GMO conspiracy theories

Last updated

GMO conspiracy theories are conspiracy theories related to the production and sale of genetically modified crops and genetically modified food (also referred to as genetically modified organisms or "GMOs"). These conspiracy theories include claims that agribusinesses, especially Monsanto, have suppressed data showing that GMOs cause harm, deliberately cause food shortages to promote the use of GM food, or have co-opted government agencies such as the United States Food and Drug Administration or scientific societies such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Contents

Critics charge that GMO conspiracy theories are largely promulgated by those opposing the production and sale of GMOs, and instances of unsubstantiated conspiracy theories have lately occurred in the context of public health issues that are mostly unrelated to GMOs, including the 2015–16 Zika virus outbreak and concerns over food safety at Chipotle Mexican Grill.

Context

The existence of conspiracy theories relating to the fear over GMOs has been attested to by scientists, journalists, and skeptics who oppose much anti-GMO activism. Such commentators include Michael Shermer (writer of a monthly Skeptic column series for Scientific American ), [1] Mark Lynas (an environmental activist and writer who opposed GMOs for years and recently switched positions), [2] and Jon Entine (the founder and head of an advocacy organization dedicated to advancing the case in favor of genetic engineering in agriculture and biotechnology). [3] Academics writing about bioethics and science communication have also taken note.

A 2013 paper published in the journal PLOS ONE found statistical evidence that linked conspiracy theorist ideation as being a significant factor in the rejection of scientific propositions about genetically engineered food. [4] One GMO conspiracy theory was identified by biochemist Paul Christou and horticulturalist Harry Klee as a claim that development and promotion of GMOs was done by pesticide companies to cause crops to become more vulnerable to pests and therefore require more pesticides, [5] while philosopher Juha Räikkä identified a conspiracy theory that claims the lack of any reliable scientific evidence that show harmful effects of GMOs is due not to a lack of evidence but rather to a conspiracy to hide that evidence. [6]

Conspiracy theories involving GMOs and their promoters have been invoked in a variety of contexts. For example, in commenting on the Séralini affair, an incident that involved the retraction of a much-criticized paper which claimed harmful effects of GMOs in lab rats, American biologist PZ Myers said that anti-GMO activists were claiming the retraction was a part of "a conspiracy to Hide the Truth™". [7] A work seeking to explore risk perception over GMOs in Turkey identified a belief among the conservative political and religious figures who were opposed to GMOs that GMOs were "a conspiracy by Jewish Multinational Companies and Israel for world domination" [8] while a Latvian study showed that a segment of the population of that country believed that GMOs were part of a greater conspiracy theory to poison the population of the country. [9]

A study of media rhetorical devices used in Hunan, China found that the news articles that were opposed to trials of golden rice promoted conspiracy theories "including the view that the West was using genetic engineering to establish global control over agriculture and that GM products were instruments for genocide". [10] Likewise, a study of the rhetoric used in public policy debates about genetically modified food in Ghana showed that conspiracy theories were a feature of a civil society opposition to GMOs:

Government and scientists were denying the claim that GMO was discriminatory and posed significant human health risk, as well as the call to action to do something about GMOs. Civil society adapted the counter rhetoric of insincerity, claiming that scientists had some kind of “hidden agenda” behind their claim, such as eagerness to just earn money from their patents on GMOs. It is imperative that communication on GMOs includes the underlying assumptions, the uncertainties and the probabilities associated with both best and worst case scenarios. This is a necessary condition to minimise misinformation on GMOs but may be insufficient to completely erase conspiracy theories from the minds of the public especially when scientists and government are perceived to be biased towards multinational corporations that are ostensibly preoccupied with making profits. [11]

Social critic Margit Stange contextualized certain arguments adopted by GMO conspiracy theorists as being part of the larger controversy surrounding the subject:

The corporate push for genetically modified food arouses great suspicion. Critics charge that GM food ("Frankenfood") is profitable to industry not only because it can be patented but because crop uniformity will eventually drive up pesticide demand. The charge that big food interests take advantage of poverty to open new markets for GM food is restated by conspiracy theorists, who describe a deliberate macroeconomic creation of food shortages in impoverished nations in order to open the door to GM food. The food industry's opposition to GM food labeling and precautionary measures fuels such suspicions. [12]

This view was echoed by bioethicist Michael Reiss and moral philosopher Roger Straughan who explain in their book Improving Nature?: The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering that fears about the consolidation of power by a few agrochemical companies over farmers is a main argument against new genetic engineering technology in agriculture: "At its extreme, this fear belongs to the conspiracy-theory genre and, to caricature somewhat, envisages powerless farmers forced to pay ever increasing amounts to anonymous international companies who profit from the cost of the crop seed and from the cost of the herbicides used to spray them." [13]

Political science professors Joseph Uscinski and Joseph M. Parent in their book American Conspiracy Theories summarized the people that have adopted GMO conspiracy theories thusly:

Another prototypical conspiratorial movement involves those opposed to genetically modified organisms (GMO), in essence a protest against the genetic engineering of food. Not everyone who opposes GMOs is a conspiracy theorist: reasonable people can disagree about research and fail to see small groups of people covertly working against the common good. But most visible and vocal members of this movement, however, are conspiracy theorists. They believe that genetically modified foods are a corporate plot, led by the giant multinational Monsanto, to profit off unhealthy food. [14]

Uscinski, writing for Politico in the context of the 2016 United States presidential election, identified GMO conspiracy theories as one of the "honorable mentions" appended to his list of the "five most dangerous conspiracy theories of 2016". He specifically singled-out candidates Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein as promulgators. [15] Michael Shermer and Pat Linse, writing for Skeptic magazine, specify that in terms of political ideology, "GMO conspiracy theories are embraced primarily by those on the left." [16]

Scholars have identified ways that the internet has aided proliferation and connection between conspiracy theories including those about GMOs. For example, computer scientists Tanushree Mitra and Mattia Samory found in a 2018 study that "[to]pics [such as] “big pharma,” “vaccines,” and “GMO,” for example, decry the corruption of health services while promoting the virtues of a “natural” lifestyle." [17] MIT Technology Review reported in February 2018 that Russian-backed disinformation campaigns were sowing public confusion about GMOs by promoting conspiracy theories. [18]

Monsanto

A major aspect of many conspiracy theories is the fear that large agribusinesses, especially Monsanto are working to undermine the health and safety of the general public by introducing and promoting GMOs in the food supply. One claim is that Monsanto is deliberately hiding scientific evidence that GMOs are harmful. [6] Some anti-GMO activists claimed that Monsanto infiltrated both the American Food and Drug Administration and the American Association for the Advancement of Science which is why the two organizations have supported the scientific evidence for the safety of the genetically engineered food available for human consumption. [19] Jeffrey M. Smith is identified in the book American Conspiracy Theories as arguing that Monsanto has captured the FDA and many other countries. [14] In the compendium Agricultural and Food Controversies, the authors who are social scientists and food scientists trace the conspiracy theory relating in particular to Monsanto back to events in the early 1990s:

There are some well-qualified dissenting scientists and a motivated group of food activists behind them, pushing back against GM food. They believe a GM crop is not substantially equivalent to traditional crops. Moreover, they believe that the FDA follows the substantial equivalence rule not because of the science, but because the FDA was corrupted by corporate influence. This is not a belief that the authors' share, but there are smart people of high character who do believe this conspiracy theory, and their side of the story deserves to be heard.

In The World According to Monsanto, author Marie-Monique Robin describes how the substantial equivalence began with a 1992 policy statement by the FDA under the leadership of a former Monsanto lawyer, who, after working in the FDA, returned to Monsanto as vice president. Her story suggests that GM regulations were the product of a revolving-door system where regulators are former and/or future employees of the company being regulated (note that some argue Monsanto wanted excess regulations to keep out competitors, but that is not Robin's story). It is not hard to imagine a company rewarding lenient regulators with a nice job, and food activists have websites listing powerful government officials and their relation to Monsanto and other corporations. If this sounds like a conspiracy theory (a term not meant as a euphemism), it is. [20]

Belief that Monsanto is particularly problematic has inspired such actions as the March Against Monsanto and the singling out of Monsanto over other agribusinesses such as DuPont, Syngenta, Dow, BASF and Bayer, and has been identified as a salient feature of anti-GMO activism. [21]

