biology fortified
disambig see main
cited by entine at NAS
pam ronald tag
usrtk no lnx pix
nothing on funding for UC davis
co-founder
http://www.biofortified.org/blog/
husband
https://www.biofortified.org/2009/03/guest-blogger-raoul-adamchak-on-corporate-transparency/
https://usrtk.org/tag/pamela-ronald/
CORNELL ALLIANCE FOR SCIENCE IS A PR CAMPAIGN FOR THE AGRICHEMICAL INDUSTRY
Posted on September 23, 2020 by Stacy Malkan
The Cornell Alliance for Science (CAS) is a public relations campaign funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to train fellows around the world, especially in Africa, to promote and defend genetically engineered crops and agrichemicals in their home countries. The group based at Cornell uses its academic-sounding name and affiliation with an Ivy League Institution to try to gain credibility, but CAS has a long history of spreading inaccurate and misleading information.
The Gates Foundation has spent $22 million since 2014 funding this PR effort. This fact sheet documents inaccuracies, deceptive tactics and corporate partnerships of CAS and people affiliated with the group. The examples described here provide evidence that CAS is using Cornell’s name, reputation and authority to advance the PR and political agenda of the world’s largest chemical and seed corporations.
INDUSTRY-ALIGNED MISSION AND MESSAGING
CAS launched in 2014 with a $5.6 million Gates Foundation grant and promises to “depolarize” the debate around GMOs. The group says its mission is to “promote access” to GMO crops and foods by training “science allies” around the world to educate their communities about the benefits of agricultural biotechnology.
Pesticide industry group promotes CAS
A key part of the CAS strategy is to recruit and train Global Leadership Fellows in communications and promotional tactics, focusing on regions where there is public opposition to the biotech industry, particularly African countries that have resisted GMO crops.
The CAS mission is strikingly similar to the Council for Biotechnology Information (CBI), a pesticide-industry funded public relations initiative that has partnered with CAS. The industry group worked to build alliances across the food chain and train third-parties, particularly academics and farmers, to persuade the public to accept GMOs.
CAS messaging aligns closely with pesticide industry PR: a myopic focus on touting the possible future benefits of genetically engineered foods while downplaying, ignoring or denying risks and problems. Like industry PR efforts, CAS also focuses heavily on attacking and trying to discredit critics of agrichemical products, including scientists and journalists who raise health or environmental concerns.
WIDESPREAD CRITICISM
CAS and its writers have drawn criticism from academics, farmers, students, community groups and food sovereignty movements who say the group promotes inaccurate and misleading messaging and uses unethical tactics. See for example:
Experts in agroecology withdraw from Cornell Alliance for Science Agroecology Webinar, citing bias — Community Alliance for Global Justice (9.30.20)
Messengers of Gates’ Agenda: A Case Study of the Cornell Alliance for Science Global Leadership Fellows Program, by AGRA Watch, Community Alliance for Global Justice (8.7.20)
Students Should Continue to Question the Ethics of the Cornell Alliance for Science, by Fern Anuenue, Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action, Cornell Daily Sun (11.19.19)
Mark Lynas slammed for exploiting African farmers’ images to promote GMOs, African Centre for Biodiversity press release (2018)
Mark Lynas’ unauthorized use of farmer’s images in misleading and unethical tactics to promote GM crops in Tanzania, report by Eugenio Tisselli, PhD, and Angelika Hilbeck, PhD. (2018)
Seeds Of Neo-Colonialism: Why The GMO Promoters Get It So Wrong About Africa, statement by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (2018)
6 ways this Ivy League university is acting like a PR firm for junk food, GMOs and pesticides, by Sophia Johnson, Salon (2017)
New York Farmers Call for Cornell to Evict the ‘Alliance for Science,’ Bioscience Resource Project press release (2016)
The GMO Debate: One Student’s Experience of Pro-GMO Propaganda at Cornell University, by Robert Schooler, Independent Science News (2016)
Gates-funded Cornell Group Misfires in Protest of Vandana Shiva, USRTK (2016)
Why is Cornell University hosting a GMO propaganda campaign? by Stacy Malkan, The Ecologist (2016)
Gates Foundation Backed Pro-GMO Cornell Alliance for Science On the Attack, Corporate Crime Reporter (2015)
The War on Genetically Modified Food Critics, by Timothy Wise, Food Tank (2015)
EXAMPLES OF MISLEADING MESSAGING
Experts in genetic engineering, biology, agroecology and food policy have documented many examples of inaccurate claims made by Mark Lynas, a visiting fellow at Cornell who has written dozens of articles defending agrichemical products in the name of CAS; see for example his many articles promoted by the Genetic Literacy Project, a PR group that works with Monsanto. Lynas’ 2018 book argues for African countries to accept GMOs, and devotes a chapter to defending Monsanto.
Inaccurate claims about GMOs
Numerous scientists have criticized Lynas for making false statements, “unscientific, illogical and absurd” arguments, promoting dogma over data and research on GMOs, rehashing industry talking points, and making inaccurate claims about pesticides that “display a deep scientific ignorance, or an active effort to manufacture doubt.”
“The laundry list of what Mark Lynas got wrong about both GMOs and science is extensive, and has been refuted point by point by some of the world’s leading agroecologists and biologists,” wrote Eric Holt-Giménez, executive director of Food First, in April 2013 (Lynas joined Cornell as a visiting fellow later that year).
“disingenuous and untruthful”
Africa-based groups have critiqued Lynas at length. The Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa, a coalition of more than 40 food and farming groups across Africa, has described Lynas as a “fly-in pundit” whose “contempt for African people, custom and tradition is unmistakable.” Million Belay, director of AFSA, described Lynas as “a racist who is pushing a narrative that only industrial agriculture can save Africa.”
In a 2018 press release, the South Africa-based African Centre for Biodiversity described unethical tactics Lynas has used to promote the biotech lobby agenda in Tanzania. “There is an issue definitely about accountability and [need for] reigning the Cornell Alliance for Science in, because of the misinformation and the way that they are extremely disingenuous and untruthful,” Mariam Mayet, executive director of the African Centre for Biodiversity, said in a July 2020 webinar.
For detailed critiques of Lynas’ work, see articles at the end of this post and our Mark Lynas fact sheet.
Attacking agroecology
A recent example of inaccurate messaging is a widely panned article on the CAS website by Lynas claiming, “agro-ecology risks harming the poor.” Academics described the article as a “demagogic and non-scientific interpretation of a scientific paper,” “deeply unserious,” “pure ideology” and “an embarrassment for someone who wants to claim to be scientific,” a “really flawed analysis“ that makes “sweeping generalizations“ and “wild conclusions.” Some critics called for a retraction.
A 2019 article by CAS fellow Nassib Mugwanya provides another example of misleading content on the topic of agroecology. The article, “Why traditional agricultural practices can’t transform African agriculture,” reflects the typical messaging pattern in CAS materials: presenting GMO crops as the “pro-science” position while painting “alternative forms of agricultural development as ‘anti-science,’ groundless and harmful,” according to an analysis by the Seattle-based Community Alliance for Global Justice.
“Particularly notable in the article are strong usages of metaphors (e.g., agroecology likened to handcuffs), generalizations, omissions of information and a number of factual inaccuracies,” the group said.
Using Monsanto playbook to defend pesticides
Another example of misleading industry-aligned CAS messaging can be found in the group’s defense of glyphosate-based Roundup. The herbicides are a key component of GMO crops with 90% of corn and soy grown in the United States genetically engineered to tolerate Roundup. In 2015, after the World Health Organization’s cancer research panel said glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen, Monsanto organized allies to “orchestrate outcry” against the independent science panel to “protect the reputation” of Roundup, according to internal Monsanto documents.
Monsanto’s PR playbook: attacking cancer experts as ‘activists’
Mark Lynas used the CAS platform to amplify the Monsanto messaging, describing the cancer report as a “witch hunt” orchestrated by “anti-Monsanto activists” who “abused science” and committed “an obvious perversion of both science and natural justice” by reporting a cancer risk for glyphosate. Lynas used the same flawed arguments and industry sources as the American Council on Science and Health, a front group Monsanto paid to help spin the cancer report.
While claiming to be on the side of science, Lynas ignored ample evidence from Monsanto documents, widely reported in the press, that Monsanto interfered with scientific research, manipulated regulatory agencies and used other heavy-handed tactics to manipulate the scientific process in order to protect Roundup. In 2018, a jury found the that Monsanto “acted with malice, oppression or fraud” in covering up the cancer risk of Roundup.
LOBBYING FOR PESTICIDES AND GMOS
Although its main geographical focus is Africa, CAS also aids pesticide industry efforts to defend pesticides and discredit public health advocates in Hawaii. The Hawaiian Islands are an important testing ground for GMO crops and also an area that reports high exposures to pesticides and concerns about pesticide-related health problems, including birth defects, cancer and asthma. These problems led residents to organize a years-long fight to pass stronger regulations to reduce pesticide exposures and improve disclosure of the chemicals used on agricultural fields.
“launched vicious attacks”
As these efforts gained traction, CAS engaged in a “massive public relations disinformation campaign designed to silence community concerns” about the health risks of pesticides, according to Fern Anuenue Holland, a community organizer for Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action. In the Cornell Daily Sun, Holland described how “paid Cornell Alliance for Science fellows — under the guise of scientific expertise — launched vicious attacks. They used social media and wrote dozens of blog posts condemning impacted community members and other leaders who had the courage to speak up.”
Holland said she and other members of her organization were subjected to “character assassinations, misrepresentations and attacks on personal and professional credibility” by CAS affiliates. “I have personally witnessed families and lifelong friendships torn apart,” she wrote.
OPPOSING THE PUBLIC’S RIGHT TO KNOW
CAS Director Sarah Evanega, PhD, has said her group is independent of industry: “We do not write for industry, and we do not advocate or promote industry-owned products. As our website clearly and fully discloses, we receive no resources from industry.” However, dozens of emails obtained by U.S. Right to Know, now posted in the UCSF chemical industry documents library, show CAS and Evanega coordinating closely with the pesticide industry and its front groups on public relations initiatives. Examples include:
CAS played a key role in trying to discredit a public records investigation by U.S. Right to Knowto obtain information about the pesticide industry’s partnerships with academics. According to Monsanto documents released in 2019, Monsanto was deeply worried about the USRTK investigation and planned to try to discredit it as an attack on “scientific freedom” — the same messaging CAS used in a in a public petition opposing the investigation.
CAS partnered on the petition with Biofortified, a group that lobbied against pesticide regulations in Hawaii at the behest of a pesticide industry trade group, while claiming to be independent.
The Monsanto PR plan to counter the USRTK investigation suggested having a Monsanto executive reach out to Rob Horsch at the Gates Foundation to ask for assistance with the effort.
CAS Director Sarah Evanega was a Trustee in 2017 of the International Food Information Council, a food and chemical industry-funded PR group that defends sugar, food additives, GMOs and pesticides.
More examples of CAS partnerships with industry groups are described at the bottom of this fact sheet.
ELEVATING FRONT GROUPS, UNRELIABLE MESSENGERS
In its efforts to promote GMOs as a “science-based” solution for agriculture, Cornell Alliance for Science has lent its platform to industry front groups and even a notorious climate science skeptic.
Trevor Butterworth and Sense About Science/STATS: CAS partners with Sense About Science/STATS to offer “statistical consultation for journalists” and gave a fellowship to the group’s director Trevor Butterworth, who built his career defending products important to the chemical, fracking, junk food and drug industries. Butterworth is founding director of Sense About Science USA, which he merged with his former platform, Statistical Assessment Service (STATS).
Journalists have described STATs and Butterworth as key players in chemical and pharmaceutical industry product defense campaigns (see Stat News, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, The Intercept and The Atlantic). Monsanto documents identify Sense About Science among the “industry partner” it counted on to defend Roundup against cancer concerns.
Climate science skeptic Owen Paterson: In 2015, CAS hosted Owen Paterson, a British Conservative Party politician and well-known climate science skeptic who slashed funding for global warming mitigation efforts during his stint as UK Environment Minister. Paterson used the Cornell stage to claim that environmental groups raising concerns about GMOs “allow millions to die.” Pesticide industry groups used similar messaging 50 years ago to try to discredit Rachel Carson for raising concerns about DDT.
Lynas and Sense About Science: Lynas of CAS is also affiliated with Sense About Science as a longtime advisory board member. In 2015, Lynas partnered with climate science skeptic Owen Paterson Paterson also Sense About Science Director Tracey Brown to launch what he called the “ecomodernism movement,” a corporate-aligned, anti-regulation strain of “environmentalism.”
INDUSTRY DEFENSE IN HAWAII
In 2016, CAS launched an affiliate group called the Hawaii Alliance for Science, which said its purpose was to “support evidence-based decision-making and agricultural innovation in the Islands.” Its messengers include:
Sarah Thompson, a former employee of Dow AgroSciences, coordinated the Hawaii Alliance for Science, which described itself as a “communications-based non-profit grassroots organization associated with the Cornell Alliance for Science.” (The website no longer appears active, but the group maintains a Facebook page.)
Social media posts from the Hawaii Alliance for Science and its coordinator Thompson have described critics of the agrichemical industry as arrogant and ignorant people, celebrated corn and soy mono-crops and defended neonicotinoid pesticides which many studies and scientists say are harming bees.
Joan Conrow, Managing Editor of CAS, writes articles on her personal website, her “Kauai Eclectic” blog and for the industry front group Genetic Literacy Project trying to discredit health professionals, community groups and politicians in Hawaii who advocate for stronger pesticide protections, and journalists who write about pesticide concerns. Conrow has accused environmental groups of tax evasion and compared a food safety group to the KKK.
Conrow has not always disclosed her Cornell affiliation. Hawaii’s Civil Beat newspaper criticized Conrow for her lack of transparency and cited her in 2016 as an example of why the paper was changing its commenting policies. Conrow “often argued the pro-GMO perspective without explicitly mentioning her occupation as a GMO sympathist,” wrote journalism professor Brett Oppegaard. “Conrow also has lost her journalistic independence (and credibility) to report fairly about GMO issues, because of the tone of her work on these issues.”
Joni Kamiya, a 2015 CAS Global Leadership Fellow argues against pesticide regulations on her website Hawaii Farmer’s Daughter, in the media and also for the industry front group Genetic Literacy Project. She is an “ambassador expert” for the agrichemical industry-funded marketing website GMO Answers. Like Conrow, Kamiya claims pesticide exposures in Hawaii aren’t a problem, and tries to discredit elected officials and “environmental extremists” who want to regulate pesticides.
STAFFERS, ADVISORS
CAS describes itself as “an initiative based at Cornell University, a non-profit institution.” The group does not disclose its budget, expenditures or staff salaries, and Cornell University does not disclose any information about CAS in its tax filings.
The website lists 20 staff members, including Director Sarah Evanega, PhD, and Managing Editor Joan Conrow (it does not list Mark Lynas or other fellows who may also receive compensation). Other notable staff members listed on the website include:
Gregory Jaffe, Associate Director of Legal Affairs of CAS, is also the Director of Biotechnology for Center for Science in the Public Interest where he draws a $143,000 salary plus benefits. CSPI opposes GMO labeling and Jaffe argues that “Americans should embrace” the current crop of genetically engineered foods.
Jayson Merkley, one of 10 members of the CAS training team, worked as a social media consultant for March Against Myths Against Modification, a project of the industry partner group Biofortified. For an example of misleading messaging involving Merkley, see 2016 post, Gates-funded Cornell group misfires in protest against Vandana Shiva.
The CAS advisory board includes academics who regularly assist the agrichemical industry with their PR efforts.
Pamela Ronald, a geneticist at UC Davis, has ties to chemical industry front groups and PR efforts that claim to be independent; she co-founded and served on the board of Biofortified, and set up the industry-tied Genetic Literacy Project and its founder Jon Entine with a platform at UC Davis. Ronald receives industry payments for speaking engagements; see $10,000 invoice to Bayer and $3,000 invoice to Monsanto.
Alison Van Eenennaam, a cooperative extension specialist at UC Davis, argues for deregulating genetically engineered animals she is developing. She is a key outside spokesperson who has worked with the agrichemical industry on various PR efforts to oppose regulations and transparency.
Cornell Professor Tony Shelton was one of several professors recruited by Monsanto to write pro-GMO papers that were published by the industry front group Genetic Literacy Project with no disclosure about Monsanto’s role. Shelton created a controversy when he asked his students to taste a pesticide, ostensibly as a stunt to promote GMOs.
GATES FOUNDATION CRITIQUES
Since 2016, the Gates Foundation has spent over $4 billion on agricultural development strategies, much of that focused on Africa. The foundation’s agricultural development strategies were led by Rob Horsch (recently retired), a Monsanto veteran of 25 years. The strategies have drawn criticism for promoting GMOs and agrichemicals in Africa over the opposition of Africa-based groups and social movements, and despite many concerns and doubts about genetically engineered crops across Africa.
Critiques of the Gates Foundation’s approach to agricultural development and funding include:
Failing Africa’s Farmers: An Impact Assessment of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, by Timothy Wise, Tufts Global Development and Environment Institute (2020)
False Promises: The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, by Rosa Luxtemburg Stiftung et. al. (2020)
‘Replacing hunger with malnutrition’: Former UN official calls out African Green Revolution, by Timothy A. Wise, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (2020)
Gates Foundation’s ‘failing green revolution in Africa,’ by Stacy Malkan, The Ecologist (2020)
Has Africa’s green revolution failed? Deutsche Welle (2020)
US groups invest billions in industrial ag in Africa. Experts say it’s not ending hunger or helping farmers, by Lisa Held, Civil Eats (2020)
Seeds of Neo-Colonialism: Why the GMO Promoters Get it So Wrong About Africa, statement by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (2018)
The Gates Foundation’s Ceres 2030 Plan Pushes Agenda of Agribusiness, by Jonathan Latham, Independent Science News (2018)
Gates Foundation Hired PR Firm to Manipulate UN Over Gene Drives, by Jonathan Latham, Independent Science News (2017)
Philanthrocapitalism: The Gates Foundation’s African programmes are not charity, by Philip L Bereano, Professor Emeritus at the University of Washington, Third World Resurgence (2017)
Does the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation help big corporations more than poor people? by Oscar Rickett, Vice (2016)
Bill Gates is on a mission to sell GMOs to Africa, but he’s not telling the whole truth, by Stacy Malkan, Alternet (2016)
Philanthropic Power and Development. Who shapes the agenda? by Jens Martens and Karolin Seitz, Global Policy Forum (2015)
Gates Foundation’s Seed Agenda in Africa ‘Another Form of Colonialism,’ Warns Protesters, by Lauren McCauley, Common Dreams (2015)
How does the Gates Foundation feed the world? funding analysis by GRAIN report (2014)
Bill Gates spends bulk of agricultural grants in rich countries, by John Vidal, the Guardian (2014)
Gated Development: Is the Gates Foundation always a force for good? Global Justice Now report (2014)
How Bill Gates is Helping KFC Take Over Africa, by Alex Park, Mother Jones (2014)
MORE CAS-INDUSTRY COLLABORATIONS
Dozens of emails obtained via FOIA by U.S. Right to Know, and now posted in the UCSF chemical industry documents library, show CAS coordinating closely with the agrichemical industry and its public relations groups to coordinate events and messaging:
CAS Director Sarah Evanega worked with Monsanto’s Cami Ryan to organize a series of workshops in 2017 to promote genetically engineered foods.
