Bayer’s Monsanto was ordered to pay more than $1.5 billion Friday over claims its patented weed-killer, Roundup, was linked to users’ cancer, Bloomberg reported.

James Draeger, Valerie Gunther and Dan Anderson were each awarded a total of $61.1 million in actual damages and $500 million each in punitive damages by jurors in state court in Jefferson City, Missouri.

The three people alleged that their non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas — a type of cancer that begins in your lymphatic system, part of the body’s immune system — were caused by years of using Roundup while gardening.

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ll never forget the weird fucking sub of literal Monsanto apologists on reddit who’d keyword search for anything negative and descend with gish-gallop and brigading.

    Bunch of weirdos, some of whom openly admitted to working for and depending on Bayer/Monsanto for a living.

      • extant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        More than likely it’s a bot farm hired by a public relations firm. Bot farms create bots every day and then assign them tasks to repost popular content and then reply using popular comments under different bots all so they can build up credibility and look like a real user. So then when they are put to a task you can have a single user welding the influence of hundreds or thousands to control the narrative.

        Reddit is famously saturated in those bots and this place is likely no different but on a smaller scale made even easier by the instance system.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It was proven in court docs if I recall that they did have a troll farm not unlike the Russian IRA with the sole purpose of defending Monsanto’s products with vigor. The only type of person who would engage in that degree of fundamentalist day in and day out is either an AI bot or on a payroll to do exactly that.

    • PanaX@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As a mod on a few garden and science subs at that time, they were pernacious and ethically inept. They would associate anything anti-pesticide or GMO with being an anti science quack. And they would dog pile on poor individuals expressing concern.

      I had several debates with them, often reported them for brigading, and ultimately had to ban them.

      • aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Being anti-GMO is almost always anti-science quack. (Except if your complaint is about the patenting of the DNA) Pesticides are a bit more complicated because they are necessary for modern agriculture, but of course making a poison that only kills the things you want to kill has the risk if them killing more things.

        • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Being blanket pro GMO is kinda nuts and can only come from a kneejerk against anti-science nuts.

          There are some great GMO examples but also a lot of really bad ones, do you realise that the vast majority of GMO seeds have been modified not to use less pesticide but to make the crops resilient to the pesticides and allow them to use more? It allows them to absolutely flood the area with Monsanto products that all wash into the waterways and destroy ecosystems - and they don’t care because if people are forced to farm dead wasteland they’ll need loads of the chemical fertilisers they also sell…

          Capitalism had a whole load of choices for how to use these new technologies, they could have chosen to help the environment, but the other option is fuck everyone and grab the money so of course they took that.

    • broadacre_farmer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Bunch of weirdos, some of whom openly admitted to working for and depending on Bayer/Monsanto for a living.

      Society relies on products they’ve developed, the world would be a very different place without gramoxone, 2,4-D and glyphosate. Considering glyphosate is the safest of the widely used herbicides it’s probably not a great thing to brand everyone who is against banning it a shill.

    • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’ll defend glyphosate if you like, it’s pretty damn safe and useful. Might not be good idea to be chronically exposed to it, although as I understand it the evidence is still unclear.

      I think it has an important role in setting up conservation agriculture systems, during the initial land preparation to remove perennial weeds. We don’t do enough of this and topsoil losses from annual tillage are a huge, civilisation ending problem.

      But it’s like that clip of somebody calling it safe then refusing to drink a glass of it. He should have offered them a nice glass of cow shit slurry in return. It doesn’t track, I wouldn’t drink a glass of lube but I’m pretty sure it’s safe.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Lol this is hilarious. You’re the only one here that put forth an argument. And in a thread where someone was whining about being “piled on” for their position against glyphosate, you’re being piled on.

        It was like they were literally warning people what would happen if you don’t join the circle jerk.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You call that an argument? It was all either unsourced or unfalsifiable opinion. Additionally their final paragraph worked against their own point. It’s either safe or it isn’t. “Pretty sure” doesn’t cut it.

          I really don’t even think it merits a response. Basically, I rest my case.

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, it was an argument. A weak one, maybe, as it was unsourced as you point out. But they gave something to actually challenge. They took an actual position rather than just claim any opposition to their belief must be shills.

            I really don’t even think it merits a response. Basically, I rest my case.

            Of course you don’t, this come as zero surprise. You just want to, hilariously in light of the whining by a previous poster, pile on any dissent.

            You’re what you hate, not separate from it.

            • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Well, it’s not like I’m getting paid. It’s literally just my opinion, although I think of it more like a conclusion on a personal level.

            • lennybird@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’ll grant an argument need not require a source, but even you admit it’s a weak one. I don’t accuse this individual specifically as a shill, I just don’t consider it worth my time and find them somewhat ignorant on the subject-matter. I’m referring to a specific community that included self-professed shills who literally worked for said companies as mouthpieces. Literally can’t get more shill than that.

              You’re what you hate, not separate from it.

              I’m not because I don’t take a paycheck and have zero skin in the game. The burden is on the user above to source their claims and we go from there. They did not.

              • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I have a top MSc in agricultural science 😂

                I just know from experience these exchanges don’t go anywhere productive, everybody has already made their mind up.

                • zazo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Not sure how that degree makes you an expert in toxicology or cancer research, but I sure hope you’ve not made your mind up about Roundup being safe. I’m not saying it’s not (the WHO is) but from experience I’ve found that treating potentially cancer causing chemicals with extra care is less likely to well…give you cancer.

                  But I’m willing to hear your side. Just fyi I don’t think the argument “it’s the best we got right now or people starve” is any stronger than saying “we can’t switch from lead pipes, the people will die of thirst”.

                • lennybird@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Well hey, fair enough! For fun, can I challenge you on that notion? Screenshot of diploma w/ username? 😁

              • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                It’s interesting that it’s not worth your time to make an actual argument, or ask for sources because you don’t think the argument is complete, but it is worth your time to defend not making an argument and making vague accusations of subs filled with self professed shills and other less forthcoming shills descending upon any post critical of glyphosate.

                The latter, of course, you’ve provided no evidence for and thus by your own metric is a weak argument. Again, you are what you hate.

                • lennybird@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Teaching you fundamentals of argumentation and rhetoric to me is worth a little bit of my time. It is, of course, not your decision to decide what is and isn’t worth my time.

                  Bear in mind that my original comment wasn’t intended to mount an anti-glyphosate position; for I’ve very little interest in divesting the time into that at the moment (been there, done that). I was simply ranting out loud about a negative experience I had with vitriolic brigaders who openly admitted to shilling and taking a paycheck from the very company in question; a notable conflict of interest that would taint anyone’s perception in matters of controversy that might jeopardize their very own paycheck. After all, we saw precisely the same behavior from Tobacco companies for decades until they were thoroughly eviscerated. Anyways, that’s not really an argument I need to defend; it’s merely an observation from a personal experience I’m throwing out in the void, which evidently, many others here shared a similar experience. The user who volunteered to defend glyphosate mounted a point utterly tangential to the original subject-matter at hand, which is why I think it was down-voted. I thought their defense was very amateur, argumentative-wise — especially if they’re a scientist in that field. I’d expect better. So if that’s the starting-point, I’m very skeptical over it being worth investing further time. Sorry, take it or leave it.

                  Meanwhile observe how your own cognitive bias taints your perspective, here. You came to the user’s defense and yet absent of any compelling argument — for which you openly admitted yourself — did you advise they provide a source? Of course you didn’t.

        • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, I’ve reached a point in my life where I don’t mind too much. I’m sure it can be dangerous in the wrong contexts, everything is.

          No interest in a sophomoric reference battle, it’s not like anybody reads them.

          • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m with you mate, it’s the only stuff that’ll actually get rid of Japanese knotweed so I’d rather use it than have my entire ecosystem destroyed by an invasive species

            There are far worse things out there and of course people who spray without masks and gloves are going to get sick, but glyphosate is about as safe as we’re going to get just now, so fuck it lol

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nor should it bother you. I was just laughing at the fact that this group did pretty much exactly what they were whining about. Its amazing how often we see ourselves in others.

  • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    $1.5b is barely a slap on the wrists, but hopefully the first in an avalanche of lawsuits for them. This is like one fiscal quarter’s revenue for RoundUp, but hopefully the signal of the beginning of the end. Bayer gotta be really regretting that big Monsanto purchase.

    Now do insecticides.

    ETA: I retract a bit of my previous statement, looks like they were up to $11b in payouts as of last year, and looking to surpass the $16b they set aside for these lawsuits. Keep slapping that wrist!

    • treefrog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, I was thinking 1.5b sounded like nothing. But this is two people. So, I’m okay with this.

      • aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d like to point out, Alex Jones was sued for $1b for being a dick on the internet.

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Split between about twenty people. So $50 million each vs $750 million each.

          And I would also like to point out that Alex’s being a dick on the Internet was directly linked to threats of violence made against Sandy Hook families. So his words were far from harmless and far more damaging than your average dick on the Internet.

  • splonglo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    A Monsanto shill claimed he would drink the stuff on TV in an interview to prove how safe it was, but the interviewer called him out on his bluff and he refused to do it LMAO. Guy’s name was Patrick Moore, ex-greenpeace founder turned paid shill for whatever company is paying him, usually it’s climate change denial.

    • rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      True story: When I was in grade school another kid bragged that a 2-4-D salesman told a bunch of loggers that it was so safe that you could drink it. Afterwards one of the loggers put a $50 bill next to a small cup of the herbicide and dared anyone to drink it for the money. The kids dad drank it and snatched the money. He died of cancer within 10 years.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      How can you be an ex-founder of something? That’s like being an ex-inventor or ex-murderer.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      He’s also the one who called out Greenpeace for their anti-nuclear stance. Which was correct on his part, but it’s sad to see that stance comes with so much other baggage.

  • steakmeout@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    In high school in the 80s our science teacher repeatedly showed RoundUp promotional materials over a period of about 6 months. It was super creepy, almost Leni Riefenstahl in production.