Editorials & Other Articles

HuckleB

(35,773 posts)

93. I don't need industry-funded research when there is plenty of independent research.

Thu Jul 14, 2016, 02:30 PM

Jul 2016

You seem to think that you can just push all the debunked anti-GMO nonsense out there, and not have it called out.

That's not ok.

http://fafdl.org/gmobb/about-those-industry-funded-gmo-studies/

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

105 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Don’t Eat the Yellow Rice: the Danger of Deploying Vitamin A Golden Rice [View all] Judi Lynn Jul 2016 OP

I dunno about this. longship Jul 2016 #1

that pesky human nature doesn't always comply with "what's best" eShirl Jul 2016 #2

that's not the point of this piece Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #14

What is the point then? cleanhippie Jul 2016 #29

Oh boy. Where to start? DetlefK Jul 2016 #3

We can be quite sure skepticscott Jul 2016 #5

Excellent rebuttal. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2016 #7

Nobel prize winners really don't have to worry about their career anymore. Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #11

In science, there is "wrong" and there is "wrong". DetlefK Jul 2016 #16

I agree all that, but signing onto this product is not going to be some huge embarrassment Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #46

So, William Shockley was right about race, and Linus Pauling was right about vitamin C? jberryhill Jul 2016 #56

I don't know who they are and I never said anything about being "right". DetlefK Jul 2016 #74

I'm sorry, but they are two very well known Nobel Prize winners jberryhill Jul 2016 #102

So you think you can compare single scientists to 107? HuckleB Jul 2016 #103

Notice the total lack of science offered by those waving the word science like a banner. kristopher Jul 2016 #78

Also, your reading of the piece is odd Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #12

Wrong. The resistance to it has been there from the beginning. HuckleB Jul 2016 #22

Wha??? Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #47

I see you choose to focus on the parts you like. HuckleB Jul 2016 #53

I'm not anti-GMO! Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #66

If you say so, and the consumer is often the farmer in this case. HuckleB Jul 2016 #70

"Asians have a natural aversion"... uriel1972 Jul 2016 #63

Insofar as this refers to the propensity marybourg Jul 2016 #24

You forgot a particularly glaring one Warpy Jul 2016 #55

What scientific criteria, specifically? kristopher Jul 2016 #76

For example: DetlefK Jul 2016 #79

So you don't really have a sense of what "criteria" means? kristopher Jul 2016 #81

re DetlefK Jul 2016 #82

Yeah, you're better off running from substantive discussion. kristopher Jul 2016 #84

*sigh* DetlefK Jul 2016 #85

Unless Greenpeace puts its "review" up for peer review in a legit journal, it really doesn't matter. HuckleB Jul 2016 #86

Another Pro-tip kristopher Jul 2016 #89

You are in no position to give anyone tips of any kind. HuckleB Jul 2016 #90

The more appropriate reaction for you would be shame. kristopher Jul 2016 #91

Pro-tip: The first rule of doing science is to be honest. kristopher Jul 2016 #87

We keep hearing how awful GMOs are. Skinner Jul 2016 #4

This source makes a mockery of the forum title. nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #8

Some GMOs are benign and others are harmful. Else You Are Mad Jul 2016 #54

Name one GMO on the market that is harmful compared to the non-GMO alternatives. HuckleB Jul 2016 #59

Harmful is a relative term... Else You Are Mad Jul 2016 #61

So you have nothing. HuckleB Jul 2016 #62

Yes, they can. Else You Are Mad Jul 2016 #67

Not really, no. HuckleB Jul 2016 #68

Well, both sides are just as fanatical... Else You Are Mad Jul 2016 #71

Not even close. HuckleB Jul 2016 #83

Counterpunch? Woo from Counterpunch? This would be hysterically funny if it weren't msanthrope Jul 2016 #6

maybe read the piece first Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #13

Ted Greiner is an HIV denialist. I have better things to do with my time than read woo msanthrope Jul 2016 #17

thanks for the info. I can't believe anyone even glances at Counterpunch anymore uhnope Jul 2016 #19

Source for him being an HIV denialist? Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #48

Precisely. That's HIV denialism. HIV is definitely transmitted msanthrope Jul 2016 #58

the paper was a while ago, and it looked like he was merely saying the evidence Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #64

Indeed...his HIV denialism is probably why he's now characterized as an ex-professor. nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #72

Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of it there, these days. HuckleB Jul 2016 #23

There are GMOs and GMOs. Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2016 #9

Monoculture was a problem before GMOs. progressoid Jul 2016 #33

Yes, monoculture predates it. Thanks for interesting excerpt. . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2016 #41

For a minute I thought this was ms liberty Jul 2016 #10

And only 99 cents! I love it! nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #18

Stop eating tostones, too bluedye33139 Jul 2016 #26

Really? The goal of the yellow-rice people was to shame GMO critics? Igel Jul 2016 #15

I don't think that was the whole goal, but I do know that yellow rice is a big part of PR for Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #49

And yet GMOs destroy people's lives regularly fasttense Jul 2016 #20

I find this line of thinking bizarre. Skinner Jul 2016 #21

First, glyphosate is not a GMO. Second, Seneff's silliness has been debunked over and over again. HuckleB Jul 2016 #25

Round Up is killing you too. fasttense Jul 2016 #27

This is nuts. Archae Jul 2016 #32

No, it's not. Why do you want to go back to harsher herbicides? HuckleB Jul 2016 #36

Drop the binary thinking. There are GMOs and GMOs. Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2016 #39

First, without GMOs glyphosate use would be down by over 50%. What do you think Round-Up ready seeds fasttense Jul 2016 #104

So you prefer more toxic products used on non-GMO plants. HuckleB Aug 2016 #105

Illogical & Foolish in the extreme to condemn ALL GMO because SOME GMO has issues. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2016 #38

Total crap course. HERVEPA Jul 2016 #51

It is important to read the entire article, not just the title. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #28

Huh? progressoid Jul 2016 #30

So subsistence farmers, who cannot afford to pay, get it free. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #31

It's not anyone's market because of frightened luddites around the world. progressoid Jul 2016 #34

Weeds? Use a 5% vinegar solution. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #40

Won't work on these. progressoid Jul 2016 #42

Vinegar works on many common weeds, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #45

It's interesting that you get debunked, but you just repeat yourself as if it hadn't happened. HuckleB Jul 2016 #60

I am an organic gardener, and know a few others. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #65

Anecdotes about using old technology that isn't safer aren't really going to change reality. HuckleB Jul 2016 #69

Neither is believing industry-funded "research" that is designed guillaumeb Jul 2016 #92

I don't need industry-funded research when there is plenty of independent research. HuckleB Jul 2016 #93

If you read the original post, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #94

FFS, you are going to use the debunked IARC nonsense? HuckleB Jul 2016 #95

From your very own citation: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #96

So you don't know what the IARC's job is. HuckleB Jul 2016 #97

Your own citation, the one that you chose to make your point, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #98

You really don't get it, do you? HuckleB Jul 2016 #99

Agreed, it is rather sad. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #100

Again, you show that you don't know what the job of the IARC is. HuckleB Jul 2016 #101

You might want to look a bit further. HuckleB Jul 2016 #44

The Anthropology of Genetically Modified Crops kristopher Jul 2016 #77

exactly. Fast Walker 52 Jul 2016 #50

Maybe DU should have a "Bad Reads" or "Idiotic Reads" forum. progressoid Jul 2016 #35

Something needs to change. HuckleB Jul 2016 #37

Yeah... thedeadchucken Jul 2016 #43

Your ignorance concerning science and inability to recognize a bad and disgusting source is just sad HERVEPA Jul 2016 #52

Don't eat the yellow snow either! Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel Jul 2016 #57

GMOs, Greenpeace and Nobel Laureates Judi Lynn Jul 2016 #73

National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine kristopher Jul 2016 #75

Imaginary Organisms NeoGreen Jul 2016 #80

A great discussion that shows the ludicrous nature of the OP. HuckleB Jul 2016 #88