Parents and tax payers are paying for this...

The GMO Debate – Science and Society - New University Course - 4 Credits

Course Objectives

To enable students to understand the scientific background about GMO crops and food, to objectively assess claims made in the media and on the internet, to present cogent reports on the science, government regulation and social attitudes, and to defend their viewpoints with well-referenced, reasoned arguments both verbally and in writing.

Pro-terrorist Cornell University takes money from globalist Bill Gates to push GMOs destroying America

March 31, 2015 - By J.D. Heyes

“We taxpayers deserve to know the details about when our taxpayer-paid employees front for private corporations and their slick PR firms,” Ruskin said.

“This use of surrogates is par for the course with the biotech industry,” wrote Tim Schwab of Food & Water Watch in September. “Sometimes called the soft lobby, corporations routinely engage neutral-appearing scientists and impartial-sounding front groups to help advance their political and economic agendas.”

And while Lesser said the study contained his personal observations rather than those of Cornell, GMO backers nevertheless began to refer to his findings as “the Cornell study” in their efforts to stave off initiatives by states to force food makers to include labeling of GMO ingredients in their products.

The Alliance for Science site, then, is essentially Cornell’s GMO propaganda instrument.

Fast forward six months to the latest alliance effort to quash the FOIA requests; it’s as if Cornell believes that Americans should not be told whether professors at the public universities they help fund are being influenced at all in their support of GMO foods by the corporate and philanthropic interests developing and promoting them.

Is Cornell the Go-To University for Industry Science?

August 28, 2014

Public Research, Private Gain - Corporate Influence Over University Agricultural Research

Starting in the 1980s, however, federal policies including the Bayh-Dole Act of 1982 began encouraging land-grant schools to partner with the private sector on agricultural research. A key goal was to develop agricultural products such as seeds, which
were sold to farmers under an increasingly aggressive patent regime.1

By 2010, private donations provided nearly a quarter of the funding for agricultural research at land-grant universities. !is funding steers land-grant research toward the goals of industry. It also discourages independent research that might be critical of the industrial model of agriculture and diverts public research capacity away from important issues such as rural economies, environmental quality and the public health implications of agriculture.

Private-sector funding not only corrupts the public research mission of land-grant universities, but also distorts the science that is supposed to help farmers improve their practices and livelihoods. Industry funded academic research routinely produces favorable results for industry sponsors. Because policymakers and regulators frequently voice their need for
good science in decision-making, industry-funded academic research influences the rules that govern their business operations.
Arty turns 11 this summer.