The GMO safety narrative is seemingly chock full of villains (corporations), victims (public health), and heroes (activists) – the necessities of a great story. And although this narrative has been accurate in the past it doesn’t really hold up when it comes to genetic engineering.
Food Evolution film makers Scott Hamilton Kennedy and Trace Sheehan sit down with the Food and Farm Discussion Lab community for a free wheeling chat about making the film, the state of the GMO debate, and doing science communication well.
Alison Van Eenennaam explains how the Washington Post recently conflated organic with grass fed in an exposé of Aurora Dairy a massive organic dairy in Colorado.
University of Wyoming professor Andrew Kniss addresses the issues of intimidation and chilling effects of the USRTK’s FOIA campaign against researchers active in communicating about biotech in ag.
“In all, the impact of adopting slow growing birds is a 34% increase in feed per lb prime meat, a 40% increase in gallons of water and a 53% increase in the manure per bird marketed, and a 49% increase in costs per bird marketed.”
And to what end is this big step backwards in terms of sustainability being undertaken? Theoretically for animal welfare. But what is absent in this discussion is – why slower growing = better welfare?
Giles-Eric Séralini has a new paper out. This one is even worse than the ones that came before. Alison Van Eenennaam explains the how and why.
Alison Van Eenennaam explains why the FDA’s proposed regulations on biotech breeding make no sense.
UC Davis animal genomics and biotechnology specialist Alison Van Eenennaam weighs in on confusion about research funding and industry influence.