USDA panel rejects neonic researcher-turned-activist Jonathan Lundgren integrity complaint

butterfly e

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

A three-member [USDA] Scientific Integrity Review Panel said Agricultural Research Service’s Jonathan Lundgren “did not provide credible and verifiable evidence to support his contention that his research was impeded and that he was restrained from communicating with the media and interacting with the broader scientific community.”

Lundgren’s whistleblower complaint against ARS before the Merit Systems Protection Board is proceeding.

. . . .

In his SIP complaint, Lundgren says he was subjected to “cumulative low-level harassment” after giving interviews to the press and serving as a reviewer for a Center for Food Safety study.

Lundgren said ARS superiors told him that his planned presentation for a European Food Safety Authority workshop pertained to “a very sensitive research topic and that (he) was not allowed to express any opinions on the matter – just data.”

The panel said ARS allowed Lundgren to participate in media interviews and submit manuscripts for publication after late March/early April of 2014, when Lundgren says he was told to refrain from talking to the press “and subjected to professional interference in violation of the USDA SIP.”

. . . .

The SIP says USDA scientists ”should refrain from making statements that could be construed as being judgements of or recommendations on USDA or any other federal government policy, either intentionally or inadvertently,” the panel said.

Read full, original post: Entomologist’s scientific integrity complaint rejected by USDA panel

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
Picture1
The FDA couldn’t find a vaccine safety crisis, so it buried its own research
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-11_42_59-AM-2
Viewpoint: NAD is the wellness grifters latest evidence-lite longevity fad. At least the mice are impressed.
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-12.15.17-PM
UK gene-editing milestone: Livestock barley that increases ruminant value and reduces methane emissions is first-approved CRISPR crop
vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-16-2026-02_56_53-PM
Financial incentives, over diagnosis, and weak oversight: Autism claims are driving up Medicare costs
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-3.15.53-PM
Chiropractors may no longer be modern-day snake oil salesmen, but the benefits of their therapy are limited–at best
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-11_27_01-AM-2
AI likely to improve health care, research shows—but not for blacks and ethnic minorities
Screenshot-2026-05-20-at-5.11.17-PM
Viewpoint: No, sugar doesn’t ‘feed’ cancer — common cancer myths, debunked

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.