7 comments on “Inbox An Interesting Place Regarding GMOs

  1. I received a comment via email that I’d like to post here. The writer of the email said my comment function was not being friendly, but the comment sure is!

    For what it’s worth I know how you feel. I’m a vegan activist and sadly there is a huge overlap with the woo-crowd still. Just saying “I’m not pro-Monsato, I’m just not generally opposed to GMO” makes people go crazy. It’s so sad that people are afraid of people questioning things, asking for facts and back-up. And especially in any field of activism (also environmental activism) fact-checking is essential, otherwise there’s no chance people take you seriously at all.

    Even if people ARE opposed to GMOs in their food and even if it were true that GMO-food was less nutritious – people at least need to understand that in a world with a growing population and food scarcities, GMOs can be a chance to help people not starve. Are big cooperations out there to make money? Obviously. But that is true with all food companies. This is not a GMO-issue.

    It’s really weird that people are offeneded when I say “hey, non-organic gmo fruits & vegetable is still vegan and healthy you know, Im certainly not afraid to eat it”.

    I really enjoy your blog. Thanks for keeping it. I think it’s wonderful to have a “normal person” talking about this, someone who just came to this conclusions by asking questions and trying to remain levelheaded by doing so.

    All the best,

    All I can say is: “Lea you made my day!”

  2. Thanks for fighting the good fight. It never ceases to amaze me how delusional the activists are (no offense!). They will.not.listen to reason. You and Mark Lynas are the only 2 people that have been vocal about “switching sides” because you’ve actually done the research and trust the science.

    P.S. I’m still waiting for my big ol’ check from Monsanto too! 😉

  3. Julie,

    Just a small nitpick! Because of the high rate of data falsification and academic fraud, small study effect sizes that yield contradictory results (think eggs are good for you, now they are bad for you, now they are good, etc), and over 4,000 predatory journals, the peer reviewed journal article by itself is no longer a good standard of evidence. The Seralini disaster of an article is a prime example of this. There is no perfect answer yet, but the standard of peer reviewed consensus is a good start. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s