Bioscience Warfare

Within a scientific world rarely seen by the general public, the response by Syngenta and associated researchers to his ongoing studies was, Hayes says, scientifically appalling. According to Hayes, Syngenta hired a number of scientists from the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, Michigan State University, the University of Florida, and Texas Tech University, among others, with the intent of discrediting his work. "This is a group of individuals whose sole goal is to prove me wrong and to keep atrazine on the market," says Hayes. "Their science is so poor, yet they continually try to damage or hurt my findings by saying they can't reproduce my work under the pretense that they're doing real science."

For instance, Hayes contends, a group of scientists led by John Giesy, an aquatic toxicology professor at Michigan State, did a study that exposed frogs to atrazine and claimed to find no effect on testosterone levels. "They took blood samples from juvenile males ... when it was not breeding time or season, and stressed them by anesthetizing them for hours," says Hayes. "It was as if I had taken [testosterone] samples from a 3-year-old boy. They specifically designed the study to fail." In another study, the same scientists treated green frogs with atrazine and claimed they found no change in the gonads. Hayes took a closer look at their study. Ninety percent of the animals died during the experiment, which, he contends, should have rendered any change (or lack thereof) seen in the remaining 10 percent statistically meaningless.

In another study led by Giesy, scientists claimed that they did get hermaphrodite frogs when they exposed the amphibians to atrazine. But, the scientists claimed, they found similar changes in the sex organs of the control group of frogs that they did not dose with atrazine. Thus, the study claimed, those changes were naturally occurring. After a closer look Hayes found that the control group of frogs was contaminated with more atrazine than the test group. It's possible, he notes, that the scientists didn't realize that tap water in Michigan is already contaminated with significant levels of atrazine. Giesy did not return calls or e-mails requesting comment for this story.

Another researcher whom Hayes worked with closely on the Ecorisk panel, professor James Carr of Texas Tech University, published a study in the toxicology journal edited by Kendall. The Carr study, Hayes contends, actually backs up his own findings, showing, with a level of statistical significance even greater than that found in Hayes' experiments, that developing frogs become hermaphrodites when exposed to low levels of atrazine. In their summary, however, Carr and his fellow scientists working on the study concluded that atrazine is "not lethal and not directly toxic to developing frogs." Hayes says that the scientists released this conclusion in the popular press before the actual study was published, spreading a misleading impression about atrazine and, consequently, his own research. Carr did not respond to this claim, but it seems unlikely the academic would have been involved in disseminating information to the general press.

Syngenta responded to Hayes' contentions with a prepared statement, declining to answer specific questions or allegations. Sherry Ford, communications manager for Syngenta Crop Protection, the U.S. arm of Syngenta AG, issued the statement, which reads, in part: "Mr. Hayes' allegations are simply not true. They serve only to distract others from the real work at hand, which is the ongoing study of atrazine and any potential effect on amphibian development. Syngenta is fully committed to this endeavor and to the safe use of atrazine."

According to the statement, Syngenta feels the EPA and a scientific advisory panel have reviewed all available research, and the company believes the EPA's conclusion that there is insufficient evidence to say whether atrazine is harmful or not. "Our focus continues to be the pursuit of sound science in this emerging area of study, and we are confident that the safety and benefits of atrazine will continue to be confirmed," the statement says.

So far, Hayes acknowledges, the attacks on his research and credibility have had no official effect on his status at UC Berkeley, but they have created enough stress and tension within the Berkeley faculty and administration that Hayes no longer wants to work there. He says he plans to accept an offer to relocate to Duke University.

In the meantime, he continues to submit papers to scientific journals explaining his experiments and challenging his opponents' research. Overall, though, he's severely disappointed in the reaction of the scientific community to what he believes is a campaign to stop research into atrazine's risks. "I thought only criminals and desperate people lied, not educated people," he says. "My 11-year-old looks over their experiments and sees that they have no controls. They can't be that dumb, so they're lying."

Tyrone Hayes has unexpectedly found himself in the company of scientists around the world who say they have also experienced pressures related to university research alliances, and also seen the priorities of private sponsors influence what should have been impartial research findings.

John Losey, an entomologist at Cornell University, says he was extremely careful when publishing the results of his study of the effects of genetically modified "BT-corn" on monarch butterflies in May 1999. BT-corn, a grain variant genetically engineered to kill the European corn borer, is patented by Monsanto Corp. To test for possible unintended side effects from the pest-resistant BT-corn, Losey fed monarch larvae milkweed leaves dusted with BT-corn pollen. Losey noted that 44 percent of the larvae that consumed the engineered pollen died. The BT-corn produces pollen that contains crystalline endotoxin, which, as it turns out, poisons monarch caterpillars.