Capilano Honey

Dying cancer patient, poisoned by the same weed killer found in Capilano Honey, awarded $A395M

A cancer patient in the US has been awarded $395 million Australian dollars ($US289 million) after a court found he got cancer from Roundup which Capilano Honey CEO Ben McKee admitted to beekeeper Simon Mulvany has also been found in Capilano’s honey.

Roundup is made by US agro-chemical giant Monsanto and there are hundreds more people suing Monsanto because of Roundup. Capilano Honey would be well aware of the numerous global lawsuits regarding pesticides like Roundup and what implications it potentially has regarding their company. It helps explain why Capilano Honey are running SLAPP lawsuits against Simon Mulvany and myself to try to silence public debate and awareness of the issue.

The ABC reported today (11/8/18):

Agribusiness giant Monsanto has been ordered to pay $US289 million ($396 million) to a former school groundskeeper dying of cancer, with a San Francisco jury saying the company’s popular Roundup weed killer contributed to his disease.

The lawsuit was the first to go to trial among hundreds filed in state and federal US courts claiming Roundup causes non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, which Monsanto denies.

Jurors in California’s Superior Court agreed the product contributed to Dewayne Johnson’s cancer and the company should have provided a label warning of the potential health hazard.

Mr Johnson’s attorneys sought and won $US39 million in compensatory damages and $US250 million of the $US373 million they wanted in punitive damages.

“This jury found Monsanto acted with malice and oppression because they knew what they were doing was wrong and doing it with reckless disregard for human life,” said Robert F Kennedy Jr, a member of Mr Johnson’s legal team.

The US Environmental Protection Agency says Roundup’s active ingredient is safe for people when used in accordance with label directions.

However, the France-based International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is part of the World Health Organisation, classified it as a “probable human carcinogen” in 2015. And California has added glyphosate to its list of chemicals known to cause cancer. (Click here to read more)

The SMH reported the same story today (11/8/18) and also said:

Johnson blames Roundup for his suffering and accused the company – recently acquired by Germany’s Bayer – of concealing the dangers of the weed killer. Monsanto vigorously rejects the allegations and says the herbicide glyphosate is safe.

“In addition to the individual lawsuits there is a class action suit in Chhabria’s courtroom filed by farmers, gardeners and consumers.” (Click here to read more)

Other lawsuits around the world

Beekeepers in France have also instituted a lawsuit against Bayer / Monsanto because of Roundup (glyphosate) being found in their honey. It was reported on the 12 of June 2018:

Beekeepers File Legal Complaint Against Bayer Over Glyphosate in Honey

Bayer, which recently wrapped up its takeover of Monsanto, now owns glyphosate and the liabilities surrounding it.

Last Thursday, the same day the $63 billion acquisition closed, a beekeeping cooperative in northern France filed a legal complaint against the German chemical giant after the controversial weedkiller was detected in honey produced by one of its members, AFP reported.

Famille Michaud, one of France’s largest honey marketers, found the chemical in three batches supplied by one of its members, according to Jean-Marie Camus, the head of the 200-member beekeeping union, L’Abeille de l’Aisne.

In 2016/2017 the Huffington Post reported in America:

FDA Finds Monsanto’s Weed Killer In U.S. Honey

The Food and Drug Administration, under public pressure to start testing samples of U.S. food for the presence of a pesticide that has been linked to cancer, has some early findings that are not so sweet.

In examining honey samples from various locations in the United States, the FDA has found fresh evidence that residues of the weed killer called glyphosate can be pervasive – found even in a food that is not produced with the use of glyphosate. All of the samples the FDA tested in a recent examination contained glyphosate residues, and some of the honey showed residue levels double the limit allowed in the European Union, according to documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. There is no legal tolerance level for glyphosate in honey in the United States.

Glyphosate, which is the key ingredient in Monsanto Co.’s Roundup herbicide, is the most widely used weed killer in the world, and concerns about glyphosate residues in food spiked after the World Health Organization in 2015 said its cancer experts determined glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen. Other international scientists have raised concerns about how heavy use of glyphosate is impacting human health and the environment.

In the records released by the FDA, one internal email describes trouble locating honey that doesn’t contain glyphosate: “It is difficult to find blank honey that does not contain residue. I collect about 10 samples of honey in the market and they all contain glyphosate,” states an FDA researcher. Even “organic mountain honey” contained low concentrations of glyphosate, the FDA documents show. (Click here to read more)

Another class action was started last year (2017) in Canada against a honey producer:

Glyphosate presence in honey raises concerns

Last fall, the U.S. Organic Consumers Association and Beyond Pesticides filed a lawsuit against Sue Bee Honey of Sioux City, Iowa, because its honey tested positive for traces of glyphosate. The lawsuit said Sue Bee’s labelling, advertising its honey as “Pure” and “Natural,” is false and misleading.

