In a landmark ruling, a French court has found agri-chemical behemoth Monsanto guilty of chemical poisoning of a farmer. It is thought the case could open the door for more such lawsuits as, although around 200 reports of sickness supposedly related to pesticide use are reported to the authorities each year in France, the EU’s largest agricultural producer, only 47 cases have been acknowledged in that time.

Yesterday a court in Lyon ruled that arable farmer Paul François had been the victim of chemical poisoning. M François said he suffered neurological damage after inhaling Monsanto’s Lasso weedkiller whilst cleaning the tank of his crop sprayer, resulting in headaches, memory loss and stammering. He said the product did not carry adequate warnings.

image expired

Monsanto said it was disappointed and is considering appealing the ruling. Alachlor, the herbicide in question, has been banned in the EU since 2006. However, it is still used widely in the United States. France aims to halve its agrichemical use by 2018.

Although it has been speculated that yesterday’s ruling may give rise to more such cases, experts have said that, unlike M François’ condition, which results from a single incident, most of the affects of chemical exposure are accumulated over time and are difficult to pinpoint.  

One farmer described the adverse effects of dealing with harmful agrichemicals, and the difficulty linking problems to specific incidents. He told news agency Reuters, "It's like lying on a bed of thorns and trying to say which one cut you."

French health protection agency ANSES is expected to release the results of a study on farmers’ health next year. Representatives of French crop protection companies have said that there are stringent safety measures in place and that, if there were serious problems with the chemicals, they would already be known to the manufacturers.

Although many of the most dangerous agricultural chemicals are now banned in the developed world, growing resistance to current preparations has led some to consider reverting to older, more harmful chemicals. This ruling may serve to caution those who would readily bring more powerful chemicals back fro retirement.

Tweet