October 5, 2017
Re: Official Inquiry Regarding Monsanto’s Manipulation of Science and Potential Collaboration with Regulators
Dear Chairs, dear Vice-Chairs, dear Group Coordinators, dear Deputy Group Coordinators, dear Members of the European Parliament:
Thank you for protecting the public and environmental well-being of Europeans. We appreciate that the European Parliament is working hard to ensure that the decision to relicense glyphosate is supported by a robust evaluation of the available scientific data. To that end, we would like to assist Parliament by bringing your attention a number of documents discovered during the course of the pending federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) against Monsanto Company.
These documents, which are attached and described in the accompanying flash disk, tell an alarming story of corporate malfeasance. They reveal that Monsanto has been manipulating the science of glyphosate for decades by ghostwriting scientific literature designed to make glyphosate look safe, bullying scientists that publish anything negative about their billion-dollar product, and colluding with regulators to ensure “positive” assessments. Monsanto’s systematic efforts to hide the risks of glyphosate has remained in the shadows for too long—and these documents, which are just the tip of the iceberg (with many more documents to come) are an important first step to bringing Monsanto’s misconduct into the light.
That said, as lawyers working on the litigation in the United States, there is only so much we can do to aid the Parliament in its important responsibility. We recommend that you, consistent with your responsibilities and obligations, open an official inquiry about Monsanto’s influence on the scientific debate over the safety of glyphosate. Specifically, we recommend that the Parliament examine the following issues:
Monsanto’s relationship with members of the European Food Safety Authority and the BfR;
Monsanto’s sponsorship and implementation of ghostwritten scientific literature, specifically designed to influence European authorities;
Monsanto’s decisions to terminate studies showing much higher absorption rates of glyphosate than previously reported to the EU;
Monsanto’s efforts to bully and intimidate members of the International Agency for Research on Cancer and other researchers publishing data and analysis that glyphosate is carcinogenic;
Monsanto’s knowledge concerning the carcinogenicity of Roundup formulations (glyphosate + other ingredients like surfactants) and Monsanto’s deliberate refusal to study formulated products;
Monsanto’s internal strategy to discredit IARC; and Monsanto’s knowledge of the effects of glyphosate on the micro biome, and the various life-sustaining microorganisms that dwell within the human body.
I, obviously, believe that glyphosate and Roundup are dangerous. I believe they cause cancer. And, in my work as an attorney in the United States, I intend to prove that to a court of law. But, you do not need to take my word on this. These documents show, at the very least, that the EU needs more information before it can make an informed decision about the relicensing of glyphosate. The stakes are simply too high to make a decision without all the information and data. Quite literally, millions of lives are at risk.
If you have any questions or concerns, I would be happy to work with any EU Parliament member.
Brent Wisner, Esq.
Michael L. Baum, Esq.
BAUM HEDLUND ARISTEI & GOLDMAN, P.C.