tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.comments2023-06-26T03:08:40.549-07:00Tomorrow's TablePamela Ronaldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comBlogger176125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-7069069927520908572013-06-02T05:20:45.076-07:002013-06-02T05:20:45.076-07:00The scientific process and the ethics of science j...The scientific process and the ethics of science journalism (all journalism) should be a prominent discussion in every high school. It this day and age, what you've written here are essential skills that everyone should have.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-59565062793030619302012-11-18T15:06:21.854-08:002012-11-18T15:06:21.854-08:00Hi Pamela,
I'm an occasional reader of your ...Hi Pamela, <br /><br />I'm an occasional reader of your blog and work in a somewhat related field of molecular biology. I enjoy online discussions about GE foods and engage in them with some regularity. I believe it is important to be as accurate as possible but to also have a good frame for addressing your target audience. I will be updating my language to reflect the important point you make in this post.David Hooksnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-55978428809400712792012-10-22T00:40:19.027-07:002012-10-22T00:40:19.027-07:00For more on the fundamentally flawed experiment ca...For more on the fundamentally flawed experiment carried out in 1999 that was never confirmed (Ewen and Pusztai 1999), please see<br /><br />http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-content/genetic-roulette/section-1/1-1-pusztais-flawed-claims/Pamela Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-59200422987453772802012-10-21T19:12:57.463-07:002012-10-21T19:12:57.463-07:00I know this is an old topic but it's still rel...I know this is an old topic but it's still relevant.<br /><br /> With reference to the adverse health effects of GMOs, you write that this is "in reference to a fundamentally flawed experiment carried out in 1999 that was never confirmed (Ewen and Pusztai 1999)." But you don't give any reference supporting your claim that it was "fundamentally flawed" so we just have your word on a very important point. Why not give thereference here?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15637405295737441515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-34370540471282509122010-04-25T12:05:57.452-07:002010-04-25T12:05:57.452-07:00Too bad people don't use your 7 points when lo...Too bad people don't use your 7 points when looking at global warming - especially the points on peer review and conflict of interest. There is so much money to be made by claiming that man can and should impact global warming, not to mention the power that comes with regulating people's lives.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-78771513455131553022009-11-10T01:52:04.434-08:002009-11-10T01:52:04.434-08:00Really good article after a long time I read this ...Really good article after a long time I read this kind of stuff thanks for sharing..!Term Papershttp://www.ghostpapers.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-19524255156955842682009-11-09T23:57:27.981-08:002009-11-09T23:57:27.981-08:00Really interesting thanks for sharing...!Really interesting thanks for sharing...!Term Papershttp://www.ghostpapers.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-79355221005089475462009-10-27T12:32:49.448-07:002009-10-27T12:32:49.448-07:00thanks for your thoughtful comments Marc!thanks for your thoughtful comments Marc!Pamela Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-62612775436811101552009-10-27T12:28:34.058-07:002009-10-27T12:28:34.058-07:00I'm also someone who is newly aware of this bl...I'm also someone who is newly aware of this blog, and I'm looking to fill in some huge gaps in my knowledge of the issue. I consider myself "pro-science", but when scienceblogs started promoting that poll thing, I realised that most of my opinions on genetically modified foods are influenced more by the "Frankenfood" crowd. I can see there's tonnes of reading ahead of me, and there are issues I'm hoping will be clarified. Some of my concerns (mostly raised by pop-science documentaries, unfortunately) are about environmental risks (eg, invasive modified species edging out other species in ecosystems), and social justice ones (an anecdote I saw in a documentary years ago about modifed crops cross-polinating with non-modified crops owned by a small-scale farmer, and the Big bad corproation suing the farmer for "stealing" their genes...I have no real idea how accurate or realistic that situation is).<br /><br />So, I'm grateful to have a chance to read what someone on the front lines has to say, and look forward to having some of my questions answered as your blog(s) progress...Quietmarcnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-32610465017927051762009-10-25T05:14:39.183-07:002009-10-25T05:14:39.183-07:00I come from cuttack and your article was a good re...I come from cuttack and your article was a good read,it somehow manages to catch the quintessence of an Indian Village.<br /><br />Amarjeet MohantyMaximus Primehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470865517610865065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-82285829001461573762009-10-22T13:05:45.917-07:002009-10-22T13:05:45.917-07:00Thanks James. I really appreciate your kind words ...Thanks James. I really appreciate your kind words and insights.Pamela Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-40051634715316575352009-10-22T06:13:58.112-07:002009-10-22T06:13:58.112-07:00I just became aware of this blog thanks to your ne...I just became aware of this blog thanks to your new presence on ScienceBlogs. I am really looking forward to reading what you have to right. I have developed an interest in sustainable and organic food, but have been frustrated that the community talking about this is permeated with people who engage in all sorts of paranoid or magical thinking. (Just the other week, my wife forwarded me a post to a local