The Wartime Law Protecting Pesticides
The Government Just Granted Immunity to Pesticide Companies. Why Aren't More People Talking About This?
On February 18, 2026, the White House signed an executive order that quietly changed the rules for one of the most controversial chemicals in America's food supply.
The order, titled "Promoting the National Defense by Ensuring an Adequate Supply of Elemental Phosphorus and Glyphosate-Based Herbicides," invokes the Defense Production Act — a wartime law from the 1950s — to classify glyphosate and the phosphorus used to make it as materials "critical to national defense." The order directs the USDA to prioritize their production and, perhaps most significantly, extends a legal liability shield to the companies that manufacture them.
That means the same law designed to mobilize industry during national emergencies is now being used to protect pesticide producers from the very lawsuits brought by people who say those products made them sick.
Let's look at the details — and what this actually means for the food you eat every day.
What Is Glyphosate — and Why Does It Matter?
Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup, the most widely used herbicide on the planet. It was originally developed by Monsanto (now owned by Bayer) and has been a cornerstone of industrial agriculture for decades. It's sprayed on corn, soybeans, wheat, oats, and dozens of other crops — both to kill weeds during the growing season and as a "desiccant" to dry crops out before harvest.
That last point is important: glyphosate isn't just on the plants around your food — it's often applied directly to the crops you eat shortly before they're harvested. Residues have been found in bread, cereal, oats, beer, wine, and baby food.
According to the FDA's most recent Pesticide Monitoring Report, pesticide residues were detected in over 57% of domestic food samples tested. Nearly 80% of fruit samples and over 61% of vegetable samples contained detectable residues — even after washing and preparation.
Approximately 1 billion pounds of pesticides are sprayed on food in the United States each year, with corn being the single most heavily treated crop. Up to 75% of processed foods on grocery store shelves contain some form of corn — from high fructose corn syrup to corn starch to citric acid.
What the Science Says About Health Effects
In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as "carcinogenic to humans." That classification was based on extensive review of published research linking glyphosate exposure to non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other cancers.
Since then, tens of thousands of lawsuits have been filed against Bayer (which inherited the litigation when it acquired Monsanto in 2018) alleging that Roundup caused cancer in farmers, groundskeepers, landscapers, and everyday homeowners who used it in their yards.
It's important to understand that companies don't pay settlements unless wrongdoing has been established or credibly demonstrated. Settlements of this magnitude don't happen as a goodwill gesture — they happen because juries have already returned massive verdicts, courts have found the evidence compelling, and the company's own internal documents have been exposed. Bayer has lost multiple jury trials, with individual verdicts reaching as high as $2.25 billion before being reduced on appeal.
To date, Bayer has paid out more than $16 billion in Roundup-related settlements and litigation costs, with a new $7.25 billion class action settlement proposed on February 17, 2026 — just one day before the executive order was signed.
Putting the Numbers in Perspective
To understand why these settlements haven't stopped pesticide production, you need to look at the numbers. Bayer reported €45.6 billion (approximately $50 billion USD) in global sales for 2025 alone. The company's Crop Science division — which includes Roundup — generated over €21 billion of that.
The proposed $7.25 billion settlement is structured to be paid out over 21 years — roughly $345 million per year. That's less than 1% of Bayer's annual revenue. Even the total $16 billion in settlements paid over the past several years represents about a third of what the company earns in a single year.
Meanwhile, individual payouts to the people who developed cancer tell a different story. Under the proposed settlement, a farmer diagnosed with an aggressive form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma before age 60 would receive an average of $165,000. A residential user diagnosed between ages 60 and 78 would receive about $20,000. Those diagnosed at age 78 or older — roughly $10,000.
For Bayer, these settlements are a manageable line item in an annual report. For the individuals and families affected, they represent a lifetime of illness, medical bills, and loss — compensated at a fraction of what a single day of Bayer's revenue generates.
The question is straightforward: when a company earns $50 billion a year and the cost of harming people amounts to less than 1% of revenue, where is the incentive to change?
