Videos Worth Watching….

Want to know what organic really means? Learn the difference between conventional and organic farming plus what certifier’s logos to look out for regardless of whether you are buying food, clothing or cosmetic products.




Our new report, “Spinning food,” investigates how Big Food and agrochemical corporations are deliberately misleading the public — and reporters — on facts about industrial agriculture and organic and sustainable food production.

Taking their cues from the tobacco industry, these companies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars in the past few years on stealth PR tactics, deploying over a dozen front groups to push coordinated messages attacking organic food production, defending pesticides and the routine use of antibiotics and promoting GMOs — messages that are making their way into the pages of our largest media outlets.

Click here to read the  report

In 2006, Drs. Allison K Wilson and Jonathan R Latham co-founded the Bioscience Resource Project to conduct independent scientific analysis of genetic engineering and its risks. They later enlarged the project to include other aspects of the science of food and agriculture and their impacts on health and the environment.

When 107 Nobel Laureates demanded that Greenpeace cease its opposition to GMOs and “golden rice,” no one in the press seems to have asked if the event was organized by the biotech industry (or if all of the Laureates were still living). They should have.

Dear All,

Published today (July 1st 2016) on Independent Science News: “107 Nobel
Laureate Attack on Greenpeace Traced Back to Biotech PR Operators“, a short
news item written by Jonathan Latham, PhD.

Synopsis: When 107 Nobel Laureates demanded that Greenpeace cease its
opposition to GMOs and “golden rice,” no one in the press seems to have asked
if the event was organized by the biotech industry (or if all of the Laureates
were still living). They should have.

Read the full story at:

107 Nobel Laureate Attack on Greenpeace Traced Back to Biotech PR Operators

Additional Reading: “Independent” Academics Sporting Biotech Ties

For more background on the Nobel Laureates, “Golden Rice” and the attack on
Greenpeace, read this excellent longer story by GMWatch: “Pro-GMO campaign
exploits Nobel laureates to attack Greenpeace and fool the people” (2016).
Read at:

Food and Water Watch’s Issue Brief: “Under the Influence: The National
Research Council and GMOs” (2016). Summary and Download at:

Another important Report by Food and Water Watch: “Public Research, Private
Gain: Corporate Influence over Agricultural Research” (2012). Summary and
Download at:

A recent Freedom of Information request by US Right to Know documents numerous
ties between corporations and academics at large universities across the US,
including Cornell, Harvard, University of Illinois, University California
Riverside, University of Florida and the University of Georgia. The emails
reveal the coordinated efforts of these academics and the Biotech PR industry
to promote GMOs. A number of articles have been written so far about the data
in these emails:

The latest — an excellent article with new data from U.S. Right to Know on the
undermining of organics and GMO campaigning by secretly funded scientists:
“Monsanto Fingerprints Found All Over Attack On Organic Food” (2016). Read at:

Excellent but incomplete New York Times article about Kevin Folta, Bruce
Chassey and other familiar academic names promoting GMOs in close
collaboration with industry: “Food Industry Enlisted Academics in G.M.O.
Lobbying War, Emails Show.” (2015) Read at:

Jonathan Latham’s follow-up article based on the same emails: “The
Puppetmasters of Academia (or What the NY Times Left out)” (2015) Read at:

Universities and academics with conflicts of interest are undermining
scientific understanding and promoting scientific misconceptions, such as the
“need” for GMOs and industrial and chemical-based agriculture. They thus
hinder the transition to ecologically and ethically sound farming systems and
a healthy food system. Scientific funding and research need to be moved into
areas focused on sustainable, non-proprietary, low-tech and scale-able methods
(e.g. crop rotations, cover cropping, push-pull techniques) and systems (e.g.
agro-ecology and diversified farming systems) and to emphasize participatory
and evolutionary plant breeding of open-pollinated varieties.

Please share this email with anyone who might have an interest in these


Allison Wilson, PhD
Science Director
The Bioscience Resource Project


New Study: Consumers Don’t View GMO Labels as Negative ‘Warnings’

Results from polling data released as U.S. Senate considers controversial GMO labeling law

Experts Exploring The Science Of Genetic Engineering And Its Impact On Food, Health And Agriculture


The Roots of Your Profits – Dr. Elaine Ingham, Soil Microbiologist, Founder of Soil Foodweb Inc 

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

You can see Elaine’s slides here:…

The ‘Green Revolution’ Dr. Ingham refers to was the push just after WWII to change agricultural practices worldwide from traditional methods (some more sustainable than others) to industrial agriculture methods – dependant on heavy machinery, petroleum, and synthetic chemicals.  The goal was ostensibly ‘to feed the world’… the benefits were almost entirely to the military industrial, er agricultural, industrial complex.


One of the most completed list of GMO Science – Studies & Research is on the GMO Free USA website – please link through HERE

Review of GMO safety assessment studies: glyphosate residues in Roundup Ready crops is an ignored issue

Environmental Sciences EuropeBridging Science and Regulation at the Regional and European Level201527:20

DOI: 10.1186/s12302-015-0052-7

Received: 22 August 2014

Accepted: 11 August 2015

Published: 10 September 2015


Industry studies are not sufficient for regulation. Despite decades of risk assessments and research in this field, specific unanswered questions relating to safety and quality aspects of food and feed from GM crops need to be addressed by regulators. Independent research gives important supplementary insight.

Read more:


SOURCE:  Independent Science News

AUTHOR:  Jonathan Latham

DATE:    02.11.2015

SUMMARY: “Pregnant goats fed with genetically engineered (GE) soybeans have offspring who grow more slowly and are shorter, according to a new Italian study (Tudisco et al., 2015). Publishing in the Journal of Small Ruminant Research, the researchers was testing the results of supplementing the feed of female goats with Roundup Ready GE soybeans. “


No scientific consensus on safety of genetically modified organisms
Scientists release statement as World Food Prize goes to Monsanto and Syngenta Press release, ENSSER, 21 October 2013

Stephanie Seneff1*, Nancy Swanson2, Chen Li1 Aluminum and Glyphosate Can Synergistically Induce Pineal Gland Pathology: Connection to Gut Dysbiosis and Neurological Disease:

April 2015

Dr. Robert Kremer: GMOs, Glyphosate and Soil Biology April 15, 2015, by

Dr. Robert Kremer: GMOs, Glyphosate and Soil Biology

Listen to the podcast:

<iframe width=”320″ height=”24″ src=”;powerpress_player=default” frameborder=”0″ scrolling=”no”></iframe>


Pro-GMO Database: Monsanto is the Most Common Funder of GMO Research


Rolling Stone

What Is Killing America’s Bees and What Does It Mean for Us?

Pollinators are vanishing, and a silent spring could become a horrifying reality. So why won’t the EPA do more?

By Alex Morris August 18, 2015

Read more:
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S. — the first sixteen years

Environmental Sciences EuropeBridging Science and Regulation at the Regional and European Level201224:24

DOI: 10.1186/2190-4715-24-24

Received: 28 June 2012,

Accepted: 3 September 2012

Published: 28 September 2012


Herbicide-resistant crop technology has led to a 239 million kilogram (527 million pounds) increase in herbicide use in the United States between 1996 and 2011 while Bt crops have reduced insecticide applications by 56 million kilograms (123 million pounds). Overall, pesticide use increased by an estimated 183 million kgs (404 million pounds), or about 7%.

Read More: