Full-Service Law Firm solving complex challenges through bold thinking, precise execution, and shared purpose.

Full Service Law Firm | Michael Best & Friedrich LLP

Specializing in the Intersection of Business &amp; Government

Meet our team of trusted advisors, strategic thinkers, and community builders dedicated to client success.

Learn about our full-service legal and business solutions, designed to address complex challenges for leading organizations across industries.

Access thought leadership, news, and resources to stay informed about the latest trends, legal developments, and industry innovations.

Discover how partnership, bold thinking, and precise execution drive results for clients nationwide.

Explore how our national reach and local expertise support clients across the United States and beyond.

Grow at a firm designed to bring out your best.

For nearly a decade, thousands of plaintiffs have sued Monsanto alleging that the chemical glyphosate used in Roundup caused their cancer and that the company had covered up the risks. Since then, Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, has paid out more than $10 billion to settle approximately 100,000 Roundup claims, and faces the potential of further costly lawsuits and jury verdicts, given the thousands of people who have used and continue to use the product.One of the lynchpins of Monsanto's defense, and regulations that have deemed the weedkiller safe, is a 2000 scientific review conducted by three scientists that found Roundup safe. However, the study was retracted last month by the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, citing serious ethical concerns about the paper basing its conclusions largely on unpublished studies conducted by Monsanto. There were also indications that the authors had received financial compensation from Monsanto for their work. There was no disclosure of a conflict of interest on the part of the authors beyond a mention in the acknowledgments that Monsanto had provided scientific support. As a result, Dr. Martin van den Berg, the journal's editor in chief, said he “had lost confidence in the results and conclusions of this article.”Now the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is being asked to reconsider the safety of the product given that the retracted paper appears in the bibliography of EPA’s risk assessment on glyphosate. An EPA spokesman said the agency was aware of the article’s retraction and noted EPA’s assessment of glyphosate’s risks had not relied solely on the study, and that the agency did not intend to rely on it going forward.What this all will mean for the future of the product, and the future of the litigation over its use, will be worth watching in 2026.<input type='hidden' id='passle-remote-hosting-tracking-shortcode' value='102m2d2'/><blockquote class="wp-block-quote passle-quote has-cite-link">The 2000 paper, a scientific review conducted by three independent scientists, was for decades cited by other researchers as evidence of Roundup’s safety. It became the cornerstone of regulations that deemed the weedkiller safe. But since then, emails uncovered as part of lawsuits against the weedkiller’s manufacturer, Monsanto, have shown that the company’s scientists played a significant role in conceiving and writing the study.<cite><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/02/climate/glyphosate-roundup-retracted-study.html?smid=em-share" aria-label="www.nytimes.com/..." title="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/02/climate/glyphosate-roundup-retracted-study.html?smid=em-share" target="_blank">www.nytimes.com/...</a></cite></blockquote>

core/freeform

Paul E. Benson

Litigation

Corporate

Landmark study on the safety of Roundup is retracted. EPA called upon to reassess the widely used chemical.

Related People

Related Capabilities

You may also be interested in these

Five Financial Insights Growing Organizations Should Be Thinking About Right Now

One Word in a Signature Block Could Make You Personally Liable

What Does Outside General Counsel Actually Mean?