BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 6 Feb 2014 11:11:17 -0800
Reply-To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: How to tell GMO soybeans from non-GMO soybeans
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From:
Mike Rossander <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (13 lines) 
The full paper is available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814613019201
 
There was NO attempt to normalize for differing management practices.  That was not the point of their analysis.  It was a false assumption to have guessed that "both the 'GMO' and 'conventional' crops were treated with similar levels of Round-Up (Glyphosate)".  They were not.  The Round-Up-ready crops were subjected to substantially higher levels of glyphosate during cultivation than the other crops in the study.  So, yes, the paper does merely detect differences in cultivation practices.
 
That does not necessarily make the paper a "blatant sham" but it does highlight the dangers of jumping to conclusions based on an abstract rather than based upon the full information.
 
Mike Rossander    

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2