Add new comment

It seems that a purpose of the mascot is to counter the fear based unscientific conclusions about GMOs that are spread by activists. The overwhelming scientific consensus is that GMO food products currently produced commercially present no more danger to human health than conventional crops. The NYT piece you link to says "Thirty-seven percent of those worried about G.M.O.’s said they feared that such foods cause cancer or allergies, although scientific studies continue to show that there is no added risk." This demonstrates that the public is ill/misinformed on the subject. Jonathan Latham's organizations (listed in the article) promote bad science and spread misinformation about GM food crops. People who are interested in the subject would do well to examine the evidence presented by the Biology Fortified and the Genetic Literacy Project websites. The fears expressed by the critics of GM technology are addressed with logic, reason, and credible, substantial evidence. As a liberal progressive who demands corporate and governmental accountability, I still am able to separate corporate behavior from the science. Yes, corporations stand to profit from GM food crops, and they stand to profit from pesticide and herbicide use. But all of these technologies need to be assessed scientifically (and they have). Attacking GMOs due to emotional attachment to anger about corporate evils is an incorrect path to the truth.