Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 156 posts

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

#111

Post by mhneu »

colordrops wrote: post #61
wslh wrote: post #41

They are running a big campaign in favour of glyphosate in Reddit. in Argentina at least. Subreddit admins have cobtacted Reddit to suspend the campaign because of false claims going against the rules. The campaign also tricks people because they post links to popular media sites. There is more information about this (in Spanish) here: https://www.reddit.com/r/argentina/comments/95m863/followup_...

They've been running a campaign on reddit for years. They've even had a subreddit where they coordinated, though I can't recall the name. They scan every subreddit for posts about Monsanto, glyphosate, or GMOs, and attack anyone who posts negatively about them. It was always the same people. Edit: found the subreddit, though it doesn't appear to be as active as it used to be: https://www.reddit.com/r/GMOFacts/

Do you think they’re paid?

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

#112

Post by mhneu »

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.…

But corporate culture can matter. And culture affects who gets hired and how the employees act, even when new people come in.

If you ask biz school profs, culture is essential.

To me the bigger problem about treating corps as people is corps are willing to renege on any deal if it benefits them, and pursue profit at all costs. If a person you know acted like that, you’d call them a sociopath.

So “Corporations are people: sociopathic people.” Is probably the best description.

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

#113

Post by rhizome »

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.

I have to think they're referring to the corporate veil.

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

#114

Post by gcheong »

softwaredoug wrote: post #96

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!

Assuming you have a grass lawn, you wouldn’t want to spray roundup on a yard regardless as it would kill your grass also and potentially any non weed plants as well. There are other herbicides that grasses can tolerate though. In any cases, whatever you use is probably not a cause for concern if you’re following the label directions.

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

#115

Post by mhneu »

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.

Source: “The Chickenshit Club” by Eisinger. Explains how DOJ and SEC have moved to civil actions because they’re easier to prosecute, letting individuals at corps off the hook for actions they’d be criminally liable for if they took them against an individual in their individual capacity.

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

#116

Post by atlantic »

dionidium wrote: post #97
atlantic wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If we follow your argument to its logical conclusion, then no company could be held responsible for its actions if more than a generation had passed, because all the constituent employees would then have left.

But by the same logic, if companies are just convenient fictions, then they should have no rights whatsoever beyond those of their constituent employees - no fiscal benefits, no corporate donations, no political lobbying, no corporate legal representation, etc. Is that also your position?

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

#117

Post by christophilus »

tptacek wrote: post #103
christophilus wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It's not that you aren't the original commenter, but that you're not making the same argument. I'm interested in an answer to the question I actually asked.

My answer is in the linked video, and doesn’t fit into a sound bite. If I understand your question, you are asking for evidence that corporations get away with things that normal citizens wouldn’t. The answer is that history provides ample evidence to back up this claim, and my link is one such piece of evidence.

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

#118

Post by Buge »

colordrops wrote: post #61
wslh wrote: post #41

They are running a big campaign in favour of glyphosate in Reddit. in Argentina at least. Subreddit admins have cobtacted Reddit to suspend the campaign because of false claims going against the rules. The campaign also tricks people because they post links to popular media sites. There is more information about this (in Spanish) here: https://www.reddit.com/r/argentina/comments/95m863/followup_...

They've been running a campaign on reddit for years. They've even had a subreddit where they coordinated, though I can't recall the name. They scan every subreddit for posts about Monsanto, glyphosate, or GMOs, and attack anyone who posts negatively about them. It was always the same people. Edit: found the subreddit, though it doesn't appear to be as active as it used to be: https://www.reddit.com/r/GMOFacts/

That subreddit appears to be about genetically modified organisms, not glyphosate or other chemicals.

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

#119

Post by dionidium »

atlantic wrote: post #116
dionidium wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If we follow your argument to its logical conclusion, then no company could be held responsible for its actions if more than a generation had passed, because all the constituent employees would then have left. But by the same logic, if companies are just convenient fictions, then they should have no rights whatsoever beyond those of their constituent employees - no fiscal benefits, no corporate donations, no politica…

No. You’re making a legal argument. Maybe that’s useful. Maybe not. But if your goal is to better understand the world, then it’s a dead-end.

(In other words, litigating the history of Agent Orange does not clarify or contextualie this discussion about glyphosate; it adds only unnecessary and unhelpful moral confusion. It obfuscates and misleads. It is political axe-grinding of the worst kind.)

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

#120

Post by trumped »

chakalakasp wrote: post #101
trumped wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm cheap, I'd probably do it for $10k (1/4oz)... If it's a recurring deal, I might even do it weekly for $5k each time...

I’m imagining you at a party in a smart dinner jacket holding some sort of cocktail. “So, what do you do for a living?”

well, at least I don't work for Facebook or Google ;) /s
Post reply on HN