He is ethically sketchy. He headed the Ramazzini Institute for his allies, which is "an advocacy forum for their pro-compensation and aggressive regulation views on social and political issues" according to independent watchdogs. He secretly took nearly $1,000,000 from funds donated to discredited organic-industry-funded economist Chuck Benbrook's Heartland Health Research Alliance (HHRA) to finance his Ramazzini Global Glyphosate Study. New management at HHRA decided to disclose the odd transaction years later because it was illegal, which forced Phil to admit he had been unethical yet again.
All that time he was cashing checks from lawyers who wanted to sue over non-certified-organic weedkillers. Scientists know plants are not little green people and so a weedkiller that only acts on a biological pathway in plants can't be killing humans but epidemiologists will happily correlate anything to anything if they have an agenda.
Like Landrigan.
This is all well known, yet the American Academy of Pediatrics continues to let him use their brand for legitimacy. They have had their own struggles with legitimacy. They adopted flawed epidemiology and increasingly unattainable guidelines on breastfeeding without considering they were undermining the mental health of working women or those who couldn't express milk very well. They weirdly want to ban Halloween after 6PM and walking to school until age 10, and diet soda(1) and GMOs forever. They bizarrely claimed 'a classroom of kids dies from gun violence' each day, except they classified "kids" as up to age 24.(2) Those are clear signs of an ideological struggle between classical pediatricians - let's help kids - and modern progressive evangelists involved in culture wars and using children to do it.
Like Landrigan.
He is a shill for the same organic groups that fund his conspiracy articles. Yet he is able to slither through AAP because they only require financial conflicts of interest if they are directly involved in a manuscript someone submits. If Landrigan gets a legal ally to submit something and then walks it through their peer-review, that is allowd. If he simply lies until he's exposed years later, that is okay.
Except it isn't okay if children are what matter. Like AAP claims now and once truly believed. Instead, they are letting a wolf guard the chickens, and the wolf is hungry.
At The Firebreak, Dr. David Zaruk has even more queasy detail about Landrigan's poisoning of American minds.
(1) Yet endorsing fruit juice. Look at the calories in fruit juice. If you added vitamin C to Coca-Cola, they'd be identical.
(2) Actual accidents which can be prevented, not criminal behavior, was just 9 children. Out of 68,000,000. Well, 96,000,000 million if you count people so old they have children as children.
Comments