“We will restore science to its rightful place”. Oh what sweet words. Has Obama lived up to his vows? A recent story suggests that a change of administration at the White House does not necessarily mean that the best science will be of high priority when informing the public.
Karl Haro von Mogel recently posted that a USDA Report by Cyndi Barmore, The Unexplored Potential of Organic-Biotech Production, has been pulled from the USDA website after complaints from the organic industry.
An excerpt from the report: “The divide between organics and biotechnology is an artificial construction maintained by ideology rather than science. A governmental decision to change organic regulations to permit the use of biotechnology could have far-reaching policy implications for global agriculture. Allowing producers to gain organic certification for biotech crops could encourage the development of a new type of environmentally sustainable agricultural production with greater benefits for the consumer.”
The report is science-based, practical and well-grounded in science. Why pull the report?
A source inside the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service told me that good science is now secondary to political considerations. Instead of an open discussion of sustainable agriculture, scientific consensus is beings suppressed if it conflicts with the financial interest of the organic industry.
Under the Bush Administration, people on the right wing of politics denied the science of global warming until the glaciers melted before there eyes. Will progressives make the same mistake? Must we run out of water, land and food before we use science-based knowledge to create a more sustainable agriculture?