We've written a number of times about how Greenpeace uses selective reporting of the facts in pursuit of its radical agenda. One of the most glaring transgressions that Greenpeace and others us is to promote research findings that have either been debunked or even disavowed by the folks who initially published them.
In case you haven't seen this a Canadian researcher has made a bit of news north of the border with a presentation on fish and mercury. Dr. Gideon Koren says his latest work, looking at more than 100 women's hair samples, has lead him to the conclusion that 20% to 30% of Canadian women of reproductive age have mercury levels high enough to damage the brain of a developing fetus.
The latest installment of Monterey Bay Aquarium's own version of "Eat This, Not That" for seafood made some headlines in conjunction with their 25th anniversary. Far be it from us to be party poopers, but NFI felt the need to hit the wires with an announcement of its own taking issue with MBA's "Super Green List" of seafood that gives high marks for sustainability a
Last summer a study that showed some lean fish have more omega-6s than omega-3s resulted in headlines like “Farmed tilapia may be no better for you than a doughnut.”
You would think a group that calls itself the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) would be an outfit that focuses on public health and even perhaps responsible communications about it... but sadly that's not the case.
Quick name a Tony award winning actor who is not Huge Jackman. I didn't think so.
Those finger-on-the-pulse-of-mainstream-America Broadway watchers over at the New York Times have crafted yet another rehash of the stale Jeremy-Piven-claims-to-have-mercury-poisoning story.
Yesterday the Center for Science in the Public Interest released its distorted list of what it calls the "riskiest" foods. More than a few observers questioned why, for instance, CSPI insisted on claiming tuna was the third most risky food to eat when by its own calculations eight other foods on the list caused more illnesses.
The following fall under the category of, did you know?
Did you know that the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is headed up by a lawyer? Did you know that by trade she's a lobbyist not a scientist?
Did you also know that until she was exposed in a front page story as a lawyer/lobbyist and not a scientist she was being considered by the Obama administration to run the USDA's Food Safety Inspection Service?
Later this morning the scaremongers at the Center for Science in the Public Interest will be holding a news conference detailing what it says are the "top 10 riskiest foods" the FDA needs to pay closer attention to. It's important for reporters to note that by focusing on FDA the report excludes beef, chicken and some egg products, which means that the vast majority of proteins eaten by Americans aren't even considered.
