A decades-long campaign alleges that BPA, a chemical used to manufacture many plastic products, is dangerous. There is no evidence to support that allegation, and there never was. A large body of research shows that artificial sweeteners can help people lose weight, so why does the press continue to speculate about the harms of these "fake sugars"? It takes many years and costs hundreds of millions of dollars to discover and commercialize new pesticides. Why is the process so expensive and so time-consuming?

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 250 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Anti-GMO activists take page out of anti-chemical and anti-BPA lobby, targeting the ‘black box’ of endocrine disruption

There are striking similarities between the campaigns against GM crops and BPA. That's because critics of agricultural biotechnology utilized the "playbook" of anti-BPA activists to attract media attention and public support for their cause. While there is zero credible evidence that either technology causes harm in real-world settings, a cohort of committed activists continues to insist that both should be banned. Why have these tactics been so effective, and how can scientists counter them today?

* Sucralose, aspartame, stevia: With the use of sugar substitutes continuing to rise, questions mount about their impact on diets

The evidence is clear at this point: artificial sweeteners promote weight loss without causing any serious side effects in the vast majority of cases. Nevertheless, mainstream news reports continue to speculate about the potential harms of so-called "fake sugars," alleging they could damage the gut microbiome and increase the risk of diabetes, stroke and coronary heart disease. Let's fact-check the fact-checkers and examine what the science really says about artificial sweeteners.

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

SIGN UP

* If a viable herbicide was discovered this year, farmers couldn’t use it until at least 2035’: Why new weedkillers take so long to hit store shelves

On average, it takes several decades of research and $250 million to discover and commercialize a new weedkiller.

Sustainable agriculture advocates are split over the potential benefits of cell-based meat. Why are these longtime allies divided over this fledgling technology? Marijuana legalization has given rise to a growing industry dubbed "Big Weed" by critics. How worried should we be about the pot business and the intoxicating products it markets? The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recently published a hotly contested report on biotech crops and pesticides. Experts fear it could mislead parents about the safety of America's food supply.

Podcast:

Video:

Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 249 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Cell-based, lab grown meat is splitting food and agricultural sustainability communities. Here’s why

Cell-based meat, produced in a laboratory rather than on a farm, has been hailed as a massive step forward for earth-friendly food production, though not everybody is excited about the technology. Many scientists worry the industry won't be able to deliver on its sustainability marketing, owing to the high costs and energy consumption that come with its products. Advocates of cell-based meat say these criticism are overblown. Let's take a closer look at the evidence.

* ‘Big Weed’: How today’s cannabis landscape mirrors tobacco companies in the 1950s

Once a largely underground industry, marijuana has grown into a multi-billion-dollar business driven by retail and online dispensaries that market a broad array of products. Some public health activists say the marketing claims used to sell this recently legalized cannabis are misleading, and the products themselves (ranging from vape pens to gummies and even THC-laced beverages) pose a serious threat to children's health. This burgeoning industry should therefore be regulated like the tobacco industry, critics argue.

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

SIGN UP

* Are children and pregnant women risking their health by eating “GMO” foods? The American Association of Pediatrics controversially says ‘yes’. The real question: Is the AAP endangering the food vulnerable?

The (American Academy of Pediatrics) AAP has a reputation for disseminating science-based guidance on vaccines, nutrition and other vitally important children's health topics. Unfortunately, the organization in recent years has joined the chorus of activist groups that spreads misinformation about crop biotechnology and pesticides. Its recent clinical report on those topics was blasted by experts for repeating cl...

Thousands of pending lawsuits allege that the weedkiller paraquat causes Parkinson's Disease (PD), a connection its manufacturer tried to hide from regulators and the public for many years. "Documents unveiled as part of ongoing court proceedings in California show that [the chemical company] Syngenta has spent decades investigating the potential side effects of its product," the LA Times reported in December. "This research has sometimes contradicted public statements issued by the company."

These allegations have attracted major media attention, but there's an awkward fact rarely mentioned in the headlines: a large body of research has failed to produce any solid evidence that paraquat exposure causes Parkinson's.

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 248 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down this recent GLP feature:

* Phony Whistleblower Gambit: This is how far some environmental activist groups are willing to go to corrupt science for money and ideological gain

Only available to licensed pesticide applicators, paraquat was used in agriculture without incident for many years. Long after it was commercialized, however, scientists discovered the herbicide was chemically very similar to an impurity found in illicit opioids that caused Parkinson-like symptoms in several recreational drug users. This discovery fueled rampant speculation about the risks of paraquat exposure, though subsequent research showed that the herbicide doesn't cross the blood-brain barrier efficiently enough to cause the neurological damage at the root of PD.

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

SIGN UP

Studies have also shown that workers at paraquat manufacturing plants, individuals with the highest exposure to the chemical, are no more likely to develop Parkinson's than the general population. With this data in mind, is there any additional evidence that can help settle the dispute about paraquat and Parkinson's? Let's take a closer look at the science and politics surrounding this controversial herbicide.

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 Cou...

Exaggerated media coverage distorts the public's understanding of critically important scientific issues, and the consequences can be dire. How do we combat the harmful effects of sloppy science journalism? There's no evidence that the weedkiller glyphosate harms pregnant women (or anyone else for that matter), but that hasn't stopped reporters from trying to embroil the controversial pesticide in yet another scandal.

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 247 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Viewpoint: ‘Following sensationalism’ — How media distort science, influencing courts and regulators

It's a familiar formula: questionable study makes an exaggerated claim about a chemical; reporters uncritically promote the study's conclusion; courts and regulators restrict or ban said chemical in a bid to appease consumers misled by the hyperbolic media coverage. Reporters need to do a better job of conforming their science and health coverage to the available evidence. Since they won't do it themselves, what can scientists and informed laypeople do to hold the media accountable?

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

SIGN UP

* Glyphosate can harm pregnant women living near farms? Carelessly-written article based on the same authors’ more sober academic study shows how misinformation metastasizes

Glyphosate is arguably the most-studied chemical in history, with thousands of papers published over five decades showing that it poses minimal risk to the public, including pregnant women. Nevertheless, headlines routinely assert that mothers and their unborn children could be harmed by exposure to the herbicide. The claim is usually based on low-quality research unworthy of the glowing media coverage it receives. Let's examine a textbook example of a recent study involving women who live near farms and the Conversation's misleading reporting about the research.

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 his website and follow him on X @camjenglish

Speculation persists about the causes of autism thanks to an explosion in the number of cases that have been diagnosed in recent years. Why are so many more children diagnosed today than in previous decades? Veterans battling crippling PTSD may benefit from treatment with psychedelic drugs, but lingering scientific and legal obstacles could prevent us from finding out for certain. Is alcoholism inherited? Some studies support that conclusion, though it could just be a classic case of confusing correlation for causation.

Podcast:

Video:



Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 246 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

* Autism increase mystery solved? No, it’s not vaccines, GMOs, glyphosate—or organic foods

There's no doubt that the number of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) cases has skyrocketed in recent decades, going from one child in 2,000 being diagnosed in the 1970s to roughly one in 250 eight years olds today. The increase has given rise to rampant speculation about the environmental factors that may contribute to the spectrum of conditions. Everything from pesticides and vaccines to assisted reproductive technologies and maternal alcohol consumption have been identified as possible causes, although none of these correlations have withstood scientific scrutiny. Have we learned more about the causes of ASD, or are we still grasping at straws?

* Psychedelics could help veterans with PTSD, anxiety and depression. Breakthroughs and dropping of taboos opening new treatment possibilities

Military veterans suffering from PTSD and related psychiatric disorders may benefit from the use of psychedelic drugs like MDMA. Preliminary research and anecdotal evidence have been promising, suggesting that psychedelics may cure these debilitating conditions in some cases, though additional research is needed to understand the long-term impacts of these treatments, including their side effects. There's a bipartisan effort underway in Congress to roll back regulations that restrict how these substances are studied and utilized in clinical settings, but it remains to be seen if psychedelics can live up to their hype.

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

SIGN UP

* Can alcoholism be inherited?

Children of alcoholics are four times more likely than other children to become alcoholics. That observation has fueled investigations to uncover a genetic basis for alcohol use disorder (AUD). While there is no definitive answer yet, studies have linked mutations in genes related to alcohol metabolism to an individual's risk f...

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...