Aha, @sciam released a new version of the article previously called "Broccoli Is Dying. Corn Is Toxic. Long Live Microbiomes!".
Link to old version: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/broccoli-is-dying-corn-is-toxic-long-live-microbiomes/?amp …
Now it is just called "Long Live Microbiomes!"https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/long-live-microbiomes/ …
-
Show this thread
-
Several scientists, including me, tweeted about the first version that contained a lot of non-scientific statements and (my words) "bullshit". Scientific American now states that the first version did not meet their editorial standards.pic.twitter.com/rpwJqHfC6y
2 replies 7 retweets 47 likesShow this thread -
Let's see what changed in this new version. For starters, two-thirds of the title was dropped. Was 2/3 of the article deleted as well?
2 replies 2 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
The new version is actually a bit longer than the old version (1472 words now vs 1392 words in the first version). Using SimTexter ( https://people.f4.htw-berlin.de/~weberwu/simtexter/app.html … ) we can also compare the two texts.
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
It appears a nearly complete rewrite. Here is the SimTexter screenshot. On the left the original, on the right the revised version. Colored blocks depict text that is identical between the 2 versions.pic.twitter.com/WKN7NT2JtN
2 replies 0 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
Good: The incorrect statement "The level of every nutrient in almost every kind of food has fallen between 10 and 100 percent" is now gone. However, there are still iffy statements about less nutrients in plants with no references.
2 replies 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
Also gone, thankfully, is the sentence "The epidemic of 20 chronic diseases—including diabetes, obesity, breast and thyroid cancers, stroke and autism—is highly correlated with the rise in production of “Roundup Ready” GMO corn and soy, both sprayed with glyphosate."
3 replies 3 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
These are good improvements. The article still has some statements that are hard to believe (without references) but this new version is a huge step in the right direction.
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
I applaud the authors and
@SciAm for taking our criticism seriously and for doing a transparent rewrite.5 replies 3 retweets 46 likesShow this thread -
It is still more an opinion piece than a scientific writing, since it has statements about glyphosate and GMO plants that are not well founded.
3 replies 0 retweets 18 likesShow this thread
Yes that's certainly how I read it. However, have to congratulate @sciam here - while I disagree with much of the framing I can no longer find a single statement that is factually incorrect. Misleading, yes, but nothing that is wrong
-
-
To be honest, I think the conclusion is what bothers me most now. Organic farming is no more "natural" than conventional - they are both just different applications of quite advanced farming techniques so far removed from nature that any comparison is a bit sillypic.twitter.com/chOAbSTv4h
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.