4月21日在加利福尼亚州注册了对孟山都公司的集体诉讼，指责孟山都做虚假广告，因为他们声称“农达中的活性成分草甘膦只会瞄准植物体内的一种酶，而人类或动物体内则没有这种酶”。用这种说法，孟山都以此支持其草甘膦对人类无害的断言。诉讼论据：被草甘膦瞄准的酶，EPSP合成酶，也存在于驻留在我们肠道的微生物群中，因此人类与动物体内也有这种酶。人类与动物许多健康问题都与我们肠道微生物群受到干扰相关。“草甘膦杀死我们的肠道微生物，因此它关系到胃和肠道问题、消化不良、溃疡、结肠炎、失眠、嗜睡、抑郁、克罗恩氏病,腹腔疾病, 过敏,肥胖、糖尿病、不孕症、肝病、肾功能衰竭、自闭症、老年痴呆症、内分泌干扰，世界卫生组织最近宣布草甘膦是‘可能的致癌物’。”加利福尼亚州的居民都可以成为该项集体诉讼的成员。该项诉讼寻求的判决：禁止孟山都继续声称草甘膦所瞄准的酶在人体中不存在，对原告予以赔偿，包括律师费。原告律师菲利普斯表明，他期望其他州的律师效仿提出同样的诉讼。今天的诉讼是今年早些时间北京市民对中国农业部提出诉讼的继续，可能是全球对孟山都提出诉讼雪崩的开始。

证据#1：草甘膦瞄准植物体内的一种酶，而人类或动物体内则没有这种酶--孟山都在2013年草甘膦除草剂产品上的宣告。



T.Matthew Phillips

原告律师：T·马修·菲利普斯



Today a class action lawsuit wasfiled in Los Angeles County, California againstthe Monsanto corporation.The suit alleges that Monsanto is guilty of false advertising byclaiming that glyphosate, theactive ingredient in Roundup, targets anenzyme only found in plants and not in humans or animals. Monsantomakes this claim to support the contention that glyphosate isharmless to humans.

今天，在加利福尼亚州洛杉矶县注册了对孟山都公司的集体诉讼。诉讼指责孟山都做虚假广告，因为它声称农达中的活性成分草甘膦只会瞄准植物体内的一种酶，而人类或动物体内则没有这种酶。用这种说法，孟山都以此支持其草甘膦对人类无害的断言。



In the lawsuit, the argument is made that thetargeted enzyme, EPSP synthase, is found in the microbiota whichreside in our intestines and therefore this enzyme is found inhumans and animals. It is further stated in the lawsuit that thereare many human and animal health problems associated with thedisruption of our intestinal microbes.

该项诉讼提出的论据是，被草甘膦瞄准的酶，EPSP合成酶，也存在于驻留在我们肠道的微生物群中，因此人类与动物体内也有这种酶(而不是没发现存在）。诉讼进一步提出，人类与动物许多健康问题都与我们肠道微生物群受到干扰相关。



“Because it kills-off our gut bacteria,glyphosate is linked to stomach and bowel problems, indigestion,ulcers, colitis, gluten intolerance, sleeplessness, lethargy,depression, Crohn's Disease, Celiac Disease, allergies, obesity,diabetes, infertility, liver disease, renal failure, autism,Alzheimer’s, endocrine disruption, and the W.H.O. recentlyannounced glyphosate is 'probably carcinogenic'.”

“因为草甘膦杀死我们的肠道微生物，因此它关系到胃和肠道问题、消化不良、溃疡、结肠炎、麸质不耐受、失眠、嗜睡、抑郁、克罗恩氏病, 腹腔疾病, 过敏, 肥胖、糖尿病、不孕症、肝病、肾功能衰竭、自闭症、阿尔茨海默症（老年痴呆症）、内分泌干扰，世界卫生组织最近宣布草甘膦是‘可能的致癌物’。”



The International Agency for Research on Cancer, part ofthe World Health Organization (WHO), last month declared thatglyphosate is Group 2A carcinogen.The American Cancer Society quickly followed suit,also listing glyphosate as a Group 2A carcinogen.

世界卫生组织的国际癌症研究机构上个月宣布草甘膦为组2A致癌物。美国癌症学会迅速跟进，也将草甘膦列为组2A致癌物。



An Environmental Protection Agencymemo dated October 30, 1991 states that theEPA classified glyphsate as a possible carcinogen in 1985. In this1991 memo, without any justification, this classification waschanged to Not Carcinogenic. Three scientists refused to sign, twoof whom wrote beside their name: Do Not Concur.

