[Editor’s note: Kevin Folta is a molecular geneticist and chair of the horticultural sciences department at the University of Florida.]
Apparently an Adjunct Professor in Denmark associated with the Harvard School of Public Health is exploiting the reputation and name of this prestigious institution to promote an agenda, and using a EU Parliament document as the vehicle.
This is the familiar vilification of conventional agriculture.
As always, I’m fine with organic production methods and am very happy that farmers can make a buck using them. I’m excited to see people thinking about minimizing inputs and producing using alternative methods. That’s awesome. But don’t tell me that the food is more nutritious or safer. The data do not support that conclusion. Minor differences are seen for different nutrients in either direction, under different conditions, and with different plant lines.
The main claim is that “Three long-term birth cohort studies in the U.S. suggest that pesticides are harming children’s brains.”
The associated report is from the EU Parliament. I breezed through it, mostly focusing on major syntheses. The conclusions are rather telling.
Share this article
and
So apparently this was evidence enough to satisfy Harvard Public Health of the glaring dangers of conventional agriculture. I’m crossing them off of my liver transplant list.
…
The Harvard School of Public Health would be well guided to vet the claims made in such articles on their behalf. These soft-science claims end up affecting a reputation. Ask [the] Cleveland Clinic.
The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Read full, original post: Harvard Public Health-The Sadly Vilifying Conventional Ag?
