Status Updates From The Monsanto Papers: Deadly...

The Daubert began. Plaintiffs are focusing on the 80s mouse study that showed glyphosate being potential cause of tumor, which Monsanto had debated over with EPA for years and declined a redo of the study. Monsanto argued this was confidential record but the judge determined the study from 35 years ago is irrelevant to remain confidential.

-Shift in Monsanto’s favor-a study by scientists was published (on the same day of a key hearing preparing for Daubert) stating no association between NHL and glyphosate herbicides. Monsanto used this excuse to delay Daubert.
-CAPHR (financially backed by CropLife America, a lobbying org for Monsanto) attacked and called for IARC reform.
-Monsanto pushed congress republicans to strip IARC funding.

-Brent released files to journalists after Hollingsworth failed follow the judge’s protective order stating the confidentiality designations will be automatically waived if they fail to make a motion after plaintiffs request de-designation.
-judge said the public file release was a bad faith PR move (bureaucratic bullshit kills lives and what Brent was doing-following the order to a T-was fighting fire with fire)

-Monsanto deliberately ignored many of plaintiff attorney’s procedural requests during the litigation, arrogant and condescending

-Monsanto wanted a majority of discovery files to be designated for confidentiality, plaintiffs lawyers argued “public health and safety interests outweigh Monsanto’s privacy interests”

-“dark money” secretly flowed into ACSH that attacked the integrity of IARC scientists (the amount of lobbying is crazy..their manipulation of media was why ppl kept using roundup while actively developing cancer…evil!)
-“one group secretly funded by Monsanto would often quote another group secretly funded by Monsanto, creating a covert echo chamber that magnified the company’s messaging” Twitter be like

-during the litigation, Monsanto possibly paid an international news agency to attack the legitimacy of the IARC classification, making up a false story, as well as various third party media outlets to manipulate public opinion - so it appears to be without monsanto’s influence and trustworthy - the same tactic used in the ghostwriting.

-The process of finding plaintiffs in mass litigation is predatory: hunting down individuals and not the other way around; only those who fit the “perfect victim” criteria get chosen.
-Monsanto scientists were aware of the IARC classification coming soon as well as many legitimate concerns over the decades, and actively fought against it. Not negligence, straight up corruption and harm. These people are evil.

-Internal emails revealed Monsanto scientists “ghost wrote” scientific studies backing up glyphosate’s safety and hired independent scientists to slap their names on the publications to make them appear credible.
-Jess Rowland-who signed the article briefly posted on Monsanto website was found out to be intentionally utilized by the company because he was retiring soon.

-Report alleging glyphosate is not carcinogenic appeared on Monsanto website, signed by EPA official who retired shortly after (sus). Pulled later but was used in trial as evidence.
-St Louis is a hot spot for class action lawsuits due to unequal corporate and gen population (largely African American) wealth distribution.
-Plaintiffs team was pushing for MDL but Monsanto was against centralized litigation (typical).

-2015 IARC classification linking glyphosate to non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

-The key to winning the case was proving Monsanto was aware of Roundup being carcinogenic yet advertising it to be safe.

-Mutagenicity expert’s request for more tests was dismissed by Monsanto, who wanted someone else who’s “influential with regulators”.

-EPA had glyphosate concerns since 1985, was repeatedly fought back by Monsanto.