Protect The Harvest | Skewed Studies Used to Advance Extremist Agenda

As the war against animal agriculture rages on, it has become common for wealthy animal and environmental extremists to fund, conduct, and then publicize biased and erroneous studies via complicit media outlets. The skewed results of such studies are nearly always presented to the public as irrefutable facts, but the reality is that these studies are most often completed by hand-picked, like-minded researchers, frequently with the predetermined goal of “proving” that animal agriculture should be eliminated. This kind of slanted research is designed to demonstrate that meat and dairy products are supposedly unhealthy to eat, that animal agriculture is supposedly harmful to the environment, or a combination of both.

Sloppy “Journalism” Props Up Extremist Narrative

In addition, it is standard for “researchers” to omit information that is contradictory to the desired outcomes of their work. Sadly, it has become standard practice for a significant portion of the mainstream media to refuse to cover opposing viewpoints. Thus, even when the incomplete, biased studies are contested by experts, rebuttals are unlikely to get any coverage. In the rare instances that they do, the damage can already be done in the mind of a well-meaning but perhaps non-discerning reader.

The average consumer might not normally track down, read, and review studies; instead they may rely upon various media for information.