EDITORIAL

GM crops—lessons from medicine

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science  16 Sep 2016:
Vol. 353, Issue 6305, pp. 1187
DOI: 10.1126/science.aaj1764

eLetters is an online forum for ongoing peer review. Submission of eLetters are open to all. eLetters are not edited, proofread, or indexed.  Please read our Terms of Service before submitting your own eLetter.

Compose eLetter

Plain text

  • Plain text
    No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests
CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

  • RE: GM crops—lessons from medicine

    Absence of evidence is indeed evidence of absence, after the search has been conducted.

    Those who cite 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence' usually fail to distinguish the two states of knowledge to which it applies.

    Prior to an investigation, there is an 'absence of evidence' equal to ignorance. But *after* an investigation, there may still be an absence of evidence, but now it is a a statement from a point of knowledge.

    For example, it is true that there is an absence of evidence pertaining to the hazards of GMOs. That was true in 1983, but it was based on ignorance-- at that time, there had been no biosafety assessments of GMOs in the open environment. In 2016, the statement is still true, but based on knowledge and experience, from the thousands of biosafety experiments conducted in the meantime on every aspect of GMO biosafety.

    Competing Interests: None declared.

Stay Connected to Science

Navigate This Article