Are you ready to eat insects? Some scientists say it's time we get more protein from bugs and less from meat. CRISPR gene editing may help eliminate high cholesterol, potentially reducing the deadly threat posed by heart disease. Flu shots based mRNA technology may be coming to a drug near you.

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 198 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Insect food? Public skepticism remains a major hurdle but here is the sustainability case for including them in our diet

Is it time for consumers in the developed world to make bugs a staple in our diets? Some scientists and policymakers have been vocal in their demands that we eat insects in order to reduce agriculture's contribution to climate change.  As is often the case with controversial ideas, two questions arise: does the science support this campaign to put mealworms on the menu, and will doing so really reduce our environmental footprint?

* Poor cholesterol? A gene-edited solution could lower ‘bad’ LDL and reduce heart disease risk

Millions of Americans suffer from high cholesterol, a major risk factor for heart disease. Although multiple treatments exist for high cholesterol, a novel CRISPR-based therapy may allow scientists to edit the gene that controls LDL levels, potentially eliminating the risk before it becomes a problem later in life. This gene-editing solution is many years from commercialization, but it's still tempting to speculate about how it may impact the interplay between genetics and environment that dictates our risk for heart disease.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

SIGN UP

*

Do you want to clone your pet? There are companies that will do it for you—if you have a half-million dollars to spare. Drought-tolerant biotech crops have been developed and are grown around the globe. Why do anti-GMO groups continue to deny they exist? We need new antibiotics to control bacteria that have evolved resistance to the drugs we've used for decades. How do we spur the development of these desperately needed medicines?

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 197 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* ‘He’s more than just his DNA’: Cloning a beloved pet costs up to $500,000 — but there’s no guarantees when it comes to personality

The death of a family pet is a brutal experience for most of us. If you've ever wished that you could hit the reset button and give your dog, cat or even your prized bull a second chance—and you have anywhere from $50,000 to $500,000 laying around—there are companies that will harvest your pet's cells and use them to produce a clone of your fury family member. The problem? With just a 20 percent success rate, the process is hardly foolproof. And even if it works, Lassie 2.0 may not behave as you expect. It's a stark reminder that genetics doesn't dictate personality—even in our pets.

* Viewpoint: GM drought-tolerant crops: Here is one biotech innovation that only anti-GMO science rejectionists can demonize

Drought-tolerant biotech crops exist. Varieties of corn, wheat and soy have been developed and farmers around the world grow them every year. Why, then, do anti-GMO groups persist in claiming that biotechnology can't produce plants with drought tolerance? They're either unaware of the evidence or they just deny it. Neither option paints a flattering picture of these activist groups.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

SIGN UP

Believe it or not, scientists are exploiting venom from snakes, snails and other poisonous critters to make life-saving medicines. Could genetically engineered soybeans reduce deforestation caused by palm-oil production? Sustainable, biodegradable plastics may be on the horizon, thanks to a slew of biotechnology innovations.

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 196 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Life-saving venom? How deadly compounds can be used as medications

Sensible folks know it's wise to avoid poisonous snakes and other dangerous animals. What's not widely known, however, is that venom from these creatures has already yielded effective medications—for example, the first ACE inhibitor used to treat high blood pressure. The list of important drugs we could derive from venom is seemingly endless and includes everything from non-addictive pain killers to affordable insulin found in the venom of snails.

* An alternative to harvesting environmentally-destructive palm oil? Here’s a biotech solution using soybeans

Producing palm oil in bioreactors using soybean cells could be one of the solutions that helps us reduce deforestation in west Africa and South America. The concept is simple in principle: using gene-editing technology, researchers engineer soybean to produce the oil we usually get from palm kernels. These souped-up soybean cells thrive on nitrogen and sugar and "grow" in laboratory bioreactors. The big hurdle may be energy consumption. Could electricity required to run the bioreactors offset some or all of the environmental benefits of this new palm oil source?

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

SIGN UP

*

Using body mass index (BMI) to assess a patient's health may yield misleading results and undermine public trust in medicine, researchers claim. Lab-grown meat has been heralded as solution to agriculture's environmental footprint, but the technology may not live up to the hype. One anthropologist says he's uncovered evidence suggesting that early humans ate each other. Did our ancestors really engage in cannibalism?

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 195 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: Do doctors rely on BMI too much? Undue focus on weight can lead to patient distrust and delayed care

Doctors and public health officials have used body mass index (BMI) to assess obesity for decades. In recent years, though, BMI has come under fire as an unreliable and unhelpful tool. Some researchers now argue that this single metric doesn't tell physicians very much about their patients' health. Urging overweight individuals to slim down based on BMI may "harm" them emotionally and discourage them from seeking medical care when they need it. Is it time to ditch BMI and replace it with more holistic measurements of health?

* Why sustainably-produced lab-grown meat might be a pipe dream

Is meat more sustainable if it's grown in a lab instead of raised on a farm? While there isn't enough evidence to conclusively answer that question, two other issues could limit the technology's impact on our dietary habits: cost and consumer acceptance. Producing meat in a laboratory is incredibly expensive at present, and many consumers have said they won't give up their traditionally produced steaks and burgers even if those foods could be mass produced without animals. Can the nascent "alternative protein" industry overcome these hurdles?

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

SIGN UP

* Ancient homo sapiens diets included grains, veggies… and other people? Cannibalism was the norm in early human societies

Although we consider cannibalism unthinkable today, recent anthropological research has uncovered "evidence of butchery, gnawing, filleting, and cooking on human bones at sites around the world," science writer Ross Pomeroy recently reported for BigThink. This data invites an uncomfortable question: did early humans eat each other?

Kevin M. Folta is a professor, keynote speaker and podcast host. Follow Professor Folta on Twitter

The New York Times last week alleged that a high-profile scientist is in cahoots with the meat industry. Is there any truth to the allegation? Genetically engineered insulin was approved 40 years ago. What have we learned about drug regulation since then? Four gene therapies have received FDA approval so far. Will we see more of these novel medicines on the market in the coming years?

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 194 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: NY Times collaborates with Greenpeace in front page ‘hit piece’ targeting professor working to reduce the sustainability footprint of animal agriculture. Here’s his response

Repeating recent history, the New York Times last week attacked a widely respected scientist for allegedly taking money from corporations to defend their products. "He’s an Outspoken Defender of Meat. Industry Funds His Research, Files Show," the paper wrote about UC Davis air-quality specialist Dr. Frank Mitloehner. The problem? Nearly everything in the story was completely false.

* Viewpoint: Human insulin saga: Anomalous, successful 40-year history of the first genetically-modified medicine underscores how regulators can scuttle innovation

Insulin produced from genetically engineered microbes hit the market roughly four decades ago. It greatly expanded access to the hormone and earned regulatory approval in a record-breaking five months, instead of the usual 30 months. According to the FDA scientist who oversaw the approval of this novel drug, known commercially as "Humulin," the story illustrates the power of biotechnology to save lives—and how unnecessary regulation can stifle innovation.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

Air pollution harms our health in many ways; does it also encourage obesity? Farmers in India have access to two newly approved GM crops. Are regulators in the country finally beginning to embrace biotechnology? Wearable devices that track your blood sugar, sleep habits and macronutrient intake are being marketed as a solution to obesity. Will they live up to the hype?

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 193 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Air pollution linked to greater risk of obesity in women

Air pollution is nasty stuff. It's been linked to all sorts of deadly diseases, and research in recent years has suggested that exposure to air pollutants might amplify the risk of obesity. Do these studies stand up to scrutiny, or is the link between weight gain and smog a media-created health scare?

* India approves first genetically-modified crops in 20 years: Herbicide-tolerant cotton and mustard

After two decades of foot dragging, regulators in India have approved two more genetically engineered crops, herbicide-tolerant cotton and mustard. Many farmers have been growing the enhanced cotton illegally for several years now because it helps them efficiently control weeds and therefore preserve their crop yields. Has the Indian government finally discarded its unnecessary fear of "GMOs"?

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

SIGN UP

Will ‘biological push notifications’ from weight loss gadgets keep people on track with their diets?

Type 1 diabetics have worn continuous glucose monitors for many years to track their blood sugar. The same technology is now being deployed to help more consumers lose unwanted excess weight. These devices, which can be worn as rings or even embedded in workout clothing, track respiratory rate, blood oxygen, and other health metrics; one device even analyzes breath to determine which macronutrients the user is burning. But with little research to validate these "wearable technologies," some experts wonder how effectively they'll help people lead healthier lives.

Kevin M. Folta is a professor, keynote speaker and podcast host. Follow Professor Folta on Twitter

So-called "regenerative" farming is gaining traction as a method of sustainable food production. Does it live up to the hype it receives from politicians and reporters? Genetically engineered bacteria can be turned into cancer-killing Trojan horses that evade the defenses of tumor cells. Thanks to gene editing, banana-flavored beer may be coming to a brewery near you.

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 192 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: ‘Regenerative’ is replacing ‘organic’ as the latest green farming fad. Here’s why the reality falls far short of the hype

As consumer interest in sustainability explodes, policymakers and food companies are beginning to push "regenerative" farming as a weapon against pollution and climate change. The problem? Regenerative agriculture is little more than organic farming dressed in new marketing language. Contrary to the favorable news coverage, regenerative growing methods tend to exclude low-toxicity pesticides and genetically engineered seeds that improve farm efficiency. The result is lower crop yields and a larger environmental footprint.

* ‘Sending a Trojan horse into cancer cells’ Can this genetically-engineered bacteria stop tumors in their tracks?

We've heard it before. A cure for cancer is just around the corner, headline after headline has declared for years on end. While these pronouncements have been exaggerated, novel therapies for different cancers are indeed coming online. In one recent instance, researchers engineered bacteria that produce a tiny non-living cell that "mingles" with tumors. This nano-cell hooks onto tumors and interfering RNA molecules (siRNAs) packaged with the nano-cell then hinder the function of DNA replication enzymes the tumors need to grow.

Early clinical research indicates that this novel approach effectively treats multiple cancers, without generating the toxic side effects often associated with chemotherapy.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

Reporters continue to exaggerate the results of low-quality nutrition studies. Their desire to attract readers with dramatic headlines may be destroying the public's trust in mainstream news sources. Taking a brief break from drinking might yield some significant health benefits. Why do so many people develop acne? Could it be something unique to our "industrialized" way of life?

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 191 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: How reporters regularly botch food nutrition studies

Reporters have again blown the results of an underwhelming nutrition study out of proportion, claiming that grape consumption may prevent Alzheimer's Disease and extend your lifespan. While grapes are both delicious and packed with important nutrients, the research in no way justified those headlines. Is exaggerated reporting driving the public's dwindling trust in major media outlets?

* Taking a break from alcohol? Here’s the positive changes in the brain when you stop drinking for a month

A bout of alcohol abstinence may promote brain health, according to scientists who study alcohol use disorder. Research has shown that alcoholics who achieve sobriety experience myriad health benefits, thanks to the body's ability to repair damage done by substance abuse. Newly gathered evidence indicates that people who regularly consume alcohol might benefit in a similar manner. There's nothing wrong with the occasional drink, though participating in "sober October" might still be a good idea.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

SIGN UP

*

Science Facts and Fallacies host Cameron English recently appeared on the Dr. Phil show to tackle an incendiary question: Has the Body Positivity Movement Gone Too Far? Activists behind this campaign assert that obesity isn't a public health issue, it's an identity that should be respected. For many years, the argument continues, society has "medicalized" obesity in order to oppress "fat" people. More recent evidence indicates that somebody's weight reveals little or nothing about their overall health, fat acceptance advocates claim.

These assertions have ignited an intense debate. As Dr. Phil summarized it,

Are we doing too much to celebrate the plus-sized? Not according to Lexi and her husband, Will, who say they’ve struggled with their body image their entire lives and have now found freedom in letting go of the need to control their weight and instead accepting themselves the way they are.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

SIGN UP

Do this argument for so-called "fat acceptance" stand up to scrutiny? Perhaps more importantly, is this movement undermining science by pressuring society to ignore the risks of obesity? Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 190 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down the Dr. Phil debate and examine the arguments for body positivity.

 

Kevin M. Folta is a professor, keynote speaker and podcast host. Follow Professor Folta on Twitter @kevinfolta

Cameron J. English is the director of bio-sciences at the American Council on Science and Health. Visit his website and follow ACSH on Twitter @ACSHorg

Should we be skeptical of GMO safety studies funded by biotech companies? Major food makers including Pepsi and Nestle have invested millions in "regenerative" farming. Is this a worthwhile effort, or just another case of "greenwashing"? Can vegetables that taste like snack food bring the obesity epidemic to an end?

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 189 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Are most GMO safety studies funded by industry?

Anti-GMO groups allege that industry-funded studies can't be trusted. Biotech companies won't fairly evaluate their own products, the argument goes, so whatever research they produce won't document the risks that come with consuming genetically engineered crops. Is this a reasonable criticism, or just more misleading rhetoric from activist groups?

* Nestle, General Mills, PepsiCo and other food companies have pledged support for regenerative agriculture. Is this a greenwashing campaign?

Food conglomerates are beginning to invest heavily in "regenerative" farming projects that reward growers for employing techniques like cover cropping. Nestle, General Mills and Pepsi say this transition to more "sustainable" practices is necessary to protect their supply chains from the impacts of climate change. This sort of marketing appeals to many consumers today, but what does the science say about the benefits of regenerative agriculture?

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

SIGN UP

* 4 in ten Americans are obese. Producers need to harness biotechnology to make spinach as tasty as popcorn

Obesity is one of the largest public health problems afflicting the world today, yet experts still don't know how to help millions of people lose significant amounts of weight. Could the answer be veggies that taste like snack food? If biotech companies can produce fruits and vegetables with better flavor profiles, the argument goes, consumers will eat them in place of the calorie-dense foods available in every supermarket, restaurant and convenience store. Could this proposal work, and is it even possible to make green vegetables taste like popcorn?

Kevin M. Folta is a professor, keynote speaker and podcast host. Follow Professor Folta on Twitter