Thanks for that pointer.
The paragraph quoting Goodman was better than the ones quoting you though. Maybe cause Goodman started by admitting that there is a new protein (or two or three) in there, where your less lengthy quotes didn't explain it in as much detail. I'm not saying it's your doing.
I don't think I've read Jon Entine before. It appears scientific journalism may not be an oxymoron. I didn't see a place where he obviously didn't get the science - that's very rare.
And I read "the book" (Tomorrow's Table) a few months back. Pretty good. Thanks.
Disclaim: study human cancer, not plants. No conflicts to report.
Thanks for that pointer.
The paragraph quoting Goodman was better than the ones quoting you though. Maybe cause Goodman started by admitting that there is a new protein (or two or three) in there, where your less lengthy quotes didn't explain it in as much detail. I'm not saying it's your doing.
I don't think I've read Jon Entine before. It appears scientific journalism may not be an oxymoron. I didn't see a place where he obviously didn't get the science - that's very rare.
And I read "the book" (Tomorrow's Table) a few months back. Pretty good. Thanks.
Disclaim: study human cancer, not plants. No conflicts to report.