title: The tarnished gold standard for GM risk assessment.
abstract: The American public's assessment of the accuracy of news stories is now at its lowest level in more than two decades, and their views of media bias and independence now match previous lows, according to a September 2009 Pew Research Center survey.  Only 29% of Americans say that news organizations usually get the facts right, while 63% say that news stories often are inaccurate.  Although there are no similar survey data for "peer-reviewed journals" -- which submit articles to review by independent experts before they are accepted for publication and which have long been considered science's "gold standard" - it is not uncommon for articles that are egregiously, obviously flawed to find their way into prominent international scientific publications. If the articles have policy implications, misinformation is quickly and widely propagated; feeds the propagandizing of opportunistic, anti-technology activists, and can have dire consequences.
authors.affiliation: The Hoover Institution, Stanford University, CA 94305-6010, U.S.A. miller@hoover.stanford.edu
authors.forename: Henry I
authors.initials: HI
authors.lastname: Miller
mesh_terms: D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D008402:Mass Media / Q000592:standards; D010380:Peer Review / Q000592:standards*; D030821:Plants, Genetically Modified / Q000235:genetics* / Q000254:growth & development; D011643:Publishing / Q000592:standards*; D012107:Research Design / Q000592:standards; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000592:standards*