The Ethical Dilemma

        Throughout Monsanto’s time as a company, they have been the cause of several ethical issues, many of which have had negative effects on the environment and the health of the public. A big subject when discussing Monsanto is their frequency of polluting the environment. For example, from the years 1929 to 1971, Monsanto had been dumping toxic waste into the local waterways in Anniston, Alabama. They also buried contaminated soil which polluted Snow Creek, Choccolocco Creek (FarmstandApp).


           Monsanto had also been one of the major suppliers of Agent Orange for the U.S. during the Vietnam War. This chemical agent caused detrimental health effects such as cancer, heart disease, and birth defects, on U.S. veterans and Vietnamese citizens, this also destroyed extensive amounts of farmland in Vietnam which has still not recovered to this day.


            However, seemingly the largest ethical dilemma related to Monsanto, is related to their Roundup herbicide. The Roundup herbicide contains a chemical known as glyphosate which is very effective as an herbicide, as it is capable of eliminating weeds. The issue is that it also eliminates crops.


 

                            Image of Monsanto's Roundup product


Monsanto had led the charge in the development of GMOs in agriculture, leaving a lasting impact on agricultural methods worldwide. The company created their Roundup Ready crops which were engineered to be resistant to glyphosate. This would allow farmers to spray fields without harming crops, leading to higher yields. These crops included, most prominently, soybeans and corn. This promise of increased yields and easier management of weeds appealed to farmers. The widespread acceptance of these products led to Monsanto controlling 80% of the corn market and 90% of the soybean market in the U.S. (FarmstandApp). This effectively trapped farmers into exclusively buying from Monsanto, which along with strict contracts on their products caused farmers to solely depend on Monsanto.


Due to the dependency on Monsanto’s Roundup Ready seeds and Roundup herbicide, they naturally became very widely used products. Other than forcing this dependency in the market, there seemed to be no major issues. Until in 2015 it was determined by the International Agency for Research on Cancer that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen. What this means, is that glyphosate (the primary active ingredient in Roundup herbicide), increases the risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in humans (verywellhealth). Roundup has also been accused of causing several other cancers such as multiple myeloma, liver cancer, kidney cancer, hemangiosarcoma and leukemia (Consumer Shield). 


It is important to note that the label on Roundup products does not mention anything of a cancer risk. In 2023 there was a case about a man named John Durnell, who often used Roundup to kill weeds around his neighborhood. Durnell had developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma. This case resulted in a judge in Missouri awarding John $1.25 million dollars (TSPR). Another instance in 2018 occurred in which a school groundskeeper who had been using Roundup contracted non-Hodgkin lymphoma; he was granted $289 million dollars. Again, there seemed to be no label relating to a cancer risk (CBS).


              Video from CBS Evening News explaining the 2018 case


Due to the severity of the alleged effects that Monsanto’s Roundup product has on people, there has been a lawsuit filed against Monsanto, which as of March 11th, 2026, is still ongoing (Lawsuit Information Center). Monsanto-Bayer expects to pay $7.25 billion dollars in lawsuits, making this the biggest agricultural settlement in U.S. history. The lawsuit is based on people who have contracted non-Hodgkin lymphoma, as well as the fact that Roundup contains to warning label on the product that the product may cause a risk of cancer.


Sources:

“10 Devastating Ways Monsanto Has Harmed Our World.” FarmstandApp, 15 Jan. 2026, www.farmstandapp.com/3745/what-bad-things-has-monsanto-done/.

Does Roundup Weed Killer Cause Cancer?, www.verywellhealth.com/does-roundup-cause-cancer-5077049. Accessed 21 Mar. 2026.

Marks, Michael. “Bayer Faces Thousands of Roundup Cancer Lawsuits. A Supreme Court Ruling May Make It Harder to Sue.” Tri States Public Radio, TSPR Tri States Public Radio, 21 Mar. 2026, www.tspr.org/2026-03-23/supreme-court-case-cancer-claims-roundup-bayer.

“What Cancers Are Included in the Roundup Lawsuit? 6 Types.” ConsumerShield, 5 Feb. 2026, www.consumershield.com/product-liability/roundup/what-cancers-are-included.

"Monsanto ordered to pay $289M to man who claimed weedkiller contributed to cancer" CBS Evening News,YouTube, youtu.be/YFHu22zJKZ4. Accessed 21 Mar. 2026.

 

Comments

  1. The market control stats were eye-opening — when farmers have no real alternative, the absence of a cancer warning label becomes a much bigger ethical problem. Do your later posts address why the label still hasn't changed despite the court rulings?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Yes, later posts do explain this. Monsanto maintains the idea that their product and glyphosate are not linked to causing cancer, so they do not see it necessary to make a cancer warning label for their Roundup products.

      Delete
  2. Post 2: The Ethical Dilemma
    You have effectively defined the ethical dilemma. I also like the way you have emphasized the issue of profit and public health/environment. This has made the ethical issue easy to understand. The way you have defined the issue can be related to real-life ethical dilemmas faced by many companies. The post is excellent because it has clearly demonstrated that the issue is not only business-related but also has a moral dimension.

    Which ethical theory do you think best applies here utilitarianism or duty-based ethics?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe utilitarianism applies the best to this issue. This is because utilitarianism is an ethical theory that seeks to maximize overall happiness and minimize suffering. The company seems to not care about minimizing suffering, as they do not plan to change anything about their products, which they should probably do to result in maximized happiness.

      Delete
  3. I like how you addressed the ethical dilemma and showed how Monsanto's actions impacted the environment and human health since it explains the problem and exposes the actual effects on people's lives. It seems sense that there are major ethical issues when a warning flag is left off despite possible risks.
    Overall, it seems that public safety may have been sacrificed to company operations.

    The question I have regarding posting, Do you think Monsanto should take full responsibility for the harm they caused to people's health?

    Do you believe farmers were forced to depend on Monsanto, or did they have an option?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think that Monsanto should take full responsibility necessarily. I think that because they know that their product is dangerous to human health, they should hold themselves accountable. They should also warn people of the risks.

      I don't believe that farmers are necessary forced to depend on Monsanto, they certainly have options, but there are certainly benefits to using Monsanto products based on yield amount and effectiveness at growing crops.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Ethical Solution

About Monsanto

Public Response