"In April 2000, Elsevier published an article in the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, which claimed that the herbicide Roundup (glyphosate) from the Monsanto Company didn't pose a risk of cancer or other health issues for humans. Twenty-five years later, the publisher has retracted that paper, citing litigation that revealed it was based solely on unpublished studies by Monsanto itself."
""The paper had a significant impact on regulatory decision-making regarding glyphosate and Roundup for decades," Martin van den Berg, the journal's co-editor-in-chief, writes in the retraction notice. Van den Berg adds that "the lack of clarity regarding which parts of the article were authored by Monsanto employees creates uncertainty about the integrity of the conclusions drawn." "Specifically, the article asserts the absence of carcinogenicity associated with glyphosate or its technical formulation, Roundup," Van den Berg wrote. "It is unclear how much of the conclusions of the authors were influenced by external contributions of Monsanto without proper acknowledgments." According to Elsevier's metrics, the article has been cited 779 times, including 66 policy citations."
Elsevier retracted a widely cited April 2000 safety review that concluded Roundup/glyphosate posed no human carcinogenic risk after litigation revealed the review relied solely on unpublished Monsanto studies and appeared co-written by Monsanto employees without disclosure. The retraction notice indicates possible compensation to the named researchers Gary M. Williams, Robert Kroes, and Ian C. Munro. Co-editor-in-chief Martin van den Berg emphasized the paper's significant regulatory impact and said unclear attribution creates uncertainty about the integrity of its conclusions. Elsevier records show 779 citations, including 66 policy citations. Revelations linked to litigation date back to 2017.
Read at Fast Company
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]