Science Facts & Fallacies

The same technology that yielded COVID-19 vaccines could help protect livestock from deadly diseases, but a growing chorus of skeptics could undermine the use of these new mRNA-based shots for animals. On a related note, do farmers use too many drugs to raise their animals? This myth persists despite abundant contrary evidence. Just a few companies dominate the global seed market; how did these firms become such economic powerhouses?

Podcast:

Video



* Kill the Messenger: mRNA-based livestock vaccines are under attack by vaccine skeptics. Here’s why their rejectionism is misplaced — and dangerous

Agricultural animals get sick just like humans do. To reduce the risk of infection and its potentially deadly effects, vaccines are administered to protect the chickens, cows and pigs we depend on for food. While this seems uncontroversial, some of the same critics who opposed COVID-19 vaccination are now sounding the alarm over mRNA-based vaccines for livestock. The new shots, skeptics claim, are a stealth means of immunizing vaccine-hesitant people against SARS-CoV-2. Is there any truth to this allegation?

* Does conventional livestock farming use drugs at ‘unnecessarily high levels’, endangering human health, as activist critics claim?

When vaccines aren't an option, livestock are treated with drugs to bring them back to health. Although treating sick animals is necessary and perfectly ethical, some allege that farmers use medicines, antibiotics included, to make their animals grow faster. In reality, these drugs are tightly regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and prescribed by veterinarians.

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

SIGN UP

* Four multinational companies sell half of all seeds globally, says USDA report on agricultural consolidation

Critics of genetic engineering have long complained about consolidation in the global seed market. With fewer and fewer companies selling seed as time progresses, our food supply is increasingly controlled by just a few international conglomerates. Should we be worried about this oligopoly in the seed market? If so, what can we do about it?

Environmental-Social-Governance (ESG) metrics are supposed to help promote sustainable industry, but could they actually undermine efforts to make farming more eco-friendly? There's a long list of propagandists who attack modern agriculture and medicine; let's take a look at the top 10. The FDA has proposed to label some foods in the grocery store "healthy." It's a terrible idea.

Podcast:

Video



Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 213 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: How Environmental—Social—Governance (ESG) screens can be manipulated to promote misleading science and damage sustainability efforts

In theory, investing in food companies based on their commitment to sustainable farming is a great idea. The problem is, many investors define "sustainability" as a synonym for "organic" farming, which a wealth of research shows is actually worse for the planet. If the ESG movement continues to gain influence, could it harm global food production and efforts to protect the environment?

* Top 10 anti-biotech propagandizers: Who are the science deniers and snake oil peddlers undermining science in agriculture and medicine?

Vandana Shiva, Mike Adams, Robert F Kennedy, Jr., Joe Mercola. These are just some of the high-profile activists undermining public confidence in agriculture and medicine. Let's analyze some commentary from a few of these influential but misguided figures. What exactly do they get wrong, and how can we learn to spot their mistakes?

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

SIGN UP

* Viewpoint: ‘A fool’s errand’ — Here’s why the FDA’s new ‘healthy’ label for foods won’t move the needle on chronic disease

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says it wants to label "healthy" foods in grocery stores, in a bid to promote smarter eating habits. There's a number of critical problems with this proposal. Most importantly, and by the agency's own admission, the vast majority of Americans will not use these labels once they are implemented.

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

So-called "clean" cosmetics have become a big business in recent years. But as with food fads like "Non-GMO," clean cosmetics may actually be no better for consumers or the planet. England has approved the commercial use of gene-edited crops. Could this development set an important precedent in Europe? CRISPR-edited animals carrying a single mutation could produce a lot more meat, significantly boosting sustainable farming.

Podcast:

Video

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 212 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Rethinking the ‘clean cosmetics’ movement: ‘It’s reductive to think that just because it’s biotech it’s inherently more sustainable’

Cosmetic manufacturers have followed the food industry's lead and affixed all sorts of eco-friendly labels to their products. The problem is, makeup made from "natural" or "clean" ingredients is often bad for the environment, since it requires the use of endangered plants. The good news is that identical products can be made using ingredients manufactured in the laboratory, eliminating the need to harvest endangered species. Will consumers embrace these products if they're made using modern biotechnology?

