The fatally flawed Stanford study claiming that organic food is the same as conventional was conducted by Ingram Olkin, a known statistical ‘liar’ for Big Tobacco companies. It failed to examine key food issues such as the use of GMOs, high-fructose corn syrup, mercury in the food supply, and countless other factors.
Stanford University has also been found to have deep financial ties to Cargill, a powerful proponent of genetically engineered foods and an enemy of GMO labeling Proposition 37.
The study was authored by the very many who invented a method of ‘lying with statistics’. Olkin worked with Stanford University to develop a “multivariate” statistical algorithm, which is essentially a way to lie with statistics.
This research ultimately became known as the “Dr. Ingram Olkin multivariate Logistic Risk Function” and it was a key component in Big Tobacco’s use of anti-science to attack whistleblowers and attempt to claim cigarettes are perfectly safe.
This study needs to be retracted, investigated by an independent third party, and the mainstream media needs to acknowledge its failures. Writers for the New York Times have used the erroneous study to call organic consumers ‘narcissists’ and attack them directly.
It is essential that we make enough waves within the media to force Stanford and the mainstream media to issue a retraction. Otherwise, the very validity of real science is smeared and an unknown number of families around the world will endanger their health by eating toxic foods containing GMOs, mercury, and aspartame on a daily basis.
By Mike Adams, The Health Ranger & Anthony Gucciardi: