{"id":2227683,"date":"2026-10-30T02:40:50","date_gmt":"2026-10-29T23:40:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=2227683"},"modified":"2026-10-30T02:40:50","modified_gmt":"2026-10-29T23:40:50","slug":"missouri-decision-could-reshape-bayers-glyphosate-fight","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=2227683","title":{"rendered":"Missouri decision could reshape Bayer’s glyphosate fight"},"content":{"rendered":"

[analyse_image type=”featured” src=”https:\/\/static.dw.com\/image\/75196568_6.jpg”]<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
https:\/\/p.dw.com\/p\/5OqU1<\/span><\/div>\n<\/section>\n
Prefer DW on Google<\/a><\/div>\n
Bayer has denied that the active ingredient in Roundup is carcinogenicImage: Haven Daley\/AP Photo\/dpa\/picture alliance<\/small><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

The German pharmaceutical giant Bayer won a trial on Thursday over claims the Roundup weedkiller<\/a>, manufactured by subsidiary Monsanto, caused cancer in three women.<\/p>\n

The Missouri jury sided unanimously with Bayer. It’s the first trial since a US Supreme Court ruling that limits complaints over the product<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Bayer is waiting for a separate court ruling where the company is seeking a $7.25 billion (\u20ac6.5 billion) settlement<\/a> in relation to tens of thousands of other Roundup cases<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n

Missouri decision could reshape Bayer’s glyphosate fight<\/h2>\n

What is the complaint against Roundup?<\/h2>\n

Thursday’s court ruling follows a case brought to a St. Louis court by Theresa Aretino, Cynthia Fernandez and Betty Larkin in 2020.<\/p>\n

The three women had said they were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after regularly using the weedkiller.<\/p>\n

Their attorneys argued that Roundup was defectively designed and unreasonably \u200bdangerous, and that Bayer was negligent in selling it.<\/p>\n

The three were not participating in the Bayer settlement. Some 65,000 other cases have been filed against the company, claiming Roundup gave them cancer.<\/p>\n

What did the Supreme Court rule in regards to Roundup?<\/h2>\n

The US Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that plaintiffs could not argue that the Roundup label failed to warn users about the risk of cancer since the US Environmental Protection Agency had concluded the label does not require a cancer warning.<\/p>\n

\n

Bayer wins in US court, but at what cost to public health?<\/h2>\n

“We are pleased with the jury’s favorable verdict for Monsanto validating our belief that there is no evidence to prove design defect, fraud or negligence claims in the Roundup litigation,” Bill Dodero, the company’s US general counsel and global head of litigation, said in a statement.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n

“This verdict should send a strong signal that plaintiffs who wish to pursue claims in the court system following the Durnell<\/em> ruling will face significant challenges both in demonstrating they have viable claims and putting forth the necessary evidence to prove them in court,” he added, using the name of the Supreme Court case.<\/p>\n

The company has repeatedly defended the use of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as safe, calling it “one of the most studied agricultural tools in history.”<\/p>\n

The EPA has previously concluded that glyphosate is probably not carcinogenic, but it is in the middle of a new review of its safety. The International Agency for Research on Cancer concluded in 2015 that the chemical was “probably carcinogenic” to humans, but Bayer has rejected the study’s findings, calling it an outlier.<\/p>\n

If you rely on our team for trusted reporting, please take a moment <\/em>to select us as your Preferred Source on Google<\/a> so you’ll always see our verified news first.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n

\n

The German pharmaceutical giant Bayer won a trial on Thursday over claims the Roundup weedkiller<\/a>, manufactured by subsidiary Monsanto, caused cancer in three women.<\/p>\n

The Missouri jury sided unanimously with Bayer. It’s the first trial since a US Supreme Court ruling that limits complaints over the product<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Bayer is waiting for a separate court ruling where the company is seeking a $7.25 billion (\u20ac6.5 billion) settlement<\/a> in relation to tens of thousands of other Roundup cases<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n

Missouri decision could reshape Bayer’s glyphosate fight<\/h2>\n

What is the complaint against Roundup?<\/h2>\n

Thursday’s court ruling follows a case brought to a St. Louis court by Theresa Aretino, Cynthia Fernandez and Betty Larkin in 2020.<\/p>\n

The three women had said they were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after regularly using the weedkiller.<\/p>\n

Their attorneys argued that Roundup was defectively designed and unreasonably \u200bdangerous, and that Bayer was negligent in selling it.<\/p>\n

The three were not participating in the Bayer settlement. Some 65,000 other cases have been filed against the company, claiming Roundup gave them cancer.<\/p>\n

