Exploring GM Foods (Part III – The Third Eye of Shiva)

Vandana Shiva vs GM Foods - examining the battle lines and fallouts of this war.


Vandana Shiva is a chain reaction that cannot be stopped. It can only be witnessed from a safe distance. The process of achieving critical mass was a slow and arduous one and to understand it one has to go back to her formative years in activism. It is a journey few have taken – a pity for it expounds unmistakably her rabid opposition to GM Foods and science in general.

Back in the early 1980s Vandana was, along with Ashis Nandy and Shiv Vishwanathan, at the forefront of a bizarre Alternate Science movement. It helped that none among them was a practising scientist. Indeed, they prided themselves in being anti-rationalist, anti-enlightenment, and violent opponents of “scientific temper”  In a book of essays: Science, Hegemony and Violence: A Requiem for Modernity, Vandana wrote, “Contrary to the claim of modern science that people are ultimately the beneficiaries of scientific knowledge, people – particularly the poor – are its worst victims.” Essentially, these intellectuals were out to “question the superiority of the method of science as against the collective wisdom of Indian people.” They tried to explain rational thought and scientific temper through Reductionism, calling it the root cause of colonialism and patriarchy and something that turned women into passive objects. “The nexus between modern science and violence is obvious from the fact that eighty per cent of all scientific research is devoted to the war industry and is frankly aimed at large-scale violence,” noted the young Vandana, refusing even then to provide a single citation. This war on science reached its zenith in Vandana’s most famous book, Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development .

“The parochial roots of science have been concealed behind a claim to universality, and can be seen only through other traditions – of women and non-western peoples. It is these subjugated traditions that are revealing how modern science is gendered, how it is specific to the needs and impulses of the dominant western culture and how ecological destruction and nature’s exploitation are inherent to its logic.”

From every page, from almost every paragraph, the battle-cry is audible – that modern science has made Mother Earth, women, and colonised cultures passive and powerless.

This careful mixing of pop-psychology with environmentalism and feminism is a masterstroke, for it brings together to the vanguard, like placard-carrying tributaries of frothing-from-the-mouth peoples, the two major streams of twentieth-century protest culture. That it is dangerous is not quite obvious at first sight. Feminism remains a laudable counter-weight to patriarchy, in literature, in science, even in politics. It may have run its course in the West but not so in India. Vandana knew this.

“Science and masculinity were associated in domination over nature and femininity, and the ideologies of science and gender reinforced each other. The witch-hunting hysteria which was aimed at annihilating women in Europe as knowers and experts was contemporous with two centuries of scientific revolution. It reached its peak with Galileo’s Dialogue…”

NL Subscription Banner

There we have it, the missing piece in the Strangelove jigsaw. Witch-hunting coincided with scientific revolution. For woman and earth to be emancipated, science had to be made the villain. On such foundations was Navdanya established. Requests for appearances and lectures poured in, so did donations, until Vandana likely realised anti-science rants could damage the long-term prospects of an environment NGO. It is true – the unsure gladly lend an ear to a pseudo-scientific theory, but are swayed by it only when they trust the credentials of its source. Baba Ramdev, for example, can slam GM Foods and animal-testing and rare-earth mining as much as he wants – and people will listen – but then they’ll dissipate chuckling and shaking their heads.

And so, a physics MSc graduate who had earned her PhD in philosophy became a scientist: “Yes, I am an ecologist and feminist. But I am also a scientist…a trained Quantum Physicist” . The philosopher also never bothered to correct gushing interviewers and a hundred others from churning out artful biographical sketches -“…Vandana would follow her hero, Albert Einstein. She would become a physicist…Nuclear physics was Dr Shiva’s chosen specialty…”, or “Dr. Shiva completed her PhD on the ‘Hidden Variables and Non-locality in Quantum Theory’…”

The makeover was complete. Forbes called her one of the seven most powerful feminists, lecture-circuit agencies made a beeline eager to cash in, with universities allegedly paying as much as $ 40,000 and a business class ticket to hear her. She was even nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

The messiah was now impossible to handle. She termed economic growth as anti-life, called inserting a gene into a seed as “polluting it”, opposed development and poverty reduction initiatives, saying that the ‘natural’ state of poverty is preferable for Africans and Indians, talked of sterile seeds even though the use of such seeds is banned worldwide, and when the Intelligence Bureau furnished proof that her NGO – having previously received Rs 12.78 crore from Canada, Italy, Germany, Sweden and even Pakistan – hadn’t filed its Foreign Contributory Statement for the year 2013-14, she accused the IB of “conspiring with global corporate interests to haemorrhage India’s agricultural economy”. Some scientist.

In the directory Pubmed, where millions of peer-reviewed research papers are catalogued, the search string Shiva_V brings up only four entries, none of which describe original scientific research work. Reading through one such entry –The seed and the earth. Biotechnology and the colonisation of regeneration, one finally understands Dr. Shiva’s hatred for science and in particular Biotechnology.

“The invasion and take-over of land as colonies was made possible through the technology of the gunboat; the invasion and takeover of the life of organisms as the new colonies is being made possible through the technology of genetic engineering. Biotechnology, as the handmaiden of capital in the post-industrial era, makes it possible to colonise and control that which is autonomous, free and self-regenerative.”

Insulin, Hepatitis vaccine, Antibiotics, Erythropoietin, Herceptin, Taxol, Stem cells – consigned all to the dustbin of imperialism.

It gets worse.

“Scientific missions colluded with religious missions to deny rights to nature. The rise of mechanical philosophy with the emergence of the scientific revolution was based on the destruction of concepts of a self-regenerative, self-organising nature which sustained all life. Just as technology changes seed from a living, renewable resource into mere raw material, it devalues women in a similar way.”

This is no ordinary grouse but a requiem for Galileo and, as we shall now see, a paean for Gaia.

