6
Comments:

Filter Questions

Reset Filter

No questions match....

  • There have been no discussions since the expert answer was published.

  • Community Manager's picture
    Community Manager
    01.07.2014
    This community intends to have a productive and non-confrontational conversation which focuses on the facts about GMOs — please keep this in mind when posting comments. We reserve the right to remove comments and block users who continually break our house rules, available here: http://gmoanswers.com/house-rules. Joseph Najjar's confrontational comment was deleted from this thread because it violates our house-rules.
  • Rickinreallife's picture
    Rickinreallife
    08.07.2013
    Isn't Jeffrey Smith a yoga instructor or something like that? There is a wesite, "Academics Review" that painstakingly disects each claim Jeffrey Smith makes in Genetic Roullette, including exposing flaws in the research articles and other sources he cites as evidence. No wonder Jeffrey Smith insisted on his own segment of the program and asked not to be seated with scientists and have no on stage interaction with them on Dr. Oz Show segment. Even if you suspect Academics Review is an industry hatchet job, you should take a look, since the flaws in its critique of Jeffrey Smith's Genetic Roullette should be obvious. I can understand the lack of trust in research and assessment that support the lack of harm in gmo products, as so reduntly expressed on this site, but it does not follow that anything written by authors like Jeffrey Smith are to be automatically immune to critical review by scientist or anyone else for that matter.
    • Person-Man's picture
      Person-Man
      12.13.2013
      @Rickinreallife

      Plus, why feel a need to try and degrade someone based on their chosen profession? I see what you're trying to do and it's quite low. If you were a truck driver, but found out about something in politics that was alarming and made a film with people in politics to raise awareness about it would you want to be next to a political commentator who's sole purpose will be to take jabs at your findings? Were these farmers lying for the fun of it?
      Someone cited the "Academics Review", so I looked into it. At random I looked into one of the refuting references because I found the name funny; Barfoot, P or Peter Barfoot.

      I found he works for PG economics and then I found some interesting facts on that "Independent Research Group". Interesting things such as a report funded by ABE which members include; Bayer CropScience, BASF, Dow AgroSciences, Dupont, Monsanto and Syngenta. Information they withheld. Other things too all summarized here:
      http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/PG_Economics
      *note this is not my site and I am complying with rules of GMOanswers site

      I don't have time to painstakingly disect ALL references on the "Academics Review"- but that was just ONE AT RANDOM and I'm sure there are more like that- this "non-biased site" is also funded by names mentioned above.

      Can you understand my lack of trust in corporations that lack integrity?
      • Joseph Najjar's picture
        Joseph Najjar
        12.14.2013
        @ Person-man That is ridiculous to say. If you have no formal training in the hard sciences, you cannot just step in and access a situation like the professionals who have an education and work experience in that field. I too read the Academics review, its right here: http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-individuals/jeffrey-smith/

        Its pretty clear Jeffery Smith is full of it, I have never seen him cite a source, he routinely ignores scientific literature on the issues he discusses, and never debates a researcher or scientist directly, as he would be torn to shreds by logic and reason. His statements are so outlandish, its almost satirical. If you want real information on GMOs, look at this journal published out of the European Union: http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Nicolia-20131.pdf
      • Rickinreallife's picture
        Rickinreallife
        12.29.2013
        Person-Man: I regret the condescending tone my comment appears to have conveyed. Please understand that I do not intend to degrade Jeffrey Smith because he practices and teaches yoga. But, he does hold himself out as an expert on genetic engineering and makes a number of claims and interpretations of scientific literature in genetic roulette and other writings. I get it that those like me with only lay understandings of the relevant science might be skeptical of scientific literature when people perceive there is an economic self interest in the results. Jeffrey Smith has assumed a role of somewhat of a watchdog that I think segments of the public appreciate, even if his assessment of risks associated with biotechnology can be shown to be incorrect.

        Particularly because of his lack of training or expertise in any scientific field relevant to the topic of genetic engineering, I do not find it imprudent to seek out assessments from sources that have training and practice in that field. While I agree there is no need for condescention, I still believe his claims in genetic roulette should stand or fall on their merits, and just as you have implied that industry associated science is subject to skepticism, neither is Jeffrey Smith entitled to my, your, or anyone's unquestioning acceptance. From a variety of sources that I find more trustworthy, I am highly skeptical Jeffrey Smith's claims in genetic roulette correctly interpret the literature, either purposely omit or are only possible by being oblivious to the breadth of research, and relies often on shaky sources of information. That is not a moral judgement of Mr. Smith, it is merely my personal assessment of the accuracy and quality of his writings.

        I will agree in general that some of the pro-GMO sites can be callously dismissive of dissenting viewpoints and authors. I think that hurts because people perceive it as attacking those perceived as looking out for the public interest. But, I don't know how those who practice in the field and have extensive experience and knowledge, whether employed by biotech firms or in academia, can respond to someone like Jeffrey Smith. And it goes both ways. There are people who work in biotechnology who sincerely believe it holds great promise, who are attracted to the field because of its possibilities to resolve agronomic and nutritional problems. Yet you cannot go to a site like gmo watch or read comments to articles where these professionals are ridiculed as being industry stooges, inferring that they know genetic engineering is somehow wrong but they have sold out for money. That's not fair either.
  • Brenna Aune's picture
    Brenna Aune
    08.06.2013
    Of course they're gonna say it's pseudo-science. They gotta wait till the head pooah has a dead child, with endless evidence it was from GMOs.