the latest thoughts-articles-musings from gmowtf and friends:
Dr. Steve Savage emailed me. I emailed him back. He's a pro-GMO scientist who has worked in academia, for DuPont, and writes for Forbes, GMOanswers.com, and BioFortified. I Invited him to come and debate some GM-critical scientists at Cornell University, for all to see. I hope he accepts my offer.
Bill, let’s be honest: your new episode on GMOs is absolute poppycock - and it has significantly damaged your reputation. The entire series feels like cheap propaganda, and I literally feel stupider after wasting my time watching it. If you continue to make similar content, you will completely sacrifice your credibility as a science communicator.
Who would have thought that at Cornell University, arguably the most highly regarded agricultural university in the world, no scientist would speak for the benefits and safety of GMOs?
Lynas’ main charge is that criticism of genetic engineering (GE) in agriculture is anti-science. His focus is on what he calls “the antis”—activists opposed to genetically engineered crops—but by setting up this straw man, and ignoring complex scientific concerns about GE while making summary judgments about its safety and value, he appears to be attempting to discourage real scientific debate.
Environmental, food safety and organic farming organizations are demanding clear public information about a controversial plan to conduct an open air field trial of genetically engineered (GE) diamondback moths at Cornell’s agricultural experiment station in Geneva, New York.
Cornell, one of the world's leading academic institutions, has abandoned scientific objectivity, writes Stacy Malkan - and instead made itself a global hub for the promotion of GM crops and food. Working with selected journalists and industry-supported academics, Cornell's so-called 'Alliance for Science' is an aggressive propaganda tool for corporate biotech and agribusiness.
The authors conclude, “Based on … weaknesses in the study design, we believe it is questionable as to whether any objective or meaningful conclusion can be drawn from the Alliance’s initiative.”
“Yet there is no balance to this – nothing in the materials or programs of “The Alliance for Science” is anything but entirely pro-biotechnology. They are without balance or significant critical evaluation of the range of agricultural systems and technologies that exist in food production today,” notes Elizabeth Henderson, organic farmer from Wayne County.
We should continue to campaign for labeling GMOs. We should call upon Cornell to disband its propaganda arm for GMOs – the Alliance for Science – or repurpose it under the guidance of a board that represents the interests of the people of NY State. We should not oppose continuing research in genetic engineering, but we should demand that equal resources go into agroecology.