45.
Internal Monsanto Email: ‘You Cannot Say That Roundup is not a Carcinogen’
No: MONGLY00922458
Date: 11/21/2003-11/24/2003
Documents Released: 8/1/2017
Description
This document contains email correspondence between Donna Farmer and Sekhar
Natarajan, in which Dr. Farmer discusses the potential adverse effects
of the formulated Roundup product, conceding that “you cannot say
that Roundup is not a carcinogen…we have not done the necessary
testing on the formulation to make that statement.” at *1-2.
Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation
as it evinces knowledge by a Monsanto toxicologist regarding the biological
plausibility of the Roundup formulation, as opposed to glyphosate by itself,
to act as a human carcinogen. This is also relevant to Dr. Farmer’s
credibility, who is one of Monsanto’s primary expert witnesses at
the company.
46.
Email Showing Monsanto Had Long Known of N-nitrosoglyphosate (“NNG”)
in Roundup
No: MONGLY00925905
Date: 9/23/2004
Documents Released: 3/15/2017
Description
This document contains correspondence between Michael Cunningham (Monsanto)
and several other colleagues discussing a counter argument against N-ntirosoglyphosate
(“NNG”). The email quotes Dr. Ruth Shearer in 1984: “The
problem with glyphosate… is that it combines readily with nitrites,
found in normal human saliva, to form an N-nitroso compound called N-nitrosoglyphosate.
Although that particular compound has not been tested as a cancer-causing
agent, over 75% of all other N-nitroso compounds so tested have been shown
to cause cancer by way of tumour formation.”
NNG is found in glyphosate-based formulations such as Roundup, but not necessarily in glyphosate evaluated in animal bioassays. The public will not find any reference to NNG on the Roundup® label. NNG is part of a family of carcinogenic chemicals known as “nitroso compounds”. Nitroso compounds have consistently been identified as carcinogenic following analysis. NNG forms whenever glyphosate interacts with nitrites, whether outside or inside the body.
47.
Monsanto PowerPoint Presentation Shows 2010 Regulatory Goals in Germany
to ‘Push Back on Data Requests’
No: MONGLY02721133
Date: 9/1/2005
Documents Released: 8/1/2017
Description
This document is a PowerPoint presentation which details Monsanto’s
regulatory goals for 2010. The strategy in Germany was to “Defend
POEAs” and “push back on data requests.” at *10.
Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation
as it demonstrates Monsanto’s unwillingness to cooperate with national
regulatory agencies in providing comprehensive data for the registration
of Roundup. This is particularly relevant since Monsanto routinely relies
on the evaluations of foreign regulatory agencies to support its claim
that Roundup does not cause cancer. The lack of data regarding the safety
of the formulated product (in this instance the surfactant POEA) is related
to the issue of regulatory agencies reaching an informed consensus on
the carcinogenicity of Roundup. An important feature of general causation
discovery has entailed the extent to which Monsanto circumvented proper
regulatory safe guards.
48.
Internal Email Discussing Metallic Ions in Glyphosate
No: MONGLY02478386
Date: 12/20/2007
Documents Released: 3/15/2017
Description
This document contains email correspondence between Monsanto scientist
Eric Haupfear and others discussing potential impurities in glyphosate.
The email suggests reticence to conduct further tests on a quantitative
level. Daniel Goldstein (Monsanto scientist), who comments in the email
chain, says: “No decision has been made that we need to answer this
question…I am NOT suggesting analytical work be initiated on this…”
49.
Monsanto PowerPoint Presentation Shows Company Awareness of Roundup Cancer
Plausibility
No: MONGLY01182770
Date: 7/15/2008
Documents Released: 8/1/2017
Description
This document is a PowerPoint presentation concerning the “EU Expert
Advisory Panel”. Page 6 of the presentation is titled: “Monsanto’s
Roundup ® acts on one of the key stages of cellular division, which
can potentially lead to cancer in the long term.” at *6. The page
references a French in-vitro study which observed adverse effects associated
with Roundup. The final page contains “questions” regarding
how to “position” in-vitro hazards using “urine concentrations
from applicator exposure into plasma concentrations.” at *7. Monsanto
also considers the risks in “running a new study”. Id.
Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation
to demonstrate that Monsanto was aware of the biological plausibility
of Roundup as a carcinogen and realized the risks in conducting new studies
that would confirm this suspicion already prevalent in the existing scientific
literature.
50.
Internal Email from 2008: Monsanto Executive Long Aware of Glyphosate Link
to non-Hodgkin Lymphoma
No: MONGLY01179185
Date: 10/14/2008
Documents Released: 8/1/2017
Description
This document contains email correspondence wherein Dean Nasser (Monsanto)
sends a “Beyond Pesticides” publication to Dr. Donna Farmer.
The publication references a study which found positive association between
glyphosate and Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. Dr. Farmer responds: “We
have been aware of this paper for awhile and knew it would only be a matter
of time before the activists pick it up… how do we combat this?” at *1.
Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation
as it indicates Monsanto has been aware of the links between glyphosate
and NHL for a considerable amount of time. Furthermore, as Dr. Farmer
indicates, Monsanto aim to “combat” the biological plausibility
of glyphosate as a carcinogen only when the information gains significant
public attention. This is relevant since it lends support to Plaintiffs’
assertion that Monsanto has taken deliberate actions to influence scientific
literature by attacking any study showing a link between Roundup and cancer.
This is also relevant to Dr. Farmer’s credibility, who is one of
Monsanto’s primary expert witnesses at the company.
51.
Videotaped Deposition of Monsanto Toxicologist Donna Farmer + Monsanto
Internal Emails
No: MONGLYO1192115 – MONGLYO1192117
Date: 9/21/2009 (Emails) 1/11/2017 (Deposition)
Documents Released: 3/14/2017
Description
Monsanto Toxicologist Donna Farmer’s 1/2017 deposition where she
is asked about a 2009 email in which she said, “you cannot say that
Roundup does not cause cancer-we have not done carcinogenicity studies
with “Roundup”.” (MONGLYO1192115)
In the depo, Farmer calls POEA ban in EU “a political decision.”
52.
Monsanto Executive Steven Adams Discusses 1,4-Doixane Specs: “If
There is a Chemical That is Considered to be Cancer Causing, it Doesn’t
Matter How Much is in There…”
No: MONGLY01041300
Date: 6/10/2010
Documents Released: 3/15/2017
Description
This document contains email correspondence in which Steven Adams (Monsanto)
responds to a question regarding the specs for the surfactant 1,4-dioxane.
In the email Adams states that 1,4-dioxane is “an impurity in the
ethoxylated surfactants and not in the glyphosate manufacturing process
itself.” 1,4-dioxane is not listed on the Roundup label, but is
carcinogenic to animals and likely carcinogenic to humans. Adams continues
discussing 1,4-dioxane: “…we have to be very careful before
we go slinging mud about 1,4-dioxane in Chinese glyphosate in public,
because whether it is 1 ppm or 10 ppm, we most likely have it on our products
too, and the general public does not understand the difference between
1 ppm and a bucket full…if there is a chemical that is considered
to be a cancer-causing, it don’t matter how much is in there, just
that it is in there!”
53.
Monsanto Inert Ingredient Submission to EPA (2010) and Internal Emails
Related to Inerts
No: MONGLY05190476 – MONGLY05190485
Date: 11/17/2010 – 4/4/2013
Documents Released: 3/15/2017
Description
This document contains Monsanto’s 2010 ‘Petition Proposing
an Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance for Residues of Alkyl
Amidodimethylpropyl Amine (AADPA) Surfactants in or on Raw Agricultural
Products and Food Products. Monsanto requested the establishment of an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for a new inert. At least
five (5) Toxicology Studies submitted in the exemption request relating
to Roundup ingredients were authored by Kimberly Hodge-Bell, a known participant
and orchestrator in drafting waiver requests to regulatory agencies. It
is believed that these summaries relate to toxicity findings in surfactants
and are part of Monsanto’s catalog of studies related to inert submissions
to regulatory bodies to support Roundup safety.
54.
Internal Email: Monsanto Employee Admits Company Has Not Tested Carcinogenicity
of Roundup Formulation
No: MONGLY01155974
Date: 12/10/2010-12/14/2010
Documents Released: 8/1/2017
Description
This document contains email correspondence between various Monsanto personnel
wherein Stephen Adams addresses the issue of testing Roundup formulations:
“With regards to the carcinogenicity of our formulations we don’t
have such testing on them directly…” at *1.
Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation
as it contains admissions by a Monsanto employee which strongly undermine
Monsanto’s contentions that it is not biologically plausible for
the Roundup formulation to be carcinogenic. It militates against Monsanto’s
claim that it has carried out sufficient testing to rule out the biological
plausibility of Roundup to act as a human carcinogen.
55.
Monsanto Internal Email: Employee Admits Company Hasn’t Tested Roundup
for Chronic or Sub-Chronic Toxicity
No: MONGLY01159775
Date: 3/4/2013 – 3/5/2013
Documents Released: 8/1/2017
Description
This document contains email correspondence between various Monsanto personnel
wherein Xavier Belvaux confirms that: “We do not conduct sub-chronic,
chronic or terotogenicity studies with our formulations.” at *2.
Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation
as it contains express admissions by Monsanto that it has not tested Roundup
for chronic or sub-chronic toxicity. Such lack of thorough toxicological
analysis undermines Monsanto’s firm denial of the biological plausibility
of Roundup’s carcinogenicity based on sufficient testing.
56.
Monsanto Pressures Surfactant Manufacturer to Take Prop 65 Warning off
Surfactant Material Safety Data Sheets
No: MONGLY04175012
Date: 3/20/2013 – 3/29/2013
Documents Released: 3/15/2017
Description
The document contains email correspondence between Gary Klopf (Team Lead,
Surfactant Sci and Formulation at Monsanto) and personnel at Azko Nobel,
one of two main manufacturers of surfactants. The subject of this email
chain is particularly concerning because it involves Monsanto pressuring
Azko Nobel to take off a Prop 65 cancer warning from their surfactant
material safety data sheets, so that Monsanto can avoid a Prop 65 warning
on Roundup.
.png "California Powerhouse")
