​The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found a link between some pesticides and a significantly increased risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma—a type of cancer of the lymphatic system. In this type of cancer, tumors of the lymph nodes or within the lymph system can form. According to the review of 44 studies, 80 active ingredients in 21 classes of chemicals, researchers found that exposure to glyphosate the main ingredient in Roundupdoubles the risk of this deadly cancer.

According to an article in Rodale News: “There’s been a striking increase in the number of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma cases over the past three decades, and a major new scientific review suggests chemical pesticides—particularly glyphosate, the active ingredient in the popular weedkiller Roundup—are playing an important role in fueling the cancer.”

Glyphosate’s increasing use can be attributed to the rise of genetically-modified food crops. Monsanto, the manufacturer of Roundup is also the creator and manufacturer of genetically-modified seeds, the use of which has skyrocketed over the last two decades.

Monsanto touts its weed killer as safe, declaring on its website that: “Roundup herbicides and other glyphosate products can be used as part of an environmentally responsible weed control program and fit with our vision of sustainable agriculture and environmental protection.”

While the company claims that its product is safe the pesticide that is also known as the “Darth Vader chemical” has been linked to other serious health conditions and environmental degradation. It has been linked to autism, allergies, cancer, Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS), Parkinson’s disease, depression, heart disease, multiple sclerosis, infertility, Alzheimer’s disease, and more. In a peer-reviewed report by Anthony Samsel, a retired science consultant and Dr. Stephenie Seneff, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) research scientist, found that glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup caused nutritional deficiencies and systemic toxicity.

Additionally, while Monsanto may claim its product somehow contributes to “environmental protection” environmentalists assure us that this chemical doesn’t just wash off produce, and instead is finding its way into air and water supplies, as well as killing pollinators like butterflies and bees.
​
Read more: http://www.care2.com/greenliving/exposure-to-monsantos-roundup-pesticide-doubles-cancer-risk.html#ixzz3XTx76LZa

TAGS:

Spraying Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup could cause cancer, the World Health Organization said in a new report.
 
The most popular weed-killer in the United States — and possibly the world — “probably” causes cancer, according to a new report from the World Health Organization (WHO).
 
Published Thursday in the journal The Lancet Oncology, the reportfocuses on a chemical called glyphosate, invented by Monsanto back in 1974 as a broad-spectrum herbicide. It’s the active ingredient in Roundup, a popular product used mostly in commercial agriculture production. Roundup is particularly good for genetically modified crops, which can be bred to resist damage from the product while it kills the weeds surrounding it.
 
Roundup, shown here, includes a chemical that could be carcinogenic to humans.

​In the U.S., glyphosate is not considered carcinogenic. The Environmental Protection Agency’s current position is that “there is inadequate evidence to state whether or not glyphosate has the potential to cause cancer from a lifetime exposure in drinking water.” In the wake of Thursday’s report, however, the EPA said it “would consider” the U.N. agency’s findings.
 
The new report, crafted by the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), puts glyphosate at the second-highest level of the agency’s classifications for cancer. There are four classifications for things that could cause cancer: known carcinogens, probable or possible carcinogens, not classifiable, and probably not carcinogenic. It noted that glyphosate has been detected in the blood and urine of agricultural workers, indicating that it is absorbed by the human body.
 
Roundup is used in both industrial agriculture and in home gardens, but the new classification is aimed mainly at industrial use. Home gardeners do not risk significant health impacts from using the product, one of the agency’s representatives told the Associated Press.
 
“It’s agricultural use that will have the biggest impact,” the IARC’s Kate Guyton said. “For the moment, it’s just something for people to be conscious of.”
 
The U.N agency’s findings are being met with some heavy skepticism — particularly from Monsanto. The company is arguing that the bulk of the scientific literature shows no proven carcinogenic effects on humans, and that the researchers used data that was already widely available to make a conclusion that no other health agency has ever made.
 
“There is no new research or data that was used; the most relevant, scientific data was excluded from review; the conclusion is not supported by scientific data; and there is no link between glyphosate and an increase in cancer when the full data set is included in a rigorous review,” said Philip Miller, Monsanto’s vice president of global regulatory affairs, in a statement. “We don’t know how IARC could reach a conclusion that is such a dramatic departure from the conclusion reached by all regulatory agencies around the globe.”
 
Aside from debate over its cancer-causing effects, the active ingredient in Roundup has been shown to be harmful to humans in other ways. When exposed to heightened levels long-term, the EPA saysglyphosate can cause kidney damage, and could have harmful reproductive effects. Acute exposure can cause congestion of the lungs and an increased breathing rate, according to EPA.
 
Focus on the health impacts of glyphosate has magnified over the years as the chemical’s use has skyrocketed across the country and the world. According to the report, it is now used in more than 750 different products for agriculture, forestry, urban, and home applications.

TAGS:

This fact sheet will answer some common questions about cancer. Many people wonder if the environment they live in “causes cancer.” To answer such difficult questions, it is first necessary to understand what cancer is, how it develops and what factors contribute to cancer.

​What is cancer?
Cancer is not a single disease. It is a group of more than 200 different diseases. Cancer is an uncontrolled growth of cells that disrupts body tissues and organs. Cancerous cells are not normal in their structure and function. They grow and multiply to form tumors that invade local tissues and sometimes scatter throughout the body. In the beginning, there are no warning signs to alert us to the disease. Later, the signs of cancer are related to the location of the tumor. As cancer progresses, it commonly causes loss of muscle tissue, pale skin, pain, fatigue and loss of appetite.

How widespread is cancer?
It is estimated that one out of every two men and one of every three women will have cancer in their lifetimes. About one in four persons will die of cancer. The American Cancer Society estimates that about 570,000 cancer deaths occur each year in the United States. Cancer is the second leading cause of death after heart disease.

Which cancers cause the most deaths?
In the United States, lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths for both sexes, followed by prostate cancer in males and breast cancer in females. For children younger than 15 years old, cancer is the fifth leading cause of death after accidents. Leukemia and cancers of the brain and central nervous system are the leading cancers in children in this age group.

How many kinds of cancer are there?
There are many types of cancer because cancerous cells can grow anywhere in the body. The location of the cancer and the type of tissue involved helps to give the disease a specific name, such as lung cancer, ovarian cancer, breast cancer and prostate cancer. Other examples are melanoma (involving cells that contain skin pigment called melanin) and leukemia (involving the white blood cells).

How does cancer develop?
Cancer is a process with three steps: initiation, promotion and progression. Each step plays a vital role in stopping the cancer process. Since a period of many years usually exists between the initiation of the cancer process and the onset of the symptoms, cancer prevention methods like risk control and early detection are most effective in the first two steps.

The first step involves changes to the genetic code (DNA) of a cell called initiation. Initiation is simply a mistake (mutation). The mistake may appear on a chromosome, or it could turn up in a gene segment of DNA. Usually, initiation by itself is not enough to produce cancer; the body’s repair systems can replace damaged sections of DNA, which allow the cell to recover under normal circumstances. If the cell reproduces while the DNA is damaged, more abnormal cells can be made that may develop into cancer.

The altered cells undergo more changes that may require an additional substance called a promoter. A promoter is something that speeds up the pace of cell division, which can create more genetic mutations. A promoter may be a hormone such as estrogen or a toxic substance such as a chemical in tobacco smoke.

The last step is progression , which means that the cells have begun to grow out of control and is the basis for all cancers. The out of control cells form a tumor. A tumor is simply a mass of abnormal cells that keep growing and can extend into nearby tissues or spread to other parts of the body. How quickly a cancer progresses is determined by body conditions, such as hormones, and by genetic factors.

No one completely understands this process, but certain aspects of a person’s lifestyle can be linked to cancer formation.

What causes cancer?
There is no single cause of cancer. Cancer development depends on things such as family history (genetics), health, nutrition, personal habits and the environment. Genetic factors by themselves probably account for only a small fraction of cancers. Genetic factors do have an important influence on a person’s chance of developing cancer when combined with outside factors. These factors are either voluntary (such as cigarette smoking, diet, and sexual behavior) or involuntary (such as breathing polluted air or drinking contaminated water).

What factors contribute to cancer?
Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of cancer. Cigarette smoke contains more than 3,800 individual chemicals, and more than 40 are carcinogenic (cancer causing).

Portions of the diet, especially fatty foods and alcoholic beverages , also are linked to cancer.

Skin exposure to ultraviolet radiation in sunlight is the primary cause of melanoma, a skin cancer.

Sexual behavior that helps spread sexually transmitted diseases is closely linked to cervical cancer in women.

Environmental pollution by chemicals in drinking water, air, food and in the workplace may contribute to cancer. The harmful health effects of chemicals depend on the dose, strength of the chemical compound, the length of exposure and the general health of the individual. Outside the workplace, very few cases of cancer are believed to be caused by exposure to chemicals in the environment.

Most cancers may be prevented through the identification and control of external factors. Approximately 30 percent of cancers are linked to cigarette smoking. The remaining 70 percent are likely the result of interaction among various factors.

How do chemicals cause cancer?
Some chemicals in the environment are toxic substances that can produce cancer in humans and animals. Most chemicals act by causing the initiation step in the cancer process (altering the DNA), but they also can act as promoters.

What cancers are caused by chemicals?
Most cancer-causing chemicals were first recognized in workplace settings. The workplace is unique because workers are often exposed to large amounts of chemicals over long periods of time. The first association of cancer with the workplace occurred in 1775. A London doctor related cases of cancer of the scrotum among young chimney sweeps to their exposure to soot. Other cause-and-effect relationships have been noted in workers between –

• benzene and leukemia;
• asbestos and lung cancer; and
• vinyl chloride and liver cancer.

Workers may be exposed to a combination of cancer-causing chemicals (carcinogens), which increases their cancer risk. The risk of lung cancer in asbestos workers who also smoke cigarettes is at least 50 times higher than the risk in nonsmoking asbestos workers. Reducing chemical exposure can prevent most work-related cancers.

How are chemicals tested for cancer causing properties?
Studies and experiments with laboratory animals are the main sources that identify whether exposure to a certain chemical causes cancer. Laboratory tests often use doses much higher than those found in the environment. Scientists then apply the animal results to humans to calculate the “cancer risk” for the tested chemical. This process is difficult because there is no complete match between cancer in animals and cancer in humans.

If I am exposed to a carcinogen, will I get cancer?
Cancer development is a complex process that occurs over a long period of time, and is influenced by many factors. There are many different substances that act as carcinogens. Some, like asbestos, are linked to many different human cancers and risk of cancer development is high. Therefore, the risk of getting cancer from exposure depends upon the type of carcinogen and length of exposure.

The good news is that if exposure to carcinogens is stopped soon enough, the body can stop or reverse the cancer process.

What can you do to reduce your risk of getting cancer?
Scientific evidence shows that lifestyle choices, a healthy diet, good nutrition and physical activity can reduce cancer risk. It is never too late to make these changes, but changing long-term behavior can be difficult. You must be persistent over time to reduce your risk of getting cancer. The American Cancer Society recommends the following –
​

1. Avoid using tobacco products, such as cigarettes, snuff and chewing tobacco. This is especially important for individuals who drink alcoholic beverages. Cancer risk of tobacco and alcohol combined is greater than the sum of their individual effects.
2. Choose most of the foods you eat from plant sources. Eat five or more servings of fruits and vegetables each day. Eat other foods, such as breads, cereals, grain products, rice, pasta or beans, several times each day. Wash fresh fruits and vegetables before eating.
3. Limit your intake of high-fat foods, particularly from animal sources. Choose foods low in fat and limit consumption of high-fat red meats. Choose baked and broiled meats, seafood and poultry, rather than fried food.
4. Be physically active and achieve and maintain a healthy weight. Be moderately active for at least 30 minutes on most days of the week. Stay within your healthy weight range. Be aware that many fat-free cakes, cookies, snack foods and other desserts are high in calories.
5. Limit consumption of alcoholic beverages. Men should have no more than two drinks per day. Women should have no more than one drink per day because they absorb alcohol more readily and are usually smaller in body size.
6. Avoid or reduce exposure to sunlight, particularly in childhood. Reduce your sun exposure by avoiding sun during the middle of the day, wearing protective hats and clothing, seeking shade while outdoors and applying sunscreen to uncovered skin.
7. Follow safety rules and regulations at your workplace. If possible, carcinogens should be replaced with safer substitutes. Workers should handle hazardous materials in a ventilated area and be trained to protect themselves. Personal protective clothing and respirators may be required.

Where can I get more information?
If you have concerns about your health and cancer, talk to your doctor about ways to reduce your cancer risk.

