- The mainstream scientific community delivered swift blowback to an activist study claiming biotech crops cause cancer. McGill University’s Joe Schwarcz, whom we know has little time for ideologically blinded activists, summarizes the problems: “The control group was way too small, there was no disclosure of control rats with tumors, data were improperly interpreted, there was no dose-response relationship, and the strain of rat used was genetically susceptible to tumors.” Additionally, other scientists have pointed out that the authors demanded that journalists not speak to outside experts before the study was announced, which violates usual best practices.
- The organic-only food movement is not happy with a Stanford University study that showed that organic food had no more nutrients than conventional food. One New York Times columnist recounts his hate mail from the easily mock-able organic-eating crowd but defends his position, noting that an agronomist working in Africa backed went so far as to call organic ideology “a substitute for organized religion.”
- More evidence suggests that calorie counts on menu boards don’t motivate people to change their calorie consumption, as we predicted when calorie labeling on restaurant menus was first mandated. No wonder then that Kelly “Twinkie Tax” Brownell wrote that “society doesn’t have the luxury to await scientific certainty” before adopting government mandates and regulations to fight obesity. The ones he likes don’t seem to work that well.
- CCF in the News: We’re warning Oklahomans and Pennsylvanians that the food police won’t stop at the New York City line and debunking dubious obesity projections in the Chicago Tribune.
- CCF This Week: In our daily posts this week, we looked at more evidence that hysterical projections of falling lifespans are false, debunked the meaningfulness of claims that you can avoid pesticides by eating organic foods, wondered if menu-mandate-happy bureaucrats will learn from the hostile reaction of students to new school lunch rules, and reported on a PCRM board member’s weak arguments against meat and dairy.
