San Francisco Man Was Awarded $80 Million after Accusing Garden Product in Causing Cancer

Edwin Hardeman became a public sensation after he publicly declared Roundup Pesticide the cause of his cancer. New reports claim he has won the lawsuit and has now been granted a whopping $80 million for damages!

Doctors diagnosed Hardeman with a terminal disease, non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The 70-year-old then found that glyphosate, an active ingredient used in the production of the pesticide he frequently used, was a crucial factor in the genesis of the carcinoma.

The injustice he felt caused him to question the producers of Roundup publicly and also file a lawsuit against them. In the legal proceedings, Hardeman stepped forward with substantial proofs of how the production company had done a terrible job in manufacturing Roundup as they didn't label any of its constituents as being carcinogenic.

Hardeman disclosed that, while oblivious to the damage posed by the pesticide, he had used it to treat poison oak and eradicate weeds on his farming property for many years!

Roundup is widely circulated and is especially prevalent in agricultural setups and even in everyday gardening. It is one of the significant products of Monsanto, a company highly regarded in the agribusiness sector. Hardeman’s lawsuit has instituted a big dent in the company's reputations as they were labeled “negligent” by a San Francisco jury.

On Wednesday, Hardeman was declared victorious in the proceedings and won about $80 million in damages. About 6 percent of this was awarded in compensation while the more substantial fraction is for punitive damages. On hearing the final decision, a joyful Hardeman was seen hugging his wife and attorneys as they were declared winners in the case.

Although defeated, Monsanto maintained their stance of innocence as they pushed that findings have established that glyphosate is considered safe and of no threat to human life. Bayer, who recently gained ownership of the company, explained that they plan to appeal to the court.

A public statement from the company reads:

“We are disappointed with the jury’s decision, but this verdict does not change the weight of over four decades of extensive science and the conclusions of regulators worldwide that support the safety of our glyphosate-based herbicides and that they are not carcinogenic.”

The case has drawn a lot of attention and has now become the subject of numerous media outlets online. Hardeman’s victory signals a lot more to come as there are many lawsuits quite similar to his.