Print Friendly and PDF

Action Alert: Sign the Petition to Fight Deceptive Organic Study

Anthony Gucciardi
by
September 10th, 2012
Updated 11/01/2012 at 10:23 pm
Pin It

It is now public knowledge that the co-author of the Stanford study claiming that organic food is the ‘same as conventional’ has massive ties to Big Tobacco, is the very creator of a complex algorithm that allows one to ‘lie with statistics’, and worked deeply with an organization that paid off media organizations and journalists to promote pro-tobacco propaganda in the 60s and 70s. It has also come out that Stanford has been the recipient of massive financial support on behalf of Cargill – a massive food insutry giant that has openly supported Monsanto’s biotechnology with millions in funding to defeat GMO labeling.

Along with Mike Adams, the Health Ranger of NaturalNews.com, we have launched a Change.org petition to set the record straight on this study and its deceptive influence on consumers worldwide. I highly encourage you to sign this petition, share it with your friends on Facebook or however you’d like, and help to garner attention for it. The reason that we launched this petition is simple: the disinformation brought upon by this flawed study is causing individuals to choose health-wrecking conventional foods full of GMOs, mercury, and other contaminants over high quality organics.

organicstudypetition 235x156 Action Alert: Sign the Petition to Fight Deceptive Organic StudyWe will be openly calling out the mainstream media to cover this petition, what it presents, and to get the facts straight on this issue. We are also asking Stanford why they currently allow the author of the study to continue authoring studies after creating the infamous “multivariate” statistical algorithm, which is essentially a way to lie with statistics (or to confuse people with junk science). Amazingly, it was this formula that ultimately became known as the “Dr. Ingram Olkin multivariate Logistic Risk Function” and it was a key component in Big Tobacco’s use of garbage science to attack whistleblowers and attempt to claim cigarettes are perfectly safe.

Organic Study Deception

The outside issues of course, are in addition to the fact that the study itself has inherent flaws. Not only does the study openly admit that organic foods have lower pesticide levels, lower incidents of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and so on, but it also fails to even take a look at key factors like:

  • Genetically modified organisms (GMOs)
  • Mercury-containing high-fructose corn syrup
  • Artificial sweeteners
  • The type of pesticide, herbicide, or insecticide used

And countless other important items – which is why it is essential to get the word out on this subject. Not only do we make no money from this petition, by the way, but we do not hold or even have real access to your information. Instead, we set up the system to email Stanford directly with each new petition email sent. It’s a powerful way to initiate change using activism. I encourage you to sign the petition right now to set the record straight on this issue.

organicpetition 235x58 Action Alert: Sign the Petition to Fight Deceptive Organic Study

About Anthony Gucciardi:
1.thumbnail Action Alert: Sign the Petition to Fight Deceptive Organic StudyGoogle Plus ProfileAnthony is the Editor of NaturalSociety whose work has been read by millions worldwide and is routinely featured on major alternative and mainstream news website alike, including the powerful Drudge Report, NaturalNews, Daily Mail, and many others. Anthony has appeared on programs like Russia Today (RT), Savage Nation, The Alex Jones Show, Coast to Coast AM, and many others. Anthony is also dedicated to aiding various non-profit organizations focused around health and rehabilitation as well as the creator of the independent political website Storyleak

From around the web:

  • Hal

    Signed! Thanks for all that you do.

  • Fay B

    The study is here: http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1355685 (it was published in the journal “Annals of Internal Medicine”. However, only the abstract is available for free (which is standard in the medical/science/etc research world). I don’t know if the full text is freely available anywhere.
    However, numerous commentaries about the article (including the NY Times, The Huffington Post, MSNBC and so many more) have summarized the study and its conclusions. Do a quick online search, to find some.
    Hope think helps.

  • John

    It would have been nice to have a link to the actual study so we could fact check for ourselves, or at least a citation. What you're saying is nice and all, but if I can't go to the source and verify, I can't take what you're saying seriously.

  • Kristy Pannke

    I concur.

  • Jonathan Knight

    Great reporting Anthony! Petition sign and forwarded to family and friends.