What did the Supreme Court rule in regards to Roundup?<\/h2>\n

The US Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that plaintiffs could not argue that the Roundup label failed to warn users about the risk of cancer since the US Environmental Protection Agency had concluded the label does not require a cancer warning.<\/p>\n

\n

Bayer wins in US court, but at what cost to public health?<\/h2>\n

“We are pleased with the jury’s favorable verdict for Monsanto validating our belief that there is no evidence to prove design defect, fraud or negligence claims in the Roundup litigation,” Bill Dodero, the company’s US general counsel and global head of litigation, said in a statement.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n

“This verdict should send a strong signal that plaintiffs who wish to pursue claims in the court system following the Durnell<\/em> ruling will face significant challenges both in demonstrating they have viable claims and putting forth the necessary evidence to prove them in court,” he added, using the name of the Supreme Court case.<\/p>\n

The company has repeatedly defended the use of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as safe, calling it “one of the most studied agricultural tools in history.”<\/p>\n

The EPA has previously concluded that glyphosate is probably not carcinogenic, but it is in the middle of a new review of its safety. The International Agency for Research on Cancer concluded in 2015 that the chemical was “probably carcinogenic” to humans, but Bayer has rejected the study’s findings, calling it an outlier.<\/p>\n

If you rely on our team for trusted reporting, please take a moment <\/em>to select us as your Preferred Source on Google<\/a> so you’ll always see our verified news first.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The German pharmaceutical giant Bayer won a trial on Thursday over claims the Roundup weedkiller<\/a>, manufactured by subsidiary Monsanto, caused cancer in three women.<\/p>\n

The Missouri jury sided unanimously with Bayer. It’s the first trial since a US Supreme Court ruling that limits complaints over the product<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Bayer is waiting for a separate court ruling where the company is seeking a $7.25 billion (\u20ac6.5 billion) settlement<\/a> in relation to tens of thousands of other Roundup cases<\/a>.<\/p>\n

To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video<\/a><\/p>\n

Thursday’s court ruling follows a case brought to a St. Louis court by Theresa Aretino, Cynthia Fernandez and Betty Larkin in 2020.<\/p>\n

The three women had said they were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after regularly using the weedkiller.<\/p>\n

Their attorneys argued that Roundup was defectively designed and unreasonably \u200bdangerous, and that Bayer was negligent in selling it.<\/p>\n

The three were not participating in the Bayer settlement. Some 65,000 other cases have been filed against the company, claiming Roundup gave them cancer.<\/p>\n

The US Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that plaintiffs could not argue that the Roundup label failed to warn users about the risk of cancer since the US Environmental Protection Agency had concluded the label does not require a cancer warning.<\/p>\n

To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video<\/a><\/p>\n

“We are pleased with the jury’s favorable verdict for Monsanto validating our belief that there is no evidence to prove design defect, fraud or negligence claims in the Roundup litigation,” Bill Dodero, the company’s US general counsel and global head of litigation, said in a statement.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n

“This verdict should send a strong signal that plaintiffs who wish to pursue claims in the court system following the Durnell<\/em> ruling will face significant challenges both in demonstrating they have viable claims and putting forth the necessary evidence to prove them in court,” he added, using the name of the Supreme Court case.<\/p>\n

The company has repeatedly defended the use of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as safe, calling it “one of the most studied agricultural tools in history.”<\/p>\n

The EPA has previously concluded that glyphosate is probably not carcinogenic, but it is in the middle of a new review of its safety. The International Agency for Research on Cancer concluded in 2015 that the chemical was “probably carcinogenic” to humans, but Bayer has rejected the study’s findings, calling it an outlier.<\/p>\n

If you rely on our team for trusted reporting, please take a moment <\/em>to select us as your Preferred Source on Google<\/a> so you’ll always see our verified news first.<\/em><\/p>\n

[analyse_source url=”https:\/\/www.dw.com\/en\/bayer-wins-roundup-cancer-trial-after-supreme-court-ruling\/a-79803301″]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

[analyse_image type=”featured” src=”https:\/\/static.dw.com\/image\/75196568_6.jpg”] https:\/\/p.dw.com\/p\/5OqU1 Prefer DW on Google Bayer has denied that the active ingredient in Roundup is carcinogenicImage: Haven Daley\/AP Photo\/dpa\/picture alliance The German pharmaceutical giant Bayer won a trial on Thursday over claims the Roundup weedkiller, manufactured by subsidiary Monsanto, caused cancer in three women. The Missouri jury sided unanimously with Bayer. It’s […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[226,74],"class_list":["post-2227683","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics","tag-crawlmanager","tag-dw-com"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2227683","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2227683"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2227683\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2227683"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2227683"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2227683"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}