US-RTK and Intimidation

-
I've heard a lot about how public records requests can be used to intimidate and harass scientists.  I know that the documents requested from me will likely be used to harm my reputation, as I see things that will be taken from context and used to attack my credibility. It is not a question of if, it is a question of when. 

A twitter post circulated yesterday where scientists are living in fear of a few that are agents of the "biotech/chemical industry" that successfully intimidate others, forcing them to shun their morals, ethics and responsibility and "look the other way". 

This is how you are being painted by a registered dietitian, a person most likely dispensing food and health advice to paying customers.  


Hey you, flimsy university scientist... You're either a bully or a spineless twit, either way playing perfectly into the hands of the chemical industry.


I present this because this is the perception.  This is what people in health-related professions believe.  You're a malleable idiot that can't stand up for the obvious truth, because you are intimidated by someone, or some company, that is making up your mind for you. 


Here's the Irony. 

Since the US-RTK request of public records I have received amazing support from the academic community, and it is growing. However, how many scientists have written op-eds, how many have made public statements, how many have rallied national organizations on behalf of the fourteen that are being bullied by this well-financed organization set out to harm science?  

Not many. 

How many of you have signed up to help with GMO Answers?

Maybe one, and I work with him, and he's not happy about this.

WHY?  Because US-RTK is well financed by organizations like the Organic Consumers Association ($46,000 to US-RTK last year, which is exactly $46,000 more than I got from the 14 companies they claim influence my science), and to satisfy future payments they need to be harassing scientists, most of all, discrediting the effective voices in biotech education.

Does Intimidation Work? 

Yes.  One of my colleagues that used to post on GMO Answers says that he's not doing it any more.  

A junior professor at a major university sent me this email: 

Click on it to embiggen.  I told him to get some guts and get involved anyway.  We'll see what happens. 


This was posted on a message board on Nation of Change:







Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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