An example of Monsanto-based conspiracy theorizing were the claims by some anti-GMO activists that Monsanto banned GMOs from their cafeterias while promoting them for sale and consumption by the public. [22] Anti-GMO/chemtrail blogger Barbara H. Peterson, a retired correctional officer and rancher, complained that Monsanto "has painted those of us attempting to shed light on the dangers of genetically modified/engineered organisms (GMOs) as 'conspiracy theorists'...." She went on to attack Monsanto's suggestion that sabotage could be a possible explanation for the discovery of a few plants of experimental genetically modified wheat found inexplicably growing on a farm in Oregon as being a conspiracy theory itself. [23]

GMO cannabis hoax

A 2015 internet hoax purporting to show that Monsanto was creating genetically modified cannabis to supply to the cannabis industry. [24] [25] The hoax was created by satirical fake news website World News Daily Report on April 9, 2015. [24] Monsanto created a "standing denial" of the hoax on their "Myths About Monsanto" webpage, [26] and tweeted a disclaimer prior to the 420 holiday in 2016, [27] and on April 20, 2017, again tweeted "Happy 4-20. Time for our yearly reminder: Monsanto has not and is not working on GMO marijuana." [28]

Zika virus

In January 2016, concerns over a Zika virus outbreak were accompanied by claims first published on Reddit that the virus was being spread by a genetically modified mosquito. [29] The fears were based in part because of a new mosquito abatement initiative led by Oxitec—male mosquitoes (which do not bite) are genetically modified to be sterile, and released to mate with females, resulting in no offspring, thereby reducing the Aedes aegypti mosquito population that spreads tropical diseases such as Zika. [29] The claims were identified as "unproven" by the debunking website snopes.com. [30]

Chipotle food safety

In the context of mid-2010s concerns over food safety at Chipotle Mexican Grill certain commentators have implied that the outbreaks of food-borne illnesses were sabotage carried out by the biotech industry in retaliation over Chipotle's removal of GMOs from their menu. [31] [32] The claims were identified as "unproven" by the debunking website Snopes . [33]

Alpha-gal syndrome

In 2023, a false conspiracy theory connecting tick-borne alpha-gal syndrome (an acquired allergy to red meat) to Gates Foundation tick research was spread on social media. [34] [35]

Ethical criticism

In Scholars & Rogues, an online progressive political journal, David Lambert, a development program officer for the United Nations, compared the conspiracy theories supported by some in the anti-GMO movement to those supported in the anti-vaccination movement,

Like preventable childhood diseases, malnutrition is another great moral failing of our time. GMOs such as golden rice—rice modified to contain high levels of beta carotene in order to compensate for the vitamin A deficiency which kills hundreds of thousands of children around the world and blinds many more every year—and drought resistant crops, which will become increasingly vital in the global south due to climate change, have vast potential to help those who don't shop at Whole Foods. But real progress has been stymied by the paranoid and misinformed, who clamor that GMOs, which are biologically no different than "natural" foods, are somehow poisonous. Behind it all is of course an evil corporation: Monsanto. [36]

Offering a similar critique Kavin Senapathy, a freelance writer and speaker who offers editorials from the perspective of the skeptical movement, wrote for Forbes that

Both [the anti-vaccine and anti-GMO movements] cite cherry-picked, discredited, and retracted scientific studies, such as the 1998 Andrew Wakefield study linking the MMR vaccine with autism, and the 2012 Gilles-Éric Séralini rat study linking genetically engineered crops with cancer, while ignoring the vast bodies of evidence against them....

And both lead to injustice....It may seem that surely the anti-GMO movement is benign albeit wrong, innocuous compared to anti-vaccine atrocities. It may appear that it all boils down to some harmless non-GMO labels on grocery items. But it turns out there is a human cost.

The same movement that drives marketers to source non-GMO ingredients also influences regulatory bodies around the world. Crops are kept from regions in Africa where drought is a major contributor to the complex causes of malnutrition, with researchers in Tanzania forced to burn test fields of drought-tolerant corn rather than feed starving local children. Disease-resistant crops languish due to ideological regulations, with bananas resistant to xanthomonas wilt—which is threatening food security in Uganda and eastern Africa where it’s a staple crop—kept from farmers and people who need them.... [37]

Philosopher Giovanni Tagliabue argued that promoters of GMO conspiracy theories were being taken advantage of by anti-environmental corporate interests:

This ideological and political anti-corporate worldview, although sometimes almost paranoid, is legitimate. Yet, while I do not argue whether this attitude is good or bad, right or wrong, I maintain that the avowed anti-industrial struggle in the field of green biotechnologies not only fails to hit the supposed target, but benefits and supports a part of the industry whose products have a stronger environmental impact than rDNA cultivars; in addition, and more importantly, opposing GMOs generates heavy collateral damage to public science, agricultural progress and the poor. [38]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified maize</span> Genetically modified crop

Genetically modified maize (corn) is a genetically modified crop. Specific maize strains have been genetically engineered to express agriculturally-desirable traits, including resistance to pests and to herbicides. Maize strains with both traits are now in use in multiple countries. GM maize has also caused controversy with respect to possible health effects, impact on other insects and impact on other plants via gene flow. One strain, called Starlink, was approved only for animal feed in the US but was found in food, leading to a series of recalls starting in 2000.

The Monsanto Company was an American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri. Monsanto's best-known product is Roundup, a glyphosate-based herbicide, developed in the 1970s. Later, the company became a major producer of genetically engineered crops. In 2018, the company ranked 199th on the Fortune 500 of the largest United States corporations by revenue.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food</span> Foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA

Genetically modified foods, also known as genetically engineered foods, or bioengineered foods are foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA using various methods of genetic engineering. Genetic engineering techniques allow for the introduction of new traits as well as greater control over traits when compared to previous methods, such as selective breeding and mutation breeding.

Flavr Savr, a genetically modified tomato, was the first commercially grown genetically engineered food to be granted a license for human consumption. It was developed by the Californian company Calgene in the 1980s. The tomato has an improved shelf-life, increased fungal resistance and a slightly increased viscosity compared to its non-modified counterpart. It was meant to be harvested ripe for increased flavor for long-distance shipping. The Flavr Savr contains two genes added by Calgene; a reversed antisense polygalacturonase gene which inhibits the production of a rotting enzyme and a gene responsible for the creation of APH(3')II, which confers resistance to certain aminoglycoside antibiotics including kanamycin and neomycin. On May 18, 1994, the FDA completed its evaluation of the Flavr Savr tomato and the use of APH(3')II, concluding that the tomato "is as safe as tomatoes bred by conventional means" and "that the use of aminoglycoside 3'-phosphotransferase II is safe for use as a processing aid in the development of new varieties of tomato, rapeseed oil, and cotton intended for food use." It was first sold in 1994, and was only available for a few years before production ceased in 1997. Calgene made history, but mounting costs prevented the company from becoming profitable, and it was eventually acquired by Monsanto Company.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified crops</span> Plants used in agriculture

Genetically modified crops are plants used in agriculture, the DNA of which has been modified using genetic engineering methods. Plant genomes can be engineered by physical methods or by use of Agrobacterium for the delivery of sequences hosted in T-DNA binary vectors. In most cases, the aim is to introduce a new trait to the plant which does not occur naturally in the species. Examples in food crops include resistance to certain pests, diseases, environmental conditions, reduction of spoilage, resistance to chemical treatments, or improving the nutrient profile of the crop. Examples in non-food crops include production of pharmaceutical agents, biofuels, and other industrially useful goods, as well as for bioremediation.

Since the advent of genetic engineering in the 1970s, concerns have been raised about the dangers of the technology. Laws, regulations, and treaties were created in the years following to contain genetically modified organisms and prevent their escape. Nevertheless, there are several examples of failure to keep GM crops separate from conventional ones.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food controversies</span>

Genetically modified food controversies are disputes over the use of foods and other goods derived from genetically modified crops instead of conventional crops, and other uses of genetic engineering in food production. The disputes involve consumers, farmers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists. The key areas of controversy related to genetically modified food are whether such food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the objectivity of scientific research and publication, the effect of genetically modified crops on health and the environment, the effect on pesticide resistance, the impact of such crops for farmers, and the role of the crops in feeding the world population. In addition, products derived from GMO organisms play a role in the production of ethanol fuels and pharmaceuticals.

The MON 810 corn is a genetically modified maize used around the world. It is a Zea mays line known as YieldGard from the company Monsanto. This plant is a genetically modified organism (GMO) designed to combat crop loss due to insects. There is an inserted gene in the DNA of MON 810 which allows the plant to make a protein that harms insects that try to eat it. The inserted gene is from the Bacillus thuringiensis which produces the Bt protein that is poisonous to insects in the order Lepidoptera, including the European corn borer.

The United States is the largest grower of commercial crops that have been genetically engineered in the world, but not without domestic and international opposition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified soybean</span> Soybean that has had DNA introduced into it using genetic engineering techniques

A genetically modified soybean is a soybean that has had DNA introduced into it using genetic engineering techniques. In 1996, the first genetically modified soybean was introduced to the U.S. by Monsanto. In 2014, 90.7 million hectares of GM soybeans were planted worldwide, making up 82% of the total soybeans cultivation area.

Genetically modified canola is a genetically modified crop. The first strain, Roundup Ready canola, was developed by Monsanto for tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in the commonly used herbicide Roundup.

The Center for Food Safety (CFS) is a 501(c)(3), U.S. non-profit advocacy organization, based in Washington, D.C. It maintains an office in San Francisco, California, and Portland, Oregon. CFS's mission is to empower people, support farmers, and protect the earth from the harmful impacts of industrial agriculture through groundbreaking legal, scientific, and grassroots action. It was founded in 1997.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jeffrey M. Smith</span>

Jeffrey M. Smith is an American consumer activist, self-published author, and former politician. He is the author of two books on genetically engineered foods, Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies about the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You’re Eating, and Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives, which he made into a film in 2012. He has appeared twice on each of the shows -The Dr. Oz Show and The Doctors. Smith has worked with organic food marketers and alternative health product promoters to advocate against genetically modified food. Supporters identify Smith as an influential educator on the alleged risks associated with genetically modified foods, while others point out Smith's lack of formal scientific training. In 1998, Smith ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a candidate for the Natural Law Party. As of 2021, Smith is the executive director of the Institute for Responsible Technology, and executive director of the global campaign Protect Nature Now.

Natural News is a far-right, anti-vaccination conspiracy theory and fake news website known for promoting alternative medicine, pseudoscience, disinformation, and far-right extremism. The website began publishing articles in 2008 and is based in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Séralini affair</span> Retracted study led by Gilles-Éric Séralini

The Séralini affair was the controversy surrounding the publication, retraction, and republication of a journal article by French molecular biologist Gilles-Éric Séralini. First published by Food and Chemical Toxicology in September 2012, the article presented a two-year feeding study in rats, and reported an increase in tumors among rats fed genetically modified corn and the herbicide RoundUp. Scientists and regulatory agencies subsequently concluded that the study's design was flawed and its findings unsubstantiated. A chief criticism was that each part of the study had too few rats to obtain statistically useful data, particularly because the strain of rat used, Sprague Dawley, develops tumors at a high rate over its lifetime.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">March Against Monsanto</span> International protest movement

The March Against Monsanto was an international grassroots movement and protest against Monsanto, a producer of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and Roundup, a glyphosate-based herbicide. The movement was founded by Tami Canal in response to the failure of California Proposition 37, a ballot initiative which would have required labeling food products made from GMOs. Advocates support mandatory labeling laws for food made from GMOs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gilles-Éric Séralini</span>

Gilles-Éric Séralini is a French molecular biologist, political advisor and activist on genetically modified organisms and foods. He is of Algerian-French origin. Séralini has been a professor of molecular biology at the University of Caen since 1991, and is president and chairman of the board of CRIIGEN.

