This is a YouTube video titled "Why Did It Take So Long To Sue Bayer/Monsanto?" containing a monologue or single-speaker explanation from August 2, 2020, discussing the legal challenges related to suing Bayer/Monsanto over health issues linked to Roundup, focusing on the Daubert standard for scientific evidence in court cases.
We know that Roundup is associated with all kinds of illnesses, with gluten allergies, with celiac disease, definitely with non-alcoholic fatty liver cancer, with colon cancers, with kidney cancers, and with many, many other problems. But you can't sue somebody. You can't sue the producer of a toxic chemical until science on that chemical and that particular association and the particular harm reaches a certain threshold. That's called Daubert. Federal rule and most of the states have rules that follow Daubert. What Daubert says is the purpose of Daubert is they don't want somebody coming in and going to a jury and saying, You know, that this perfume made me insane. Right, right, right, right. Because they want to make sure that there's enough science that you can't just bring a weird theory or a marginal theory into court. So it's a level of evidence to the jury and have the jury decide on that. So the judge has to say, The science on this is actually mainstream enough. It has passed a threshold that I'm going to allow you to explain this to the jury. And so we couldn't sue on Sandy, even though we all knew it's causing all these problems. We couldn't sue them on it until 2015.