glyphosate

One of the best ways to sustain your bad ideas is to surround yourself with people who think just as you do. Like a cult member who only associates with other true believers, you're effectively cut off from outside scrutiny.

For more than two decades, anti-GMO groups have resorted to the same dishonest claims about the risks of genetically engineered crops.

We frequently receive requests to comment on specific news stories. These are usually examples of journalists or pundits commenting on subjects they know nothing about and badly misleading their audiences as a result.

My esteemed colleague Cameron English has gotten into it (again) with the esteemed journalist BS artist Carey Gillam, who sees herself as the investigative savior of a poisoned world.

During a recent trip to Home Depot, I found myself standing next to another customer in the lawn and garden department. He was attentively looking over a container of the weed killer Roundup. "Isn't this the one that causes cancer?" he asked.

The anti-GMO movement has lost much of its cultural relevance in recent years and it now appears that the political debate surrounding crop biotechnol

Misinformation is rampant on social media.

Testing for chemical carcinogenicity using animals is timely, costly, and for some, morally wrong.

If you want to show that any chemical is dangerous, here's a three-step process that will consistently yield the desired result: 

“This Roundup ingredient might cause cancer—but the EPA won’t ban it,” Popular Science told its readers in a terribly misleading January 13 story about the weedkiller glyphos