“We have to make a choice,” pleads Dr Shiva, “Will we obey the market laws of corporate greed or Gaia’s laws for maintenance of the earth’s ecosystems?” What next – Cultural learnings of Intelligent Design for make benefit glorious nation of farmers? For the uninitiated, Gaia hypothesis states that “Life moderates the planetary environment to make it more favourable for life.” In other words, Mother Earth is a throbbing, breathing, living entity complicit in life’s propagation itself. Darwin be damned, it is the third rock from the sun that regulates survival of the fittest. Here, then, was yet another hypothesis waiting its turn to shake hands with feminism and environmentalism. It is unfortunate that Dr. Shiva, a Gaia associate and someone who features prominently in Gaia Foundation and Gaia University activities, hasn’t found time to acquaint herself with Prof Tyrrell’s authoritative discourse on Gaia. His book, On Gaia: A Critical Investigation of the Relationship between Life and Earth, lays bare what many scientists have long suspected, that Gaia confuses cause and effect. As one study puts it, “Climate stability might be a precondition for a complex biosphere rather than climate stability being the consequence of a complex biosphere”. Richard Dawkins, in his excellent book The Extended Phenotype calls Gaia a fatally flawed attempt to apportion evolution onto a web of connections. “It is an extreme form of the BBC Theorem.” The planet does not yield an offspring; the planet is not a product of Darwin’s evolution; its inhabitants are.

Recently, a supporting hypothesis called CLAW – touted as a validation of sorts for Gaia – was debunked, leaving Gaia-ites gasping for air. But the Pillars of Hercules are constantly being shifted to make Gaia acceptable to the wider scientific community – Gaia Hypothesis, Gaia Theory, and there is even something called a Weak Gaia. Gaia is evolving; the irony isn’t lost on some.

It could very well be that Dr. Shiva’s faith in Gaia has allowed her to term India’s Green Revolution an unmitigated disaster. “It has often been argued that the Green Revolution provided the only way in which India could have increased food availability. Yet, until the 1960s, India was successfully pursuing an agricultural development policy based on strengthening the ecological base of agriculture and the self-reliance of peasants. The term high-yielding varieties, HYV, is a misnomer”. While Dr. Shiva is right to an extent, in that the continuance of practices adopted during the Green Revolution have since caused havoc, it is grossly unfair on her part to label the revolution itself one big failure. Today, almost 100% of Indian wheat lines possess remnants of HYV genes. Between 1970 and 1995, after much of Asia had adopted HYVs, the incomes doubled, calorific intake jumped by 30 per cent, and poverty reduced by a quarter despite steep population growth. It was because of the Green Revolution that many countries including India escaped finally from the clutches of devastating famines. This wasn’t always so. Post-independence, hunger and disease were wide-spread leaving us perennially at the mercy of American wheat imports – the so-called PL-480 programme. Many countries doubted our capacity to feed our people; “basket-case”, they called us. The HYVs Lerma Rojo-64A, Sonora 63, Sonora 64, and Mayo 64, procured in 1963 from Dr Borlaug changed all that. So when Dr. Shiva claims, “Hunger and malnutrition are hardwired in the design of the industrial, chemical model of agriculture”, it is simply not true. We as a nation were saved at the gates of hell by the Green Revolution; we owe a debt of gratitude to those who made it possible. Its dreadful consequences three decades later, evident in Punjab and elsewhere, have their reasons – “It became Greed Revolution not Green Revolution” – but the phenomenal contribution of HYVs to independent India’s history cannot be denied.

Dr. Shiva also doesn’t like Golden Rice (or Vitamin A rice), a genetically-engineered variety that can provide much-needed Vitamin A to malnourished children in Africa and Asia. “Vitamin A rice is a hoax”, she says. “Vitamin A rice will not remove vitamin A deficiency. It will seriously aggravate it. This is a recipe for creating hunger and malnutrition. It appears as if the world’s top scientists suffer a more severe form of blindness than children in poor countries.” Citing a peer-reviewed study, Dr. Shiva then alleges, “The promoters of Golden rice admit that it produces only 35 micrograms per 100 mg of rice. Biodiversity and ecological agriculture offers us alternatives that are 3500% richer in vitamin A than Golden Rice. Golden Rice will actually decrease Vitamin A availability compared to the alternatives. Table 6.12 Gives sources rich in vitamin A used commonly in Indian foods”.

Table 6.12 lists methi-ka-saag, bandh gobi, and kaddu as containing 450, 217, and 120 micrograms of vitamin A per 100 gram portion respectively. Debate over.

Not quite. The Golden Rice portion quoted by Dr. Shiva was in milligrams not grams. Equated to the same SI units, a 100 gram portion of Golden Rice would contain 35,000 micrograms of vitamin A, way beyond saag or kaddu and comparable to the amount present in cod-liver oil.

Scientific debates, however, are not occasions to gloat over falsifications, deliberate or otherwise. The scientists were talking of 35 micrograms of beta-carotene, not vitamin A. For the correct picture one needs to read the citation carefully. It turns out that a 100 gram portion of Golden Rice would provide 500-800 micrograms of retinol (human form of vitamin A) representing 80-100 per cent of Estimated Average Requirements for adults, and that as little as a 50 gram portion would take care of  90% vitamin EAR (275 micrograms retinol per day) for children. Indeed, not only does the Golden Rice portion meet a child’s daily requirement, its beta-carotene is as good as the one present in oil at providing vitamin A.

But it was too late. Dr. Shiva’s essay went viral and was duplicated on innumerable anti-GMO platforms like Seedfreedom and GMwatch. Needless to say, such deceits act as a tonic for anti-GMO protestors, some of whom take the next logical step of burning and vandalising Golden Rice trial fields. Scientists have estimated that opposition to Golden Rice has resulted in as many as 1.4 million life years lost over the past decade in India.

Perhaps the most scathing indictment of Dr. Shiva’s claims comes from an article in the scientific journal Nature that takes a dispassionate look at GM Foods, and in doing so exposes the falsehood that Bt cotton has led to genocide. Has it? The short answer is, no. Dr Shiva’s assertion runs counter to the study carried out by researchers at the International Food Policy Research Institute. Their report, Bt Cotton and Farmer Suicides in India, shows irrefutably that the rate of farmer suicides has remained constant over the past decade, even as the area under Bt cotton cultivation has shown a dramatic increase, not to mention an equally dramatic jump in cotton production.  Yet another scientific study, Economic impacts and impact dynamics of Bt cotton in India, published in the prestigious journal PNASc, shows that India’s switch to Bt cotton has led to a “24% increase in cotton yield per acre through reduced pest damage and a 50% gain in cotton profit.”.

