{"id":335,"date":"2011-02-24T09:05:51","date_gmt":"2011-02-24T14:05:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/2011\/02\/a-call-for-skepticism.html"},"modified":"2011-02-24T09:05:51","modified_gmt":"2011-02-24T14:05:51","slug":"a-call-for-skepticism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/2011\/02\/a-call-for-skepticism.html","title":{"rendered":"A Call for Skepticism"},"content":{"rendered":"Camano Island is NW of Everett, Washington, and this article is from 2002,\nresponding to an article in the local paper there. -jsq\n
\n\n<\/a>\nCommentary\n
\nA Call for Skepticism\n
\nby Steven K. Roberts\n
\nCamano Island\n

\nIf ever we needed a demonstration that the fundamental flaw in many\narguments is a lack of discrimination regarding information sources,\nwe have it in the Nels Konnerup article, “Toxicology 101 Defended,”\nin the March 26 issue of the S\/C News.\n

\nThe author makes a “plea for cogent thought, rather than a visceral\nreaction to the use of pesticides and herbicides,” and cites a number of\nreferences “authored by highly qualified and respected scientists.” So\nfar, so good.\n

\nBut just for fun, I spent a few minutes researching some of these sources\nto see if I could determine the affiliations and biases of their authors.\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n

\n

\nLet’s look at the low or declining cancer rates associated with all\nrisk factors except those directly associated with tobacco. This is\nbacked up by references to papers published by Doctors Cole and Rodu\nand widely cited. Sounds unassailable, right, especially with all those\nblack-and-white tabulated numbers and the letters after the authors’\nnames? But do you know who Dr. Rodu is?\n

\nHe is author of the book, “For Smokers Only: How Smokeless Tobacco Can\nSave Your Life” (with a foreword by Dr. Cole). Information is available\nat\nwww.DrRodu.com<\/a>,\nwhere you can buy the $15 book and find links to the\nMint Snuff homepage.\n

\nOK, so this gentleman generates income by making tobacco look bad (which\nof course it is, and I’m all for anything that helps people quit). But\ndo you smell a hint of potential bias? This is not pure research, this\nis marketing. Are the cancer-rate figures correct? I don’t know, maybe\nthey are. But the added datum about their source makes me skeptical\nenough to suspect that there might be another side to the story, so at\nthis point I wouldn’t cite this paper to support an argument without\nadditional investigation. It took about 2 minutes to find this at an\nAustralian cancer research site:\n

\n“Death rates from Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma have risen about four per cent\na year [since 1950] in line with increasing incidence. The cause of\nthis cancer and the reason for increasing incidence are not known.” We\nfind with a bit more digging that the death rate for many cancers\n(including stomach, Hodgkin’s, and testis) has indeed declined markedly,\nthus establishing an encouraging set of averages… but that lymphoma,\nmyeloma, melanoma, and liver cancer are up (although the rate of increase\nis dropping).\n

\nIs this data correct? Well, maybe, maybe not. But now we have seen,\nwith a trivial amount of effort, that the numbers quoted in the article\nare potentially suspect and very likely optimized to support the sales\nof a book… while conveniently making it look like environmentalists\nare barking up the wrong tree.\n

\nThe other trick I see used here is emphasis on the cancer issue,\nwhich is indeed only a suspected link with glyphosphates, not\nyet proven one way or the other to anyone’s satisfaction. Arguing\nthis point distracts the reader from all the others. There have\nbeen conflicting studies, and it’s easy to find comments from\n“respected scientists” on both sides of the issue. But there’s\na lot more to the picture than non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, including a\nvariety of effects on other species. Please read the excellent summary at\n\nhttp:\/\/www.beyondpesticides.org\/infoservices\/pesticidefactsheets\/toxic\/glyphosate.htm<\/a>\nfor a much more detailed explanation than I have space for here. Is this\nreport itself biased? Quite possibly: after all, it’s on a site called\n“beyondpesticides.org.” Be suspicious of anything you read on either\nside of a thorny issue, and use\nwww.google.com<\/a>\nto investigate further\nif you sense distorted reportage. You will find, however, that many of\nthe citations in this article point to EPA studies and academic research, some of which directly\ncontradict the claims of Dr. Konnerup and the original Toxicology 101\narticle by Dana Pratt (who I don’t doubt is an expert in the pesticides\nfield).\n

\nThe point here is that there is a near-infinite amount of information out\nthere, and when one has an agenda (especially economic or political),\nit’s fairly trivial to find supporting material. Some studies are\nseriously flawed, with inadequate detail in questionnaires to establish\na distinction between specific chemicals and general pesticide use, as\nwas the case with one study published in another of the sources cited\nin the Konnerup article (The Agrichemical and Environmental News).\n

\nSo be very skeptical, especially when someone tries to tell you that\nraining persistent toxins onto your yards and watersheds is perfectly OK\nbecause there’s no proven link to lymphoma. Even the Pesticide Action\nNetwork database (www.pesticideinfo.org<\/a>), which is very conservative\non human health links, shows the following Roundup effects on other\norganisms:\n

\n\n
Organism Group<\/th>Effects Noted<\/th><\/tr>\n
<\/td>
<\/td><\/tr>\n
Aquatic Plant<\/td>\nAccumulation, Development, Growth, Intoxication, Physiology,\nPopulation\n
Crustaceans<\/td>\nMortality, Population\n<\/td><\/tr>\n
\nFishes\n<\/td>\nAccumulation,\nAvoidance, Biochemistry, Enzyme(s), Histology, Intoxication, Mortality\n<\/td><\/tr>\n
\nInsects\n<\/td>\nIntoxication, Population Mollusks Enzyme(s), Growth, Mortality,\nPhysiology\n<\/td><\/tr>\n
\nPhytoplankton\n<\/td>\nBiochemistry, Intoxication, Physiology,\nPopulation\n<\/td><\/tr>\n
\nTerrestrial Plants\n<\/td>\nGrowth\n<\/td><\/tr>\n
\nZooplankton\n<\/td>\nIntoxication, Mortality,\nPopulation\n<\/td><\/tr>\n<\/table>\n

\nThere is another subtle bit of perhaps-unintentional misdirection in\nthe article by Dr. Konnerup. He states that “a report prepared for\nthe Washington Friends of Farms and Forests on integrated vegetation\nmanagement programs contains the following statement,” and then quotes\nthe claim that mechanical control costs 10-20 times more per mile\nthan chemical methods. This sounds awfully high, compared with other\nfigures I have seen (but hey, what do I know?). Again, off to the Net\nfor background…\n

\nIt turns out that the Washington Friends of Farms and Forests, along\nwith the Washington Pulp and Paper Association, lobbied vigorously last\nyear against the use of state funds for research into alternatives to\nthe use of persistent bioaccumulative toxins! This is an advocacy group\nfor farmers and timber producers, despite its cuddly-sounding name. Among\nother things, the organization promotes the use of clopyralid, a potent\ntoxin that is finding its way into compost and killing off residential\nvegetable gardens, on the strength of the argument that if they don’t\nuse that, then they’d have to use a lot more of something else. Sounds\nlike a hint of bias here as well.\n

\nDr. Konnerup is reasonable when he asks for cogent thought on this\nissue, but then uses every trick in the book to support his own side\nof the argument. There is plenty of bias and irrationality on BOTH\nsides, however, and the reader should not be swayed by a long list of\ncitations, official-looking tabular data, and academic or government\naffiliations. For that matter, why believe me? You should take my own\nbiases into account as well (full disclosure below in “About the Author”).\n

\n

\nWhen you get right down to the bottom line, it’s all about money… and\nas voters, it is up to us so see through the hype and misdirection and\ntry to make intelligent decisions about matters that affect our health\nand environment.\n

\nThe end\n

\nAbout the Author\n

\nSteven K. Roberts is the owner of Nomadic Research on Camano Island,\na small R&D firm focused on technomadic adventure and environmental\ndata collection, along with various publishing and consulting spinoffs\nincluding a recent project for the National Science Foundation. The\nenterprise is supported by over 130 industry sponsors and a team of\nvolunteers, and Roberts is the author of 6 books (the most recent of\nwhich, detailing the Microship project, is scheduled for early-2003\npublication by O’Reilly & Associates). He participates occasionally in\nenvironmental and land use issues but doesn’t claim to be an expert,\nnor is he in the medical profession. His exploits are detailed at\nwww.microship.com<\/a>.\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Camano Island is NW of Everett, Washington, and this article is from 2002, responding to an article in the local paper there. -jsq Commentary A Call for Skepticism by Steven K. Roberts Camano Island If ever we needed a demonstration that the fundamental flaw in many arguments is a lack of discrimination regarding information sources, […]","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[8,585,85,174,44,69,60,73],"tags":[2762,15,620,179,2790,1011],"class_list":["post-335","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-agrochemicals","category-amphibians","category-arachnids","category-glyphosate","category-health","category-insects","category-plants","category-science","tag-agrochemicals","tag-monsanto","tag-pesticides","tag-roundup","tag-science","tag-steven-k-roberts"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4Gj0O-5p","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/335","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=335"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/335\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=335"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=335"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.okraparadisefarms.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=335"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}