Putting My Money Where Your Mouth Is!

The Stunning Corn Comparison promoted by Zen Honeycutt at Moms Across America was certainly stunning.  While Zen, farmer Howard Vlieger and Profit Pro stand by these data as authentic, a codified scientific community sees them as either poor quality, a mistake, (or at worst) fraud.

If the results are real and GMO corn is stripped of almost all carbon, loaded with (carbon-based) formaldeyde and glyphosate, plus a Brix of 1%, it would be a remarkable story that would shake the foundation of modern production agriculture. Such findings, if found transparently and in independent, replicated trials, would likely grace the covers of major science weeklys like Science or Nature.

It would be huge news, and as a scientist, I am thrilled to test the hypothesis that the previous data are authentic.

So excited!  I love to see experimental data replicated! 

More numbers, locations, etc, the better I sleep at night!

I have agreed to personally finance the analytical portion of a replicate of the experiment. Experimental design is pending based on the corn genotype, culture conditions and analytical tests performed to obtain previous data. I am waiting to hear back from those that obtained the last numbers.

It is expected that those that produced the original data participate, and I'm working on that.  I think they'd be glad to see their stunning results replicated in statistically meaningful independent trials. Since they stand by the data so rabidly, it is expected that they participate.

At this point, here are the conditions (please submit suggestions in Comments)

Experiment:

• The experimental design will contain corn from at least two locations.
• Each location will contain the "GMO" and "non-GMO" lines (hybrids?) used to obtain the original numbers. 
• Each measurement will come from three replicates of each genotype. 
• Statistical methods will be determined up front and be adhered to.
• At least two analytical facilities will be used. 
• All samples will be coded in the field by independent personnel (County Agents, grower cooperators) and coding will not be revealed until final data are complete.
• Exact analysis will be based on previous data reported, including %Brix, carbohydrates, amino acids, minerals, organic compounds (formaldeyde, glyphosate) and any other tests suggested.  I'm not sure how to test "anerobic biology", so I'm waiting for information from Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and Howard Vlieger to tell me how to do this or where we get it done.  Or what it is.

Dissemination:

• The data will be reported in a peer-reviewed journal consistent with impact of results. Publication will be pursued regardless of results obtained. 
• All participants will be co-authors.  Offers have been extended to Dr. Ho.  I would also like to include Huber, Vlieger and Zen Honeycutt, as they stand by these data and should be included in their publication.
• Results will be prominently featured, potentially after publication, on websites and blogs, regardless of outcome.  An announcement will be made to obtain agreement to report results on various websites. This will be a written agreement and publicly accessible.  It is expected that Moms Across America will stand by their rabid defense of the original data and agree to post these findings. 

A proposal will be circulated early this week and it will be adjustable based on public input and the scientific team that vetted/promoted the original data.   We want an airtight, valid, mutually-agreeable experimental design here so that we can have the biggest impact with the results! 

Here goes!  I'm so excited to see this get off the ground.  I'm grateful for Dr. Ho's agreement to participate and also for all of the experimental advice from Anastasia Bodnar and Karl Haro von Mogel. 

Verifying "Stunning Corn Data"

As the fields begin to grow and acres of corn blanket the nation, it is a great time to re-think the numbers from the chart shown on Moms Across America.  To recap, a chart claiming to be a chemical analysis of GMO and conventional corn was shown, featuring dramatic differences in nutrient content and chemical contamination.

The data, without information of source or method, were widely criticized, including by Yours Truly. However, the person that did/commissioned the test, Howard Vlieger, stands by the data as authentic, along with a host of others, including Zen Honeycutt from "Moms".  UFO Blogger and the Paranormal Society have lent their scientific analysis and are convinced too.

However, in the YouTube video (@7:51) Vlieger says clearly that the data were not repeated, "Just those two samples".  He then goes on to defend the Seralini rat study, so the scientific rigor is not necessarily high here.

Let's re-test those results!  Who's on board! 

As the corn grows in 2013, we are presented with a great opportunity to verify these earthshaking results. I'm excited to have the opportunity to lead a rigorous study to replicate these data.  I've been contacted by Dr. Maewan Ho, and she has Vlieger on board and apparently Dr. Don Huber of anti-GMO fame.

With help of others, we are currently designing a double-blind, multiple location test.  The plan is:

1.  Devise a mutually-agreeable proposal, including tests at multiple sites.

2. The same seeds will be used as in the previous replicate (provided they can be shipped, as they are transgnenic)

3.  Two separate laboratories will be sent coded samples.

4  Data will be returned and then matched to location/genotype.

5.  All facets of the project will be shared here and on Biofortified.org, and wherever others involved would like it posted.

***  All participants must agree on the experimental design, testing facility, procedure.  All must agree to be named authors on the publication.

Personally, I think the last results were crap, that's why I want the most airtight and solid experimental design to go forward.  If it is done right, and the same results are obtained, it will be a huge story in food and corn biology!  That would be really good, so the experiments need to be perfect.

This is the plan at the moment.  Stand by!!

The Great Debate... GMO Science

It is an amazing pleasure to get to discuss science in a public forum, every single time.

But imagine my excitement when I get to discuss biotechnology with Jon Entine on a panel at the CATO Institute! 

Imagine my excitement when I learn we get to discuss biotechnology with Jeffrey Smith and Giles-Eric Seralni!   I had to pinch myself.  I know Smith and Seralni's work inside and out, and would love the opportunity to discuss science with them in a live, public format.

The discussion is to take place in Washington DC on June 4.  Stay tuned for details

So excited to talk science and how it relates to biotechnology...

how can we use it to help people rather than scare them? 

.

Himalayan Sea Salt! GMO Free! With Extra Plutonium!

Yesterday I wrote about a website I found HERE and could not believe my eyes.  It was a picture of Himalayan Sea Salt, VERIFIED GMO-Free!   I wrote a little something about this and its insanity. 

I decided to follow up on this curious stuff.  Himalayan Sea Salt.  GMO-Free. Going forward, when I mention "salt" we're talking table salt. Table salt is one simple molecule, a sodium and a chloride locked together in ionic bliss.  In our typical table salt they add a pinch of goiter-busting iodine and calcium silicate to prevent caking. Other than that, pretty simple stuff. 

I know I'm risking being called a shill for big salt, but here goes...

So I go online and the first thing that pops up is Mercola's website- he loves not good old sodium chloride, but Himalayan Salt, over 250,000,000 years old, so it claims. 

 Dr. Mercola must have slept through chemistry class. Click on this to read the words of a true anti-scholar.  Plus, people that refer to themselves as "Dr. _______" all the time drive me nuts.  

First, the "Purest Salt on Earth".  What a great claim.  The purest salt on earth is the reagent grade sodium chloride on my lab shelf.  Mercola claims that table salt has nothing in common with natural salt, and that "heat alters the natural chemical structure of (table) salt".  

Altering sodium chloride's natural chemical structure is pretty difficult to do.  Aside from dropping it in water and dissociating it into ions, the stuff together, dry and happy, is simply sodium chloride.   

Turns out that Himalayan Sea Salt (which if it actually comes from the Himalayas is about as far as you can get from the sea) is loaded with all kinds of fun elements.  Over at Salt News (no kidding) they did a spectral analysis of Himalayan Sea Salt.  No GMOs, but plenty of things that would get spark an activist frenzy if they were present in Monsanto corn.  The laundry list of evil elements present is long, and there are detectable levels of lead, arsenic, plutonium, radium, uranium,  and the list goes on and on.  They also refer to "tungsten" as "wolfram", which explains the "W".  The list is shown after the end of this posting.

The analysis says 97.5% good ol' sodium chloride, at least as I can back calculate from these numbers. Keep in mind Mercola's note above, "Today's common table salt has nothing in common with natural salt", which is exactly true, if you ignore the fact that they are both 97.5% sodium chloride. Plus, using "common" twice in his sentence is confusing. He needs a better proofreader, but they'd probably correct his loony science too. 

Now I know damn well that the vanishingly small amounts of these elements are probably present in many food items.  No argument there.  They are there at levels that are undeniably physiologically irrelevant. 

The point is, if such chemical analysis was done on corn you'd read about how GM corn contains lead, arsenic, plutonium and uranium. It would be posted on every anti-GM website and it would be the obvious link between GM and disease.  Correlations are the mainstay of anti-GM "evidence". 

The ironic part is that 1 in 10 deaths in the USA are blamed on salt, 2.3 million deaths a year worldwide. That's exactly 2.3 million more than GMOs, as transgenic plants have killed 0.0.  Salt consumption is linked clearly to high blood pressure and is a contributing factor in stroke and cardiovascular disease.

Ultimately, that ear of corn is not nearly the poison that the big pink rocks of Himalayan salt are. 

However, they do taste delicious together when used in prescribed amounts.

Here are the data from Salt News.  No other source is provided, so take them with a grain of salt. 

Monsalto

Here's how we know that science is dead in the anti-GMO movement.  

The Non-GMO Project and their crack scientific team has verified, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that salt is not a transgenic plant. 

For many that have been scared to death by pictures of lumpy rats and Jeffery Smith, this comes as a surprise.  Without a label, how would they know that salt is not a transgenic plant?  Luckily the Non-GMO project provides this important verification. 