Unfortunately, Dr. Shiva’s rebuttal to the damning Nature article is as dense as it is incoherent. “Yes, I am an ecologist and feminist”, she begins, “But I am also a scientist – a fact (Nature) intentionally avoids mentioning. As a Quantum Physicist, I have been trained to look at the interconnectedness and non-separability of processes, which in a mechanistic and reductionist paradigm, are seen as separate and unrelated…Reality cannot be cooked up in papers, no matter how prestigious the journals in which these concoctions are published. Reality is what happens in reality…”

Not only does Dr. Shiva stick to her earlier claim – “It is, indeed, a genocide,” she also junks the peer-reviewed PNASc study, stating: “Every statement of (that study) is false as shown from both our field studies and studies of India’s parliament and leading scientific institutions.” Dr. Shiva does not provide any citations of her “field studies” or those conducted by “India’s parliament”. Why should she? The beauty of pseudo-science is that it beats science hands-down. It is accessible, comprehensible, reachable, even desirable. Granted, it is not logical, responsible, practical, or dependable but then these are lyrics not virtues.

The tragedy is that it need not have turned out like this. Dr. Shiva’s NGO Navdanya has done creditable and pioneering work in the field of seed know-how and Organic Farming. Her scientific ideas concerning these subjects make sense, they really do. Organic Farming (dealt in detail in Part V) is not voodoo, it works and it is good for the environment. Many Indian states such as Sikkim are heavily involved in it.

Even Dr. Shiva’s criticism of the terrible consequences of India’s Green Revolution is valid. None other than the scientist who made it happen acknowledges this, adding that Organic Farming is a worthy enterprise and must form an essential part of what he calls the next step – an Evergreen Revolution. The problem comes when Dr. Shiva claims Organic Farming and GM Foods cannot co-exist, that her solutions for sustainability are the only solutions. This is clearly not the case. Had the world depended entirely on Organic Farming for its needs it would have required an additional 3 billion hectares of land, especially as Organic Farming provides up to 34 per cent lower yields than conventional farming.

Like a proselytiser loathed to extol the virtues of other religions, Dr Shiva refuses to budge from her anti-GMO, anti-science pedestal, even going the extra mile to help foreign NGOs prevent new technologies from reaching the domestic food sector. She likens farmers being given freedom to choose GM Foods to rapists being given the freedom to rape. So it goes.

Vandana Shiva’s mind is made up. A science-hater-turned-philosopher-turned-activist-turned-quantum physicist is busy sowing seeds of doubt among the gullible. Fools who challenge her will only end up supplementing those seeds with the nourishment they need, for they have now taken root and shall one day, just like their progenitor, bloom into magnificent trees laden with lies and deceit, ripe and pluckable. As the Navajo saying goes, you can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.



Author’s note: Some of the statements and quotes have been abridged for want of space. Part IV will examine the science behind Bt cotton, Golden Rice, and other GM Foods.


NL Subscription Banner

Disclaimer : The information, ideas or opinions appearing in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the views of Newslaundry.com. Newslaundry.com does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same. If the article carries photographs or images, we do not vouch for their authenticity.

All our articles are run through a software to avoid the possibility of unattributed work finding its way into Newslaundry.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (51 votes, average: 4.20 out of 5)

More from Anand Ranganathan

Contribute Your Views
  • Aranya Chatterji

    What an awesome piece!! Have never seen someone being so beautifully yet so ruthlessly exposed. Sau lohar ki ek sunar ki, lol.
    And “The messiah was impossible to handle” ….*bows*

    • Souvick Choudhury

      He hasn’t “exposed” anything, if anything , he’s grudgingly acknowledged her work and the things she has to say.
      You seem like a person who gets swayed by screaming headlines, is that incidentally ,how you decide to cast your vote ,just asking.

      • irregularexpression

        LOL! You seem have severe comprehension problems. Anand has exposed her thoroughly and quite convincingly for the fraud and and anti-science nut that she is! But fanboys are too blinded by personalities and ideologies (and possibly money) to see what is clear as daylight. Are you a cult follower? Just asking!

        • anupam

          U r right,people live vandana shiva obviously can’t have fans among rational thinkers because her agenda is to fool the society and she is very lucky many educated illiterates consider her to be some kind of champion but the fact is people like her are responsible for keeping society backward(already there are corrupt politicians nd to make things worse here we have pseudo-scientists nd their blind followers!!)

        • nikhilsheth

          forget Vandana Shiva. She’s just one in millions of people who through lived experience have seen the ill effects of industrial agriculture.
          I’d like to know what the people who hate Ms.Shiva so rabidly have to say about the actual matter : on whether the current batch of GM foods that are being pushed by mega corporations are actually better for human beings or not.

          • Eric Bjerregaard

            I do not hate her. In fact I respect her ability to deceive and manipulate her victims. However this is the same sort of respect I give to a thief with a gun or a terrorist with a bomb. That said. The g.e. foods are not better. They are roughly the same from a nutrition view. It is from an efficiency to the farmer view that they are better. Those efficiencies will hopefully assist in slowing the rise in food prices.

      • LogicalLiberalAtheist

        Point out five “grudging acknowledgments” in the article.

        • Souvick Choudhury

          4th and 3rd para para from the end.

          • LogicalLiberalAtheist

            Selective reading, much? Did you bother to read the sentences after those?

  • Souvick Choudhury

    Perhaps you would do well to re-read the quote that has been attributed to Dr.Shiva,the one you have attempted to pass as incoherent-
    “But I am also a scientist – a fact (Nature) intentionally avoids mentioning. As a Quantum Physicist, I have been trained to look at the interconnectedness and non-separability of processes, which in a mechanistic and reductionist paradigm, are seen as separate and unrelated…Reality cannot be cooked up in papers, no matter how prestigious the journals in which these concoctions are published. Reality is what happens in reality…”
    It actually does make a lot of sense and quite nicely sums up the principle behind opposition to gmo’s.
    Your primary criticism , i.e. aside from labeling her “psedo-scientific,anti-science(what a head spinner) etc ” seems to be be, basically her stubborn refusal to acknowledge that gmo’s and organic farming(whose merits you have barely alluded to,but would give an entirely different character to the debate if the article covered it) can potentially co-exist and that the consumer/farmer etc is missing out on the boost that gmo’s would provide to agriculture.
    Now,I think we can both agree that this is a point where facts and counter facts have to be presented, but more importantly, even then the potential long term negatives of gmos’s cannot be written off and buried under scientific jargon (ex-Monsanto’s GM wheat with roundup resistant gene whose field trials had ended in 2005 cropped up in a farm and was impossible to get rid of).
    In any case , here’s the parliamentary report that you accused her of not producing while making claims on Bt.Cotton(
    Genetics is not exactly about add/rmove gene “x” and get so and so result.While we may know with temporary certainty that such and such were the functions of a particular gene ,we can never claim to know that that was all there was in entirety.Nature is a complex,flexible, adaptive system,and while we can break it down into different systems and subsystems ,we dont know if our analysis is something that merits a 100% trust, not to mention the complex interactivity and interlocking character of all its components.There are permutations and combinations of possibilities that are attempted , discarded or accepted for furthur propagation in nature, all risks and benifits are handled,but …..please explain to me how any composition of a gene from a crab introduced in the genetic makeup of a tomato ( for example) can come about on its own naturally, and also explain how you can state with 100% certainty that this is not going to introduce an uncomputable and potentially catastrophic risk in the ecosystem ?
    To know more on the concept of potential risk as applied to gmo’s, an important and crucial facet to this discourse ,i would like to direct you to N.N Taleb’s paper on this subject(just google search would show it).

    • irregularexpression

      You should start a protest against butterflies, since a flapping of their wings is said to cause hurricanes in distant lands that kills thousands of people. Taleb may have written a scholarly paper on it!

      • Souvick Choudhury

        Have you read my comment ? or are you only interested in making smart ass remarks…..
        This is a serious issue, and its downsides will be borne by generations to come, to be cavalier about it in the name of “science” or “anti-science”, is criminal apathy.
        You’ve allowed your humanity to be subverted with hyped up pretentious ascientific nonsense, so get some goddam help and take this Anand chap with you.

        • irregularexpression

          “This is a serious issue, and its downsides will be borne by generations to come”.

          Prove it!

          Oh, but don’t let facts get in the way of your scare-mongering. After all, you are armed with speculation (just like climate change deniers, young earth creationists, stem-cell opposers, anti-vaccine loonies and assorted clowns).

          Last time you mentioned your prophet Taleb, you got your ass handed to you by Subodh.. and now you are back peddling the same BS (I mean Black Swan, which coincidentally has the same abbreviation, albeit with other, eminently relevant connotations).

          • Souvick Choudhury

            Well i cant fucking do it until after the fact CANN I !!???
            I have given enough info in my comments for you to zap out of your rabid “science” zealotery, care to read it ?
            “I got my ass handed”……Loll, more like i got exhausted trying to reason with a moron simply throwing the conventional gibberish and established views in my face, when he refused to recognise the simple fact that those views themselves stand in doubt given the way things had panned out as a result of following that kind of thinking.
            Here’s the thing you dont seem to be getting, and how can you when you get a kick out of internet shooting matches,that this isn’t about “my” arguments outweighing “your” arguments or vice versa, but “me” speaks from the knowledge he’s cared to obtain ,being the guy who tries to figure out how shit works in this world.
            In any case ,for a joint exploration of the subject, we need to start from a place of commonality, and that for me is making sure that we dont potentially ruin ourselves by chasing misguided policies,especially when it is so very very much possible that we are not neuroligically wired to see past our own biases and fallacies ….a position you take delight in ridiculing.

            ANNNNDDD PLEEAASE….. dont repeat that beaten trick of putting something i say in quotes and then throwing out a rant based off that, it is really the greatest sign that you’re not interested in considering my position in its entirety.

          • Dinesh Batra

            Ohoh, looks like this paid VS troll is getting angry!!!! LOL, Irregular is correct – you are basically butt-hurt ever since that Suboth fella took you for a nice trip to the zoo, hahahaha! what an idiot you are man, go get a life. I see youve completely spammed this section with your 20 comments. think what your near and dear ones will think of your actions dude…they must be very worried of this psycho behavior! now get off or I just might have to call subodh by commenting below one of his comments, hahahahahaha!!! what a loonie!

          • LogicalLiberalAtheist

            Upper case – check
            Long-pressing letter keys – check
            Age check, much?

          • Subodh

            Hahaha..you needed timeout several times so that you could go back and find answers to my questions from the books that had brainwashed you (“brushing up” your research, as you called it) and when you couldn’t find any answers you started writing gibberish conspiracy theories about how IMF and its currency SDR would result in death of democracy and rule of one-world order global elite bureaucracy.

          • Souvick Choudhury

            actually i did the best could in 45 minutes before the apparent futility of it all overwhelmed me.But anyway , i admit tht i shld have re-read it a couple of times before posting,as i mistyped some words and phrases whr i shouldnt have etc.
            There are a lot of guys spouting stuff about the masons, illuminati, rothschild ,CFR,Trilateral commision, Bilderberg group…..there’s a lot of substance,mixed in with copious doses of fear mongering. But i still stink it was worthwhile of me to immerse myself in that whole area ,as i found out just quite a bit of stuff, and really important stuff , that i dont think anybody will ever read in a standard history textbook, thus the way they make sense of the world and whats happening in it will always be distorted, to say the least. Not saying that everyone needs to dive into this stuff, just that if som1 takes an interest in this stuff , and that interest is strong enough to make him want to get to the bottom of things by wiehing the conventional narrative as well other others, then credible authors on their respective subjects have to eventually read.
            Jim Rickards is one such guy.
            John Perkins.
            Naom Chomsky.
            N.N Taleb.
            And several such names are there, that can be trusted to not invoke aliens,anti semitism or some other crap.
            Just saying, its never a bad idea to expand one’s horizons.

          • Subodh

            I’ve read Perkins “Confession of an Economic Hit Man” and I believe most of it. Noam Chomsky too is brilliant. So is Joseph Stiglitz. But they only get one side of the picture and ignore the positive side. Reality is a lot more complex and to believe that IMF or WB is filled with evil men hatching a conspiracy to enslave third world is looking at reality with extreme cynicism.

            The conventional narrative is far closer to the truth than the conspiracy ridden narrative. Most of times, men in power take wrong decisions because they don’t know any better or have been brainwashed to believe their way is the best way.

            The IMF & WB are losing relevance in the 21st century. Most Asian or Latin American countries have stopped borrowing from these institutions (except for small loans which they can easily repay). So, if there was a conspiracy to enslave poor countries, it surely hasn’t unraveled as planned.

          • Eric Bjerregaard

            Perhaps I should have saved my comment about the potty mouth till after I got to this comment.

          • Dinesh Batra

            ROFL, Irregular sir, please dont hurt this suvick idiot much….he is still recovering from the subodh butt-hurt of last!!! just look at him spamm this comments section with his crazy nutjob comments. Do you think he will change his opinion?? and btw thoroughly enjoy your comments esp when you do jhaadu-pocha on these commie loonies! but they keep coming keep coming, lol!