TAGS:

Recent studies have highlighted many possible dangers of glyphosate herbicide, known commonly as Roundup.
October/November 2013
By Shelley Stonebrook

Glyphosate herbicide, more commonly known as Roundup, is the world’s most commonly used herbicide. It is sprayed on everything from homeowner’s lawns to gigantic fields of “Roundup-Ready” genetically modified crops. Though ubiquitous, many research studies suggest that this weed-killing chemical is far from benign. Browse this roundup of information to learn about some of the dangers of glyphosate.

EPA Raised Residue Limits of Monsanto’s Toxic Chemical Glyphosate Herbicide
The toxic herbicide Roundup is an endocrine disruptor that has been linked to serious health impacts, and now the EPA is raising the allowing residue limits for many crops.
​
Hazards of the World’s Most Common Herbicide
New scientific studies link Roundup (glyphosate), the most widely used herbicide in the world, to a host of health risks, such as cancer, miscarriages and disruption of human sex hormones.

Roundup Weed Killer Kills More Than Weeds
Alarming new research on the health hazards of Roundup weed killer is shining a harsh light on a regulatory process that was meant to protect us.

Glyphosate Use
This chart shows that glyphosate use in the United States has been steadily increasing every year, for many years.

GMO Debate Continues as Studies of Herbicides Reveal Chronic Health Problems
Despite new studies proving glyphosate to be a harmful herbicide, the FDA has increased the limits allowed in fruits and vegetables — empowering Monsanto and refreshing the GMO debate.

Roundup Is Toxic to Good Bacteria in Soil
Scientists are finding many negative impacts caused by the glyphosate used on Roundup-Ready GM crops.

The Threats From Genetically Modified Foods
Genetically modified foods and crops pose serious threats to human and animal health, but Big Ag doesn’t want you to know that.

Pesticide Use Rises as Herbicide-Resistant Weeds Undermine Performance of Major GM Crops
A new Washington State University study shows that the emergence and spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds is strongly correlated with the upward swing in pesticide use.

The Crazy New Research on Roundup
A popular chemical sprayed onto lawns and food crops all across the country may cause a catastrophic situation in your gut.

TAGS:

​PUBLISHED: SEPTEMBER 29, 1992
Farmers have higher rates of several deadly forms of cancer, possibly because of exposure to pesticides and other substances and long hours out in the sun, National Cancer Institute researchers say.
 
Over all, farmers were found to be much healthier than others, with lower rates of heart disease and lung cancer. That is probably because they smoke less and get a lot more exercise, said Dr. Aaron Blair, one of the study’s authors.
 
“What’s striking is that out of this peaks,” he said last week.
 
Dr. Blair and his cancer institute colleagues, including Dr. Joseph F. Fraumeni Jr., found that farmers had increased rates of Hodgkin’s disease, multiple myeloma, leukemia, melanoma and cancers of the lip, stomach and prostate. The melanoma and lip cancers are probably due to farmers’ exposure to ultraviolet radiation in sunlight, Dr. Blair said.
 
He said pesticides were a likely cause of some of the other cancers; other possible causes are fertilizer in drinking water; fuels and oils; fumigants, and animal cancer viruses. Pesticides may be interfering with the farmers’ immune systems, allowing tumors to gain a foothold, he suggested. “Pesticides affect the immune system in a number of animals,” he said. “These aren’t hard links, you understand, but it’s more of a suggestion of one of the things that might be going on.”
 
John McCarthy, vice president for science of the National Agricultural Chemicals Association in Washington, said: “If you add up all the evidence, we don’t believe there’s a cancer-pesticide association from proper use. But if there are better studies to be done to clarify that, let’s do them.”
 
Dr. Devra Lee Davis, a scholar at the National Academy of Sciences who studies environmental causes of changing cancer rates, has collaborated with Dr. Blair on a forthcoming study that confirms many of the findings in Dr. Blair’s work, which appears in the current issue of the Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health.
 
The cancer institute study was an analysis of some two dozen studies from around the world, Dr. Blair said. The studies were mathematically analyzed to look for trends that might not be apparent in each study individually.

TAGS:

​Following on from last week’s Word Health Organization (WHO) report on glyphosate, which confirmed the world’s most used herbicide probably causes cancer, Sustainable Pulse has discovered documents from 1991 that show how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) themselves were fully aware of glyphosate’s carcinogenic potential.

