In the past few months, Scientific American published an article that attacked biotechnology, another that repeated conspiratorial nonsense about 5G technology, and a third that went on an anti-medical rant aimed at a high-profile gynecologist.
The Guardian axed its science blog in August 2018. Then, apparently, it found a new moneymaker in spreading chemophobia and more with a new series titled "Toxic America."
The New York Times ran an Op-Ed about the wellness industry that asked, "Why are so many smart women falling for its harmful, pseudoscientific claims?" Gee, maybe it's because they also read about the benefits of witchcraft in the very same newspaper?
A former high school science teacher, who believes the biotech industry commits crimes against humanity, attacked our organization on an anti-Semitic website. We, of course, are honored. And we have a few things to point out as a result.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science is one of the foremost pro-science organizations in the world. Not only does it advocate for good science and science policy, it publishes Science, the prestigious journal read globally by millions. Unfortunately, AAAS has gotten a bit weird in recent months.
Question: How do you know when a "study" isn't really a study? Answer: When those who performed it also write up a brochure, hyping its results before actually bothering to publish a scientific paper.
People who sign up for golf tips probably aren't looking for bad health advice. Yet, that's exactly what they got – as well as an unhealthy dose of conspiracy theory – in a recent newsletter sent out by Golf Game Tips.
Not only did Americans vote on members of Congress this week, but citizens of several states also voted on various science- and health-related policy issues. How did those turn out? On the upside, an anti-fracking law was defeated. On the downside, workplace vaping was banned and bogus medical marijuana laws passed.
The famous vodka company cashes in on the anti-science movement, announcing that it was renouncing GMO corn in its famous "No. 21 vodka." What's wrong with GMO corn? Nothing. In fact, it's a net positive for the environment.
GMOs. Nuclear power. Self-driving cars. Why all the fearmongering? Because doing so produces an awful lot of money. Telling people that technology is bad generates roughly $30 million every single year. Meanwhile, UCS really ought to consider renaming itself.
Gene editing – a brilliant demonstration of how basic research can yield world-revolutionizing technology – is seen as unsafe in Europe. The good news is that some scientists aren't going to sit idly by while Europe attempts to destroy an entire field of scientific research. The scientists are striking back.
The deliberate and malicious ignorance of the anti-GMO movement must be resoundingly defeated, with its lies tossed into the dustbin of history.