A pivotal scientific paper that for decades served as a cornerstone for the safety claims of the world’s most widely used herbicide has been formally withdrawn by the journal that published it. The retraction cites “serious ethical concerns” regarding the paper’s authorship and the integrity of its research.
The study, originally published in the year 2000, concluded that glyphosate—the active ingredient in popular weed-killing products—posed no cancer risk or other significant health dangers to humans. This conclusion was repeatedly cited by regulatory bodies globally as evidence of the chemical’s safety.
However, the journal’s editor-in-chief announced the retraction after an examination revealed the paper’s conclusions were based exclusively on unpublished studies provided by the herbicide’s manufacturer. The editor’s statement pointed to a “misrepresentation of the contributions by the authors and the study sponsor,” as well as “potential conflicts of interest.”
The retraction follows years of litigation and the public release of internal corporate communications. Those documents revealed that company scientists were deeply involved in the paper’s development, a fact not transparently disclosed at the time. In one internal email, a company executive explicitly described a strategy of having outside scientists “edit & sign their names” to work orchestrated internally, referencing the handling of the now-retracted study.
While the paper listed three academic researchers as its authors, internal correspondence praised the “hard work” and “perseverance” of multiple company employees over three years of “data collection, writing, [and] review.” One email celebrated the publication as a key business tool to “defend” the product and “differentiate” it from competitors.
In response to the retraction, the company that now owns the herbicide brand stated that its involvement was acknowledged in the original paper and emphasized that global regulatory consensus, based on thousands of studies, continues to support the safe use of glyphosate. A spokesperson for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency stated the agency was aware of the retraction but had never relied on that specific article for its regulatory conclusions, noting its own ongoing review involves thousands of independent studies.
Legal representatives for plaintiffs in lawsuits against the manufacturer hailed the retraction as long overdue. They described the study as a “quintessential example” of how corporate influence can undermine scientific integrity through practices like ghostwriting and selective use of data.
The development coincides with ongoing high-stakes legal and political battles over the herbicide’s safety and the future of litigation from individuals who claim exposure caused their cancers.