Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial • Hacker News Board

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#91

Post by atlantic » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 7:30 PM UTC

dionidium wrote: post #66

np76 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So Monsanto were selling a dangerous pesticide and intentionally obfuscating its effects. The same Monsanto that manufactured PCBs and Agent Orange? That's a crazy coincidence.

Well, no, not the same Monsanto that did any of that. They spun off their chemical division in 1996. [0] More philosophically (and despite what SCOTUS has to say about it), companies aren't people; they are run by people. "Monsanto" can't do anything. The people running Monsanto have agency. And the people who did the things you mention here are dead . [0] https://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/11/business/monsanto-plans-t.…

That's sophistry. You can take that line of argument to absolve anyone or anything from responsibility.

For example, none of the cells in my body are the same as ten years ago, ergo this is not the same body as a decade ago. Or, there is no continuity between my thoughts then and now, therefore mentally I am not the same entity. Or, all of the individuals composing a company when it committed an environmental crime are now retired, therefore it is no longer the same company.

Seriously? What about the continuity of corporate culture and management processes?

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#92

Post by mjburgess » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 7:30 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #88

joshmn wrote: post #44

My mom is another one of these stories. I wish I was exaggerating. I bet there's still Round-up in the her garage. I've spent the last 4 years or my life have been devoted to working so I can afford her treatments and keep her around and happy. Does anyone have any environmental attorneys they've worked with in the past they can recommend?

How do you know Round Up caused her cancer?

post hoc ergo propter hoc

Background frequency of cancer? Background frequency of owning the most popular weed killer? Expected number of co-incidence?

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#93

Post by jcranmer » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 7:49 PM UTC

killbrad wrote: post #2

I vaguely remember watching an interview with an exec from Monsanto saying RoundUp was perfectly safe, safe enough to drink. Then immediately refusing to drink it when offered, because of course it's poison.

Glyphosate is about as toxic as salt, as measured by LD50.

Are you willing to drink an entire glass of soy sauce to prove its safety?

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#94

Post by troels » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 7:50 PM UTC

killbrad wrote: post #2

I vaguely remember watching an interview with an exec from Monsanto saying RoundUp was perfectly safe, safe enough to drink. Then immediately refusing to drink it when offered, because of course it's poison.

Reminded me of this little gem. Seems there's a whole tradition of inventors of pesticides offering to eat it on camera.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtcXXbuR244

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#95

Post by refurb » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 7:53 PM UTC

mjburgess wrote: post #92

refurb wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know Round Up caused her cancer?

post hoc ergo propter hoc Background frequency of cancer? Background frequency of owning the most popular weed killer? Expected number of co-incidence?

How do you do that on an individual level?

Even people who smoke that get cancer don’t know whether it was the smoking or not. Plenty of people who don’t smoke get lung cancer too.

I’ve never seen a cause of cancer determined beyond population analyses or someone having a specific gene where the rate of cancer development is near 100%.

Edit: I should also add extremely rare cancers where people have been exposed to a known causal agent. Like mesothelioma and asbestos.

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#96

Post by softwaredoug » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 8:02 PM UTC

Ugh. I was just about to spray weed killer on some spots in my backyard. :) The rain in the east this year has made it impossible to keep up with weeding!

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#97

Post by dionidium » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 8:09 PM UTC

atlantic wrote: post #91

dionidium wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, no, not the same Monsanto that did any of that. They spun off their chemical division in 1996. [0] More philosophically (and despite what SCOTUS has to say about it), companies aren't people; they are run by people. "Monsanto" can't do anything. The people running Monsanto have agency. And the people who did the things you mention here are dead . [0] https://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/11/business/monsanto-plans-t.…

That's sophistry. You can take that line of argument to absolve anyone or anything from responsibility. For example, none of the cells in my body are the same as ten years ago, ergo this is not the same body as a decade ago. Or, there is no continuity between my thoughts then and now, therefore mentally I am not the same entity. Or, all of the individuals composing a company when it committed an environmental crime a…

In your frenzy to hold Monsanto culpable for their “corporate culture and management processes” (whatever that means), you’re making arguments that you wouldn’t yourself endorse in any other context.

The son is not responsible for the sins of the father, no matter how much of the father’s “culture” he picked up along the way.

Agent Orange has nothing to do with GMOs or glyphosate. It just doesn’t. Full stop.

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#98

Post by christophilus » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 8:29 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #80

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people running Monsanto are buffered - if not always protected entirely - by numerous laws from facing the consequences of their actions, precisely because they take those actions in the context of a corporate entity. If I poison my neighbour and I'm caught, I'm going to jail. (In the US I may face the death penalty.) If I'm working inside a corporate and my decisions poison [unknown power of ten] people and caus…

Are you sure about that whole "buffer" argument? Can you back it up with sources? I'm not sure that's correct.

Not the OP, but there's a long history of evidence that powerful corporations get away with a whole lot of things-- including murder. There is a great documentary by the BBC called The Century of the Self[0]. It isn't explicitly about this-- it's much broader-- but it does tangentially serve as sources for this kind of claim. Well worth a watch regardless of your views.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#99

Post by KSteffensen » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 8:29 PM UTC

jcranmer wrote: post #93

killbrad wrote: post #2

I vaguely remember watching an interview with an exec from Monsanto saying RoundUp was perfectly safe, safe enough to drink. Then immediately refusing to drink it when offered, because of course it's poison.

Glyphosate is about as toxic as salt, as measured by LD50. Are you willing to drink an entire glass of soy sauce to prove its safety?

Acute toxicity and carcinogenic activity are not the same thing.

Re: Monsanto ordered to pay $289M damages in Roundup cancer trial

#100

Post by WalterBright » Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 8:36 PM UTC

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #78

dionidium wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, no, not the same Monsanto that did any of that. They spun off their chemical division in 1996. [0] More philosophically (and despite what SCOTUS has to say about it), companies aren't people; they are run by people. "Monsanto" can't do anything. The people running Monsanto have agency. And the people who did the things you mention here are dead . [0] https://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/11/business/monsanto-plans-t.…

The people running Monsanto are buffered - if not always protected entirely - by numerous laws from facing the consequences of their actions, precisely because they take those actions in the context of a corporate entity. If I poison my neighbour and I'm caught, I'm going to jail. (In the US I may face the death penalty.) If I'm working inside a corporate and my decisions poison [unknown power of ten] people and caus…

You want to outlaw the car industry (for example) because it is collectively harmful and profit is being pursued?

What do you propose instead? Cars replaced horses. The latter regularly gravely injured people, and the dead horses and manure were a major health hazard in cities.