You may have heard about this epic trial and historic verdict on the news, but do you want to know what those emails from Monsanto actually said, and see the proof that Monsanto has known their products cause cancer since 1999? Find all the screen shots, emails, and documents used in the trial in this post! The documents used in this post are taken from the trial documents, which are posted publicly on the plaintiff’s legal firm’s website.
Note, I’ve only featured a small portion of what was used in the trial, and what was used in the trial only constitutes 10-20% of the documents they have yet to use. What I’m saying is….this is just the beginning.
Though the independent jury decided that Monsanto is guilty, and must pay the terminally ill plaintiff (cancer) $289 million, Monsanto employees continue to lie, saying “the science still stands” and that “the verdict doesn’t change the science…the 800 studies that show glyphosate is safe.” 800 studies? What are they referring to? We’ll go over that later in this post.
Monsanto repeats these lies in public interviews with the media, hoping that people won’t see what the jury saw….emails from Monsanto senior employees, strategizing to hide what they knew, so that they could keep selling and profiting, business as usual. One of the strategies Monsanto utilized to hide the truth, was ghost-writing the scientific analysis that our government has relied upon as proof that this RoundUp and glyphosate is safe.
What is ghost-writing?
- Monsanto paid someone (James Parry) to review/do a ‘meta-analysis’ (report) of independent scientific studies conducted in the late 1990s, in Italy.
- James Parry finished his report in 1999. James Parry found that RoundUp and Glyphosate damages DNA, and told Monsanto that they needed to essentially go back to the drawing board, and do more science and study of both glyphosate and the formulated product: RoundUp.
- That is not the answer/report Monsanto wanted, so they hired a different person to do another review/report of the scientific studies. Lo and behold, the this second person and second report found that the glyphosate and RoundUp are completely safe!
It simply means, that Monsanto paid a sciency person to make stuff up, and then Monsanto passed it off as real science, and shared it with all of the regulatory agencies as scientific proof of their product’s safety. Fraud.
Monsanto has known since 1999 (from James Parry’s report) that glyphosate causes DNA and chromosome destruction, cancer, non-alcohol fatty liver disease, brain tumors, endocrine disruption intefering with sexual development, and chelating of minerals, robbing us of the basic building we need to run our bodies. I’m sure there was more…
In this post, we’ll get into the specific emails and documents where it shows what Monsanto employees actually said, and how they lied, and hid the truth, with SCREEN SHOTS.
Before we get into the details, it has to be pointed out that Monsanto is also hoping that no one pays attention to the 6 epidemiological studies showing that glyphosate causes cancer in humans, and the ~ 20 animal studies which show cancer in animals. Why didn’t these 6 human studies lead the EPA to declare that glyphosate is a carcinogen for humans?
That’s an interesting question…texts and emails between senior EPA officials and Monsanto employees show that there was a collaborative effort to hide the truth about these toxic substances. See all of those details here.
In the last decade, study after epidemiological study has shown that glyphosate is poison, but the government didn’t heed those studies…the only study they heeded, was the study that was done by Monsanto themselves….the same study that we now know was ghost-written, based on the subpoenaed emails from Monsanto employees.
Strategies Monsanto Utilizes to Lie to Us
- only does the MINIMUM scientific study that government requires, which is testing on the active ingredient (glyphosate), rather than on the formulation (the entire product with all chemicals combined).
- purposely DOESN’T do further scientific study on the active ingredient, even after the expert they hired (James Parry) told them that they needed to do further studies because the ingredient destroys human cells.
- purposely DOESN’T do further scientific study on the formulation (RoundUp), in which the active ingredient is used, which consists of a host of toxic chemicals.
- GHOST-WRITES the minimum study they DID do. –
- corrupts government officials, capturing government agencies that are supposed to protect us from pollution.
- discredits any challengers, by relentlessly using Ad hominem attacks, to destroy the work or even careers of journalists, scientists and anyone and everyone who tries to uncover and distribute the truth to the public.
Monsanto Has Used these Strategies for Other Poisons that are now considered the most toxic substances ever made.
Monsanto is the company who made and sold DDT. When Rachel Carson challenged the safety of DDT in her brilliant book Silent Spring (1962), Monsanto utilized their third strategy, ad hominem attack, continuing to attack her while and until she died of breast cancer, which just makes ad hominem attack so much worse, doesn’t it?
Monsanto utilized all of their strategies to lead an attack to deny compensation to thousands of veterans who died and whom were disabled by Agent Orange, which they were exposed to in Vietnam. Monsanto made and sold Agent Orange, of course.
Mosanto’s product: PCBs polluted our water supply, and when they learned that the government was ready to ban it, they made a quick pivot to get rid of it – by putting it into caulking that they sold to schools.
Monsanto knew that all of these products cause disease and death, yet they continue to create their toxic products, one after another…as one is banned, they create another.
It could be argued that Monsanto is the most toxic corporation that has ever existed. Now that they are so hated by so much of the world they’re doing it again, except instead of replacing a toxic product with another, they are replacing their own name (Monsanto), with another — they were recently bought by the corporation Bayer.
Senator Kennedy has been suing one of Monsanto’s toxic creations continuously for 30 years.
The First of Many Punishments to Come – Finally, a little Justice
The $289 million the court ordered Monsanto to pay, consists of
- $39 million in compensation, and
- $250 million in punitive damages to the plaintiff.
In court lingo, ‘punitive’ means intentional malice — lies…
Monsanto had highly paid legal representation in this court case, but sent no Monsanto representatives to testify. In fact, when the plaintiff’s firm tried to subpoena Monsanto employees, their attorneys fought back, saying that since Monsanto is headquartered in another state (MO), the court can’t legally force their employees to appear in court in California.
There are more than 5,000 other plaintiffs waiting for their own trial. The next one WILL be taking place in Missouri, where Monsanto headquarters is located.
Let’s Get Into the Screen Shots
In the late 1990s, studies such as Lioli (1998) WERE done on glyphosate and Roundup, and the studies documented major health problems.
Monsanto was worried that this would hurt their profits, so they hired an expert named James Parry, and asked him to review the studies that were done (incl. Lioli), and write a report, hoping that Dr. Parry would confirm that their product was safe, and that the studies were flawed.
However, James Parry did not confirm safety….instead, James Parry found that the studies were legitimate, and that RoundUp and glyphosate can cause DNA and chomosome damage in cells (clastogenic).
You can read Dr. Parry’s full report here: https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/pdf/monsanto-documents/johnson-trial/PTX-0220-Parry-Evaluation-Gly-Toxicity.pdf
James Parry said that there appears to be a synergistic effect between all the chemicals in the formulation, and told Monsanto (Donna Farmer) that they MUST test the formulated product.
Monsanto proceeded to NOT test the formulated product, disregarding James Parry’s urging.
In the next screen shot, we see that instead, Monsanto began a search to find a different scientist who would either confirm the safety of RoundUp, or could be bribed to confirm the safety of RoundUp.
“We want to find/develop someone who is comfortable with the genotox profile of glyphosate/RoundUp and who can be influential with regulators and Scientific Outreach operations when genotox issues arise. Myriad is that Parry is not currently such a person, and it would take quite some time and $$$/studies to get him there. We simply aren’t going to do the studies Parry suggests… …we should seriously start looking for one more other individuals to work with. …[we] are currently very vulnerable in this area. The have time to fix that, but only if we mke this a high priority now.”
This is malice. James Parry is saying that the product causes cell damage, but Monsanto doesn’t care. Monsanto is saying that they WILL NOT do any scientific study on the formulated product.
RoundUp is not JUST glyphosate, it is glyphosate AND a bunch of other chemicals. All of this together is what is called the formulation. Glyphosate is the active ingredient.
True to their word, Monsanto very quickly found another expert, or experts, (Williams, Kroes, and Munro) to review the studies (incl. Lioli). The Williams report was finished within months of Parry’s report.
Monsanto didn’t show James Parry’s report to anyone.
But Monsanto DID show the Williams, Kroes and Munro report to EVERYONE. Why? Because the Williams report confirmed what Monsanto wanted (that glyphosate and RoundUp was safe). Monsanto sent it to:
- EPA (the EPA still cites this report to assure RoundUp’s safety)
- all of the government authorities
These experts (Williams, Kroes and Munro) oddly enough found the exact opposite of what James Parry found.
They found that glyphosate and RoundUp is completely safe!
You can view the report here: https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/pdf/monsanto-documents/johnson-trial/PTX-0377-Williams-Kroes-Munro-Study.pdf.
How could these experts findings differ any more? How did their reports contain such opposite conclusions?
Did Monsanto pay Williams, Kroes and Munro to lie in their report?
YES, Monsanto paid them to lie – to ghost-write the report. But no one knew, until these emails were subpoenaed by the California court:
The Williams, Kroes and Munro report was distributed widely by Monsanto starting in the year 2000, but the email below wasn’t written until February 2015. However, in this email you can read William Heyden propose that Monsanto pay experts to ghost-write a report/meta-analysis of the recent published science, saying that glyphosate is safe. He reminds his fellow employees that bribing experts with large sums was an effective tool that they used in to get Williams, Kroes and Munro to ghost-write their report, in 2000.
In 2015, Monsanto’s leading toxicologist, Donna Farmer appeared on The Doctors TV show, reassuring us that glyphosate is completely safe:
“…if we had any indication or any concerns about the safety of this product (RoundUp), we wouldn’t be putting it out there. …And I mean this very honestly…I am extremely highly confident in this product, as a mom, and then, I can back it up as a scientist.”
Wow, after all the stuff we’ve already uncovered?
And then busted further, not like she needs further busting! ….by Donna’s own email to fellow Monsanto employees. She is reminding them to be very careful about what they say and how they say it — reminding them that they can’t say RoundUp doesn’t cause cancer.
On the same show, Donna Farmers says:
“they [IARC] actually injected the roundup formulation into the abdomen of the animals, and it did have an effect, but that’s not a relevant route of exposure for somebody who is going to be spraying the herbicide.”
BUSTED! ….by the data. Although Monsanto never sold their products to be used as an injection, by way of the sheer amount of RoundUp and other glyphosate formulations USED on this planet to date, our water and animals and human and air and soil is so THICK and POLLUTED with glyphosate, that glyphosate IS being injected, via vaccine ‘contamination.’
Again, RoundUp is not JUST glyphosate, it is glyphosate AND a bunch of other chemicals. All of this together is what is called the formulation. Glyphosate is the active ingredient.
Monsanto maintains that there are ‘800 studies’ that prove glyphosate is safe.’ Those studies are not whether glyphosate causes cancer…those studies are regarding things like: ‘does it cause eye irritation’, etc.
The actual science regarding cancer shows undeniably that glyphosate causes cancer.
In a study done in South America, where they tested the blood of the people who were getting aerially sprayed by glyphosate, (in an attempt to ‘agent orange’ the plants used to make cocaine), all of the people tested had significant genetic destruction.
In 2014, IARC announced their intent to review recent science showing that glyphosate causes cancer. Following that announcement, Monsanto’s William Heyden urged his fellow Monsanto employees to do something, as they all knew that glyphosate IARC would find that glyphosate was indeed cancer-causing.
It was two weeks after William Heydens wrote the email above that the plaintiff with cancer called Monsanto…TWICE, asking them if their product could be causing his rash. They told him both times they would call him back….in fact, there’s an email documenting his call….
And the Chief Medical Director of Monsanto said he would call…but he never did.
In Daniel Goldstein’s deposition, he was asked why he didn’t call the plaintiff back, and Daniel Goldstein said he didn’t remember. They then asked Daniel what he would have said if he HAD called the plaintiff back. Daniel said: “I would have told him to keep using it [glyphosate via product Ranger Pro].”
After IARC declared glyphosate as a carcinogen, Monsanto put together a panel of ‘independent’ experts to review the data. But the independent experts chosen were Monsanto employees and former employees. One of these former employees is John Acquavella, whose words are in the screen shot below. William Heyden, Monsanto employee and Ph.D. toxicologist, leading the toxicology program at Monsanto, tries to coerce John into removing his own name, and the name of Larry Kier, from the review report drafted by this panel of independent experts. Because John and Larry were both former Monsanto employees, Monsanto knew that the public would find the relationship between Monsanto and Larry and John, and didn’t want the public to see that relationship.
Monsanto paid Larry Kier $70,000 to participate in this independent panel to review the science on glyphosate, and write an independent report.
Here is a copy of Monsanto’s contract with Larry: https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/pdf/monsanto-documents/johnson-trial/PTX-0361-Consulting-Agreement-Kier.pdf
Does this sound independent to you?
John replies that if they removed John’s and Larry’s name from the report, that would be unethical ghost-writing. John’s name did end up on the publication, but the report says that the authors acted independently, and that no parts of the report were reviewed or written by Monsanto.
The report was put forth as a completely independent report, but it was NOT independent. This statement of independence was a complete lie, as is shown by email after email from William Heyden redlining and writing sections of the report!!!
During this time when Monsanto was developing an approach to ‘deal’ with the science that had been coming out, and ‘deal’ with IARC’s coming review, they were planning to pay the American Council on Science and Research to support pro-glyphosate claims, in an attempt to discredit the damning review they knew was coming out of IARC’s review.
You can read the full email here: https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/pdf/monsanto-documents/johnson-trial/PTX-0321-Monsanto-Email-Re-ACSH-2015.pdf
You can read all of the documents referenced in the trial, and much more at the links below.
At the very bottom, find links to resources you need to maintain a lawn without poisons.
If you want even more details about Monsanto’s corruption, there are a lot of books to choose from, including:
- Carey Gillam’s book Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science (glyphosate & RoundUp). Journalist Carey Gillam has been covering Monsanto for over 30 years.
- Jeffrey Smith’s book Seeds of Deception, and Genetic Roulette, both covering (GMOs & RoundUp/glyphosate)
- Marie Monique Robin’s The World According to Monsanto
- Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (DDT)
Court Trial Documents
Day 12: 7/26/18
No Exhibits Admitted
Day 13: 7/27/18
Day 14: 7/30/18
Dr. Aaron Blair Exhibits
DX 2851 – 2015 PowerPoint Presentation: Occupational Cancer Research Center – An Evaluation of Glyphosate Use and the Risk of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Major Histological Sub-Types in the North American Pooled Project
Dr. Matthew Ross Exhibits
Day 15: 7/31/18
Day 16: 8/2/18
Dewayne Johnson v. Monsanto Court Documents
Order on Deposition Designations and Certain Proposed Jury Instructions(23 pages) (5.17.18) – Judge rules plaintiffs can present punitive damages in CA State Court case DEWAYNE JOHNSON vs. MONSANTO COMPANY, ET AL. Deposition designations start on page 17. Rulings are in limine and so subject to review by trial judge as the trial progresses.
Order on (1) Monsanto’s Omnibus Sargon Motion; (2) Monsanto’s Motion for Summary Judgment; (3) Plaintiff’s Omnibus Sargon Motion; (4) Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Adjudication (48 pages) (5.17.18) – Judge issues ruling in CA State Court case DEWAYNE JOHNSON vs. MONSANTO COMPANY, ET AL.
Monsanto’s Omnibus Sargon Motion: The judge ruled to exclude Dr. Portier’s pooling analysis and any conclusions that depend on it, Dr. Sawyer’s water permeability test and cancer slope opinions, certain testimony from Dr. Benbrook and Dr. Mills’ opinion as to total lost income. Otherwise motion was denied.
- Monsanto’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Adjudication: The motions were denied.
- Plaintiff’s Omnibus Sargon Motion: The judge ruled to exclude Dr. Rider’s opinion that the epidemiological evidence precludes the conclusion that there is a causal relationship between glyphosate exposure and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Dr. Kuzel’s mycosis fungoides latency opinion, although Dr. Kuzel may opine generally as to latency for cancers. Otherwise the motion is denied.
- Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Adjudication: The motion was granted.
Complaint Dewayne Johnson v. Monsanto Co. (50 pages) (1.28.16)
Johnson vs Monsanto Trial News
ABC News 7 San Francisco – Opening arguments begin in lawsuit over Roundup weed killer
US Right to Know Carey Gillam Blog: First Monsanto Roundup Cancer Trial Jury Selection
Courthouse News – Trial Begins Over Claim That Roundup Causes Cancer
KPIX CBS News TV – Trial Begins Seeking To Prove Monsanto’s Roundup Caused Man’s Cancer
Glyphosate Girl – Blog about the trial
- Day 3 – The Doctor is In
- Day 4 – Well Played, Dr. Portier
- Day 5 – Bueller, Bueller
- Day 6 – Who Me? Couldn’t Be.
- Day 7 – Weighing Sh!t with a Gold Scale
- Day 8 – Not Drinking the Kool Aid
- Day 9 – “Cide” Means Kill
- Day 10 – So Unbelievably Misleading, It Makes Me Dizzy
- Day 11 – The “Incredible Feces Error”
- Day 12 – Liberal Morons Who Don’t Want Cancer
Day 13 – Non-Suits and No-Suits
- Day 14 – Teacher Appreciation Day
- Day 15 – The EPA Ain’t the Ten Commandments
- Day 16 – What Hypothetical? Mr. Johnson is the Hypothetical!!
Food Integrity Now – Trial of The Century: Johnson v. Monsanto
Australia Broadcasting Corp Radio – Victorian Country Hour for Wednesday 11th July 2018
Politico EU – The man who haunts Europe’s food safety watchdog
Courthouse News – Judge Culls Cancer Expert’s Testimony in Roundup Trial
Courthouse News – Monsanto Lawyer Clashes With Cancer Expert in Roundup Trial
Courthouse News – Yelling Breaks Out During Roundup Cancer Link Trial
Organic Consumers Association
- Plaintiff Testifies in Landmark Monsanto Roundup Trial
- Monsanto Trial: Two Days Closer to a Verdict
- Monsanto Trial: Toxicologist Explains to Jury How Monsanto Colluded With EPA
- Ed Begley, Jr. Attends Monsanto Trial
- Plaintiff’s Final Live Witness Testifies in Monsanto Trial
- Monsanto’s Herbicide Expert Has Bad Day in Court
- Neil Young and Daryl Hannah at Monsanto Roundup Trial
- Monsanto Pays Harvard Wizard $100k to Perform Statistical Magic Show for Jury
Source: Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman
See other resources on glyphosate/Roundup on the Beyond Pesticides website:
Glyphosate: Gateway on Pesticide Hazards and Safe Pest Management
“Global Glyphosate Study” Finds Health Impacts at Levels Regulators Consider Acceptable
Court Affirms Listing Glyphosate as Probable Carcinogen
Action: Glyphosate/Roundup Must Be Removed from the Market
Federal Bill Benefits Monsanto/Bayer, Overriding Labeling of Roundup/Glyphosate as a Carcinogen under California Law
Consumers Sue Monsanto for Misleading Labeling of Roundup …
Amount of Monsanto’s Glyphosate/Roundup in Human Body …
Roundup Damages Earthworms and Soil Biota, Contributes to Nutrient Pollution
Roundup Linked to Animal Shape Changes
Lawn Care – Toxin Free
- Organic Lawn Care 101
- Read Your Weeds
- Learn how to organically manage your lawn through the Beyond Pesticides YouTube channel.
- turn your lawn into a native prairie! We don’t need all this lawn.
- Nature knows what to do if we leave her alone.
- turn your lawn into an instant garden using this method from Geoff Lawton – start with vegetables, then add edible and medicinal flowers, bushes, shrubs and trees! Make someday your yard will look like this 23-year old New Zealand food forest, or this Canadian suburban yard. Find more resources here.
- If you really want to get into making compost teas, visit Elaine Inghram’s website www.soilfoodweb.com. You might even find yourself taking one of her courses to learn how to use a microscope to assess your compost-tea making success!
- Give your local boards and legislators this link to Training for Municipal Officials or Landscapers on Organic Land Care Basics
For more tips on maintenance outside the home, click here.
If you’re worried that eliminating RoundUp and its associated genetically engineered seeds are needed to feed the world, relax. The only global review of the food supply ever done states that GMOs are not even a PART of the solution.
IAASTD is an international effort to evaluate the quality of agricultural science. Their report queries how the world can reduce hunger and came to the conclusion that GMOs are not the answer. Beintema N et al. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development: Global Summary for Decision Makers. IAASTD. 2008.
See also The Organic & Non-GMO Report. (May 2008). Global agriculture report says GM crops not a solution. http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/may08/global_agriculture_gm_crops.php “IAASTD director, Robert Watson, chief scientist at the UK food and farming department DEFRA, said much more research was needed to prove whether GM crops offer any benefits and do not harm human health and the environment.”
The Union of Concerned Scientists “Failure to Yield” Report states that most yield gains are actually due to traditional breeding or other agricultural improvements, not due to the use of genetically modified seed.
Nancy L. Swanson 1, Andre Leu, Jon Abrahamson, and Bradley Wallet. Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America. http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/92/abstracts/Swanson-et-al.html