When jurors hear cases, they reasonably expect that they are presented only with reliable scientific information to support their deliberations. Regrettably, this is often not the case. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that one of the worst examples of “junk science” that finds its way into our courts is being funded by American taxpayers.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer, or IARC, supported by the National Institutes of Health, issued a report concluding that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is carcinogenic. That report became the basis for a San Francisco jury entering a $289 million jury award against Monsanto. And the essential evidence in this case – the IARC report – contradicts more than 800 scientific studies, including analyses by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the NIH.