Bayer Pays $10 Billion To Settle Thousands Of Monsanto Glyphosate Lawsuits

Posted by freedomforall 4 months ago to Business
38 comments | Share | Flag

Citing people familiar with the matter, German newspaper Handelsblatt reported that the company has agreed to settle tens of thousands of glyphosate-related lawsuits in the US for between $8 billion to $10 billion.



Of that number, $2 billion is considered a "reserve" which can be used to settle future claims.

The rest will be used to settle all of the lawsuits pending in the United States from users of the controversial weed killer, the number of active lawsuits against the Roundup purveyor recently numbered more than 50k.

Talks for an out of court settlement have been ongoing since last summer.

Last year, scientists evaluated a batch of existing studies and determined that Monsanto's ubiquitous weed-killer Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate increased cancer risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) by 41%, according to a research published in February 2019. Back in 2018, a San Francisco Jury awarded $289 million in damages to a former school groundskeeper, Dewayne Johnson, who said Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller gave him terminal cancer. That award consisted of $40 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages.
SOURCE URL: https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/bayer-pays-10bn-settle-thousands-monsanto-glyphosate-lawsuits


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by amhunt 4 months ago
    Did Monsanto know of NHL danger?
    Did Monsanto warn people to be careful when using the product.
    Did Monsanto force people to use the product?
    My point is that there is always a trade. I choose A at the expense of B. Eliminate fraud and force -- then we make our own decisions and live with the consequences. Perhaps Monsanto is guilty of one or both? Apparently the court thought so. It does not seem clear to me but I did not listen to the arguments.
    BTW 41% increase in getting NHL is how much? I saw no figure for the probability of getting NHL.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 4 months ago
    Why would companies continue to make/sell anything anymore, seeing as though they can be liable for way more than they ever actually made on the product.

    I got out of medical equipment manufacturing years ago just for this reason. You could work 15 years building up a business and lose it all to a shutdown order by the FDA, or one lawsuit. Not worth the risk.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 4 months ago
    An interesting note about Roundup - it doesn't actually poison the plants directly. The way Roundup works is to overstimulate the plants' growth and reproductive cycles so that the plant dies of "old age" - without ever bearing viable fruit. The similarities of this process to certain forms of cancer is undeniable.

    I guess my question is this: if you aren't taking the proper precautions when applying the product and you get it on you - especially day after day - should the company really be responsible? Having used Roundup for 30+ years, I note that the packaging has always advised to take precautions when using the product and not to get it on you. I always wore long pants and shoes (preferably rubber irrigating boots) when applying Roundup with a wand applicator and backpack sprayer. I made sure to never spray when it was too windy (mostly because the overspray will kill the good plants) and I always washed the clothing I wore and showered thoroughly afterward, recognizing that if the stuff was that nasty to plants, it probably wasn't good for humans either. I have to admit I'm having a hard time drawing the line on this one...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Lucky 4 months ago
    California has failed, or maybe just halted, so another state is going after Exxon-Mobil.
    The right word is extortion- you have money, we want it.
    Now it is Monsanto, same same.

    It works, so expect to see more. The motivation is the same as looting, mindless, when the wokists go after their supporters who have even more money, there may possibly, be some re-thinking.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Orwellian 4 months ago
    No cancer in my family, used a lot of glyphosate for years and had NHL. Currently in remission after lots of treatment. No tears for Monsanto from me.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 4 months ago
    You know?...what really makes me scratch my head is: Wouldn't it have been cheaper and more profitable to make a product that wouldn't harm your customers???

    It's like law suits in general, how it goes down never made any sense to me. You are clearly harmed by X, so you seek restitution for the wrong doing and it only amounts to Y, but with all the hassel, with all the denial and stalling...you end up getting (10 X Y.)..would have be cheaper for them to pay Y and call it a day.

    Why oh why doesn't it work that way...they are their own worst enemy.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 months ago
      I get your point, OUC. There has to be a lot of rationalization on the part of those who make products with deadly side effects.
      $10 billion amortized over x billion quarts of Roundup. It amounts to about 5 years (2015) profits from Roundup for Bayer. Bayer also makes about $6 billion profit a year on genetically modified seed (and other genetic products). That profit is also greatly dependent on use of Roundup and the generic copies of glyphosate made by other companies. Bayer can cut their own sales of Roundup to look good to the public while still raking in profits on genetic products dependent on glyphosate sold by other companies. Those sales are protected from suits by the "Monsanto Protection Act" passed by con-gress, written by Monsanto, and signed by Obama in spite of the public outcry against it. Obama had "flexibility" for Monsanto since he wasn't running for another term in 2013. How many times did he give away American's lives and rights for his "30 pieces of silver?"

      Bayer lost a couple of judgments of $80-90 million each. This settlement is about $238 thousand per plaintiff and that's a bargain to the Bayer accountants. According to the EPA (an admittedly biased source) about 10,400 people die each year from ALL pesticide use so Bayer had to expect some lawsuits in their business. Compare that to about 250 a year from so-called assault rifles. Con-gress is filled with hypocrites and looters.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CaptainKirk 4 months ago
      Well, EVERYONE here should be looking at Regenerative Farming, and supporting it.
      https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savor...

      Basically, if we raise Cattle in a holistic manner. Using their manure, letting chickens feed after they do, moving the cows around.
      Then the chickens, etc. Then we actually sequester carbon, and grow "soil"... Without the chemicals.

      And the reason we have all these "pesticides" was because war companies had extra "chemicals" no longer needed for bombs. So into the soil it went.
      Then the hunt for pesticides followed. Instead of doing it more inline with nature.

      Now the problem is, before pesticides, we lost a X% of all crops to infestations... So, economically, if you could cut X in 1/2 without spending too much, it made sense. It SHOULD NOT. Because what did we learn. Within 2-3 years, the infestations adapted, and we end up with X% still. The SAME X%. LOL. But now we made infestations that could REALLY RAVAGE unprotected farms. THIS was 100% in the interest of the pesticide makers.

      Ending up with GMO food, that CONTAINS the pesticide pieces INSIDE the crops. This and man-made lectins in Wheat, I BELIEVE, are at the base of the obesity and inflammation problems in the world today. I, personally, am highly sensitive to these, and removing them from my diet has CHANGED MY LIFE!

      But government was paying these companies so well, they had slush funds and extra chemicals, and already defined processes for making more... Why stop? The harm (if any), wouldn't be noticed, and "progress" made it worth while. (typical justifications). Now, THAT can be taken too far, and the prevention of using FIRE and ELECTRICITY could be argued in a similar way! But there are 2 COLUMNS: PROS and CONS. Today, it's clear the CONS out weigh the PROS!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 4 months ago
        👍
        Add worm farms to the grow the soil side, too.
        Now, if I can just keep the possums from nibbling my pepper plants.

        It's too bad the political system itself prevents progress.
        I fear that there is no peaceful solution to that problem.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 4 months ago
          Grow HOT hot tomali's?...laughing...would love to see the look on their faces!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 4 months ago
            I am, but they eat the tops of the plants before they fruit. [grrrr]
            So far they have temporarily halted production of Serrano (10,000), Mexican cherry bomb (5,000), Gambo (sweet), Fresno (10,000), Thai Birdseye (100,000), Brazilian Starfish (20,000), and Pimento (500).
            Scoville ratings in ()
            I am offering the brutes some bacon but they are avoiding the trap so far.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 4 months ago
        Exactly. I remember reading about a Virginia Farmer that farmed that way in the Book: The Omnivore's Dilemma.

        Today's wheat was developed originally to make starving kids in Africa FAT...they conveniently forgot the nutrition part...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 4 months ago
        maybe we have just too many people on the planet to be sustainable. The rush to produce more and more "food" is really a result of overpopulation.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CaptainKirk 4 months ago
          Hardly. I have traveled across our great country, and from Norway to St. Petersburg, France, Italy, and all the way down to Australia.
          (FWIW, Japan is next on my list)

          I would ESTIMATE that 80% of the land on the planet is not in use. And that 80% of the population lives on about 5% of it.
          A LONG drive through TN, KY, Montana... Will surprise some people... Same thing for a train ride through France.

          There was a Ted Talk where the guy explained... As countries mature, they have fewer children. Over time, societies like Japan will fade away,
          as they have negative population growth. The USA as well, as we already see the majority being replaced artificially. In 6 generations, we will
          not recognize our country...

          But the prediction was that at about 8 Billion population, the populations would start shrinking. Child mortality would be much LOWER, and the poorest parents could have fewer children. That group is THE driver of the current growth. Well, that group and a couple of religions I wont mention...

          Anyways, as people become wealthier, they focus on wealth preservation, and naturally have fewer children that they can invest more into.
          My Grandma had 12 children, My Mom had 4, 2 brothers each had 2, I have 1... NONE of that generation is producing offspring with my daughter being the youngest at 21... I would say 50/50 she wont have kids. True shame, 'cause she has AMAZING Genes... Super Bright.

          Idiocracy is no longer humor... LOL

          But we could feed our entire country BEEF every day, if we raised cattle properly. While preserving nature, and producing healthier chickens, and better eggs!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 4 months ago
            I think my comment came from the idea that to support the large populations, things had to be done faster and with less land use, spawning efficiency improvements which involve involve the use of processes not compatible with naturel.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 4 months ago
          We produce more food than we need...tons of it gets disposed of or maybe the free market can't distribute it fast enough...I don't know which.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 4 months ago
            what I was getting at is that the old "organic" methods of farming do not produce enough food, so new more efficient methods were needed and have been employed over the years.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 4 months ago
              At the time...yes, but I've read where they figured it out and now can produce just as much.
              Wish I paid more attention to at least give you a little tid bit but I just didn't have a spare neuron at the time...laughing

              Honest science applied to time tested ways is the best way to go. For food, for medicine, for mankind.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by term2 4 months ago
                I would feel better if my food come right out of the ground without all this chemical modifiers. Most of those wind up being carcinocenic years and years after they have been tried out, with us all as the guinea pigs.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 4 months ago
                  Agreed...not to mention it tastes better...like I remember as a kid...we used cow shit and the plants flourished and the food was good.

                  I am presently waiting for 10 early tomatoes to ripen so I can eat them...
                  Started my plants indoors under a great full spectrum grow light back in April...couldn't plant them till early June...just like the last few years.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by term2 4 months ago
                    I used to raise tomatoes in my garden in New Jersey. They actually had a great flavor compared with the lackluster ones I get in Vegas
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 4 months ago
                      Even if you don't use poison, not letting them ripen on the vine gives them a sour taste.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by 4 months ago
                        But fried green tomatoes are so good.

                        I have about 150 green cherry tomatoes so far, in various stages of ripening at present. Still have a couple weeks before any will be ripe, I think.
                        (It's difficult to get good beefsteaks or heritage tomatoes here where we get over 90F for long periods of summer.)
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 4 months ago
                          Believe it or not, my larger tomatoes will be the first to be eaten...usually, the little ones are first.

                          My beefsteaks took forever to ripen last year and each ended up with bad spots. This year I am trying something I listen to online. 600mg of asprin, mixed with a gallon of water and sprayed on the leaves,promotes root growth, immune enhancement and better tasting fruit...
                          I'll let you know if it works.

                          The video was titled: Grow tomatoes, not leaves.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo