You mean pro-organic organizations tied the study to Monsanto (Reply #11)

In the discussion thread: 4 Myths about Organic Foods / Healthy Food Secrets [View all]

Sun May 26, 2013, 03:18 AM

11. You mean pro-organic organizations tied the study to Monsanto

Doesn't men it's true. Sounds like Oil Companies saying Peer Review of Global Warming is all funded by Al Gore. Fact is Peer Review is Peer Review. It's extremely hard to get something published in any area of science Backed by Monsanto or not (probably not) it still had to go through a very stringent peer review process to get published. That means experts from all over the world looked it over and put their reputations on the line.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

42 replies	Author	Time	Post
4 Myths about Organic Foods / Healthy Food Secrets [View all]	Quixote1818	May 2013	OP
it is also about ingesting	KT2000	May 2013	#1
It's also about building and maintaining the soil	Warpy	May 2013	#2
Still the yields are about 25% lower than conventional farming	Quixote1818	May 2013	#3
The stanford study you quote is biased considering STANFORD RECIEVES MONSANTO FUNDING	obama4socialism	May 2013	#6
I have yet to see a peer reviewed study	Quixote1818	May 2013	#9
Why repeat what has been proven to be wrong? If biased studies make it through the peer review	facismrising	May 2013	#12
While most public attention	sulphurdunn	May 2013	#32
I garden organically, and I have more and tastier produce than my neighbors who use miracle grow	Viva_La_Revolution	May 2013	#20
There are over 120 peer reviewed studies here...	Veilex	May 2013	#22
That's true but quick review says they don't all suggest	Progressive dog	May 2013	#26
Science is rarely black and white. Phenols have been extolled for their virtues, but some would argue	Veilex	May 2013	#33
science is usually tending toward black and white, that's the point	Progressive dog	May 2013	#37
This message was self-deleted by its author	Veilex	May 2013	#38
Your right, in that science does try to define everything it can (The black and white analogy)...	Veilex	May 2013	#39
Fact is, since farmers have moved away from organic methods	Progressive dog	May 2013	#40
"I agree that there is very little scientific proof of nutrients or yield in either direction"...	Veilex	May 2013	#41
So where's the beef, it's not in your 120 studies	Progressive dog	May 2013	#42
Um, not quite	Warpy	May 2013	#23
She is lying! No estrogenic pesticides plus organic food is HIGHER IN IMPORTANT NUTRIENTS	facismrising	May 2013	#4
That study is bogus. Please post something from a science journal next time	Quixote1818	May 2013	#7
Stanford MONSANTO funded study gets in Journal, OTHERS THAT SHOW ORGANIC MORE NUTRIENT DENSE	facismrising	May 2013	#8
I can't believe we even pay attention to the so called "mainstream" reporting anymore. They	obama4socialism	May 2013	#10
You mean pro-organic organizations tied the study to Monsanto	Quixote1818	May 2013	#11
You like subjective research, the rest of us don't!	facismrising	May 2013	#13
This message was self-deleted by its author	Veilex	May 2013	#35
your assertions about cattle feed have caused me to conclude you have no credibility for this topic	Kali	May 2013	#24
organic is non-GMO.	Cobalt Violet	May 2013	#5
That isn't a winning argument.	Crow73	May 2013	#30
This is classic Straw Man* crapola	Berlum	May 2013	#14
Yup you nailed it! The argument is flawed; Organic is BETTER!	Civilization2	May 2013	#16
And yet they leave out important aspects of the Cargill funded study.	fasttense	May 2013	#15
Her 4 mythical myths destroyed	KurtNYC	May 2013	#17
yeah - that "pestilized" made me go	Kali	May 2013	#25
This is obviously not a clear cut black and white issue	Snake Plissken	May 2013	#18
organic is better	fpasko	May 2013	#19
Welcome to DU my friend!	hrmjustin	May 2013	#21
That Sounds's Interesting. Any Proof of Organic-only at Monsanto HQ.	dballance	May 2013	#27
Suspicious timing, right after Monsanto March	felix_numinous	May 2013	#28
Thanks, but	Crow73	May 2013	#29
That made a lot of sense	Progressive dog	May 2013	#31
The presentation is glib and slick.....	DeSwiss	May 2013	#34
very interesting discussion - thanks to all	CHOCOLATMIMOSA	May 2013	#36

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.