Unfortunately, junk science can be generated by people with agendas, and the editorial process does not always prevent it from getting the undeserved legitimacy of publication. In extreme cases the legitimate scientific community responds, but can it undo the damage? Recently a group of scientists led by Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen published a feeding study which purported to find tumorigenic effects of GMO corn and glyphosate. It was so blatantly flawed in design and interpretation that it elicited a rapid and overwhelmingly negative response.
But can the damage from the study be undone? It is far more probable that this “cancer link” will become another permanent entry in the lexicon of anti-GMO “evidence.”
Related on the SLP
View the original article here: Can the Damage from Agenda-driven Junk Science be Undone …
