By Carey Gillam
Three years ago this month Monsanto executives realized they had a big problem on their hands.
It was September 2014 and the company's top-selling chemical, the weed killer called glyphosate that is the foundation for Monsanto's branded Roundup
products, had been selected as one among a handful of pesticides to
undergo scrutiny by the World Health Organization's International Agency
for Research on Cancer (IARC). Monsanto had spent decades fending off
concerns about the safety of glyphosate and decrying scientific research
indicating the chemical might cause cancer or other diseases. And even
though the IARC review was still months away, Monsanto's own scientists
knew what the outcome would likely be—and they knew it wouldn't be good.
Internal company records show not just the level of
fear Monsanto had over the impending review, but notably that company
officials fully expected IARC scientists would find at least some cancer
connections to glyphosate. Company scientists discussed the
"vulnerability" that surrounded their efforts to defend glyphosate amid
multiple unfavorable research findings in studies of people and animals
exposed to the weed killer. In addition to epidemiology studies, "we
also have potential vulnerabilities in the other areas that IARC will
consider, namely, exposure, genetox and mode of action…" a Monsanto
scientist wrote in October 2014.
That same email discussed a need to find allies and arrange funding for
a "fight"—all months before the IARC meeting in March 2015.
And
Monsanto predicted internally before IARC even met that the review of
the scientific evidence would result in a decision that glyphosate
"possibly" was carcinogenic or "probably" was. Monsanto officials had
forecast the IARC decision in an internal "preparedness" plan
that warned colleagues to "assume and prepare for the outcome..." The
document shows Monsanto thought it most likely that IARC would peg
glyphosate as a "possible human carcinogen." The rating of probable
carcinogen was "possible but less likely," the Monsanto memo stated.
IARC ultimately did classify glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans."
As
the IARC meeting loomed, the internal documents show that Monsanto did
not wait for the actual IARC decision before acting. It enlisted teams
of PR and lobbying experts, scientists and others in a plan aimed at
creating what was designed to appear as a storm of "outcry" and
"outrage" to follow the IARC classification. IARC had a history of
"questionable and politically charged rulings," the Monsanto memo said.
