SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Ask Michael Burke
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (131970)10/3/2012 9:48:28 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (2) of 132070
 
And a study witch we can't have much confidence in, due to (among other things) its tiny control group, is effectively discredited. Its not very significant.

If other studies showing the opposite are also weak as you claim, then they aren't very significant either, and your just left without much in the way of information.

Of course you do have the fact that millions of animals are fed GMO crops without any sign of it causing problems. Its not a well controlled "study", or one that uses rigorous methodology, OTOH the "study's" size is rather huge. And if your right about the other (actual) studies other than this new weak one, its pretty much the only solid data we have.

If your claim is that GM crops in general are highly dangerous, then your claim is rather extreme, and would require an extreme amount of evidence to take seriously. If its that this specific modification is somehow dangerous then it would be a more normal claim.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News