* England becomes first European country to approve gene editing of plants and animals

After living under Europe's oppressive genetic engineering restrictions for decades, England has finally approved the use of gene editing to improve food crops, and may soon green light the technology in animal agriculture. Does England's decision indicate that anti-GMO activism is losing its political influence in the UK and European Union?

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

SIGN UP

*

Have we so badly depleted the world's soil that we only have 60 harvests left? No. New "green" pesticides could be available to farmers in the coming years. But there is concern that pests may rapidly develop resistance to these latest and greatest plant-protection products. Environmental groups are trying to subvert the US pesticide regulatory system through litigation, in a bid to get low-risk pesticides banned. Does this tactic pose a threat to our food supply?

Podcast:

Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 210 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: ‘Only 60 harvests remaining on Earth’? Environmentalist exaggerations obscure dramatic advances in biotechnology-boosted agriculture

Critics of modern agriculture have claimed for years that the world has only 60 harvests left; "industrial farming" has so thoroughly depleted our soil, the argument goes, that we soon won't be able to feed ourselves. Although this idea remains popular, it has never been correct. Food production has exploded in recent decades while the amount of land dedicated to agriculture has only increased slightly. On balance, technological advances, especially in plant breeding beginning with the Green Revolution, have made our food supply far more sustainable.

* Green pesticides are plagued by fast-developing insect resistance. Here’s how that can be addressed

As new biopesticides come online, they are almost immediately confronted by insects, weeds and microorganisms that can rapidly develop resistance to their pesticidal effects. What's the solution? According to a recent study, farmers have to grow a variety of crops and utilize different chemistries with varying modes of action. This helps prevent pests from evolving resistance to any one of the products used to control them. But the question remains: how much progress are we actually making in controlling pesticide resistance?

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

SIGN UP

* Viewpoint: ‘Regulation through litigation’ — Activist groups team up with lawyers to...

It's the time of year when Environmental Working Group (EWG) puts out its much-ballyhooed "dirty dozen" list of fruits and vegetables that are supposedly contaminated with pesticides. Experts continue to stress that EWG's analysis is mistaken and needlessly scares consumers. Speaking of which, any time you look for facts about pesticides, be sure to get your info from hands-on experts, not ideologues. Europe's Farm-To-Fork plan (F2F) was poised to boost the EU's organic food production and slash its fertilizer and pesticide use. The war in Ukraine has brought those plans to a halt.

Podcast:

Video:



Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 210 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* 99.8%: Rebuffing Environmental Working Group’s ‘Dirty Dozen’ pesticide claims, EPA says almost all fruits and vegetables are safe

Despite EWG's claims about the dangers of pesticides, independent experts and regulators continue to insist that America's food supply is among the safest in the world. There is simply no evidence to suggest that trace amounts of pesticides on your produce can pose a health risk. Let's examine just how extensively officials at the EPA, FDA and USDA investigate the chemicals that farmers are allowed to use.

* Viewpoint: Concerned whether pesticides in the environment are safe? Listen to hands-on experts, not ideologues

Claims that pesticides pose a severe threat to human health and the environment are a dime a dozen. The problem is, most of these allegations come from people with ideological commitments that force them to oppose pesticide use. Talking to experts, who actually work with these chemistries, offers a much more balanced perspective. When pesticides are misused, they can indeed be very dangerous. When used as intended and with the proper safety protocols in place, pesticides play and important role in producing our abundant food supply.

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

SIGN UP

* How the war in Ukraine has derailed the European Union Farm to Fork initiative — and sparked debate about what constitutes sustainable agriculture

Ukraine is a major grain producer; Russia is one of the top producers of chemical fertilizer used in agriculture. With the ongoing war disrupting both countries' exports,

Many people have turned to low-carb diets as a way to shed unwanted body fat, but a new study suggests they may just be elevating their heart disease risk. As the developing world continues to pull itself out of poverty, a new debate has emerged among economists in wealthy, Western countries: should emerging nations clean up their environments before further growing their economies, or can they do both at the same time?

Podcast:

Video:



Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 208 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Keto and low-carb, high-fat diets linked to heart disease in new study

Low-carb and ketogenic diets have loyal adherents, who swear that these eating regimens have helped them lose weight and dramatically improve their health. But a new study indicates that high-fat, low-carb dieting could double someone's heart disease risk. Should this research concern us?

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

SIGN UP

* Economic ‘de-growth’ or ‘green growth’: Which climate change strategy makes the most sense?

Should climate change force developing nations to put the environment before economic development? That's been the conventional wisdom among many scientists and global warming activists for decades; however, a new school of thought in economics claims that the developing world can simultaneously protect their natural resources and boost their economies. Is such an effort really possible?

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

The European Union is all too happy to allow consumers to eat potentially dangerous bug-based food, yet it remains hostile to low-risk biotech crops and many pesticides. The hypocrisy is palpable. Is pesticides use "exploding"? Activist groups say "yes," though the evidence tells a different story. How can public health officials rebuild America's trust in science after three years of controversial pandemic-response measures?

Podcast:

Video:



Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 208 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Europe’s precautionary principle hypocrisy: Allowing unevaluated bug-based food while banning safe GM food and crop chemicals

The European Union is known for its hyper-skepticism of novel technologies. Yet the recent push to increase insect consumption has found eager supporters among EU leadership. This has persisted despite legitimate concerns that insect farming carries potentially serious health risks that should be addressed before humans begin relying on cockroaches as a protein source. Why is the EU so enthusiastic about bug-based food but fearful of low-risk biotech crops and pesticides?

* Viewpoint: The Guardian cites ‘shocking’ statistics from environmental lobby groups claiming increasing dangers from pesticide poisonings. Here’s why they are wrong, yet again

Friends of the Earth Europe recently claimed that global pesticide use has increased by 80 percent since 1990. It's a troubling statistic. It's also meaningless. Food production has outpaced increases in pesticide use over the same period, even though the global population has boomed. Moreover, the toxicity of many pesticides continues to decline, though we may be using greater quantities of them. These numbers make clear that farming is becoming more sustainable over time, whatever critics may say.

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

SIGN UP

* Analysis: US public health officials scramble to restore trust in science and vaccines after two years of COVID controversies

Nearly three years of confusing, often contradictory pandemic response measures has left many Americans deeply skeptical of the public health establishment. Fearful that the public will begin rejecting healt...

A bottle of perfume used to cost more than $10,000. The price has dropped precipitously thanks to advancements in synthetic biology, making a lot of fragrances available to many more consumers. The recent World Economic Forum (WEF) gathering in Davos proved to be a massive platform for "fashionable fantasies" about organic farming. A headline-grabbing study recently linked sleeping medication to dementia. But the research deserves much more scrutiny than it's received from the press.

Podcast:

Video:



Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 206 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* $10,500 for a bottle of perfume made with 8,000 flowers? Synthetic biology makes royal fragrances available at a fraction of that price

Instead of harvesting thousands of petals from hundreds of plants to manufacture perfume, scientists can use the tools of synthetic biology to engineer microbes that produce identical fragrance ingredients much more sustainably. Applied beyond perfume to food ingredients, flavorings and medicines, these techniques are poised to yield an array of economic and environmental benefits. But this raises an important question: could consumer perceptions delay the progress of synthetic biology in the same way they slowed progress in crop biotechnology?

*

Viewpoint: ‘Fashionable organic fantasies’ — Global elite at Davos WEF convention endorsed failed agriculture policies amid global food crisis

There is a clear consensus surrounding organic farming. Although there is nothing wrong with this form of agriculture, it simply cannot produce enough to meet the global demand for food today or in the future. Why, then, do so many economic and political elites continue to push governments around the world to mandate organic farming practices? It would seem that ideology trumps evidence more often than we'd like to admit.

