Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Inside
the Network Funding GMO Propaganda and PR to Cover Up Toxic Chemical Risks
By Stacy Malkan [1] / AlterNet [2]
March 20, 2017
2
British
writer George Monbiot has a warning for those of us trying to grasp the new
political realities in the U.S. and the U.K.: “We have no hope of understanding
what is coming until we understand how the dark money network operates,” he
wrote in the Guardian [3].
Corporate
America may have been slow to warm up to Donald Trump, but once Trump secured
the nomination, “the big money began to recognize an unprecedented
opportunity,” Monbiot wrote. “His incoherence was not a liability, but an
opening: his agenda could be shaped. And the dark money network already
developed by some American corporations was perfectly positioned to shape
it.”
This
network, or dark money ATM [4] as Mother Jones
described it, refers to the vast amount of hard-to-trace money flowing from
arch-conservative billionaires, such as Charles and David Koch and allies, and
corporations into front groups that promote extreme free-market ideas – for
example, fights against public schools, unions, environmental protection,
climate change policies and science that threatens corporate profits.
Investigative
writers Jane Mayer [5], Naomi Oreskes,
Erik Conway [6] and others have exposed how “the story of
dark money and the story of climate change denial are the same story: two sides
of the same coin,” as U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse described it last year
in a speech[7].
The
strategies of the “Koch-led, influence-buying operation” – including propaganda
operations that spin science with no regard for the truth – “are probably the
major reason we don't have a comprehensive climate bill in Congress,”
Whitehouse said.
While
these strategies have been well-tracked in the climate sphere, less reported is
the fact that the funders behind climate-science denial also bankroll a network
of PR operatives who have built careers spinning science to deny the health
risks of toxic chemicals in the food we eat and products we use every day.
The
stakes are high for our nation’s health. Rates of childhood cancer [8] are now 50% higher
than when the “war on cancer” began decades ago, and the best weapon is one we
are hardly using: policies to limit exposure to cancer-causing chemicals.
“If we
want to win the war on cancer, we need to start with the thousand physical and
chemical agents evaluated as possible, probable or known human carcinogens by
the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health
Organization,” wrote scientist and author Devra Lee Davis, PhD, MPH, in The Hill [9].
Reducing
known agents of harm has had “less to do with science, and more to do with the
power of highly profitable industries that rely on public relations to
counteract scientific reports of risks,” Davis noted.
Chemical
Industry Propagandists
When
products important to the chemical and junk food industries run into trouble
with science, a predictable cast of characters and groups appear on the scene,
using well-worn media strategies to bail out corporations in need of a PR
boost.
Their
names and the tactics they use – lengthy adversarial articles, often framed by
personal attacks – will be familiar to many scientists, journalists and
consumer advocates who have raised concerns about toxic products over the past
15 years.
Public
records requests by U.S. Right to Know [10] that have
unearthed thousands of documents, along with recent reports by Greenpeace [11],
The Intercept [12] and others, are shining
new light on this propaganda network.
Key
players include Jon Entine, Trevor Butterworth, Henry I. Miller and groups
connected with them: STATS, Center for Media and Public Affairs, Genetic
Literacy Project, Sense About Science and the Hoover Institute.
Despite
well-documented histories as PR operatives, Entine, Butterworth and Miller are
presented as serious science sources on many media platforms, appearing in
the Wall Street [13] Journal [14], New York Times [15], Los Angeles Times [16], Newsweek [17], Philadelphia Enquirer [18], Harvard Business Review [19] and, most [20] often [21], Forbes [22] – without disclosure of
their funding sources or agenda to deregulate the polluting industries that
promote them.
Their
articles rank high in Google searches for many of the chemical and junk food
industry’s top messaging priorities – pushing the narratives that GMOs,
pesticides, plastic chemicals, sugar and sugar substitutes are safe, and anyone
who says otherwise is “anti-science.”
In
some cases, they are even gaining in influence as they align with establishment
institutions such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Cornell
University and the University of California, Davis.
Yet
their funding sources trace back to the same “ultra free market” ideologues
from oil, pharmaceutical and chemical fortunes who are financing climate
science denial – Searle Freedom Trust [23], Scaife Foundations [24], John Templeton
Foundation and others identified as among the largest and most consistent funders [25] of
climate-change-denial groups, according to a 2013 study [26] by Drexel University
sociologist Robert Brulle, PhD.
Those
seeking to understand the dark money network’s policy goals for dismantling
health protections for our food system would do well to keep an eye on
these modern propagandists [27] and their
messaging.
Jon
Entine – Genetic Literacy Project / STATS
Jon
Entine, a former journalist, presents himself as an objective authority on
science. Yet ample evidence suggests [28] he is a
longtime public relations operative with deep ties to chemical companies plagued
with questions about health risks.
