Here is an interesting little piece from the Guardian (which I found checking out this item on Natural news.) I have been skeptical about scientific papers and the reporting on them for some time. Too often we get a big splash for preliminary studies and nothing for the later studies which qualify or even totally discredit the initial results. The tobacco industry had their bought researchers construct studies designed to discredit all of the studies which showed connections between smoking and disease. The drug industry it seems has taken the fraud to another level by simply writing the studies themselves and paying scientists to allow the papers to be published under their more respectable names. Bottom line: you have to carefully consider any information even from supposedly reputable sources.
I really like this story from Natural News (citing the Minnesota Star Tribune). A couple years ago I read stories about Monsanto (primarily) suing neighboring farmers, many of whom were seed savers, for infringing on their patents for GMO crops when the farmers' crops showed genetic contamination from the GMO crops. Now organic farmers can sue for trespass when the neighbors' chemical applications and Monsanto's crops pollinate their crops. Good!
Now this is curious. I don't necessarily endorse the study. Statistics are always slippery and malleable. But I do know that Repthuglican politicians seem to drive me crazy--in or out of the White House.