          • Souvick Choudhury

            “Commie loonie”

            ……Bhaj-tard cover blown!!!!

          • irregularexpression

            I don’t think he will change his opinion, for he is blinded by ideology and will not hesitate in clutching at straws to fuel his bias. My responses (and those of others who respond to him, I think) are not meant for him, but for challenging the nonsense his lobby peddles, to prevent them from infecting neutral readers — just doing my microscopic bit to help Anand in his noble cause!

          • Souvick Choudhury

            are these people facts enough for you—-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvJmcoTjH6s&app=desktop

        • Subodh

          “and its downsides will be borne by generations to come”

          Haven’t we been hearing this argument for centuries? Every scientific invention was greeted with skepticism and fear. Has any fear come true? Even the worst product of science – the nuclear bomb – has never been used after H&N. And for all the destructive weapons produced as a result of technology, the percentage of people dying in wars keeps reducing.


          • Souvick Choudhury

            That specific point is a matter to be approched from the point of view of risk management ,complexity theory and such feilds. So heed the man who is trained in that field and sees its flaws that are really human cognitive biases dressed up as intellectual fraud.
            He goes specifically into why gmo’s are not comparable with nuclear (something to do with damages being localised vs propagated through the system) and other several points.
            I’ve read both his books, along with his paper, and as you just said a few minutes ago that its not all one big conspiracy,but just poor decision making , i do believe that to be the case to a large extent ( even if hypothetically the decision making was a segment of some overarching agenda)
            Posting the link to the doc-https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIbGFzOXF5UUN3N2c/edit?pli=1c

          • Subodh

            Okay, so you can’t compare it with nuclear, but what about Green Revolution itself? Surely, Taleb’s Risk Management theory would have equally applied to GR. Hasn’t the world survived green revolution without self-destructing?

      • Souvick Choudhury

        Please feel free to eat and feed gmo’s to your kids for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
        Just dont make the govt force farmers grow it anywhere near where my food is supposed to come from ( u can try farmville, it would safe for you as well).

        • Eric Bjerregaard

          “force farmers” Please Educate me about this issue. I do not remember seeing articles or pictures of gov’t troops or employees “forcing” farmers to buy or grow G.E. crops. Yet almost miraculously this claim shows up when people like Robert whip you with facts and logic. Will you next accuse your critics of being “shills” and getting paid by “Monsatan ” to post in these discussions? You have already resorted to obscene language. So please consider citing natural news or g.m.watch as sources.

    • gbm

      “and also explain how you can state with 100% certainty that this is not going to introduce an uncomputable and potentially catastrophic risk in the ecosystem” .. If it can’t be said with 100% certainty in favor of GM foods, we cannot say with the same certainty against it either, right ?

      Given the fact that population is increasing and agricultural land size is going down, as of now what alternative is there except GM foods which can tackle the need of the future ? GM foods may have its own negative impacts, but unless they are found, its probably wrong to discard it just based on speculations.

      Anyday, I would like to trust and listen to an expert on the subject, like Anand (a scientist in molecular biology) rather than a horn-honker from a different field.

      • Souvick Choudhury

        Boss, this population boogeyman was going around even in the 70’s and 80’s.There were books written by various knowledgeable people and analysis /policy frameworks suggested by reputed think tanks.But …what happened really, we’re still here, and we’re still projecting a future date when the population will outgrow traditional agriculture’s capacity to feed all of it.
        There are several dimensions to the debate on whether gmos are necessary , and if population growth is the matter of concern, then i can honestly tell you that there are more dynamics involved there than the simple linear projection that our numbers will stedily keep climbing. In fact, off the top of my head, i seem to recall some projections that humanity will hit a platue after 10billion. Now you may ask if eventually we’ll be able to grow enough for that number, lets see some research involving actual magnitude of cultivable land available, the wastages in storage, transport and how much we may realistically save in that and other relevant factors.
        The horn -honker in this case is a very intelligent , knowledgeable and articulate individual , so ask yourself if you would have taken more seriously, or even paid any heed at all, to some farmer or village guy who was going all out against gmo’s ?

        • gbm

          “very intelligent , knowledgeable and articulate individual ” — Dr. Shiva ? Whats the credibility of such an individual when at the same time she justifies poverty ? And of course there are more dimensions involved here, than just a linear projection. But in any case, that fails to justify the out-right denial to GM foods, when no ill-effects is yet known. To me, the arguments against GM foods seem to be like 2012 being end of the universe (mayan calender hoax). I am sure such arguments would have arised when they introduced DDT for example.

          • Souvick Choudhury

            On the point of poverty, i think what people mistake to be her justification of poverty, is her way of making a very reasonable assertion, that is , that in a country like india where 70% of the population lives in rural areas ,many of them dependent on agriculture for sustainance ,one simply cannot start dropping shopping complexes and multiplexes, and giving a polished finish in the name of “development” .The truth is , if the govt supported these people in the right ways (not the gmo way, but with improving storage/distribution, better pricing,better loans etc) then these areas and the vast number of people in them ,would be quite capable of handling their own affairs,farmer suicides, rural to urban migration and all such ills would be handled.

      • If one wants to listen to experts why not try the Technical Expert Committee set up by the Supreme Court of India, The majority of them including a toxicologist, Biodiversity expert, molecular biologist, nutrition science expert submitted their final report in July last year observing the potential and actual impacts from GM crops, the inadequacy of our regulatory system to properly aess it and finally giving a set of reccomendations advising for a precautionary approach towards them. Refer http://www.ensser.org/fileadmin/files/TEC-SC-Main-Report-WP%28C%29260_2005.pdf

        So if the trust is only on experts then one should listen to those experts who are in the field of biosafety than anything else and the TEC members were from that field.

        And they are not alone in their views 256 Indian scientists wrote to the PM last year endorsing the TEC’s views and asking for its acceptance. http://indiagminfo.org/?p=649 And for those seeking scientific evidence a 2nd edition of the compilation of peer reviwed papers on adverse impacts of GMcrops/food has close to 450 such papers. http://indiagminfo.org/?p=657

        This edition also has commentaries from Dr M.S Swaminathan, Dr Pushpa Bhargava and Dr Madhav Gadgil who are considered as doyens of agriculture science, modern biology as well as ecology.

