DeWayne J. is a pioneer among at least 5,000 litigants suing because Monsanto’s Roundup products have been allegedly linked to cancer, according to an August 2018 New York Times article.

The former California school district groundskeeper was the first of many scheduled to go to trial against this arm of the Bayer Company over allegations of Roundup cancer. Bayer is a Germany-based mega-corporation that acquired Monsanto through a $62.5 billion payout last June.

DeWayne’s lawsuit was purportedly put on the front burner because of the likelihood that he would succumb to the non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma he was diagnosed within four years of the lawsuit’s filing in 2016.

The registration of the landscaper’s complaint occurred one year after the World Health Organization’s International Association for Research on Cancer (IARC) pronounced that glyphosate—the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup products—was determined to be a “probable human carcinogen.”

According to IARC’s website, seventeen global experts met in the spring of 2015 to painstakingly evaluate all scientific evidence regarding the potential carcinogenic nature of the five top insecticides and herbicides, including glyphosate. The conclusion was reportedly based upon real world examples of cancer occurring in humans that had come in contact with glyphosate products—however limited—and experimental exposures of the pure ingredient with test animals.

The panel of experts concluded that the evidence was significant enough to conclude toxicity of glyphosate whether it was used in its purest form or as part of a compound.

The Environmental Protection Agency Weighs In on Glyphosate

As indicated on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) website on Dec. 18, 2017, the federal organization is at odds with IARC’s notion that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen.”

The draft statement released on this date claims that if glyphosate-based products are used following packaging labels consistently, “meaningful risks to human health” are nonexistent.

The federal environmental oversight agency says that this conclusion is consistent with the data presented by other scientific studies from around the world. Additionally, the EPA claims similar findings to that of the 2017 National Institute of Health Agricultural Survey.

While coming to this apparently contradictory conclusion to IARC, the EPA did acknowledge that they did find that there was the potential for birds, mammals, terrestrial and aquatic plants to suffer effects from use of the chemical.

According to an article in The Nation, this admission goes against the grain of a widely-held belief that glyphosate is harmless to living creatures. This is because of its tendency to focus on an enzyme that animals and humans do not produce or have systemically.

The way in which the chemical indiscreetly attacks plants, however, reportedly set the stage for one of Monsanto’s most creative profit machines—Roundup ready seeds. The company genetically modified seeds to withstand the effects of glyphosate, making farmers beholden to the agricultural giant. The farmers didn’t have to change herbicides, could spray for weeds, and not hurt the resulting crops.

The Research Continues

In February of this year, according to a CNN report, University of Washington researchers have pinpointed the percentage of cancer risk increase an individual exposed to glyphosate endures. The researchers reportedly evaluated existing studies and ran their own.

Determinations were made that the risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma occurring because of exposure to glyphosate weed killers like Roundup increases by 41 percent. This blood cancer severely affects the body’s immune system.

The doctoral student and co-author of the study indicated that their research included a 2018 study involving 54,000 people whose occupation it is to directly apply herbicides and pesticides.

While the study concluded by saying that there was definitely a “compelling link” between products like Roundup and cancer, the Bayer Co. claims the research is a manipulation of statistics. The company reportedly insinuated there were significant flaws in the application of the scientific method which invalidated the Roundup study.

The Pioneer is Given His Day in Court

After a three-day jury deliberation in the Superior Court of the State of California in San Francisco, according to the New York Times article, the defendant was found liable for failing to warn potential consumers of the dangers of using Monsanto’s Roundup products.

DeWayne allegedly used Monsanto’s Roundup and Ranger Pro—both glyphosate-based products—daily in his job as a school district groundskeeper and pest control manager in California. He claimed that this constant exposure, thought to be benign, brought on his eventual diagnosis of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a type of blood cancer affecting the production of white blood cells.

The jury’s deliberation resulted in a compensatory award of $39 million and $250 million punitive damages award. Punitive damages are assessed to punish a defendant for outrageous and reckless behavior with the idea this will discourage them acting with future disregard for the well being of others.

As indicated by the New York Times article, the jurors in this first trial had been privy to Monsanto’s internal documents revealing precursory knowledge of the cancerous nature of glyphosate for several decades.

