When chemical giant Syngenta hired biologist Tyrone Hayes to study its widely used herbicide atrazine, the company didn’t like the results. Hayes found that atrazine, one of the most common weed killers in America, disrupted hormones in frogs and altered their sexual development. Instead of facing the science, Syngenta went into product-defense mode: pressuring Hayes not to publish, and when he did, launching a full-scale effort to discredit him. Internal company documents later revealed a coordinated campaign to smear Hayes’s reputation and bury his findings.
This story is typical of how the world’s largest chemical corporations act when confronted with evidence their products cause harm. Today, just four multinationals dominate the global pesticide market – Bayer, Syngenta, BASF, and Corteva. All of them have long histories of suppressing inconvenient science, manipulating regulators, and attacking critics to weaken regulation and keep their profits flowing. Meanwhile, American children are exposed to many toxic chemicals that are not allowed in other countries.
Atrazine: A Case Study in Regulatory Failure
Since Hayes’s research, dozens of studies have raised health concerns about atrazine. The herbicide, one of the most common contaminants in U.S. drinking water, is linked to hormone disruption, birth defects, low birth weight and fertility problems. Recent studies suggest atrazine may also age brain cells, possibly leading to neurodegenerative disease.
The European Union banned atrazine back in 2004 because of contaminated drinking water. Yet here in America, more than 70 million pounds of atrazine are sprayed each year, mostly on our corn crops.
Why the difference? Europe follows a precautionary approach, shifting the burden of proof to companies and taking action when credible evidence suggests a risk of serious harm – even before every mechanism is understood or harm proven. In the U.S., by contrast, the burden falls on the public, independent scientists, or regulators to prove a chemical is harmful beyond doubt before restrictions are imposed. This allows the industry to keep selling harmful products for years or decades. Even then, our politicians have been mostly unwilling to stand up to the pesticide industry.
More Than Just Atrazine
American children are exposed to dozens of pesticides and chemicals that Europe and other countries have deemed too dangerous. These include chlorpyrifos, tied to brain damage in children; paraquat, linked to Parkinson’s disease; and 2,4-D linked to certain cancers.
Because of our failure to regulate, American families live with daily exposures to multiple pesticides in our food, water, and even household dust. Biomonitoring tests consistently find pesticides in the bodies of infants and children. And troubling health patterns are emerging: Iowa, the nation’s largest corn-growing state, is one of only two states where cancer rates continue to rise.
Meanwhile, farmers and others are seeking justice in the courts. More than 160,000 people filed lawsuits against Monsanto arguing that its glyphosate-based Roundup herbicides gave them cancer. Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018, has paid out $11 billion to settle some of these cases, with about 60,000 cases still pending.
As Syngenta did with atrazine, Monsanto and Bayer have responded by denying risks and trying to control the narrative: ghostwriting studies, attacking independent scientists, and funding “farmer-led” front groups to resist regulation. Faced with billions more in potential liability, Bayer is now lobbying lawmakers for something even more radical: legal immunity from future cancer claims.
In Washington DC, Bayer-backed allies inserted language into a 2025 House appropriations bill that would grant pesticide companies, including Bayer, immunity from lawsuits over “failure-to-warn” claims, and would block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from requiring cancer warnings on glyphosate products. Several states are also debating bills that would shield Bayer from “failure-to-warn” lawsuits, and two states – Georgia and North Dakota – have enacted such bills into law.
These efforts reflect a coordinated strategy: shift the burden of Bayer’s legal and financial problems onto the public by closing the courthouse doors to families harmed by glyphosate. If successful, these maneuvers would strip people of their right to seek justice from the courts, and undermine the basic principles of accountability and responsibility.
Voters in farming states are not fooled. A 2024 Accountable Iowa poll found that 87% of registered Republican voters oppose giving Bayer immunity from lawsuits. Another 94% agreed that it is very concerning that the EPA relies on industry-funded studies to assess chemical safety. They are right to be concerned.
A Bipartisan Failure
The failure to regulate pesticides belongs to both parties. For decades, both Democrats and Republicans have looked the other way as chemical lobbyists poured money into Washington. The result is a broken system where public health takes a back seat to corporate profit.
But this should not be a partisan issue. Protecting children’s health, farmers, and food security should unite Americans across the political spectrum. Parents don’t want their kids drinking weed killer in tap water or eating food laced with carcinogens. Farmers don’t want to be poisoned by the very tools they need to work their land. And they don’t want that for their families. It’s time to make farming safe for our children, so that they can grow up healthy and have a full chance to grow, thrive, and flourish.
Stacy Malkan is the managing editor of U.S. Right to Know.
