A Question from a Hofstra Debater

-
I'm glad to report that I received a kind and inquisitive email from one of the anti-GM debaters from the Hofstra event.   Bhavani Jaroff is a food activist, chef and radio host.  I was glad to meet her as we certainly align on the vast majority of food-related issues.  She argued on the side promoting increased GM regulation and her presentation was fear-laden activist talking points without firm understanding of the science.

Recently I reached out, offering to explain the science behind her supporting evidence.  She declined the offer and suggested that she'd stay with Jeffrey Smith and Vandana Shiva as sources of scientific information in this area.

Of course, that made all of my hair stand on end.  Neither Smith nor Shiva will ever offer to hold your hand and navigate a scientific paper in biotech.  Because neither of them can.



Bhavani Jaroff gets huge cred for at least asking questions about biotech.


However, times may be a-changin'.  I was delighted to receive an email from Bhavani about the long-dead  "Gene IV" issue, the nugget gathered from a paper on the 35S promoter used in biotech.   She asked a series of good questions and I was happy to supply the answers.

I write this blog for two reasons:

1.  The last blog I wrote made it sound very much like she had shut off and didn't want to know any information except from sources that supported her biases.  I think that's not the case based on this correspondence. (last blog reflects this)

2.  It shows that as scientists we can begin to start an important process.  If those holding any opinions that run counter to science are presented with an opportunity to learn the hard facts, sometimes it can be attractive.  Bhavani is a good example. She's clearly super intelligent, wants to do the right thing, and certainly would not want to be deceived.  It is easy to interest people like her in looking further into the real science.

In this case even reaching out for more information and then comparing the info from multiple sources is a huge step.  Big kudos to Ms. Jaroff.   That made my day.


Popular posts from this blog

Food Babe Visits My University

-
Image
It was 6:30 pm in the lab and I was just thinking about the last things I'd need to get done before I could go home.  Typical night.  Usually I'm riding home about 7 pm, but an email popped up asking me if I was going to go watch the Food Babe.  A click on a link would take me to the note on a UF Dean for Students Good Food Revolution Events website.  Vani Hari would be spreading her corrupt message of bogus science and abject food terrorism here at the University of Florida. Oh joy. There's something that dies inside when you are a faculty member that works hard to teach about food, farming and science, and your own university brings in a crackpot to unravel all of the information you have brought to students. She might have started from honest roots.  Her story says she was duped by an organic yogurt stand (join the club) into buying taro toppings that were filled with artificial, non-organic colors.  She realized that she could use social m...
Read more

Film Review: The Need to Grow

-
Image
The recurring ads on Facebook pulled at me to watch The Need to Grow , a documentary film about food and farming.  As someone connected with these areas professionally and personally, I thought it would be worth a watch.  Here is a review. First the good things.  The film is nicely shot and well written.  The majority of the work builds on themes such as nutritious diets healthy soils, and efficient energy. Those are the central underlying values of the film, and ones that I wholly endorse.  However, where the film falls apart is in its approaches to achieve those end points.  Two of the "experts" recruited for the film are none other than Jeffrey Smith and Vandana Shiva, two people with little training in science or farming (and no, Vandana Shiva is not a physicist as the film claims).  The narrator is actress Rosario Dawson, who early in the film makes the proclamation, "Agriculture is the most destructive human activity on the planet." It is...
Read more

Shame on Pediatrics. Rejecting Scientist's Comments

-
 A lot has been said about the journal Pediatrics December 2023 Clinical Report on "Using GMOs on Children". The poor scholarship and citation bias are alarming, and the bias against safe technology is clear.  When I wrote to editor-in-chief Dr. Lewis First, he indicated that I was invited to submit a response to the article that would be posted below the article on its website. I submitted my response, and it was not published on the site. My guess is that it illuminated the bankruptcies of the article in a manner that ran counter to the authors', editor's and journal's narrative.  So I'll publish my comment here.  Dear Pediatrics Readership,  The article by Abrams et al. represents a stunning example of how misinformation spreads- even through a credible conduit. Pediatrics is a respected journal, so when a paper implies a technology is dangerous, physicians and the general public take note. That’s good. But if the message runs counter to the scientific con...
Read more