Responding to a request from a DuPont Pioneer executive, Evanega recruited University of Florida Professor Kevin Folta to speak to the University-Industry Consortium, a group that works to maintain “a competitive advantage” for its corporate and academic members. Although Folta has misled the public about his ties to industry, Evanega has promoted him as “an amazing champion for change” and “a model for scientists.”
Evanega invited CAS advisory board member Alison Van Eenennaam, a cooperative extension specialist at UC Davis, to speak at the DuPont Pioneer-funded Cornell Breeding Symposium. The emails show Evanega asking Van Eenennaam to submit comments on a government proposal to regulate GMOs, and discussing how to develop feminist materials to promote GMOs.
Evanega served on the working group of the UC Davis Institute for Food and Agricultural Literacy (IFAL), alongside Monsanto staffers and two industry front groups, Genetic Literacy Project and Academics Review. The groups co-hosted an industry-funded “boot camp” to train scientists and students to promote and defend GMOs and pesticides.
MORE CRITIQUES OF MARK LYNAS
Mark Lynas’ inaccurate, deceptive promotions for the agrichemical agenda — USRTK fact sheet (updated regularly)
Mark Lynas slammed for exploiting African farmers’ images to promote GMOs, African Centre for Biodiversity (2018)
Seeds Of Neo-Colonialism – Why The GMO Promoters Get It So Wrong About Africa — Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (2018)
The Science is Still Out on GMO Safety, by David Schubert, PhD, Head, Cellular Neurobiology Laboratory & Professor at The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, San Diego Union Tribune letter (2018)
The Absurdity of Claiming All GMOs are Safe, by geneticist Belinda Martineau, PhD Biotech Salon and Letter to NYT (2015)
The War on Genetically Modified Food Critics, by Timothy A. Wise, Food Tank
Professor John Vandermeer challenges environmentalist Mark Lynas on GMOs, Food First (2014)
Science, Dogma and Mark Lynas, by Doug Gurian-Sherman, PhD, Union of Concerned Scientists (2013)
Misleading Claims Made By and About Mark Lynas, GM Watch (2013)
Of Myths and Men: Mark Lynas and the Intoxicating Power of Technocracy, by Eric Holt-Giménez, PhD, Director Food First/Institute of Food Policy and Development, Huffington Post (2013)
Scientist: Genetic Engineering is Based on Dramatically Incomplete Knowledge, Q&A with John Vendermeer (2013)
22 Pieces Of Junk Science From The Lynas Manifesto, by Brian John, PhD, Permaculture Research Institute (2013)
A Rebuttal to Mark Lynas’ GMO Reversal, by Jason Mark, Earth Island Journal (2013)
Food For Thought, GMOs, Our Investigations, Pesticides, Sweeteners ACSH, Alison Van Eenennaam, American Council on Science and Health, Anthony Shelton, BASF, Bayer, Biofortified, CBI, Center for Consumer Freedom, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Cornell Alliance for Science, Cornell College of Agriculture and Life Science, Cornell Office of International Programs, Council for Biotechnology Information, CSPI, Dow AgroSciences, DowDuPont, ecomodernism, Gates Foundation, Genetic Literacy Project, Gil Ross, Global Leadership Fellows, GMO Answers, Gregory Jaffe, Hawaii Alliance for Science, Hawaii Farmer's Daugh, Jayson Merkley, Joan Conrow, Joni Kamiya, Kauai Eclectic, Kevin Folta, March Against Myths Against Modification, Mark Lynas, Monsanto, Owen Paterson, Pamela Ronald, Rick Berman, Rob Horsch, Sarah Evanega, Sarah Thompson, Science Literacy Project, Sense About Science, STATS, Syngenta, Tracey Brown, Trevor Butterworth, University of California Davis, University of Florida
PAMELA RONALD’S TIES TO CHEMICAL INDUSTRY FRONT GROUPS
Posted on December 27, 2018 by Stacy Malkan
Updated in June 2019
Pamela Ronald, PhD, a professor of plant pathology at the University of California, Davis and author of the 2008 book “Tomorrow’s Table,” is a well-known advocate for genetically engineered foods. Less known is Dr. Ronald’s role in organizations that portray themselves as acting independently of industry, but in fact are collaborating with chemical corporations to promote and lobby for GMOs and pesticides, in arrangements that are not transparent to the public.
TIES TO KEY AGRICHEMICAL INDUSTRY FRONT GROUP
Pamela Ronald has multiple ties to a leading agrichemical industry front group, the Genetic Literacy Project, and its executive director, Jon Entine. She assisted them in many ways. For example, documents show that in 2015, Dr. Ronald appointed Entine as a senior fellow and instructor of science communications at UC Davis, and collaborated with Genetic Literacy Project to host an agrichemical industry-funded messaging event that trained participants how to promote agrichemical products.
The Genetic Literacy Project is described in an award-winning Le Monde investigation as a “well-known propaganda website” that played a key role in Monsanto’s campaign to discredit the World Health Organization cancer research agency’s report on glyphosate. In a 2015 PR document, Monsanto identified Genetic Literacy Project among the “industry partners” the company planned to engage to “orchestrate outcry” about the cancer report. GLP has since published many articles attacking the cancer scientists as “anti-chemical enviros” who lied and engaged in corruption, distortion, secrecy and fraud.
Entine has longtime ties to the chemical industry; his body of work includes defending pesticides, industrial chemicals, plastics, fracking, and the oil industry, often with attacks on scientists, journalists and academics. Entine launched the Genetic Literacy Project in 2011 when Monsanto was a client of his public relations firm. The GLP was originally associated with STATS, a nonprofit group journalists have described as a “disinformation campaign” that seeds doubt about science and is “known for its defense of the chemical industry.”
In 2015, the Genetic Literacy Project moved to a new parent organization, the Science Literacy Project. IRS tax filings for that year indicated that Dr. Ronald was a founding board member of the Science Literacy Project, but emails from August 2018 show that Dr. Ronald convinced Entine to retroactively remove her name from the tax form after it became known she was listed there (the amended tax form is now available here). Dr. Ronald wrote to Entine, “I did not serve on this board and did not give permission for my name to be listed. Please take immediate action to notify the IRS that my name was listed without consent.” Entine wrote that he had a different recollection. “I clearly recall you agreeing to be part of the board and head the initial board … You were enthusiastic and supportive in fact. There is no question in my mind that you agreed to this.” Nevertheless he agreed to try to get her name removed from the tax document.
The two discussed the tax form again in December 2018 after this fact sheet was posted. Entine wrote, “I listed you in the original 990 based on a telephone conversation in which you agreed to be on the board. When you represented to me that you disagreed, I purged the record as you requested.” In another email that day, he reminded Dr. Ronald that “in fact you were associated with ‘that organization: as we worked together, seamlessly and constructively, in making the boot camp at your university a great success.”
Science Literacy Project tax forms now list three board members: Entine; Drew Kershen, a former law professor who was also on the board of “Academics Review,” a group that claimed to be independent while receiving its funds from agrichemical companies; and Geoffrey Kabat, an epidemiologist who serves on the board of scientific advisors for the American Council on Science and Health, a group that received money from Monsanto for its work defending pesticides and GMOs.
FOUNDED, LED UC DAVIS GROUP THAT ELEVATED INDUSTRY PR EFFORTS
Dr. Ronald was the founding director of the World Food Center’s Institute for Food and Agricultural Literacy (IFAL), a group launched in 2014 at UC Davis to train faculty and students to promote genetically engineered foods, crops and pesticides. The group does not fully disclose its funding.
Documents show that Dr. Ronald gave Jon Entine and his industry front group Genetic Literacy Project a platform at UC Davis, appointing Entine as an unpaid senior fellow of IFAL and an instructor and mentor in a science communications graduate program. Entine is no longer a fellow at UC Davis. See our 2016 letter to the World Food Center inquiring about funding for Entine and IFAL and their obscure explanation about where their funding comes from.
In July 2014, Dr. Ronald indicated in an email to a colleague that Entine was an important collaborator who could give them good suggestions on who to contact to raise additional funds for the first IFAL event. In June 2015, IFAL co-hosted the “Biotech Literacy Project boot camp” with Genetic Literacy Project and the Monsanto-backed group Academics Review. Organizers claimed the event was funded by academic, government and industry sources, but non-industry sources denied funding the events and the only traceable source of money came from industry, according to reporting by Paul Thacker in The Progressive.
