The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a World Health Organization subsidiary mired in controversy, picked Dr. Elisabete Weiderpass as its new director on May 17th. Critics hoped IARC would mend unscientific practices used under former director Chris Wild by filling the vacancy with an outsider, but Weiderpass will likely champion its status quo.
Scientists scrutinize IARC research for frenetic labeling of consumer products like coffee, baby powder, and glyphosate (found in Roundup weedkiller) as possible carcinogens. These findings have been contradicted or questioned by esteemed health organizations, including the National Cancer Institute, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and European regulators.
The IARC withdrew its claims on coffee years later. Meanwhile, baby powder producer Johnson & Johnson is battling 6,000 lawsuits thanks to IARC claims, despite wide disagreement among scientists on its carcinogenic potential.
IARC research gets pilloried partly because it evaluates whether products are possible carcinogens at any exposure level, not whether humans are put at risk by consuming them at real-world doses. Some of their human research involves data reported from patient memory, which is notoriously inaccurate.
But that’s the toned down version of the IARC’s shortcomings. In reality, IARC is a shell-company for left-wing environmentalists, greedy trial lawyers, and boilerplate pseudoscientists. The organization has bashed heads with the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology over the past two years due to its deliberate omission of science that disputes its boneheaded claims.
View Article