Why do most liberals endorse pseudoscience like anti-GMO?

I’ve never minded calling myself a liberal. I don’t like wars and heavy militarization. I’m in favor of civil rights for all, all races, sexual orientations, gender identities. I understand how changes in the US tax laws over the last several decades have kept down the poor and propped up the rich. In addition, when I look at scientific evidence and see a consensus by the science experts about something, I’ll go with the science experts.

Regarding the scientific evidence, most liberals will agree with me that childhood vaccinations are good, as one example. And most liberals have accepted that climate change is happening, and that human activity is a major cause. But, in contrast, most liberals will be anti-GMO, and will believe there is something to homeopathy, acupuncture, chiropractic, essential oils, etc.


For example regarding GMOs, there is scientific consensus that GMOs are safe and that GE technology represents one tool that could really help humanity in the coming decades. This consensus is on the same level as the agreement that there is climate change and that human activity is a major contributor. The same level of scientific consensus! And yet, when I mention this, my liberal friends get emotionally charged up and say that I’m spouting corporate propaganda.

Homeopathy, as another example, has zero evidence on peer-reviewed controlled, double-blind studies that it has any positive effects beyond a placebo. Zero!

Sure, it’s fun to hate big, mean, aggressive corporations. And it’s wonderful to take a few drops of some perfectly safe liquid and believe that it’s helping whatever condition. But where is actual reality? Do we want to do what feels good and believe what feels good or what we would dearly want to be true? Or do we want to understand the actual, factual reality?

It seems like the desire to have things that feel good to be true is so strong that people can be literally blinded to the point that real data from real experts are just patently dismissed. I’m not sure if that’s arrogant or immature. It certainly doesn’t sound like people who cling to these pseudoscientific beliefs are being responsible adults.

I speak from experience. I was not too long ago anti-GMO. I’ve taken homeopathics before and gone to the chiropractor. I so wanted all those things to be true. But if they’re not, they’re not. I’ve decided to make choices like a grown up.

The idiotic Republicans like to say “I’m not a scientist” and then hide behind the implication that a scientific consensus is somehow in doubt. Well, I’m not a scientist either, but I’m going to go with the people who are the expert scientists, and trust the work that they’ve devoted their lives to, and make my choices based on reality, not what might feel better.

PS – Want to see the scientific consensus that GMOs are not the dangerous horrible evil that many (embarrassingly, liberal) people say they are? Check out this and this. You’ll see an array of respected, non-profit, non-corporate-sponsored scientific organizations who have made statements about the safety and progressive promise of GMOs.

One Reply to “Why do most liberals endorse pseudoscience like anti-GMO?”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: