He supports, without reservation, the use of neonicitinoid pesticides that have been repeatedly shown to contribute to honeybee colony collapse. September 21, 2016. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kavinsenapathy/2016/09/21/nobel-laureate-sir-richard-roberts-to-ask-religious-and-government-leaders-to-support-gmos/#695a848e5cc8, [19] http://www.gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/17077-pro-gmo-campaign-exploits-nobel-laureates-to-attack-greenpeace-and-fool-the-people, [21] “Who is to blame for the failure of GMO golden rice?” Independent Science News. The study was sponsored by a number of major international organizations, including the United Nations, the World Bank, the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, and UNESCO.Not surprisingly and conspicuously, the United States was one of only three nations present at the IAASTD conference that refused to sign the accord. A Mother Jones investigative report in 2010 uncovered Ketchum’s espionage activities targeted against Greenpeace on behalf of Dow Chemical. [24] James Ridgeway. Over the years, many advocates for public safety—Ralph Nader, Jim Turner, Sydney Wolf, Michael Jacobson, Ronnie Cummins, Andrew Wakefield and many others—have battled the righteous struggle to protect consumers against dangerous and unsafe drugs, chemicals and products that the federal government more often than not defends and protects on behalf of corporate interests. GMO science has become a mad science, a form of pathology that hides behind the illusion of being objective.

Big Ag has turned the clock back to the era of the tobacco industry’s legacy. The chemical agricultural industry relies upon American universities in many ways. Curiously, there is no mention of this study in the Nicolia Review. And none of the Nobel signatories have any background in agriculture, which led a professor of physical sciences and statistics at UC-Berkeley to write “Science is supposed to be ‘show me’, not ‘trust me’… Nobel Prize or not.”[19], So, how did Sir Roberts, gather 107 signatures from Nobel laureates? According to Gary Ruskin’s investigations at US Right to Know, GMO Answers claims the public’s questions and concerns about GMOs are answered by qualified scientists and professors.

For example, last year, we were made aware of a mother lode of formerly sealed Monsanto documents the EPA was forced to release through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request only after considerable political pressure was applied. (31st Street between Madison and Park Ave.). This review of over 1,700 studies, also known as the Nicolia Review, is the most cited source making the broadest claims for GMO safety. Joan Esposito Live, Local & Progressive (Replay).

It acknowledges that GM crops are highly controversial. And there is little wonder that even with the most damning scientific evidence to discredit anything of long-term value regarding GMOs, virtually nothing is done at the federal level to protect the public. The bogus economic studies trumped up by the Big Ag cartel to defeat California’s GMO labeling bill Prop 37 were performed at this university.

Corn is the US’ number one crop with eighty-nine percent being genetically modified. The success of Big Agriculture’s public relations strategy and operations has been fear, intimidation, and character assassination. The Genetic Literacy Project and University of California at Davis. Greenpeace adopted a precautionary stance.

Many have been mercilessly attacked, libeled and slandered through a sophisticated network of PR hacks,  industry special interest groups, educational and pseudo-scientific organizations and projects, and the mainstream media, publications and lobbying firms.