A group of Nobel Prize-winners have signed onto a campaign demanding activist groups and their seemingly willing accomplices in the press refrain from spreading misinformation about the science behind genetically modified foods.

GMOs showcase how bad journalists do covering science https://t.co/6Au0PLgsc6

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) July 1, 2016

"The media very often likes to present a supposedly balanced argument," Sir Richard Roberts, who is spearheading the campaign along with fellow Nobel Prize-winner Philip Sharp, told the Washington Examiner's media desk Thursday.

"They present it as though it's a 50/50 deal, rather than the fact that it's a 99-to-1 percent. The media have to do a better job. They just have to do a better job of estimating where is the consensus and if you want to bring another view in, you have to point out it's a minority view," he added.

Here’s Why You Should Vote Against Measure P, Even If You Hate GMOs UPDATED

Updated: Critics of genetically modified organisms or GMOs claim that they pose health risks to the public. Jimmy (Kimmel) is always interested in people who have strong opinions, so (they) sent a crew to one of (the) local farmers markets to ask people why they avoid GMOs and, more specifically, what the letters GMO stand for.



◼ Even if you are against the use of GMOs (genetically modified organisms), you shouldn’t support Measure P because the wording of the measure is very problematic. - Op-Ed by HSU biology professor Mark Wilson/Lost Coast Outpost

It is so flawed that it would exempt Roundup Ready corn and alfalfa from the ban, even though these are the GMOs most likely to be grown in Humboldt County in the near term. Meanwhile, the measure would ban hundreds of non-GMO varieties, some of which would be difficult for farmers to identify before planting. Farmers who have grown non-GMO varieties may find out mid-season that some of the crops they’ve been growing for years are prohibited.

Most people think of GMOs as being transgenic organisms, that is, organisms in which one or a small number of genes from an unrelated organism have been inserted using a variety of laboratory techniques. However, that is not how Measure P defines it.

...Because the authors of Measure P used the flawed wording that the USDA is in the process of revising, that flawed wording would be codified into county law. Based on the USDA comments, it seems likely that many local farmers are growing crops that somewhere in their history underwent gene doubling, or cell fusion. The farmers who planted these crops are almost certainly unaware of their breeding histories.

What would happen if one of the massive GMO corporations (which have been conspicuously silent), or even just a mischievous student, stepped in, not to challenge the Measure P definitions but to force the county to actually follow the letter of the law? Farmers would have 30 days to destroy crops that they had planted in good faith, and more importantly crops that there is no rational reason to think are somehow dangerous. A major disruption to our local farmers is possible....◼ READ The ENTIRE PIECE, It is well worth your time.

◼ This is a discussion document by a Subcommittee of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). Discussion documents are posted for public comment, and may later become proposals for full Board consideration. They are not final Board proposals or recommendations, or NOP policy. from links in the op-ed above

◼ READ MEASURE P

◼ If wild anti-GMO claims were anything more than contrived hysteria, that would rock the world - Chad White/Mad River Union

“P” is for Pseudoscience, Poverty, Prejudice, and Prohibition

Something I learned from scientist Kevin Folta is that if his lab had a slight hint that GMOs were dangerous, he would do his best to repeat that study, get a collaborator to repeat it independently, and then publish the data on the covers of Science, Nature and every news outlet that would take it. IT WOULD ROCK THE WORLD, and he would be rich and famous.

Showing that 70-something percent of our food was poisonous? That would be a HUGE story – “we are talking Nobel Prize and free Amy’s Organic Pot Pies for life!” hos.ufl.edu/faculty/kmfolta

◼ Measure P’s fear, prejudice and ideology, part 1 - Chad White/Mad River Union
◼ Anti-GMO tribal conformity and mythology, part 2 - Chad White/Mad River Union

◼ Recent Letters to the Editor regarding GMOs and Measure P - Mad River Union

◼ Mark Wilson: Megacorps and tribal compulsions derail informed decisionmaking about GMOs

We don’t need to be afraid of the future and should reject those who try to scare us in the name of “Fairness, Prosperity and Protection.” KEEP READING

Mark Wilson is a Biology Professor at Humboldt State University, a microbial geneticist with a Ph.D from Cornell University. He has no ties, financial or otherwise, to any agricultural biotechnology company.

◼ Rollin Richmond: Education and knowledge, not fearful ideology, are key to understanding GMOs - Rollin Richmond/Mad River Union

The recent article, “What the GMO Four aren’t Telling you about biotech food,” by Dr. John Schaefer in the Aug. 26 Mad River Union is a classic example of the “fear factor” that unfortunately often affects people who are forced to deal with a new scientific discovery or technical tool and have not been adequately educated about its basis and use....KEEP READING

Evolutionary biologist Rollin R. Richmond is the former president of Humboldt State University. He has no ties, financial or otherwise, to any agricultural biotechnology company.

◼ What's in Measure P's DNA? - Times-Standard
◼ Measure P seeks to ban GMO crops in Humboldt County - Times-Standard

For those interested in the #Monsanto #GMO study

for those interested in the #Monsanto #GMO study, we'll be covering it on @thelead today on CNN, 4 pm ET/1 pm Pacific

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) May 28, 2013

So who would oppose something that could save millions of children's lives and millions of other children from blindness?

◼ Environmentalism and Human Sacrifice - Dennis Prager/Townhall

Last week, Bjorn Lomborg, the widely published Danish professor and director of one of the world's leading environmental think tanks, the Copenhagen Consensus Center, published an article about the Philippines' decision, after 12 years, to allow genetically modified (GM) rice -- "golden rice" -- to be grown and consumed in that country.

The reason for the delay was environmentalist opposition to GM rice; and the reason for the change in Philippine policy was that 4.4 million Filipino children suffer from vitamin A deficiency. That deficiency, Lomborg writes, "according to the World Health Organization, causes 250,000 to 500,000 children to go blind each year. Of these, half die within a year."

During the 12-year delay, Lomborg continues, "About eight million children worldwide died from vitamin A deficiency."

"Golden rice" contains vitamin A, making it by far the most effective and cheapest way to get vitamin A into Third World children.

So who would oppose something that could save millions of children's lives and millions of other children from blindness?

The answer is people who are more devoted to nature than to human life.

And who might such people be?

They are called environmentalists....