In the ongoing debate over genetically modified organisms (GMOs), Cui Yongyuan and Fang Zhouzi have taken to Weibo, each presenting their own perspectives. Cui believes that Fang is stubborn and holds fast to his views, making it hard to tell who is right. The clash between them reflects a broader public anxiety about genetic modification, as well as the confidence of some advocates pushing for its adoption.
This battle has played out in multiple rounds, not just in China but globally. It's not a new conflict, but the involvement of two high-profile figures has brought it back into the spotlight. Cui argues that while people can choose whether to eat GMOs, he also has the right to question what others claim as scientific truth. He even dares to call those who support GMOs "idiots" if they don’t fully understand the science.
Fang, on the other hand, emphasizes that people should be free to choose not to eat GMOs, but shouldn't block the progress of agricultural technology. He claims his science is backed by authoritative institutions worldwide and points to his academic background in biochemistry in the U.S. as proof of his credibility.
The data used to support GMOs includes statistics showing that 93% of U.S. soybeans are genetically modified, with most being exported to China. A 2011 study by Henry Miller from Stanford University suggests that Americans have consumed $3 trillion worth of GMO foods over the past decade. These figures are often cited to justify the legitimacy of GMO consumption in China.
However, even in the U.S., the debate remains unresolved. Japan, a close ally, has pushed for organic agriculture to limit GMOs, while Europe maintains strict regulations. Even in the U.S., GM technology hasn't been widely applied to staple foods, highlighting lingering concerns.
In contrast to the West’s robust legal framework and food safety systems, Chinese consumers lack strong legal protection. Their rights to information, choice, and oversight are often overlooked, and public scientific literacy remains low—only 4% of the population had basic scientific knowledge in 2012. This makes it all the more important for the government to be transparent when promoting GMOs.
Even in the U.S., public concern persists. A 2017 poll showed that 64% of people remain uncertain about the safety of GMOs, while 21% believe they are safe and 15% think they are unsafe. Most agree that GMO products should be clearly labeled.
Meanwhile, repeated food safety scandals have eroded public trust in the government. When the government pushes for GMOs, it often sparks strong public backlash. Relying on figures like Fang Zhouzi to promote GMOs may seem less credible in this environment.
The scientific consensus is that there is currently no evidence that GMOs are harmful to human health. However, science is always evolving, and what is safe today may raise ethical concerns in the future.
History shows that even widely accepted technologies can have unforeseen consequences. DDT, once celebrated, later raised serious environmental and health issues. Rachel Carson’s *Silent Spring* highlighted these dangers, leading to a global shift toward environmental protection.
Carson once wrote, “The more clearly we focus on the natural wonders and objective things in the universe, the less we try to destroy them.†Her words remind us that controversy isn’t necessarily bad—it encourages critical thinking and deeper understanding.
While the GMO debate continues, it’s clear that the discussion has moved beyond pure science. Even if GMOs are safe, the real challenge lies in creating a fair and transparent system that allows people to make informed choices.
Buffet Of Equipment,Kitchenware Products,Common Kitchen Ware,Kitchen Cooking Ware
Shaoxing Biaoyi Hardware Products Co., Ltd. , https://www.byeob.com