Farmers allege a link between the popular herbicide paraquat and Parkinson’s disease
Many countries have banned the herbicide, Paraquat, due to its extreme toxicity, while others have expressed concerns over the possible risk for Parkinson’s disease. It is against the law to use paraquat in China, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and dozens of other countries. Yet the herbicide, manufactured by a Swiss company that is owned by the Chinese state, is still widely used throughout the United States in part because it is a highly effective way to kill weeds. The company, Syngenta, says that paraquat, which it produces under the name Gramoxone, “is safe for its intended and labeled use.”
Clayton Tucholke, who used Gramoxone for years on his farm in South Dakota, and has since been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, says otherwise. A 76-year-old father and grandfather, Tucholke lived on his farm with his wife Denise, but as the symptoms of Parkinson’s have worsened, he says he was forced to give up his career in agriculture and had to move to the nearby town of Milbank to be closer to medical professionals. Daily tasks have become arduous for Tucholke, who now has to travel to physical therapy three times a week to slow the progression of his symptoms. The Tucholkes are among the more than 4,000 Americans who have filed lawsuits as part of a multi-district litigation against Syngenta, which currently manufactures Gramoxone, and Chevron, which distributed it in the U.S. from 1966 until 1986. Although Syngenta and Chevron say there is no scientific evidence that supports a causal link between paraquat and Parkinson’s disease, the Tucholkes, and other plaintiffs allege that such a link exists, arguing that Syngenta and Chevron knew or should have known that the herbicide could “cause severe neurological injuries.” To the Tucholkes, paraquat was highly effective at removing weeds when they used it throughout the 1970s and 1980s. It even killed weeds that had developed resistance to other herbicides. “[It] kills vegetation, doesn’t matter what,” Denise Tucholke said. “You don’t want it to drift to crops. You have to be careful where you spray.”
Frank Garcia, a retired farmer living in Arizona, says he and his family used paraquat for years. He says his family knew paraquat was highly toxic if swallowed, but added that they were not warned of possible effects that could come from other forms of exposure to the herbicide. “They should’ve told us the consequences of this, and they didn’t,” Garcia said. “That just burns me to a crisp.”
Like Clayton Tucholke, Garcia’s wife Maria was also diagnosed with Parkinson’s. Paraquat containers include warnings that one sip of the product can kill, and the EPA cautions that there is no known antidote to this toxic substance. During training, those seeking certification are told to wear proper protective equipment, including respirators, when handling paraquat. Aside from its immediate toxicity, some of the world’s leading scientists believe that exposure to environmental toxins, including pesticides like paraquat, could be associated with an elevated risk of developing Parkinson’s disease. Despite warnings on paraquat containers and the absence of an antidote, individuals handling the herbicide are advised to wear protective gear. Scientists globally suggest a potential link between exposure to environmental toxins, including paraquat, and an increased risk of Parkinson’s disease, adding to the growing concerns surrounding the herbicide’s usage.
The Tucholkes and Garcias assert in their legal claims against Syngenta, that paraquat products lacked adequate warnings about potential health effects, including the development of Parkinson’s disease due to exposure. Both families admitted uncertainty about whether they wore respirators during the paraquat application. These lawsuits are not the only ones Syngenta and Chevron have faced over paraquat.
In 2017, they were sued by Parkinson’s disease plaintiffs and settled multiple lawsuits for a total of $187.5 million, as stated in Syngenta’s financial statements. Carey Gillam, a contributor to The Guardian and managing editor for The New Lede, obtained internal documents from the case, alleging that Syngenta and Chevron management were aware of paraquat risks for decades. Gillam pointed out disturbing revelations from the documents, indicating Chevron’s awareness of potential legal issues related to chronic effects in the 1970s. A 1974 Chevron meeting noted concerns about workers breathing in paraquat mist and potential industrial injury claims. By 1985, a Chevron memo flagged an article implicating pesticides, including paraquat, in Parkinson’s disease, leading to Chevron ceasing paraquat sales in 1986 for commercial reasons, not health concerns. Despite this, Syngenta continued profiting from paraquat, defending it through counter-strategies, scientific studies, and regulatory influence, as revealed in internal memos from 1985. Maria Garcia, who used paraquat on her Arizona farm over four decades ago, now relies on family assistance due to Parkinson’s, facing substantial medical bills and a diminished quality of life. Syngenta expresses sympathy but insists paraquat is safe when used as directed. The company accuses plaintiffs’ lawyers of orchestrating a “mass tort machine.” Frank Garcia disputes Syngenta’s claims and questions why regulators, including the EPA, renewed Paraquat’s U.S. registration in 2021. Despite strengthened safety requirements, Garcia and advocates appeal for a ban, as the EPA has not found paraquat unsafe when used according to regulations and has not established a link between Parkinson’s and paraquat.
Farmers allege a link between the popular herbicide paraquat and Parkinson’s disease
Many countries have banned the herbicide, Paraquat, due to its extreme toxicity, while others have expressed concerns over the possible risk for Parkinson’s disease. It is against the law to use paraquat in China, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and dozens of other countries. Yet the herbicide, manufactured by a Swiss company that is owned by the Chinese state, is still widely used throughout the United States in part because it is a highly effective way to kill weeds. The company, Syngenta, says that paraquat, which it produces under the name Gramoxone, “is safe for its intended and labeled use.”
Clayton Tucholke, who used Gramoxone for years on his farm in South Dakota, and has since been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, says otherwise. A 76-year-old father and grandfather, Tucholke lived on his farm with his wife Denise, but as the symptoms of Parkinson’s have worsened, he says he was forced to give up his career in agriculture and had to move to the nearby town of Milbank to be closer to medical professionals. Daily tasks have become arduous for Tucholke, who now has to travel to physical therapy three times a week to slow the progression of his symptoms. The Tucholkes are among the more than 4,000 Americans who have filed lawsuits as part of a multi-district litigation against Syngenta, which currently manufactures Gramoxone, and Chevron, which distributed it in the U.S. from 1966 until 1986. Although Syngenta and Chevron say there is no scientific evidence that supports a causal link between paraquat and Parkinson’s disease, the Tucholkes, and other plaintiffs allege that such a link exists, arguing that Syngenta and Chevron knew or should have known that the herbicide could “cause severe neurological injuries.” To the Tucholkes, paraquat was highly effective at removing weeds when they used it throughout the 1970s and 1980s. It even killed weeds that had developed resistance to other herbicides. “[It] kills vegetation, doesn’t matter what,” Denise Tucholke said. “You don’t want it to drift to crops. You have to be careful where you spray.”
Frank Garcia, a retired farmer living in Arizona, says he and his family used paraquat for years. He says his family knew paraquat was highly toxic if swallowed, but added that they were not warned of possible effects that could come from other forms of exposure to the herbicide. “They should’ve told us the consequences of this, and they didn’t,” Garcia said. “That just burns me to a crisp.”
Like Clayton Tucholke, Garcia’s wife Maria was also diagnosed with Parkinson’s. Paraquat containers include warnings that one sip of the product can kill, and the EPA cautions that there is no known antidote to this toxic substance. During training, those seeking certification are told to wear proper protective equipment, including respirators, when handling paraquat. Aside from its immediate toxicity, some of the world’s leading scientists believe that exposure to environmental toxins, including pesticides like paraquat, could be associated with an elevated risk of developing Parkinson’s disease. Despite warnings on paraquat containers and the absence of an antidote, individuals handling the herbicide are advised to wear protective gear. Scientists globally suggest a potential link between exposure to environmental toxins, including paraquat, and an increased risk of Parkinson’s disease, adding to the growing concerns surrounding the herbicide’s usage.
The Tucholkes and Garcias assert in their legal claims against Syngenta, that paraquat products lacked adequate warnings about potential health effects, including the development of Parkinson’s disease due to exposure. Both families admitted uncertainty about whether they wore respirators during the paraquat application. These lawsuits are not the only ones Syngenta and Chevron have faced over paraquat.
In 2017, they were sued by Parkinson’s disease plaintiffs and settled multiple lawsuits for a total of $187.5 million, as stated in Syngenta’s financial statements. Carey Gillam, a contributor to The Guardian and managing editor for The New Lede, obtained internal documents from the case, alleging that Syngenta and Chevron management were aware of paraquat risks for decades. Gillam pointed out disturbing revelations from the documents, indicating Chevron’s awareness of potential legal issues related to chronic effects in the 1970s. A 1974 Chevron meeting noted concerns about workers breathing in paraquat mist and potential industrial injury claims. By 1985, a Chevron memo flagged an article implicating pesticides, including paraquat, in Parkinson’s disease, leading to Chevron ceasing paraquat sales in 1986 for commercial reasons, not health concerns. Despite this, Syngenta continued profiting from paraquat, defending it through counter-strategies, scientific studies, and regulatory influence, as revealed in internal memos from 1985. Maria Garcia, who used paraquat on her Arizona farm over four decades ago, now relies on family assistance due to Parkinson’s, facing substantial medical bills and a diminished quality of life. Syngenta expresses sympathy but insists paraquat is safe when used as directed. The company accuses plaintiffs’ lawyers of orchestrating a “mass tort machine.” Frank Garcia disputes Syngenta’s claims and questions why regulators, including the EPA, renewed Paraquat’s U.S. registration in 2021. Despite strengthened safety requirements, Garcia and advocates appeal for a ban, as the EPA has not found paraquat unsafe when used according to regulations and has not established a link between Parkinson’s and paraquat.
