HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Odin2005 » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Odin2005

Profile Information

Name: Taylor Selseth
Gender: Male
Hometown: Ulen, MN
Home country: US
Current location: Moorhead, MN
Member since: Fri Nov 11, 2005, 09:42 PM
Number of posts: 48,255

Journal Archives

Study linking GM crops and cancer questioned.

New Scientist gets called a Monsanto shill in 3, 2, 1...

Are the findings reliable?

There is little to suggest they are. Tom Sanders, head of nutritional research at King's College London, says that the strain of rat the French team used gets breast tumours easily, especially when given unlimited food, or maize contaminated by a common fungus that causes hormone imbalance, or just allowed to age. There were no data on food intake or tests for fungus in the maize, so we don't know whether this was a factor.

But didn't the treated rats get sicker than the untreated rats?

Some did, but that's not the full story. It wasn't that rats fed GM maize or herbicide got tumours, and the control rats did not. Five of the 20 control rats 25 per cent got tumours and died, while 60 per cent in "some test groups" that ate GM maize died. Some other test groups, however, were healthier than the controls.

Toxicologists do a standard mathematical test, called the standard deviation, on such data to see whether the difference is what you might expect from random variation, or can be considered significant. The French team did not present these tests in their paper. They used a complicated and unconventional analysis that Sanders calls "a statistical fishing trip".

Anthony Trewavas of the University of Edinburgh, UK, adds that in any case, there should be at least as many controls as test rats there were only 20 of the former and 80 of the latter to show how variably tumours appear. Without those additional controls, "these results are of no value", he says.


Rest of the article here:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22287-study-linking-gm-crops-and-cancer-questioned.html

Sounds like the anti-GMO French group that did this study are guilty of bad science in order to get the results they wanted.

Study linking GM crops and cancer questioned.

New Scientist gets called a Monsanto shill in 3, 2, 1...

Are the findings reliable?

There is little to suggest they are. Tom Sanders, head of nutritional research at King's College London, says that the strain of rat the French team used gets breast tumours easily, especially when given unlimited food, or maize contaminated by a common fungus that causes hormone imbalance, or just allowed to age. There were no data on food intake or tests for fungus in the maize, so we don't know whether this was a factor.

But didn't the treated rats get sicker than the untreated rats?

Some did, but that's not the full story. It wasn't that rats fed GM maize or herbicide got tumours, and the control rats did not. Five of the 20 control rats 25 per cent got tumours and died, while 60 per cent in "some test groups" that ate GM maize died. Some other test groups, however, were healthier than the controls.

Toxicologists do a standard mathematical test, called the standard deviation, on such data to see whether the difference is what you might expect from random variation, or can be considered significant. The French team did not present these tests in their paper. They used a complicated and unconventional analysis that Sanders calls "a statistical fishing trip".

Anthony Trewavas of the University of Edinburgh, UK, adds that in any case, there should be at least as many controls as test rats there were only 20 of the former and 80 of the latter to show how variably tumours appear. Without those additional controls, "these results are of no value", he says.


Rest of the article here:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22287-study-linking-gm-crops-and-cancer-questioned.html

Sounds like the anti-GMO French group that did this study are guilty of bad science in order to get the results they wanted.

Note to tin-foilers, this is what an ACTUAL conspiracy looks like:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014243712

I am on SSI. I am constantly hounded by RW assholes because of it.

I've been called a leach, a parasite. I've had people tell my that "Asperger's Syndrome does not exist and is an excuse to give welfare to lazy nerds". This is why I fear that the video may not hurt Romney as much as we would think. These assholes are everywhere and they vote.

This GD thread belongs in Creative Speculation

Why hasn't this been locked? The OP invokes the Chemtrail nonsense seriously.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021344496

Apparently saying you will vote 3rd Party is A-OK now.

Even though it's clearly against community standards.

I'm definitely voting and undecided. probably 3rd party
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1341477

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

YOUR COMMENTS:

this post shows that the author does not vote for Democrats

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Fri Sep 14, 2012, 09:37 AM, and voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The post does not attack any DU member or the democratic party as a whole, just states the posters opinions....I don't like some of the things our president has done, but he has my support...we had greens here during the 01-04 period who made discussion lively...I don't see a foul Here IMHO...
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I don't see anything offensive here. So, the poster doesn't vote for Democrats. Convince them.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No, this post shows that the author votes for whoever most closely aligns with their POV. Which is how I hope MOST people vote. There is nothing here 'disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.' except the alert.

Quit feeding the trolls, people!

When you see an inflammatory thread made by a low post count poster, IGNORE IT, the troll who gets an angry reaction out of you is a troll who is winning at his/her job at making DU suck.

Mitt wouldn't pass a Turing Test.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

He must be a robot with faulty AI.

Not liking an offensive movie is not an excuse to riot and kill people.

Why do these folks in Libya and Egypt think the US government has anything to do with an Israeli guy's offensive low-budget film?

9/11 has become the yearly 2-Minute Hate

Keeping people terrorized and scared so they continue to give up their civil liberties.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next »