Disturbing allegations as lawsuits pile up alleging Roundup causes cancer. - Mark P. Loftus

September 26, 2025

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer[IARC] a part of the World Health Organization, published its findings after looking into the carcinogenicity of five common pesticides. One of the pesticides examined – glyphosate – is a primary ingredient in Roundup – a pesticide made by Monsanto that anyone with a garden knows about – and likely uses. Those gardeners may want to rethink that.

The IARC Report concluded that plyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans. Not surprisingly, regular users of Roundup who also suffered from cancer, began filing lawsuits. Lots of lawsuits. Currently there are 800 cancer patients suing Monsanto. They are claiming that Monsanto failed to warn users about the cancer risk affiliated with glyphosate. Monsanto of course denies any proof and points to a separate study by the Environmental Protection Agency’s Cancer Assessment Review Committee that declared that glyphosate is not likely to cause cancer in humans. But the credibility of the EPA report is very much in question. First, it appears the EPA didn’t even consider the IARC report, as the EPA report was issued months before the IARC published their findings. And there have been allegations in some of the legal proceedings that Jess Rowland, the former Head Honcho of the EPA Pesticide Programs was involved in efforts to “kill” ongoing glyphosate studies linking it to cancer. Even more troubling are allegations that Rowland, shortly before leaving the EPA indicated to Monsanto that he “…could be useful to Monsanto as we move forward with ongoing glyphosate defense.” The EPA, it would seem, should be interested only in assessing whether certain herbicides cause cancer – and if so making the public aware. Playing “defense” on behalf of a herbicide manufacturer certainly raises some serious questions.

Tim Litzenburg’s law firm represents more than 500 of the patients suing Monsanto. He said that most of the patients had no knowledge of the link with glyphosate until the IARC came out with its report. And he noted that the lawsuits do not allege simply that that glyphosate alone caused the cancers. Litzenburg explained that “Roundup contains animal fats and other ingredients that increase the carcinogenicity of the glyphosate.” Let me break that down a bit. The plaintiff are alleging that not only did Monsanto manufacture a pesticide that included a cancer-causing agent. Monsanto added other ingredients that increased the carcinogenic impact of that agent.

Monsanto of course claims that glyphosate has a long history of safe use and does not pose any unreasonable risk to human health when used properly. And they cite to hundreds of studies demonstrating that glyphosate is safe.

I would be interested in knowing precisely how many Monsanto executives currently use Roundup in their well-tended gardens. I would bet not very many. Probably just coincidence.

Red Tesla sedan driving on a road.
September 26, 2025
According to online reports, Tesla ignored a $60 million dollar settlement overture in the wrongful death case that ultimately resulted in a $242 million dollar jury verdict against the car maker. The lawsuit grew out of 2019 crash where a Tesla Model S with Autopilot engaged, plowed through a Florida intersection and crashed into a Chevy Tahoe. Neima Benavides Leon and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo were standing near the Tahoe when the Tesla crashed into it. Leon was killed and Angulo suffered serious injuries. A lawsuit was filed against Tesla, asserting that although the Autopilot feature was engaged, the vehicle did not brake. Florida law permits a monetary demand to be issued before trial. If the defendant fails to accept the demand within 30 days it is considered rejected. If the plaintiff then goes to trial and secures a verdict 25% greater than the offer, the defendant is on the hook for plaintiff’s investigative expenses and attorneys’ fees. Tesla is appealing the jury verdict, citing “substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial.”.
Johnson's baby powder container, white bottle, blue text, red seal, 400g.
September 26, 2025
This important ruling got kind of lost in the news cycle. A couple weeks ago, the United States Supreme Court refused to vacate a $2.2 billion dollar ovarian cancer verdict against Johnson & Johnson[“J & J”]. The verdict was originally returned by a Missouri jury in 2018 on behalf of 22 women. The original verdict was actually $4.7 billion but a Missouri Appellate Court reduced the award to $2 billion. Each of the women claimed that there was asbestos and asbestos-laced talc in J & J talcum powder products they used, and they developed ovarian cancer as a result. Asbestos is known to cause cancer. Talc, in its raw form is often found in close proximity to naturally occurring asbestos. When J & J mined talc, that talc sometimes contained asbestos. And that asbestos sometimes found its way into J & J personal hygiene products. [In 2019, J & J recalled 33,000 bottles of J & J products after FDA testing found asbestos in test samples]. J & J, has known of the risk of asbestos contamination in talc products since the 1970’s. Some 21,000 plus ovarian cancer cases are pending against J & J throughout the United States.
Movie poster for
September 26, 2025
Reports today say that DuPont and the State of New Jersey have reached a $2 Billion dollar settlement arising out of DuPont’s release of “forever chemicals” into soil, wetlands and other areas in New Jersey – and then forgetting to clean up the mess they made. The settlement with DuPont is reportedly the largest environmental settlement ever obtained by a state. “Forever chemicals” – also known as PFAS(referring to per and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are man-made chemicals that are used in an extensive variety of products as they are both water and grease-resistant. The chemicals are linked to litany of health problems, including increased risk of certain cancers(kidney, testicular and breast) liver damage, thyroid issues and reproductive problems(such as decreased fertility, low birthweight and developmental problems). NJ.Com is reporting that one of the sites where DuPont created munitions created such significant contamination in the environment that over 300 homes required filters to prevent toxic chemicals from seeping into their homes. The settlement terms provide that DuPont will spend $875 millions cleaning up the contamination and set aside another $125 million to cover other damages that may arise. Additionally, DuPont will also set p a $1.2 billion funding source and reserve fund of $475 million to ensure that even if the company fails to make payments, or goes bankrupt, public funds will not be used. For a stark introduction into the nature of PFAS, check out Dark Waters, a compelling and criminally underrated movie based on the decades old fight waged by attorney Robert Bilott against DuPont for contaminating West Virginia rural communities.