General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums“Independent” GMO Researcher Forced to Release Emails Showing $25K Grant from Monsanto
(ANTIMEDIA) Oakland, CA In January of 2015, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by Oakland organization U.S. Right to Know requested email records between academics, scientists, and representatives of Big Agriculture.
The FOIA requests were sent to 14 scientists at four public universities, requesting information on communications and email records.
The FOIA findings included communications of well-known, staunch proponents of GM crops like Kevin Folta, a professor and chairman of the Horticultural Sciences Department at the University of Gainesville, who received a $25,000 grant from Monsanto. The emails reveal the funds could be used at [his] discretion in support of [his] research and outreach projects.
About 4,600 pages of emails, among other records, were obtained from Folta.
According to the communications, the ties between allegedly objective scientists and Big Agriculture run deep. According to Nature Magazine,
The documents show that Monsanto paid for Foltas travel to speak to US students, farmers, politicians and the media. Other industry contacts occasionally sent him suggested responses to common questions about GM organisms.
While its not uncommon for scientists to receive corporate funding through grants, these revelations are troublesome because Folta is regularly sold to the public as an independent authority on GMOs. In fact, the biotech industry-funded site, GMOanswers.com which seeks to dispel myths about the dangers of GM foods and pesticides has still not disclosed Foltas financial ties to Monsanto.
According to an article from Nature Magazine, U.S. Right to Know is probing what it sees as collusion between the agricultural biotechnology industry and academics who study science, economics and communication.
In laymans terms, t
he organization is made up of ordinary people who seek to make corruption transparent and obliterate illusions of objectivity.
Executive director of U.S. Right to Know, Gary Ruskin, said one of the reasons the organization made the requests is that The agri-chemical industry has spent $100 million dollars in a massive public relations campaign.The public has the right to know the dynamics.
It looks like the FOIA targets are doing everything they can to avoid revealing information. According to Wired, Legal teams at the universitiesNebraska, University of Florida, UC Davis, and the University of Illinoisare currently evaluating the situation, but some scientists have already spoken out against the FOIA request.
FOIA requests might be one of the greatest threats to corruption and revolving door politics, which explains why those who oppose transparency are doing everything they can to prevent them.
Open records requests are increasingly being used to harass and intimidate scientists and other academic researchers, or to disrupt and delay their work, a report from The Union of Concerned Scientists claims.
Academic institutions and other involved parties need to be prepared to respond to these requests in a way that protects the privacy and academic freedom of researchers while complying with the law and respecting the publics right to information.
Kevin Folta did what he could to avoid blame, saying, Im just a teacher, trying to distill a controversial literature for the general public.
I turned over everything [requested by the FOIAs] immediately, he said.
There is no such thing as objective science when a researcher receives tens of thousands of dollars from the GM producers themselves, then goes on to promote their financiers products. Corporate collusion between government bureaucracies and educational institutions has become a serious issue in the U.S. that has corrupted objectivity in nearly every sector of American life.
If there is corruption in our society that you wish to make transparent, you can file your own Freedom of Information Act request, just like U.S. Right to Know did.
This article (Independent GMO Researcher Forced to Release Emails Showing $25K Grant from Monsanto) is free and open source.
http://theantimedia.org/independent-gmo-researcher-forced-to-release-emails-showing-25k-grant-from-monsanto/
Quote from article:
The documents show that Monsanto paid for Foltas travel to speak to US students, farmers, politicians and the media. Other industry contacts occasionally sent him suggested responses to common questions about GM organisms.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)"There is no such thing as objective science when a researcher receives tens of thousands of dollars from the GM producers themselves, then goes on to promote their financiers products. Corporate collusion between government bureaucracies and educational institutions has become a serious issue in the U.S. that has corrupted objectivity in nearly every sector of American life."
If there's nothing to worry about then why the collusion?
4lbs
(6,865 posts)GMOs so that a ballot measure that would have required labeling of GMOs was defeated. They made people fear that such labeling would actually cause the price of food to go up.
