-23 votes

Confession from a paid shill for Monsanto and Big Pharma

Just kidding. I'm not a paid shill. I earn exactly as much money by defending the principles of molecular biology and pharmacology as I make by defending free-market libertarianism- $0.

In every thread or post about GMO's or pharmaceuticals or medicine, I am inevitably accused of being a paid shill, often by more than one person. I'm not exaggerating when I say HUNDREDS of people have made this baseless, childish accusation. It is ubiquitous, and pathetic.

Why is this happening?

Are people so convinced of their beliefs that they can't even fathom that someone would have a genuine, educated, and opposing scientific viewpoint? Just because someone criticizes the mythology of the church does not mean they are possessed by the devil.

It is incredible to me that so many of a group of people who pride themselves in being "awake" are so quick to stoop to primitive anti-intellectualism. The "natural" health/alternative medicine movement has become a hivemind united in the lowest common denominator of sensationalism and logical fallacy.

I can't even estimate how many times I've been told to "keep drinking the fluoride, man." It is a brainless, meaningless, hypocritical insult, and as a dentist I will keep brushing my teeth with fluoridated toothpaste because it hardens enamel and makes it more caries resistant. I will also keep using my limited influence to stop public water fluoridation, because I strongly oppose the practice for both ethical and scientific reasons. People aren't even attempting to understand the mindset and perspective of the strangers (who are often allies in liberty) they are insulting.

Ultimately the blame comes down to each individual, but there are influential leaders in the natural health/alternative movement who are spewing anti-science disinformation, and they have a legion of followers who parrot their style of demagoguery and spam their propaganda everywhere. The worst example of this, of course, is Mike Adams of Natural News. His propaganda is so distinctly emotional (and unscientific) that I can often not only recognize his work instantly, but whether someone else has been influenced by his work. With the possible exception of Alex Jones, he is unrivaled in his ability to create an alarmist frenzy out of non-existent, minimal, or even conflicting information. There are Natural News disciples who have more confidence in the pseudoscience of the Natural Fallacy than Einstein did in the principles of physics. I mean this literally. Einstein had doubts about physics, while many NaturalNewsers have no doubt whatsoever that GMOs, pesticides, vaccines, psychiatric and other pharmaceutical drugs, nuclear power, et cetera are going to destroy the human race.

Is this what people prefer to believe? Chemophobia?

This has to stop. I'm sick of the fear-mongering. I'm sick of getting accused of being a paid shill in every conversation. I'm sick of getting blasted with pseudoscience alarmism. Defending the claims of Natural News by linking to a different Natural News article, which is defended by a different Natural News article, which is based on a documentary by an activist film maker who based his work on Greenpeace research, mixed in with angry name-calling and false allegations, is NOT debating.

We don't live in a black and rainbow fairy tale. Don't be that anti-intellectual who is manipulated by demagogues. Science is often counter-intuitive and complicated. Scientific evidence and mechanisms should not be angrily and immediately dismissed because they conflict with preconceived notions, superstition, and speculation. Corporations, including Monsanto, and the government are NOT always wrong, particularly in the case of science. Opposing a government program like NASA does not mean that the principles and accomplishments in astronautics are lies and conspiracies. This is analogous to the FDA and EPA in medicine and agriculture.

I AM NOT A SHILL. So please stop accusing me and the other defenders of modern medicine/science as such.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I've heated

my home with a small corn stove for the past 6 years. It got expensive, but is still generally less expensive than LP and certainly less than electric. It's also safer in that burning it doesn't produce carbon monoxide. For years, I was always in a panic to burn or otherwise store the corn before the weather got too warm and the Pantry Moths invaded and ruined it....
With the advent of GMO and "Roundup Ready" corn in NW Ohio and NE Indiana, problem solved! They WON'T touch it! Either that, or they die for ingesting it. As near as I can figure, the only safe use of this stuff IS burning it.

Maybe Not "Paid"

But, A shill nonetheless.

buddy

Here is my question

I am no fan of Monsanto or GMO's. If they aren't so bad then why did Monsanto get legal protection from lawsuits over the safety of their product? To me that screams it's not good for you. What is your opinion on that?

"Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security." - Dr. Ron Paul

as long as you are aware of the fact that there are . . .

highly educated scientists who are 'alarmed' (as in disturbed by) by GMO, etc.--

that being 'scientific' does not automatically make a person pro-Monsanto or pro-GMO--

or that being anti-GMO and anti-Monsanto does not make a person an ignorant 'red-neck'--

then *we* are fine with your admission.