The products are global best sellers and have been sold without any package warning for consumers for years. Had these warnings been posed, consumers might have made other product choices or chose to don protective gear more readily.

Monsanto Fights Back

Two months after the San Francisco jury made its landmark decision on behalf of DeWayne J., the judge made the decision to reduce the Roundup lawsuit award to $78 million from the original $289 million, according to an October 2018 Seattle Times article. Through his counsel, the former groundskeeper made the decision not to fight this judicial move.

The plaintiff’s attorney is in strong disagreement with this decision, but believes that DeWayne has a right to see this action come to a conclusion before his death. The plaintiff is currently just 46 years old and not expected to survive his cancer diagnosis much more than 2-3 years.

As indicated in the Seattle Times report, Monsanto’s burden of litigation had increased from 5,000 to about 8,000 lawsuits. A spokesperson for the defendant said that the company had every intention of fighting verdicts against them through court appeal processes.

In this landmark case, the judge believed that the original award was just too high and determined that bringing the punitive award down to match the compensatory award of $39 million would be more reasonable.

More Follow in DeWayne’s Tracks

A separate New York Times article, written on March 19, 2019, reported the filing of a lawsuit by another victim of non-Hodgkins lymphoma who allegedly regularly used Monsanto Roundup products was the subject—Edwin H., also of the State of California. A jury in federal court ruled that Edwin’s use of the globally popular herbicide Roundup was a ‘substantial factor’ in the development of his disease.

According to the report, Edwin maintained his property for 26 years with Monsanto’s glyphosate-based weed killers. Use of the chemical was designed to control general weeds and poison oak which regularly plagued the landowner’s property.

The jury’s finding ended the first of two phases of this federal case. The second phase will determine if defendant Monsanto has liability with regard to bringing the plaintiff’s disease at least partially into being. Edwin’s counsel told the New York Times that she believes the defendant did everything in its power to spin public opinion and science to their own profitable advantage.

While Bayer—Monsanto’s new parent company—insists that the evidence is on their side, they claim sympathy for Edwin’s condition and that of the now 11,200 people that are seeking to blame them for their diagnosis of non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

The plaintiff’s attorney believes the verdict in Edwin’s case will exert a monumental effect on future lawsuits. A Vanderbilt University law professor, Edward K. Cheng, told the New York Times that the finding in the first phase is irrelevant in terms of setting a legal precedent.

Edwin’s attorney also reported to the New York Times that she believes the agricultural giant must be held accountable for 40 years of corporate malfeasance. She hopes the verdict will send the message that Monsanto must completely change the way they do business or face the risk of enormous assets over time. Manipulation of public opinion, suppression of known dangers, and mistreatment of a consumer base for profit is—in her mind—unacceptable.

According to the New York Times, the verdict has a place in helping Monsanto start to add up the cost. If multiple juries start repeatedly answering the question of culpability with yeses, the agricultural industrial leader might just have to consider its best financial options.

The Second Phase Concludes

On March 27, 2019, according to a National Public Radio (NPR) report, the second phase of Edwin H.’s Roundup cancer lawsuit concluded with a decision which again sided with him. The San Francisco jury awarded $80 million dollars to the man who had used Monsanto’s Roundup products to maintain nearly 56 acres that he personally owned for over a quarter century.

As indicated by the NPR article, the landowner heralded from Sonoma County, Calif. and was diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma in 2015. The Bayer Company, accused of failing to warn consumers and regulators of potential risks, maintains a staunch position of product safety.

The defendant reportedly claims disappointment in the jury’s conclusion, but claims that forty years of scientific inquiry and expert conclusions support that glyphosate is safe and not culpable in terms of being a cancer-causing agent.

Bayer reportedly still doesn’t acknowledge IARC’s claim of the glyphosate being a ‘probable human carcinogen’ despite the reputation of the World Health Organization and this related organization.

According to the NPR report, a spokesperson for the law firm which offered counsel to the plaintiff believes that, no matter what evidence is presented to the contrary, Bayer and Monsanto will continue to undermine and delegitimize the findings.

If you or a loved one developed cancer after using Roundup as a farm worker or home gardener, you may have a legal claim. Legal migrant farm workers may also seek help. Learn more by filling out the form on this page for a FREE case evaluation.

Learn More