Cited by 41Pharmaceutical industry and healthcareAcademic integrity and plagiarismGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology

Roundup litigation discovery documents: implications for public health and journal ethics

Krimsky, Sheldon, Gillam, Carey·2018·Journal of Public Health Policy

Abstract

This paper reviews the court-released discovery documents obtained from litigation against Monsanto over its herbicide Roundup and through Freedom of Information Act requests (requests to regulatory agencies and public universities in the United States). We sought evidence of corporate malfeasance and undisclosed conflicts of interest with respect to issues of scientific integrity. The findings include evidence of ghostwriting, interference in journal publication, and undue influence of a federal regulatory agency.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1057/s41271-018-0134-z

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Monsanto funded academic studies, engaged in ghostwriting of scholarly journal articles, and prepared presentations for the academics it sponsored.

    “The firm funded academic studies and engaged in ghostwriting of scholarly journal articles, and even prepared presentations for the academics it sponsored (Krimsky and Gillam 2018).”

    From Corporate concentration and power matter for agency in food systems (2025) · cites this paper as Krimsky and Gillam 2018

Cites

2 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Krimsky, S., & Gillam, C.
Affiliations
  • Tufts University (US)
  • U.S. Right to Know (US)
Corresponding author
Krimsky, Sheldon
Venue
Journal of Public Health Policy
Published
2018-06-08
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pages
318-326
ISSN
  • 0197-5897 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-655X
OpenAlex
W2806191778
Cited by
41
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2
FWCI
0.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Public Health Policy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Keywords
Monsanto, glyphosate, Freedom of Information Act, scientific integrity, ghostwriting, conflicts of interest, corporate misconduct, corporate influence on science, public health
MeSH terms
Glyphosate, Authorship, Chemical Industry, Glycine, Herbicides, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Public Health, United States, Liability, Legal, Access to Information

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review