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

SIGN UP

*

Sleeping pills hasten dementia? Bogus study illustrates how correlation studies are often manipulated to reach a desired, ideological conclusion

A recent study captured popular attention for positing a link between commonly used sleeping medications and dementia. Some news stories helpfully explained the paper's limitation...

Cystic fibrosis is a fatal condition that claims patients at an early age, so why does it persist? Soaring seed prices are hitting farmers hard. What explains the exorbitant price increases? The European Union says mutagenic plants aren't 'GMOs.' Why does Europe oppose more precise genetic engineering techniques while accepting crops produced through less controlled methods?

Podcast:

Video:



Join geneticist Kevin Folta and guest host Michelle Horning on episode 205 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Cystic fibrosis chronicle: Why has the often-deadly CF gene not passed out of the human genome? And what new treatments are being developed?

Cystic fibrosis (CF) affects some 10 million people, claiming many of their lives at an early age. It's one of the most common genetic disorders in the US and very difficult to treat; so far, no effective therapies have emerged. But that raises an important question: why does the defective gene behind the disease persist in the human genome? Some evidence suggests that the carriers may have enhanced resistance to other conditions, which could extend their lives under the right circumstances. The good news is that scientists are developing a treatment based on phage therapy, deploying viruses that literally eat harmful bacteria. The therapy targets one of the main causes of serious complications in CF, recurrent infection of the lungs. Will this treatment survive clinical trials and begin saving lives?

* Soaring seed prices: What role do patents and regulation play?

$130 million over 13 years. That's what it can cost to develop and commercialize a new crop variety. In order to recoup that investment, patent protection ensures that only the developer can sell the new crop variety for two decades. That makes some economic sense, but it also means that farmers have to pay higher prices for seed. When you factor in the added expense of regulation, seed prices can reach stratospheric levels—sometimes increasing by 700 percent. This can cause downstream effects, including tight margins for growers and higher consumer food prices. Can anything be done to reform the regulatory environment to cut seed prices?

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

SIGN UP

* European Court of Justice reinforces ruling that crops gene edited via mutagenesis should not be regulated as GMOs

Europe is well known for its idiosyncratic plant-breeding regulations.

Dozens of researchers recently blasted two universities for inviting anti-vaccine, anti-GMO activist Vandana Shiva to speak. Why do America's academic institutions keep giving her a platform? Progressives who oppose crop biotech should consider Cuba's stance on the issue. The tiny communist nation is a biotechnology powerhouse. We've had labels on 'bioengineered' foods for a year now. How have consumers reacted to this labeling policy? Have they even noticed?

Podcast:

Video:



Join geneticist Kevin Folta and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 204 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* 50+ scientists challenge Boston College, Florida International for hosting philosopher Vandana Shiva, disseminator of science disinformation on vaccines and crop biotechnology

Vandana Shiva is a long-time proponent of unscientific nonsense when it comes to crop biotechnology and vaccines. She played a key role in convincing Sri Lanka to ban synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, sparking food shortages and riots around the country last year. Despite her shameful track record, Shiva continues to receive invitations (and hefty honorariums) to speak at American universities. The science community has voiced its opposition to this state of affairs, but to no avail. Why are institutions of higher learning promoting Shiva's messaging, especially while they complain about other types of "misinformation" in the public square?

* Viewpoint: Why leftist GMO rejectionists should take notice of Cuba’s emergence as biomedicine and ag-biotech innovator

Driven by concerns about corporate control of food, opposition to crop biotechnology is a characteristically progressive cause. But one scientist from Latin America says this anti-capitalist pose need not push the left to oppose genetic engineering. Cuba, he notes, is one of the few remaining communist countries in the world, as well as something of a leader in agricultural and biomedical research. Can Cuba's success with biotechnology shift the public discourse around GMOs?

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

SIGN UP

* It’s been 1 year since the FDA required labels for food made with genetically modified crops. How have consumers reacted?

Many products in US grocery stores have carried USDA 'bioen...