Carry on.

Peace.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Should we put the Oregon Department of Agriculture

on your list of ignorant alarmist luddite tools?

by Evan Sernoffsky, KGW.com staff
Posted on June 21, 2013 at 2:26 PM

WILSONVILLE, Ore. – Scientists investigating a bee die-off in Wilsonville are calling it the largest mass bumblebee death on record with more than 50,000 reportedly dying.
The Oregon Department of Agriculture determined the pesticide Safari is responsible for the death of the bumblebees in a parking lot this week but said the death toll is closer to 25,000.
The Xerces Society for invertebrate conservation has been investigating the bumblebee die-off since last weekend when the bees started falling from a cluster of 65 European Linden trees near a plaza just off Interstate 5. It said the bees likely represented more that 300 wild colonies.
“Each of those colonies could have produced multiple new queens that would have gone on to establish new colonies next year. This makes the event particularly catastrophic," said Rich Hatfield, a biologist with the Xerces Society in a press release...

http://www.king5.com/news/environment/Pesticides-killed-2500...

(Safari is produced by Valent Corp., not Monsanto although they have a close working relationship
with Monsanto and Sumitomo Chemical of Japan)

http://www.valent.com/newsroom/newsreleasesbyyear/2010/monsa...

Notice what they blame- neonicotinoid pesticides

It has nothing to do with genetic modification or Bt's cry toxin or RoundUp. So why are GMOs constantly under attack for CCD? People are making Monsanto guilty by association.

It seems people just want to lynch Monsanto and kill their superstitions about genetic engineering instead of figuring out the truth.

Also, Europe place a 2 year ban on neonicotinoids. We are going to find out very soon whether this is the cause. We have been using neonicotinoids for a century, so it is likely that CCD is mupltifactoral. At this point no plausible mechanism has been presented that expalians a role in GM corn.

Wow. You really aren't very

Wow. You really aren't very smart.

The surfactant in Roundup - glyphosate - IS a neonicotinoid pesticide.

But by all means. Please eat more GMO's.

Want to bet? I'll bet you a $20 donation to C4L

Glyphoshate is not neonicotinoid. Take the bet..

Do you know how to accss info that isnt fringe propaganda?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid

Please send me a copy of your reciept.

Look at the chemical structure of glyphosphate. It is not in the nicotine fanily. You are wrong despite what some idiot on Youtube says.

That 'idiot on YouTube' is

That 'idiot on YouTube' is Dr. David Suzuki and his C.V. is far, far more impressive than anything you can possibly claim.

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/downloads/drsuzukiCV.pdf

Make sure you clean out the

Make sure you clean out the rats' cages in the lab.

http://www.naturalnews.com/034744_tobacco_leaves_genetically...

and

From http://www.monsantoafrica.com/_pdfs/roundup_360.pdf

Sugar 15,000 Table salt 3,320 Vitamin A 2,000
Aspirin 1,240 Caffeine 200 Petrol 159
Nicotine 53 Arsenic 5

Asclepius's picture

delete

delete

Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery; none but ourselves can free our minds. - Bob Marley

Yup, paid shrill

talks like one

Please enlighten me on how a paid shill talks.

I'm starting to get suspicious that some of you are Greenpeace and Sierra Club spokesmen deliberately causing confusion on the Daily Paul. Here I am becoming the wild speculator I wrote this post criticizing.

Please outline how to recognize signs of a paid shill step by step. Or let me guess. Is there one step?

Step 1: Is the person hysterically anti-genetic engineering?

No? PAID SHILL!

The real science - The BT in

The real science -

The BT in BT corn, cotton and soybeans stands for bacillus thuringiensis. http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/insect/05556.html

Biology 101 - There is no cross-kingdom gene mergers in nature. Forcing genetic material from one kingdom into another hasn't been adequately tested with the exception of this independent study by Chinese geneticists - http://www.nature.com/cr/journal/v22/n1/full/cr2011158a.html

The American Medical Association recognizes the need for further testing on GMO's to ensure public safety - http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/csaph/a12-csaph2-bioen...

Wow. Do you even realize how ridiculous your arguments are?

Bacillus thuringiensis is a NATURALLY occurring bacteria that is everywhere, hence the cry toxin is everywhere. If you are scared of cry toxin, then you should fear everything you eat!

