Monsanto wanted the case consolidated with roughly 30 others being overseen by a different judge in Kansas City, Missouri. Attorneys for plaintiff Sheila Carver objected to the suggestion, and asked the judge to go ahead and set a trial date. Jackson County Circuit Court Judge Jennifer Phillips decided to give the parties 30 days to file motions on the matter.</p>
<p>Bayer's annual shareholders' meeting is set for April 28 and analysts said investors would like to see either a settlement of the litigation by that time, or at least meaningful progress in containing the liability. Bayer's <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/business/monsanto-roundup-cancer-verdict.html" target="_blank">stock took a dive</a>, losing billions of dollars in value, after the first jury verdict in August 2018, and share prices remain depressed.</p><p>"Bayer's stock has reacted negatively to each of the three trial verdicts. Therefore, Bayer does not want to face more negative trial headlines from losing another trial, especially while it is engaged in good faith settlement discussions," said Claps.</p><p>There are multiple factors at play, however, including the uncertainty surrounding the outcome of the appeals that are pending for each of the three trials. If an appellate court were to overturn the jury findings of Monsanto's liability, it would weaken the plaintiffs' bargaining power for a global settlement. Conversely, the company's position would be weakened if the jury verdicts are upheld on appeal. But no decision is expected <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto-roundup-trial-tacker/monsanto-comes-out-swinging-in-appeal-of-johnson-verdict/" target="_blank">on the appeals</a> for several more months at least.</p><p>In December, the U.S. Department of Justice took the rare step of <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-21/u-s-epa-supports-bayer-s-appeal-of-roundup-cancer-verdict" target="_blank">intervening in the litigation</a> to <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/bsk-pdf-manager/2019/12/EPA-amicus-brief-supporting-Monsanto-in-Hardeman-appeal.pdf" target="_blank">side with Monsanto</a> and Bayer in the appeal of one of the verdicts.</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto-roundup-trial-tacker/more-monsanto-roundup-cancer-trials-expected-to-be-postponed/" target="_blank">U.S. Right to Know</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Former Monsanto CEO Ordered to Testify at Roundup Cancer Trial ... ›
- Cancer Takes Toll as New Roundup Trials Near - EcoWatch ›
- Judge Blocks California From Putting Cancer Warning on Roundup - EcoWatch ›
- Bayer Settles Roundup Cancer Suits for Over $10 Billion - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
GMO Mosquitoes to Control the Spread of Disease Carries Unknown Risks
04 October 2019
Insights + Opinion
Biologist releases GMO mosquitoes in Piracicaba, Brazil on Feb. 11, 2016. Victor Moriyama / Getty Images
By Natalie Kofler, Françoise Baylis, Graham Dellaire, Landon J Getz
Every year, around one million people die of mosquito-borne diseases according to the World Health Organization (WHO). This is why mosquitoes are considered one of the deadliest living creatures on the planet — not because they are lethal themselves, but because many of the viruses and parasites they transmit are.
<p>Consider, for example, dengue fever. This mosquito-borne virus is a leading cause of hospitalization and death among children and adults in several countries in Asia and Latin America. In 2016, member states in three of the six WHO regions <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dengue-and-severe-dengue" target="_blank">reported 3.34 million cases</a>.</p><p>In the absence of an effective vaccine for dengue fever, Zika fever, chikungunya and other mosquito-borne diseases, researchers have developed genetic strategies to reduce mosquito populations. One such strategy involves the release into the wild of genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes that express a lethal gene — a strategy believed to have little impact on the overall DNA of wild populations of mosquitoes.</p><p>As an interdisciplinary group of authors, we generally support technologies that can reduce human disease and suffering. However, given our combined expertise in science, governance and ethics we have concerns that recent decisions to deploy GM mosquitoes have not been made responsibly.</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://theconversation.com/genetically-modifying-mosquitoes-to-control-the-spread-of-disease-carries-unknown-risks-123862" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.</em></p>
Genetically Modified Mosquitoes
<p>The transfer of new genes from GM organisms to wild or domesticated non-GM populations is a key criticism of GM crops like soybean and corn. There are concerns that the introduction of GM genes into non-target species could have <a href="https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/genetically-modified-organisms-gmos-transgenic-crops-and-732/" target="_blank">negative consequences for both human and environmental health</a>.</p><p>Oxitec, a company that spun out of research at Oxford University in the early 2000s, developed and trademarked GM <a href="https://www.oxitec.com/our-technology" target="_blank">Friendly™ mosquitoes</a> (also known as strain OX513A of <em>Aedes aegypti</em>). These male GM mosquitoes have what the company describes as a "self-limiting" gene, which means that when these so-called friendly mosquitoes mate, their offspring inherit the self-limiting gene which is supposed to prevent them surviving into adulthood.</p><p>In theory, when these mosquitoes are released in high numbers, a dramatic reduction in the mosquito population should follow.</p><span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8d418a7c3cf175000fe60ea35aab2cb5"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5dRGPsx3tAw?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>Changes to the Gene Pool
<p>According to research published by Oxitec researchers in 2015, field trials involving recurring releases of Friendly™ mosquitoes demonstrated <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0003864" target="_blank">a reduction of nearly 95 percent of target populations in Brazil</a>. In these field trials, experiments were not performed to assess whether GM mosquitoes might persist in the wild.</p><p>A recent study from the Powell lab at Yale University has since confirmed that <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49660-6" target="_blank">some of the offspring of the GM mosquitoes didn't succumb to the self-limiting lethal gene and survived to adulthood</a>. They were able to breed with native mosquitoes and thereby introduce some of their genes into the wild population.</p><p>The Yale researchers found that mosquitoes captured at six, 12 and up to 30 months post-release carried DNA from the GM mosquito population, thereby disproving "<a href="https://news.yale.edu/2019/09/10/transgenic-mosquitoes-pass-genes-native-species" target="_blank">the claim that genes from the release strain would not get into the general population because offspring would die</a>."</p><p>It appears that between five and 60 percent of the captured mosquitoes post-release contained genetic sequences inherited from the Friendly™ mosquitoes. Importantly, the number of mosquitoes identified as still containing DNA derived from GM mosquitoes declined between the 12-month and 27-month capture periods specifically, perhaps indicating that the offspring of GM mosquitoes might be less fit in nature after all. This remains to be shown conclusively.</p>Unknown Potential Impacts
<p><span>Meanwhile, the impact of mosquitoes carrying these new genes remains largely unknown. One significant worry is that a new breed of mosquito might emerge that is more difficult to control. These new genes could also potentially alter evolutionary pressures on viruses carried by mosquitoes, like dengue fever, in unpredictable ways. This includes potentially increasing their virulence or changing their host-insect interactions. These are hypothetical risks that have been raised by scientists, and reflect the need for further study.</span><br></p><p>Thus, like GM soybean or corn, there is legitimate concern about the propagation of <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2011/369573" target="_blank">new genetic material</a> in wild populations with as yet unknown consequences.</p><p>Field trials involving the release of GM organisms are typically designed to evaluate safety and efficacy, to assess possible impact on food networks, and to ensure that there is no (or minimal) undue harm to the environment or human health. Put simply, field trials are meant to assess potential harms associated with genetic technologies and to provide opportunities to minimize these harms before moving forward with more large-scale releases.</p><p>This raises two important questions: Given that <a href="https://time.com/the-war-against-mosquito/" target="_blank">"around 5 percent or less"</a> of the GM mosquito population was expected to survive, shouldn't Oxitec have made plans to assess the risk of gene transfer to wild populations during their initial trials? And shouldn't the Brazilian government have required such an assessment as part of the regulatory approval process, <a href="https://bch.cbd.int/database/record.shtml?documentid=105833" target="_blank">given their awareness of the risk</a>?</p><p>Instead, with approval from Brazilian authorities, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.12618" target="_blank">Oxitec released nearly half a million GM mosquitoes every week into shared environments in Jacobina over a two-year period from 2013 to 2015</a>. This was done without the benefit of adequate risk assessment and without proper public consultation.</p><p>Oxitec reports having used leaflets, social media, carnival parades and community meetings to inform the public of their research. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1326257" target="_blank">Public education is not the same as public consultation and engagement</a> and, in our view, the people living in the vicinity of this release had more than a right to be informed of the plans. They also had a <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6414/527.summary" target="_blank">right to participate</a> in relevant decision-making.</p><p>On the basis of presumed success in Brazil where mosquito populations were reduced — a consequential <a href="https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/94/8/16-020816.pdf" target="_blank">reduction in the prevalence of dengue fever</a> has yet to be demonstrated — plans have been made to extend field trials to other jurisdictions, including <a href="https://www.oxitec.com/florida" target="_blank">the Florida Keys in the U.S</a>.</p><p>To date, public pushback <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3927" target="_blank">has temporarily prevented</a> the release of GM mosquitoes in the Florida Keys. But Oxitec hopes to eventually secure approval from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to perform field trials and assess release of a <a href="https://keysweekly.com/42/oxitec-reveals-new-technology-up-for-epa-consideration/" target="_blank">second-generation GM mosquito</a> that causes lethality only in female mosquitoes, as another means to collapse wild populations.</p>Regulating Genetic Modification
<p>In the end, minus the <a href="https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/09/study-dna-spread-genetically-modified-mosquitoes-prompts-backlash" target="_blank">hyperbole and somewhat alarmist reporting of the Yale study</a> (the journal is looking into <a href="https://www.genomeweb.com/scan/pushback-mosquito-paper#.XZJv0S2ZNTZ" target="_blank">allegations brought forth by Oxitec of speculative and unsubstantiated claims</a>), the finding that offspring of GM mosquitoes could survive in the wild remains undisputed. This illustrates the importance of careful decision-making and adequate oversight of field trials involving the release of GM organisms. Careful decision-making requires open venues for informed and deliberative public dialogue, engagement and empowerment.<br></p><p>Genetic modification technologies need to be more transparent, as do the scientific processes for evaluating their risks, especially where the rights and needs of affected communities can inform technology development. With more robust and nuanced regulatory processes governing the development and release of GM organisms, it should be possible to benefit from these technologies without harming or disenfranchising the communities that are the intended beneficiaries.</p><p>Mosquito-borne illnesses cause immense human suffering, and we should continue to develop technologies to reduce that suffering. At the same time, we must be equally dedicated to designing scientific processes that are safe, ethical and just.</p>From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Healthline
By Makayla Meixner
Blue fruits get their vibrant color from beneficial plant compounds called polyphenols.
<p>In particular, they're high in anthocyanins, which is a group of polyphenols that give off blue hues (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4561837/" target="_blank">1Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>However, these compounds provide more than just color.</p><p>Research suggests that diets high in anthocyanins may promote heart health and reduce your risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, certain cancers, and other diseases (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5613902/" target="_blank">2Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Here are 7 delicious blue fruits with powerful health benefits.</p>
<p> <em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/blue-fruits" target="_blank">Healthline</a>. </em><em></em></p>
1. Blueberries
<p>Blueberries are tasty and packed with nutrients.</p><p>They're <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/low-calorie-foods" target="_blank">low in calories</a>, high in fiber, and loaded with essential micronutrients, such as manganese and vitamins C and K (<a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/171711/nutrients" target="_blank">3</a>).</p><p>These delicious berries are also high in anthocyanins, which are potent antioxidants that help defend your cells against harm from unstable molecules called free radicals (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18759450" target="_blank">4Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31074028" target="_blank">5Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12475297" target="_blank">6Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>According to one study in 10 healthy men, the antioxidants provided in about 2 cups (300 grams) of blueberries may immediately protect your DNA against free radical damage (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23507228" target="_blank">7Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Additionally, research indicates that diets high in anthocyanins from <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-proven-benefits-of-blueberries" target="_blank">blueberries</a> and other fruits and vegetables may help prevent chronic illnesses, such as heart disease, type 2 diabetes, cancer, and brain conditions like Alzheimer's (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25745811" target="_blank">8Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27748191" target="_blank">9Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25317174" target="_blank">10Trusted Source</a>).</p><p><strong>Summary</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Blueberries are rich in essential nutrients and antioxidants, which play a role in preventing cell damage and may reduce chronic disease risk.</p>2. Blackberries
<p>Blackberries are sweet and nutritious dark-blue <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/11-reasons-to-eat-berries" target="_blank">berries</a> that offer several health benefits.</p><p>A single cup (144 grams) of blackberries packs nearly 8 grams of fiber, 40% of the recommended Daily Value (DV) for manganese, and 34% of the DV for vitamin C (<a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/173946/nutrients" target="_blank">11</a>).</p><p>The same serving also provides 24% of the DV for vitamin K, making blackberries one of the richest fruit sources of this essential nutrient (<a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/173946/nutrients" target="_blank">11</a>).</p><p><a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/foods-high-in-vitamin-k" target="_blank">Vitamin K</a> is necessary for blood clotting and plays an important role in bone health (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26468402" target="_blank">12Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Though the relationship between vitamin K and bone health is still being researched, scientists believe that a lack of vitamin K may contribute to osteoporosis, a condition in which your bones become weak and fragile (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28403946" target="_blank">13Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>While leafy green vegetables are highest in vitamin K, a select few fruits, such as blackberries, blueberries, and prunes, also contain ample amounts to help you meet your daily needs (<a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/171711/nutrients" target="_blank">3</a>, <a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/173946/nutrients" target="_blank">11</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28698808" target="_blank">14Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/168162/nutrients" target="_blank">15</a>).</p><p><strong>Summary</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Blackberries are loaded with fiber, manganese, and vitamin C. They're also one of the few fruits that are high in vitamin K, which plays an essential role in blood clotting and bone health.</p>3. Elderberries
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMDUxNDc2NC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNTcxODg1MH0.8PnMGKTE7b8Cj76kt76sMPiUoheQt8CcpAVdpBNn6j4/img.png?width=980" id="aabc2" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="04676a76f321b4c4a25c5eaa89758647" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" /><p><a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/elderberry" target="_blank">Elderberry</a> is one of the most popular plant remedies worldwide (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28198157" target="_blank">16Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24409980" target="_blank">17Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>This blue-purple fruit may help defend against the cold and flu by boosting your immune system. It's also been shown to help people recover from these illnesses faster (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9395631" target="_blank">18Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Research suggests that the beneficial plant compounds in elderberries may activate healthy immune cells that help fight off cold and flu viruses (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28282861" target="_blank">19Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>What's more, test-tube studies indicate that concentrated elderberry extracts may fight the flu virus and prevent it from infecting cells, though this is still under investigation (<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1756464619300313" target="_blank">20</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19682714" target="_blank">21Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>In one 5-day study, taking 4 tablespoons (60 ml) of a concentrated elderberry syrup daily helped people with the flu recover an average of 4 days quicker than those who did not take the supplement (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15080016" target="_blank">22Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>These berries are also high in <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/does-vitamin-c-help-with-colds" target="_blank">vitamins C</a> and B6, two nutrients known to promote a healthy immune system. Just 1 cup (145 grams) of elderberries provides 58% and 20% of the DVs for vitamins C and B6, respectively (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29099763" target="_blank">23Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29261855" target="_blank">24Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/171727/nutrients" target="_blank">25</a>).</p><p>Keep in mind that it may be best to eat these berries cooked. Raw elderberries may cause an upset stomach, particularly if eaten unripe (<a href="https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/herbal-report/final-assessment-report-sambucus-nigra-l-fructus_en.pdf" target="_blank">26</a>).</p><p><strong>Summary</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Elderberries are a nutritious purple-blue berry popularly used as a natural remedy for cold and flu symptoms.</p>4. Concord Grapes
<p>Concord grapes are a healthy, purple-blue fruit that can be eaten fresh or used to make wine, juices, and jams.</p><p>They're packed with beneficial plant compounds that function as antioxidants. In fact, Concord grapes are higher in these compounds than purple, green, or red <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/benefits-of-grapes" target="_blank">grapes</a> (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26784463" target="_blank">27Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Though more research is needed, some studies show that Concord grapes and their juice may boost your immune system (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19640969" target="_blank">28Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>For example, one 9-week study that had people drink 1.5 cups (360 ml) of Concord grape juice daily observed increases in beneficial immune cell counts and blood antioxidant levels, compared with a placebo group (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21138361" target="_blank">29Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Additionally, several smaller studies suggest that drinking Concord grape juice daily may boost memory, mood, and <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/11-brain-foods" target="_blank">brain health</a> (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20028599" target="_blank">30Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28429081" target="_blank">31Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19640963" target="_blank">32Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29163162" target="_blank">33Trusted Source</a>).</p><p><strong>Summary</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Purple-blue Concord grapes may boost immunity, mood, and brain health, though more studies are needed to confirm this.</p>5. Black Currants
<p>Black currants are very tart berries with a deep, bluish-purple hue.</p><p>They can be eaten fresh, dried, or in jams and juices. You may also find them in dietary supplements.</p><p>Black currants are especially <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vitamin-c-foods" target="_blank">high in vitamin C</a>, which is a well-known and potent antioxidant.</p><p>A single cup (112 grams) of fresh blackcurrant supplies more than two times the DV for this vitamin (<a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/173963/nutrients" target="_blank">34</a>).</p><p>As an <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/foods-high-in-antioxidants" target="_blank">antioxidant</a>, vitamin C helps protect against cellular damage and chronic disease. In fact, some population studies note that diets rich in this nutrient may offer significant protection against heart disease (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5000725/" target="_blank">35Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Additionally, vitamin C plays a key role in wound healing, your immune system, and the maintenance of your skin, bones, and teeth (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29099763" target="_blank">23Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225480/" target="_blank">36Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29477224" target="_blank">37Trusted Source</a>).</p><p><strong>Summary</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Blackcurrants are packed with vitamin C, a potent antioxidant that plays a vital role in your immune system and helps maintain healthy skin, bones, and teeth.</p>6. Damson Plums
<p>Damsons are blue <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/benefits-of-plums-prunes" target="_blank">plums</a> that are often processed into jams and jellies. They can also be dried to make prunes (<a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-6907-9_11" target="_blank">38</a>).</p><p>Prunes are a popular choice for digestive problems, including <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/best-foods-for-constipation" target="_blank">constipation</a>, which is an ailment that affects an estimated 14% of the global population (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21606976" target="_blank">39Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>They're high in fiber, with 1/2 cup (82 grams) packing an impressive 6 grams of this nutrient (<a href="https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/168162/nutrients" target="_blank">15</a>).</p><p>As a result, eating more prunes may increase stool frequency and soften your stools, making your bowel movements easier to pass (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25109788" target="_blank">40Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29398337" target="_blank">41Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Plums also contain certain plant compounds and a type of sugar alcohol called sorbitol, which may help loosen your stools and promote more frequent bowel movements as well (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11401245" target="_blank">42Trusted Source</a>).</p><p><strong>Summary</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Prunes made from damson plums supply fiber, beneficial plant compounds, and the sugar sorbitol — all of which may help relieve constipation.</p>7. Blue Tomatoes
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMDUxNDc2Ni9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzODUxNTU0OX0.D2pDsOIyNfq2lkDt6gK9ykTm1dlkbG35iKXwz7nf4Fg/img.png?width=980" id="de5fa" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7b532565c2af0ec6e77c6ce3ff5fd122" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" /><p>Blue tomatoes, also known as purple or Indigo Rose tomatoes, are grown to be high in anthocyanins (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19359211" target="_blank">43Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Their high anthocyanin content gives off a purple-blue tint (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26920283" target="_blank">44Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Several studies suggest that diets high in anthocyanin-rich foods may <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/13-anti-inflammatory-foods" target="_blank">reduce inflammation</a>, protect against heart disease, and promote eye and brain health (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28974032" target="_blank">45Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25139396" target="_blank">46Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24791600" target="_blank">47Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28483533" target="_blank">48Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30277799" target="_blank">49Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22218162" target="_blank">50Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>What's more, blue tomatoes pack various other powerful antioxidant compounds typically found in regular tomatoes, such as <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/lycopene" target="_blank">lycopene</a> (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18953354" target="_blank">51Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>Observational studies link lycopene-rich diets to a reduced risk of heart disease, stroke, and prostate cancer (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23317928/" target="_blank">52Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28983399" target="_blank">53Trusted Source</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12424325/" target="_blank">54Trusted Source</a>).</p><p><strong>Summary</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Blue tomatoes are grown to be rich in anthocyanins while retaining high amounts of other beneficial plant compounds that have been associated with a reduced risk of heart disease, stroke, and prostate cancer.</p>The Bottom Line
<p>Aside from their delicious taste, blue fruits offer a wide array of health benefits.</p><p>They're nutrient-dense sources of powerful antioxidants, including vitamin C and beneficial plant compounds called anthocyanins.</p><p>Due to their high antioxidant content, these fruits may reduce inflammation and stave off chronic conditions like heart disease and <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/foods-to-avoid-with-diabetes" target="_blank">type 2 diabetes</a> (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28974032" target="_blank">45Trusted Source</a>).</p><p>To boost your health, eating a variety of blue fruits regularly may be worthwhile.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The compound of German chemicals and pharmaceuticals giant Bayer in Berlin. ODD ANDERSEN / AFP / Getty Images
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria announced his ruling in San Francisco on Monday.
