Why we’re so scared of GMOs, according to someone who has studied them since the start

[swag]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/06/why-people-are-so-scared-of-gmos-according-to-someone-who-has-studied-the-fear-since-the-start/

By Roberto A. Ferdman

When Chipotle announced earlier this year that it would no longer serve food made with genetically modified organisms due to safety concerns, customers rejoiced. But there was one big problem: Just as more Americans grow wary of GMOs, the scientific community is moving in the opposite direction. There is now near unanimity among scientists that GMOs are safe to eat. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the World Health Organization and the American Medical Association have all said that GMOs are fine for consumption.

Yet the divergence between scientists and the American public has only grown bigger. As of last fall, nearly 60 percent of Americans believed that GMOs were "generally unsafe." Back in 2000, the population was pretty much evenly split.

There are many reasons for this, says Jayson Lusk, an agricultural economist at Oklahoma State University, who has been studying peoples' aversion to GMOs ever since they were introduced in the late 1990s. Lusk likens the split to the disagreement that once existed between the scientific community and general public about climate change, but warns that it can be hard to change peoples' minds about biotechnology.

I spoke with Lusk to learn why people are so scared of GMOs, why he believes they shouldn't be, and what it will take to shed all of the fear. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

. . . interview at the link above

[GreatGazoo]

1. unrec for the GMO Strawman

There is no consensus or "near unanimity"

Consumers have a variety of reasons for wanting to avoid GMOs and some GMOs are absolutely and demonstrably not safe to eat (ask me to prove that please).

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

2. There's a lot of scientific illiteracy among those who work in journalism.

They tend to make sweeping assumptions that go beyond the scope of the actual studies involved. They see a bunch of studies that specifically check a given GMO for a correlation to a given disease or condition, see no correlation and declare that as proof that the GMO's are 'safe', ignoring the fact that for every disease or condition checked, there are hundreds of things that still haven't been checked. Or that biological systems aren't always simply altered by single variables, but sometimes require combinations of variables, such that studies not designed to examine those specific combinations just won't come up with any useful results.

Sadly, you don't see it just in 'journalism' about biologic systems, but in all sorts of 'science journalism', with reporters making grand pronouncements that go far beyond the confines of that which can be extrapolated from existing studies and their data.

[GreatGazoo]

3. Agreed. I looked at the author's other stories and he doesn't cover science

which may be why they approached him to publish this GMO marketing stuff.

The good news is that the average reader doesn't need to understand much about agriculture or genetics to know that a crop designed to be sprayed with a lot of pesticide is going to be sprayed with a lot pesticide. It is that simple.

GMO crop systems marketers have their hands full with the broadly questioned science, environmental and ethics issues. They are in no position to take on a social media discussion about the lack of benefits to the end consumer of the product. The customer is demanding healthier, tastier, fresher food but GMOs are associated with greater pesticide use, longer storage times, resistance to visible post-harvest bruising and dishonest coloring.

They don't want to have a real discussion that they can't win so they come with Bill Gates' (a GMO investor) standard marketing angle -- 'If you don't want our product you are stupid.'

[Dr Hobbitstein]

4. K&R for science! Nt

[Gore1FL]

5. Most of the GMO criticism I've seen is hyperbole.

It reminds me of the criticism created against global warming and vaccination, quite frankly.

I put my trust in the scientific community in all of these areas.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

6. GMO OMG

They are part of a system that is destructive. A stupid solution to problems in a stupid system.

[HuckleB]

7. Recommended!