farming mailing list touting an article from a notorious cancer quack, <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/09/a_religious_loon_cant_even_wait_until_he.php" rel="nofollow">Mike Adams</a>. The optimistic part of me asks, "Don't these people check their sources?!", but I fear the truth is more like that some of the people on this list might <i>agree</i> with Adams' conspiracy theories)<br /><br />This post, on the other hand, was one of the most thoughtful and informative treatments of GMO -- er, excuse me, GE crops ;) -- that I have ever heard. I look forward to reading more of what you have to say!James Sweethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17212877636980569324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-47129414685982427472009-10-17T17:06:12.841-07:002009-10-17T17:06:12.841-07:00thanks for the kind words Razib. And I completely ...thanks for the kind words Razib. And I completely agree that Tree of life is at the top of the stack.Pamela Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-84457882835780763582009-10-17T15:07:40.383-07:002009-10-17T15:07:40.383-07:00Wow - you rock. I have applied to move my blog the...<i>Wow - you rock. I have applied to move my blog there (some time ago) and got not even a whisper of a response. So as I said, you rock.</i><br /><br />has to be an oversight. they get swamped with inquiries. i made the "powers that be" aware of this comment, and made it clear that if i had discretion (which i do not) "The Tree of Life" would be at the top of the stack when it comes to future sciencebloggers.<br /><br />in any case, am honored to be sharing a domain with dr. ronald. they might have erred (in my opinion) in overlooking *tree of life*, but they hit paydirt with *tomorrow's table*.<br /><br />best<br />-razib of gene expressionRazib Khanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09555115542918519593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-32416152553746691612009-10-16T21:34:25.760-07:002009-10-16T21:34:25.760-07:00thanks Jonathan. Did I know what a blog was before...thanks Jonathan. Did I know what a blog was before I met you? I dont think so. Now if I can just learn how to keep the pace- you set a high bar.Pamela Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-68780050750277759062009-10-16T19:18:23.100-07:002009-10-16T19:18:23.100-07:00Wow - you rock. I have applied to move my blog th...Wow - you rock. I have applied to move my blog there (some time ago) and got not even a whisper of a response. So as I said, you rock.Jonathan Eisenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07953790938128734305noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-30877173739665695522009-08-25T13:00:10.763-07:002009-08-25T13:00:10.763-07:00Surely, Dr. Burtch's comments are in jest.
In...Surely, Dr. Burtch's comments are in jest.<br /><br />In the USA, it is completely illegal to use human excrement as fertilizer, unless it has been properly processed to the point where no viable fecal bacteria remain. (Hence the "sewage sludge" micro-controversy.)<br /><br />This is no easy task, as human excrement, by dry weight, consists of roughly 50 percent bacteria. <br /><br />Personally, the practice of using excrement from *any* source as fertilizer for crops intended to be eaten raw -- primarily vegetables -- should be completely outlawed. <br /><br />All manner of fecal bacteria can persist in the soil. Why not? They want to live, too. But living in the soil, they are taken up in the root systems of the plant and take up residence in the plant tissues. At that point, washing your vegetables is a pointless exercise. These critters are living on the *inside* of, say, your crisp and lovely-looking Romaine lettuce. And they'll get you from there.<br /><br />As for Barbies that "can't be killed", well, it takes a very rich imagination, and a set of intellectual values I do not share, to countenance the notion that Barbies have ever been alive in the first place.<br /><br />The notion of being "attacked by beets" is thoroughly repellent. People have been trying to get me to eat beets for years, and all have utterly failed. Being overwhelmed by these bloated tuberous nightmares in some dark alley would surely distort my psyche to an unimaginable degree. <br /><br />I find solace in the knowledge that these are not motile organisms, and besides, don't have the neurological structure required to deliver on any threats which their non-existent minds could hope to conceive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-59373630307340733522009-08-25T11:37:03.547-07:002009-08-25T11:37:03.547-07:00Dear Dr. Burtch
I appreciate your taking time to ...Dear Dr. Burtch<br /><br />I appreciate your taking time to skim a paragraph or two of the article in Reed magazine and then providing an in-depth highly analytical response based on your previous entrenched opinion of the issues. You are not alone in your concerns on food safety. I receive numerous letters from people like you who are strongly supportive of science and who also have time to read the internet to learn what scientists are plotting. Such letters are invaluable in helping bench scientists like me understand the workings of the mind of average Americans. As my new found hero Barney Frank would say, 'What planet are you from?"<br /><br />Although I do not personally work on toys, I do understand that glow-in-the-dark zebra fish are for sale and quite popular. I suggest you buy some, put them in your tank (Please add water, they will do better) and stare at them for a long time. This will give face to gill time with GMOs and will further your scientific training. As is true with all Zen practices, you will have much less time to read the internet and write letters but it will provide peace of mind to you and those you would normally correspond with. <br /><br />All the best,<br />Ms DoctorPamela Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-16393217717276514882009-08-13T00:47:48.284-07:002009-08-13T00:47:48.284-07:00nice blog and have lots of stuff here.........
ht...nice blog and have lots of stuff here.........<br /><br />http://biotechnolo.blogspot.comUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13587121423031454489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-78289630928241803092009-08-08T07:56:14.280-07:002009-08-08T07:56:14.280-07:00Yes that is precisely the problem. Many well-meani...Yes that is precisely the problem. Many well-meaning people simply cannot tell quality research from garbage.<br /><br />It is something as scientists we have learned over many years of training. But for a public bombarded with media messages of varying quality, it is very difficult for them to make the distinction.<br /><br />How can scientists help without being labeled "arrogant"?Pamela Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-408091470484834902009-08-08T02:48:50.664-07:002009-08-08T02:48:50.664-07:00This is a wonderful post. I have an anti-vax frien...This is a wonderful post. I have an anti-vax friend that says her kids become violently ill when they don't eat organic food because of the GMO. When I tell her that there's no basis for her assertions she tells me "go get your check from Monsanto".<br /><br />One other note. Good research grows. A group can publish a legitimate finding that just does not hold up over time. We see this all the time in the Alternative and Complementary Medicine literature. A study with 8 subjects has a positive effect, but the study with 8000 does not. <br /><br />If it's legit, more pile on and expand the line of inquiry. Dead ends usually mean bad research.<br /><br />I have a similar post going up this month on my blog, only debunking vaccines. The anti-vaxers find information, they just can't tell quality research from garbage. I'll refer them to this post!Kevin M. Foltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10253508434587464552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-85570887703168870692009-08-07T08:55:29.418-07:002009-08-07T08:55:29.418-07:00Yes I agree. The other point is that just because ...Yes I agree. The other point is that just because it is in Science or PLoS Biology does not mean it is necessarily any more reliable than something published in PLoS One or Nucleic Acids Research. It may simply be more trendy at the time.Pamela Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08905736049638342587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-40784427384389666032009-08-06T19:59:54.530-07:002009-08-06T19:59:54.530-07:00I think most of this is very useful. I question (...I think most of this is very useful. I question (I know, shocking, coming from me) the part about citations and journal impact. You say " The frequency of citation reflects acknowledgment of importance by the scientific community." I think this is partly correct but not more. For example, review papers get cited very highly, but that in many cases is more because people are looking for something to cite when they make general statements about some topic. Also - some papers of course get cited because they are wrong - and people want to refer to something incorrect. And so on. Number of citations is useful but only upon examination of the citations and not just as a numberJonathan Eisenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07953790938128734305noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-30913587470378185022009-08-06T12:31:57.736-07:002009-08-06T12:31:57.736-07:00I myself feel antagonistic and towards genetically...I myself feel antagonistic and towards genetically engineered plants and food. I also trust science when it comes to the reports coming out about climate change. However, if scientists built consensus around a geo-engineering project, perhaps involving making changes directly to the way our atmosphere or ecosphere works, I think I would feel the same way about the geo-engineering project as I do about genetic-engineering projects currently underway. The only thing I can say about the way I feel toward these projects is the following: I have a distrust for the clever when it is practiced at the microscopic scale that it can impact the entire genetic sphere without the necessary foresight into it's long-term impacts. I also feel like the current regime of world intellectual property rights standards which seem to favor the powerful and financially wealthy while excluding others. Furthermore, I find it to be poor thinking that we think we can escape making changes at the MACRO scale by making changes at the MICRO scale. If there is anything that humans should have the power to change, it is our macro scale environment, our human-scale environment and perhaps if we focused on these changes the others would be unnecessary. I also see how changes to the micro scale environment can be used as a tool to control the macro scale, from without, not from within.eknutzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02199719354761206712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3590966175110441391.post-48356150868103055152009-07-23T11:11:45.724-07:002009-07-23T11:11:45.724-07:00Personally, I like the sound of "Science Base...Personally, I like the sound of "Science Based Agriculture."Karl Haro von Mogelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11409062416165090211noreply@blogger.com