Editorials & Other Articles

appal_jack

(3,813 posts)

20. What about Monsanto's own studies, Mike?

Sun Apr 28, 2013, 12:49 AM

Apr 2013

My understanding is that most of the industry-sponsored studies 'proving' the safety of GMO crops lasted only 90 days. I have even heard that when a study found deleterious effects, it was retroactively terminated prior to those effects showing up. Voila! No bad results...

Do you critique pro-gmo study methodologies, or only focus on the anti's?

And what of the very real financial bias within the companies themselves? ANti-gmo activists may have confirmation bias from fears or principles, but negative result for gmo safety could cost Monsanto billions; do you really think that they let the pursuit of knowledge be their only guide? Why do they place such heavy restrictions on the research that is done? Have you seen one of their non-disclosure agreements?

What of Monsanto's history? They lied about PCB's, they lied about Agent Orange. Why should the slate be wiped clean with their latest technology?

-app

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

condemning Monsanto with bad science is dumb [View all] mike_c Apr 2013 OP

Whatever. bunnies Apr 2013 #1

that study was also bogus.... mike_c Apr 2013 #2

Its a "personal bias" to say that poison is poison? bunnies Apr 2013 #5

it is when the actual evidence doesn't support that bias.... mike_c Apr 2013 #8

Its only called that by monsanto representatives socialsecurityisAAA Apr 2013 #9

What about Monsanto's own studies, Mike? appal_jack Apr 2013 #20

oh no, it's well understood that self study is about as objective... mike_c Apr 2013 #22

I agree that most scientists are good, ethical people. appal_jack Apr 2013 #23

Xenoestrogens are known to be toxic BethanyQuartz Apr 2013 #3

and yet folks doing bad science rely upon confirmation bias rather than... mike_c Apr 2013 #4

I'm not a chemist BethanyQuartz Apr 2013 #6

The body produces the estrogens we need socialsecurityisAAA Apr 2013 #10

You don't have to try to convince me xenoestrogens are horribly toxic BethanyQuartz Apr 2013 #11

Just giving you more ammo for your arsenal to use against monsanto reps socialsecurityisAAA Apr 2013 #12

More ammo is always good BethanyQuartz Apr 2013 #13

The wealthy can afford organic, free range food. socialsecurityisAAA Apr 2013 #19

No. Zoeisright Apr 2013 #15

K&R Progressive dog Apr 2013 #7

You have completely ignored the important part of that study. Zoeisright Apr 2013 #14

with all due respect... mike_c Apr 2013 #17

The academy protects its own shava May 2013 #24

Welcome to DU my friend! hrmjustin May 2013 #25

long time listener first time caller shava May 2013 #27

We are glad you came aboard! hrmjustin May 2013 #28

for more discussion on this on my G+ shava May 2013 #29

this paper describes areas KT2000 Apr 2013 #16

Thanks, Mike. (And, TBH, I wish Mrs. Haspel could do a similar article on the AGW issue as well.) AverageJoe90 Apr 2013 #18

I don't like Monsanto's practices either, uriel1972 Apr 2013 #21

That is a reasonable Newest Reality May 2013 #26

I assume you have a plan to fund this then? shava May 2013 #30

I appreciate your Newest Reality May 2013 #31

When people respond to a news story, it's as though it weren't to a real situation shava May 2013 #32

Ok, then. Newest Reality May 2013 #33