The herbicide glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup, will be classified by California as a carcinogen, “known to the state to cause cancer.” The state’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment reported the news June 26, although it will officially take effect July 7. 
 
 Monsanto sued the state earlier this year to prevent the listing, but lost. However, the St. Louis-based company is appealing the ruling, which forces Monsanto, and any other company using glyphosate, to issue a warning label on packaging. The state environmental office told Reuters that Monsanto has not been granted a stay so the listing will go ahead next month despite the appeal. 
 
 “This is not the final step in the process, and it has no bearing on the merits of the case,” said Scott Partridge, Monsanto’s vice president of global strategy, in an email. “We will continue to aggressively challenge this improper decision.” He added that the listing is “unwarranted on the basis of science and the law.” 
 
 In March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)—part of the World Health Organization— classified glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen.” That ruling has been controversial, to say the least, and is the basis for California’s actions. A Reuters investigation published earlier this month has raised question about the classification, however. That piece shows that Aaron Blair, the head of the IARC’s glyphosate research group, had access to data from a large study (which hadn’t yet been published) suggesting that the weed killer likely wasn’t linked to cancer. That study notwithstanding, numerous papers published as of March 2015 (and since) do seem to suggest a link a link between glyphosate and certain cancers, and IARC has said it’s sticking with its classification. 
 
 California is required under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, better known as Proposition 65, to publish a regularly updated list of chemicals thought to cause cancer or birth defects. 
 
 “California’s decision makes it the national leader in protecting people from cancer-causing pesticides,” said Nathan Donley, a former cancer researcher and senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, in an emailed statement. “The U.S. EPA now needs to step up and acknowledge that the world’s most transparent and science-based assessment has linked glyphosate to cancer. ||||| Regulators in California took a pivotal step on Monday toward becoming the first state to require the popular weed killer Roundup to come with a label warning that it's known to cause cancer. 
 
 Officials announced that starting July 7 the weed killer's main ingredient, glyphosate, will appear on a list California keeps of potentially cancerous chemicals. A year later, the listing could come with warning labels on the product, officials said. 
 
 However, it's not certain whether Roundup will ultimately get a warning label. 
 
 Monsanto, the chemical's maker, has filed an appeal after losing in court to block the labeling, arguing that Roundup doesn't cause cancer and that the labels will harm the company's business. 
 
 State health regulators must also decide if there's a high enough amount of the chemical in Roundup to pose a risk to human health. State officials received more than 1,300 public comments. 
 
 "We can't say for sure," said Sam Delson, a spokesman for California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. "We're reviewing those comments." 
 
 Glyphosate has no color or smell. Monsanto introduced it in 1974 as an effective way of killing weeds while leaving crops and plants intact. 
 
 It's sold in more than 160 countries, and farmers use it on 250 types of crops in California, the nation's leading farming state. 
 
 Attorney Michael Baum, who represents more than 300 people who claim a loved one became sick or died from exposure to Roundup, says the fight to protect Californians is not over. 
 
 He said that the state's failure to set the proper risk level would undermine protections California put in place by listing harmful chemicals. 
 
 Scott Partridge, Monsanto's vice president of global strategy, said in a statement that glyphosate does not cause cancer and there's no need to list it as harmful in California. 
 
 "This is not the final step in the process," Partridge said. "We will continue to aggressively challenge this improper decision." ||||| (Reuters) - Glyphosate, an herbicide and the active ingredient in Monsanto Co’s popular Roundup weed killer, will be added to California’s list of chemicals known to cause cancer effective July 7, the state’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) said on Monday. 
 
 Monsanto vowed to continue its legal fight against the designation, required under a state law known as Proposition 65, and called the decision “unwarranted on the basis of science and the law.” 
 
 The listing is the latest legal setback for the seeds and chemicals company, which has faced increasing litigation over glyphosate since the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer said that it is “probably carcinogenic” in a controversial ruling in 2015. 
 
 Earlier this month, Reuters reported that the scientist leading the IARC’s review knew of fresh data showing no link between glyphosate and cancer. But he never mentioned it, and the agency did not take the information into account because it had yet to be published in a scientific journal. The IARC classed glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen,” the only major health regulator to do so. 
 
 Dicamba, a weed killer designed for use with Monsanto’s next generation of biotech crops, is under scrutiny in Arkansas after the state’s plant board voted last week to ban the chemical. 
 
 OEHHA said the designation of glyphosate under Proposition 65 will proceed following an unsuccessful attempt by Monsanto to block the listing in trial court and after requests for stay were denied by a state appellate court and the California’s Supreme Court. 
 
 Monsanto’s appeal of the trial court’s ruling is pending. 
 
 “This is not the final step in the process, and it has no bearing on the merits of the case. We will continue to aggressively challenge this improper decision,” Scott Partridge, Monsanto’s vice president of global strategy, said. 
 
 Listing glyphosate as a known carcinogen under California’s Proposition 65 would require companies selling the chemical in the state to add warning labels to packaging. Warnings would also be required if glyphosate is being sprayed at levels deemed unsafe by regulators. 
 
 Users of the chemical include landscapers, golf courses, orchards, vineyards and farms. 
 
 Monsanto and other glyphosate producers would have roughly a year from the listing date to re-label products or remove them from store shelves if further legal challenges are lost. 
 
 Slideshow (6 Images) 
 
 Monsanto has not calculated the cost of any re-labeling effort and does not break out glyphosate sales data by state, Partridge said. 
 
 Environmental groups cheered OEHHA’s move to list the chemical. 
 
 “California’s decision makes it the national leader in protecting people from cancer-causing pesticides,” said Nathan Donley, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity. ||||| In June, a California groundskeeper will make history by taking company to trial on claims it suppressed harm of Roundup 
 
 At the age of 46, DeWayne Johnson is not ready to die. But with cancer spread through most of his body, doctors say he probably has just months to live. Now Johnson, a husband and father of three in California, hopes to survive long enough to make Monsanto take the blame for his fate. 
 
 
 
 On 18 June, Johnson will become the first person to take the global seed and chemical company to trial on allegations that it has spent decades hiding the cancer-causing dangers of its popular Roundup herbicide products – and his case has just received a major boost. 
 
 Last week Judge Curtis Karnow issued an order clearing the way for jurors to consider not just scientific evidence related to what caused Johnson’s cancer, but allegations that Monsanto suppressed evidence of the risks of its weed killing products. Karnow ruled that the trial will proceed and a jury would be allowed to consider possible punitive damages. 
 
 
 
 Monsanto says its pesticides are safe. Now, a court wants to see the proof | Carey Gillam Read more 
 
 “The internal correspondence noted by Johnson could support a jury finding that Monsanto has long been aware of the risk that its glyphosate-based herbicides are carcinogenic … but has continuously sought to influence the scientific literature to prevent its internal concerns from reaching the public sphere and to bolster its defenses in products liability actions,” Karnow wrote. “Thus there are triable issues of material fact.” 
 
 
 
 Johnson’s case, filed in San Francisco county superior court in California, is at the forefront of a legal fight against Monsanto. Some 4,000 plaintiffs have sued Monsanto alleging exposure to Roundup caused them, or their loved ones, to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Another case is scheduled for trial in October, in Monsanto’s home town of St Louis, Missouri. 
 
 
 
 The lawsuits challenge Monsanto’s position that its herbicides are proven safe and assert that the company has known about the dangers and hidden them from regulators and the public. The litigants cite an assortment of research studies indicating that the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicides, a chemical called glyphosate, can lead to NHL and other ailments. They also cite research showing glyphosate formulations in its commercial-end products are more toxic than glyphosate alone. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen in 2015. 
 
 
 
 Monsanto does not want the truth about Roundup and cancer to become public Michael Miller, attorney 
 
 Monsanto “championed falsified data and attacked legitimate studies” that revealed dangers of its herbicides, and led a “prolonged campaign of misinformation” to convince government agencies, farmers and consumers that Roundup was safe, according to Johnson’s lawsuit. 
 
 
 
 “We look forward to exposing how Monsanto hid the risk of cancer and polluted the science,” said Michael Miller, Johnson’s attorney. “Monsanto does not want the truth about Roundup and cancer to become public.” 
 
 
 
 Monsanto has fiercely denied the allegations, saying its products are not the cause of cancer. The IARC finding was wrong, according to Monsanto, as are studies finding glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup to be potentially carcinogenic. Monsanto points to findings by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other regulatory authorities as backing its defense. 
 
 
 
 Facebook Twitter Pinterest A march against the powerful agrochemical company Monsanto in Bordeaux, France, on 19 May. Photograph: Mehdi Fedouach/AFP/Getty Images 
 
 “Glyphosate-based herbicides are supported by one of the most extensive worldwide human health and environmental effects databases ever compiled for a pesticide product,” Monsanto states on its website. “Comprehensive toxicological and environmental fate studies conducted over the last 40 years have time and again demonstrated the strong safety profile of this widely used herbicide.” 
 
 
 
 A company spokeswoman did not respond to a request for additional comment. 
 
 
 
 How the Johnson lawsuit plays out could be a bellwether for how other plaintiffs proceed. If Johnson prevails, there could be many more years of costly litigation and hefty damage claims. If Monsanto successfully turns back the challenge, it could derail other cases and lift pressure on the firm. 
 
 
 
 Weedkiller found in granola and crackers, internal FDA emails show Read more 
 
 According to the court record, Johnson had a job as a groundskeeper for the Benicia unified school district where he applied numerous treatments of Monsanto’s herbicides to school properties from 2012 until at least late 2015. He was healthy and active before he got the cancer diagnosis in August 2014. In a January deposition, Johnson’s treating physician testified that more than 80% of his body was covered by lesions, and that he probably had but a few months to live. Johnson has improved since starting a new drug treatment in November but remains too weak sometimes to even speak or get out of bed, his attorneys and doctors state in court filings. 
 
 
 
 Monsanto’s lawyers plan to introduce evidence that other factors caused Johnson’s cancer, to challenge the validity of the science Johnson’s claims rely on, and to present their own experts and research supporting safety. The company has an EPA draft risk assessment of glyphosate on its side, which concludes that glyphosate is not likely carcinogenic.
– California's latest environmental and health crackdown has Monsanto in its crosshairs: Reuters reports that as of July 7, glyphosate, the herbicide serving as the main ingredient in the agrochemical company's Roundup weed killer, will take a spot on the Golden State's list of cancer-causing chemicals, per the state's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. The new designation falls under the umbrella of Proposition 65 (aka the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986), under which an annually updated list of chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, or reproductive harm is required. Scott Partridge, the VP of global strategy for Monsanto, which has been battling the designation in trial court, called the decision "improper" and "unwarranted on the basis of science and the law" in an email to Newsweek. It's not just glyphosate's new ranking that has Monsanto fuming: ABC News notes if the company doesn't win an appeal in the case, in a year's time it may have to add onto its Roundup labels that the product is carcinogenic, making California the first state to issue such a mandate. Whether that happens will depend not only on the results of Monsanto's appeal, but also on whether state health officials determine Roundup contains enough of the odorless chemical to pose a health risk. As the company defends the chemical widely used by landscapers, farms, and vineyards, as well as by individual consumers, environmental groups are applauding California's move. "[The state's] decision makes it the national leader in protecting people from cancer-causing pesticides," a senior scientist for the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity says in a statement to Newsweek.