General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science [View all]longship
(40,416 posts)The extent that one would even mention it is a testament to ones bias, given that paper's odious history. It was withdrawn; not a good record.
And Carman's pig study universally failed peer review. It was excoriated. Excuse me, her major claim was the opposite to the data!
And of the 19 outcomes that were measured, none of them were hypothesized as the outcome of the study until after the fact, a sure indication of cherry-picking. That is doom for any science publication.
Here's the response to Seralini's rat study:
The Seralini GMO Study Retraction
As to the Judy Carman study, it did not pass peer review. Not even close!
https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/glp-facts/judy-carman/
David Gorski's Blog post: https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/once-more-bad-science-in-the-service-of-anti-gmo-activism/
The anti-GMO crowd have nothing but rubbish (so-called) science on their side. None of it passes peer review let alone any experimental methodological rigor, let alone statistical means testing.
If the anti-GMO crowd wants to make their case they have to first step up to the basic science that states that they are likely wrong. They have not met that burden.