Beyond Cancer: The Broader Health Effects
The concerns go well beyond cancer. Peer-reviewed research has linked pesticide exposure to a wide range of health issues:
• Hormonal disruption: Endocrine disruption — interfering with hormones including estrogen, testosterone, and thyroid function
• Widespread chemicals: Over 50 pesticide active ingredients have been identified as endocrine disruptors by the European Union
• Metabolic effects: Linked to increased risk of obesity, Type 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome
• Neurological impact: Associated with ADHD, developmental delays in children, and neurodegenerative diseases like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's
• Cancer aggression: Studies show pesticide-exposed breast cancer patients had higher disease recurrence and more aggressive tumor profiles
• Reproductive health: Linked to reduced sperm count, infertility, and reproductive disorders in both men and women
The executive order does not mention any of these findings. Neither the order itself nor the accompanying White House fact sheet discloses that glyphosate has been linked to an array of cancers and health problems in multiple independent studies.
Where Pesticides Show Up in Your Food
Every year, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) analyzes USDA data to publish its "Dirty Dozen" — a list of the fruits and vegetables with the highest pesticide residues. The 2026 report analyzed over 54,000 samples of 47 different fruits and vegetables.
The 2026 Dirty Dozen:
- Spinach (highest contamination by weight for the second year running)
- Kale, collards, and mustard greens
- Strawberries
- Grapes
- Nectarines
- Peaches
- Cherries
- Apples
- Blackberries
- Pears
- Potatoes
- Blueberries
Across the Dirty Dozen samples, a total of 203 different pesticides were identified. Residues were detected on 96% of the fruits and vegetables tested. For the first time, the 2026 report also found PFAS ("forever chemicals") on 63% of Dirty Dozen items.
On the other end of the spectrum, the Clean 15 — produce with the lowest pesticide levels — includes pineapples, sweet corn, avocados, papaya, onions, asparagus, cabbage, cauliflower, watermelon, mangoes, bananas, carrots, mushrooms, and kiwi. These tend to have thicker skins or natural protections that reduce pesticide absorption.
The takeaway is straightforward: pesticides are not a fringe concern. They are present on the majority of conventional produce Americans eat every day.
What the Executive Order Actually Does
The executive order does three main things:
1. Declares glyphosate "critical to national defense." By invoking the Defense Production Act, the order classifies glyphosate-based herbicides and elemental phosphorus as essential materials on par with wartime supplies. The White House argues that "lack of access to glyphosate-based herbicides would severely threaten agricultural productivity."
2. Directs the USDA to prioritize production. The order instructs the USDA Secretary, in collaboration with the Defense Secretary, to "determine the appropriate nationwide priorities" and grants authority to mandate production of these materials to "ensure a continued and sufficient supply."
3. Extends a legal liability shield. The Defense Production Act includes a provision stating that "no person shall be held liable for damages or penalties for any act or failure to act resulting directly or indirectly from compliance." Critics argue this effectively grants pesticide manufacturers immunity from lawsuits — precisely when the Supreme Court is about to hear Monsanto v. Durnell, a landmark case on whether federal law preempts state-level pesticide liability claims.
The Center for Food Safety called the order "a transparent attempt to influence the Supreme Court to grant glyphosate-maker Monsanto/Bayer and other pesticide behemoths immunity from liability for the harms caused by their products."
Meanwhile, health advocates and environmental organizations point out a fundamental contradiction: the order was issued by an administration that campaigned on "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) promises. The Environmental Working Group described it as "a complete betrayal of MAHA promises."
The Bipartisan Pushback
The executive order has not gone unchallenged. On February 20, 2026, Representatives Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Chellie Pingree (D-ME) introduced the bipartisan No Immunity for Glyphosate Act (HR 7601).
The bill does two things:
- Prohibits the use of federal funds to implement the executive order, preventing agencies from enforcing or administering the directive
- Affirms that glyphosate manufacturers are not immune from civil liability, ensuring injured individuals retain the right to pursue legal claims under federal and state law
"This Executive Order has nothing to do with protecting farmers or feeding the country — it's about protecting corporate profits and insulating polluters from accountability." — Representative Chellie Pingree
The bill has drawn support from both sides of the aisle, reflecting broader bipartisan concern that the executive order prioritizes corporate interests over public health.