<p>Chhabria reduced the amount that Germany's Bayer AG has to pay the claimant to $25.27 million (€22.4 million). Bayer bought <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto" target="_self">Roundup</a> maker <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto" target="_self">Monsanto</a> for $63 billion last year.</p><p><a href="https://www.dw.com/en/roundup-cancer-case-monsanto-ordered-to-pay-us-man-80-million/a-48089737" target="_blank">Following a four-week trial in March</a> a federal jury awarded $5 million (€4.4 million) in compensatory and $75 million in punitive damages to a man who blamed his <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/cancer" target="_self">cancer</a> on <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate" target="_self">glyphosate</a>-based weed killer Roundup.</p><p>Edwin Hardeman was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in 2014.</p>
<h2>Limits on Ratios for Damages<br></h2><p>At a hearing to discuss Bayer's request to overturn the verdict earlier this month, Chhabria said, "It's quite clear that under the Constitution I'm required to reduce the punitive damages award and it's just a question of how much."</p><p>U.S. Supreme Court rulings limit the ratio of punitive to compensatory damages to 9 to 1.</p><p>The judge said he would also take into account the fact that Hardeman was now in full remission and unlikely to suffer as much as he had in the past.</p><p>Bayer says Roundup — and its active ingredient glyphosate — are <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/defending-glyphosate-a-roundup-of-german-agribusiness-sentiments/a-48841453" target="_blank">safe for human use and not carcinogenic</a>. However, in 2015 the World Health Organization's cancer arm reached a different conclusion, classifying glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans."</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTkzMTYyMy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxODM5MzEyOX0.7JK-gpmEtmn_xjZNy2pWdiNSsUBjYBHZeyk7oPMQEpU/img.jpg?width=980" id="f7bc1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4a0de18acc2c279b3cea121124cdd2e8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Roundup products for sale in California.
<h2><br>Litigation Hits Share Price</h2><p>The Leverkusen-based company is facing lawsuits from more than 13,400 plaintiffs in the U.S.</p><p>Earlier this year, Bayer CEO Werner Baumann conceded the <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/us-jury-orders-bayer-to-pay-2-billion-in-roundup-cancer-case/a-48725939" target="_blank">effect the court cases had had on the share price</a>: "We have lost two cases in lower courts. That is why the company is massively affected. You see it in our share price," he said at an academic business event in Cologne in April. "You see it selectively, mainly here in Germany and in France — less so in the USA — in our reputational scores."</p><p>Over the past year, Bayer's share price has dropped dramatically and the company has seen €30 billion (approximately $33.7 billion) wiped off its market value since the first court ruling last August. Its share price has fallen from €96 (approximately $108) in August 2018 to €58.63 (approximately $66) at close of markets in Frankfurt on Monday.</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="0149527fe1e9c508b621343c050fecfc"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cl9pjhn1fso?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Thanks <a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@EcoWatch</a> for reposting my article <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Glyphosate?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Glyphosate</a> Spin Check: Tracking claims about the world's most widely used herbicide <a href="https://t.co/gBz2vnBRs9">https://t.co/gBz2vnBRs9</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/USRightToKnow?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@USRighttoKnow</a></p>— Stacy Malkan (@StacyMalkan) <a href="https://twitter.com/StacyMalkan/status/1123999757502951426?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 2, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/bayer-monsanto-damages-reduced-to-2527-million-by-us-judge/a-49602104" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">DW</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- French Court Rules Monsanto Liable for Farmer's Health Problems ... ›
- Bayer Apologizes Over Secret List of Monsanto Critics - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
albedo20 / Flickr
By Pat Thomas
Throughout the U.S., major food brands are trying to get rid of GMO ingredients — not necessarily for the right reasons, but because nearly half of consumers say they avoid them in their food, primarily for health reasons.
But the CEO of Impossible Foods, purveyor of the Impossible Burger, is bucking that trend.
<p>The manufacturers of the <a href="https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/promotion-gmo-derived-impossible-burger-worlds-largest-natural-food-trade-show-denounced" target="_blank">controversial</a> veggie burger just announced that in the future, due to "high demand" for the product, its plant-based patties will be made using GMO soy.</p><p>The formula change was made to ensure the smooth rollout of the Impossible Burger in Burger King restaurants. The soy formulation is apparently better able to withstand Burger King's trademark <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/impossible-burger-national-launch-gmo-soy-burger-king-2019-5?r=US&IR=T" target="_blank">flame grilling</a>. As a result, in early in 2019, Impossible Foods dumped the textured wheat protein it had been using and replaced it with soy protein concentrate instead.</p><p>Pat Brown, founder and CEO of Impossible Foods, publicly <a href="https://medium.com/impossible-foods/how-our-commitment-to-consumers-and-our-planet-led-us-to-use-gm-soy-23f880c93408" target="_blank">defended</a> the move. But a closer look reveals that Brown's claims about the healthfulness and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/sustainability">sustainability</a> of "Impossible Burger 2.0" just don't stack up.</p><p>Here are six reasons the CEO of Impossible Burger is wrong when he claims that GMO soy is "the safest and most environmentally responsible option" for scaling up production of the fake meat product — a product that already uses a genetically engineered yeast, called heme, as its key ingredient.</p>
