haden's wrote in that email i think i was just naive and it clearly did not lead to any policy decision we all have decades of experience in the industry and then a full week reputations to maintain and that means that there is no point in those being responding to the influence of one stakeholder over another because those reputations would be destroyed i can say absolutely and. if the goalie categorically this paper was ghost written we all imports our own sections to the paper there was no input involvement or influence of the review on months and thinking well it seems apparent that monsanto actually fears real independent authentic science monsanto said itself it feared the i.r. preview when it found n n 2014 this is before sat down before the classification monsanto says it fears this it says internally that it knew it had vulnerability in epidemiology toxicology geno talks monsanto officials even predicted that glyphosate would warrant a possible or probable rating with respect to s. an echo. you know absence of process is defined as a peer review and i understand that and that's