Tax records show that Academics Review, which received its funding from the agrichemical industry trade group, spent $162,000 for the three-day conference at UC Davis. The purpose of the boot camp, according to the agenda, was to train and support scientists, journalists and academic researchers to persuade the public and policy makers about the benefits of GMOs and pesticides.
Speakers at the UC Davis boot camp included Jay Byrne, Monsanto’s former director of corporate communications; Hank Campbell of the Monsanto-funded American Council on Science and Health; professors with undisclosed industry ties such as University of Illinois Professor Emeritus Bruce Chassy and University of Florida Professor Kevin Folta; Cami Ryan, who now works for Monsanto; David Ropeik, a risk perception consultant who has a PR firm with clients including Dow and Bayer; and other agrichemical industry allies.
Keynote speakers were Dr. Ronald, Yvette d’Entremont the Sci Babe, a “science communicator” who defends pesticides and artificial sweeteners while taking money from companies that sell those products, and Ted Nordhaus of the Breakthrough Institute. (Nordhauswas also listed as a Science Literacy Project board member on the original 2015/2016 tax form, but his name was removed along with Dr. Ronald’s in the amended form Entine filed in 2018; Nordhaus said he never served on the board.)
COOKING UP A CHIPOTLE BOYCOTT
Emails indicate that Dr. Ronald and Jon Entinecollaborated on messaging to discredit critics of genetically engineered foods. In one case, Dr. Ronald proposed to organize a boycott against the Chipotle restaurant chain over its decision to offer and promote non-GMO foods.
In April 2015, Dr. Ronald emailed Entine and Alison Van Eenennaam, PhD, a former Monsanto employee and cooperative extension specialist at UC Davis, to suggest they find a student to write about farmers using more toxic pesticides to grow non-GMO corn. “I suggest we publicize this fact (once we get the details) and then organize a chipotle boycott,” Dr. Ronald wrote. Entine directed an associate to write an article for Genetic Literacy Project on the theme that “pesticide use often soars” when farmers switch to a non-GMO model to supply restaurants like Chipotle. The article, co-authored by Entine and touting his UC Davis affiliation, fails to substantiate that claim with data.
CO-FOUNDED BIOTECH SPIN GROUP BIOFORTIFIED
Dr. Ronald co-founded and served as board member (2012-2015) of Biology Fortified, Inc. (Biofortified), a group that promotes GMOs and has a partner activist group that organizes protests to confront Monsanto critics. Other leaders of Biofortified include founding board member David Tribe, a geneticist at University of Melbourne who co-founded Academics Review, the group that claimed to be independent while receiving industry funds, and collaborated with IFAL to host the Biotech Literacy Project “boot camp” at UC Davis.
Former board member Kevin Folta (2015-2018), a plant scientist at the University of Florida, was the subject of a New York Times story reporting that he misled the public about undisclosed industry collaborations. Biofortified bloggers include Steve Savage, a former DuPont employee turned industry consultant; Joe Ballanger, a consultant for Monsanto; and Andrew Kniss, who has received money from Monsanto. Documents suggest that members of Biofortified coordinated with the pesticide industry on a lobbying campaign to oppose pesticide restrictions in Hawaii.
PLAYED LEADING ROLE IN INDUSTRY-FUNDED PROPAGANDA MOVIE
Dr. Ronald featured prominently in Food Evolution, a documentary film about genetically engineered foods funded by the trade group Institute for Food Technologists. Dozens of academics have called the film propaganda, and several people interviewed for the film described a deceptive filming process and said their views were taken out of context.
https://www.foodpolitics.com/2017/06/gmo-industry-propaganda-film-food-evolution/
ADVISOR FOR CORNELL-BASED GMO PUBLIC RELATIONS CAMPAIGN
Dr. Ronald is on the advisory board of the Cornell Alliance for Science, a PR campaign based at Cornell University that promotes the GMOs and pesticides using agrichemical industry messaging. Funded primarily by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Cornell Alliance for Science has opposed the use of Freedom of Information Act to investigate public institutions, misled the public with inaccurate information and elevated unreliable messengers; see documentation in our fact sheet.
RECEIVES MONEY FROM THE AGRICHEMICAL INDUSTRY
Documents obtained by U.S. Right to Know indicate that Dr. Ronald receives compensation from agrichemical companies to speak at events where she promotes GMOs to key audiences that companies seek to influence, such as dieticians. Emails from November 2012 provide an example of how Dr. Ronald works with companies.
:{
}:
Monsanto staffer Wendy Reinhardt Kapsak, a dietician who formerly worked for the food-industry spin group IFIC, invited Ronald to speak at two conferences in 2013, Food 3000 and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Food and Nutrition Conference and Expo. Emails show that the two discussed fees and book purchases and agreed Dr. Ronald would speak at Food 3000, a conference organized by the PR firm Porter Novelli that Kapsak said would reach “90 high media impact food and nutrition professionals/influencers.” (Dr. Ronald invoiced $3,000 for the event). Kapsak asked to review Dr. Ronald’s slides and set up a call to discuss messaging. Also on the panel were moderator Mary Chin (a dietician who consults with Monsanto), and representatives from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Monsanto, with Kapsak giving opening remarks. Kapsak later reported that the panel got rave reviews with participants saying they would share the idea that, “We have to have biotech to help feed the world.”
Other industry-funded speaking engagements for Dr. Ronald included a 2014 speech at Monsanto for $3,500 plus 100 copies of her book which she declined to tweet about; and a 2013 speaking engagement for which she invoiced Bayer AG for $10,000.
RETRACTED PAPERS
Retraction Watch reported that, “2013 was a rough year for biologist Pamela Ronald. After discovering the protein that appears to trigger rice’s immune system to fend off a common bacterial disease – suggesting a new way to engineer disease-resistant crops – she and her team had to retract two papers in 2013 after they were unable to replicate their findings. The culprits: a mislabeled bacterial strain and a highly variable assay. However, the care and transparency she exhibited earned her a ‘doing the right thing’ nod from us at the time.”
See coverage:
“What do you do about painful retractions? Q&A with Pamela Ronald and Benjamin Swessinger,” Retraction Watch (7.24.2015)
“Can the scientific reputation of Pamala Ronald, the public face of GMOs, be salvaged?” by Jonathan Latham, Independent Science News (11.12.2013)
“Pamela Ronald does the right thing again, retracting a Science paper,” Retraction Watch (10.10.2013)
“Doing the right thing: Researchers retract quorum sensing paper after public process,” Retraction Watch (9.11.2013)
Food For Thought, GMOs, Our Investigations Academics Review, Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, ACSH, Alison Van Eenennaam, American Council on Science and Health, Andrew Kniss, Bayer, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Biofortified, Biology Fortified Inc., Biotech Literacy Project, Biotech Literacy Project boot camp, Breakthrough Institute, Bruce Chassy, Cami Ryan, Cornell Alliance for Science, Cornell University, David Ropeik, David Tribe, Dow, Drew Kershen, Dupont, Food 3000, Food Evolution, Gates Foundation, Genetic Literacy Project, Geoffrey Kabat, GMOs, Hank Campbell, IFAL, Institute for Food and Agricultural Literacy, Institute for Food Technologists, Jay Byrne, Joe Ballanger, Jon Entine, Kevin Folta, MAMMyths, Monsanto, Pamela Ronald, Porter Novelli, Science Literacy Project, Statistical Assessment Service, Steve Savage, Ted Nordhaus, The Sci Babe, Tomorrow's Table, UC Davis, University of Florida, University of Illinois, University of Melbourne, Wendy Reinhardt Kapsak, World Food Center, Yvette d’Entremont
BIOFORTIFIED AIDS CHEMICAL INDUSTRY PR & LOBBYING EFFORTS
Posted on May 31, 2018 by Stacy Malkan
Biology Fortified Inc., known as “Biofortified,” is a nonprofit organization that works closely with the agrichemical industry and its collaborators on public relations and lobbying campaigns to defend genetically engineered foods and pesticides, and attack industry critics.
Board members and bloggers are key agrichemical industry allies
Current and former board members and blog authors listed on Biofortified’s “meet our experts” page have close ties to the agrichemical industry and industry front group efforts.
Current board member David Tribe, a geneticist at University of Melbourne, co-founded Academics Review, a Monsanto front group that claimed to be independent while receiving industry funds. Internal documents describe how Academics Review was set up with the help of Monsanto to attack industry critics. Tribe has been a Biofortified board member since the group’s launch in 2012.
Biofortified co-founder and former board member Pamela Ronald, a geneticist at UC Davis, is also a former board member of the Science Literacy Project, the umbrella organization of Jon Entine’s Genetic Literacy Project, a key chemical industry front group. Ronald has received industry money to promote genetically engineered crops; see $10,000 invoice to Bayer and $3,000 invoice to Monsanto for speaking fees.
Former Biofortified board member Kevin Folta, a plant scientist at the University of Florida, aids agrichemical industry PR efforts and has also received industry funds. [Update: Biofortified announced on 8/29/2018 they cut ties with Folta over conflict of interest disclosure issues.]
Biofortified blog author Steve Savage, an agrichemical industry consultant and former DuPont employee, promoted inaccurate information about pesticide residues in organic food, according to a May 2018 column in the Washington Post
Biofortified blog author Joe Ballenger has been a Monsanto contractor.
Biofortified blog author Andrew Kniss was offered an “unrestricted gift” by Monsanto.
Following are examples of industry-aligned lobbying and public relations efforts involving Biofortified and its leaders.
