Illumination 2.0

Last week I was so happy to answer a thousand thoughtful questions on Science Reddit.  Many questions were moderator blocked (which I discouraged), so angry queries found a home over on the "Kevin Folta Monsanto Cheerleader" reddit thread. Monsanto cheerleader?  And then they put the word scientist in quotes.  They are convinced I"m a corporate cheerleader and not a scientist.  Shows how well they know me and what I do.   I'm really proud to say that I'm a Professor at UF.  I work with some of the best science minds out there and am always humbled by the amazing work going on here.  That's no secret.  But Monsanto Cheerleader? When I told them that I had no formal connection to Monsanto (other than visiting there last week to talk about how they could improve their outreach, first time ever there), GM opponents scoured the web, searching for any morsel of evidence to connect me to deep financial collusion with the Big M. They were certain they ha

It has been widely shown that the anti-GMO movement does not have evidence to support their position.  In the absence of science, biotech opponents must resort to misinformation and fear in order to achieve their goals. Today a report surfaced about It reminded me of a post I produced last year. In China, GM cotton has been used for over a decade and the technology has brought tremendous advantages.  In 2003, the use of Bt cotton stopped over 300,000 tons of insecticide from being applied (Pam Ronald, Tomrorow's Table).  The technology is doing well, and today there is a great discussion among Chinese scientists about the technology-- and they are for the development of such products. However, the anti-GM movement has effectively manipulated Chinese citizens.  In the USA, you scare people by telling them they'll be fat and packed with tumors like a 2-year old Sprague Dawley Rat. In China, you need to tell them that they won't be able to have children. With rules on

In the last blog I wrote about correspondence from a young woman that apparently was not interested in scientific interaction.  To review, she posted a note on the Stop Neil deGrasse Tyson from Talking about Science petition , requesting he contact her so that she could give his dim self some book learnin'.  She provided an email address in this public forum. Dr. Tyson is a busy guy.  He's trying to disentangle fundamental questions about our universe, and may not be surfing crackpot websites, especially those trying to censor him. To be of service, I wrote a short and punchy note to (we'll call her RK) only to earn a semi-psychopathic retort. I get it.  Asking Neil deGrasse Tyson to contact you and then getting a note from Kevin Folta is a lot like ordering a pizza and having the delivery guy show up with a used tube sock filled with guacamole. I'm sure she was disappointed, but when life hands you a tube sock of guacamole, get the chips! I took the time to

Last weekend when skimming the petition to silence Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson I stumbled upon one that seemed really odd.  The author, I'm guessing a female, said, "End the Bt (Agent Orange) Toxic Corn", as part of her rant.  She offered her email address an suggested that Dr. Tyson contact her, of course, perhaps in more crunchy tones. Seeing as though Dr. Tyson was probably busy solving problems of the cosmos and not likely to respond to this request, I kindly took it upon myself to send her a quick note and clarify her Bt/Agent Orange foible. Shortly thereafter I received her gentle retort. Reaching out to touch the lives of others with the gift of science.  My she is one feisty space bat.  I'd recommend Occupy a Padded Cell. I'm guessing her trusted and accredited news sources is probably Natural News. My first note to her was honest and well intended, and I'd be glad to talk to her about transgenics, Bt, 2,4-D, agent orange, whatever.  I

This is likely one of the worst papers ever to be published. However, to some, it is stellar evidence. Here's one website claiming that the link between glyphosate and piglet deformities is now CONFIRMED!    At least that's what many in the anti-GMO community think, and a recent paper is all the proof they need.  A new steamer from Monika Kruger's group in Germany provides low-power investigation oozing with no science, heavy rhetorical flourish, and missing controls. The whole thing is designed to scare the bejezzus out of the credulous.  And it works!  I only found this because an anti-GMO soul on a comments section pointed to it as "irrefutable evidence tying glyphosate to birth defects".  The work appears in May's  J Environ Anal Toxicol.  First, articles in "Omics" journals are usually pretty lame. They are a well known predatory publisher that will publish anything if the price is right.   Second, Kruger's group

I was grateful when Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson accidentally stepped in science's ripest dookie- anti-GMO pseudoscience.  He's getting to experience first hand what it is like to be a scientist trying to communicate sound science with the most rabid bunch of clueless know-it-alls ever amassed under a single banner. When asked last week about transgenic crops, he said that humans have been manipulating genes for thousands of years, so "chill out".  He's exactly right.  Humans have been taking the trash that nature gave us and folding it into useful crops for certainly the last 10,000 years. The process is random and wild, and only since the dawn of biotechnology do we have any handle on what genes we are moving and how we do it. However, far be it from the anti-GMO movement to accept scientific facts.  To them, Tyson is a sellout to corporate seed greed, a Monsanto Collaborator, and probably someone that Mike Adams wants dead. I wrapped up my Saturday science day

Grandpa Folta liked Consumer Reports , the magazine that would help him find maximum value in his oil filters and bacon bits. They have been recognized for a long time as an objective source of critical side-by-side analysis of consumer goods, and I've made decisions based on their recommendations. The magazine is still popular, and is well known for its independent evaluation of consumer goods, helping the consumer make better buying decisions. My friend Chris alerted me to a little Consumer Credulity. The latest version shows that even an source claiming objective and technically sound analysis, is not immune from the bias of bad information.  A recent article on Milk Alternatives: Should You Sip or Skip provides a short evaluation of the various consumer milk substitutes, stuff like coconut milk, soy milk, almond milk and other dairy alternatives. You can read about the pros and cons of milk substitutes in the latest Consumer Reports .  Unfortunately their reviewers hav

Sometimes history repeats itself.  Sometimes history repeats itself in remarkable irony. Last week Mike Adams (the Natural News ‘Health Ranger’), a highly public figure in natural foods and magical thinking,  made a less than veiled call to arms.  Citing references to Nazi propaganda, he almost directly instructed the assassination of scientists and journalists that exhibited favorable viewpoints on transgenic (GMO) technology.   Much has been written about his rants onsocial media , along with his tenuous claims that scientists and journalists are dangerous corporate pawns with a mission to poison the planet. Adams’ deplorable viewpoints caused quite a hiccup, followed by a backpedal.  Even anti-GMO's darling Vandana Shiva lovingly posted Adams' science-Nazi rants, until even she realized that he is insane and probably bad for $40,000 speaker engagements.  They have since been pulled from her website and live on only in screenshots for use another day. Inciting ha

Dear Biotech Critics, Mike Adams has issued a rather unveiled threat against journalists and scientists that favorably view crop biotechnology.  His position has since been implicitly backed by Vandana Shiva on her website. it is the moral right — and even the obligation — of human beings everywhere to actively plan and carry out the killing of those engaged in heinous crimes against humanity . This is a call to publicly denounce the terrorist tactics by Adams and Shiva.  It is important to your own movement that you distance yourself from them, and condemn their statements. Or, if you think their positions are good, don't I have a right to know? Thanks! Kevin

Whenever I take the time to comment on an article, or discuss GM in a public forum, I get barraged by opposition-- but "__________" says... So who is  "_______________"?   Why does their perspective count more than mine? The irony is that those of us that work in public service are labeled as pawns and stooges, dupes of higher corporate interests, and not 'real' experts-- but we are public-sector scientists that don't have anything to do with the GMO discussion as a primary part of our positions. It is not our day job. Yet we are frequently classified as "shills" or scientists with conflicts of interest.  However, the main voices critical of the technology seem to be closer to such conflicting financial and career incentives. It may be good to point out to those making "shill" accusations. So who are the voices of science in the GMO discussion? Who do they work for, how are they compensated, and what are their "day jobs&

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