A scientific paper written 25 years ago, claiming that the herbicide glyphosate posed little risk to people, has finally been withdrawn after it was found that the authors relied solely on Monsanto studies and did not acknowledge that Monsanto staff had assisted in writing the paper.

Monsanto makes the glyphosate-based Roundup, used as a weedkiller throughout the world. Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018, is currently facing thousands of lawsuits, primarily from farmers, who claim that they have developed cancer as a result of exposure to Roundup.

The study by Gary Williams, Robert Kroes and Ian Munro was published in 2000 in the journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, but only retracted last Friday.

Making the announcement, journal co-editor Martin van den Berg cited several problems, including the “authorship of this paper, validity of the research findings in the context of misrepresentation of the contributions by the authors and the study sponsor and potential conflicts of interest of the authors”.

According to the paper: “The use of Roundup herbicide does not result in adverse effects on development, reproduction, or endocrine systems” in people or animals. 

“It was concluded that, under present and expected conditions of use, Roundup herbicide does not pose a health risk to humans.”

This paper has been used to justify the use of Roundup around the world.

“The conclusions about the non-carcinogenicity of glyphosate or Roundup in this article are limited to the Monsanto studies alone and hamper a general conclusion as suggested by the authors,” said Van den Berg.

This was despite other studies being available at the time that flagged the potential carcinogenicity of glyphosate, based on studies in mice, he added.

Meanwhile, a 2015 study by the World Health Organization (WHO) linked glyphosate to non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

What took so long?

Not only that, it “appears from correspondence that employees of Monsanto may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgement as co-authors”.

The correspondence was obtained back in 2017 through litigation by lawyers “representing thousands of cancer victims who are suing Monsanto, alleging their exposure to the company’s glyphosate-based herbicides caused them to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma,” according to the US-based organisation, Right to Know.

“In one email from 2001, Monsanto scientist Katherine Carr asked if the ‘team of people’ at Monsanto who worked on the Williams paper ‘could receive Roundup polo shirts as a token of appreciation for a job well done’,” according to Right to Know.

Right to Know and several researchers have questioned why it has taken the journal so long to retract the paper. Van den Berg, who is based in the Netherlands, told Right to Know via email: “It simply never ended (up) on my desk being at first primarily a U.S. situation with litigation”.

However, the organisation quoted various researchers claiming that the journal has a bias towards industry.

Bayer appeals to Trump

Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018, appealed to US President Donald Trump for assistance to avoid liability. In court papers, Bayer says it faces claims from “more than 100,000 plaintiffs across the country that … seek to hold Monsanto liable for not warning users that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, causes cancer”. 

Bayer argues that the responsibility for cancer warnings lies with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The US government heeded their appeal this week, and Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to review the company’s immunity plea.

“The Trump administration filed a brief with the Supreme Court arguing that lawsuits alleging that Monsanto failed to warn consumers of the health impacts of its Roundup weedkiller are preempted by federal law,” The Hill reported on Tuesday.

Monsanto wants the Supreme Court to overturn a lower court’s ruling that it has to pay damages for failing to warn about its product’s health impacts.

However, this has angered “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) supporters.

“President Trump specifically promised to address the harms from pesticides. This move to support the Supreme Court in hearing Bayer’s case for federal preemption of state laws that protect our safety could not stray further from that promise he made to American citizens,”  said Kelly Ryerson, co-executive director of American Regeneration and a MAHA leader.

Image Credits: Pesticide Action Network.