        There is nothing new in this because if one looks at the history of rDNA technology it has been scientists starting from 1973 when Stanely Cohen developed his first GMO an Ecoli with a viral onco gene , it has been scientists who have been in the vanguard of questioning the safety of releasing such GMOs in to the open. That lead to the Asilomar conference in 1975 and the debate contiues with more evidence popping up every now and then about the potential and real adverse impacts of using this technology for products that are for environmental release. So science is also about understanding about the consequences of a technology as much as it is about understanding the priciples behind development of technologies.

  • Souvick Choudhury

    This aricle is completely one-sided, takes liberties with facts ,does outright misrepresentation on a number of points.So to anyone reading this with the intention of possibly making up their mind about whether to embrace gmo’s or to go against them, please do further reading .

    • RobertWager

      Further reading, excellent idea. May I suggest the European Academies Science Advisory Council 2013 report-Planting the Future. In it you can read the following quotes:

      “There is compelling evidence that GM crops can contribute to sustainable development goals with benefits to farmers, consumers, the environment and the economy.”

      “There is abundant and accumulating evidence from extensive worldwide experience for benefit, and lack of evidence for environmental or human health risk associated with GM crop technology. ”

      “It is vital that sustainable agricultural production and food security harnesses the potential of biotechnology in all its facets.”

      It is free on-line, well worth a read for those who want to know the real science of GMO’s.

  • SkyWalker

    Anand, I like this series of articles on a controversial topic for two reasons:

    – Your objective approach in taking up the topics.

    – Simplistic style of narration.

    Waiting for the next two parts before doing critical analysis. Meanwhile I suggest you to get copyright for the quote “The beauty of pseudo-science is that it beats science hands-down. It is accessible, comprehensible, reachable, even desirable. Granted, it is not logical, responsible, practical, or dependable but then these are lyrics not virtues.” 😉

    • irregularexpression

      Amazing quote — I might steal it! 😉 Also reminded me of the fourth law of thermodynamics: https://twitter.com/briandavidearp/status/481304548305555456

      • SkyWalker

        Lol…Actually its scientifically tenable too considering the loss of energy in overcoming ‘friction’ resulting in ‘heat’ 😛

        • irregularexpression

          Explains why Vandana Shiva is full of hot air! 😀

      • Hackety Man

        I like this quote. Definitely relatable. It takes so much effort to try and get people to see that the development of GMO seeds isn’t about science, or feeding hungry people, but that it’s solely about money, money, money.

  • anupam

    Very good article,Dr.shiva is a CULT leader not a scientist,just like Karl Marx or deepak chopra(allegedly an expert at quantum physics).Like all sophisticated charlatans she bombards audience with her lies wrapped in fancy language.She is not a philospher either because philosophy requires deep thinking.I have listened to her many times and she never gives any logical argument,which is expected from a quantum scientist too(even if quantum physics is counter-intuitive).Anand sir could have demolished her pseudo-science without going into much depth just like Richard Dawkins deflated deepak chopra’s so-called Quantum-consciousness bullshit in 5 minutes.

    • irregularexpression

      Vandana Shiva and Deepak Chopra — what an apt comparison! Both snake oil sales(wo)men!

    • Sterling Ericsson

      What’s with these hacks and quantum mechanics anyways? Is it so they can push quantum woo claims or what? I mean, Shiva has already stated that she doesn’t believe in quantum mechanics, so it makes one wonder what the heck the point of her supposed degree in it was for.

      • anupam

        Not ony quantum sci,Shiva doesn’t believe in science as such.She is of the view that people should be left poor because creating new jobs requires infrastructure,resources need to be organised,this requires expertise.Obviously this gradually threatens the old social structure,thats the reason some backward looking people start demonising development,eg medhapatkar has problem with nuclear power,thermal plants,GM,stem cells,hydropower,mines,interlinkingriver project.so on.If they tell their readers that they are anti progress,nobody will listen them,thats why they create clever stories,filled with half-truths,just to implant confusion in the minds of people,once the educated are fooled their job is done.My simple question is this have they done any thing to eleviate people from poverty?NO ,after seeing people like shiva,prashant bhushan i have actually starting respecting Ambanis!! atleast they are not hypocrites,they don’t pretend that they are serving humanity.

  • Yanchi Vadera

    Bullshit a load of crap

    • irregularexpression

      You got that right about Vandana Shiva — though you use harsh words! 😛

    • RobertWager

      Yes she did in fact win the BS Award at the 2002 Johannesburg UN Conference on Biodiversity.

  • irregularexpression

    What an amazing takedown Anand! As somebody from a computer science background, the science behind it all is extremely interesting for me. I have never been a big fan of biology (physics/math was more my thing), but this has gotten me quite interested in genetic engineering. My line of work — high performance computing and data analytics is closely associated with bioinformatics. However, the twin task of exposing the anti-science lobby is almost as important as researching in labs to facilitate the advancement of science. I hope this inspires other writers to speak out against these powerful, overhyped and well funded anti-science nuts. We need more scientists with such communication skills in order to make science “accessible, comprehensible, reachable and desirable” to the masses.

    NewsLaundry — why you no have consistency in classifying content? The first two parts of this series is listed under criticles, and this one is listed under articles! :-/

    • bombayite

      “High Performance computing and data analytics”.. how is this relevant here? Oh right, that in your mind is hi-tech stuff; will make you look cool and will help the credibility of your comments.
      Chal maan liya .. Tu shivaji, Teri G**nd laal 🙂

      • irregularexpression

        Like calling yourself ‘bombayite’ and throwing in a few slangs makes you feel cool? I am sure even registering for a Disqus ID is too hi-tech for your level. The credibility of my comments was well established before you even learned how to use a keyboard. The last thing I need is validation from hit-and-run dumbfucks like you. Now run along and go look for ‘fraandsheep’ on Facebook. Chal ab rasta naap!

  • funnyybone

    So much hubris, why don’t you avid that Anand? This has bothered me to no ends, why do they still have Ph, in scieice PhD, philosophy is dead for science in early 20th century..Coming back to your articles so far, it really sounded figuratively, a bookish homework from school, a true reportage? so far genomic study a has found as fact we are intelligent from chimps by 1.5% of DNA.Two questions for you, 1)What will be impact of GMO in increasing or deacrising this number? 2 does GMO change any DNA sequencing? Please provide links to publications research

  • rajanvt

    Why do I always come away with a feeling of being a huge ignoramus, when I read your articles Dr.Ranga?! You are a superstar sir!! (Hope Rajnisir and his fans don’t read my comments!)

