Illumination 2.0

Mike Adams has called for the assassination of journalists and scientists that stand behind the use of modern biotechnology in crops.  Not to be outdone, this warm message of love and tolerance was quickly posted by Vandana Shiva, you know, the one that received the Sydney Peace Prize in 2010.  Sydney must be a relatively violent place. Today her website featured a reprint of Adams' article, reminding her followers that science is not to be tolerated and that those that support science must be stopped.   Her website, Seed Freedom , reminds her throngs of followers of Adams' vicious message- that those supporting biotechnology are all simply "Monsanto Collaborators" and akin to Nazi supporters that generated propaganda and took action to advance the influence of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi movement.  The content squares nicely with her claims of modern biotech as being a new genocide, responsible for the deaths of millions. Shiva's website proudly displays

This week, Health Ranger Mike Adams made a thinly-veiled call to recruit anti-GMO activists and the general public to arms.  His goal, mobilize interest to threaten or harm scientists, journalists and others that dare to interpret the scientific literature on transgenic crops and/or communicate it to the public.  The article appeared on Natural News, a page with a readership of over 200,000 a day.  The page was steeped in Nazi imagery, calling supporters of transgenic technology part of the Agricultural Holocaust . The title of the article is : Biotech genocide, Monsanto collaborators and the Nazi legacy of ‘science’ as justification for murder I hear that the Nazis have contacted Adams and the owners of the "Monsanto Collaborators" website.  The Nazis feel that Adams and anti-GMO are negative weight on their reputation. Stay hot, Dork Ranger.  Of course, he now has shown that he's seriously off his rocker and willing to command his army of the brain dead to harm tho

Some people are truly slimy.  Few things frame the use of fear to attempt to motivate opinion on transgenic crops like the increasing use the phrase "Agent Orange".  It seems that you can't read an anti-GMO opinion lately where the author does not allude to the tragic use of this military agent, now in the contemporary setting of a farm near you!   And of course, they'll tell you it will be in your food.  And in your baby food.  And in your breastmilk.  It is about fear.  Period. Agent Orange was a collection of herbicides, namely 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T, that were produced by at least sixteen companies during the Vietnam War era.  They were used as defoliants, key weapons to expose an entrenched resistance in a dense jungle.  These compounds are synthetic auxins, a class of plant hormone that inspires rapid cell division and elongation growth.  Essentially, a plant grows itself to death.   The 2,4,5-T preparation was contaminated with a potent dioxin, a chemical direct

There is a lot of discussion about glyphosate use and its relative toxicity lately.  For activists, it is an easy target, as it is easy to put glyphosate in the ag input hopper in close association with DDT and other goodies that freak out affluent white people.  You can read on any activist website or comment section that "Roundup Ready seeds are doused in massive amounts of glyphosate- getting this deadly chemical into your body".  Farmer David Walton did a really nice discussion of this over at Genetic Literacy Project  recently. However, I've had this blog entry half done for ages and with the topic coming up over and over again, I thought I'd expand on David's excellent report and provide some more relative numbers, especially with respect to toxicity. Let's do some math.  --  How much is this massive amount ?  -- When is it applied to the crop?  -- How do amounts used translate to toxicity risks?  Massive Amounts?  For soybeans, the applic

I live a rather high-strung, active life.  I don't have kids, I have a job I adore, and have good friends that participate in a vibrant sports community.  Most people don't know the whole story.  I don't talk about it much. Today I'm complaining, so if you are reading this looking for some snarky criticism of pseudoscience hit your back button and go away.  I'm at home early tonight, going completely nuts.  Here's why. May 31, 2014 I found myself face down on the pavement, scraping forward from 25 mph to a dead stop attached to a bicycle.  I was riding in the thick of a fast-moving pace line on a usual Saturday morning club ride.  We did a fast 50 miles from Gainesville to Melrose, FL and back.  When coming back into town, the rider in front of me got a flat, hit the brakes, I hit him and went down. I fell correctly, got up, dusted off, took a deep breath, and rode my bike back to my car about another 5 miles away. My left knee swelled up like a balloon,

I was shocked, but not surprised, when a internet meme from GMO-Free USA popped up on my Facebook page: GMO Free USA (and GMO Free Canada, eh) really shows their true colors with this one.  The referenced paper has nothing to do with GMO insulin, other than saying that it is better than the stuff from animals. The rocket surgeons over at GMO Free USA really stepped in it this time.  They are using their fear-based misinformation machine to now scare people away from life-saving insulin therapy.  We all depend on insulin, a hormone synthesized in the Pancreas, to control blood sugar levels. Elevated blood sugar can lead to a variety of metabolic disorders and long-term damage to various organs. Type II diabetics produce too much at first, leading to insulin resistance, a state where the body just does not respond to the hormone and blood sugar levels remain high. Eventually type II's do not produce enough, so they need to control blood sugar with drugs, or in some cases

" I don't need a crystal ball; I have a crystal brain. " - -Adam Carolla Today the famous Lumpy Rat paper was published by Seralini and colleagues.  I should say RE-published because it is basically the same content published in 2012, that was later retracted from the journal.  Personally, I was glad to see him attempt to publish it again.  The literature is where the conversation should happen, and if the work is of good quality it will be reproduced and expanded upon.  If the work is of poor quality it will die a scientific dead end, cited only by the same authors in future papers with no additional progress.  Kind of like the rest of the Seralini work.  Unfortunately the general public doesn't follow the scientific conversation. People only pick the monologues they agree with, and a single flawed study from a biased lab carries as much weight (or more) than a thousand agreeing reports from 800 different groups.  It was disappointing to see that S