And the anti-GMO world erupted in excitement, as now they could enjoy giant pretzels and something on the rim of their margaritas-- and confidently sip knowing that the salt will not give them allergies, autism, parkinson's disease, obesity, ADD, ADHD, cancer, liver failure, kidney dysfunction, and it won't get into their umbilical cords, even on guys. 

I wonder if it is non-GMO tequila?

Once again a swing and a miss.  It shows that labels are not necessary, as if you put a Non-GMO label on everything then you can assume the rest is evil.  Good times, stay hot.   

The story was originally posted HERE

Anti-GMers-- Your Moment to Shine!

To all of the anti-GMO folks out there, I'm glad to report that your efforts are making a difference in derailing the spread of trangenic technology!

I was speaking with a scientist from a smaller ag company.  It's one most don't think of, not Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, etc.  I don't want to name names because 1. I don't want to give them grief and 2. you won't believe me anyway.

Smooth move. Be careful of what you wish for, activists. 

The company had a GM trait installed in a non-agronomic crop that would stop insect feeding.  Basically it was a specific Bt to solve a specific, insecticide-intensive problem.  However, they abandoned the effort when they did the economic analysis.

The cost of de-regulation and commercialization, plus the time lag, plus the uncertain climate toward the technology was too much for the company to gamble with.  Plus, right when they were ready to move into deregulation BASF started making an extremely cheap version of a potent insecticide, so it made more sense to abandon transgenic efforts (that worked without insecticide) and simply apply more insecticide.

As he put it, "Pesticides are cheap, they work, and we don't have to deal with public perception".

So take a bow anti-GM folks.  Now that a Bt horticultural crop is out of the pipeline we can get back to the business of using broad-spectrum insecticides that might otherwise be eliminated!  Bravo!

An "Experiment"? Really?

Last week the interwebs reverberated in shock over news that a student had been expelled from school for conducting a science experiment. I was shocked too, certainly I've been extremely active in science fairs, elementary school science education and fostering the adoption of STEM disciplines by minorities and young women.  This is an outrage!

Until you read the details.  I don't know why the world has rushed to her defense.  To me, this is entirely different than a science experiment gone bad, as it is described in the press.

A science experiment gone bad?  Are you serious?  This is an insult to every child in a science fair that does a hypothesis-based, replicated, rigorous science experiment. 

I contend that she was curious and put a caustic chemical into a container with a catalyst and it exploded.  That's not an experiment.  

Of course, her parents have lawyered-up, the public is in a state of outrage and many are screaming for justice.  I just have a few questions for all of them about Kiera's experiment:

• What was the hypothesis tested? 
• How did she plan to quantify response?
• What statistical methods did she plan to use to determine significance? 
• How many replicates were planned? 
• Was she planning on presenting these in science fair? 

The answer to all of these questions is, there is no answer! 

Bottom line:  There are three major fails here. 

• Kiera was caught doing something wrong, she falls back on the "experiment" defense
•  The public gives her a free pass and accepts/defends the "experiment" excuse
• A zero-tolerance Patriot Act policy calls for her expulsion and for this to be considered a felony. 

What should have happened?  She should have admitted to making the device, apologized, discussed why it was wrong and then been suspended for a day.  The school/state should have dropped any criminal charges, as this was clearly not the intent. 

When I was in high school we did lots of experiments. I did the nitrous oxide inhaling experiment and that landed me a suspension. My parents didn't lawyer up and the suspension didn't cause public outrage. Instead, I was grounded, had to talk to counselors, etc. 

In Keira's story, details are slim, but based on the information provided it is clear that this was not an experiment.  Maybe that will change, but for now, it was a sharp kid that made a bad decision that broke the rules, and got caught.  Now is being told that she's an innocent victim, she did nothing wrong, and her behavior was acceptable. 

Friday May 10 should be declared Keira Wilmot Science Solidarity Day. I suggest that all kids, in nationwide support of Keira, perform the same science 'experiment' at their schools.    I'll buy the Drain-O!  Let's see how consistent public outrage is when 30 kids show up to each school with a bottle full of caustic drain cleaner that will explode. 

A discussion with Keira's lawyer pretty much eludes to the fact that her parents will sue the school district and probably the State of Florida.  The attorney says, "It will work out very well for Keira".   

Here a lawyer and some parents will turn their kid's bad decision into a lottery ticket.  Maybe she didn't mean to make a bomb, but she should have admitted to doing something wrong, shown some contrition, and agreed not to do this again. 

Instead she'll show that by playing the victim and whining for public approval can pay for college.  That was the real experiment, and the data suggest that it just might work.