The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

scientists suppressed 173for review. It was accepted and publication was scheduled for July 1, 1999. 35Oddly, a week before publication, when according to normal practice the articlewas still under embargo, the American Soybean Association [ASA],known to be tied to Monsanto, issued a press release claiming that our studywas not rigorous. We never found out the source of the leak.”I located the press release from the association (whose vice president Imet soon thereafter): “ASA has confidence in the regulatory reviews ofRoundup Ready soybeans conducted by U.S. and global regulatory agenciesand the underlying scientific studies that found equivalence in isoflavonecontent between Roundup Ready soybeans and conventional soybeans.” 36“How do you explain the fact that Monsanto found the two soybeansequivalent?” I asked Britt Bailey.“I think the principal flaw in their study is that they did not spray theplants with Roundup, which completely invalidates the study, becauseRoundup Ready soybeans are made to be sprayed with the herbicide.”“How do you know?”“Because of a blunder by Monsanto’s legal department.”Britt Bailey showed me a letter from Tom Carrato, one of Monsanto’s attorneys,to Vital Health Publishing, which was then about to publish a book sheand Marc Lappé had written on GMOs. This letter, dated March 26, 1998,says a great deal about the company’s practices. After explaining that he hadlearned of the imminent publication from an article in Winter Coast Magazine,he writes with disconcerting self-confidence: “The authors of the book assertthat Roundup is ‘toxic.’ What do they mean by toxic? Every substance that exists,whether synthetic or found in nature, is able to produce toxicity at somedose. . . . Anyone who has consumed several cups of coffee or observed aperson drinking alcohol understands the dose-response relationship and theidea of threshold. . . . These errors must be corrected prior to publication . . .because they disparage and potentially libel the product.” Later in the letter,Carrato defends the study conducted by Stephen Padgette, and makes a damagingadmission: “Studies of unsprayed [emphasis added] RR soybeans showno difference in estrogen levels. Those studies were reported in a peerreviewedarticle in the Journal of Nutrition in January 1996.”“Anyway, the letter was effective,” said Bailey, “because our publisher decidednot to publish the book and we had to find another one.” 37“Do you know whether the Roundup residues inevitably found on transgenicsoybeans have been assessed from a health perspective?”