They always try to hit voters with such false statements. The only cost would have been a total of $1 million statewide to regulate such labeling.
http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_37,_Mandatory_Labeling_of_Genetically_Engineered_Food_(2012)
The ballot measure was defeated by a very narrow vote of 51.5 to 48.5
If Proposition 37 had been approved, it would have:
Required labeling on raw or processed food offered for sale to consumers if the food is made from plants or animals with genetic material changed in specified ways.
Prohibited labeling or advertising such food as "natural."
Exempted from this requirement foods that are "certified organic; unintentionally produced with genetically engineered material; made from animals fed or injected with genetically engineered material but not genetically engineered themselves; processed with or containing only small amounts of genetically engineered ingredients; administered for treatment of medical conditions; sold for immediate consumption such as in a restaurant; or alcoholic beverages."
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)Something close to 90 percent of Californians initially approved of it. But big bucks and relentless propaganda took their toll. By the time November rolled around, support had eroded to such an extent that the proposition lost.
It's really quite frightening how easily manipulated we all are by propaganda.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)That's why the ridiculous bill had so much support, in the first place.
Getting the real information out is the hard part, and yet it happened.
Hmm.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)the labels would be on the shelves within a week.
We are so manipulated it's sickening.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Or lets have a look a Kevin Folta's appearance on Joe Rogan podcast from June 4, 2015. Just a couple of months ago.
Near the very beginning of the podcast Folta lies again
. At 3:05 he states:
Kevin Folta: "I should note right off the top, I have nothing to do with Monsanto. I'm not, you know, I don't work for them, I'm a scientist-
Joe Rogan: sarcastic "Wait a minute I've read online that you are a shill."
Kevin Folta: laughs "That's right-"
Joe Rogan: "You are NOT a shill?"
Kevin Folta: "I am not a shill"
Unbelievable how this guy just lies straight to Joe's face. Wish Joe would've asked him who paid for his trip to come to his studio.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)were provided as entertainment? LOL
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)He even had a TV show after that now he has a huge following on the internet. But yes he did do fear factor back then
His podcasts/ youtube shows are interesting.... he gets a lot of amazing guests
closeupready
(29,503 posts)But I think he's Republican - and he seems like another self-styled Rush Limbaugh, and the line of questioning has that undertone to it which I have no patience for.
Cheers.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)He has libertarian leanings, not a ron paul fan,
You sound closed minded..You don't need to get out more
just quit the TV.
List of some of his guests
Scientist Brian Cox
writer ; Graham Hancock
Cenk Uygur.. young turks
comedian .. Dave Attell
actress ..Amy Schumer
Rosseanne Barr
He's all over the place. with his guests , look for the guests I like and he's not a bad interviewer...................... anyway
What the hell does this have to do with the monsanto liar?
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Its not TV so the language is rough both do stand up
- (1:50:31) and (1:53:57) ..... before this they talk about Trump if you want to see what they think about him.
Jeff Ross did a lot of comedy roasts on the comedy channel.
azmom
(5,208 posts)The day. Thank you US right to know.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)Settlement?)
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Council_on_Science_and_Health
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ACSH_Scientific_advisors
they can't call them "dirty-cop scientists" because there's more of them than there are dirty cops: it should be "ACSH cops"
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Once upon a time, actors playing doctors and stuff said smoking was good for one's health.
Now, things are more "rational."
Trial sans Error: How Pharma-Funded Research Cherry-Picks Positive Results
Romulox
(25,960 posts)Doesn't it?
immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Michael Halpern, an expert on scientific integrity at the Union of Concern Scientists in Washington DC, says that
Folta's case suggests that universities should do more to educate researchers on what constitutes a conflict of interest and what types of financial relationships should be disclosed.
KT2000
(20,588 posts)corporations pay for scientists and that is by sending unsolicited checks. A friend who was doing research in nuclear pharmacy received such checks from pharmaceutical companies. Open the mailbox - and voila!
That is money we won't know about.
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)$25,000 is a piddling grant in the academic sciences.
That said, Folta is as shill as shills get. What a cafone.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)and we don't know if he gets money on the side either.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)They might not get the right result.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Kevin Folta is an ethical scientist. The fact that your preconception go against the science he has done does not change that.
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/09/15/georgias-wayne-parrott-time-to-end-transparency-double-standard-targeting-biotech-scientists/