New Academic Safety Study Slaps Monsanto’s own Study!

September 27, 2018 – San Diego, CA.  Ongoing and upcoming lawsuits against Bayer AG/Monsanto’s product Roundup weed killer may get new ammunition from a recently published academic journal.

Critical Reviews in Toxicology is an academic journal that publishes review articles on the mechanisms, responses and assessments of toxins and toxicants.  Source:

The publisher has clearly stated on Wednesday it is issuing an “Expression of Concern” linked to the articles because the authors “have been unable to provide an adequate Critical Reviews in Toxicology explanation to why the required level of transparency was not met on first submission.” – We wrote about this back on September 7, 2017 in a blog on Monsanto’s “Ghost Writers”.

Here is an excerpt from that blog post:

Recent findings show academic papers validating Roundup herbicide were authored by its employees.

What was it in these newly unsealed documents that have Monsanto so worried?  

Monsanto has always touted its Roundup product as safe when used as directed.  The company claims that “independent” studies have vetted the chemical glyphosate and deemed it safe.  But now new evidence in the form of these unsealed documents (over 70) is now under scrutiny.

Internal company emails released on August 1 by the plaintiffs’ lawyers indicate that Monsanto worked closely with a consulting firm to induce a scientific journal called Critical Reviews in Toxicology to publish an “independent” review of Roundup’s health effects, and it looks like this really wasn’t so independent at all.

This review and others published in September 2016 was formulated to counter the 2015 assessment (below) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization.

Drawing on published reports in scientific literature from independent researchers, IARC specifically linked exposure to Roundup and glyphosate to non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and several other blood cancers, including B-cell lymphoma, a subtype of NHL.

 Monsanto Worked with Intertek Group Plc.

Consulting company Intertek Group Plc, was paid by Monsanto to craft a “review” called “An Independent Review of the Carcinogenic Potential of Glyphosate”

It was IARC’s assessment that glyphosate “probably” causes cancer in humans is significant because farmers and agricultural workers are not the only ones at risk for exposure. Residue from Roundup’s main ingredient glyphosate can be found in the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat. This led California to list glyphosate as a known human carcinogen.  This now had the effect of launching 1,000 lawsuits in both state and federal courts from people claiming that glyphosate caused them to suffer non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

According to the review’s Declaration of Interest statement: “Neither any Monsanto company employees nor any attorneys reviewed any of the Expert Panel’s manuscripts prior of submission to the journal.” However the internal company emails illustrate something entirely different.

Monsanto scientist helped organized, reviewed and edited the drafts by the outside experts.

Chief of regulatory science, William Heydens vetoed panel requests to downplay “inflammatory” criticisms of the IARC.  Panelist John Acquavella, who is an epidemiologist in Denmark, stated in a February 2016 email “An extensive revision of the summary article is necessary.”  

With further edits made by Haydens, Acquavella was satisfied and then went on to bill the company $20,700 for his month’s work on the piece.

Genna Reed, a noted scientist and policy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Center for Science and Democracy who knows about Monsanto’s editorial involvement said: “in direct opposition to their disclosure”, and further says “It does seem pretty suspicious”.

Monsanto responds by saying it was blindsided by these disclosures and wanted them purged from the web, and the following statement was made from Monsanto’s Partridge: “It’s unfortunate these lawyers are grandstanding at the expense of their clients’ interest.”

Critical Reviews in Toxicology requires author conflicts must be disclosed.

This is called transparency and apparently Monsanto wasn’t very forthcoming in telling who actually took part in the studies.

Nathan Donley, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental advocacy group offered this on the subject: “Although I’m glad the journal is now on record finding that they were misled when publishing these articles, a retraction is more than warranted for this situation.”

He goes on to state: “Furthermore the journal appears to be allowing the phrase ‘an independent review’ to remain in the title of the issue. There is nothing independent about this review by any stretch of the imagination.”

Read other Roundup articles here:

Timelines of Scientific Studies and Reviews of glyphosate.

The Roundup Cancer Controversy – A Timeline of Scientific Studies and Reviews of glyphosate battles in court

Roundup found in breakfast cereal.

What the Monsanto Roundup Cancer lawsuit victory means to field workers.

Judge Rules Monsanto Cancer lawsuit may move forward.

Who can participate in the Roundup Cancer Lawsuits?

Occupations that require workers to handle Roundup directly or indirectly may be most at-risk. A few examples of these occupations include:

  • Crop farm workers and laborers
  • Nursery or greenhouse workers
  • Agricultural equipment operators
  • Soil scientists and surveyors

You don’t have to work on a farm to be exposed to Roundup. Glyphosate residues are found in the air and drinking water near agricultural fields where they are applied, putting whole communities at risk.

If you or someone you love was exposed to Roundup and were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or another blood cancer, you may be entitled to compensation. The legal team at National Injury Help is ready to answer your questions and help you determine if your case qualifies for a Roundup Cancer Lawsuit.

Call National Injury Help today at 1-800-214-1010 for a free case evaluation or use the form on the bottom of your screen.