Illumination 2.0

Ever since the brutal treatment I received last fall, and continue to receive, I have vowed to never let another researcher stand alone in fighting misplaced activism. Your public scientists are under ideological interrogation with personal attacks that seek to destroy reputations and careers. Here is the latest round in this fight of pseudo-religious-belief against the inconvenient truth offered by an independent, academic scientist. We must take control of this narrative. The truth must dominate this narrative.  Greenpeace has waged a vicious attack on a leading researcher and environmental advocate.  Dr. Ray Hilborn, a University of Washington Professor and a recognized leader in fisheries conservation for decades, has drawn fire from this activist organization because he reported data that were incompatible with their agenda.   A researcher does good research.  Activists don't like the outcome. They trash the researcher because industry funded work in his program.

Last year the National Academies of Science convened a panel of experts to discuss genetically engineered crops.  The panel listened to a huge range of testimonials and opinions.  They hosted everyone from Jeffery Smith, to Jon Entine, to a pile of scientists spanning many disciplines.  The discussion was vetted against the scientific literature, and you know what we learned?  This image has nothing to do with the article.  Anyone know a good tattoo artist? We learned that GE crops pose no special risks over conventional breeding, that they help farmers by cutting costs and marginal effects on yields, despite no yield-associated genes being installed.  There is no evidence of effects on health for humans and animals, and environmental risks are understood and should be addressed.  We learned what we knew, and what we already teach.  The report also speaks of new ideas for a regulatory framework that makes a lot of sense. Every crop/gene combination should be weighed o

“Citrus” is a term applied to a variety of popular and nutritious fruits, including oranges, grapefruit, lemons and limes.  Citrus breeders are tasked with improving the varieties, which takes decades.  Still, great progress has been made in fruit improvement.   However, over the last twenty years a disease called Huanglongbing, or “HLB” (also known as “citrus greening”) has emerged in the USA and threatens the citrus industry.  Today the focus is how to grow improved citrus varieties that can survive this insidious disease.  Dr. Fred Gmitter is a seasoned citrus breeder that has  produced improved fruit varieties, but also is working to identify new varieties to combat HLB. Listen to this week's podcast here.  

Several times a year I find myself exiting the Florida’s Turnpike at Yeehaw Junction and heading south.  When I get to the small town of Okeechobee I take a left and head down Route 98 through Florida’s extensive agricultural backyard.  Flanked by Lake Okeechobee on the west and the affluent cities of the Atlantic coast off to the east, the small towns nestled in this sliver of land support vibrant production of sweet corn, cattle, lettuce, and sugarcane. Cane-derived sugar ends up in many cupboards as table sugar, and also is found in many consumer products.   As reported on NPR , candy companies are caving in to consumer demands that the sugar they consume does not come from a GMO plant.  To the scientist this is curious, because table sugar coming from sugarcane (which never was a GMO) is chemically identical to table sugar from GMO sources like sugar beets—it is sucrose.   Sugarcane and sugar beets are partners in pleasure, together satisfying America’s sweet tooth.

Last week I was spending a lot of time on flights, so I picked a few podcasts outside of my normal queue to fill my head with new ideas.  I read on Twitter about Take Out , a podcast hosted by Robyn O'Brien and Ashley Koff RD, so decided to give it a listen. One of the episodes features Carey Gillam.  Ms. Gillam works for US-RTK, the activist organization claiming to be looking for crimes and collusion between Big Ag and university scientists, while they really are a well-financed front group for Organic Consumer Association that is out to facilitate the libeling of scientists that teach about evidence-based food technology. While serving on the activist payroll, she writes for several outlets trashing scientists and technology, ironically, calling them paid shills.  She's been especially harsh on me, reiterating especially Eric Lipton's lies from his article.  But that will be fixed with time.  Let's see what's up here...  The Take Out podcast makes cl

She has my emails, I held up my end of the deal in full transparency and compliance. It is in her court. Will she do the right thing?  One follower over on Facebook does not think so, and provided the most eloquent statement about the situation. I'm done now. Let's focus on science. 

Public records requests are an important tool for journalists and other investigators to obtain information to check public employees' for episodes of wrongdoing.  Today there are two alarming trends.  1. Politicians with deep pockets and plenty of attorneys find ways to make sure the records are not made public. 2. Scientists that do not have deep pockets and attorneys are seeing abuse of the system for elaborate witch hunts, expeditions that find no evidence of wrongdoing, yet result in potentially career-damaging manufactured narratives.  In other words, when you teach a scientific topic or do research that some find objectionable, your records can be used to harm your career. It has been seen by researchers in climate, vaccines, animal research, genetic engineering, and most recently, fisheries .   Last year my institution received a Public Records Request from Vani Hari, The Food Babe.  It was indeed curious, and it didn't take long to realize that this was re