The Risk-Monger

The Risk-Monger participated in the EU Transparency Register Consultation. He would like to see clear definitions of how academics and scientists lobby, create a Registry for journalists, have a section where organisations upload their internal ethical codes of conduct and make it clear that NGOs also have conflicts of interest which I call a conflict of influence.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

Certain activists are using Pesticide Action Week to create scary numbers on how pesticides and other chemicals have a greater cost to society than they are worth. Their numbers don’t add up. Is this Stupid’s last stand?

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

In my second part of this glyphosate series, I look at how and why IARC published a report that the scientific community could not accept. Because of IARC’s unprofessional and unethical behaviour, I suggest that it is time to retract their glyphosate monograph.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

NGOs, activist scientists, organic lobbyists and IARC have been campaigning to ban glyphosate in the EU with no scientific evidence but a lot of public fear. In the Age of Stupid, they will succeed, but until then, we need to take a moment to acknowledge how good glyphosate has been.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

Part 6 deals with Stupid’s strategy to remove industry from being a legitimate actor or stakeholder in policy debates. They have been very successful in denormalising tobacco, now fossil fuels and biotech, and soon pharmaceuticals. By denying industry to share its research, views and concerns, they have become pariahs who pay taxes.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

Why do people willingly believe nonsense? How is it possible for people to convince others to act without facts, evidence or rationality? Commonality is a communications process developed to deceive – patented in 1930s Germany but only now reaching its full potential with the rise of social media. It is time to forego academic taboos and discuss the dangers of commonality.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

The Activist Playbook presents a simple tool that anyone can use to win campaigns (even if your issue is stupid). There are 12 simple steps that we can find in most NGO campaigns.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

Eco-fundamentalism is a religious dogma that allows stupid to thrive via a naturalogic that puts faith over evidence.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

Part 2 in the ten-part series on how to deal with stupid looks at how stupid gets its wings. With the growth of social media, bad ideas, virally spread and well repeated in a form of mass-messaging, do not leave most people with enough time to reflect on whether the arguments are valid, or, well, just plain stupid.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

Part 1 of a 10-part series, Stupid needs to be redefined. As social media outpaces governance structures, stupid proliferates, creating bad policy, public fear and a decline in the value of expertise.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

Most people think that organic produce is pesticide-free. This is what the organic food lobby wants you to think, but the reality is that they are often more toxic to humans, bees and the environment. Here is the Risk-Monger’s Dirty Dozen of organic-approved pesticides – all of them being more toxic than glyphosate.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

As NGOs are funding more activist science, we need to consider whether this research is worthy to be included in policy debates, or if bias is built into the methodology. Dave Goulson is an activist scientist receiving funds from NGOs in exchange for evidence to be integrated into anti-pesticide campaigns. I find this outrageous.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

The media ignored IARC’s cancer risks from red meat, but not their report on glyphosate. Why is there no outrage? Perhaps because news today is decided by marketing managers measuring what we want to hear.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

The pesticide industry has to choose between moral integrity or defending its products from attacks by the NGO activists and organic food industry lobby and allowing conventional farmers to bring sufficient food to market. They have chosen integrity so products will be taken off of the market.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk

EFSA needs to account for conflicts of interest of NGO activists involved on their corrupted draft Bee Guidance Document. At least they could give me the courtesy of answering my question.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Posted by David Zaruk