Over
the years, Entine has attacked [29] scientists [30], professors [31], funders [32], lawmakers [33] and [34] journalists [35] who have raised concerns
about fracking [36], nuclear power [37], pesticides [38] and industrial chemicals [39] used in baby bottles [40] and children’s toys[41]. A 2012 Mother Jones
story by Tom Philpott describes Entine as an “agribusiness apologist [42],” and Greenpeace
details his history on their Polluter Watch website [11].
Entine
is now director of the Genetic Literacy Project [43], a group that
promotes genetically engineered foods and pesticides. The site claims to be
neutral, but “it’s clearly designed to promote a pro-industry position and
doesn’t try to look neutrally at the issues,” said Michael Hansen, PhD, senior
scientist at Consumers Union.
“The
message is that genetic engineering is good and anybody who criticizes it is a
horrible ideologue, but that’s just not indicative of where the scientific
debate actually is.”
Entine claims [44], for example, that the
“scientific consensus on GMO safety is stronger than for global warming” – a
claim contradicted by the World Health Organization, which states it is not possible to make general statements [45] about
GMO safety, and by hundreds of scientists who have said there is no scientific consensus [46] on GMO
safety.
The
Genetic Literacy Project also has not been transparent about its connections to
Monsanto. As one example, the site published several pro-GMO academic papers
that emails later revealed were assigned to professors [47] by a
Monsanto executive who provided talking points for the papers and promised
to pump them out all over [48] the
internet.
Another
example: Genetic Literacy Project partners with Academics Review on the Biotechnology Literacy Project [49],
pro-industry conferences that train scientists and journalists on how to “best
engage the GMO debate with a skeptical public.”
Academics
Review, which published a report [50] in 2014 attacking the
organic industry, presents itself as an independent group, but emails revealed [51] it was set up with
the help of a Monsanto executive who promised to find funding “while keeping
Monsanto in the background so as not to harm the credibility of the
information.” Emails also showed [52] that Academics Review
co-founder Bruce Chassy had been receiving undisclosed funds from Monsanto [53] via
the University of Illinois Foundation.
So who
funds Genetic Literacy Project and Entine?
According
to their website [54], the bulk of funding comes from
two foundations – Searle and Templeton – identified in the Drexel study [25] as leading funders of
climate-science denial. The site also lists funding from the Winkler Family
Foundation and “pass through support for University of California-Davis Biotech
Literacy Bootcamp” from the Academics Review Charitable Association.
Previous
funding sources also include climate science denial supporters and undisclosed
pass-through funding.
The
Genetic Literacy Project and Entine previously operated under the umbrella of
Statistical Assessment Services (STATS), a group located at George Mason
University, where Entine was a fellow at the Center for Health and Risk
Communication from 2011-2014.
STATS
was funded largely by the Scaife Foundation and Searle Freedom Trust between
2005 and 2014, according to a Greenpeace investigation of STATS
funding [11].
Kimberly
Dennis, the president and CEO of Searle Freedom Trust, is also chairman of the
board of Donors Trust [4], the notorious
Koch-connected dark money fund whose donors cannot be traced. Under Dennis’
leadership, Searle and Donors Trust sent a collective $290,000 to STATS in
2010, Greenpeace reported.
In 2012 [55] and 2013 [56],
STATS received loans from its sister organization, the Center for Media and
Public Affairs, which received [57]donations [58] during those years from
the George Mason University Foundation, which does not disclose funding sources [59].
Entine
has at times tried to distance himself and GLP [60] from these groups;
however, tax records [61] show Entine was paid
$173,100 by the Center for Media and Public Affairs for the year ending June
30, 2015.
By
2014, emails
show [62], Entine was trying to find a new home for Genetic
Literacy Project, and wanted to establish a “more formal relationship” with the
University of California, Davis, World Food Center. He became a Senior Fellow
at the school’s Institute for Food and Agricultural Literacy and now identifies
as a former fellow. GLP is now under the umbrella of a group called the Science
Literacy Project.
Entine
said he would not respond to questions for this story.
Trevor
Butterworth - Sense About Science USA / STATS
Trevor
Butterworth has been a reliable industry messenger [63] for many years,
defending the safety of various risky products important to the chemical and
junk food industries, such as phthalates [64], BPA [65], vinyl plastic, [66] corn syrup [67], sugary
sodas [68] and artificial sweeteners. [69] He is a
former contributor at Newsweek [70] and has written book
reviews for the Wall Street Journal [71].
From
2003 to 2014, Butterworth was an editor at STATS, funded largely by Scaife
Foundation and Searle Freedom Trust. In 2014, he became the founding director
of Sense
About Science USA [72] and folded STATS into that group.
A
recent exposé by Liza Gross in The Intercept [12] described Sense
About Science, its director Tracey Brown, Butterworth, STATS and the founders
of those groups as “self-appointed guardians of sound science” who “tip the
scales toward industry.”
