March 24, 2017

All of Today’s Establishment Science is Ghost Written


And sustain your business’s “science” that way.

Last week we contemplated the revelations coming out the Monsanto cancer litigation. Monsanto has been forced by the court to divulge much hitherto secret information about its propaganda machine and how it has sought to cover up the facts about glyphosate’s cancerousness. The new information especially reinforces our longstanding knowledge of the real character of regulators like the EPA. Such regulatory agencies are indelibly pro-corporate and can never serve the people the way the good civics textbooks claim. They were designed to do the opposite, to assist corporate organized crime in looting and poisoning the people and destroying the environment.
Among the new proofs of what we already knew are the Monsanto e-mails crowing about their practice of getting academic scientists to put their names on papers written by Monsanto PR flacks. They call it “ghost writing”. Monsanto cadres discussed several specific examples including a pathologist at New York Medical College. Embarrassed that one of its prostitutes has been caught in the act, NYMC is scrambling to cover its tracks and promises to investigate the good doctor. Of course the kind of organization which doesn’t let it be known implicitly that such corruption is acceptable wouldn’t be the one caught sheltering it.
This is just de jure corruption, the more superficial kind. That’s just the tip of the iceberg.
What’s vastly greater and more profound is the inertia of the scientific establishment as such, which works predominantly to reinforce prevailing “scientific” dogmas. This is what Thomas Kuhn called “normal science”. These dogmas in turn are dictated by the elite power interests of a society. Under corporate rule, Western society exalts the corporate science paradigm.
Therefore, in a broader, deeper sense Monsanto and its fellow oligopoly corporations “ghost write” the entire establishment agenda for toxicological and cancer research, and the paradigm of “science” deployed by regulators. Even mavericks like Seralini tend to define themselves as reformers within this corporate normative framework.
But history proves that nothing short of scientific and social revolution can overthrow such entrenched, sclerotic, malign frameworks.
For a compendium of the fraudulent “science” of glyphosate deployed in publications written by industry and used as religious gospel by regulators, see the new report “Buying Science”.


  1. Hi Russ,
    I have no direct experience in Monsanto’s science, however, your arguments re corporate influence on EPA decision making, in this era of crony capitalism seem perfectly rational; it’s integral to a Drumpian culture.
    Some relatively recent developments in the domain of physics/chemistry, which some of your followers might also find interesting, concern the efforts of Randell L Mills to commercialize his discovery of the energy properties involved in the production of an allotrope of hydrogen named ‘hydrino’. Details are available at his website –


    and a recent lecture at Fresno SU is at:

    In the past, many people have scoffed at Mills’ efforts/promotions and even now some would suggest his efforts are incomprehensible. I recall an ACS meeting in the late 80s at which S Pons and M Fleischman presented their ‘cold fusion’ research results and were subjected to intense criticism by the ‘hot fusion’ physicists who had convinced various Federal government agencies to fund such efforts to the tune of many $B.
    However, when Dr. Mills’ SunCell becomes commercially available in the near future, it will be interesting to follow the modifications of our culture. If the ‘important’ physicists/physical chemists should come around to accepting Dr. Mills GU Theory of Classical Physics, there would likely have to be a reevaluation of the (in)significance of quantum mechanics. Furthermore, the nature of cosmic “Dark’ matter and the shortcomings of ‘hot’ fusion energy research efforts could be recognized. In any event, it will be interesting to watch whether/how the reputation/public perception of a very intelligent scientist/engineer/business person evolves from that of a quack to a genius.

    Comment by William Wilson — March 24, 2017 @ 10:29 am

    • Where it comes to the likes of the EPA I only state the evident facts. The only reason there’s any controversy is because even among critics of pesticides, most people have an anti-historical, infantile religious belief in the idea of such “regulators”. Thus we remain saddled with them for now.

      If by Drumpian culture you mean corporate-controlled electoralism as such, then I agree. Trump of course is nothing but the logical culmination of all electoralism of the last 40+ years. (Thus far. Of course it can get worse, and it looks like Trump’s detractors especially are determined to learn nothing and forget nothing and double down on every idiocy which brought them Trump. So we can indeed expect worse to come.)


      I certainly hope no one who reads this site will have any interest in any flying spaghetti energy cult. We’re dedicated to the reality-based universe where fossil fuels are finite and nothing can substitute for even a significant fraction of the energy consumption they afford. No “silver bullet” could work even in principle, unless one postulates a god powering it. Those who tout such scams are worse than quacks, they’re crooks trying to prop up belief in high energy consumption corporate technocracy, and helping to serve as gatekeepers against the new and necessary ideas.

      It is funny, though, the squabbles Mills has with his con-man competitors. But they’re all engaged in the same Big Con.

      Comment by Russ — March 24, 2017 @ 11:01 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: