Anti-GMO hysteria now most dangerous anti-science movement

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter BWV
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Movement
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the implications of anti-GMO sentiment and its perceived impact on science and public health. Participants explore the consequences of rejecting genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in various contexts, including food security, public health, and environmental policy. The conversation touches on historical instances of anti-GMO activism and its potential risks, as well as the role of regulatory bodies like the FDA in assessing GMO safety.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that anti-GMO activism poses significant risks to food security, particularly in developing countries facing famine.
  • Others highlight the historical context of anti-GMO sentiment, linking it to broader issues of public health and safety, such as the AIDS crisis and the rejection of food aid.
  • A few participants express skepticism about the impartiality of the FDA and the reliability of studies on GMO safety, suggesting that industry ties may influence research outcomes.
  • Concerns are raised about the tactics used by anti-GMO activists, including demands for transparency from scientists, which some view as intimidation.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of scientific consensus on GMOs, with some asserting that the consensus is clear, while others question the validity of this claim.
  • Participants discuss the challenges of finding truly independent research on GMOs and the potential biases in studies funded by industry sources.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the safety and implications of GMOs. There are multiple competing views regarding the role of anti-GMO activism, the reliability of scientific studies, and the influence of regulatory bodies.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about the safety of GMOs rely on the FDA's assessments, which are questioned by participants due to perceived conflicts of interest. The discussion also highlights the difficulty in obtaining unbiased research on GMOs, with some participants noting the potential for cherry-picking data to support specific viewpoints.

  • #121
The fact is that humans have been changing vegetables for thousands of years. Our ancestors did not have carrots, potatoes, corn, tomatoes, broccoli, and on and on. These were not naturally selected, so by the new standards are not acceptable. Virtually every food we eat would need to be labeled. It's ridiculous.