GMO debunking

We are the Borg.
User avatar
Witness
Posts: 18909
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

GMO debunking

Post by Witness » Mon Dec 17, 2018 2:08 am

At the start was:
Wikipedia wrote:The Séralini affair was the controversy surrounding the publication, retraction, and republication of a journal article by French molecular biologist Gilles-Éric Séralini. First published by Food and Chemical Toxicology in September 2012, the article presented a two-year feeding study in rats, and reported an increase in tumors among rats fed genetically modified corn and the herbicide RoundUp. Scientists and regulatory agencies subsequently concluded that the study's design was flawed and its findings unsubstantiated. A chief criticism was that each part of the study had too few rats to obtain statistically useful data, particularly because the strain of rat used, Sprague Dawley, develops tumors at a high rate over its lifetime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A9ralini_affair

New study is out, found no effect: The GMO90+ project: absence of evidence for biologically meaningful effects of genetically modified maize based-diets on Wistar rats after 6-months feeding comparative trial (I don't quote, it's, as can be expected, quite boring.)

User avatar
shemp
Posts: 5391
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:16 pm
Title: stooge

Re: GMO debunking

Post by shemp » Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:22 am

I don't believe in evidence, it's too boring.
"It is not I who is mad! It is I who is crazy!" -- Ren Hoek

Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 73436
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: GMO debunking

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:12 am

I thought moi had the last word on the subject. :BigGrin3:

viewtopic.php?p=883887#p883887
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 18909
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: GMO debunking

Post by Witness » Tue Dec 18, 2018 2:19 am

Abdul Alhazred wrote:
Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:12 am
I thought moi had the last word on the subject. :BigGrin3:

viewtopic.php?p=883887#p883887
Smirnoff Concedes Its Non-GMO Label Is Just A New Marketing Gimmick

Smirnoff, a vodka brand owned by British company Diageo, recently undertook an ad campaign starring celebrities Ted Danson and Jenna Fischer touting how they are gluten-free and non-GMO.

Wow, healthy vodka. Who knew that was possible?

Well it isn't possible, but since labels on most consumed products are a free-for-all they can get away with it. Except when it comes to alcohol. On that, they were busted trying to infer a health claim due to using non-GMO corn and as a result were forced to admit they were just creating a marketing scam.
https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/10/19/sm ... mick-13528

Caught milking the dumbth. :mrgreen:

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 23289
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: GMO debunking

Post by Anaxagoras » Wed Jan 16, 2019 1:29 am

Predictably, those who know the least (or more accurately I believe, those who are most misinformed) think they know the most.

On GMO safety, the fiercest opponents understand the least
And those who know the least are often very confident they know a lot.
Science literacy

A US-Canadian team of researchers started off by having a demographically diverse group of 500 US residents answer a series of questions. Participants were asked to rate their level of concern with and opposition to GMOs. As had been found in past surveys, there was a lot of uncertainty about the biotechnology; more than 90 percent of respondents reported concern, and a similar number were somewhat opposed to its use. But that opposition didn't break down along political lines: "there were no significant differences in extremity of opposition between self-reported liberals, moderates, and conservatives."
Well at least it isn't yet a partisan issue. Thank goodness for small blessings.
So what's going on? The researchers also included questions that tested how well the participants understood science in general and genetics in particular. And here, there was a very clear pattern: "As extremity of opposition increases, scientific literacy decreases." In other words, the people who are most strongly opposed to GMOs knew the least about science, and specifically, genetics.

In addition to assessing their scientific knowledge, the researchers had the participants rate their own. And here, something funny happened. At lower levels of opposition to GMOs, people were pretty good at understanding how well they understood science. But as opposition edged into extreme territories, things changed: people started consistently overrating their own level of knowledge. Again, the authors put it very succinctly, writing, "For extremists, knowing less is associated with thinking one knows more."
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 18909
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: GMO debunking

Post by Witness » Wed Jan 16, 2019 1:50 am

Dunning–Kruger in action.