<h2>1. Dubious Health Claims</h2><p>When the switch to soy was first made. Sue Klapholz, Impossible Foods vice president of nutrition & health, <a href="https://medium.com/impossible-foods/soy-facts-myths-and-why-its-in-our-new-recipe-12815b4997cf" target="_blank">said</a> that "Soy is not only safe; it's accessible, nutritious."</p><p>That's not quite true.</p><p>Results from studies showing healthful properties of fermented soy products like tofu or miso are sometimes used to support the healthfulness of other, more highly processed types of soy.</p><p>But all soy is not created equal.</p><p>In the messy world of soy studies, where "soy" can be defined as almost anything with soy in it, there are just as many <a href="https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/soy/" target="_blank">studies</a> showing no or only marginal benefits, and in some cases, potential for harm — e. g. interference with thyroid medication — from diets high in soy.</p><p>Soy protein isolates and concentrates are made from defatted soybean flakes that have been washed in either alcohol or water to remove the sugars and dietary fiber. The flakes are then processed into powders or "flours."</p><p>Alcohol is the most common process, as it produces products with a neutral taste. But the beneficial isoflavones in soy are removed by this method. Soy protein concentrate has the <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/134/5/1229S/4688709" target="_blank">lowest level</a> of healthful isoflavones — including daidzein, genistein and glycitein — of any form of processed soy.</p><p>There are other differences between the various types of soy. A 2014 study comparing GMO and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/organic">organic</a> soy beans found small but statistically significant <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814613019201" target="_blank">differences</a> in the nutritional quality: The organic soybeans had slightly higher protein levels and lower levels of omega-6 fatty acids. Omega-3 fatty acids showed no significant difference. Both fats are essential in human diets, but U.S. eaters tend to consume a <a href="https://www.drweil.com/vitamins-supplements-herbs/vitamins/balancing-omega-3-and-omega-6/" target="_blank">higher ratio</a> of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids than is healthy.</p>
<h2>2. Higher Use of Pesticides</h2><p>Brown says that "careful analysis" has "conclusively shown" GMO soy is "better for the environment than the alternatives."</p><p>Absolutely untrue. GMO soy, whether fed to cows or people, is bad for the environment.</p><p>A 2013 Food & Water Watch <a href="http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/reports/superweeds/" target="_blank">study</a>, based on U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency data, found that planting GM crops quickly resulted in the growth of herbicide-resistant "superweeds" which caused farmers to increase their herbicide use.</p><p>That report echoed the findings of another <a href="https://enveurope.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/2190-4715-24-24" target="_blank">study</a> produced by Washington State University research professor Charles Benbrook in 2012. In 2016, research from University of Virginia confirmed that <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate">glyphosate</a>-resistant weeds have led to a <a href="https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/8/e1600850" target="_blank">28-percent hike</a> in herbicide use on GM soybeans compared with non-GM.</p><p>This has also been seen in other countries, including <a href="https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/AGRI/Brief/BR8451190/br-external/CanadianBiotechnologyActionNetwork-e.pdf" target="_blank">Canada</a>, <a href="http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-81232017021003333" target="_blank">Brazil</a> and <a href="https://www.grain.org/article/entries/706-twelve-years-of-gm-soya-in-argentina-a-disaster-for-people-and-the-environment" target="_blank">Argentina</a>.</p><p>There is also evidence that <a href="https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/glyphosate-fact-sheet" target="_blank">glyphosate</a>, the active ingredient in Monsanto's <a href="https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/monsantos-roundup-enough-make-you-sick" target="_blank">Roundup</a> weedkiller, accumulates in GM soy. The same study that found GM soy is nutritionally inferior to organic, and that GM-soy <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814613019201" target="_blank">contained</a> high residues of glyphosate and its toxic breakdown product AMPA, while conventional and organic soybeans were free of these agrochemicals.</p><p>That may help explain why a recent laboratory analysis by Moms Across America found glyphosate residues in the new formula Impossible Burger. The <a href="https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/yesmaam/pages/8069/attachments/original/1557958339/COA_S0004900_Impossible_Burger_and_Beyond_Meat_patty_-_glyphosate.pdf?1557958339" target="_blank">levels of glyphosate</a> and its toxic breakdown product AMPA were low (11 ppb) but as the Moms note, evidence from animal feed studies indicates that just 0.1 ppb of glyphosate can <a href="http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/yesmaam/pages/680/attachments/original/1393210354/Glyphosat__publikation__Shehata_und_Kr%C3%BCger.pdf?1393210354" target="_blank">destroy gut bacteria</a>.</p><p>Other studies of animals fed GM foods and/or glyphosate show worrying trends, including <a href="http://earthopensource.org/wordpress/downloads/GMO-Myths-and-Truths-edition2.pdf" target="_blank">damage</a> to vital organs like the liver and kidneys, damage to gut tissues and gut flora, immune system disruption, reproductive abnormalities and even tumors.</p><p>Agrichemical companies continue to claim that glyphosate is safe. Yet glyphosate is a "probable human carcinogen" <a href="https://www.iarc.fr/featured-news/media-centre-iarc-news-glyphosate/" target="_blank">according to</a> the World Health Organization (WHO), and its maker <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto">Monsanto</a> (Bayer) has recently been <a href="https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/monsanto-ordered-pay-2-billion-cancer-victims" target="_blank">ordered</a> to pay out billions in compensation to victims who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma as a result of using the weedkiller. More cases are pending.</p>
<h2>3. No Benefits for Farmers</h2><p>According to Brown, the company decided to source "American-grown, milled and processed GM soy" that is "from farms in Iowa, Minnesota and Illinois" because there just isn't enough non-GMO soy to meet demand.</p><p>There is no question that GM soy is more plentiful than non-GM soy in the U.S. In fact, the U.S. grows more soybeans than any other country except Brazil. <a href="http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-us/recent-trends-in-ge-adoption.aspx#.U1b1TYKjIuI" target="_blank">According to the USDA</a>, more than 90 percent of the soybeans harvested on U.S. farms are genetically engineered to withstand herbicides, especially Roundup.</p><p>That should translate into more crops to sell, but an in-depth <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/business/gmo-promise-falls-short.html" target="_blank">investigation</a> by the New York Times found that, in addition to increasing pesticide use, genetic modification in the U.S. and Canada has not brought the expected increases in crop yields.</p><p>This echoes the findings of a 2016 National Academy of Sciences report that found "<a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23395/genetically-engineered-crops-experiences-and-prospects" target="_blank">there was little evidence</a>" that the introduction of genetically modified crops in the U.S. had led to yield gains beyond those seen in conventional crops.</p><p>Right now, U.S. farmers are suffering from a <a href="https://www.producer.com/2019/02/u-s-soy-glut-could-take-three-years-to-eliminate/" target="_blank">glut of soy</a>, thanks to ongoing trade disputes with China, which have resulted in low prices and farm bankruptcies.</p>
