The forces arrayed against Genetic Modification of food sources have no shame. They come out of their lairs and put up misleading claims, but sometimes they offend their colleagues too much.
Genetically Modified is considered by some fanatics to be scary. Franken Food they say.
The noisiest and most publicized of the GM opponents is Jeremy Rifkin, whose predictions about the future of GM Food and his criticisms have been mostly about his anti progress agenda and his dislike of the biotech revolution.
But this little note is about a French natural food advocacy group opposed to GM that got confused about what’s science and what’s propaganda for political purposes. Kinda like the Union of Concerned Scientists.
They got exposed for putting up a junk science article claiming rodents got more cancer if they ate Genetically Modified (GM) Corn (called Maize in the plant science biz).
Those Frenchie French researchers cheated a little on the choice of strain of rodent fed the GM corn? Shocking.
The retraction statement by the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology said:
the retraction was because the study’s small sample size meant no definitive conclusions could be reached.
The sample sizes too small–well how about they did a toxicology study that was based on a premise that invites cheating.
I’d say the methodology is less reliable than just inadequate sample sizes. How about plausibility? I get tired of these people putting up studies with endpoints that are statistical, not biological. If you get my meaning. Premature death is a statistical phenomenon as used by cheaters, not a biological/pathological event. We can do better if we really do investigations instead of desk top number crunching.
But you be the judge. looks like the critics also know the danger of doing “tumor” as an endpoint in mice.
We don’t know what causes cancer, then we call “tumors” in mice cancer when we know that they naturally have high rates of “tumors” anyway.
And after that it goes downhill. In pursuit of a scare about genetically modified food plants.
Genetic modification (GM) has been going on for a long time with great success to improve plant strains. Norman Borlaug, agronomist extraordinaire raised in Iowa and grad of U of Minnesota, won a Nobel Prize and was called the father of the green revolution because he developed methods for producing better strains of wheat and corn, even rice. He is credited with saving 1 billion people from starvation and is one reason Thomas Malthus was a failure. GM is now much more developed and allows for developing insect resistance.
Recently a Vitamin A containing rice was developed to prevent deficiencies in populations that have mostly rice diets, to prevent blindness. Greenpeace was condemned and criticized for trying to have the rice outlawed because of its irrational and junk science opposition to GM.
I am handsome because of a special genetic modification that eliminated the ugly from Irish ancestors, they couldn’t find a mate.
Beef bulls are selectively bred to produce offspring with mo’and better beef.
Genetic manipulation doesn’t produce toxic or carcinogenic DNA and nuclear material.
“Natural” and “Organic” is a religious word game with secret meaning for fanatics.