  • Krishnan GV

    I was always operating under the belief that people like Vandana Shiva, were talking about the Socio-economic effect of GM foods. By watching her talks on youtube and reading some of her books it gave me an impression that what she was talking about was not that science was wrong but rather that the commercial markets have been cannibalistic. Companies like Monsanto & Dupont own both seed and fertilizer subsidiaries.And that the argument was that they were producing seed varieties tailored to the fertilizers that they produce. Farmers who buy these seeds cannot store and reuse the seeds for the next year.There have been lots of lawsuits both India and Abroad because of these rules. There have been so many lawsuits where farmers who did not have GM crops on their land had to hand over their produce because it was believed that seeds dispersed from a GM field had germinated in their lands. GM seeds are welcome if they don’t come with a huge terms and conditions book you need to sign. What with so many illiterate it comes to wholesale exploitation. The author makes a point the sterile seeds(Terminator varieties) have been banned but that ban was bought into place because of these NGO’s. The last question I have is that if the BT cotton area has widened in the country and if the production levels from such a crop has also gone up then why is it that farmer suicide levels have remained a constant? shouldn’t they have dropped and diminished?

    • Cairenn Day

      There has NEVER been a lawsuit against a farmer for accidental ‘contamination’. I suggest that you leave the anti GMO sites and look at independent ones instead.

      Farmer suicides in India are lower than that of the general populace there.

      Farmers stopped saving and reusing most seeds 50 years ago. I also suggest you try talking to some real farmers for a change.

      • Souvick Choudhury

        I see Monsanto trolls have started invading this place with their factually inaccurate , logically fallacious arguments that are strengthened only by the average reader’s inertia against creating a compilation of hard data and research that thoroughly thrashes every twisted claim they make.
        Folks, please take the utmost pleasure in abusing these people, feel free to relieve yourself of any nagging guilt at not immediately rebutting their nonsense, as they are not a breed that is here to have its mind changed by knowledge of reality (so it would be pointless anyway ), but only to raid article after article on the internet to hopelessly try and create a pro-gmo consensus.

        • Cairenn Day

          What ‘hard data’ do yo have to support your claim? Why instead of presenting did you go directly to name calling?

          In just under 20 years, Monsanto has filed less than 175 suits. This is spite of selling seeds to millions of farmers.

          FARMERS choose to buy GMO seeds because they allow them to get better yields (less loss to insects) and it allows them to use more environmentally friendly practices such as no till.

          The SCIENCE is clear on GMOs they are as safe as any other food product.

          • Souvick Choudhury

            The history of american globalised corporations in general(enron, union carbide etc..) and monasanto specifically,with regards to the kind gifts these benign entitites have bestowed upon the human race( agent Orange) ,will thorougly strip anybody’s illusions about them having the least regard for human life,or an inkling of ethics in the way they go about doing their business ( even these days Monsanto has to lobby the US govt hard to arm twist african nations into accepting its offerings ,otherwise the being threatened with cancellaton of aid packages).
            It literally has an army of researchers and scientists on its payroll,who while not necessarily compromising on the standards of research,are nevertheless human beings that have concerns about their career advancement.
            I could go on and on with “facts” to take apart every claim that is being made,…yes,even the one about no studies finding any damage from gmos’,which besides being factually incorect, rests on a logical fallacy of mistaking “evidence of absence” as the “absence of evidence”, but i’ve got things to do.

          • Cairenn Day

            May be you need to improve your research skills. Agent Orange was developed by the UK in the 1950s.

            Your comment is devoid of facts, lots of opinion, but that is all.

            Why don’t we hear from an Indian farmer, instead of urban Americans


        • First Officer

          TAS, Troll Accusation Syndrome, strikes yet again!

        • Ruchka

          Here’s a film on testimonies from farmers in Vidarbha https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvJmcoTjH6s&app=desktop

        • Eric Bjerregaard

          Ding ding ding a ding fweeep fweep. there it is the Monsanto trolls accusation I predicted as I read through the discussion. At least you didn’t lead with that evidence free balderdash.

      • Krishnan GV

        Hmm fair point but diving into the number of farmer suicide by population is often misleading.. let me explain … The total no of “cultivators” in India (according to the Register general of India’s survey) is around 118 million (circa 2013)), and the official number on farmer suicides (Maharashtra leads this, it also grows a lot of BT cotton, co-incidence most probably) is around 13754 (National Crime Records Bureau 2012 report) which gives you a picture of 12 in 100000 farmers which is around the national suicide rate average for the US (in context india’s national average is 11.3 (NCRB 2013) so shouldn’t this number be lower). In context we have seen the similar numbers since 2002 so one can claim 12000×10= 120000(I have discounted for fluctuations) farmer suicides in the last 10 years and at the same time we are lost around 9 million farmers (RGI general census data 2012) over the same decade, obviously adjusted to population rise. See statistics is such a bitch..

        Also about farmers not saving seeds, Indian farmers still do save their seeds. They are among the poorest farmers farming on very little land. So maybe you should stop talking to western “mechanisation centric- big land owning” farmers and talk to some Indian farmers.

  • Promila Suri

    Anand, well argued and logical artical.Shiva’s “natural state of poverty is preferable for Africans and Indians” This sentence really takes the cake I hope she uses none of the fruits of science lives naturally without AC does not take medecine and gets cured naturally if sick….LOL. All these NGO kinds have double standards self gain is what they are after any which way.

    • First Officer

      Excepting, of course, an Indian named Vandana Shiva!

  • Balasubramanian Ponnuswami

    Vandana is trying to play Lysenko in GM science. Lysenko killed thousands of innocent Siberians who were deprived of food because of that the Siberians were compelled to practice his Marxian Biology. Biology has never obeyed politicians like Vandana.

    • MED

      Maybe… but I’d still assume that Lysenko was more crazy than this woman.

      • Vandana wud prove to be crazier if gets the same govt support that Lysenko got.

  • RobertWager

    From the WHO website-Twenty Questions on GMO’s:

    “The GM products that are currently on the international market have all passed risk assessments conducted by national authorities. These different assessments in general follow the same basic principles, including an assessment of environmental and human health risk. These assessments are thorough, they have no indicated any risk to human health.”
    (2013 website

    From the American Association for the Advancement of Science:

    “The World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Society, and every other respected organization that has examined the evidence has come to the same conclusion: consuming foods containing ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant improvement techniques.” AAAS 2012

  • Kamya

    Shame on you! Deliberately misquoting and misrepresenting facts. Nice way of doing propaganda for paving the way for biotech, by trying to delegitimize any opposition. Pathetic.

