>> By far most independent studies (listed on Wikipedia) conclude that glyphosate is not or is unlikely to be carcinogenic.

Well, if there was no concern about the objectivity of the science that might be more relevant. Unfortunately the whole article is pointing out that the science done may not be accurate, as Monsanto has been putting financial incentives against honest research.

We may like to tell ourselves that scientific studies are beyond corruption, but that's plainly not true. There was even a time when a "scientific study" concluded leaded gasoline was safe. This is why financial backers must be disclosed in respected research.

As a consumer, if a CEO wants to consistently subject himself to a 10x dose of the chemical that will be remaining on/in my food, maybe I'd have more faith that our incentives align.