Science and Profit II: serving Monsanto

More and more „scientifical“ organizations publically show their opinion against Ca Prop 37 (Californian law that would require genetically modified ingredients in foods to be labeled). Like UC Davis professors paid by agrobusiness number 1, Monsanto, publish statements against the labeling, the American Association for the Advancement of Science also follows this new trend. Their statements sound very similar to the ones made on the website of the „No on 37“ campaign (major funding of this group: agrobusiness corporation like Monsanto and DuPont, and, of course, the big supermarket companies). And they talk about „competitive advantages“. Very scientifical, isn´t it

And, these statements are misleading (like in the UC Davis Case)

[that the AAAS statement, author´s note]

is filled with distortion and misleading statements. If mandatory labeling of GM foods would ‘mislead and alarm consumers,’ does the AAAS really believe that 60 other countries are misleading and alarming their consumers?

Michael Hansen,senior staff scientist at the Consumers Union, as quoted on Corporations and Health Watch webpage

Revolving doors

And, the document states that organizations such as the World Health Organization say GMO´s are safe, which isn´t true. The article says it´s written by the board of directors of AAAS. Corporations and Health Watch had a look at it. Nina Federoff is one of the AAAS directors, besides from her job at the industry-funded „No on 37“ campaign. Before that, she worked for the Sigma-Aldrich Chemical Company. Very Interesting, isn´t it?

Kommentar verfassen

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Abmelden /  Ändern )

Google Foto

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Google-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Twitter-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Verbinde mit %s