General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary Clinton GOES TO BAT For GMOs At Biotech Conference [View all]truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Barf... What scientific consensus?
The first thing that happened "science-wise" was that Mike Taylor stepped forward and in his position as advisor to Pres. Bill Clinton, Taylor declared that GM seeds, foods, crops were safe.
How could Taylor know? This statement was made in the early 1990's, and there were certainly no decades of science research to rely upon. But his statement was taken as the God's awful truth; we have not seen this level of "Authority Proclaims Science" since back when the Holy Mother Church told the lay person how the sun revolved around planet earth.
Corporate Based-Science now runs the show. Big media is not going to protest - after all, which side of the Gm argument runs the multi-billion dollars worth of ads on CNN and other channels as to the safety of methods used by Monsanto or Daniels Midlands? Do you think any of the TV stations that are accepting ad revenues from Monsanto for their Product "RoundUp" are going to really undertake a total debate about the safety of pesticides, or Gm seeds, crops and foods, if they stand to lose all the ad dollars?
Recent history reminds us of how the truth about cigarettes did not really take hold over the culture until all the ad dollars for cigarettes were banned from major media. That ad dollars = failure to address health risks of a product should offer up a meaningful warning as to what is going on right now in terms of Gm products and also the risks of pesticides.