Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

CanSocDem

(3,286 posts)
7. Indeed.
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 08:49 AM
Jun 2016

...from the link:

Jim Goodman, farmer, activist and member of the Organic Consumers Association policy advisory board, recently wrote about Monsanto’s deceptive use of the expression “sound science.”

But, ‘sound science’ has no scientific definition. It does not mean peer reviewed, or well documented research. ‘Sound science’ is only a term, an ideological term, used to support a particular point of view, policy statement or a technology. ‘Sound science’ is little more than the opinions of so-called “experts” representing corporate interests. Simply put, ‘sound science’ always supports the position of industry over people, corporate profit over food safety, the environment and public health.

Here are five new reports and studies, published in the last two months, that blow huge holes in Monsanto’s “sound science” story. Reports of everything from Monsanto’s Roundup causing fatal, chronic kidney disease to how, contrary to industry claims, Roundup persists for years, contaminating soil, air and water. And oh-by-the-way, no, GMO crops will not feed the world, nor have they reduced the use of herbicides and pesticides.




.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

EU Refuses limited use of glyphosate womanofthehills Jun 2016 #1
Scientists with conflicts of interest, tainting pro-GMO research Scientific Jun 2016 #2
Five Reasons Monsanto’s ‘Science’ Doesn’t Add Up with great links womanofthehills Jun 2016 #3
The perversion of science by corporations is a great tragedy of our times. Scientific Jun 2016 #4
What about the chemtrails? Major Nikon Jun 2016 #11
BioMed Research International did some good work Scientific Jun 2016 #5
Yeah, like publishing Seralini Major Nikon Jun 2016 #14
Courts rule for Seralini. GMO execs guilty of defaming him Scientific Jun 2016 #15
Sure, and just because Wakefield also won a civil case, that also must mean vaccines cause autism Major Nikon Jun 2016 #16
Attempting to defend the perversion of science by dragging in unrelated issues is FAIL personified Scientific Jun 2016 #18
If you are intentionally trying to be ironic, you succeeded brilliantly Major Nikon Jun 2016 #19
Plague of glyphosate resistant superweeds drive up costs for GMO soybean farmers Scientific Jun 2016 #6
Indeed. CanSocDem Jun 2016 #7
A DEEPER LOOK AT THE VALIDITY OF HOMEOPATHY Major Nikon Jun 2016 #8
Are you lost??? CanSocDem Jun 2016 #12
Globalresearch? Major Nikon Jun 2016 #13
Globalresearch? Major Nikon Jun 2016 #10
The NAS also takes at least 50 times more from the oil industry, yet produced this... Major Nikon Jun 2016 #17
Study after study... Major Nikon Jun 2016 #9
I'm guessing "ring of fire" has nothing to do with the Johnny Cash song right? Initech Jun 2016 #20
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»MONSANTO CAN'T deny the r...»Reply #7