I think the first paragraph tells the story
The politics of genetically modified food has created a rift in a policy-setting committee of the influential Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that demonstrates the difficulty in finding anyone — anywhere — who doesn’t already have an opinion on the issue.
There are a few unsettling things in the article, but it is important to have both sides equally represented. Maybe both sides is a little too polarizing. I think about the Supreme Court, where you already have an excellent guess as to how they will vote. Maybe the challenge should be to find a group of people with varying degrees of opinions (very strong for, very strong against, and everything i the middle) – but more importantly, aren’t so cemented into their opinion that they tune the other side out. Have we got to the point where people in the center are tuned out? That would be sad.
As for the conflict of interest — it only seems to be a problem when you agree with the point of view that does not jive with that persons conflict. But it is important to watch.
read the full article on the New York Times