“Biofortified boys” lobby squad defends pesticides
In 2013, the Hawaii Crop Improvement Association (HCIA) — a trade group representing DowDuPont, Monsanto and the Hartung Brothers— organized a lobbying trip to Kauai for industry allies to oppose a community ordinance that would have improved public disclosure of pesticide use and required pesticide buffer zones around schools, hospitals and other public areas. According to emails obtained by U.S. Right to Know, the HCIA executive director referred to four supporters who were invited on the lobby trip as the “Biofortified boys.” They were:
Karl Haro von Mogel, Biofortified science director
Steve Savage, Biofortified blog author and agrichemical industry consultant
Kevin Folta, Biofortified board member and professor at University of Florida
Jon Entine, director of Genetic Literacy Project, a Monsanto partner group
Emails show that Renee Kester, lead organizer of the HCIA lobby project, emailed the four men on July 11, 2013 (page 10) to thank them “for all of the support you have given us over here in Hawaii with regard to our recent legislative battles” and to set up a call to discuss their availability to attend an upcoming legislative hearing. Alicia Muluafiti, executive director of HCIA, then emailed the group (page 9) about the need to craft out short term and longer term strategies “using the Biofortified boys”:
More information:
New York Times, “A Florida Professor Works with the Biotech Industry: A Trip to Hawaii to Testify, Paid by Industry” (page 23) (9/5/2015)
GM Watch, “How the ‘Biofortified Boys’ defended the pesticide industry’s secrets in Hawaii” (9/27/2015)
Biofortified listed as “industry partner” in Monsanto PR doc
This internal Monsanto document identifies Biofortified as an “industry partner” in Monsanto’s public relations plan to discredit the World Health Organization’s cancer research arm, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), to protect the reputation of Roundup weedkiller. In March 2015, an IARC expert panel judged glyphosate, the key ingredient in Roundup, to be probably carcinogenic to humans.
The Monsanto PR document identified four tiers of industry partners the corporation planned to engage in its “preparedness plan” for the IARC cancer report. Biofortified is listed in “Tier 2,” along withAcademics Review, AgBioChatter academics, Genetic Literacy Project and Sense About Science.These groups are are often cited as independent sources, but as the Monsanto plan and other examples suggest, they work behind the scenes with the agrichemical industry to protect corporate interests. (Update: In October 2018, Biofortified posted a statement from Monsanto saying the company does not fund or partner with them.)
Opposed transparency and state FOIA requests
Biofortified co-sponsored, along with the Cornell Alliance for Science, a March 2015 petition opposing the use of state Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to investigate links between publicly funded academics and the agrichemical industry.
Emails obtained by U.S. Right to Know via state FOIA requests have since revealed numerous examples of academics working in covert ways with agrichemical companies and their PR firms to aid industry’s lobbying and messaging agenda — for example, the documents describing the origins of the front group Academics Review, and those that discussed the “Biofortified boys” lobby trip to Hawaii. Many of the emails obtained by U.S. Right to Know are now posted in the UCSF Chemical Industry Documents Library, USRTK Agrichemical Collection. The documents have generated worldwide media coverage about transparency in the food industry and the health and environmental risks of pesticides and GMOs.
Biofortified’s industry-aligned attacks on critics
A stuffy doll representing GMO corn named Frank N. Foode is the mascot of Biofortified.
Biofortified founding board member David Tribe co-founded Academics Review, a front group set up with the help of Monsanto to attack industry critics, according to documents obtained by U.S. Right to Know. In one email, Jay Byrne, a former director of corporate communications for Monsanto, discussed a target list of industry critics he was developing for Monsanto.
March Against Myths about Modification (MAMyths), a project of Biofortified, also targeted some of the groups and individuals named on Byrne’s target list – for example, the group participated in a protest against Vandana Shiva and reportedly led a failed attempt to derail an event featuring Vani Hari, the “Food Babe,” sponsored by the Center for Food Safety.
MAMyths co-founder Kavin Senapathy had several articles deleted by Forbes after the New York Times revealed that her co-author, Henry Miller, published a column in Forbes that was ghostwritten by Monsanto. Miller was also identified as a partner in Monsanto’s public relations plan to attack the IARC cancer panel.
Senapathy is co-author of a 2015 book about Hari, “The Fear Babe,” which features a forward written by former Biofortified board member Kevin Folta, in which he describes the food movement as a “well financed terrorist faction.”
Senapathy and Haro von Mogel also appear in the GMO propaganda film Food Evolution.
Related projects
GENERA Database is a list of studies to “show people how much research has been conducted on genetically engineered crops,” according to the FAQ on the Biofortified website. The list was first started by David Tribe, who also co-founded the Monsanto front group Academics Review. Early promotion for GENERA misleadingly claimed to show “more than 600 peer-reviewed reports in the scientific literature which document the general safety and nutritional wholesomeness of GM foods and feeds.” Many of those studies did not address safety issues. The inaccurate promotional language was later removed, along with about a third of the studies.
Food For Thought, GMOs, Our Investigations, Pesticides Academics Review, AgBioChatter academics, Alicia Muluafiti, Andrew Kniss, Bayer, Biofortified boys, Cornell Alliance for Science, David Tribe, DowDuPont, Dupont, Food Evolution propaganda film, Frank N. Foode, GENERA, Genetic Literacy Project, HCIA, IARC, industry partner, Jay Byrne, Joe Ballenger, Jon Entine, Karl Haro von Mogel, Kavin Senapathy, Kevin Folta, March Against Myths about Modification, Monsanto, Pamela Ronald, Renee Kester, Science Literacy Project, Sense About Science, Steve Savage, Syngenta, UC Davis, University of Florida, University of Melbourne, World Health Organization
FOOD EVOLUTION GMO FILM SERVES UP CHEMICAL INDUSTRY AGENDA
Posted on February 4, 2018 by Stacy Malkan
This post has been updated with reviews of Food Evolution:
Letter from 45 academics: “Food Evolution deserves to be called out for what it is: a piece of propaganda“
Letter from University of Minnesota research scientists: “The Food Evolution movie is agribusiness propaganda“
NYU Professor Marion Nestle: Food Evolution is a “slick piece of GMO industry propaganda” … “I have asked repeatedly to have my short interview clip removed from this film. The director refuses. He believes his film is fair and balanced. I do not.” Follow up post by Marion Nestle: “A win for GMO trolls: this blog no longer accepts comments“
Michael Pollan: “My experience and take much the same” and “This movie is funded by industry“
UC Berkeley Associate Professor Alastair Iles: “No evolution in thinking in Food Evolution“
UC Berkeley Professor Miguel Altieri: “Food Evolution is propaganda for public support of GMOs“
Doug Durian-Sherman, PhD: “Food Evolution Supports GMOs, but Not Science” Part 1 and Part 2
Vice article: “This Documentary Wants to Teach People About GMOs, But Experts Call It Propaganda“
Alternet by Stacy Malkan: “Neil deGrasse Tyson Owes Fans a More Honest Conversation About GMOs“
By Stacy Malkan, 6/19/2017
Some industry messaging efforts are so heavy-handed they end up highlighting their own PR tactics more than the message they are trying to convey. That’s the problem with Food Evolution, a new documentary by Academy Award-nominated director Scott Hamilton Kennedy and narrated by Neil deGrasse Tyson.
The film, opening in theaters June 23, claims to offer an objective look at the debate over genetically engineered foods, but with its skewed presentation of science and data, it comes off looking more like a textbook case of corporate propaganda for the agrichemical industry and its GMO crops.
That the film’s intended purpose was to serve as an industry-messaging vehicle is no secret. Food Evolution was planned in 2014 and funded by the Institute for Food Technologists, a trade group, to culminate a multi-year messaging effort.
:{
}:
IFT is partly funded by big food corporations, and the group’s president at the time was Janet Collins, a former DuPont and Monsanto executive who now works for CropLife America, the pesticide trade association. IFT’s President-Elect Cindy Stewart works for DuPont.
IFT chose Kennedy to direct the film, but he and producer Trace Sheehan say they had complete control over the film they describe as a fully independent investigation into the topic of GMOs including all points of view.
The film’s credibility suffers from their choice to embrace only the science and scientists who side with the chemical industry players who profit from GMOs and the chemicals used on them, while ignoring science and data that doesn’t fit that agenda.
The Monsanto Science Treatment
The clearest example of the scientific dishonesty in Food Evolution is the way the film deals with glyphosate. The weed killer chemical is at the heart of the GMO story, since 80-90% of GMO crops are genetically engineered to tolerate glyphosate.
Food Evolution reports that the increase in glyphosate use due to GMOs is not a problem, because glyphosate is safe. Two sources establish this claim in the film: a farmer says glyphosate has “very, very low toxicity; lower than coffee, lower than salt,” and Monsanto’s Robb Fraley – in response to a woman in an audience who asks him about science linking glyphosate to birth defects and cancer – tells her that’s all bad science, “it’s pseudoscience.”
All science raising concerns about glyphosate is “pseudoscience,” says Monsanto.
There is no mention of the carcinogenicity concerns that are engulfing Monsanto in an international science scandal, or the many farmers who are suing Monsanto alleging they got cancer from the company’s glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide.
There is no mention of the 2015 report by the World Health Organization’s cancer agency that classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen, or California’s decision to add glyphosate to the Prop 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer, or the peer-reviewed studies that have linked various adverse health outcomes to glyphosate and Roundup.
