German chemical giant Bayer and agricultural groups are seeking to shield themselves from lawsuits claiming its Roundup weedkiller causes cancer, according to an AP News report.
Legislation pending in Iowa and at least seven other US states would protect pesticide companies from claims they failed to warn their product caused cancer if the product label otherwise complied with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s regulations, the 10 February report said.
Similar attempts to legislate on the issue failed during 2024 legislative sessions in Iowa, Missouri and Idaho, AP News wrote.
However, Bayer and a coalition of agricultural groups had launched a broader media campaign this year highlighting the importance of glyphosate-based Roundup for US agriculture, the report said.
The campaign also had the support of a group that ran a Super Bowl advertisement in Missouri claiming the legislation was necessary to combat Chinese influence over US food supply.
Campaigners against the legislation claim the bills would limit the rights of people to hold companies accountable if their products caused harm, according to the report.
Although some studies had associated Roundup’s key ingredient glyphosate with cancer, the EPA has said it was not likely to be carcinogenic to humans when used as directed.
However, numerous lawsuits against Bayer have alleged glyphosate caused a form of cancer - non-Hodgkin lymphoma, AP News wrote.
Bayer has always disputed claims that Roundup causes cancer, but the company has been issued with around 177,000 lawsuits involving the weedkiller and has set aside US$16bn to settle cases.
The company has said those legal costs were “not sustainable” and it was looking for relief from lawmakers concerned about the possibility that Roundup could be taken off the US market, the report said.
For crops including corn, soyabeans and cotton, Roundup is designed to work with genetically modified (GM) seeds.
Some farmers have claimed that if lawsuits forced Roundup out of the US market, Chinese-made products could be the only alternative.
“Losing access to this one safe and effective tool will set off a domino effect that will threaten family farmers and our state’s economy,” Kevin Ross, a farmer from southwest Iowa, was quoted as saying to Iowa lawmakers.
