Monsanto covertly funded glyphosate lobbying studies

LobbyControl demands complete clarification and comprehensive transparency from Bayer

09-Dec-2019 - Germany

According to research by LobbyControl, Monsanto has attempted to influence public and political debate in Germany and the EU in the glyphosate debate with covertly funded studies. The Group financed two studies by the Institute for Agribusiness in Giessen. These studies were published without mentioning Monsanto and thus found their way into scientific essays, media reports and lobbying materials. Only a few weeks ago, the author of the study had claimed that the glyphosate studies had been carried out without the support of third parties. LobbyControl are now available protocols that prove the funding by Monsanto. Bayer, as the current owner of Monsanto, has since admitted to LobbyControl that Monsanto commissioned and financed the studies.

A ban on glyphosate would cause billions in losses of prosperity in the EU. In addition, glyphosate is ecologically advantageous. With these messages, Monsanto and other glyphosate producers promoted the re-approval of the weed killer. Two studies from the Institute for Agribusiness (IAB) in Gießen served as proof. The results of the studies were also published in recognised scientific journals. None of the publications indicated that the studies were funded by Monsanto. The studies therefore appeared in media reports and Bundestag speeches as neutral science.

Ulrich Müller of LobbyControl criticises the concealment of the economic interests behind the studies: "Monsanto used professorship witnesses to lend credibility to its own messages and make itself more heard in public and politics. The disguising of economic interests makes it difficult to critically question and classify the studies. This form of covert influence is unacceptable."

The results of the studies were published in the Journal für Kulturpflanzen. This journal is published by the Julius Kühn Institute, the Federal Research Institute for Cultivated Plants. The Institute is a public institution under the authority of the Federal Ministry of Agriculture. In addition, the University of Giessen, where the IAB director held a chair, is mentioned as the contact. However, it was not university research, but commissioned research by the private institute for agribusiness. The journal said, at LobbyControl's request, that Monsanto's failure to mention would contradict its publication ethics and its claim to scientific publications. The publications will be examined. If the suspicion is confirmed, the essays would be withdrawn by 31.12.2019. "It's good and important that the essays are examined. Monsanto's science lobbying must now be comprehensively clarified," Müller continues.

"Bayer, as the new owner of Monsanto, must disclose which scientists and studies Monsanto financed for lobbying purposes," demands Müller. "In the debate on renewed glyphosate approval, studies that have in reality been commissioned and paid for by industry must not be used as a neutral science again. We expect a clear commitment from Bayer and the other glyphosate producers to provide clear funding for all studies in the now commencing glyphosate 2022 re-approval process". This must apply especially to the studies that are prepared for lobbying and public relations work.

According to Müller, Bayer has a dual responsibility here to provide information. Bayer CropScience was itself represented on the board of the IAB supporting association and worked with the institute and Prof. Schmitz for many years.

The University of Giessen is also examining the case. To date, the University's statutes on safeguarding good scientific practice do not contain any rules on the indication of sources of funding for contract research. The case should now be taken as an opportunity to "discuss possible amendments to the statutes of the university to this effect".

LobbyControl welcomes this: "Universities and scientific institutions have a responsibility to prevent the abuse of scientific reputation for lobbying purposes. They should have clear rules requiring scientists to disclose their financiers. This must also apply to research projects carried out as a secondary activity. Private secondary institutes such as the Institute for Agribusiness must not serve as a masquerade for interest-driven contract research and use the reputation and resources of the universities in the process".

Note: This article has been translated using a computer system without human intervention. LUMITOS offers these automatic translations to present a wider range of current news. Since this article has been translated with automatic translation, it is possible that it contains errors in vocabulary, syntax or grammar. The original article in German can be found here.

https://www.yumda.com/en/news/1164031/monsanto-covertly-funded-glyphosate-lobbying-studies.html