The attitude is so hypocritical. "Cry toxin found naturally on organic food is healthy! Bt improved or modified by recombinant genetic engineering is dangerous and evil!"

Speaking of Biology 101, I highly recommend you take it before you start lecturing others about biology. Then take some upper level molecular biology and genetics and microbiology. There is absolutely cross-kingdom gene mergers. In fact up to 8% of your genome codes for endogenous retroviruses. I don't know what point you think you are making by linking to this journal, but microRNA has nothing to do with GMO discussion, as genetic engineering does not involve miRNA, and this gene transfer is irrelevant. I'm guessing you are blindly repeating Jeffrey Smith, who made a documentary based on science he has a poor grasp on. Good play, Cirocco- "HERE'S A SCIENTIFIC PAPER I DON'T UNDERSTAND AT ALL BECAUSE A NON-SCIENTIST FILM-MAKER TOLD ME ABOUT IT."

And by the way, what is adequate testing? What is the adequate amount of testing for someone who is prejudiced and superstitious about a technology? If you were scared of ghosts in a building, and the FDA said it did 100 tests with the best technology it had, and told you that the house is not haunted and the ghosts are not dangerous to you, would you believe them? Or would you double down on your preconceived fear and accuse them of being paid off by wizards and demand for 10,000 more safety tests? Or more independent tests?

Lastly, the AMA statement is the opposite of what you just claimed.

(1) Our AMA recognizes the continuing validity of
the three major conclusions contained in the
1987 National Academy of Sciences white paper
"Introduction of Recombinant DNA-Engineered
Organisms into the Environment." [The three majo
r conclusions are: (a)There is no evidence that
unique hazards exist either in the use of rDNA te
chniques or in the movement of genes between
unrelated organisms; (b) The risks associated with
the introduction of rDNA-engineered organisms
are the same in kind as those associated with the introduction of unmodified organisms and
organisms modified by other methods; (c) Assessment of the risk of introducing rDNA-engineered
organisms into the environment should be based on
the nature of the organism and the environment
into which it is introduced, not on the method by which it was produced.)

Please enlighten us all, oh

Please enlighten us all, oh sage and wise one, about the mutating nature of viruses and to which other kingdom those can be genetically bonded.

For everyone else, look up the information and then ask yourself why Monsanto would need to gene splice the bacillus artificially if such a merger COULD occur naturally.

It's not rocket science. Just biology.

I just laughed out loud in class. This is gibberish.

Don't say "it's just biology," because you have no idea what you are talking about. You are completely oblivious that your "understanding" of biology is a blatant fallacy. You are trying to appeal to nature, but you aren't even thinking irrationally correctly. Gene splicing does occur naturally. Where the hell do you think humans got the idea and abitlity? Black magic?

You are using words like "virus" and "mutate" and "splice" and "nature" but not in a way that makes any sense. You sound like a parrot just repeating the words a scientist says and combining
them randomly.

You are a perfect example of the person I made fun of in this post. You are more confident in biology than Einstein was in physics but you lack even a basic understanding of it. Seriously, you are screwing the DP community even giving your opinion on genetics. Please spend your time doing something more helpful, like coaching the Cleveland Browns by yelling commands from the bleachers.

Please oh wise sage, stick to rocket science, because biology is not your forte.

And here's a little refresher

And here's a little refresher high school biology review for you since you're still clearly confused about your class - http://www.101science.com/Taxonomy.htm

You can cross a donkey with a horse and get a mule because they're in the same kingdom, same phylum and same family. You cannot cross that donkey with a dandelion and get a donkelion. You cannot cross a rooster with a goldfish. You cannot cross anything that's not in the same kingdom unless it's done artificially, which - again - hasn't been adequately tested.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/12/28/obamas-scie...

Ah, and before I forget the Deputy Commissioner of the FDA is Michael Taylor, former Monsanto VP for Public Policy.

But no conflict of interest there, right?

Cirocco. Please listen.

You are confused. One of the criteria scientists use for determining the difference between species is whether they can sexually reproduce and have offspring capable of reproduction (fecundable offspring). We consider a donkey and a horse two different species because the offspring are sterile. They can, however, combine their chromosomes and create a viable offspring that shares the genotype and phenotype of both horse and donkey. Their DNA are similar enough to create an offspring, but too dissimiliar to reproduce.

