sallee4’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  re: Sour Milk?

  Tom, I appreciate you taking the time to comment on my piece that I did for The Environment Report. I hope Grist readers will investigate the topic more closely than either my piece or your comments on it can supply. I want to make it clear, though, that this particular piece wasn't meant to be a final, definitive report on the subject of rbst and whether the use of the hormone (or whether milk consumption itself) is appropriate. I only illustrate that a scientist is taking on what has become a common assumption in the environmental community that the hormone has no environmental merit. Mr. Park's comments were presented to make average listeners understand a common reason supplied to avoid rbst and why the market's following along.  Ms. Capper (and others) suggest there's a likely scientific rationale that should trump that line of reasoning. I assume not all listeners (or scientists) would agree.

  We were aware of the conflict of interest cited in the PNAS study. I had Ms. Capper and others explain how the research was conducted, who drove it and what roles they played in shaping the outcome. I defer to the PNAS editors on the issue of whether standards were met for publication.

  I expect there'll be more scientific salvos fired on the issue, and we'll certainly cover those at The Environment Report as well. In the meantime, I'd invite readers to see what other views we've made available on the subject at http://www.environmentreport.org.  And while you're there, search the word "milk" to get a better idea of how we've covered this issue overall.
  Sincerely,
  Shawn AlleeOn The Environment Report naively pushes Monsanto-related study praising rBGH posted 1 year, 1 month ago 2 Responses