Science Facts & Fallacies

Americans are losing trust in scientists following the COVID pandemic. How can experts regain the public's support? The European Union (EU) has sided with farmers and suddenly halted its plans to mandate a 50 percent reduction in pesticide use and 25 percent boost in organic farmland. Gene editing is a promising biomedical technology, though some ethicists fear this tool might lead us into a superhuman future with consequences we aren't prepared for.

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 245 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Trust in scientists nosedives post pandemic with deeper slide among Republicans

The US government's COVID-19 response–inconsistently enforced lockdowns, mask mandates and vaccine mandates, most notably–angered many Americans. Recent poll results show that just 57% of the public says science has had a mostly positive effect on society, an eight percentage point drop since November 2021 and a decline of 16 points since before the coronavirus outbreak. With the frustrations of the pandemic still fresh in the minds of many, what can scientists do to regain America's confidence?

* Reckoning for European Green Deal ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy: EU lawmakers side with farmers and consumers, bury plan to cut chemical pesticide use by 50%

The EU had a grand plan to boost organic farming and cut agricultural chemical use—then reality hit. The pandemic, war in Ukraine and severe inflation turned food shortages into a looming threat for Europe. Added to these tumultuous conditions was intense opposition from farmers, who saw the EU's infatuation with organic agriculture as an attempt to rob them of their livelihoods. Politicians in Europe finally took a hint and rescinded their 'Green Deal' proposal. Governments around the world should learn from the EU's example: bad policy can have potentially catastrophic consequences.

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

SIGN UP

* Playing God: Catholic ethical experts caution against ‘superhuman’ genetic future

Gene editing has already yielded incredible results in medicine and agriculture, and the technology will only grow more powerful with time as our understanding of genetics improves. However, some ethicists fear that advances in human gene editing, particularly germline editing, which modifies the DNA parents pass down to their children,

Has Twitter (X) devolved into a misinformation cesspool? Once scientist says yes. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) claims schools near farms could put students at risk of pesticide exposure. It's another evidence-free scare story. Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. says drug companies are neglecting chronic diseases to protect their profits. Is this a scandal in need of a solution, or just campaign-trail rhetoric?

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 243 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Twitter/X’s race to the disinformation bottom: Are we losing a valuable forum for rational discussion?

After Elon Musk purchased Twitter in 2022, the popular social media platform, now dubbed "X," reverted to a digital wild west. Once-banned users were allowed back on the site, and X liberalized its moderation policies. Evidence also emerged that Twitter had collaborated with both Republican and Democratic presidents to suppress ideas their administrations found objectionable. Free speech advocates have generally celebrated the changes under Musk's leadership, though some critics allege X is now home to the wildest conspiracies, scientific misinformation and other forms of misleading and even harmful content. Have we lost a forum for rational discussion, or is X better as a freer platform?

* Viewpoint: Dark money and tort-lawyer-funded Environmental Working Group (EWG) launches new campaign to scare public about ‘dangerous’ pesticide spraying near schools

EWG has launched a campaign warning parents that their children's schools may be adjacent to farms that utilize pesticides. This bit of geography trivia has no bearing on public health—pesticide use is tightly regulated to protect us from harm—but it's a typical example of how activist groups abuse factual information to bolster their ideological goals. Let's take a closer look at EWG's claims about pesticides and schools.

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

SIGN UP

* RFK, Jr. accuses drug companies of ignoring chronic diseases and focusing on ‘money-making infectious diseases’ like measles and COVID, vows to reverse NIH policies if elected

As he tries to lure voters away from his rivals in the 2024 presidential r...

The creation-evolution debate has fallen out of the spotlight in recent years, but many Americans still reject Darwin's theory. Should we be alarmed by this widespread skepticism of basic biology? You probably believe at least some myths about food and nutrition; let's debunk the top 10. Farmers in the Philippines are finally starting to grow vitamin-fortified Golden Rice. The results so far are encouraging.

Podcast:

Video:

Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 243 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Aligned with views of new House Speaker Mike Johnson, 60% of Americans believe Biblical creation myth or that God guided evolution

A plurality of American adults still reject Darwin's theory of evolution, or believe the process was guided by God. It's just one example of a widespread phenomenon today: people of all backgrounds routinely reject established biological facts to protect their religious and cultural beliefs. Why does this science denial persist, and what can we do about it?

