A study is retracted after it turns out that its authors were misrepresented as “third-party experts” even though they were actually paid by the company?

Gur Huberman points to this news article: A Study Is Retracted, Renewing Concerns About the Weedkiller Roundup Problems with a 25-year-old landmark paper on the safety of Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, have led to calls for the E.P.A. to reassess the widely used chemical. In 2000, a landmark study claimed to set the record straight on glyphosate, a contentious weedkiller used on hundreds of millions of acres of farmland. The paper found that the chemical, the active ingredient in Roundup, wasn’t a human health risk despite evidence of a cancer link. Last month, the study was retracted by the scientific journal that published it a quarter century ago . . . The 2000 paper, a scientific review conducted by three independent scientists, was for decades cited by other researchers as evidence of Roundup’s safety. It became the cornerstone of regulations that deemed the weedkiller safe. But since then, emails uncovered as part of lawsuits against the weedkiller’s manufacturer,…