September 2018

Ever since a $289 million verdict against Monsanto that was literally discussed around the world, several prominent cities have considered passing resolutions to ban the glyphosate herbicide that was at issue in the lawsuit. In the lawsuit, a California groundskeeper alleged that his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma cancer was caused by exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup product.

The lawsuit relied on findings from the World Health Organization’s 2015 report that indicated glyphosate is a likely carcinogen. Increasingly, cities are now responding to a renewed debate on the health risks of glyphosate. Miami Beach, for its part, has now chosen to pass a resolution that bans herbicides containing glyphosate.

A Closer Look at the Miami Beach Glyphosate Ban

Citing a concern for the safety of Miami Beach residents and city employees alike, the Miami Beach Commission chose to unanimously approve its ban on weed killers that contain the glyphosate herbicide. Miami Beach Commissioner Ricky Arriola hailed the move, reiterating the World Health Organization findings that glyphosate is a likely carcinogen. However, Arriola went one step further by calling glyphosate a "known carcinogen", while also adding it is important for fathers like himself to know that children who are playing at Miami Beach playgrounds will not be harmed by glyphosate.

After the resolution passed, the city manager of Miami Beach now has the authority to ban glyphosate by all city employees. Additionally, contractors who perform maintenance or landscaping on properties owned by Miami Beach will also be prevented from relying on glyphosate.

What Are the Health Risks of Glyphosate?

Given Miami Beach’s decision, it is important to realize that the area is far from alone. Indeed, thirteen countries have placed limitations on the herbicide or even banned glyphosate outright, including leading nations such as:

• Australia
• Canada
• England
• France
• Germany
• Greece
• Spain
• Sweden

Domestically, California has chosen to place glyphosate on its Proposition 65 list of chemicals and substances that are known to cause cancer. Other areas in the United States have chosen to go pesticide-free, serving as a reminder that glyphosate is under increased scrutiny in many parts of the country.

Talk to a Roundup Cancer Lawyer at The Ledger Law Firm

The Ledger Law Firm is a nationally recognized law firm that is currently reviewing glyphosate cancer claims in order to help deserving victims recover the compensation that is owed to them. There are numerous studies that connect glyphosate to causing a number of cancers, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

If your non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or multiple myeloma diagnosis was potentially caused by repeated exposure to Roundup or another glyphosate herbicide, our team is ready to review your claim and fight for your right to receive deserved compensation.

Contact us online for a legal consultation to discuss the facts of your legal claim with a Roundup cancer lawyer at The Ledger Law Firm today.

For anyone who has been following the latest legal battle between Monsanto/Bayer and the thousands of plaintiffs arguing that glyphosate causes cancer, it is clear that some scientific evidence has tied glyphosate weedkiller to causing non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Most notably, the 2015 World Health Organization’s finding that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen has figured prominently into the debate.

What is less discussed, in part because fewer studies have found a causal connection, is the potential link between glyphosate and multiple myeloma.

What Is Multiple Myeloma?

This form of cancer refers to plasma cells that grow out of control after becoming cancerous, and the precise cause for this form of cancer is currently unknown. However, researchers have discovered that the following demographics are at higher risk of receiving a multiple myeloma diagnosis:

• People older than 65
• Individuals with a family member who was diagnosed with the disease
• African-American patients

Given the relative uncertainty as to the cause of this cancer, quality studies on a potentially causal link are worthy of attention.

Monsanto Faces Lawsuits From Agricultural Workers Who Used Roundup and Were Diagnosed With Multiple Myeloma

In addition to lawsuits from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients and surviving loved ones, Monsanto is also facing legal action from those who used Roundup and were diagnosed with multiple myeloma. Notably, there are studies that seem to justify this legal action.

For example, a 2005 study available for analysis on PubMed found that Iowa and North Carolina farm workers who used Roundup had twice the risk of receiving a multiple myeloma diagnosis. This was no small study, for reference, with conclusions that were derived from a comprehensive dataset of more than 50,000 agricultural workers who were involved in the study. Approximately one decade later in 2015, analyzed this same study once again and disagreed with these findings.

Talk to Ledger Law for a Multiple Myeloma Case Evaluation

As such, it is important to point out that the potential link between glyphosate causing multiple myeloma has yet to become established science. It remains to be seen where the pendulum of science will swing on this issue based on further studies, but lawsuits are still being filed with the science in doubt. The same is true regarding glyphosate and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma lawsuits, with plaintiffs relying on WHO reports deeming glyphosate a probable carcinogen and Bayer/Monsanto relying on findings from the EPA that glyphosate is likely not carcinogenic.

The best course of action, therefore, is to discuss your legal claim via a free case evaluation with a multiple myeloma cancer lawyer at The Ledger Law Firm. Our law firm has helped cancer victims recover millions in compensation, and we are currently reviewing cases arguing that Roundup weedkiller causes multiple myeloma.

Contact us online for a free case evaluation to discuss your long-term use of Roundup that may have contributed to a multiple myeloma diagnosis and potential right to legal compensation.