* Revising 10 fact-based perspectives on entrenched food myths: Gene editing is good, diet soda is fine, organics is not the answer

Diet soda is harmful; food deserts cause obesity; farm subsidies make junk food cheap. The preceding statements are completely false, yet they're often taken as established fact in public health debates. Let's debunk these and a handful of other popular falsehoods about food and nutrition.

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

SIGN UP

* Which is better to fight blindness — Golden Rice or Vitamin A supplement pills?

After more than two decades of research and regulatory review, some farmers in the Philippines are starting to grow Golden Rice (GR), a genetically engineered crop designed to fight vitamin A deficiency (VAD), a devastating condition that afflicts millions of children in southeast Asia. But political opposition to GR persists and it's still not clear what the future holds. Let's take a look at the deployment of Golden Rice in the Philippines and see how it's progressing.

Dr. Liza Dunn is a medical toxicologist and the medical affairs lead at Bayer Crop Science. Follow her on X @DrLizaMD

Cameron J. English is the director of bio-sciences at the American Council on Science and Health. Visit

Facing intense criticism from experts, the BBC was pushed to correct a deeply misleading story about the benefits of organic farming. Genetically engineered insulin turned 41 this year. Let's take a look back at the importance of this groundbreaking drug. According to one biologist, Scientific American has become a "scientific sewer."

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 242 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* BBC corrects its misleading educational site hyping the benefits of organic and the alleged environmental problems of GMOs

In an error-ridden report on the benefits of organic farming, the BBC alleged that conventional agriculture poses a serious risk to biodiversity and human health, owing to its use of "synthetic" pesticides and other chemicals that can increase pollution. Science for Sustainable Agriculture, self-described as a "pro-science think-tank," lodged a complaint with the news network, urging it to remove the misleading claims from its BBC Bitesize website, which is geared toward undergraduate college students. After reviewing the matter, BBC editors updated the website and issued a correction. It's a great example of experts holding the media accountable, and reporters taking steps to ensure the accuracy of their coverage.

* Happy 41st birthday, genetically-engineered insulin. Your approval by the FDA in 1982 took 5 months. How many years would it take now?

We used to retrieve insulin from the pancreases of slaughtered cows and pigs to treat diabetics, who don't produce enough of the hormone naturally to maintain their blood sugar within healthy limits. That all changed in the 1970s with the advent of genetic engineering. Using this recombinant DNA technology, scientists coaxed GE bacteria into producing virtually unlimited quantities of human insulin, which proved to be safer and more effective than its counterpart derived from animals. Former FDA official Dr. Henry Miller, who oversaw the agency's medical review of the novel drug, recounts how significant this development was for public health, and what regulators today should learn from the story.

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

SIGN UP

* Vie...

Biotech startup Zbiotics says its genetically engineered bacterium can reduce the risk of hangovers. Is there solid science behind the company's marketing claims? Women can earn thousands of dollars by gestating a child for couples that can't have their own children; some experts warn the practice turns vulnerable women into "children factories." Many governments are working to limit the patent rights drug companies maintain over their products; it's a controversial move that could discourage the development of new pharmaceuticals, some commentators claim.

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 241 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Precision probiotics: Can this anti-hangover drink help you metabolize alcohol quicker?

By engineering a bacterium to enhance the metabolism of alcohol, Zbiotics claims it's developed a GM probiotic that can significantly reduce the risk of hangover after a night out at the bar. Taken as a shot before someone consumes alcohol, the product helps the gut break down a chemical called acetaldehyde, which Zbiotics says is largely responsible for the worst effects of binge drinking, based on cell-culture studies. Consumers who have tried the probiotic say it works well, but does the product stand up to scientific scrutiny?

* Viewpoint: Unregulated $14 billion surrogacy industry treats women like ‘children factories’

Couples who can't or won't have their own children are increasingly hiring young women to gestate and give birth to their babies. The practice, known as surrogacy, is billed as a practical solution for infertility. But critics maintain that this multi-billion-dollar industry exploits the vulnerable to satisfy the preferences of wealthy celebrities who don't want to endure pregnancy. There is also some evidence that surrogacy carries serious health risks for children and their biological mothers. Are these risks overblown, or is it time to strictly regulate, or even ban, this novel method of reproduction?

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

SIGN UP

* Viewpoint: In the name of equity, Democrats try to limit drug patent rights. Here’s why that could derail US bioinnovation and hurt the most vulnerable

Citing access to medicine as a human right, some governments are restricting the intellectual property rights of pharmaceutical companies. The industry and some of its allies claim thes...

Why do so many people on the political left and right, who agree on almost nothing, share a deep-seated fear of pesticides? Drugs that seem worthless may still affect our health. Researchers can boost science literacy by making a greater effort to engage the public on social media. But how exactly do they do it?

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 240 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: Anti-pesticide hysteria brings together conspiracy theorists and science-illiterate people on the left and right

Progressives and conservatives agree on very little. But when it comes to the dangers of pesticides, these political opponents often join forces in an attempt to ban the products that farmers rely on to protect their crops. What holds this odd coalition together? Some combination of distrust in public health officials and fear of technology. Scientists may have to develop new ways to address the concerns of these skeptical consumers without undermining their deeply help beliefs.

* Why worthless drugs sometimes seem to work—What we can learn from the FDA’s withdrawal of the decongestant phenylephrine

Americans spend almost $2 billion a year on the decongestant phenylephrine. Those stratospheric sales figures suggest that the drug alleviates common symptoms of congestion, but a large body of evidence indicates that phenylephrine, when taken orally, is largely ineffective, leading the FDA to declare in September that "current scientific data do not support that the recommended dosage of orally administered phenylephrine is effective as a nasal decongestant."  Why, then, do so many people use it? It might just come down to the placebo effect.

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

SIGN UP

* Study: Scientists should use social media to fight advocacy group disinformation about modern agricultural biotechnology

Millions of people rely on social media as their primary source of information on a variety of topics; they also have high trust in scientists. As a result, researchers can promote scientific literacy among the general public by engaging with users on platforms such as Facebook and YouTube, a recent study has found. By partnering with influencers and interacting with people one on one, scientists can make progress in building support for the use of biotech crops and other important technological innovations in agriculture.

Dr.

Premature babies might complete their gestation in artificial wombs called "biobags" in the coming years. The anesthetic ketamine might be a powerful treatment for depression, but increasing drug abuse could rapidly undermine its legitimate medical use. Banning the weedkiller glyphosate could have disastrous effects on agriculture around the world.

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 239 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* From lambs to humans: Artificial wombs are on the horizon

It may be possible in the coming years to gestate premature babies—as young as 22 weeks—in devices called "biobags," which are engineered to emulate the environment of a mother's womb. Researchers from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia have successfully used the technology to save premature lambs; they're now petitioning the FDA for approval to perform clinical trials with human children. Biobags represent a potentially enormous step forward for the care of premature babies, though some physicians, including a pioneer in the field of fetal surgery, say the technology isn't ready for prime time.

* Viewpoint: Ketamine for mental health is being abused. We need more regulatory oversight

Long used as an anesthetic and pain reliever, ketamine may also prove to be a blockbuster treatment for major depression. The drug's efficacy against mental illness remains in doubt until scientists gather more evidence, though existing research indicates that ketamine may be as effective as existing interventions. The ultimate problem, though, may be abuse. Physicians working in the so-called "wellness industry" have apparently started prescribing ketamine off label to patients under guise of vitamin or mineral infusions. This practice invites serious side effects and, according to some experts, downplays the risks posed by ketamine use. Will the FDA step in?

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

SIGN UP

* Viewpoint: Why a glyphosate ban would lead to use of ineffective and more toxic alternatives

Glyphosate has been studied time and again for more than 40 years. It's a low-toxicity weedkiller that poses minimal risk to human health and the environment. Nevertheless, what would happen if the pesticide's vocal opposition finally got its way and convinced governments to ban glyphosate? Officials in the Netherlands commissioned a team of scientists to study that counterfactual. Their conclusion: banning glyphosate would boost the use of more toxic pesticides.

We don't always know why anti-depressants and obesity drugs work, but that shouldn't discourage patients from taking medications that can improve their lives. Gene-editing could boost animal welfare and expand access to nutritious food around the world. Is it therefore immoral to oppose the use of CRISPR-edited animals in agriculture? A slew of recent headlines has claimed that America's water supply contains dangerous chemicals. There is no science behind that alarming speculation.

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 238 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: Antidepressants and obesity medications work — but we don’t know why. Here’s why that’s a problem

Anti-depressants and recently approved weight-loss drugs like Ozempic have something in common: they seem to work very well for many patients, who experience few negative side effects and manage to take control of their mental health or weight. This message is often obscured because we don't always know why these drugs work for some people but not others. That uncertainty drives fearful media coverage and engenders skepticism among the public. Can the available evidence help clarify how these medications work?

* Viewpoint: With meat demand expected to grow by 50% by 2050, it’s ‘immoral’ to oppose gene-edited animals

As developing nations grow wealthier, demand for meat and other animal products will increase. Using gene editing technologies like CRISPR, scientists can breed animals that are disease resistant, and farmers who lose fewer cows, pigs and chickens to costly diseases can produce much more food than was previously possible. These observations prompt an intriguing question: is it immoral to oppose animal gene editing if it gives more people access to a sustainable food supply? One scientist says yes. Let's take a closer look at his argument.

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

SIGN UP

* PFAS: EPA’s Campaign to Promote Fear Over Facts

The US has widespread access to safe, clean drinking water—which is a key "measure of progress against poverty, disease, and death," according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Unfortunately, recent news coverage has misused research conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allege that our water supply contains harmful chemicals. There is zero evidence to justify such an alarming claim.

Dr. Liza Dunn is a medical toxicologist and the medical affairs lead at Bayer Crop Science. Follow her on X @DrLizaMD

Did vaccine mandates slow the spread of COVID on college campuses? A new study says yes. AI-generated articles are already spreading dubious claims about pesticides. How do we stop this troubling development before it distorts the public's already tenuous understanding of agriculture? A growing chorus of activist groups and reporters claims that biotech crops and pesticides can't help developing countries feed their hungry populations. Let's take a critical look at the latest version of this spurious argument.

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 237 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Did COVID vaccine mandates reduce infection rates among college students?

Mandating COVID shots on college campuses helped reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2, according to a recent study conducted by researchers at Ohio State University. “Once the requirements were in place, we saw on average a 100% decrease in virus in saliva and up to 12,000% increase in antibody levels to block its spread,” the paper's lead author said in a press release. While the research confirmed that vaccination did indeed slow the spread of COVID at certain points in the pandemic, it also showed that omicron continued to spread across campuses after mandates were in place. How do we make sense of the study's results?

* Viewpoint: ‘Garbage in, garbage out’ — How AI is already skewing news coverage of complicated science issues like the safety of glyphosate

An AI-generated story recently claimed that "the agriculture department" had banned glyphosate after evidence emerged that the weedkiller causes cancer. The truth was much more nuanced. The regulation applied to all pesticides, but only in a single region of northeast India, and it had nothing to do with glyphosate or cancer. It's a helpful illustration of how easily unscientific claims can emerge and circulate online.

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

SIGN UP

* Viewpoint: Anti-biotech activists claim Gates Foundation-supported plan to embrace crop biotechnology and modernize African agriculture is failing

Jacobin Magazine recently published a terribly misleading story about a nonprofit project designed to give farmers in developing countries access to biotech seeds and other modern agricultural tools. Efforts to promote these technologies are not philanthropic, Jacobin alleged,

Are so-called "industrial" seed oils slowly killing us? Probably not. One mom and farmer says other parents shouldn't be scared of anti-GMO rhetoric they see online. Do opposites really attract? A new study appears to have debunked that old adage.

Podcast:

Video:

Join guest host and geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 236 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* ‘Industrial’ seed oils are killing you? Here’s the health story behind cooking oils

Cooking oils derived from corn, canola and other crops have been staples in Western diets for decades. Although public health authorities have promoted vegetable oils as better choices than saturated fats, growing rates of obesity and diabetes have coincided with the increased consumption of these products, leading many people to the conclusion that seed oils are inherently harmful. Is there any solid evidence to support that conclusion?

* Viewpoint: Why fellow moms shouldn’t succumb to anti-GMO information when making family food choices

Health gurus who sell fad diets and GMO-free products routinely target parents, who are keen to protect their children from potentially harmful chemicals in their food. Minnesota-based mom and farmer Wanda Patsche says her fellow parents need not fear GMOs and other modern tools that are used to produce our abundant food supply. She has some advice that may help moms and dads separate good science from health scares as they browse the shelves at their local grocery stores.

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

SIGN UP

*  Do opposites really attract? Partners in most successful relationships share political views, education levels, drinking habits and more

When it comes to romantic relationships, men and women prefer partners who are like them, according to a recent study surveying 120 years worth of research. The study found that, for more than 80 percent of personality and physical traits, people tended to pair up with partners who exhibited the same qualities they posses. In other words, opposites do not attract.

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

Cameron J.