Bayer wins US trial over three women's claims that Roundup weedkiller caused cancer

Bayer won a US court trial on Thursday over claims by three women that the Roundup weedkiller caused their cancer. Deutsche Welle (DW) and Reuters both reported the outcome.

According to DW, a jury in Missouri delivered the verdict and sided unanimously with Bayer. DW reported that Roundup is made by Monsanto, a Bayer subsidiary.

The case

According to DW, Theresa Aretino, Cynthia Fernandez and Betty Larkin brought the case in a St. Louis court in 2020. They had said they were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after regularly using the weedkiller. DW reported that they were not part of a settlement Bayer is seeking.

DW reported that this was the first trial since a US Supreme Court ruling earlier in the year that limits complaints over the product. According to DW, the court ruled that plaintiffs could not argue that the Roundup label failed to warn users about cancer risk. Its reasoning was that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had concluded the label does not require a cancer warning. Bayer's general counsel referred to that case as the Durnell ruling.

Wider litigation

According to DW, some 65,000 other cases have been filed against the company claiming Roundup caused cancer. DW also reported that Bayer is awaiting a separate court ruling on a $7.25 billion (€6.5 billion) settlement. The company is seeking that settlement for tens of thousands of other Roundup cases.

Scientific assessments

According to DW, the EPA has previously concluded that glyphosate, Roundup's active ingredient, is probably not carcinogenic. The agency is now carrying out a new review of its safety. In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded that glyphosate was "probably carcinogenic" to humans, DW reported.

What each side says

According to DW, the plaintiffs' attorneys argued that Roundup was defectively designed and unreasonably dangerous. They also argued that Bayer was negligent in selling it.

Bill Dodero is Bayer's US general counsel and global head of litigation. In a statement quoted by DW, he said: "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." He added: "This verdict should send a strong signal that plaintiffs who wish to pursue claims in the court system following the Durnell ruling will face significant challenges both in demonstrating they have viable claims and putting forth the necessary evidence to prove them in court."

According to DW, Bayer says glyphosate is safe and calls it "one of the most studied agricultural tools in history." The company rejects the IARC's 2015 findings and calls them an outlier.

What the reports do not include

The reports reviewed by Vocemundi do not include a response from the plaintiffs or their attorneys. They do not say whether the plaintiffs intend to appeal. They do not describe the damages sought, the length of the trial or the evidence presented. They do not say which court will rule on the settlement or when. The Reuters item is a one-sentence summary. The details of the location, the jury, the plaintiffs and the Supreme Court context come from DW alone.

Analysis

The verdict is one outcome in a large body of litigation. Bayer presents it as a sign that claims will be harder to win after the Durnell ruling. The reports reviewed by Vocemundi do not show how other courts or juries will treat similar cases. Several factors could shape what happens next: whether the plaintiffs appeal, the separate ruling on the proposed $7.25 billion settlement, and the EPA's ongoing review of glyphosate. Regulators and the IARC have reached different conclusions on glyphosate, and the parties disagree on its safety. Future cases may therefore depend on both legal limits and scientific evidence.

Produced by the Vocemundi newsroom with AI assistance.