On August 29, 2018, environmental groups took the argument against Bayer AG Monsanto’s weed killer to federal court. Specifically, the environmental groups argued that the EPA should vacate and remove its approval of a significant weed killer product. If you have been following our blog and national news recently, it would be understandable if you assumed this product was Roundup. However, the product these groups are focusing on is not glyphosate.

Rather, the groups filed a lawsuit to force the EPA to get rid of its approval for XtendiMax, which relies on dicamba for weed killing.

What Is Dicamba?

Dicamba is a weed-killing herbicide that performs its function by imitating plant-growth hormones (auxins), which causes weeds to grow abnormally and eventually die. This herbicide is often used in conjunction with Roundup since some weeds have grown resistant to the glyphosate contained in Roundup over time. Dicamba, therefore, kills the weeds that glyphosate is now otherwise incapable of removing.

Why Do Environmental Groups Want EPA Removal for Dicamba Removed?

One of the major harms associated with dicamba is its ability to drift from its original site of application. There are many pending lawsuits between farmers and other parties whose crops and plants have been damaged by so-called dicamba drift. This drift occurs because dicamba vaporizes after application, and environmental groups argue that the following have all been significantly affected by dicamba drift:

• Crops
• Plants
• Other wildlife

As such, the groups are specifically arguing that the EPA’s determination that XtendiMax would have no effect on plants and animal life is simply inaccurate. According to the Earthjustice non-profit attorney Paul Achitoff’s statement before the 9th U.S. Circuit, this declaration by the EPA was both "arbitrary and capricious."

This argument seems to be supported by the evidence, especially in light of a study showing that as much as 4 percent of the 2017 soybean crops in the United States were destroyed by dicamba drift. This percentage equates to a stunning 3 million acres.

In addition to the harms of plants, crops and wildlife, there is also an outstanding question as to whether dicamba also causes cancer and negative health consequences for humans. Just as some studies and reports (including an influential WHO determination in 2015) suggest that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans, some studies have linked dicamba to causing cancer as well.

That said, there is greater evidence that glyphosate is carcinogenic, and scientists have yet to clearly draw a direct link between dicamba exposure and cancer. For its part, the EPA says that dicamba is not likely to cause cancer, and it issued a similar finding related to glyphosate.

The science is not yet settled, however, which is why it is important to talk with a Roundup and Xtendimax cancer lawyer if you have diagnosed with cancer after exposure to glyphosate and/or dicamba.

The Ledger Law Firm represents plaintiffs who have been diagnosed with cancer after years of using potentially harmful herbicides like Roundup. Contact us online for a free case evaluation with an herbicide cancer lawyer at Ledger Law today.

In the recent $289 million jury verdict against Monsanto’s Roundup, much of the discussion has centered on what the science suggests. On the plaintiff side, attorneys and environmental groups have pointed toward the 2015 WHO report that stated glyphosate is a probable carcinogen. Monsanto defense attorneys, by contrast, have pointed toward 2017 EPA findings that glyphosate is probably not carcinogenic.

In the California case, the jury ultimately sided with the California groundskeeper who received a terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma diagnosis after years of using Roundup. In the decision, the San Francisco jury determined that Roundup contributed to causing the plaintiff’s cancer, and the jury also found that a warning label of the potential health hazard of glyphosate should be included on Roundup products.

In this way, the lawsuit was about more than just the potential legal wrongdoing of Monsanto. This recent lawsuit and future lawsuits involving glyphosate have effectively become debates over the safety of glyphosate itself.

A Reminder That Jury Verdicts on Scientific Issues Do Not Equate to Scientific Certainty

One of the tricky aspects of the current Roundup litigation is that the science on glyphosate safety is not yet settled. That said, judges must make the difficult decision of deciding what information should be presented to the jury, and the jury itself is then tasked with rendering a verdict on an unsettled scientific debate.

As such, it is important to keep in mind that these juries may render verdicts that, over time, are found to be inconsistent with scientific understanding. If, for example, it is found that glyphosate causes cancer, then any jury verdict finding that Monsanto’s glyphosate products like Roundup did not cause cancer may well be inconsistent with the ultimate scientific conclusion. And, the reverse could also be true if the scientific community eventually concludes that Roundup does not cause cancer.

Finally, keep in mind that the first glyphosate lawsuit on trial — the aforementioned $289 million verdict — tasked the jury with answering specific questions related to the facts of the groundskeeper’s lawsuit. Therefore, the jury was considering the evidence that Monsanto’s glyphosate products were harmful and cancer-causing, not the harms of glyphosate across the board. This is a simple, yet essential, point to keep in mind as glyphosate has continuously been in the news in recent weeks, even after high-profile findings that glyphosate was found in breakfast cereal.

The uncertainty of glyphosate science, then, will continue to play a role in legal proceedings involving glyphosate, but the jury in every case will be tasked with answering specific questions related to the harms of a glyphosate product based on the evidence presented.

The reality of glyphosate litigation is that plaintiffs who believe glyphosate caused their cancer must choose a glyphosate cancer lawyer who is capable of presenting strong trial evidence in a clear and concise way that the jury understands.

The Ledger Law Firm is a nationally recognized personal injury law firm who is representing victims of glyphosate who believe that Roundup products caused their cancer. Contact us online today for a free case evaluation with a Roundup attorney at Ledger Law today.