It's also worth noting that organic farming — a $70 billion industry in the United States — has demonstrated for decades that productive, profitable agriculture is entirely possible without glyphosate. The executive order's claim that "there is no direct one-for-one chemical alternative" ignores the existence of an entire sector built on exactly that premise.
Healthier Alternatives You Can Start Today
The good news is that you don't have to wait for policy to change to reduce your pesticide exposure. Here are practical steps grounded in the research:
Buy organic when it matters most. You don't have to go 100% organic overnight. Start with the Dirty Dozen — spinach, strawberries, kale, grapes, and apples — where the difference in pesticide exposure is most significant. For the Clean 15, conventional options carry minimal risk.
Wash and prepare produce carefully. While washing can't remove all residues (especially systemic pesticides absorbed into the plant), rinsing under running water and using a baking soda soak can help reduce surface-level contamination.
Support local and regenerative farms. Farmers' markets and CSA programs often offer produce grown with fewer or no synthetic pesticides. Getting to know where your food comes from is one of the most powerful choices you can make.
Read labels on packaged foods. Corn-derived ingredients appear in approximately 75% of processed foods. Choosing products with shorter, recognizable ingredient lists is a practical way to reduce indirect pesticide exposure.
Support Your Body’s Natural Detox Pathways
Even with the best dietary habits, we live in an environment where chemical exposure is difficult to avoid entirely. Pesticide residues are in our food, our water, and our soil. That’s why supporting your body’s natural ability to process and eliminate these toxins is just as important as reducing exposure in the first place.
At Super Boost Nutra, we’ve developed three solutions specifically designed to support your body’s detoxification pathways:
DETOXIFY — Our flagship liver support formula. Your liver is your body’s primary detoxification organ — it’s responsible for filtering out environmental pollutants, heavy metals, and harmful chemicals. Detoxify combines Milk Thistle, Dandelion Root, Artichoke Leaf Extract, Turmeric, Berberine, and Burdock Root — all traditionally used to strengthen liver function, promote bile production, and help the body process and eliminate harmful chemicals and pollutants. It also includes Choline and Zinc to support liver enzyme levels and overall liver health.
→ Learn more at superboostnutra.com/products/detoxify
SUPER GREENS — A 100% organic, all-in-one greens blend designed to support your body’s natural detox from the inside out. It contains Chlorella and Spirulina — two algae extensively studied for their ability to bind to toxins and heavy metals and help flush them from the body. The blend also includes Wheatgrass, Turmeric, Moringa, and Ashwagandha to support liver and kidney function, reduce inflammation, and boost your body’s antioxidant defenses. Simply mix a scoop into your smoothie, juice, or water.
→ Learn more at superboostnutra.com/products/super-greens
PARATOX — A powerful herbal cleanse formula designed to support internal cleanliness. ParaTox contains Chlorella (which binds to toxins and heavy metals for elimination), Psyllium Husk (which increases bulk and aids in the removal of waste and toxins from the digestive system), and Black Walnut Hull (traditionally used for its antimicrobial properties). Together, these ingredients support your body’s efforts to remove unwelcome organisms and accumulated toxins.
→ Learn more at superboostnutra.com/products/paratox
All three products are made with all-natural ingredients, are heavy metal tested, and are manufactured in GMP & NSF certified facilities in the USA. No seed oils, no GMOs, no food dyes.
Questions Worth Asking
This newsletter isn't about telling you what to think. It's about giving you enough information to think clearly.
Why would a wartime production law be used to protect a weedkiller? Why was a $7.25 billion settlement proposed one day before an executive order that could shield the same company from future liability? Why does the order not acknowledge a single study linking glyphosate to cancer, endocrine disruption, or other health effects — despite decades of independent research?
And why does the order claim there is "no alternative" to glyphosate when a $70 billion organic industry proves otherwise every day?
These are not fringe questions. They are being asked by members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, by international cancer research agencies, by federal courts, and by the tens of thousands of Americans who filed lawsuits alleging they were harmed.
At Super Boost Nutra, we believe you deserve to know what's in your food and what decisions are being made about it on your behalf. Knowledge is the foundation of every good health decision — and the more informed you are, the harder it is for anyone to make those decisions for you.
Stay informed. Stay nourished. Stay ahead.
