"The Environmental Protection Agency has removed any mention of fossil fuels — the main driver of global warming — from its popular online page explaining the causes of climate change. Now it only mentions natural phenomena, even though scientists calculate that nearly all of the warming is due to human activity."

apnews.com/article/epa-climate…

#PublicHealth #environment #climate #FossilFuels #energy #EPA #USpol

Fixed that headline for you, AP

apnews.com/article/epa-climate…

#EPA #ClimateChange #USPol #Environment

#Elsevier finally (after 25 years) retracted the primary study concluding that #glyphosate is safe for humans. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the #Roundup herbicide, manufactured by #Monsanto.
sciencedirect.com/science/arti…

h/t @civodul.
fediscience.org/@civodul@toot.…

Among the grounds for the retraction:
* "The article's conclusions…are solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto."
* "Employees of Monsanto may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgment as co-authors."
* "The authors may have received [undisclosed] financial compensation from Monsanto for their work on this article."

Remember that in 2020, the #Trump #EPA "relied almost entirely on #Monsanto studies" to conclude that Roundup was safe.
x.com/petersuber/status/122403…

In 2016, Monsanto made a show of sharing its research on glyphosate with the public. But instead of making it #OpenAccess, it put print copies in a room in Brussels, required registration to use the room, and then closed the room after two months.
web.archive.org/web/2019011921…

Two questions for follow up studies:
1. Why did Elsevier's 𝘙𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘛𝘰𝘹𝘪𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘗𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺 need 25 years to retract this piece of Monsanto advertising?
2. What harm did the article cause during the last 25 years?