Home | About | Donate

Center for Science in the Public Interest: Greg Jaffe, Cornell, and GMOs


Center for Science in the Public Interest: Greg Jaffe, Cornell, and GMOs

Russell Mokhiber

The Center for Science in the Public Interest is known in public interest circles as one of the premiere food safety public interest groups in Washington, D.C.

But that reputation has suffered over the years because of the group’s stance on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) – including its opposition to mandatory labeling of GMO foods.

That GMO stance aligns CSPI with pro-GMO organizations and against other consumer groups – including Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union and US Right to Know.


Would you have your kid genetically modified to resist inherited diseases, to be intelligent, athletic, etc.? I think many would. But would they want their food to be genetically modified? I doubt many would.


Since the early sixties academia has been the prey of highly centralized industry models buying and funding research departments for the - oh well, gee - cost of ownership of any patentable discoveries generated. As a result, hand in glove, a stunning degree of research is owned before it ever comes off the bench.
Because industry is ‘financialized’ by the speculative/ leveraged/ exclusively profit/capital model, the centralization and control of information is a travesty that has been undermining democracy for decades. We have been witnessing an exponential intensification of this maelstrom of “modernity” and its feudal fecundity. I will save my notions of the impact of the “externalized costs” shed like a horse’s winter coat and the deep layers lapping at our feet.


Exactly. Each of us is a unique interface with the spectrum of nature. But we’re not supposed to think much less live according to those terms.
Capitalism and markets have too many holes, voids, denials etc. written into their criteria for science rendering basic science subject to distortions of applied science as ‘technology’. I wonder how many people consider the distinctions and implications.


Makes one undecided about going vegan.


Didn’t realize Common Dreams was so anti-science. Unsubscribed and donations canceled.


I’m curious. What is "anti-science about this article?