SoylentNews

Monsanto Ordered to Pay $93M to Small Town for Poisoning Citizens

posted by janrinok on Tuesday July 29 2014, @05:56PM   
from the big-wins-can-happen-in-small-places dept.

gewg_ writes:

Natural Society reports

The West Virginia State Supreme Court finalized a big blow to the biotech giant Monsanto this month, finishing a settlement causing Monsanto to pay $93 million to the tiny town of Nitro, West Virginia for poisoning citizens with Agent Orange chemicals. The settlement was approved last year, but details were worked out only weeks ago as to how the funds were to be spent.

The settlement will require Monsanto to do the following:

• $9 million will be spent to clean dioxin contaminated dust from 4500 homes.

• $21 million will be spent to test to see if people have been poisoned with dioxin.

• Citizens will be monitored for such poisoning for 30 years, not just a few months.

• An additional $63 million is to be allotted if additional tests for dioxin contamination testing is necessary.

• Anyone who lived in the Nitro area between Jan. 1, 1948, and Sept. 3, 2010 will be tested for dioxin. Although they must show proof they lived in the area, they will be eligible for testing even if they no longer live in Nitro.

• Former or present employees of Monsanto are not eligible for any of these benefits.

• An office will be set up to organize testing for Nitro citizens. The registration of participants is to be overlooked by Charleston attorney Thomas Flaherty, who was appointed by the court.

• Residents have a right to file individual suits against Monsanto if medical tests show they suffered physical harm due to dioxin exposure.

• Re:It's only moneyRe:It's only money (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @09:08AM

  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @09:08AM (#75433)

  Here a good rule of thumb: Any time you're thinning about writing or saying "they'll just pass the cost on to their customers" stop and think for a bit. Because it's almost always a really dumb thing to say. If a company could successfully raise prices they almost certainly would have already done so, without the need to "pass along" some cost. Cost does not determine pricing. It doesn't have much influence at all unless everybody has the same costs.

  Parent

• Re:It's only moneyRe:It's only money (Score: 1) by bziman on Wednesday July 30 2014, @06:04PM

  by bziman (3577) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @06:04PM (#75620)

  Advice: if you're going to call someone "dumb", make sure you spell check your post before hitting submit.

  Parent

  • Spell check wouldn't help(Score: 1) by Max Hyre on Saturday August 02 2014, @03:24PM

    by Max Hyre (3427) <{maxhyre} {at} {yahoo.com}> on Saturday August 02 2014, @03:24PM (#76731)

       I.e.: ``My hair's been thinning for years.'' It would take a damned good grammar checker to catch that one, and I suspect there aren't any that good.

    Parent

  • Re:It's only money(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04 2014, @08:16AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04 2014, @08:16AM (#77125)

    Good point. Because a typo that resolves to another English word is the important part of the post. Well spotted!

    Parent

  • Re:It's only money(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @10:14AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @10:14AM (#78781)

    You weren't called dumb, you said a dumb thing. The two are not the same. Take the opportunity to learn from it, not merely feel insulted.

    Parent