Please Stop Foodbabe-ing!
The new headline circulating in the pro-genetic-engineering social media space is depressing. With joy and gusto, it is being promoted and circulated by those that appreciate the utility of genetic engineering and chemical inputs to safely address specific ag challenges.
The claim is that compounds approved for, and used by, organic production are potentially dangerous. Well, not so much potentially dangerous as outright carcinogenic.
The main shock to most readers is that organic production uses any chemical inputs at all, as the organic halo implies that no chemicals are used. Of course, we know that to not be true, it is just other chemicals that may be used.
But just like other chemicals, the dose makes the poison. For the most part these chemicals have low toxicity, and virtually no risk if applied properly and washed from food.
Clearly the Deadstate article goes on to spell out the worst-case scenario for each compound. Just like table salt, sugar or water, anything can kill you dead if you ingest too much of it the wrong way.
This is the wrong way to make a point about food and farming. You don't misrepresent another production system, just because evil people aggressively misrepresent science about conventional ag or genetic engineering. It does not win hearts and minds, and seems confusing and divisive to the people that want education and information.
This needs to be a scientific discussion. What are the safest technologies that can be used to produce more food with fewer inputs? It does not matter what you call them.
Remember, this is not an organic versus conventional, or organic vs genetic engineering debate. But let's not criticize safe inputs that help farmers, organic or conventional.
And yes, I understand that many facets of the organic industry would love to see me driven from science, and they have financed a campaign against me. Their ways are unacceptable, and an eye for an eye leaves everyone looking like a pirate.
That helps nobody and is a distraction from the needed conversation.
The above article appears on Deadstate.
The claim is that compounds approved for, and used by, organic production are potentially dangerous. Well, not so much potentially dangerous as outright carcinogenic.
The main shock to most readers is that organic production uses any chemical inputs at all, as the organic halo implies that no chemicals are used. Of course, we know that to not be true, it is just other chemicals that may be used.
But just like other chemicals, the dose makes the poison. For the most part these chemicals have low toxicity, and virtually no risk if applied properly and washed from food.
Fighting manufactured fear with manufactured fear? Why adopt Food Babe tactics if you loathe Food Babe tactics?
Clearly the Deadstate article goes on to spell out the worst-case scenario for each compound. Just like table salt, sugar or water, anything can kill you dead if you ingest too much of it the wrong way.
This is the wrong way to make a point about food and farming. You don't misrepresent another production system, just because evil people aggressively misrepresent science about conventional ag or genetic engineering. It does not win hearts and minds, and seems confusing and divisive to the people that want education and information.
This needs to be a scientific discussion. What are the safest technologies that can be used to produce more food with fewer inputs? It does not matter what you call them.
Remember, this is not an organic versus conventional, or organic vs genetic engineering debate. But let's not criticize safe inputs that help farmers, organic or conventional.
And yes, I understand that many facets of the organic industry would love to see me driven from science, and they have financed a campaign against me. Their ways are unacceptable, and an eye for an eye leaves everyone looking like a pirate.
That helps nobody and is a distraction from the needed conversation.