Sense
About Science “purports to help the misinformed public sift through alarming
claims about health and the environment” but “has a disturbing history of
promoting experts who turn out to have ties to regulated industries,” Gross
wrote.
“When
journalists rightly ask who sponsors research into the risks of, say, asbestos,
or synthetic chemicals, they’d be well advised to question the evidence Sense
About Science presents in these debates as well.”
Sense
About Science USA posted this response [73] to the piece, and
Butterworth said via email he was “disappointed with the Intercept’s misleading
article, which lumped people and organizations with no connection to Sense
About Science USA together.” He said his group takes no corporate funding and
is legally independent from the UK Sense About Science.
He
also said, “I have never been involved in industry messaging campaigns -- in
any capacity, paid or not.”
Some
journalists have concluded otherwise. Reporters at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel [74], The Atlantic [75] and Consumer Reports [76] portrayed
Butterworth as a key player in the chemical industry’s aggressive PR efforts to
defend the chemical BPA.
In
2009, journalists Susanne Rust and Meg Kissinger of the Journal Sentinel described Butterworth [77] as BPA’s
“most impassioned” defender, and an example of “chemical industry public
relations writers” who do not disclose their affiliations.
STATS, they wrote [74], “claims to be an
independent media watchdog” but “is funded by public policy organizations that
promote deregulation.” Its sister organization, the Center for Media and Public
Affairs, “has a history of working for corporations trying to deflect concerns
about the safety of their products.” Butterworth said his reporting on BPA
reflected the evidence at the time from authoritative sources, and STATS posted
responses here [78] and here [79] to the critical reporting.
A more
recent example of how Butterworth’s writings played a key role in corporate
lobby efforts to discredit troublesome science can be seen in his work on the
controversial artificial sweetener sucralose.
In
2012, Butterworth wrote a Forbes article [80] criticizing a study
that raised concerns about the cancer risk of sucralose. He described the
researchers, Dr. Morando Soffritti and the Ramazzini Institute, as “something
of a joke.”
In
2016, a food industry front group featured Butterworth’s 2012 article and
“something of a joke” critique in a press release [81] attacking a new
Soffritti “panic study” that raised concerns about sucralose. Reporters
at The Independent [82], The Daily Mail [83], The Telegraph [84]and Deseret News [85] picked up
Butterworth’s quotes discrediting the researchers, and identified him only
as a reporter from Forbes.
Similarly,
in 2011, Butterworth was a featured expert at the International Sweeteners
Association Conference, and claimed in their press release[86] there is “no evidence of a
risk to health” from sucralose. He was identified as a “journalist who
regularly contributes to the Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal.”
Emails
obtained by USRTK show that Coca Cola VP Rhona Applebaum [87] described
Butterworth to the leaders of the Global Energy Balance Network – a Coca-Cola front group [88] working to
spin the science on obesity – as “our friend [89]” and a journalist who was “ready and able [90]” to work with them.
Butterworth said he never worked with that group.
Butterworth
is now affiliated with Cornell University as a visiting fellow [91] at the Cornell
Alliance for Science, a group launched in 2014 with a Gates Foundation grant to promote GMOs [92]. The Gates-funded
group now partners with Sense About Science USA on a workshop to teach young
scientists to “Stand Up for Science [93].”
Sense
About Science USA also runs public engagement workshops
for scientists [94] at such venues as the University of
Washington, University of Pittsburg, Carnegie Melon, Rockefeller University,
Caltech and University of Massachusetts, Boston.
Henry
I. Miller – Hoover Institution
Henry I. Miller, MD [95], a fellow at the
Hoover Institution, is one of the most prolific defenders of genetically
engineered foods and fiercest opponents of labeling them. He has penned numerous
attacks on the organic industry, including “The Colossal Hoax of Organic
Agriculture” (Forbes [96]), “Organic Farming is Not Sustainable”
(Wall Street Journal [13]) and “The Dirty
Truth About Organic Produce” (Newsweek[17]).
Miller
has also written in defense of bee-harming pesticides [97], plastic chemicals [98] and radiation from nuclear power plants [99],
and has repeatedly argued for the reintroduction of DDT [100]. He did not
respond to requests to comment for this story.
Unlike
Butterworth and Entine, Miller has a science background and government
credentials; he is a medical doctor and was the founding director of the FDA’s
office of biotechnology.
Like
Butterworth and Entine, Miller’s funding comes from groups that finance climate
science denial – the Hoover Institute’s top
funder [101] is the Sarah Scaife Foundation, and the group
has also taken money from the Searle Freedom Trust, Exxon Mobile, American
Chemistry Council, Charles Koch Foundation and Donors Trust.
Like
the founders of STATS and Sense About Science [12], Miller
also has ties to the tobacco industry PR campaigns. In a 1994 PR strategy memo for the tobacco company Phillip Morris [102],
Miller was referred to as “a key supporter” of the global campaign to fight
tobacco regulations. In 2012, Miller wrote [103] that nicotine “is
not particularly bad for you in the amounts delivered by cigarettes or
smokeless products.”
