The Roundup herbicide, which remains at the center of federal multidistrict litigation in California, continues to be a linchpin for disputed scientific claims about the popular weed killer.
A study released earlier this year that was edited by Geoffrey Heal of the Columbia University Business School concluded that the use of the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, in rural communities over 20 years produced negative effects on post-childbirth health. The introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops in the United States was followed by a 750% rise in glyphosate use, the researchers found.
“Our results suggest the introduction of GM seeds and glyphosate significantly reduced average birthweight and gestational length,” an abstract describing the study states. “While we find effects throughout the birth weight distribution, low expected-weight births experienced the largest reductions. …”
The herbicide disproportionately affected historically disadvantaged groups in rural America, according to the study.
“These results conflict with current regulatory guidance, suggest current regulations may be inadequate, and highlight the need to improve pesticide use and exposure monitoring,” the study states.
The release of the new research comes amid the apparent winding down of the federal MDL involving claims that Roundup elevates the chances that consumers of the product will develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a form of cancer. Most new Roundup lawsuits are filed in state courts rather than the MDL in the Northern District of California, according to plaintiffs’ law firms.
Bayer, the parent company of the developer of Roundup, Monsanto, disputed the conclusions of the new research.
“The study is flawed and inconsistent with the expert conclusions of the leading health regulatory authorities around the world, who have evaluated thousands of studies on glyphosate spanning 50 years,” Bayer said in a statement emailed to the Southern California Record. “As part of the regulatory risk assessment process, the authorities specifically look at any potential effects on fertility and reproductive health, and no regulatory authority in the world has concluded that glyphosate impacts fertility or reproductive health.”
The company also expressed doubt that the study examining birth weights would have any bearing on the California MDL.
“We don’t expect this to affect the litigation given the flawed study and the fact that it relates to injuries that are different from those alleged in the Roundup litigation,” the statement said.
The Miller & Zois law firm reported that as of Feb. 4, only 14 new cases were added to the Roundup MDL compared with a month prior. In turn, pending claims in the MDL now number 4,414. The law firm indicated that Roundup litigation has been shifting from the federal venue to state courts.
“The relatively low number of new filings suggests that the MDL may be nearing its endgame, with most activity now concentrated in state court dockets,” Miller & Zois reported.
Roundup, marketed as an all-purpose weed killer, was introduced in the 1970s. Plaintiff attorneys have alleged that Monsanto has known for decades that glyphosate elevates cancer risks but attempted to hide the evidence and to describe the product as safe.
Last October, a Philadelphia jury handed down a verdict favorable to a Pennsylvania Roundup user, who the jurors said merited $3 million in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages.