Is IARC Fit for Purpose?

IARC has continued to slide into an crisis of legitimacy. Recent unethical, biased behaviour has left the agency no longer fit for purpose.

IARC’s Disgrace: How Low Can Activist Science Go?

We know that IARC’s political bias, non-transparency and conflict of interest on glyphosate were bad. But according to a recent publication, it is nothing compared to how bad their activist science was.

The Pesticide Industry’s Moral Dilemma

As I continue to migrate my site, this is my favourite blog from 2015. It looks at how the pesticide industry is restricted by its internal codes of ethical conduct that will not allow them to attack competitors, while the organic industry and NGOs have no issue with lying and spreading fear about pesticides. Industry (and society) will lose, but with integrity!

IARC’s unprofessional and unethical behaviour. Time to retract their glyphosate monograph

IARC has not behaved like an international scientific agency within the WHO, but more like an NGO activist agency. Their glyphosate Working Group was driven by an activist scientist and since the publication, IARC has been attacking other scientific agencies that have roundly rejected their findings. IARC has been unprofessional, untransparent and unscientific. They need to retract their monograph on scientific and ethical grounds.

IARC-gate: How NOT to represent science at the international level

IARC (the International Agency for Research on Cancer) has fallen to a new low on any scale of research integrity. Yesterday it used an anti-industry, anti-pesticides journalist to defend its position on the glyphosate monograph against claims made by scientists, institutions, governments and the media (including this blog). The day after the release of the…