And the article also said: “Something like 80 percent of American honey tested had levels of glyphosate.” (Click here to read more)

Australia’s testing of Honey

In 2016 Simon Mulvany says he had a conversation with Capilano Honey CEO Ben McKee and asked him if Capilano’s testing of their honey had found any glyphosate (Roundup). Ben McKee said “Yes, but only in small amounts”. But what is small amounts? 5%, 10% or 20%? We know the amounts are large enough that Capilano Honey won’t answer questions about it in writing and they won’t hand over their testing for the court cases against Simon Mulvany and myself.

I wrote an email to Capilano Chairman Mr Trevor Morgan (Chairman) and Ms Annette Zbasnik (Company Secretary) on the 17/9/16 titled “Criminal conduct by Capilano Honey CEO/ Managing Director Dr Ben McKee” asking some extremely serious questions about the quality of their honey etc which they refused to answer. (Click here to read the email to Capilano Chairman Trevor Morgan) I published an article the following day titled “Australia’s Capilano Honey admit selling toxic and poisonous honey to consumers“. Instead of answering the questions they instituted a frivolous and vexatious injurious falsehood and defamation case against me.

On the 26th of October 2016 I emailed further questions to Capilano Honey and their CEO Ben McKee which they have also refused to answer:

Dear Mr McKee and Capilano Honey

I would like you to answer the following Interrogatories:

  1. Is the imported irradiated pollen from China that is fed to Australian bees that make honey sold to Capilano adequately tested when it enters the country?
  2. Will the origin of the pollen come up in testing facilities?
  3. Has any Manuka honey tested shown traces of country of origin other than NZ or Australia when tested?
  4. Does overseas ingredients in Australian honey effect Australia’s credibility as an exporter?
  5. What have you done about the widespread use of illegally obtained antibiotics on bees in the Australian industry? If you have done nothing, then why have you done nothing?
  6. Are beekeepers showing vet certificates to Capilano when they are treating their bees with antibiotics.
  7. Has Capilano Honey or anyone been testing Capilano Honey for the weed killer/herbicide Glyphosate (Roundup)? (Click here to read the full article)

Department of Agriculture and Water Resources (DAWR)

In November 2016 I wrote to the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources (DAWR) and asked them questions about Capilano Honey and the testing of honey. Some of the questions I asked, and the answers received are:

  1. Are beekeepers showing vet certificates to Capilano when they are treating their bees with antibiotics.

      Answer: The department has no comment to make regarding Capilano or its operations.

  1. Has Capilano Honey or anyone been testing Capilano Honey for glyphosate (Roundup)?
  2. Has other honey that the department tests been tested for glyphosate (Roundup)?

      Answer: The department’s National Residue Survey does not undertake glyphosate testing of Australian honey. The NRS is not aware of any herbicide testing of honey undertaken by Capilano.

Testing of imported honey by the department’s Imported Food Inspection Scheme does not include analysis for residues of agricultural chemicals such as glyphosate. (Click here to read the full article).

Capilano Honey’s frivolous and vexatious lawsuits

In February 2016 Capilano Honey and their CEO Ben McKee started suing Simon Mulvany for injurious falsehood and defamation for publishing articles on his Facebook page about pesticides in honey and false labelling etc. In October 2016 Capilano Honey and Ben McKee also started suing me for writing about their lawsuits against Simon Mulvany.

Both of those cases are still afoot today. They are blatant SLAPP lawsuits which are  “intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defence until they abandon their criticism or opposition.” The reason why is obvious when you look at the $395 million judgment in the US. Capilano Honey are worth approximately $150 million so one similar judgment would wipe out the whole company more than twice over. And after the company was bankrupt litigants could potentially go after the directors for compensation such as billionaire Kerry Stokes who owns 19% of Capilano Honey.

Retailers could also likely be sued which possibly had helped influence Coles deciding to stop selling Capilano Honey’s Allowrie brand honey which contains only 30% Australian honey with the rest being imported predominantly from China.

Capilano Honey have always refused to put any evidence of the testing they do before the court. In fact, no employee of Capilano Honey will sign an affidavit saying Capilano’s honey is safe and contains no pesticides. All they have is hearsay evidence of what their lawyer, Richard Keegan, claims he was told by CEO Ben McKee about the honey being safe. Why didn’t Ben McKee sign the affidavit?

Capilano Honey’s SLAPP lawsuits. Where are they are?

