viernes, enero 31, 2014
Herbicide-resistant Weeds Run Riot in the U.S.
With best wishes
martes, enero 28, 2014
Genetic Fallacy: How Monsanto Silences Scientific Dissent
lunes, enero 27, 2014
Golden Rice: Scientific Realities
jueves, enero 23, 2014
GMO hype based on retracted science, by GM Watch
The Seralini paper was retracted for invalid reasons, but plenty of other GM-related studies are being retracted for the right reasons.
It's clear that the Seralini paper should not have been retracted, according to the criteria laid down by the Committee on Publication Ethics (experimental error, researcher misconduct, fraud and plagiarism). But plenty of other GM-related studies are having to be retracted because they meet the COPE criteria.
Retracted papers include two by the public face of GMO science, Pam Ronald. Ronald now languishes in the scientific doldrums after a central aspect of her research was discredited.
TO READ MORE:
miércoles, enero 22, 2014
Philpott responds to Nathanael Johnson
viernes, enero 17, 2014
México: Otro año contra el maíz transgénico, por Silvia Ribeiro
Por más de un año, la movilización popular ha logrado detener la liberación a gran escala de maíz transgénico en México. El movimiento lleva más de una década, con organizaciones campesinas, ambientalistas, artistas, intelectuales, pero en 2013 se amplió y afirmó frente a la amenaza de liberación comercial. Recordemos algunos hitos de este camino.
jueves, enero 16, 2014
Fakethrough! GMOs and the Capitulation of Science Journalism
miércoles, enero 15, 2014
Rounding Up Scientific Journals
It would have been perfectly appropriate for the journal to have written an editorial expressing its concerns. Instead, it seems the editors may have succumbed to industry pressure to do the wrong thing. The media coverage in the U.S. has been one-sided; criticism of Séralini’s study has been widely covered in mainstream press, while information about the conflicts of interest of critics have remained in the alternative press.
Anecdotally, we have heard several stories of journal editors being pressured by industry to suppress publication of papers that cast a commercial product in a poor light. How often does this intimidation occur? It would be a service for the editors and writers involved to make these stories public. Industry should not be allowed to intimidate medical and scientific journals, and journal editors need to have a united front against industry influence and a unified strategy on how best to combat it.
The retraction of the Séralini study is a black mark on medical publishing, a blow to science, and a win for corporate bullies.
Problemas de la insulina humana de origen transgénico
martes, enero 14, 2014
¡Victoria en Venezuela!
La Ley de Semillas, también conocida como ‘Ley Monsanto’, que pretendía ser aprobada en la Asamblea venezolana, será redactada de nuevo y su declaración inicial será debatida y redactada conjuntamente con los campesinos, guardianes de las semillas nativas. Se trata de una victoria de los movimientos sociales contra los transgénicos, quienes ya habían advertido sobre la peligrosidad de la Ley, que inicialmente favorecía la penetración de las trasnacionales de los agroquímicos en el país.
Some observations at the start of 2014, by Carmelo Ruiz-Marrero
* If we find it impossible to figure out the motivations of pro-GMO folks, keep in mind that they have an equally hard time trying to fathom our motivations, and are baffled by the fact that most of us have no personal financial gain whatsoever to obtain from a GMO ban.
* Not everyone on the anti-GMO camp is credible. Biotech supporters can easily choose from a wide variety of people and publications on our camp that routinely drag our credibility through the floor and use them as straw men, like Mike Adams/Natural News and Global Research, to give just two examples.
* Inevitably, some well intended folks make public statements with all kinds of inaccuracies. Many people on our side are still clueless about the difference between conventional breeding and GMO. Many believe Terminator technology is currently being used. And some folks even go on about Terminator sterile seeds and GMO genetic contamination in the same sentence without even stopping to think and realize that both things cannot be true at the same time.
* Some of our allies mix in the GMO issue with non-scientific and downright irrational conspiracy theories, like chemtrails, HAARP and illuminati. I have taken quite some flack at home for publicly calling people out on this stuff: http://www.80grados.net/agricultura-ecologica-y-seguridad-alimentaria/ One blatant example was the late health food guru Keshava Bhat, who was a rabid global warming denier and all-around enemy of science. (Unfortunately he is very popular among organic farmers and health conscious consumers in Puerto Rico)
* Let's face it, some people have joined the fight against GMO for completely nonsense reasons. Not much we can do about that. But for the sake of ethics and credibility, we have a duty to call out BS from wherever it comes, not just from our adversary.
Puerto Rico Biosafety
sábado, enero 11, 2014
El maíz mexicano, 20 años después, por Ana de Ita
viernes, enero 10, 2014
jueves, enero 09, 2014
Especial sobre Venezuela
RED POR UNA AMÉRICA LATINA LIBRE DE TRANSGÉNICOS
IV CONGRESO VENEZOLANO DE DIVERSIDAD BIOLÓGICA: LANZAMIENTO DE LA CAMPAÑA NACIONAL VENEZUELA LIBRE DE TRANSGÉNICOS
DECLARATORIA DEL IV CONGRESO VENEZOLANO DE DIVERSIDAD BIOLÓGICA
EL MINISTRO DE AGRICULTURA Y TIERRAS DIJO QUE LA POSICIÓN ES SEGUIR CON LOS PRODUCTOS CONVENCIONALES
martes, enero 07, 2014
¡Bien dicho! Respuesta de Nelson Alvarez Febles
De: nelson alvarez <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Fecha: 18 de diciembre de 2013, 9:31
Asunto: Crítica a artículo sobre transgénicos