| FlyLow - 11/30/2013 11:33
seemed to be a pretty weak bit of research
If it's research at all. All the conclusions are of the type "GMOs may cause gluten sensitivity", which I tend to read as "GMOs may or may not cause gluten sensitivity". Nothing conclusive, but the focus on "may" and the omission of "or may not" seems to indicate a strong anti-GMO bias to scare people, no scientific and objective data. I suspect that the selection of the scientific studies referenced in the report may also show a bias, but I can't really tell, so I'll leave it at that.
And no, I probably won't agree with you on some of your various postings, but that's fine.
Hey, welcome to the club, give it 6 months and new data, and I won't agree with my old statements either! ;)
Sorry for the undiplomatic tone of my answers, I was a bit pissed off to be jumped at the throat for just reporting the news of the day. I bring these news for NAT readers to make up their own mind, not blindly repeating pro or con GMO arguments from others. If you don't know what the other camp is saying, there's really nothing constructive or useful you can add to the debate.
I also try to comment slightly on the news, so that NAT readers can judge if it's worth their time opening the links, as I see only too frequently posts that consist of just a link, with no explanation whatsoever about what's in the link. |
GMOs: Séralini 2-year study retracted, and gluten allergy
