The ancient saying goes, "Why do you want to add sin?" When the truth is clear, questioning is a natural instinct for people to seek understanding. Although there may be many unreasonable concerns about genetic modification, they often reflect public anxiety over food safety. It's important not to dismiss or mock these concerns, especially in an era where public discourse is increasingly influenced by political narratives. When different voices are met with reflexive suppression, it risks stifling the very democratic process that should guide such discussions. Isn't this kind of "genetic modification" in public opinion even more dangerous?
Deng Zhixi, deputy director of the Rural Economic Research Center under the Ministry of Agriculture, recently spoke with an international online journalist. He emphasized that the three types of genetically modified soybeans approved for import were evaluated and authorized according to China’s strict food safety protocols, and the results confirmed their safety. While China is not the only country producing food, public skepticism largely stems from a lack of understanding about the GM food system. (June 18, International Online)
The speed at which the Ministry of Agriculture approved these genetically modified soybeans has sparked various speculations, including claims of a "flash batch." Many remain skeptical about the safety of GM soybeans, and these feelings should not be ridiculed or ignored. Here's why:
First, people rely on food as their daily sustenance, and genetically modified products represent a form of human intervention in the food supply. Their safety must undergo rigorous scientific testing and real-world validation. If people aren’t satisfied with what they eat, it could indicate deeper issues—such as environmental imbalances or health risks. Should some individuals wish for people to suffer? That seems unlikely.
As an official noted, public questioning often arises from ignorance. However, when the food environment is deteriorating, the right to know and be informed becomes even more critical. Is it the public’s fault for not understanding, or is it the government’s failure to provide accurate information? Unfortunately, the Ministry of Agriculture itself may not have a clearer understanding of genetic modification than the general public. From a logical perspective, criticizing the public as ignorant might not be coming from food safety experts, but from agricultural economists. Behind the public's confusion lies a deeper problem—the lack of transparency in the behind-the-scenes decisions shaping GM policies in China.
If the public is indeed unaware of genetic modification, why didn’t the Ministry of Agriculture conduct thorough science communication and public education before approving GM crops? Why wasn’t there a transparent discussion of both the benefits and potential risks of GM technology? Why weren’t safety measures put in place to protect the public from possible negative impacts? A government that serves the people should prioritize transparency, not profit. The ignorance of the public is not their own tragedy—it reflects the serious consequences of bureaucratic negligence and a lack of genuine public engagement.
The ancients said, "Why do you want to add sin?" When the truth is clear, questioning is a natural part of seeking truth. Even if some concerns about genetic modification seem absurd, they reveal deep-seated anxieties about food security. In today's society, when diverse opinions are met with reflexive suppression, it hinders open dialogue and undermines public trust. Isn't this kind of "genetic modification" in public discourse far more harmful? (Xiao Yong)
Fluorine Lined Valve,Lined Butterfly Valve,Electric Rubber Lined Butterfly Valve,Fluorine Lined Ball Valve
CEPAI Group Co., Ltd. , https://www.jscepai.com