  • Kamya

    Some scientist Anand, Newslaundry what evidence do you have of “alleged 40,000$” repeating slander from the internet.

    • First Officer

      Her agency was called inquiring her fees for speeches and the is what they answered.

      • Dinesh Batra

        Hey First officer, why bother replying to VS troll nonsense?! ROFL. This woman cant even click the hyperlinks provided and keeps on asking for proof – LOLLLL. I just exposed her on some mischief crap she was saying for another hyperlink. i mean are these guys THAT dumb? It only takes a click! All over her supporters are running around like headless-chickens, hahaha.

  • Kamya

    “having previously received Rs 12.78 crore from Canada, Italy, Germany, Sweden and even Pakistan – hadn’t filed its Foreign Contributory Statement for the year 2013-14, she accused the IB of “conspiring with global corporate interests to haemorrhage India’s agricultural economy”. With this deliberately mischevious statement itself, the mask of being “pro science” or neutral falls. Why dont you mention the 12.78 crores was received over which period and over how many years. And what the deadline for filing the foreign contributions statement for 2013-14. This is a deliberate attempt to create mischief. SHAME Newslaundry

    • Souvick Choudhury

      Yes ,and the amount recieved by the NGO’s mentioned in the IB report is less than 3% of the total amount recievedby all NGO’s ,many of whom are chaired by eminent citizens,one even includes Prakash Javdekar, asenior leader of the BJP itself.
      Watch NDTV’s “truth v/s hype” episode titled ” foriegn funding on NGO’s” to get a proper perspective of this.

    • Dinesh Batra

      LOL, are you a paid VS troll or what??!! i clicked on the link provided as you also shud have if you had any sense other than to spam the comments section with your BS. the link is says exactly what is the truth – that loony anti-science nut-jobs ke bure din aa guye hain, hahahaha! the congis were giving toooo much importance to these mad men and women. and if you want info about 12 crores over so many years etc etc etc then go blame the news paper whose link that is. and stop spamming with all this SHAME nonsense. deliberate attempt and what not…now return to your NGO and cry shame because your goddess has been completely exposed here. tata ok bye.

  • cvguy

    Rs 12.78 crore!

  • Kishore Asthana

    An excellent article. Should be widely disseminated.

  • Souvick Choudhury

    I have an idea, why dont we stop eating food at all, i mean think about it,….why bother with growing anything at all, lets just manufacture pills and create serums to directly inject all we need into our blood stream…..
    HEY , THAT WouLd Be A FuN ExPERimenT , rigtt ….ridht …right ???????????.

    Yeah , why not, its only Science after all….
    “science” science !!!!!!!!!!!
    science….has figured it all out ,abso-fucking -lutely EVERYTHING that needs to be known about the human body and the ecosystem, which are basically nothing but just super complex machines, that came about , out of no where,
    Nothing can go wrong , we are GODS…if you disagree , you must be an AAPTARD,Commie loonie, anti-science idiot.
    So let the gene hacking begin….

    PS- The human race is unparalleled in its capacity for self-delusion.

    • gbm

      Had some extra dosage of LSD or what?

      • Souvick Choudhury


      • Eric Bjerregaard

        You sir are off base with the lsd remark. some microdot just might help this one out.

    • >{lets just manufacture pills and create serums to directly inject all we need into our blood stream}

      dont know about others, but you seem to be doing exactly that. and enjoying it.

  • Ruchka

    Please check out this new film on testimonies from farmers in Vidarbha https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvJmcoTjH6s&app=desktop

  • Souvick Choudhury

    Watch this video you soulless peddlers of corporate tyranny…and the frothing- at-the-mouth “science” zealots. Those sopporting gmo’s are no less than enemies of humanity itself

  • Navneet Verma

    Anand you are mentioned on Ravish’s primetime

  • Navneet Verma
  • brodudeawesomedudeyo

    For the ‘educated’ beings living in this part of the globe who find everything ‘awesome’ and are ‘shocked’ at petty things but never surprised who get their ‘knowledge’ from TV, cricket ,twitter and facebook https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VEZYQF9WlE

    • brodudeawesomedudeyo

      and who think the “Green Revolution” is a god given boon for Punjab….hai mera peejjja chomeen gobbling ‘future’ of India

  • Food Inc

    Anti-GMO is Anti-Science ? Well played Ranga Doodles.

  • Hackety Man

    For Pete’s sake, I wish everyone would quit using the term “science” as a cloak that allows you to do whatever you want. The new false god telling them to go out and lie and deceive. You’re all fools if you actually think that GMOs and biotechnology is about science, feeding people, or anything other than about making loads and loads and loads of money at the expense of people and the land. Seriously.

  • Hackety Man

    The author makes a statement about Organic Farming and GM Foods co-existing. They cannot. You know why? Cross pollination. The GMO crops will contaminate the non-GMO ones. And then it’s over. From that point forward you only have GMO crops.

    I heard a metaphor (I think that’s the right word) once that fits this situation too. “If you have a white glove and some mud and you put the two together, the glove will always get muddy. The mud will never get glovey.”

  • nikhilsheth

    With all due respect, it’s the author of this article who is Anti-science and is on an insult-laden witchhunt. Just because some people don’t officially give citations for things that anyone with a barebones understanding of the world knows, doesn’t mean that person is lying. The author didn’t even attempt to verify the statements by doing a simple google search.
    The Earth is round.
    Whoops, I didn’t provide any citation. That proves that the Earth is flat.
    This is the logic of the author. I read a few other articles also by this person on this site… all of them are seriously flawed. Really disappointed to see this on news laundry.

  • nikhilsheth
  • nikhilsheth
  • Camarón

    My god, what a bad article, loaded with ideological assumptions. With a discourse that assumes that capitalist neoliberal development is Science!!… So Vandana Shiva is “anti-science”. All of you that agree with this article are just brain washed…If you think the expansion of further development will reduce poverty, but for some reason the world is still extremely poor, your all blind.

  • Sam

    Correction: She appears to have obtained her B.Sc. degree in Physics from Punjab University. Her Masters and Doctoral degrees in Canada were confirmed to be in the Philosophy of Science; as a matter of fact her doctoral thesis wrongly argued against the currently accepted philosophical implications of Bell’s theorem in Quantum Physics. Her doctorate has as much to do with the science of Physics or Quantum Mechanics as Deepak Chopra’s new age twaddle. She is not a physicist or a scientist, and does not have a physics background beyond her undergraduate exposure at Punjab University.