<h2>4. Kills Biodiversity</h2><p>The adoption of GMO herbicide-resistant crops like soy has favored the use of herbicides over tried and tested methods of weed management, such as crop rotation.</p><p>In addition to creating superweeds, glyphosate-based herbicides damage microbial life in the soil, which makes crops more susceptible to diseases. They are toxic to a range of aquatic organisms and also kill beneficial "weeds" like milkweed, a <a href="https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/monarch-butterfles-problem-herbicides" target="_blank">major food source</a> for the Monarch butterfly.</p><p>As weeds become resistant, older and stronger pesticides such as 2,4-D or dicamba, are being used. In 2017-18, "dicamba drift" was responsible for damage to an estimated <a href="https://www.revealnews.org/article/scientists-warned-this-weed-killer-would-destroy-crops-epa-approved-it-anyway/" target="_blank">5 million acres</a> of non-GM soybeans in 24 states, in addition to numerous specialty crops and wild plants.</p><p>Globally, soy plantations have been responsible for <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/stop-deforestation/drivers-of-deforestation-2016-soybeans" target="_blank">wholesale clearing</a> of forests and savannahs in places like Brazil, with the added effect of contributing to climate change. In the U.S., land converted to soy production has typically been pre-existing agricultural land and so is not linked to deforestation. But increasing demand for soy is destroying American prairies. Analysis of satellite data has shown that between 2006 and 2011, farmers in the Dakotas, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska had converted <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/02/13/1215404110.abstract?sid=6beb2b07-ff9f-4090-a5dc-ec4811e46f7a" target="_blank">1.3 million acres</a> of grassland into soybean and corn production.</p><p>Research by <a href="http://static.ewg.org/pdf/plowed_under.pdf" target="_blank">Environmental Working Group</a> and the USDA's <a href="https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=44880" target="_blank">Economic Research Service</a> supports this finding.</p><p>These monocultures are bad news for wildlife, because they destroy habitats for a wide range of wild creatures, from ground-nesting birds to pollinators like bees and butterflies.</p><p>But crop monocultures also lead to mono-diets. Agricultural diversity ensures a healthier environment and greater food security on a global scale. But the over-focus on cash crops like soy means that today just a <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/02/26/1313490111.full.pdf" target="_blank">handful of crops</a> now dominate diets around the world. This new global diet has more calories and less nutrition, and is responsible for the global rise in non-communicable diseases such as obesity, heart disease and diabetes.</p>
<h2>5. No 'Scientific Consensus' Around Safety</h2><p>Brown proclaims there is "scientific consensus that GMOs are safe for consumers and the environment — a view now endorsed by the American Medical Association (AMA), the National Academy of Sciences and the World Health Organization."</p><p>But Brown's statement is factually untrue.</p><p>A <a href="https://beyond-gm.org/who-says-gmos-are-safe-and-who-says-theyre-not/" target="_blank">closer look</a> at these claims shows that the AMA's Council on Science and Public Health statement opposing GMO labeling <a href="http://ag.utah.gov/documents/AMA-BioengineeredFoods.pdf" target="_blank">did not claim GMOs are safe</a>. It acknowledged "a small potential for adverse events ... due mainly to horizontal gene transfer, allergenicity and toxicity." The AMA recommended mandatory safety assessments prior to release of GM foods — a system which, as the AMA pointed out, is not in place in the U.S.</p><p>The National Academy of Sciences has not issued any blanket claims of GMO safety. It did issue a report in which it analyzed a range of plant-breeding techniques and concluded that GM posed a <a href="http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309092094" target="_blank">higher risk</a> of introducing unintended changes into food than any other crop breeding method other than mutation breeding, a method in which plant genomes are bombarded with radiation or chemicals to induce mutations.</p><p>The WHO has stated: "No effects on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of GM foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved."</p><p>But take a look at the <a href="http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/index.html" target="_blank">text</a> that preceded that sentence: "Different GM organisms include different genes inserted in different ways. This means that individual GM foods and their safety should be assessed on a case-by-case basis and that it is not possible to make general statements on the safety of all GM foods." The WHO also recommends that "adequate post-market monitoring" is carried out to ensure the safety of GM foods.</p><p>Yet such monitoring is not carried out anywhere in the world.</p><p>In fact, GM foods were not subjected to human trials before being released into the food chain. Their human health impacts are not being studied by any government agency, nor by the companies that produce them.</p><p>That's why nearly 300 independent scientists from around the world issued a public warning that there was <a href="https://ensser.org/tag/no-consensus-on-gmo-safety/" target="_blank">no scientific consensus</a> about the safety of eating genetically modified food, and that the risks, as demonstrated in independent research, gave "serious cause for concern."</p>
