Michael Pollan Doesn't Just Hate Agriculture, He Hates All Scientists

Michael Pollan, food activist and journalist, is the proverbial man trapped in the past in...

Cornell Students Want Their Own Kangaroo Court For GMOs

Cornell students want to "debate" GMOs tomorrow, and while finding anti-science activists is easy...

Microbiome: 'Emerging Medical Science' Is The New Term For Chasing A Fad

Nestle, the world's largest food company, has decided to embrace optimizing our microbiome, which...

California Methane Caps Could Hurt Organic Farming Most

California Governor Jerry Brown has signed a new law demanding that dairy cows stop producing so...

User picture.
picture for Robert H Olleypicture for Tommaso Dorigopicture for Steve Hentgespicture for Camilo Tabinas y Apitapicture for Fred Phillipspicture for Alex Alaniz
Hank CampbellRSS Feed of this column.

I'm the founder of Science 2.0® in 2006 and, since June of 2015, the President of the American Council on Science and Health.

Revolutionizing... Read More »

I have often argued that the pro-life movement has a disconnect about actual life when it comes to science. I don't mean about the health issues of abortion or birth control, I mean about saving babies using science. They seem to think science should only help after a baby is born, exactly the opposite of the argument they make about the beginning of life during abortion debates.
How do you know the paper claiming GMO toxicity is in a journal that isn't very reputable? They don't have $9 to renew their domain.
Schedule press event first, create study second. Dr. Gilles-Eric Seralini, the go-to researcher for Big Organic marketing groups and the partisan media enablers (SourceWatch, US Right To Know, Mother Jones) they fund, finally wrote something accurate in a paper - "it was not designed as a scientific experiment", even though the Deniers For Hire on his side claim it was just that.
"The X-Files" resumes tonight and if, like me, you might give it a try, here are 5 good episodes to watch in advance. 

I was able to sort through a lot of shows thanks to a blizzard in New York City, which kept me inside and was not accompanied by losing electricity. My non-loss is your gain.

In the early days of food labeling and regulations, it was just about mandating honesty. If you go to buy mayonnaise, you shouldn’t have to wonder if it is mayonnaise, the government reasoned, so they passed a law in 1938 requiring honesty about ingredients. The charlatans went out of the business and the free market that remained embraced “better” ingredients as a marketing distinction. It worked well.

Campbell Soup Co., which makes a variety of foods including the namesake soups and Prego pasta sauce, has declared their intention to put labels on their foods noting they are “partially produced with genetic engineering.”

Some are lamenting this will be a slippery slope to process labels being used as warnings, and undermining confidence in modern agriculture, while anti-science groups are hailing it as a victory. US Right To Know, an outreach group funded by organic food corporations and aided by the partisan attack site SourceWatch, is certainly declaring this a big win for their clients.