On February 11, 1985 the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate was first considered by an EPA panel, called the Toxicology Branch Ad Hoc Committee. The Committee, in a consensus review dated March 4, 1985, then classified glyphosate as a Class C Carcinogen. A Class C Carcinogen has  ”Suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential” according to the EPA.

This Class C classification was changed by the EPA six years later to a Class E category which suggests “evidence of non-carcinogenicity for humans”. Mysteriously this change in glyphosate’s classification occurred during the same period that Monsanto was developing its first Roundup-Ready (glyphosate-resistant) GM Crops.
​
It is now 2015 and WHO has put glyphosate’s cancer causing ability back in the spotlight. The question is who is to blame for this shocking lack of protection for public health? The answer is the U.S. government, who have pushed glyphosate around the World as part of their campaign to support the U.S. biotech industry in their attempt to dominate global agriculture.
The thirty-year glyphosate cancer cover up will go down in history as yet another failure, by the U.S. government, the EPA and worldwide regulators, to put the health of the general public before the need to protect and expand company profits.

TAGS: 

​Studies of cancer among farm workers are difficult to conduct and interpret given the unique nature of this occupational group. The transitory nature of the work, high levels of poverty, and lack of legal documentation make epidemiologic studies difficult to accomplish. Nevertheless, this workforce in the United States, which numbers as much as 3 million persons, is a high-risk population due to exposures to numerous toxic substances, including excessive sunlight, heat, dangerous machinery, fumes, fertilizers, dust, and pesticides. We summarize characteristics of farm workers (i.e., demographics, health care) from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) and the California Agricultural Workers Survey (CAWS) and present findings from a series of studies conducted among farm workers in California. The epidemiology literature was reviewed and methods for a unique farm worker union-based epidemiologic study are presented. Farm workers in California and the rest of the United States, many of whom are seasonal and migrant workers are at elevated risk for numerous forms of cancer compared to the general population and specific pesticides may be associated with this altered risk. Elevated risks have been found for lymphomas and prostate, brain, leukemia, cervix, and stomach cancers.

TAGS:

Are the full body protective suits not enough of a tip off that pesticides are toxic? If not, consider this: Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide – the most widely used and best-selling herbicide in the U.S. and one of the world’s most popular weed-killers – has been labeled a probable carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
 
The decision was made by IARC, the France-based cancer research arm of the World Health Organization, which considered the status of five insect and weed killers including glyphosate, which is used globally in industrial farming.
 
As reported by The Lancet:
 
“In March, 2015, 17 experts from 11 countries met at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC; Lyon, France) to assess the carcinogenicity of the organophosphate pesticides tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate (table). These assessments will be published as volume 112 of the IARC Monographs.”
pesticide_research_table
 
After analysis, it was determined that glyphosate falls into the 2nd level of concern (mainly at industrial use) of 4 levels for possible cancer-causing substances. The 4 levels are:
Known carcinogens,
Probable or possible carcinogens (where glyphosate stands)
Not classifiable
Probably not carcinogenic
​
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it would consider the French agency’s evaluation. But given US government agencies’ decisions and political ties, hope is dismal that they will do anything to limit its use. The EPA’s 2012 assessment of glyphosate concluded that it met the statutory safety standards and that the chemical could “continue to be used without unreasonable risks to people or the environment.”
 
Though the agency analyzed numerous weed killers, glyphosate, being one of the most popular, is of greater concern. This active ingredient found in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide currently holds the highest production volumes of any herbicide, used in more than 750 different products. Unfortunately, its use has skyrocketed in recent years due to the development of herbicide-resistant genetically modified crops – made to withstand copious amounts of herbicide spraying.
 
pesticide_mask_chemical_crop – CopyThough the ill effects from glyphosate exposure are most said to be concerning for occupational workers, tests revealing how ubiquitous the chemical really is should pave way for widespread concern.
 
Not only has glyphosate been detected in the air, in the water, and in our food, but it is also showing up in humans – despite the claims from Monsanto that the chemical is excreted from our bodies. Numerous studies have shown that not only is it causing numerous health problems, but it is showing up in urine samples, blood samples, and even breast milk. This is concerning.
 
“Glyphosate has been detected in the blood and urine of agricultural workers, indicating absorption. Soil microbes degrade glyphosate to aminomethylphosphoric acid (AMPA). Blood AMPA detection after poisonings suggests intestinal microbial metabolism in humans. Glyphosate and glyphosate formulations induced DNA and chromosomal damage in mammals, and in human and animal cells in vitro.
 
