I love progressive journalism, and although somewhat new to this site, I'm familiar with several of its authors. This article, however, is an embarrassment.

How does someone with such low standards for journalism get published here?

If you want to write an article about the dangers of modern agribusiness or genetically-modified crops, for the love of Edward R. Murrow, interview somebody - anybody - who knows something about agriculture or genetically-modified crops.

The first question I had, as a common reader, was, "What is this Tifton 85, and how is it different from common grass?" Not only did the author not answer that question for me, but it apparently never occurred to him. If it had, Mr. Gucciardi would perhaps have talked to someone (or read on wikipedia) and learned that Tifton 85 is a cross-bred grass, not a genetically modified one. Is this a subtle, esoteric difference? Not in the least.

Every single plant we grow, harvest, and eat has been cross-bred to select for desirable qualities (size of fruit, sturdiness of the plant, yield of seed, etc.) This has literally been going on for millenia. For example, there is evidence that Native Americans cross-bred maize plants a thousand years before the arrival of Europeans. Not only does this history suggest a level of safety inherent in the practice, but it demonstrates a complete intractibility of the practice - despite his literary skills, Mr. Gucciardi will not be able to end this practice, and wouldn't it be somewhat arbitrary to do so now?

And, speaking of Mr. Gucciardi's literary skills: really? You want to reference NAZI's and the holocaust when speaking about a natural chemical product of all grasses, and this one in particular? I think high school English teachers would deduct credit for such a trite and ham-handed use.

Perhaps most importantly, even to Mr. Gucciardi, this article does no service to the millions of people who are concerned about the safety of our food supply, as it only serves to make the progressive watchdogs of agribusiness look like easily misled (or deliberately manipulative) simpletons with no grasp of the issues. Kudos, dipshit.

I'm a little disappointed that Nation Of Change decided to run with this story. Or do I blame Anthony Gucciardi?

"Anthony is an accomplished investigative journalist whose articles have appeared on top news sites and have been read by millions worldwide. A health activist and researcher, Anthony’s goal is centered around informing the public as to how they can use natural methods to revolutionize their health, as well as exploring the behind the scenes activity of the pharmaceutical industry and the FDA."

I don't wish to appear hyper-critical or self-aggrandizing, but I discovered that Tifton 85 was NOT a GM grass some 2 or 3 weeks ago. I'm just a John Q. Public who reads. Should we not expect more from Anthony and Nation Of Change? This story is old news in this era of instant news and as such demands a higher standard than projectile regurgitation. Yesterday, many media outlets reported that SCOTUS struck down "Obamacare" because they couldn't wait an extra minute or two to actually listen to the complete statement. But I have come to expect that of those media outlets.

This falls way short of "journalism". When do we get the retraction? Or should I just click "unsubscribe"?

I wish this reporter and the one at CBS had done more research to get their facts correct. I don't want to argue on whether this is a hybrid or a gmo. Prussic acid kills cattle every year here in Texas. It is unfortunate, but weather and growing conditions have as much or more to do with this than plant genetics. Prussic acid can develop in plants that have been drought stressed and then get a rain and grow rapidly. It can also occur after a frost and the quick regrowth in a plant will produce prussic acid or hydrocyanic acid.

Tifton 85 is a great grass that was developed through a joint effort of the University of Georgia and USDA. It was the result of crossing a stargrass variety (known for fast growth) and Tifton 68 ( a bermuda variety noted for higher digestibilty but lacks yield). Here in East Texas, T-85 will outyield Coastal bermuda (the standard grass that all others are compared to and incidentily developed by the same researcher 40 something years earlier) by nearly 25% and will be about 10% more digestible. It is unfortunate that after being released nearly 20 years ago, we are finding out this grass can produce prussic acid if weather and growing conditions are just right. It is something cattle producers will have to learn to manage, just as they have for other grass species. Ranching is not easy and if it were more people would do it.

So whats new? Sure it is some what disconcerting for the owner and more so for the animals.

As "eyeinthesky" succinctly put is, this has been happening since before we were born. I have worked in the industry for 40 years.

To blame Monsanto or any other Ag company for this is ridiculous, and questions the factual basis for much of this series of articles. Sure breeders have been trying to create varieties with lower hazards, but this has been happening from way before DNA was identified, let alone the production of GMO's

Please do 5 minutes of confirmation search on the not before publishing a paper which I would grade a novice agronomist at -5 out of 20.

Sorghum's will do this, and there are both anti dotes to save the animals if you get there quick enough, as well as simple management techniques like cutting the material for hay when the cyanide breaks down as the hay drys, to make it safe.

This is an example of how plants protect themselves against pests - grazing animals etc. So nature can do it better. We have got to be smart enough to know when and why it happens.

Re cyanide, have a look at the food crop cassava. You have got to be careful.

The difference is that this story could have been planted by the "big corporation" to make those who worry about GMO foods look like kooks and fools. It kills our credibility.

CBS NEWS CORRECTION: "As originally published, this story referred to Tifton 85 grass as a genetically-modified product, which is incorrect; it is actually a hybrid of Bermuda grass."

I don't know why the government doesn't just close Monsanto down. This is NOT the first time that something like this has happened with one of their genetically engineered products. Of course, if they have 60 out of 100 senators in their pocket, I suppose that they will continue to get away with murder. I say murder because perhaps next time it will be human fatalities.

Keep up the investigative reporting work, Anthony

While you certainly should strive to be evermore exactingly characterizing (as regular commenter KEVINFOLTA rightfully urges all to do), the pace of the news cycle is such that getting a story out sometimes trumps spending the time to vet every detail. Perhaps you might simply be extra careful to word your characterizations more carefully (such as: "According to the report" shockingly (and quite disturbingly "to XXX") the GM grass . . .)

Regardless, here we have yet another, anecdotal now and perhaps more rigorously scientifically documented later instance of the types of "tertiary" (and I say quaternary and higher order) effects that CITIZEN7 so well articulated in comment on your "Genetic Engineers Explain Why GM Food Is Dangerous" post.

This might be good incident for KEVINFOLTA to take point for us on analyzing. Perhaps K could chase down the players, put their feet to the fire of accuracy of characterization, documentation of data, efficacy of methods, integrity of logic, and veracity of conclusions. And then keep you posted for follow-up reporting.

Good call Oroboros. Ya beat me to it. And another de-bunking article:

http://pearlsnapsponderings.wordpress.com/2012/06/24/a-load-of-bull-tift...

Man, I wish "journalists" would do some basic fact checking. Alas, Faux Noise rules, and so does the infotainment industry. Scientific illiteracy is the standard these days, I guess.