After wasting aver 2 years in the Supreme Court of NSW the Capilano Honey lawsuit against Simon Mulvany was transferred from Sydney to Melbourne where it should have been in the first place given Simon Mulvany lives near there. He is raising funds to pay for legal representation. The matter had its first direction hearing a couple of weeks ago.

Capilano’s case against myself is currently awaiting a judgment from the court of appeal regarding suppression orders. I had a dodgy Super-injunction lifted a couple of months ago and then won a judgment to have suppression orders lifted. Capilano Honey appealed which was heard a few weeks ago and hopefully the reserved decision is not to far away. Any final hearing won’t be until next year. 

Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and help promote this post.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is an independent website and is reliant on donations to keep publishing. If you would like to support the continuance of this site, please click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donations page for other donation options. (Click here to go to the Donations page)

If you would like to follow this website, you can by email notification at the top right of this page and about twice a week you will be notified when there is a new article.

Thank you for your support.

11 replies »

  1. Further information:

    Weed-Whacking Herbicide Proves Deadly to Human Cells

    Used in yards, farms and parks throughout the world, Roundup has long been a top-selling weed killer. But now researchers have found that one of Roundup’s inert ingredients can kill human cells, particularly embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells.

    Until now, most health studies have focused on the safety of glyphosate, rather than the mixture of ingredients found in Roundup. But in the new study, scientists found that Roundup’s inert ingredients amplified the toxic effect on human cells—even at concentrations much more diluted than those used on farms and lawns.

    One specific inert ingredient, polyethoxylated tallowamine, or POEA, was more deadly to human embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells than the herbicide itself – a finding the researchers call “astonishing.”

    “This clearly confirms that the [inert ingredients] in Roundup formulations are not inert,” wrote the study authors from France’s University of Caen. “Moreover, the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death [at the] residual levels” found on Roundup-treated crops, such as soybeans, alfalfa and corn, or lawns and gardens.

    The research team suspects that Roundup might cause pregnancy problems by interfering with hormone production, possibly leading to abnormal fetal development, low birth weights or miscarriages.

    Last month, an environmental group petitioned Argentina’s Supreme Court, seeking a temporary ban on glyphosate use after an Argentine scientist and local activists reported a high incidence of birth defects and cancers in people living near crop-spraying areas. Scientists there also linked genetic malformations in amphibians to glysophate. In addition, last year in Sweden, a scientific team found that exposure is a risk factor for people developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

    Read more at:

    • ” … seeking a temporary ban on glyphosate use after an Argentine scientist and local activists reported a high incidence of birth defects and cancers in people living near crop-spraying areas.”

      That’s what so many people forget – you don’t have to use the stuff to be affected by it.

      As suburbia reaches further out into fruit and veg growing rural areas, most people have never heard of ‘spray-drift’ and are unaware that a light breeze can carry unseen clouds of herbicides, pesticides and fungicides for kilometres from the source.

      Governments and farmers have known about this spreading toxicity for years – I began local campaigning against it 35 years ago – but it will continue to be covered-up and ignored. It’s about jobs and profits.

      What farmer is going to employ labourers to constantly keep weeds down when a tanker full of glyphosate will do the job in an afternoon?

      Municipal Councils love it. They dye it pink as a ‘warning’ that it’s been sprayed by their workers … job done! Bugger the workers’ and community health. After all, the parks and gardens look so neat and tidy. Do any of them check their playground equipment for contamination by spray-drift? Don’t be silly!!!

      That’s why it’s in honey. Spray-drift carries it everywhere – not enough to kill plants, but certainly enough to contaminate pollen and thus, honey.

      And as the Argentinians discovered, enough to be inhaled or ingested by people living nearby. In Australia reports of “cancer clusters” are dismissed by health authorities as “scaremongering” or “conspiracy theories”.

      Until taxpayers demand that Councils stop using it, that Governments ban it and the useless jobsworths at the CSIRO can come up with an organic biodegradable alternative, nothing will change.

      As for Stokes and his motley crew … as long as there’s a dollar to be had at someone else’s expense … they’ll keep their Judicial lapdogs working overtime to bury whistleblowers.

  2. Many humans are the least intelligent creatures on this planet due to creating an imbalance in Earth’s environment system for their abnormal need to ‘make more money’, irrespective of any or every negative, destructive consequence.

  3. Woohoo, this may just put the well-deserved nail in The Capilano Coffin. Like you, I have spread the Do Not Buy word in a much smaller way and there must be many, many of us you have reached with this message and noxious warning. As always, thankyou.

