Monsanto has fallen on evil days recently.
The World Health Organization and its International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reclassified Monsanto’s flagship herbicide Glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans”. IARC scientists are not backing down from their scientific review under Monsanto’s demands that they retract their findings. My own modest contribution regarding the revelation by a Monsanto functionary that they have a fulltime department “debunking” science which disagrees with theirs has firmly fixed the phrase “Monsanto Discredit Bureau” in the blogosphere lexicon.
On March 26, the watchdog environmental organization, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), which advocates for scientists and researchers, submitted a petition to USDA Secretary Vilsack calling upon the federal agency to revise its standard for scientific integrity to match the protocol in place in other federal departments in line with President Obama’s memorandum of March 2009 on protections for scientific inquiry.
Background statement from the petition:
The USDA Scientific Integrity Policy actively enables agency managers to suppress and alter scientific work products for their policy implications, regardless of their technical merit. It also appears clear that agribusiness interests, such as Monsanto Corporation, have access to top agency managers and are invited to lodge complaints and concerns about the published work of agency scientists. Significantly, the Policy lacks any mechanism to effectively challenge this political manipulation of science. This gap is compounded by the lack of whistleblower protection for scientists. As a result, scientists whose work raises troublesome implications or who have the temerity to file complaints about inappropriate skewing of science face the prospect of official retaliation. [emphasis mine]
.
The petition, which is a chilling read, lays out shortcomings of the USDA scientific integrity policy and also lists specific instances of violations of President Obama's memorandum:
In a growing number of cases, USDA managers are interfering, intimidating, harassing, and in some cases punishing civil service scientists for doing work that has inconvenient implications for industry and could have direct policy/regulatory ramifications. For example, in recent months USDA scientists have been subjected to –
• Directives not to publish data on certain topics of particular sensitivity to industry;
• Orders to rewrite scientific articles already accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal to remove sections which could provoke industry objections;
• Summons to meet with Secretary Vilsack in an effort to induce retraction of a paper that drew the ire of industry representatives;
• Orders to retract a paper after it had been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The paper could only be published if the USDA scientist removed his authorship thus leaving only the names of authors unassociated with USDA;
• Demotion from supervisory status and a reprimand after the scientist provided testimony before Congress that did not reflect agency preferences;
• Disruptive and lengthy internal investigations to search out any irregularity that could be used for management leverage against the targeted scientist;
• Suspensions without pay and other disciplinary actions for petty matters, such as minor irregularities in travel paperwork;
• Inordinate, sometimes indefinite, delays in approving submission for publication of scientific papers that may be controversial;
• Restrictions on topics that USDA scientists may address in conference presentations; and
• Threats by USDA managers to damage of the careers scientists whose work triggers industry complaints.
Reuter's senior journalist based in Kansas City, Missouri, Carey Gillam's excellent report on this developing story includes the reason why these USDA scientists have chosen to petition the Secretary of the Department.
PEER's Executive Director Jeff Ruch said on Friday that at least 10 USDA scientists have been investigated or faced other consequences arising from research that called into question the safety of certain agricultural chemicals.
Ruch said his organization had received mounting complaints over the last year from USDA scientists claiming they have been ordered to retract studies, water down findings, remove their names from authorship and experienced delays in approvals for publication of research papers. The petition does not identify any specific research or scientists.
These ten USDA scientists are laying their careers on the line. Although they are not identified by name in the petition for fear of retaliation, they will be instantly recognizable to Secretary Vilsack from the list of specific complaints. Their bravery characterizes the highest calling of scientific integrity.
Science is not a shining citadel on a hill founded on unassailable objective facts and data. Science is a human endeavor subject to human frailties and failings. Science, increasingly divorced from integrity and accountability, becomes subverted when it is manipulated and orchestrated by multinational corporations whose sole aim is global market share to increase profits.
Addendum: Mike Ludwig at Truthout has also written an excellent article on this development: Monsanto Is in Hot Water - Again
Late last week, companies "such as Monsanto" were implicated in a watchdog group's petition to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) on behalf of anonymous scientists within the agency who say their research is suppressed when it upsets powerful agrichemical interests.
The allegations enraged the industry's critics, who have been busy touting recent reports linking popular herbicides often used in tandem with genetically engineered crops, or GMOs, to cancer and antibiotic resistance.
Read the first diary in this series
Monsanto "Discredit Bureau" Does Exist
