Comments on: Study’s Narrow Focus Fails to Consider Full Health and Environmental Benefits of Organic http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=8034 News on pesticide science, policy and activism Thu, 16 May 2013 16:03:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Alice Sheppard http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=8034#comment-155595 Alice Sheppard Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:55:42 +0000 http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=8034#comment-155595 From a scientific standpoint, the “study” (actually a meta-analysis or compilation) appears to have a number of flaws. See the critique, “Initial Reflections on the Annals of Internal Medicine Paper ‘Are Organic Foods Safer and Healthier Than Conventional Alternatives? A Systematic Review’” posted online by Dr. Charles Benbrook of Washington State University. http://www.tfrec.wsu.edu/pdfs/P2566.pdf

]]> By: Roger Pelizzari http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=8034#comment-155292 Roger Pelizzari Sat, 08 Sep 2012 12:04:32 +0000 http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=8034#comment-155292 That Stanford study that everyone’s quoting was totally fraudulent.
http://www.naturalnews.com/037108_Stanford_Ingram_Olkin_Big_Tobacco.html

The study’s co-author, Dr. Ingram Olkin, has a deep history as an “anti-science” propagandist working for Big Tobacco. Stanford University has also been found to have deep financial ties to Cargill, a powerful proponent of genetically engineered foods and an enemy of GMO labeling Proposition 37.

The following document shows financial ties between Philip Morris and Ingram Olkin
http://tobaccodocuments.org/bliley_pm/22205.html

Olkin worked with Stanford University to develop a “multivariate” statistical algorithm, which is essentially a way to lie with statistics.

This research was a key component in Big Tobacco’s use of anti-science to attack whistleblowers and attempt to claim cigarettes are perfectly safe.

]]>