Miller
is also a member of the “scientific advisory board” of the George C. Marshall Institute [104], which is
famous for its oil and gas industry funded denials of climate change, and a
former trustee of the American Council on Science and Health [105],
which “depends heavily on funding from corporations that have a financial stake
in the scientific debates it aims to shape,” according to Mother Jones [106].
Perhaps
recognizing that pontificating men aren’t the best sources to influence the
women who buy food, Miller has recently been sharing bylines with female
protégés who have joined his attacks on health advocates and organic farmers.
Examples
include a co-authored piece with Kavin Senapathy, co-founder of a group [107] that
tries to disrupt speaking events [108] of GMO
critics, headlined “Screw the Activists [109];” and one
with Julie Kelly [110], a cooking instructor
whose husband is a lobbyist for the agribusiness giant ADM, describing organic
agriculture as an “evil empire [111].”
Recent
work by Kelly includes a piece in National Review [112] casting doubt on
climate science researchers, and an article in The Hill [113] calling on Congress to
defund the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which she accused of “cancer
collusion” and “using shoddy science to promote a politically motivated
agenda.”
As we
enter the fifth decade of losing the war on cancer, and as climate instability
threatens ecosystems and our food system, it’s time to unravel the network of
science deniers who claim the mantle of science and expose them for what they
are: propagandists who do the dirty work of industry.
This
article was originally published in The Ecologist [114].
Stacy
Malkan is co-director of U.S. Right to Know [115], a food industry
research group that voluntarily discloses its funding. She is the author
of Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry [116] and
also co-founded the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.
Follow her on Twitter @stacymalkan [117].
[119]
Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/environment/inside-network-funding-gmo-propaganda-and-pr-cover-toxic-chemical-risks
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/stacy-malkan
[2] http://alternet.org
[3] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/02/corporate-dark-money-power-atlantic-lobbyists-brexit
[4] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/donors-trust-donor-capital-fund-dark-money-koch-bradley-devos
[5] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/books/review/dark-money-by-jane-mayer.html
[6] http://www.merchantsofdoubt.org
[7] https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/speeches/time-to-wake-up-dark-money-and-climate-denial
[8] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309621024_Environmental_and_Economic_Strategies_for_Primary_Prevention_of_Cancer_in_Early_Life
[9] http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/319532-cancer-is-a-result-of-policies-on-energy-buildings-food-and?amp
[10] https://usrtk.org/our-investigations/
[11] http://polluterwatch.com/jon-entine
[12] https://theintercept.com/2016/11/15/how-self-appointed-guardians-of-sound-science-tip-the-scales-toward-industry/
[13] http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304431104579550002888434432
[14] http://www.wsj.com/articles/henry-i-miller-regulators-put-the-brakes-on-biotech-1421192611
[15] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/fashion/28skinside.html
[16] http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-miller-clifbar-recall-20160629-snap-story.html
[17] http://www.newsweek.com/dirty-truth-about-organic-produce-379464
[18] http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/healthy_kids/Organic-foods-Are-they-actually-pesticide-free.html
[19] https://hbr.org/2014/03/when-research-should-come-with-a-warning-label
[20] http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2014/09/17/the-debate-about-gmo-safety-is-over-thanks-to-a-new-trillion-meal-study/#1ce631b4ca93
[21] http://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorbutterworth/2014/04/09/bpa-the-scientists-the-scare-the-100-million-dollar-surge/#6fa6c75763c3
[22] http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/07/29/why-organic-agriculture-is-a-colossal-hoax/#1a57285d38e4
[23] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/05/state-conservative-groups-assault-education-health-tax
[24] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/scaifemain050299.htm
[25] http://drexel.edu/now/archive/2013/december/climate-change/
[26] http://drexel.edu/~/media/Files/now/pdfs/Institutionalizing%20Delay%20-%20Climatic%20Change.ashx?la=en
[27] https://twitter.com/kasparov63/status/808750564284702720?lang=en
[28] https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/jon-entine-the-chemical-industrys-master-messenger/
[29] https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/11/25/bee-deaths-neonics-inside-story-of-colony-collapse-disorder-harvards-chensheng-lus-crusade/
[30] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/08/19/1577/&refURL=&referrer=#1a585b82589c
[31] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-entine/post_10952_b_9111688.html
[32] http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/gas_heat
[33] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/09/24/while-global-bee-colonies-recover-european-politicians-seem-determined-to-kill-them-off/&refURL=&referrer=#2715e4857a0b72d31f1f6b3d
[34] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/04/18/national-resources-defense-council-nrdc-champions-shoddy-journalism-on-endocrine-active-chemicals/&refURL=&referrer=#2245c7d1698c