<h2>6. Ignores Consumer Concerns</h2><p>Brown says "we believe in our consumers and respect their right to consider the facts and decide for themselves." He adds that the inclusion of GMO soy will lead to "noise from anti-genetic engineering fundamentalists."</p><p>But concerns about GMOs aren't just "noise." They persist because they are legitimate, and because consumers want facts from independent researchers and other sources who are not <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/06/us/food-industry-enlisted-academics-in-gmo-lobbying-war-emails-show.html" target="_blank">paid mouthpieces</a> for the GMO industry, or brands with a bias.</p><p>U.S. consumers overwhelmingly want GMO foods labeled so they can make real informed choices. Impossible Foods has chosen to ignore both legitimate concerns and the desire for choice by insinuating its fake meat burger onto the market via independent restaurants, large restaurant chains, theme parks, museums, stadiums, college campuses and corporate offices — places where no food labeling is required and where customers are least likely to ask questions.</p><p>It's time to demand more from the food we eat, better protection from our regulators and a higher level of truthfulness and transparency from food brands.</p><p>If you want to let the CEO of Impossible Foods know that he's wrong about GMO soy, <a href="https://advocacy.organicconsumers.org/page/11006/action/1" target="_blank">click here</a>.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Promotion of GMO-Derived Impossible Burger at World’s Largest Natural Food Trade Show Denounced as Deceptive <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/GMO?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#GMO</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ImpossibleBurger?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ImpossibleBurger</a> <a href="https://t.co/pzQtR6M9Q0">https://t.co/pzQtR6M9Q0</a></p>— Non-GMO Report (@nongmoreport) <a href="https://twitter.com/nongmoreport/status/1113898937436573696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 4, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/05/21/6-reasons-impossible-burgers-ceo-wrong-about-gmo-soy?cd-origin=rss" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
- Impossible Burger and the Road to Consumer Distrust - EcoWatch ›
- What Is the Impossible Burger, and Is It Healthy? - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A monarch butterfly before migration to Mexico on Oct. 21, 2018 at the Mobile Botanical Gardens in Alabama. patricia pierce / CC BY 2.0
The yearly count of monarch butterflies overwintering in Mexico, released Wednesday, shows an increase of 144 percent from last year's count and is the highest count since 2006. That's good news for a species whose numbers had fallen in recent years, but conservationists say the monarch continues to need Endangered Species Act protection.
The count of 6.05 hectares of occupied forest is up from 2.48 hectares last winter. The increase is attributable to favorable weather during the spring and summer breeding seasons and during the fall migration. Monarchs have lost an estimated 165 million acres of breeding habitat in the U.S. to herbicide spraying and development.
<p>"This reprieve from bad news on monarchs is a thank-you from the butterflies to all the people who planted native milkweeds and switched to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/organic">organic</a> corn and soy products," said Tierra Curry, a senior scientist at the <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>. "But one good weather year won't save the monarch in the long run, and more protections are needed for this migratory wonder and its summer and winter habitats."</p><p>In 2014 conservationists led by the Center for Biological Diversity and the <a href="https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org" target="_blank">Center for Food Safety</a> petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to protect the butterfly under the Endangered Species Act. The Fish and Wildlife Service's initial decision was that <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species">endangered species</a> protection may be warranted, and a final decision will be issued by June.</p><p>"The question is whether the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a> administration wants to do <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto">Monsanto</a>'s bidding or protect monarchs for future generations," said George Kimbrell, legal director at the Center for Food Safety. "This year's count is a temporary reprieve that doesn't change what the law and science demands, which is that we protect monarchs under the Endangered Species Act before it's too late."</p><p>As recently as the mid-1990s, monarchs covered nearly 21 hectares of forest in their wintering ground, falling to less than 1 hectare in 2014. Scientists estimate that 6 hectares is the threshold to be out of the immediate danger zone of migratory collapse.</p><p>About 99 percent of all North American monarchs migrate each winter to oyamel fir forests on 12 mountaintops in central Mexico. Scientists from <a href="http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_offices/mexico" target="_blank">World Wildlife Fund Mexico</a> estimate the population size by measuring the area of trees turned orange by the clustering butterflies.</p><p>Monarch butterflies west of the Rocky Mountains overwinter on the coast of California. Their numbers dropped to fewer than 30,000 this year, down from 1.2 million two decades ago.</p><p>A recent study found that if current trends continue, the western population has a 63 percent chance of extinction in 20 years and more than an 80 percent chance of extinction within 50 years. The western population is now at the threshold of extinction. </p><p>The caterpillars only eat milkweed, but the plant has been devastated by increased herbicide spraying in conjunction with corn and soybean crops that have been genetically engineered to tolerate direct spraying with herbicides. In addition to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate">glyphosate</a>, monarchs are threatened by other herbicides and by <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/neonicotinoids">neonicotinoid</a> insecticides that are toxic to young caterpillars.</p><p><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">Climate change</a> also threatens to disrupt the monarch's migration and render its overwintering habitats unsuitable by the end of the century.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTEzNjQyOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NjA2MjE3N30.oe5oOw7WcI-wa2e2-8981jfHaI7ka_87xgUfbxp7zgM/img.jpg?width=980" id="b06de" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8ca07e8f528c639da5531a2bb3520fee" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Graph by Tierra Curry, Center for Biological Diversity</small></p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="1695e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="FGZGOT1576663068"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1067428243706470401" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">5 Ways to Make a Difference in the Life of a #Monarch @HFSciencePub @jnp_mn @BetteAStevens https://t.co/ZDP5MNdneR</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1067428243706470401">1543329699.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
Read More
Show Less