GMO

In poor parts of the world, people may rely on a single staple crop to meet a substantial proportion of their energy requirements. For example, those who live in southeast Asia rely heavily on rice.

The New York Times has done something that it very rarely does: It wrote an editorial in support of biotechnology.

How can you identify a scientifically ignorant person? Ask him if he's concerned about the health effects of GMOs. If the answer is yes, you've identified somebody who probably couldn't pass an 8th grade science test.

Count vodka maker Smirnoff among the latest companies to jump aboard the anti-science bandwagon.

There's no nice way to put this. Academia is in the midst of self-destructing, not just in the United States but worldwide.

There's a lot of money to be made in kowtowing to the latest dietary fads and unsubstantiated health scares.

The regulatory concerns about genetic modification of animals that I wrote about a while ago have moved towards a Congressional spotlight.

Monsanto, perhaps to rebrand itself, and certainly to remain a leader in agricultural biotech has helped establish and fund Pairwise Plants a start-up using CRISPR-Cas9 technologies to modify seeds.

Reputations are a funny thing. It takes years to build them but mere seconds to destroy them.

We were recently contacted by a concerned group of pro-science scholars who wants to counter the unscientific arguments made by anti-GMO activist Vandana Shiva. We made this handy flyer for them.