[35] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/10/03/new-york-times-blunders-into-advocacy-role-on-the-fracking-debate-children-are-the-victims/&refURL=&referrer=
[36] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/09/18/university-of-texas-environmental-defense-fund-shale-gas-study-unmasks-politics-of-anti-fracking-activist-cornell-scientists/&refURL=&referrer=#2715e4857a0b23a3fb0e7880
[37] http://www.ethicalcorp.com/environment/power-generation-will-germany-win-its-post-nuclear-bet
[38] https://www.aei.org/publication/bee-deaths-colony-collapse-disorder-chensheng-lu-flawed-harvard-study-endangers-bees/
[39] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/12/06/in-reversal-bedrock-studies-linking-bisphenol-a-bpa-to-heart-disease-challenged/&refURL=&referrer=#2715e4857a0b42ab2277da18
[40] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/10/31/bisphenol-a-bpa-found-not-harmful-yet-again-so-why-did-so-many-reporters-and-ngos-botch-coverage-yet-again/&refURL=&referrer=
[41] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/08/30/anti-chemical-alarmism-spreads-to-your-school-dora-the-explorer-will-kill-your-kid/&refURL=&referrer=
[42] http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/02/atrazine-syngengta-tyrone-hayes-jon-entine
[43] https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org
[44] https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/01/29/pewaaas-study-scientific-consensus-on-gmo-safety-stronger-than-for-global-warming/
[45] http://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/
[46] http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-014-0034-1
[47] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-02/how-monsanto-mobilized-academics-to-pen-articles-supporting-gmos
[48] https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/10/01/harvard-professor-failed-disclose-monsanto-connection-paper-touting-gmos/lLJipJQmI5WKS6RAgQbnrN/story.html
[49] https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/TamarHaspel1.pdf
[50] http://academicsreview.org/2014/04/why-consumers-pay-more-for-organic-foods-fear-sells-and-marketers-know-it/
[51] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stacy-malkan/monsanto-fingerprints-fou_b_10757524.html
[52] http://usrtk.org/in-the-news/the-inside-story-of-how-a-university-professor-quietly-collaborated-with-monsanto/
[53] https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/why-didnt-an-illinois-professor-have-to-disclose-gmo-funding/eb99bdd2-683d-4108-9528-de1375c3e9fb
[54] https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/mission-financials-governorship/
[55] https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/CMPA-2012.pdf
[56] https://usrtk.org/sas2013-2/
[57] https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/GMUF2012.pdf
[58] https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/GMUF2013.pdf
[59] http://powershift.org/blogs/gmu-students-question-koch-funding
[60] https://web.archive.org/web/20160909002518/https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/mission-financials-governorship/
[61] https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/CMPA2014-.pdf
[62] https://usrtk.org/entine-smc-2/
[63] https://usrtk.org/food-for-thought/trevor-butterworth-spins-science-for-industry/
[64] http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/18/plastic-gender-study-media-opinions-contributors-trevor-butterworth.html
[65] http://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorbutterworth/2014/04/09/bpa-the-scientists-the-scare-the-100-million-dollar-surge/#23693c3163c3
[66] http://www.southcoasttoday.com/article/20081005/news/810050333
[67] http://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorbutterworth/2014/02/06/sweet-and-sour-the-media-decided-fructose-was-bad-for-america-but-science-had-second-thoughts/
[68] http://www.theawl.com/2012/10/the-sugar-wars
[69] http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/sweetener-sucralose-probably-doesnt-cause-leukaemia/
[70] http://www.newsweek.com/authors/trevor-butterworth
[71] https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323823004578593943760620664
[72] http://www.senseaboutscienceusa.org
[73] http://www.senseaboutscienceusa.org/response-recent-intercept-article/
[74] http://archive.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/54195302.html
[75] http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/09/how-lobbyists-are-spinning-weak-science-to-defend-bpa/245657/
[76] http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2009/11/industry-reacts-to-consumer-reports-bpa-report/index.htm
[77] http://archive.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/54195297.html
[78] http://archive-org-2012.com/org/s/2012-09-24_311077-titles_4/STATS-The-BPA-controversy-When-journalists-can-rsquo-t-tell-good-evidence-from-bad/
[79] http://archive.is/20120714115315/stats.org/stories/2009/dorothy_meets_marlboro_aug27_09.html
[80] http://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorbutterworth/2012/04/24/controversial-italian-scientist-says-splenda-causes-cancer/#6188ef4856cc
[81] http://www.foodinsight.org/splenda-sucralose-ramazzini-soffritti-safety-cancer-study
[82] http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/splenda-sucralose-sweeteners-linked-to-leukemia-in-new-study-a6930556.html
[83] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3491310/Could-artificial-sweeteners-Splenda-trigger-cancer-Experts-warn-s-no-safe-dose.html
[84] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/12192163/Low-calorie-sweetener-linked-with-increased-risk-of-leukemia-study.html
[85] http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865647310/Consumer-group-sounds-new-alarm-on-Splenda.html?pg=all
[86] http://sucralose-org.co.uk/2011-international-sweeteners-association-conference-consensus-experts-recommend-low-calorie-sweeteners-such-as-sucralose-to-help-manage-weight/
[87] https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/11/24/cokes-chief-scientist-who-orchestrated-obesity-research-is-leaving/?_r=0
[88] http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/coca-cola-funds-scientists-who-shift-blame-for-obesity-away-from-bad-diets/
[89] https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/GEBN-Butterworth-march-2014.pdf
[90] https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/GEBN-Butterworth-Nov-2014.pdf
[91] https://www.linkedin.com/in/trevor-butterworth-522b5048/
[92] http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2986952/why_is_cornell_university_hosting_a_gmo_propaganda_campaign.html
[93] http://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/qa-sense-about-science-usa-partnership
[94] http://www.senseaboutscienceusa.org/workshops/
[95] https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-you-cant-trust-henry-miller-on-gmos/
[96] http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/07/29/why-organic-agriculture-is-a-colossal-hoax/#74aa860738e4
[97] http://www.wsj.com/articles/henry-i-miller-why-the-buzz-about-a-bee-pocalypse-is-a-honey-trap-1406071612?KEYWORDS=henry+miller
[98] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2014/03/12/fda-research-confirms-bpa-is-a-ok/&refURL=&referrer=
[99] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2011/12/21/can-tiny-amounts-of-poison-actually-be-good-for-you/&refURL=&referrer=
[100] https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-you-cant-trust-henry-miller-on-gmos/#_ftn10
[101] https://www.desmogblog.com/hoover-institution
[102] https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/#id=sjcf0114
[103] http://www.hoover.org/research/cigarette-smokescreen
[104] https://www.desmogblog.com/george-c-marshall-institute
[105] https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-you-cant-trust-the-american-council-on-science-and-health/
[106] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/american-council-science-health-leaked-documents-fundraising
[107] http://www.mamyths.org/about-us/
[108] http://foodbabe.com/2016/10/06/the-unethical-tactics-of-the-chemical-industry-to-silence-the-truth/
[109] https://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/08/12/screw-the-activists-we-need-a-scientific-approach-to-agbiotech-regulation/#77e68e0c8e98
[110] https://usrtk.org/food-for-thought/julie-kelly-cooks-up-propaganda-for-the-agrichemical-industry/
[111] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/12/02/how-organic-agriculture-evolved-from-marketing-tool-to-evil-empire/&refURL=&referrer=#4c80312f1f19
[112] http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444668/whistle-blower-scientist-exposes-shoddy-climate-science-noaa
[113] http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/315715-congress-should-investigate-collusion-with-international-cancer
[114] http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2988700/propaganda_wars_proscience_gmo_chemicals_boosters_funded_by_climate_change_deniers.html
[115] http://usrtk.org
[116] http://www.amazon.com/Not-Just-Pretty-Face-Industry/dp/0865715742
[117] http://www.twitter.com/stacymalkan
[118] mailto:corrections@alternet.org?Subject=Typo on Inside the Network Funding GMO Propaganda and PR to Cover Up Toxic Chemical Risks
[119] http://www.alternet.org/
[120] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
[2] http://alternet.org
[3] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/02/corporate-dark-money-power-atlantic-lobbyists-brexit
[4] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/donors-trust-donor-capital-fund-dark-money-koch-bradley-devos
[5] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/books/review/dark-money-by-jane-mayer.html
[6] http://www.merchantsofdoubt.org
[7] https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/speeches/time-to-wake-up-dark-money-and-climate-denial
[8] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309621024_Environmental_and_Economic_Strategies_for_Primary_Prevention_of_Cancer_in_Early_Life
[9] http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/319532-cancer-is-a-result-of-policies-on-energy-buildings-food-and?amp
[10] https://usrtk.org/our-investigations/
[11] http://polluterwatch.com/jon-entine
[12] https://theintercept.com/2016/11/15/how-self-appointed-guardians-of-sound-science-tip-the-scales-toward-industry/
[13] http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304431104579550002888434432
[14] http://www.wsj.com/articles/henry-i-miller-regulators-put-the-brakes-on-biotech-1421192611
[15] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/fashion/28skinside.html
[16] http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-miller-clifbar-recall-20160629-snap-story.html
[17] http://www.newsweek.com/dirty-truth-about-organic-produce-379464
[18] http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/healthy_kids/Organic-foods-Are-they-actually-pesticide-free.html
[19] https://hbr.org/2014/03/when-research-should-come-with-a-warning-label
[20] http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2014/09/17/the-debate-about-gmo-safety-is-over-thanks-to-a-new-trillion-meal-study/#1ce631b4ca93
[21] http://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorbutterworth/2014/04/09/bpa-the-scientists-the-scare-the-100-million-dollar-surge/#6fa6c75763c3
[22] http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/07/29/why-organic-agriculture-is-a-colossal-hoax/#1a57285d38e4
[23] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/05/state-conservative-groups-assault-education-health-tax
[24] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/scaifemain050299.htm
[25] http://drexel.edu/now/archive/2013/december/climate-change/
[26] http://drexel.edu/~/media/Files/now/pdfs/Institutionalizing%20Delay%20-%20Climatic%20Change.ashx?la=en
[27] https://twitter.com/kasparov63/status/808750564284702720?lang=en
[28] https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/jon-entine-the-chemical-industrys-master-messenger/
[29] https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/11/25/bee-deaths-neonics-inside-story-of-colony-collapse-disorder-harvards-chensheng-lus-crusade/
[30] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/08/19/1577/&refURL=&referrer=#1a585b82589c
[31] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-entine/post_10952_b_9111688.html
[32] http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/gas_heat
[33] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/09/24/while-global-bee-colonies-recover-european-politicians-seem-determined-to-kill-them-off/&refURL=&referrer=#2715e4857a0b72d31f1f6b3d
[34] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/04/18/national-resources-defense-council-nrdc-champions-shoddy-journalism-on-endocrine-active-chemicals/&refURL=&referrer=#2245c7d1698c
[35] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/10/03/new-york-times-blunders-into-advocacy-role-on-the-fracking-debate-children-are-the-victims/&refURL=&referrer=
[36] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/09/18/university-of-texas-environmental-defense-fund-shale-gas-study-unmasks-politics-of-anti-fracking-activist-cornell-scientists/&refURL=&referrer=#2715e4857a0b23a3fb0e7880
[37] http://www.ethicalcorp.com/environment/power-generation-will-germany-win-its-post-nuclear-bet
[38] https://www.aei.org/publication/bee-deaths-colony-collapse-disorder-chensheng-lu-flawed-harvard-study-endangers-bees/
[39] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/12/06/in-reversal-bedrock-studies-linking-bisphenol-a-bpa-to-heart-disease-challenged/&refURL=&referrer=#2715e4857a0b42ab2277da18
[40] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/10/31/bisphenol-a-bpa-found-not-harmful-yet-again-so-why-did-so-many-reporters-and-ngos-botch-coverage-yet-again/&refURL=&referrer=
[41] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/08/30/anti-chemical-alarmism-spreads-to-your-school-dora-the-explorer-will-kill-your-kid/&refURL=&referrer=
[42] http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/02/atrazine-syngengta-tyrone-hayes-jon-entine
[43] https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org
[44] https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/01/29/pewaaas-study-scientific-consensus-on-gmo-safety-stronger-than-for-global-warming/
[45] http://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/
[46] http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-014-0034-1
[47] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-02/how-monsanto-mobilized-academics-to-pen-articles-supporting-gmos
[48] https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/10/01/harvard-professor-failed-disclose-monsanto-connection-paper-touting-gmos/lLJipJQmI5WKS6RAgQbnrN/story.html
[49] https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/TamarHaspel1.pdf
[50] http://academicsreview.org/2014/04/why-consumers-pay-more-for-organic-foods-fear-sells-and-marketers-know-it/
[51] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stacy-malkan/monsanto-fingerprints-fou_b_10757524.html
[52] http://usrtk.org/in-the-news/the-inside-story-of-how-a-university-professor-quietly-collaborated-with-monsanto/
[53] https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/why-didnt-an-illinois-professor-have-to-disclose-gmo-funding/eb99bdd2-683d-4108-9528-de1375c3e9fb
[54] https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/mission-financials-governorship/
[55] https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/CMPA-2012.pdf
[56] https://usrtk.org/sas2013-2/
[57] https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/GMUF2012.pdf
[58] https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/GMUF2013.pdf
[59] http://powershift.org/blogs/gmu-students-question-koch-funding
[60] https://web.archive.org/web/20160909002518/https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/mission-financials-governorship/
[61] https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/CMPA2014-.pdf
[62] https://usrtk.org/entine-smc-2/
[63] https://usrtk.org/food-for-thought/trevor-butterworth-spins-science-for-industry/
[64] http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/18/plastic-gender-study-media-opinions-contributors-trevor-butterworth.html
[65] http://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorbutterworth/2014/04/09/bpa-the-scientists-the-scare-the-100-million-dollar-surge/#23693c3163c3
[66] http://www.southcoasttoday.com/article/20081005/news/810050333
[67] http://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorbutterworth/2014/02/06/sweet-and-sour-the-media-decided-fructose-was-bad-for-america-but-science-had-second-thoughts/
[68] http://www.theawl.com/2012/10/the-sugar-wars
[69] http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/sweetener-sucralose-probably-doesnt-cause-leukaemia/
[70] http://www.newsweek.com/authors/trevor-butterworth
[71] https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323823004578593943760620664
[72] http://www.senseaboutscienceusa.org
[73] http://www.senseaboutscienceusa.org/response-recent-intercept-article/
[74] http://archive.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/54195302.html
[75] http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/09/how-lobbyists-are-spinning-weak-science-to-defend-bpa/245657/
[76] http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2009/11/industry-reacts-to-consumer-reports-bpa-report/index.htm
[77] http://archive.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/54195297.html
[78] http://archive-org-2012.com/org/s/2012-09-24_311077-titles_4/STATS-The-BPA-controversy-When-journalists-can-rsquo-t-tell-good-evidence-from-bad/
[79] http://archive.is/20120714115315/stats.org/stories/2009/dorothy_meets_marlboro_aug27_09.html
[80] http://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorbutterworth/2012/04/24/controversial-italian-scientist-says-splenda-causes-cancer/#6188ef4856cc
[81] http://www.foodinsight.org/splenda-sucralose-ramazzini-soffritti-safety-cancer-study
[82] http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/splenda-sucralose-sweeteners-linked-to-leukemia-in-new-study-a6930556.html
[83] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3491310/Could-artificial-sweeteners-Splenda-trigger-cancer-Experts-warn-s-no-safe-dose.html
[84] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/12192163/Low-calorie-sweetener-linked-with-increased-risk-of-leukemia-study.html
[85] http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865647310/Consumer-group-sounds-new-alarm-on-Splenda.html?pg=all
[86] http://sucralose-org.co.uk/2011-international-sweeteners-association-conference-consensus-experts-recommend-low-calorie-sweeteners-such-as-sucralose-to-help-manage-weight/
[87] https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/11/24/cokes-chief-scientist-who-orchestrated-obesity-research-is-leaving/?_r=0
[88] http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/coca-cola-funds-scientists-who-shift-blame-for-obesity-away-from-bad-diets/
[89] https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/GEBN-Butterworth-march-2014.pdf
[90] https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/GEBN-Butterworth-Nov-2014.pdf
[91] https://www.linkedin.com/in/trevor-butterworth-522b5048/
[92] http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2986952/why_is_cornell_university_hosting_a_gmo_propaganda_campaign.html
[93] http://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/qa-sense-about-science-usa-partnership
[94] http://www.senseaboutscienceusa.org/workshops/
[95] https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-you-cant-trust-henry-miller-on-gmos/
[96] http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/07/29/why-organic-agriculture-is-a-colossal-hoax/#74aa860738e4
[97] http://www.wsj.com/articles/henry-i-miller-why-the-buzz-about-a-bee-pocalypse-is-a-honey-trap-1406071612?KEYWORDS=henry+miller
[98] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2014/03/12/fda-research-confirms-bpa-is-a-ok/&refURL=&referrer=
[99] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2011/12/21/can-tiny-amounts-of-poison-actually-be-good-for-you/&refURL=&referrer=
[100] https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-you-cant-trust-henry-miller-on-gmos/#_ftn10
[101] https://www.desmogblog.com/hoover-institution
[102] https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/#id=sjcf0114
[103] http://www.hoover.org/research/cigarette-smokescreen
[104] https://www.desmogblog.com/george-c-marshall-institute
[105] https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-you-cant-trust-the-american-council-on-science-and-health/
[106] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/american-council-science-health-leaked-documents-fundraising
[107] http://www.mamyths.org/about-us/
[108] http://foodbabe.com/2016/10/06/the-unethical-tactics-of-the-chemical-industry-to-silence-the-truth/
[109] https://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/08/12/screw-the-activists-we-need-a-scientific-approach-to-agbiotech-regulation/#77e68e0c8e98
[110] https://usrtk.org/food-for-thought/julie-kelly-cooks-up-propaganda-for-the-agrichemical-industry/
[111] http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/12/02/how-organic-agriculture-evolved-from-marketing-tool-to-evil-empire/&refURL=&referrer=#4c80312f1f19
[112] http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444668/whistle-blower-scientist-exposes-shoddy-climate-science-noaa
[113] http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/315715-congress-should-investigate-collusion-with-international-cancer
[114] http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2988700/propaganda_wars_proscience_gmo_chemicals_boosters_funded_by_climate_change_deniers.html
[115] http://usrtk.org
[116] http://www.amazon.com/Not-Just-Pretty-Face-Industry/dp/0865715742
[117] http://www.twitter.com/stacymalkan
[118] mailto:corrections@alternet.org?Subject=Typo on Inside the Network Funding GMO Propaganda and PR to Cover Up Toxic Chemical Risks
[119] http://www.alternet.org/
[120] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Donations can be sent
to the Baltimore Nonviolence Center, 325 E. 25th St., Baltimore, MD
21218. Ph: 410-323-1607; Email: mobuszewski [at] verizon.net. Go to http://baltimorenonviolencecenter.blogspot.com/
"The master class
has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles.
The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject
class has had nothing to gain and everything to lose--especially their
lives." Eugene Victor Debs
No comments:
Post a Comment