Suborning science for profit: Monsanto, glyphosate, and private science research misconduct

Abstract Using documents from a lawsuit filed against the agricultural chemical and biotechnology firm Monsanto (now Bayer), we document a private firm's efforts to distort the scientific peer-review process through ghostwriting, to orchestrate campaigns to retract journal articles, and to influence editorial decisions. The firm's apparent goal was to manipulate the regulatory process so that it could continue selling a product that the firm's own research indicated might be dangerous. The long-term impact has been to threaten the integrity of scientific peer review and public trust in science. The findings have implications for public-private research collaborations, the validity of private-science research, scientific journal policies on conflict-of-interest disclosures, and policies governing the role of private science in regulatory oversight.