Instead of an objective look at the evidence, Food Evolution gives viewers the full Monsanto science treatment: any science that raises concerns about the possible health risks of agrichemical products should be ignored, while studies that put those products in a favorable light is the only science worth discussing.
Double Standards in Science and Transparency
Equal treatment of interview subjects with different points of view would have helped the credibility of Food Evolution. Instead, the film paints the GMO critics it features as dishonest or out to make a buck off the organic industry, while leaving out key details about its pro-industry sources.
In one scene, the film’s main character, UC Davis professor Alison van Eenennaam, frets that appearing onstage with a Monsanto executive at a debate could sully her independent reputation. Viewers never learn that she used to work for Monsanto, or that she holds several GE patents which suggest a financial interest in the topic at hand.
Pro-industry scientist Pamela Ronald, another key science source, gets the hero treatment with no mention that two of her studies have been retracted. Yet viewers are hammered with news that a study by French scientist Gilles-Eric Séralini – which found kidney problems and tumors in rats fed GMO corn – was “retracted, retracted, retracted!”
:{
}:
The film leaves out the fact that the study was subsequently republished, and was retracted in the first place after a former Monsanto employee took an editorial position with the journal where it was originally published.
The “Africa Needs GMOs” Narrative
In another neatly spun narrative, Food Evolution takes viewers on an emotional journey to the developing world, and along another favorite industry messaging track: rather than focus on how genetic engineering is used in our food system now – primarily to convey herbicide tolerance – we should focus on how it might possibly be used in the future.
With plenty of airtime and dramatic tension, the film examines the problem of banana wilt, a disease killing staple crops in Africa, and leads viewers to believe that genetic engineering will save the crop, the farmers and the community.
Maybe. But the film neglects to mention that the savior GE technology is not yet available and might not even work. According to a paper in Plant Biotechnology Journal, the resistance shown in the lab is robust but may not be durable in open fields.
The film is “fundamentally dishonest.”
Meanwhile, a low-tech solution is working well and looks like it could use some investment. According to a 2012 paper in the Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics, farmer field schools, which help growers acquire hands-on knowledge of techniques to prevent banana wilt, led to lower infection rates and high crop recovery in Uganda. Results from farmer field schools “have been remarkable,” according to the UN.
The solution doesn’t warrant a mention in Food Evolution.
“It’s fundamentally dishonest of the film to tout a GE solution that may not even work, as the scientists themselves acknowledge,” said Michael Hansen, senior scientist at Consumers Union, “while failing to point out another way to control the problem that works very well, but doesn’t involve selling a product to make money.”
Did Monsanto have anything to do with Food Evolution?
Monsanto and allies were discussing plans for a documentary in late 2013, according to emails obtained by US Right to Know. The emails do not contain evidence linking those discussions to Food Evolution, but they do establish Monsanto’s desire for a film that sounds surpassingly similar to the one Kennedy created.
Monsanto’s Eric Sachs wrote in Dec. 2013 to a group of PR advisors, “there is clearly a lot of interest to pursue a documentary film. Importantly, the consensus was that Monsanto’s participation was welcome, particularly in the planning phase.”
He recommended a January 2014 planning call. Jon Entine of the Genetic Literacy Project stepped up to take the lead, and mentioned he had “gotten a personal pledge of $100,000 from a private business person if we can get” (the rest of the line is cut off). Entine also has a connection to the Institute for Food Technologists; he spoke about “anti-food activism” at IFT’s 2012 annual meeting.
Another person mentioned in the Monsanto emails, Karl Haro von Mogel – who had discussed with Sachs “the downsides of a film funded by the ‘Big 6’” and suggested “what would matter more than their money is their participation” – was interviewed in Food Evolution, and was also involved in filming one scene, which suggests some behind the scenes coordination with the filmmakers.
In reaction to the emails, Kennedy wrote on Twitter: “@foodevomovie has had ZERO $ or INPUT from #Monsanto. We are fully transparent & happy 2 have fact-based dialogue.”
He said in an interview, “that email exchange had absolutely nothing to do with our project whatsoever … we hadn’t even committed to making the film with IFT at that date in 2013.”
The people in the email exchange were not involved in filming or advising, he said, and Karl Haro von Mogel “was a subject in the film and had no involvement or influence on any creative/editorial decisions on the film at any point in the production. Also it may be useful to point out that the email conversation you reference occurred long before we ever even knew Karl or any of these people.”
Sneak Peek Behind the Scenes
Another email exchange obtained by US Right to Know offers a peek behind the scenes at the narrative development in Food Evolution. The exchange depicts Kennedy’s search for examples to feature for “us/developing world need GMO.”
“Any other ‘us/developing world need GMO’ you can give me names of aside from oranges? Shintakus lettuce?” Kennedy asked. Producer Trace Sheehan responded with a list of GMO products including drought-tolerant rice, allergy-free peanuts, carcinogen-free potatoes … “and then button with Golden Rice.”
When Kennedy pushed for “the top GMO crops currently in use, and what countries,” Mark Lynas of the Cornell Alliance for Science wrote, “Really Bt brinjal in Bangladesh is the only one that is truly GMO in and is in widespread operation.”
The film’s frame-driven reporting ignores that detail about the lack of operational GMO solutions, and doesn’t mention that the closer example, vitamin-A enhanced Golden Rice, still isn’t available despite huge investments and years of trials, because it doesn’t work as well in the field as existing rice strains.
What is propaganda?
:{
}:
In a scene that is supposed to convey scientific credibility, Food Evolution flashes the logo of the American Council on Science and Health at the very moment Neil deGrasse Tyson says there is a global consensus on the safety of GMOs. It’s a fitting slip. ASCH is a corporate front group closely aligned with Monsanto.
The ACSH logo scenealso appears in the background in this 2-minute clip from a recent Climate One debate, as Kennedy pushed back against the suggestion that his film is propaganda.
“How do we determine what is propaganda?” Kennedy asked. “I say one of the ways we do it is (to ask), are results asked for, or results promised? I was not asked for results and I did not promise results. If you have a problem with the film, the problem lies with me.”
This review originally appeared in Huffington Post and has been reprinted in Alternet.
See also: Stacy Malkan’s follow-up article, Neil deGrasse Tyson Owes Fans a More Honest Conversation About GMOs than Food Evolution. “Interviews with several other GMO critics who appear in the film, or were asked to be in it, corroborate the picture of a strange process involving sneaky filming, selective editing, misrepresentation and lack of disclosure about the film’s funding.”
Food For Thought, GMOs Alison Van Eenennaam, American Council on Science and Health, Cindy Stewart, Cornell Alliance for Science, CropLife America, Dupont, Eric Sachs, Food Evolution, Genetic Literacy Project, GMO, Institute for Food Technologists, Janet Collins, Jon Entine, Karl Haro von Mogel, Mark Lynas, Monsanto, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Pamela Ronald, Robb Fraley, Scott Hamilton Kennedy, Trace Sheehan, UC Davis
https://web.archive.org/web/20190218201926/https://thebreakthrough.org/people/profile/pamela-ronald
http://thebreakthrough.org/people/profile/pamela-ronald
biofort not listed
biofort not listed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pamela_Ronald
821
https://genera.biofortified.org/wp/
is the home of the GENetic Engineering RiskAtlas, or GENERA, which is a searchable database of peer-reviewed research on the relative risks of genetically engineered crops that includes important details at-a-glance. GENERA is a project of Biology Fortified, Inc., which is an independent tax-exempt nonprofit organization devoted to providing factual information and fostering discussion about issues in biology, with a particular emphasis on plant genetics and genetic engineering in agriculture. Find out more about the project on our About pages above, or search the Atlas below.
821 no lx pix
Meet our Experts
Board of Directors
Biology Fortified, Inc. (BFI) is managed by a Board of Directors, serving 2 year terms with no term limits. The Directors are elected during BFI’s annual meeting, and are not compensated for their role in determining the course of the organization.
Karl Haro von Mogel (2012 to present) is a geneticist with a PhD in Plant Breeding and Plant Genetics from UW-Madison with a minor in Life Sciences Communication. Karl serves as BFI’s Director of Science and Media and as Co-Executive Editor of the Biofortified Blog.
Alma Laney (2018 to present) specializes in plant viruses that are transmitted by arthropods (also known as arboviruses) that infect various plants including roses, figs, soybeans and wheat. He has a masters degree in plant pathology and a PhD in plant science from the University of Arkansas. Alma blogs as The Mad Virologist, teaching people about virology, plant pathology and plant science.
Guest Experts
The Biofortified Blog is written by a team of editors, regular contributors, and guest experts. If you would like to contribute to the Biofortified Blog through writing, editing, design, photography, or other means, contact us.
The strength of the discussions on Biofortified depend on the diversity of expertise, perspectives, and backgrounds of our contributors. Guest contributors are invited to participate in the global conversation about food and agriculture, and are not paid for their work.
The guest experts below are listed in approximately reverse order of appearance on the Biofortified Blog. These bios are necessarily brief, but their accomplishments and contributions to society are numerous. Bios were updated in December 2018.
Note that board members and guest experts do not necessarily speak for their employers or other organizations in which they do or do not take part.
Alison Bernstein is a neuroscientist who studies Parkinson’s disease, epigenetics and neurotoxicology. Her PhD is in Biology and Biomedical Sciences from Washington University. She did two postdoctoral fellowships at Emory University, receiving additional training in neurotoxicology, neuroscience and epigenetics. Alison is now an Assistant Professor at Michigan State University.
Inti Orozco is an artist and science enthusiast, regularly geeking out on space, agriculture and biotechnology.
Brittany Anderton seeks to improve the intersection of science and society by educating the next generation of responsible scientists and citizens. She has a PhD in cancer biology, studied the teaching and communication of biotechnology as a postdoctoral fellow at UC Davis, and is now the Associate Director of Research Talks at iBiology and Lecturer at CSU Sacramento.
Liv Langberg is a social worker and cognitive therapist. She has studied biology and has a diploma in agronomy. Back in the day, she tried her hand at organic agriculture, so she knows a thing or two about cow dung.
Øystein Heggdal is a Norwegian agronomist. He holds a bachelor’s degree in environmental science and natural resources. He is currently working as an journalist for a Norwegian farming magazine.
Jenny Splitter is a writer based in Washington, D.C. She covers science, food, and health for outlets like Forbes, The Washington Post, Slate, New York Magazine, Parents, and Mental Floss, and serves as Story Director for the immersive experience company TBD Immersive.
Arya Mitra Sharma is Professor of Medicine and currently holds the Alberta Health Services Chair in Obesity Research and Management at the University of Alberta. He is also the Medical Director of the Alberta Health Services Obesity Program.
Chris MacDonald is an educator, speaker, and consultant in the realm of business ethics. He teaches at the Ted Rogers School of Management, at Ryerson University in Toronto, where he is Director of the Ted Rogers Leadership Centre.
Iida Ruishalme is a writer and a science communicator who holds a MSc in Biology from Sweden. She thinks nature is pretty awesome, and that it only gets more awesome the more you learn about it. She writes at Thoughtscapism.
Andrew Kniss is an Associate Professor of Weed Ecology & Management at the University of Wyoming. He has a PhD in Agronomy with a minor in Statistics. He teaches undergraduate & graduate courses including Ecology of Plant Protection and Weed Science & Technology. His research focuses on developing sustainable weed management programs in agronomic crops.
Michael Dzakovich is a PhD candidate and USDA National Needs Research Fellow at Ohio State University. He uses genomic and metabolomic tools to understand how genetic diversity influences potentially health-promoting compounds in tomatoes. He also uses animal model studies to determine how tomato consumption affects gene expression in tissues where tomato phytochemicals are deposited and metabolized.
Robin Bisson is a Senior Press Officer at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN) at King’s College of London. He previously ran the Genetic Expert News Service, a DC-based nonprofit providing media access to scientific expertise on genetics and biotechnology news.
Daniel Norero serves as a consultant in scientific communication and writes a column in the Chilean “El Definido.” He studied biochemistry at the Catholic University of Chile and worked as a laboratory assistant in plant sciences. Currently, he is studying digital marketing and social media management. He founded “Yo Quiero transgénicos”, a citizen project to inform about GMOs, and is a Cornell Alliance for Science Fellow.
Don Gibson is a PhD student at UC, Davis. He’s a molecular biologist with specialization in plant science and experience in biotechnology startups and political organizing. Don is currently studying fundamental aspects of root development using Arabidopsis and tomato as model organisms.
Kendal Hirschi works at the Children’s Nutrition Research Center at Baylor College of Medicine and is Associate Director of Research at the Vegetable and Fruit Improvement Center at Texas A&M. His research program centers on many biomedical issues and has published papers using bacteria, yeast, crops, zebrafish, mice, and human subjects. His research goal is to increase the nutritional content of crops, in collaboration with clinical faculty at Baylor College of Medicine. His long-term goal is to bridge the chasm between plant biology and nutritional sciences.
Nir Oksenberg is a professional science communicator for the Delta Stewardship Council, a California state agency. He fosters productive communication among scientists, the public, water managers, and policymakers. He has a PhD in human genetics from the University of California, San Francisco and was a postdoctoral fellow at UC Davis studying the rice response to bacteria, flooding, and drought in Pamela Ronald’s lab.
Nikolai Braun is an experienced synthetic biologist, scientific group leader, and biotech product developer. He has a PhD in biophysics from UC, Davis. He is interested in networking, business opportunities, and fun new ways to make the world a better place. Nikolai co-founded Revolution Bioengineering, the beautiful biotechnology company, and now is the leader of the micro- and molecular biology programs at Luna Innovations.
Kavin Senapathy is the co-founder of international pro-science, pro-biotech movement March Against Myths, and co-author of The Fear Babe: Shattering Vani Hari’s Glass House, a book discussing popular food misconceptions and why they proliferate in the face of mountains of evidence against them. She has a passion for refuting myths popular in the wild internet west, with topics including genomics, health, food, and biotechnology. A regular contributor to Forbes, SELF Magazine, and Grounded Parents, Kavin’s work has also appeared in Slate and other outlets.
Jeff Fountain left his career in the California wine industry to study biotechnology full-time as a student at CCSF’s Bridge to Biosciences internship program. His love of science is only matched by his dislike of pseudoscience, which led him to create Food Hunk, a popular Facebook page that parodies the anti-GMO ‘pure food’ movement.
Stephanie Gorski has a PhD in entomology from North Carolina State University. She has a strong interest in environmental sustainability and conducted research on Western corn rootworm and transgenic Bt crops. She is currently an Assistant Professor at Wiley College.
Mike Bonds is a green technology advisor for a local environmental & pest management firm based in NYC. He enjoys finding alternative approaches to traditional methodologies and also has a big respect for ants.
Layla Katiraee is a human molecular geneticist working as a development scientist in DNA sequencing. She has a PhD in human molecular genetics from the University of Toronto, and is currently studying applied bioinformatics at Penn State.
Marc Brazeau is the Chief Organizer and Editor at Food and Farm Discussion Lab, a food system think tank for people within the agriculture industry to share evidence-based solutions. With experience as a chef and restaurant owner as well as organizing unions in the agriculture space, he brings a unique perspective to the food-to-table movement.
Harold Keyser, Ph.D. is a retired soil microbiologist, volunteering with Cooperative Extension on Maui to provide education on soil fertility, nitrogen fixation in legumes, and agricultural biotechnology when not volunteering at his son’s nursery. He received degrees in plant science, ecology and soil science from UC Davis, and was a researcher and educator with USDA ARS and the University of Hawaii’s College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources.
Robert Sacerich has had a diverse career across multiple industries. He is pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Philosophy of Science and Bioethics.
James Cooper has a PhD in organic chemistry from Ohio State University and worked for years at IBM Research, mostly in computer science. He is now a full time writer, writing articles for Examiner.com on food and food science, and working on several books.
Ariela Haro von Mogel is a Registered Dietitian. She holds degrees from the University of California-Davis in Sociology and Music and the University of Madison-Wisconsin in Nutrition Science. Ariela is particularly interested in Latino health, cultural competence, and nutrition education.
Andrew McGuire has been with Washington State University Extension since 1999. He works with farmers to implement solutions to irrigated farming challenges in the Columbia Basin. He is currently evaluating soil health measurements and developing high-frequency green manure rotations for soilborne disease control. He thinks, then writes about agriculture at the Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources.
Alexander Huszagh is a C++/Python developer with a Masters in cellular and molecular biosciences from UC, Irvine. He applies computational biology and mass spectrometry to the study of protein machines.
Sujatha Venkataramani is a Plant Biologist with extensive training in Molecular and Cell Biology, Genetics and Physiology. Her PhD in biology is from Texas Tech University. Sujatha is originally from India and has lived in the United States since 2000. She sincerely hopes that we as the plant community are able to find ways to feed every single mouth on this planet.
Rob Wallbridge is an organic farmer in Western Quebec, Canada. He is also a father, extensionist, writer, speaker, and rabble-rouser. He advocates for high-quality organic food and informed communities in agriculture and beyond.
Becca Harrison is currently pursuing her PhD in science & technology studies at Cornell University. She is particularly interested in how consumers view, communicate, and respond to technology used in food agriculture, and how such study can be used to influence effective policy, increasing accessibility of such food domestically and internationally.
Caroline Coatney is a plant breeder with experience in science communication and science policy. She has a Masters degree in plant biology from the University of Georgia.
Marco Rosaire Conrad-Rossi is a part-time writer and activist living Olympia, WA. He studied political science at the University of Illinois-Chicago and human rights at the University for Peace in San Jose, Costa Rica. He has published in the Humanist Magazine, Z Magazine, and on many blogs.
Patrick Cournoyer has a PhD in molecular and cell biology from Yale. His doctoral research investigated the molecular underpinnings of the plant immune system. During that time, he co-directed the “Biotechnology in Agriculture” seminar series with the Yale Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics. He now works to ensure the safety of food from genetically engineered plants at the US Food and Drug Administration.
Carolyn Olson raises organic corn, soybeans, field peas and small grains with her husband and their three daughters on 1,100 acres near Cottonwood, Minnesota. They also finish about 7,000 conventional hogs annually. Their farm will be recognized as a century farm this year. Carolyn is an active member of her community, serving on the Minnesota Department of Agriculture’s Minnesota Organic Advisory Task Force, as co-chair of the Minnesota Farm Bureau Pork Chop booth at FarmFest, and much more. Carolyn blogs at Carolyn Cares and tweets as @Westacre2CJ.