  4. I read about this huge award yesterday in the newspaper. Monsanto will keep using their money power to deny any claim such as this but what about the people here using courts to stop people exposing them? The truth is our courts and tribunals are not as clean as they need to be therefore people with deep pockets keep using them to stop getting exposed.
    I hope all the cases going on against Shane and others will be dropped now. The power of truth is unlimited. Money power has limitations. Judicial corruption in our country must stop and so is the slow poisoning of the people by deceptive labelling of the products must stop immediately.

  5. The underlying reason for success in the USA is that a “Jury” decided. Not going to happen here. Whist we allow this form of corrupt unlawful Judiciary to rule over Juries there will be no remedy.

    The despots are in control of our Courts.

    We will get the same outcome as with cigarette claims…

    Notice how they are still selling known life threatening cigarettes with immunity. They even admit the risks, it’s all about the money.

    I think the mistake that is being made is that people are suing corporations when they should be going after the CEOs and CFOs. Corporations are protected in liability whereas the people responsible hold liability for harm.

  6. Ultimately all those corporations that have an association either as wholesaler, retailer, importer or conveyor of a poison identified component in that food product are able to be litigated against as they are all in engaged in profiting from a food product containing poison.
    The manufacturer of the poison for onselling into the market place is the primary source of its introduction into the market place.
    Therefore Monsanto has been generating revenues from marketing a dangerous (read poisonous) product are not permitted to profit from their crime.
    As for the sale proceeds from selling Monsanto, Monsanto must not be permitted their retention of sales proceeds as recently announced ($63 Billion dollars) as they were the first link in the chain to feed their product (poison) into the market place.

    Big Pharma are liable for introducing a non efficacious form of an advertised and distributed curative into the market place, the same should apply to Monsanto.
    Let the integrity of the Justice system now be put to the test.

  7. I have a neighbour that saturates his property and the council verge ( 200 metre verges ) with Roundup as soon as he sees anything green. When I see him spraying I stay inside, wear a mask outside and am always aware he may have sprayed and I don’t know. When I have repeated asthma attacks I know their is spray I don’t have to see him spraying and our house is about a hundred metres from the road. I have a low tolerance to chemicals, I have seen the disappearance of frogs on his side of the road in the drain. When we came here more than twenty two years ago the frog population was massive, Our property still has frogs all year round but not in the numbers previously. When I complained of the excessive use of Roundup in our shire a former council employee informed me that you could drink a glass of Roundup and it would have no effect on you.There is a village missing it’s idiot.

    • When dealing with village idiots (and that includes any politician or public servant), you need to keep one thing in mind … if you have no proof, then it didn’t happen.

      May I suggest you begin keeping a log, a diary or a computer file of the dates and details of every incident of neighbourhood spraying. You need the date, the duration and extent of the spraying, preferably with PHOTOS of the deed and who’s doing it (the neighbour, the council etc). Add to that the weather on the day, the wind and its direction, temperature, sun or cloudy (affects evaporation rate) … and add to that details of any incidence of asthma or other related family health issue (rashes etc). That diary becomes a legally admissible document.

      In my case I did some research and found the toxins my orchardist neighbour was spraying (from a large tanker) are fat soluble and thus were likely to be concentrated in the yolks of hens’ eggs. I had to get rid of my free-range chickens because I wasn’t willing to take the risk of feeding contaminated eggs to my family. On spraying days I made sure I had no washing on the line, jumped in the car and took the kids out for the day.

      It may seem an extreme response, but my family and my home were under extreme threat of toxic contamination. When city slickers move their families to a rural area to enjoy that ‘fresh country air’ we rarely realise what’s ‘written in the wind’.

  8. When I was trained for a chemcert certificate I was told by my teacher that Roundup was no more poisonous then Sea Water. Next time I go swimming in the sea I’ll make sure I’m wearing my chemical PPE to protect me from that poisonous Sea Water

    • In that case, before you take that swim, make sure you don’t have a breakfast of Kellogs cornflakes or Cheerios, no bread and honey and no snacking on Doritos or Ritz crackers or even icecream … glyphosate is in ALL of them!

      A most shocking must-read article.

      For me, one of the most alarming disclosures is … ///”It is used to kill weeds and as a drying agent on the plants, which makes them easier to harvest.”///

      A drying agent that makes harvest easier? Consumers are exposed to risk so a harvest machine doesn’t get clogged up?

      And …///”Glyphosate has also been linked to liver and kidney disease, infertility, and birth abnormalities.”///

      I must say, some people quoted in that article seem horribly ignorant of the difference between a pesticide and a herbicide.

      Meanwhile politicians and bureaucrats around the world are falling over themselves to echo Monsanto’s hollow assurances, quibbling about what a “safe” level of toxicity might be.

Leave a Reply