美国环保署（EPA）1991年10月30日的备忘录确认，美国环保署已经在1985年把草甘膦列为可能的致癌物。但是，在没有任何理由的情况下，这份1991年的备忘录又将草甘膦改为不是致癌物。三位科学家拒绝签署备忘录，其中两位在他们的姓名旁注明：不同意。



This document contains data that clearly shows astatistically significant increase in tumors in laboratory animalstreated with glyphosate. But because there weren't more tumors inthe group of animals who received a higher dose of glyphosate thanthere were in the group that received a lower dose, Monsanto madethe claim that the tumors could not be related toglyphosate.

这个文件包含的数据清楚表明实验动物中，接受草甘膦处理的动物的肿瘤发病率显著增加。但是，与接受较低草甘膦剂量处理动物产生的肿瘤数量相比，接受较高草甘膦剂量处理的动物没有更多数量的肿瘤，因此孟山都声称实验动物的肿瘤与草甘膦无关。



Today's lawsuit may be the beginning of anavalanche.

今天的诉讼可能是一场雪崩的开始。



Earlier this year, Beijing resident Yang Xiao-lufiled a lawsuit against the Chinese Ministry of Agriculturerequesting information disclosure of the toxicology reportsubmitted to the Chinese government for glyphosate pesticideregistration in China. The case has been accepted and thecollegiate panel of the court has informed the plaintiff that,considering that Monsanto is a stakeholder to the case, they haveadded Monsanto as an involved party to the case.

今年早些时间，北京居民杨晓陆对中国农业部提出诉讼，要求信息公开，即公布孟山都申请在中国“农药登记”时向中国政府提交的毒理学试验报告。法院对此项诉讼已经立案，合议庭通知原告，考虑到孟山都是该案利益相关方，他们将孟山都作为涉案方添加到该项诉讼中。



Chinese citizens had previously petitioned theMinistry of Agriculture for this toxicology report but were denied.The Ministry cited “trade secrets” as the reason for denial. It isdifficult to comprehend how a toxicology report would contain tradesecrets since trade secrets generally constitute ingredients or arecipe for a compound or manufacturing procedure.

在此之前，中国公民们一直要求农业部公布这个毒理学试验报告，但是遭到拒绝。中国农业部将“涉及商业秘密”作为拒绝公开的理由。很难理解一项毒理学试验报告怎么会包含“商业秘密”，因为“商业秘密”一般包括制药所需的成分或成分配方或者制作工艺的秘诀。



In today's lawsuit, Monsanto is accused ofdeliberate falsification to conceal the fact that glyphosate isharmful to humans and animals. “Defendant intentionally misleadsconsumers by misrepresenting and concealing the true and correctfacts concerning glyphosate...” Attorney T. Matthew Phillips says,“We are not trying to prove that Roundup is harmful orcarcinogenic, we are merely pointing out that Monsanto is lyingabout the enzymes that Roundup targets. Roundup kills the weeds inyour backyard and the weeds in your stomach.”

在今天这个诉讼中，孟山都被指责为故意弄虚作假、隐瞒草甘膦对人类和动物有害的事实。“被告通过歪曲和掩盖关于草甘膦的真实和正确的事实，故意误导消费者...”原告律师T·马修·菲利普斯说，“我们不是试图证实农达有害或致癌，我们仅是指出孟山都就草甘膦除草剂农达所作用的酶撒谎。农达杀死你后院的野草，同时杀死你肠胃中的‘野草’。”



Judgment is sought against Monsanto to prohibitthe company from continuing to make the claim that glyphosatetargets an enzyme not found in humans and for compensation to theplaintiffs, including attorney fees.

该项诉讼寻求对孟山都的判决是，禁止孟山都继续声称草甘膦所瞄准的酶在人体中不存在，同时对原告予以赔偿，包括律师费。



Residents of California can become members ofthe class in this action by contacting T. Matthew Phillipsat tmatthewphillips@aol.com.Phillips has indicated that he hopes other attorneys in otherstates will follow suit.

通过邮箱tmatthewphillips@aol.com与原告律师T·马修·菲利普斯联系，加利福尼亚州的居民都可以成为该项集体诉讼的成员。菲利普斯表明，他期望其他州的律师效仿提出同样的诉讼。