The ancients once asked, "Why add sin?" When the truth is clear, questioning is a natural instinct for people to seek truth. Although there may be many irrational concerns about genetic modification, they reflect public anxiety over food safety. These concerns should not be dismissed or ignored. In today's political climate, when different voices arise, some tend to react reflexively and suppress public opinion. Isn't this kind of "genetic modification" in the public sphere even more dangerous?
Deng Zhixi, deputy director of the Rural Economic Research Center under the Ministry of Agriculture, recently gave an exclusive interview with an international online journalist. He emphasized that the three genetically modified soybean varieties approved by China were evaluated and authorized strictly according to the national food safety assessment program, and the results confirmed their safety. While China is not the only country producing food, the public’s current skepticism largely stems from a lack of understanding about the GM food system. (June 18, International Online)
The rapid approval of the three GM soybean varieties has sparked various speculations about a "hasty batch." Many people still have doubts about the safety of genetically modified soybeans. Such concerns should not be laughed at or overlooked. Here’s why:
First, people use food as their daily sustenance, and genetically modified crops represent human intervention in the food supply. Their safety must undergo more rigorous scientific testing and real-world verification. Food is essential for survival—if people are not satisfied with their basic needs, it raises serious questions. Do some people want the population to suffer?
As an official stated, the public questions due to ignorance. But in the face of a deteriorating food environment, the right to know and the right to be informed—should these not be fulfilled through proper education rather than just government propaganda? Unfortunately, the Ministry of Agriculture’s own understanding of genetic modification may not be much better than the public’s. From a logical perspective, criticizing the public’s "ignorance" in this case seems misplaced, as the officials involved are not food safety experts but agricultural economists. Behind the public's lack of knowledge lies a deeper ignorance within the Chinese economic system.
If the public is indeed ignorant about genetic modification, why didn’t the Ministry of Agriculture conduct thorough science communication and public awareness campaigns before approving these GM products? Why wasn’t there a transparent discussion about the benefits and risks of genetic modification, along with necessary safety measures to protect the public’s right to know and choose? After all, our government is meant to serve the people, not to act out of self-interest. The public’s ignorance is not their fault—it is the result of bureaucratic negligence and a failure to engage in meaningful dialogue. This is both sad and alarming.
The ancients said, "Why add sin?" When the truth is clear, questioning is a natural human instinct. There may be many strange worries about genetic modification, but they reveal the public's deep concerns about food safety. In today's society, when different opinions arise, some respond with old-fashioned suppression instead of open discussion. Isn’t this kind of “genetic modification†in public discourse far more harmful? (Xiao Yong)
CEPAI Group Co., Ltd. , https://www.jscepai.com