In a trial accusing Monsanto maker of the weed killer Roundup of causing the cancers of three people, defense attorneys on [August 5] sought to portray a plaintiff witness who said the chemical is a carcinogen as a well-paid mouthpiece of those suing the company.

The suit filed by the plaintiffs Marty Cox, Cheryl Davis and Gary Gentile claims they developed cancer from their exposure to Roundup. The trio are asking for punitive damages for medical bills, treatments, physical pain and mental anguish. Cox was diagnosed with B-cell lymphoma, Gentile with high-grade-B-cell lymphoma and Davis with follicular lymphoma.

Called as an expert witness by plaintiff attorneys, Benbrook is a pesticide litigation consultant and former professor with the Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources at Washington State University. He also is executive director of the Heartland Health Research Alliance (HHRA), a nonprofit located in Wisconsin tasked with ensuring public health through safe food policies.

…

“You are the executive director of the HHRA [Heartland Health Research Alliance (HHRA), a nonprofit located in Wisconsin]?” [defense attorney Jennifer] Saulino asked. “You don’t have a science degree.”

“Correct.”

“For two years (with HHRA) you were paid $326,324, correct?”

“Yes.”

…

Saulino exhibited a document from the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) stating that the use of glyphosate does not pose a risk to humans and there was no scientific basis for revising its status as a non-carcinogen.

“It would not be an undue hazard to the safety of people using it,” Saulino said. “Did I read that correctly?”

“You did,” Benbrook said.

“They (APVMA) are not changing their assessment.”

“Correct.”

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here