Home > Roundup lawsuit > The glyphosate debate
The Glyphosate Debate
Breaking down the facts of the Roundup lawsuit.
Ready to file a claim ?
See if you qualify for the Roundup lawsuit.
What is glyphosate?
Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum, non-selective herbicide used as the main ingredient in Roundup weed killer. In 1974, the Monsanto Company developed and introduced glyphosate to the United States. Its effectiveness, along with the invention of “Roundup Ready” crops in 1996, made glyphosate quickly become the most popular herbicide on the market.
How did the debate about glyphosate’s effect on human health begin?
In 1983, an academic study revealed the widespread development of kidney tumors in experimental rats dosed with glyphosate, which was a major concern for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). When confronted about the results of this study, Monsanto waved off the EPA’s findings, claiming that the presence of tumors in rats was “unrelated to treatment.”
However, public reception towards glyphosate and its potential effect on the environment and human health has been mixed for decades. Some believe that glyphosate is hazardous and linked to a variety of medical conditions, and others believe that glyphosate is as harmless as table salt.
The EPA was not happy with this response. Herbert Lacayo, now a former branch member of the EPA, made the EPA’s opinion on Monsanto’s poor defense clear.
Glyphosate is suspect. Monsanto's argument is unacceptable.
This study was enough of a concern for the eight EPA branch members to take further action. In 1985, the EPA classified glyphosate as a Category C substance, considering it to be “possibly carcinogenic” to humans. Monsanto fought hard against this classification and quickly tried to have it revoked, refusing to partake in another rat study when the EPA requested it. The EPA eventually relented on its demand for a second study in 1988.
Then in 1991, the EPA suddenly walked back its previous judgment and classified glyphosate as a non-cancerous Category E substance, declaring that there is “evidence of non-carcinogenicity” in humans. Notably, two of the eight panel members refused to sign this opinion.
This opinion remained under the radar until the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) determined in 2015 that glyphosate was “probably carcinogenic to humans.” The IARC’s decision directly contrasted against the EPA’s 1991 glyphosate ruling. It didn’t take long for the opposing results to spark a fiery clash between people who backed the EPA and those who supported the IARC’s findings.
How did the EPA and the IARC come to such different conclusions? Who should I trust?
Though it’s not clear why the EPA flipped on its glyphosate opinion, Monsanto has a long and documented history of pressuring government agencies to comply with its wishes. During an early phase of a 2017 Roundup trial, the public witnessed this tactic firsthand when the “Monsanto Papers” made national headlines.
These internal documents revealed that Monsanto had been pressuring scientists to reverse their study conclusions, lobbying government agency officials, writing its own studies that defended glyphosate under the names of academic experts, and bribing those experts into supporting those studies’ claims.
That’s not all— in 2019, peer-reviewed journal Environmental Sciences Europe published a report investigating the difference between the EPA’s and the IARC’s classifications of glyphosate. According to academic expert Charles Benbrook, the answer to this mystery is simple. The two governmental agencies used vastly different academic studies for their research.
As stated in the report, the EPA based its decision mostly on unpublished studies funded by the pesticide industry, while the IARC based its findings on published academic papers. The report also noted a bias in the studies the EPA used. All but one of the EPA’s referenced studies reported that glyphosate was completely safe and did not pose any health hazards. Meanwhile, only about 75% of the studies used by the IARC found that glyphosate could present a risk to human health.
Join the Roundup lawsuit
If you or a close family member developed Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (or a related type of lymphoma or leukemia) after being exposed to Roundup weed killer within the last 20 years, there’s still time to get the justice you deserve.
Ready to file a claim ?
See if you qualify for the Roundup lawsuit.
Referenced Articles
- Mesnage, R., Antoniou, M.N. (2018). Roundup Ready! Glyphosate and the Current Controversy Over the World’s Leading Herbicide. In Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene (pp. 149–153). essay, Elsevier. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/glyphosate#chapters-articles.
- Monsanto. (1983.) A chronic feeding study of glyphosate (Roundup® technical) in mice [Unpublished Report]. East Millstone (NJ): Bio/dynamics Inc. (Project #77-2062, 1981). Cited In: Greim et al. 2015.
View more sources
- Gillam, G. (2017, June 8). Of Mice, Monsanto and a Mysterious Tumor. Retrieved from https://usrtk.org/pesticides/of-mice-monsanto-and-a-mysterious-tumor/
- World Health Organization. (2015, March 20). IARC Monographs Volume 112: evaluation of five organophosphate insecticides and herbicides. Retrieved from https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/MonographVolume112-1.pdf
- U.S. EPA. (1993, September). Fact Sheet for Glyphosate. Retrieved from https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/reregistration/fs_PC-417300_1-Sep-93.pdf
- World Health Organization. (2015). IARC Monograph on Glyphosate. Retrieved from https://www.iarc.who.int/featured-news/media-centre-iarc-news-glyphosate/
- Lerner, S. (2015, November 3). EPA Used Monsanto’s Research to Give Roundup a Pass. Retrieved from https://theintercept.com/2015/11/03/epa-used-monsanto-funded-research/
- Hahn, J. (2021, March 12). How Corporate and Political Influence Enabled Monsanto to Sell Roundup Despite the Risks. Retrieved from https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/monsanto-roundup-epa-corporate-political-influence#:~:text=The%20documents%20also%20proved%20that,successfully%20lobbied%20regulators%20at%20the
- Benbrook, C. (2019, January 14.) How did the US EPA and IARC reach opposite conclusions about glyphosate’s genotoxicity? Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-018-0184-7
About the Roundup Lawsuit
Products at-risk
Roundup Weed & Grass Killer
Who's being sued?
The Monsanto Company, Bayer AG
Which illnesses are eligible ?
- Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma
- Chronic Lymphocytic Lymphoma
- B-Cell and T-Cell Lymphoma
- Follicular Lymphoma
- Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma
- Mantle Cell Lymphoma
- Hairy Cell Leykemia
- Burkitt Lymphoma
- Lymphoblastic Lymphoma
- Marginal Zone Lymphomas
- Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma
- Primary CNS Lymphoma
- Waldenstorm Macroglobulinemia
