A useful thing to know about this case is that the plaintiff took pains not to base their case on the carcinogenicity of glyphosate, but rather of Roundup, which is less than half glyphosate. During their opening statement, any time they referenced a study about about glyphosate, they'd say "but remember that study only looked at glyphosate, not Roundup, and as we all know, more than half of Roundup is other stuff".
They seemed particularly interested in promoting a theory that the surfectant POEA had something to do with the illness.
They seemed particularly interested in promoting a theory that the surfectant POEA had something to do with the illness.