Donkeys and dandelians have vastly different genomes that are not compatible. Plants also do not have genitals or other mechanisms for initiating this process.

This process is completely different from DNA recombination. Bacteria have a completely rifferent way of reproduction than eukaryotes (plants, animals, and fungi) with asexual reproduvction viruses don't reproduce at all on their own. Some viruses don't recombine chromosomes, bc they dont have any, but they can use enzymes to nsert their DNA into a host organism DNA, and use their machinery to reproduce the virus.

I have to do lab work now, but did you know you share about 8% of your genes with lettuce? Do you consider yourself humanettuce?

You've just proven my point.

You've just proven my point. Gene-splicing across kingdoms is completely unnatural and untested.

And regarding our little bet? http://www.monsantoafrica.com/_pdfs/roundup_360.pdf Check out the section titled "What about safety" and note the nicotine content.

You won't write the check though. People like you are basically manureheads.

Gibberish? Yup. You're a

Gibberish?

Yup. You're a shill.

http://xgmos.com/what-is-a-gmo/

2015 brings a new round of GMO's

The EPA announced that it has completed the first part of its study on dioxin, after more than 25 years of stonewalling. Dioxin is the most caustic man-made chemical known. Dioxin is a general term for hundreds of chemicals that are produced in industrial processes that use chlorine and burning. Disturbingly, it has a half-life of 100+ years when it is leached into soil or embedded in water systems. Dioxin was the most harmful component in Agent Orange (the recipe for Agent Orange is 2,4-D herbicide and 2,4,5-T herbicide).

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/millions-of-pounds-of-toxic-dioxin...

Surviving the killing fields of Minnesota

Todays brainwashing: GMO's are safe

Mark Shepard on Restoration


Mark Shepard on Restoration Agriculture

There is

a lot of confirmation bias and circular-hyperlink echo chambering that goes on with these topics.

i know exactly what you mean regarding the way people use one link to "infowars" as some legitimate source, same with "natural" news.

Both those sites have been extensively investigated as limited hangout/disinfo/honeypot sites. I would never use them as the basis of a post.

The key is to separate the wheat from the chaff to the best of your abilities, and try to present the information while allowing the reader to decide for themselves what to believe. IMHO

"If this mischievous financial policy [greenbacks], which has its origin in North America, should become endurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without debts. It will hav

Everyone knows GMO's are poison except sheeple!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0Mrm9Y6khk

Surviving the killing fields of Minnesota

Todays brainwashing: GMO's are safe

If GMO's are so good why have my bees all died?

I kept bees in a mono-culture environment, where they have to fly over corn and soybeans.

I first noticed a problem in 2006 when 75 of my best hives died within 3 weeks. It was very strange, I was feeding syrup and feeding pollen to all 300+ hives. The bees just disappeared after the hive was completely full of the syrup I was feeding, all that was left was a handful of bees and the queen. And what was really strange the bees from the other hives would not come close to the dead hives. Usually a dying hive gets robbed out within 1 or 2 days.

Their was a connection to the GMO corn. That is the farmer across the highway come and asked me to look at his corn bin, seems he was worried about my bees. That same day I went and looked a found my bees completely covering his corn pile in a building he was storing corn in. It took 2 years for me to realize there was something in the corn.

The real tragedy is that all the bee researchers knew what was the problem, but were paid by Bayer and Monsanto to keep the truth from the beekeepers.

I am not the only one in this area haqving problems, Richard Adee the worlds largest beekeeper was totally wiped out in 2010, in 2012 he lost 50,000 of his 80,000 hives.

Just months ago beekeepers in California invited the EPA to come and look at the difference between AG bees and non AG bees. But even after proof GMO's are killing the bees the EPA refused to investigate banning the pesticides used on GMO's. So the beekeepers are forced to sue the EPA for knowingly allowing poison on the market. But why would the EPA ever change after all there is a revolving door between Monsanto's board to the EPA and back.

What you don't know those beekeepers have paid for their own research that proves the opposite of what your saying about GMO's.

Surviving the killing fields of Minnesota

Todays brainwashing: GMO's are safe

What caused massive bee deaths in the late 1800's?

And early 1900's? That was almost 100 years before the structure of DNA was even known, let alone the existence of genetic engineering.

Your entire argument is "IT'S A CONSPIRACY AND EVERYONE IS IN ON IT."

Cite your source for that

Cite your source for that honeybee die-off in the early 1900's. Where?