GMO Answers is a front group launched by the agricultural biotechnology industry in July 2013 to participate in public debate around genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in crops in the U.S. food supply.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified potato</span> Potato that has had its genes modified using genetic engineering

A genetically modified potato is a potato that has had its genes modified, using genetic engineering. Goals of modification include introducing pest resistance, tweaking the amounts of certain chemicals produced by the plant, and to prevent browning or bruising of the tubers. Varieties modified to produce large amounts of starches may be approved for industrial use only, however, not for food.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kevin Folta</span> American scientist & professor of the horticultural sciences

Kevin M. Folta is a professor of the horticultural sciences department at the University of Florida. From 2007 to 2010 he helped lead the project to sequence the strawberry genome, and continues to research photomorphogenesis in plants and compounds responsible for flavor in strawberries. Folta has been active as a science communicator since 2002, especially relating to biotechnology. He has faced controversy over what his critics say are his industry connections. In 2017 he was elected as a fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.

References

  1. ↑ Shermer, Michael. "Conspiracy Central." Scientific American 311.6 (2014): 94–94.
  2. ↑ Mark Lynas (April 29, 2013). "Time to call out the anti-GMO conspiracy theory". marklynas.org. Archived from the original on February 24, 2020. Retrieved January 31, 2016.
  3. ↑ Jon Entine (May 11, 2015). "Why GMOs? Challenging anti-technology conspiracy theories". geneticliteracyproject.org. Retrieved January 31, 2016.
  4. ↑ Lewandowsky, Stephan; Gignac, Gilles E.; Oberauer, Klaus (2013). "The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science". PLOS ONE. 8 (10): e75637. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...875637L. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075637 . PMC   3788812 . PMID   24098391.
  5. ↑ Paul Christou; Harry Klee (2004). "Chapter 50: Political and Social Risk Amplification of GMOs". Handbook of plant biotechnology. John Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1002/0470869143. ISBN   978-0-471-85199-8.
  6. 1 2 Räikkä, Juha (2009). "The Ethics of Conspiracy Theorizing". The Journal of Value Inquiry. 43 (4): 457–468. doi:10.1007/s10790-009-9189-1. S2CID   145662770.
  7. ↑ "Belated retraction of Seralini's bad anti-GMO paper". Pharyngula. Retrieved January 31, 2016.
  8. ↑ Veltri, Giuseppe A.; Suerdem, Ahmet K. (February 1, 2013). "Worldviews and discursive construction of GMO-related risk perceptions in Turkey". Public Understanding of Science. 22 (2): 137–154. doi:10.1177/0963662511423334. hdl: 2381/28216 . ISSN   0963-6625. PMID   23833021. S2CID   22893955.
  9. ↑ Utinans, A.; Ancane, G. (2014). "Belief in the paranormal and modern health worries". SHS Web of Conferences. 10: 00048. doi: 10.1051/shsconf/20141000048 .
  10. ↑ Yang, Jinjie; Xu, Kaibin; Rodriguez, Lulu (May 19, 2014). "The rejection of science frames in the news coverage of the golden rice experiment in Hunan, China". Health, Risk & Society. 16 (4): 339–354. doi:10.1080/13698575.2014.923092. ISSN   1369-8575. S2CID   144936752.
  11. ↑ Kangmennaang, Joseph; Osei, Lydia; Armah, Frederick A.; Luginaah, Isaac (October 1, 2016). "Genetically modified organisms and the age of (Un) reason? A critical examination of the rhetoric in the GMO public policy debates in Ghana". Futures. SI: Futures for Food. 83 (Supplement C): 37–49. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2016.03.002.
  12. ↑ Margit Stange (2003). Peter Knight (ed.). Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 310. ISBN   978-1-57607-812-9.
  13. ↑ Reiss, Michael J.; Straughan, Roger (May 21, 2001). Improving Nature?: The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering. Cambridge University Press. p. 143. ISBN   9780521008471.
  14. 1 2 Uscinski, Joseph E.; Parent, Joseph M. (August 5, 2014). American Conspiracy Theories . Oxford University Press. p.  146. ISBN   9780199351824.
  15. ↑ Uscinski, Joseph (August 22, 2016). "The 5 Most Dangerous Conspiracy Theories of 2016". POLITICO Magazine. Retrieved May 20, 2019.
  16. ↑ Skeptic (November 11, 2014). "Conspiracy Theories — How Can You Determine if They are True or False?". Skeptic. Archived from the original on October 23, 2020. Retrieved May 20, 2019.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  17. ↑ Samory, Mattia; Mitra, Tanushree (November 2018). "'The Government Spies Using Our Webcams': The Language of Conspiracy Theories in Online Discussions". Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction. 2 (CSCW): 152:1–152:24. doi:10.1145/3274421. ISSN   2573-0142. S2CID   52213735.
  18. ↑ "Russia wants you to hate GMOs". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved May 20, 2019.
  19. ↑ "The Misleading War on GMOs: The Food Is Safe. The Rhetoric Is Dangerous". Slate Magazine. July 15, 2015. Retrieved February 2, 2016.
  20. ↑ F. Bailey Norwood; Michelle S. Calvo-Lorenzo; Sarah Lancaster; Pascal A. Oltenacu (November 17, 2014). Agricultural and Food Controversies. Oxford University Press. pp. 65–66. ISBN   978-0-19-936842-6.
  21. ↑ Stephen D. Simpson, CFA. "Why Is Monsanto Evil, But DuPont Isn't?". Investopedia . Retrieved January 31, 2016.
  22. ↑ Willy Blackmore. "Why We Shouldn't Waste Time on GMO Conspiracies". TakePart. Archived from the original on September 6, 2013. Retrieved January 31, 2016.
  23. ↑ "Monsanto's GMO Wheat Conspiracy Theory". Farm Wars. June 24, 2013. Retrieved March 4, 2016.
  24. 1 2 Mikkelson, David (April 15, 2015). "Fact Check: Monsanto Creates First Genetically Modified Strain of Marijuana". Snopes.com . Retrieved November 20, 2018.
  25. ↑ Adams, Mike (August 25, 2015). "Scientists Working to Prevent Monsanto from Monopolizing on Cannabis Strains, But Can They Stop It?". High Times. Retrieved November 20, 2018.
  26. ↑ Walters, Greg (April 20, 2016). "What a Looming Patent War Could Mean for the Future of the Marijuana Industry". Vice News . Retrieved November 20, 2018.
  27. ↑ Bricken, Hilary (April 29, 2016). "Marijuana Patents: Fear, Loathing, and Beating Monsanto". Canna Law Blog. Harris Bricken. Retrieved November 19, 2018.
  28. ↑ @MonsantoCo (April 20, 2017). "Happy 4-20. Time for our yearly reminder: Monsanto has not and is not working on GMO marijuana" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
  29. 1 2 Lydia Ramsey. "A wacky conspiracy is circulating about Zika and GMOs — and it needs to stop". Business Insider . Retrieved January 31, 2016.
  30. ↑ LaCapria, Kim (January 29, 2016). "MOSTLY FALSE: Zika Virus Caused by GMO Mosquitos". snopes. Retrieved January 31, 2016.
  31. ↑ "Publisher's Platform: Chipotle Must Denounce Mike Adam's Conspiracy Theory". Food Safety News. January 2016. Retrieved March 4, 2016.
  32. ↑ "Chipotle fans have a wacky conspiracy theory about the chain's E. coli outbreaks". Business Insider. Retrieved March 4, 2016.
  33. ↑ LaCapria, Kim (December 30, 2015). "Chipotle Sabotaged by GMO Activists?". snopes. Retrieved March 4, 2016.
  34. ↑ Fichera, Angelo (August 30, 2023). "No, a meat allergy caused by ticks is not tied to a Gates Foundation-funded program". AP News. Retrieved October 19, 2024.
  35. ↑ Cercone, Jeff (September 1, 2023). "By Jeff Cercone September 1, 2023 No connection between Gates-funded modified ticks, meat allergy". Politifact. Poynter Institute. Retrieved October 19, 2024.
  36. ↑ "Conspiracies against progress: why the rise of the modern conspiracy theory should concern us all". Progressive Culture | Scholars & Rogues. August 27, 2014. Retrieved February 2, 2016.
  37. ↑ Senapathy, Kavin (May 18, 2017). "The Anti-Vaccine And Anti-GMO Movements Are Inextricably Linked And Cause Preventable Suffering". Forbes. US. Archived from the original on March 22, 2020.
  38. ↑ Tagliabue, G (September 18, 2018). "OPINION PIECE Counterproductive consequences of 'anti-GMO' activism". Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics. 18: 61–74. doi: 10.3354/esep00185 . ISSN   1863-5415.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.