One study reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) in residents of several communities after spraying of glyphosate formulations. Bacterial mutagenesis tests were negative. Glyphosate, glyphosate formulations, and AMPA induced oxidative stress in rodents and in vitro. The Working Group classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”
 
Needless to say, Roundup creator and biotech giant Monsanto strongly disagreed with the decision.
 
“All labeled uses of glyphosate are safe for human health,” said Phil Miller, a Monsanto spokesman, in a statement.

TAGS:

​Law360, New York (September 23, 2015, 7:13 PM ET) — A former California field worker has slapped Monsanto with a lawsuit in federal court, claiming the primary active ingredient in Roundup weed killer and known carcinogen, glyphosate, caused her to develop bone cancer over years of exposure.
 
A suit claims Monsanto’s popular Roundup herbicide caused a 38-year-old to develio bone cancer. (Credit: AP) Enrique Rubio, who gathered vegetables in California, Oregon and Texas from 1986 to 1995 and sprayed them with Roundup and other chemicals, says repeated exposure to Missouri-based Monsanto’s most popular herbicide led her to develop bone cancer in 1995 at 38 years old, according to Tuesday’s complaint.
 
During her time as a field worker, Rubio said she drove a tractor and used a hand pump to spray crops with the herbicide, often at a rate of two days per week year-round, with nothing more than a paper face mask to protect her from the chemicals.
 
Considering Monsanto’s “prolonged campaign of misinformation” claiming Roundup is safe for animals, humans and the environment, Rubio’s lawyers said her condition is a result of the company’s willful and negligent actions and that there was no way she could have “reasonably discovered” the health risk Roundup presented.
 
“Agricultural workers are, once again, victims of corporate greed,” the complaint said. “Monsanto assured the public that Roundup was harmless. In order to prove this, Monsanto championed falsified data and attacked legitimate studies that revealed its dangers.”
 
The complaint claims the Environmental Protection found that two laboratories hired by Monsanto to purportedly test the toxicity of its Roundup products for federal registration regularly falsified testing data, but in spite of this, the company was allowed to market the herbicide in 115 countries, including the United States.
 
Since the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer released a study earlier this year designating glyphosate as an herbicide “probably carcinogenic to humans,” Rubio’s lawyers said Monsanto can no longer deny the health effects of Roundup.
 
Due to IARC’s findings, the California Environmental Protection Agency announced in early September that it would officially list glyphosate as a known carcinogen under the state’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986.
 
“For nearly 40 years, farms across the world have used Roundup without knowing of the dangers its use poses … because when Monsanto first introduced Roundup, it touted glyphosate as a technological breakthrough: it could kill almost every weed without causing harm either to people or to the environment,” the complaint said. “Of course, history has shown that not to be true.”
 
Rubio’s lawyers claim that Monsanto has known from the outset that Roundup is harmful to humans and the environment, but continues to claim “particularly to United States consumers” that glyphosate-based herbicides pose no unreasonable risk.
 
The suit is accusing Monsanto of strict liability over a known design defect that could have been made less harmful and of failure to warn consumers of the full hazards in dealing with Roundup, along with willful negligence and breach of implied warranty.
 
Due to Monsanto’s production and promotion of Roundup, the suit claims Rubio “has suffered and continues to suffer grave injuries” including economic hardship and considerable expenditures on medical treatment that will only continue.
 
Since being diagnosed in 1995, Rubio became disabled and is unable to work, according to the complaint.
 
Monsanto intends to “vigorously” defend itself in the case and believes “glyphosate is safe for human health when used as labeled,” company representative Charla Lord said Wednesday
 
“Decades of experience within agriculture and regulatory reviews using the most extensive worldwide human health databases ever compiled on an agricultural product contradict the claims in the suit,” Lord said.
 
Rubio is seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages and payment of legal costs, according to the complaint.
 
Rubio is represented by Christopher B. Dalbey, Robin L. Greenwald and Maja Lukic of Weitz & Luxenberg PC and Hunter W. Lundy, Matthew E. Lundy and Kristie M. Hightower of Lundy Lundy Soileau & South LLP.
 
The case is Rubio v. Monsanto Company, case number 2:15-cv-07426, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

TAGS: