As a small-scale, diversified farmer and a cancer survivor, I find myself in an interesting situation. Often, the nicest days for me to do farm work are the ones where the fields around my farm are receiving applications of a wide range of agri-chemicals. While I don’t apply pesticides on our farm, it is likely that my exposure levels to these dangerous chemicals is higher than most people.
Do I spend time wondering if my cancer is a result of that exposure? Of course I do.
Can I prove that link? Well, perhaps, someday, we could show a strong link between my cancer and pesticides. But, it is unlikely that I will ever have the evidence to successfully bring a case to court that would convince anyone that a specific product made me ill.
Because there is ambiguity as to the cause of my cancer - and the cancers so many other people are experiencing, I am amazed that there have actually been successful lawsuits. Winning these cases are extremely difficult. A successful claim must show that the product label was false or misleading, lacked adequate warnings, or failed to provide necessary instructions to protect health and the environment AND that this misbranding caused the claimants harm.
Successful cases, like Lee Johnson’s, were able to show that certain formulations of RoundUp caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. But the key component that led to findings against pesticide companies is that it was their intentional deception that led to the misbranding on pesticide use labels.
Yes, you heard me right. The pivot point that leads to pesticide companies losing lawsuits is their deliberate efforts to deceive the EPA, and us, regarding the risks their products present.
After acquiring Monsanto in 2018, Bayer found itself facing nearly 100,000 individual lawsuits and was eventually ordered to pay up to $10.9 billion to settle lawsuits that alleged RoundUp caused cancer. One key finding was that surfactants (non-active ingredients) were guilty of causing illness. It was discovered that Monsanto knew of the problem and even changed the formulation in the European Union, but they failed to make the change in the United States.
In short, Monsanto knew the product could harm people, but they withheld that information from the EPA and the public while NOT doing anything to correct the issue.
Bayer and their stockholders are regretting the decision to purchase Monsanto now. But, they are not standing still. They are leading a group titled the Modern Ag Alliance in an effort to pass bills in many states that would grant lawsuit immunity to pesticide companies. If you live in any of the states that have active bills, you have likely seen their ads in social media, television, radio and billboards. They are spending a LOT of money to get these passed into law.
These state bills grant foreign chemical companies total immunity from federal misbranding violations, stripping farmers and families of their right to hold pesticide companies accountable for deception. This is part of a coordinated effort to enact federal immunity legislation giving pesticide companies complete immunity nationwide.
But there is good news too! Organizations like Beyond Pesticides, American Association for Justice and others are working together to track these efforts and build strategies to fight against the Modern Ag Alliance game plan. And, yours truly finds himself in the middle of it via his position as Communications Manager at PAN.
So far, bills that would grant lawsuit immunity to pesticide companies in Mississippi, Oklahoma (Senate) and Wyoming have been stopped. But there is active legislation in Iowa, Missouri, Tennessee, Georgia, Idaho, Montana, Florida and North Dakota.
And now for the good part. You CAN do something to help.
At a time when so much seems out of our control, we need to find actions that will help us move towards making a difference.
You can easily use PAN’s actions for Iowa (Iowa’s action is a new version), Tennessee, Georgia and Missouri to compose letters to legislators. The software identifies your Senators and Representatives by using your address. PAN has provided a letter on the issue with important talking points. However, you should feel free to edit that letter - especially the introduction - to personalize the content.
If you live in these states - take the action. If you know individuals in any of these states, please share links to these actions with them and encourage them to participate. I also want to encourage individuals to make phone calls, send physical letters via the US Postal Service and even visit your state capitol if you are able to do so.
Finally, Beyond Pesticides is maintaining a state bill tracker, which includes their letter templates for each state.
I know everyone has different skills, different levels of comfort and varying amounts of energy and time for this work. Do what you can - but do something. Maybe that something is just learning the facts today. Perhaps you’ll inform someone else about the problem who isn’t aware of it. Or maybe you’ll call your Senator.
Whatever it is, you have both my admiration and my gratitude.
Thank you for taking the time to read and consider my words,
I heard back from state Senator Dave Sires, he said “I do not intend to support the liability waiver for chemical companies.”
So that’s promising.
Thanks for continuing to educate us, Rob. Folks in Communications tell me that one has to hear a message SEVEN times before it is absorbed, so keep on speaking to us.