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

Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

law.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 95 posts

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#41

Post by justrealist »

calculatte wrote: post #35
justrealist wrote: post #26

I feel like we need to acknowledge that 12 average jury pool members are probably not the best panel of scientific experts to determine whether a chemical is carcinogenic. Much less calculate the damages involved. Like at this point it would be more scientific to run a Facebook poll. Jury trials are a great system for criminal justice but kinda need to admit this is not the same.

So the average citizen is a barely-conscious slobbering fool. While Bayer Monstanto, the multibillion dollar organization that knowingly shipped HIV-contaminated blood products somehow deserves your defense? Alarm bells are ringing.

The average IQ is 100.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#42

Post by Tomte »

hibikir wrote: post #17
dylan604 wrote: post #3

Waiting for upcoming news about Monsanto spinning off the Roundup division into a new company that suddenly files for bankruptcy.

Monsanto hasn't been a separate company for years: Bayer bought them out for 63 billion in 2018: A coup for the Monsanto CEO, as Bayer's total market cap today is 34 billion, and that includes all the pharma and chemical work too, not just crop science. When they were independent, their legal team had a very successful track record, but I am told the majority of them just retired with the very large windfall they got…

They had a good track record in court when they were American. As soon as a foreign company bought them, juries found an appetite to convict and impose freakishly large damages.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#43

Post by shadowgovt »

nightowl_games wrote: post #37

Watched the movie Michael Clayton this morning which seems to be basically about Monsanto and Roundup. I know about the cases and it's always distressing to me because my dad was a farmer who grew round up ready canola and I grew up drinking water from a well on this farm. My dad is cancer free ATM, but it is unsettling to think about.

I wouldn't worry too much about it. The global and national cancer trends don't track Roundup entering the food system or the agricultural sector.

To the extent it might be a carcinogen, it's not a dominant environmental carcinogen relative to other forces.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#44

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

dylan604 wrote: post #38
ryukoposting wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Roundup lawsuits are a factor. One of their largest products is an albatross.

It does stretch credibility that this kind of thing wasn't discovered during due diligence of the acquisition.

They didn’t expect to lose these cases. They think the scientific facts are in their favor.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#45

Post by shadowgovt »

gopher_space wrote: post #18
google234123 wrote: post #5

This is so ridiculous, the science points to the fact that the claim that it causes cancer is not true... I really don't like the american justice system. We literally live next to coal plants that put chemicals in the air 24/7 that are certainly certainly causing cancer for people later... You can find studies showing certain meats are correlated with cancer, can we sue the grocery stores?

> This is so ridiculous, the science points to the fact that the claim that it causes cancer is not true. I just Kagi'd it and UW says non-hodgkins up by 40% with roundup exposure. I guess the question would be "whose science".

My understanding is what complicates the science hears that we don't actually have a causal story, all of the evidence is correlative.

And broad correlative analysis of the link between non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and glyphosate is difficult to tease out because the leading cause of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is HIV. The HIV numbers muddy up the wideband statistics a lot (for many reasons, including patients not being willing to disclose they have an STD), so depending on how the question was asked different research projects get different answers.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#46

Post by nolok »

sva_ wrote: post #15
viraptor wrote: post #8

Different source, unpaywalled https://archive.md/mDous

I didn't notice there was a paywall upon submission. If you use bypass paywall clean[0], you won't see it either. But thanks for the link. 0. https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean

On one hand, this extension is great.

On the other hand, it has to be one of the most direct way I can contribute to the fall of actual journalism in the internet era, allowing myself to read quality content that the writer ask money for without ever being reminded that I could pay for it ...

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#47

Post by nolok »

hibikir wrote: post #17
dylan604 wrote: post #3

Waiting for upcoming news about Monsanto spinning off the Roundup division into a new company that suddenly files for bankruptcy.

Monsanto hasn't been a separate company for years: Bayer bought them out for 63 billion in 2018: A coup for the Monsanto CEO, as Bayer's total market cap today is 34 billion, and that includes all the pharma and chemical work too, not just crop science. When they were independent, their legal team had a very successful track record, but I am told the majority of them just retired with the very large windfall they got…

The difference in value in the stock market between tech corps and other industries is so absurd. I know it's based on the value each company can extract, not on their actual critical value of what they produce, so it makes total sense, but I believe this total disconnection between the stock market goal and "people/society" goal is part of why so many feel disenfranchised and disconnected from "the economy".

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#48

Post by jrmg »

zadokshi wrote: post #40
0ckpuppet wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you don't suspect monsanto would pay to have negative comments downvoted in every corner of the internet?

We already know for a fact that the pharmaceutical companies have teams to manipulate social media through bot accounts. I don’t know why Beyer/Monsanto would be any different.

How do we know this?

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#50

Post by 1letterunixname »

justrealist wrote: post #41
calculatte wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the average citizen is a barely-conscious slobbering fool. While Bayer Monstanto, the multibillion dollar organization that knowingly shipped HIV-contaminated blood products somehow deserves your defense? Alarm bells are ringing.

The average IQ is 100.

[George Carlin joke here.]

If the defense presented compelling epidemiologist testimony and statistics, it's difficult to bullshit concrete evidence. The jury just had to act as a marginally-adequate bullshit detector. The premise of a pool of disinterested, random individuals settling disputes is occasionally problematic in isolation but superior to duels at dawn, Hatfields vs McCoys, or troubling the corn or pimentos.

Post reply on HN