872
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 months ago

When Monsanto and Bayer are paying out billions in compensation to people with glyphosate-related cancers, but still refusing to admit liability so they can keep it on the market, you've got to at least be a little suspicious about their safety claims. It's still cheaper for them to pay people off than stop selling it, I guess?

[-] ikidd@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

A jury trial for damages is about as far away from a scientific determination as one could get. People have gotten settlements for cancers "caused" by LTE power meters.

I have no clue why people trot out this sort of thing as some sort of evidence.

[-] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 months ago

IDK probably because if you were a multi billion dollar company that has already proved the science behind it's safety, apparently. It would seem rather trivial to prove it's effectiveness in court. No?

Settling doesn't mean you're guilty, but it doesn't mean you're innocent either. At best it's a PR move.

this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
872 points (100.0% liked)

Just Post

555 readers
16 users here now

Just post something ๐Ÿ’›

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS