Avoid politics disguised as science

I am concerned when I read a letter such as Charles Benedetti's portrayal of the health dangers of GMOs.

Mr. Benedetti may believe that GMOs are unsafe, and he can make the choice to purchase food that has not been genetically modified. But, his claim that scientific research data supports him is false.

Unless a study is controlled, with multiple trials, and peer-reviewed by experts in the field, it cannot be considered "science." The scenarios presented in Mr. Benedetti's letter are scary but not science: these reports are not based on scientific evidence but on correlations made without controls or hard data. And, science never says "proven." It is always open to new information, new studies, new and better evaluation of those studies.

Just as I would suspect research paid for by Monsanto, so I suspect research done by a man (Jeffrey Smith, author of "Seeds of Deception") whose education is the Maharishi University of Management. He may be a best-seller, but he's not a scientist.

Nor do I value information from organizations such as EWG (Environmental Working Group) whose reports are seldom science-based but are geared toward a political agenda and fundraising, and also often involve scare tactics.

One of EWG's most egregious allegations was the now-infamous, completely fabricated link between autism and vaccines.

Just because a group is a nonprofit or contains scientific-sounding words does not make its agenda valid. It might take a little time, but with computer access to almost unlimited information, it is easy to check the credentials of experts and their claims.

Someone purporting scientific studies should reference a peer-reviewed science journal within the article. Please do yourself and your family a favor by not being taken in by the hype of misinformation.

Mary Flanagan

Arlington Heights