The journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology has retracted a 2000 paper that previously cleared glyphosate of health risks after internal Monsanto emails—revealed during litigation—suggested company scientists helped draft the manuscript but were not credited. Editors cited misrepresented authorship and potential conflicts of interest. Bayer says Monsanto was acknowledged, while critics and plaintiffs' attorneys say the retraction highlights the need for clearer disclosures and independent safety testing.
Journal Retracts Influential 2000 Roundup Study After Monsanto Emails Reveal Undisclosed Involvement
Bill Barksdale /Design Pics Editorial/Universal Images Group via Getty Images
A leading scientific journal has retracted a 2000 paper that was frequently cited to defend the safety of glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup, after internal industry emails suggested undisclosed company involvement in preparing the manuscript.
Why The Paper Was Retracted
The article, published in Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, originally concluded that glyphosate posed no health risk despite long-standing concerns about a possible cancer link. The journal’s decision to retract followed an internal review prompted by emails surfaced in litigation that appear to show Monsanto employees helped draft the manuscript but were not listed as authors.
"Concerns were raised regarding 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,"
— Martin van den Berg, Editor-in-Chief
Evidence From Litigation
The retraction notice cites evidence produced in court cases brought by plaintiffs alleging harm from glyphosate exposure. Attorneys for those plaintiffs provided internal Monsanto emails praising the work of several company scientists whose contributions were not acknowledged in the published paper. Critics say such undisclosed involvement can undermine peer review and erode confidence in the scientific record.
Regulatory Impact And Reaction
The 2000 study was influential: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency cited it in its 2017 evaluation of glyphosate. Monsanto’s parent company, Bayer, responded by saying the company’s role was acknowledged in the paper’s acknowledgments section, which referenced "key personnel at Monsanto who provided scientific support." Critics, however, argue that such a brief acknowledgment fell short of adequately disclosing the scale and nature of the company’s contributions.
Legal And Public Response
Brent Wisner, a lead attorney for plaintiffs in the Roundup litigation, welcomed the retraction and described the study as an example of how corporate influence can distort the peer-review process through ghostwriting and selective presentation of data. The decision has reignited debate over corporate sponsorship of research and renewed calls for stricter authorship disclosure rules and independent safety testing of widely used chemicals.
Although glyphosate remains approved for use in many countries, the retraction has amplified demands from scientists, regulators and public-interest groups for greater transparency in industry-funded research and closer, independent scrutiny of chemical safety.
Help us improve.
