      Science should be the one thing we can trust.
           Research should be carried out for the sake of exploration and the results should be published, whether the results are positive or negative.
           Science, however, is increasingly being seen as managing to find the results those paying the bills on the research are hoping for.
           While that may be a cynical view of things, it seems science often does its best to support the view because widely differing findings on the same topic often come to light and leave the public having to determine who they should trust.
           The result is that many simply doubt the credability of scientific results in general, and that is scary since what should we trust if not the results of well-done scientific research?
           The most recent example of the situation surrounding the different results science can put forward which only serve to confuse revolves around glyphosate, and whether the widely used herbicide is a carcinogen. Or, to put it more simply, does glyphosate cause cancer in humans?
           The question hit the press when the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) panel released material in March 2015 which indicated glyphosate was probably carcinogenic to humans.
           IARC is a division of the World Health Organization and, given that creditability, the report carried a lot of weight. The report sent ripples throughout the world in terms of the safety of glyphosate, which is the active ingredient in Roundup herbicide.
           As an example, following the release of the IARC report, the European Union (EU) came close to banning glyphosate. One can imagine what such a ban could have done and in particular what impact it might have had on exports of grains and oilseeds from glyphosate-treated crops in other countries destined for EU markets.
           But we should hope the IARC work was carried out using sound research, and the results were backed up by data.
           Now another report has come up with differing results in terms of whether glyphosate causes cancer.
           In a paper published online recently in Critical Reviews in Toxicology, four independent panels of experts looked at the relevant research on glyphosate and whether it’s carcinogenic.
           The group of 16 scientists, from Canada, the United States, Denmark, Brazil, the United Kingdom and other countries, concluded glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans.
           And therein lies the problem.
           Whether you are a government official in the EU, or a consumer heading to the store, when putting your mind to the question of glyphosate-treated grain safety, you are first left to determine whose research and results you feel best about trusting.
           And there will always be that element of doubt based on the differing conclusions.
           It is such doubts which leave many simply tuning out scientific results, and that leaves them open to being swayed by other influences that should not be as trustworthy as good science research.Â
