December 9, 2010
Here is a great article to follow up from what transpired on the Dr. Oz show this week. Alan McHughen and Robert Wager co-author an article in the December 2010 issue of New Biotechnology entitled “Popular misconceptions: agricultural biotechnology”. I have attached the article here and I think that the Open Source Gods will shine favourably down on me for that (even if the journal doesn’t). Without going into detail, the article explains and refutes some of the most popular misconceptions around agricultural biotechnology.
Dr. Pam Ronald was a guest on the Oz episode which covered the issue of GE tech and food earlier this week. Dr. Ronald did a fantastic job of representing the science of biotechnology but unfortunately she had difficulty competing with the sexy soundbytes of anti-GE sentiments parlayed by “Seeds of Deception” author J. Smith. If that wasn’t enough, I was frustrated by Dr. Oz’s apparent bias against GE technology and GMO food – and I quote:
“…and this organic cereal contains no genetically modified seeds or products so that is an advantage…”
Back to the McHughen/Wager article…. the authors state:
“Popular misconceptions might be considered amusing if they are held only by a small ‘fringe’ group. But sometimes the misinformation and fear can become infectious and pathogenic, instigating bad public policy, with substantial negative consequences to everyone.”
I think that Dr. Oz should have a read, don’t you? (see article attached below)
I refer to some other online sources relating to the Dr. Oz show and Dr. Ronald’s appearance on it:
Dr.Ronald’s follow up to her appearance on the show: http://scienceblogs.com/tomorrowstable/
Want some GOOD, BALANCED information? Here are some sources: bioforitifed,org, ucbiotech.org and academicsreview.org
One thought on “McHughen and Wager address misconceptions around ag biotech”
Robert Wager is entitled to his opinions but not without acknowledging the fact there are mountains of evidence that GM science is flawed and that GM foods cause ill health consequences. His university, I’m sure, is receiving and soliciting research grant monies from GM companies thus making calling his objectivity into question.
You must log in to post a comment.