Arpita Bhattacharjya ?studies and writes about food: from school lunch to global hunger, biotechnology to cooking dinner at home, she am curious about everything. In an earlier life she was an economist, now a Mom and food policy issues advocate. She tweets as @greenfork. Her blog, Thought + Food is a thoughtful look at the journey of food from the fields and oceans to the fork.
Mike Haley is a row crop farmer and cattle rancher. His farm in Ohio has been in the family since 1907. Mike tweets as @farmerhaley and blogs at Haley Farms.
John Bowman uses genetics to understand plant diversity – within species, between species, between life stages, and across evolutionary time. His research is curiosity-driven, focusing on fundamental questions about plants, such as what did the common ancestor of all land plants look like and how did it evolve to produce all the land plants we have today? He was raised in Montana, but lives in Melbourne because it’s like San Francisco but without handguns.
Adam Merberg has a PhD in Mathematics from the University of California, Berkeley, with a dissertation on noncommutative probability theory and operator algebras. He sometimes reads, thinks, and writes about food and agriculture issues when he’s not busy with his work.
Jonas Kathage is an agricultural economist with a focus on quantitative empirical research. Since 2013, he has been working at the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission in Seville. His PhD in agricultural economics is from the University of Göttingen. Jonas is an expert on the socio-economics of genetically modified crops. He has also worked on plant protection, climate change mitigation, and other topics.
Brian Scott farms with his father and grandfather on 2,300 acres of land in northwest Indiana. They grow corn, soybeans, popcorn, and wheat. Brian blogs at The Farmer’s Life.
Drew L. Kershen is the Earl Sneed Centennial Professor of Law Emeritus, at the University of Oklahoma College of Law. He taught agricultural law and water law for 30+ years and retired in 2012. Beginning in 1997, he focused his writing and speaking on legal issues related to agricultural biotechnology.
Charis Cook has a PhD in Biological Sciences from Royal Holloway, University of London. She has used her scientific expertise in a variety of science communication roles, including as Senior Business Interaction Manager at the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) and Communication Officer for GARNet, a network to support UK plant scientists.
Cami Ryan
Rachael Ludwick lives in Seattle, Washington and works as a software developer, making an awesome product with lasers! She has interests in the sciences (agriculture, phylogeny, genetics), history, music, politics, and more.
Rebecca Nesbit is author of the popular science book ‘Is that Fish in your Tomato?’ which explores the fact and fiction of GM foods. She studied butterfly migration for her PhD, then worked for a start-up company training honeybees to detect explosives. She now works in science communication and her projects have ranged from a citizen science flying ant survey to visiting universities around the world with Nobel Laureates. In her spare time she writes fiction – she has published a novel, and many short stories.
Sophien is a senior scientist and Head of The Sainsbury Laboratory. He received his B.S. degree from Pierre and Marie Curie University, Paris, France, and his Ph.D. in Genetics from the University of California, Davis, USA. He held a faculty position at Ohio State University, USA, in the Department of Plant Pathology, Wooster campus, before joining The Sainsbury Laboratory in 2007. His recent research focuses on plant pathogenomics, filamentous pathogen effector biology and devising new approaches to breeding disease-resistant crops. Follow him on twitter @KamounLab
Eric has worked in ag biotech (Ciba-Geigy, Novartis, Cropsolution) since his PhD at Washington University in St. Louis. He is President of Two Blades Foundation and in that capacity is responsible for a research group at The Sainsbury Laboratory. His group focuses on identifying novel resistances to major crop diseases.
Depending on his mood, Luis Apiolaza is a forester, a quantitative forester, a quantitative geneticist or if he wants to sound suave and trendy – a statistical geneticist. Luis works at the School of Forestry, University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand (the land of the long white cloud, the Lord of the Rings and R). He blogs about statistics and science at Quantum Forest.
Calestous Juma is Professor of the Practice of International Development at Harvard Kennedy School and author of The New Harvest: Agricultural Innovation in Africa (Oxford University Press, 2011).
Emily Willingham has a bachelor’s degree in English and a PhD in biological sciences, both from The University of Texas at Austin, with a completed postdoctoral fellowship at the University of California, San Francisco. She blogs at The Biology Files about how science and writing about science take shape around the audience known as You. She is the author of The Complete Idiot’s Guide to College Biology and currently working on a book about lice. Yep, “lice.” She bets you’re about to scratch your head right now.
Lúcia de Souza has a PhD in plant biochemistry from the University of Basle in Switzerland. She has extensive experience in teaching and is actively involved in biosafety, public research, and regulation initiatives. Lúcia is an ISAAA (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications) associate.
Steve Savage has worked with various aspects of agricultural technology for more than 35 years. He has a PhD in plant pathology and his varied career included Colorado State University, DuPont, and the bio-control start-up, Mycogen. He is an independent consultant working with a wide variety of clients on topics including biological control, biotechnology, crop protection chemicals, and more. Steve writes and speaks on food and agriculture topics (Applied Mythology blog) and does a bi-weekly podcast called POPAgriculture for the CropLife Foundation.
Bill Price has a PhD in plant science. He has worked in agricultural research for nearly 40 years and is currently a statistician in the College of Agriculture at the University of Idaho. His work includes diverse topics including but not limited to dairy science, human nutrition, weed science, and benthic microbiology.
Colby Vorland is a PhD student in nutritional science at Purdue University. He is studying the regulation of intestinal phosphorus absorption in health and chronic kidney disease. Colby has a background in dietetics and has previously worked in lipid metabolism in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
kevin-folta Kevin Folta has studied biology and agricultural biotechnology for over thirty years. He has a PhD in molecular biology from the University of Illinois at Chicago. His research examines the role of light in controlling plant traits, especially those relevant to agriculture. His group is known for using innovative genomics approaches to identify genes associated with fruit quality, especially flavors and aromas.
Jack Lundee is a follower of all things green and progressive. With a degree in creative writing, and a strong involvement in the green blogosphere, Jack has been producing and editing his own content concerning things like climate change, carbon emissions, green infrastructure, green space, and eco-consciousness.
Matt DiLeo has a PhD in Plant Pathology from UC, Davis. During his postdoctoral research at Boyce Thompson Institute, he researched unintentional effects of genetic engineering. Matt builds R&D teams and biotech platforms: genome editing, gene discovery, microbials, and controlled environment agriculture.
Clark Wolf is the Director of Bioethics and a Professor in the Department of Philosophy at Iowa State University. He is a faculty member in the Graduate Program in Sustainable Agriculture and has a cortursey appointment in the Department of Political Science. He teaches and co-teaches a variety of courses, including Foundations of Sustainable Agriculture, Environmental Ethics, and Bioethics and Biotechnology. Clark gives and organizes thought-provoking talks to diverse audiences at Iowa State, including talks on biotechnology and intellectual property.
Sarah Bione-Dunn is a psychologist who conducts both clinical work and research.
James Schnable is an assistant professor and the co-founder of two start ups. His academic lab works on comparative and functional genomics as well as high throughput phenotyping of maize, sorghum, and related orphan grain crops and wild grass species. He’s interested in plants, farming, and saving the world through agriculture, the usual. James blogs at James and the Giant Corn.
Brandon Hunnicutt farms in South Central Nebraska with his dad, brother, and cousin. They raise corn, soybeans and popcorn. All their corn and soybeans contain some aspect of biotechnology in them, except for the popcorn. Brandon has been involved with defending biotechnology and promoting throughout the years and currently serves as President of the Nebraska Corn Growers Association.
Mary Mangan has a PhD in cell, molecular, and developmental biology from the University of Rochester. She co-founded OpenHelix, a company that provides awareness and training on open source genomics software tools. She has published numerous articles on biology, biotechnology, biometrics, and genomics.
Joe Ballenger is an agricultural scientist studying weed control at the University of Wyoming. He has a Masters degree in Entomology. After starting as an author with the Biofortified Blog, Joe went on to found the successful Ask an Entomologist project!
Rob Hebert is a second-year student at Georgetown Law. Before moving to DC, he lived in Brooklyn, NY.
Cody Cobb is a brand new doctor, recovering plant biologist, and photography enthusiast. He received his MD at Texas A&M Health Science Center College of Medicine. Prior to medical school, he studied plant biology and plant pathology at Rutgers University.
Melinda Yerka
Raoul Adamchak is co-author of Tomorrow’s Table: Organic Farming, Genetics and the Future of Food”. He has grown organic crops for twenty years. He has served as a member and president of California Certified Organic Farmers (CCOF) and Board of Directors and inspected over one hundred organic farms for CCOF. He now works at the UC, Davis Student Farm, where he teaches organic production practices and manages a five-acre market garden.
Pamela Ronald is Professor of Plant Pathology and Chair of the Plant Genomics Program at the University of California, Davis, where she studies the role that genes play in a plant’s response to its environment. With her husband, she co-wrote Tomorrow’s Table: Organic Farming, Genetics and the Future of Food. Dr. Ronald was one of the co-founders of Biology Fortified.
Anastasia Bodnar is a science communicator and science policy expert with a PhD in plant genetics and sustainable agriculture from Iowa State University. Anastasia has had various risk analysis roles in US government and military service. She was one of the co-founders of Biology Fortified and previously served as BFI’s Policy Director. Anastasia’s writing with BFI is conducted in her personal capacity, and the views expressed do not represent the views of the USDA.
Frank N. Foode™ is your friendly neighborhood genetically modified organism. Check him out on Instagram, Twitter, or Facebook! You can also take Frank home with you – visit our Plant Plushies page to learn more!