Are the small levels of pesticides, herbicides and genetic modifications in our food -- whether human-made or natural -- harmful? Let's put the virus aside for a moment and see what we find.
The internet is brimming with nutritional nonsense. A new book teaches us how to spot the myths.
For centuries farmers have tried to bend their crops -- nature’s bounty -- to their will to create bigger, more plentiful, perhaps ever-tastier foods. In the past, this genetic editing, known as hybridization, has been luck of the draw. But new genetic technologies have changed that random-luck equation. A new study looks at how your scientific literacy impacts the perception of these changes, and whether knowing more reduces fear.
Four sips from the firehose that is Internet content: Spicy and bitter are ways plants tried to dissuade you from eating them; CRISPR, in service of animal welfare, hits a snag; a podcast contrasts Nathan's Hot-Dog Eating Contest to chemotherapy, and good news science is alive and beautifully well.
Thanks to a backlash by scientists and journalists, it is no longer acceptable in polite society to be an anti-vaxxer. Not so for anti-GMOers. So we've curated a list of the best anti-anti-GMO memes on the web.
The Trump Administration recently issued two executive orders relating to biomedical science. The first involved the regulation of biotechnology products; the second involved transparency in healthcare costs. We believe both are a step in the right direction.
One wonders how the anti-GMO movement could oppose something like this. But given its hostility to Golden Rice, which has been genetically modified to contain a vitamin A precursor to prevent blindness, it usually finds a way.
The New York Times has done something that it very rarely does: It wrote an editorial in support of biotechnology. Unfortunately, the newspaper has a long history of spreading misinformation about GMOs and chemicals, which seriously undermines the important message in its pro-vaccine editorial.
How can you identify a scientifically ignorant person? Ask him if he's concerned about the health effects of GMOs. If the answer is yes, you've identified somebody who probably couldn't pass an 8th grade science test. Too harsh? Not according to the latest Pew poll.
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.
Though widely touted, there's no such thing as "free speech" in academia. Instead, there are two sets of standards: One for a largely far-left-wing, postmodernist type who reject science and basic decency; and a second for everybody else.
Given the thoroughly unscientific and litigious milieu in which we live, companies find themselves scrambling to appease the uneducated Twitter mob and apologizing for being in business. That's why it's such a breath of fresh air when a company stands up to the hysteria and gives a full-throated endorsement of science.