To prove the safety of GM foods is not to prove that it absolutely will not harm people, but to prove its relative safety compared with traditional non-GM foods, and whether the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. This is like a clinical trial of a new drug. If the clinical trial proves that its benefits outweigh the disadvantages, then it will be allowed to go public, but its adverse reactions will still need to be monitored after listing.
Text
Glossary
Transgenic transgenes refer to the transfer of DNA fragments containing genetic information in a certain organism into another organism. After genetic recombination, this genetic information is expressed in another organism. Transgenes can occur naturally. For example, Agrobacterium in nature can transfer bacterial genes into higher plants to form crown gall tumors on tree trunks (plant crown tumors are tumors caused by bacterial infections. At least more than 60 families, more than 200 The genus is present in thousands of higher plants.) Therefore, genetic modification is not a violation of the laws of nature, but after humans have mastered the laws of nature, they use this natural law to serve themselves.
At the beginning of this year, the Central No. 1 document clearly stated: "Based on scientific assessment and legal management, we will promote the industrialization of new transgenic varieties." Not long ago, the Ministry of Agriculture had just issued two biosafety certificates for genetically modified insect-resistant rice. This is China. The first biosecurity certificate for genetically modified staple foods was issued. The government’s concern for genetically modified staple foods has caused fierce disputes among professionals and civil society organizations.
Transgene is a neutral technology
People who oppose genetic modification will often be large without local accusations of "transgenics are contrary to the laws of nature." In fact, transgene does not violate the laws of nature at all. Transgene refers to transferring DNA fragments containing genetic information in a certain organism into another organism. After genetic recombination, this genetic information is expressed in another organism. Transgenes can occur naturally. For example, Agrobacterium in nature can transfer bacterial genes into higher plants to form crown gall tumors on tree trunks (plant crown tumors are tumors caused by bacterial infections. At least more than 60 families, more than 200 The genus is present in thousands of higher plants.) Therefore, genetic modification is not a violation of the laws of nature, but after humans have mastered the laws of nature, they use this natural law to serve themselves. Just as all technological progress in human history - from the use of fire to atomic energy technology - is a neutral technology. It is neither an angel nor a devil. The key lies in how humans use it.
There is no absolute safety for all foods
Our method of judging whether a food is safe is logically called incomplete induction. No harm was found in the past. It does not mean that there is no harm outside the scope of our observational capabilities, nor does it mean that no harm will occur in the future. Therefore, incomplete induction cannot provide absolute proof. This is true of genetically modified foods, as well as non-genetically modified foods. Traditional non-genetically modified foods may not necessarily be absolutely safe. For example, the salt that we have eaten for thousands of years and still eats every day now and in the future has been proven to be related to high blood pressure.
Therefore, to prove the safety of GM foods is not to prove that it absolutely will not harm people, but to prove its relative safety compared with traditional non-genetically modified foods, and whether its benefits exceed the risks. This is like a clinical trial of a new drug. If a clinical trial proves that a new drug outweighs its disadvantages, it will be allowed to go public, but its adverse reactions will still need to be monitored after listing, or postmarketing clinical trials will be conducted to find out that premarketing clinical trials cannot detect small adverse events. Probabilistic adverse reactions; once serious safety problems are discovered, then the drug will be required to withdraw from the market, and its manufacturers will pay a huge amount of compensation, such as the United States pharmaceutical giant Merck's painkiller Vioxx in the past few years.
Unprecedented supervision
In fact, due to the fact that human beings have accumulated considerable experience in evaluating food safety when the emergence of genetically modified foods and food management laws and regulations are stricter than ever, the research and supervision of genetically modified foods is also in the past all food products entering humans. When the recipes were not available, it was possible to pass the five-point plan under the supervision mechanism. Genetically modified foods that entered the food market had reason to receive the trust they deserve.
The genetically modified food that does not meet the requirements in terms of safety has long been eliminated at various stages of its R&D. We must believe that GM R&D companies are pursuing their interests: As long as there is good supervision, no profit-oriented company is willing to invest huge amounts of R&D funds into unqualified products that will be banned in the future, nor is it profitable. The purpose of willing to take the risk of huge compensation and litigation costs to bring unqualified products to the market (Mercury's case in the company's compensation amounted to nearly 5 billion US dollars, litigation costs also exceed 1 billion US dollars).
It can thus be seen that the assurance of the safety of genetically modified foods comes from practical evidence, good supervision, and a genuine market mechanism, rather than taking it for granted and hoping for fear.
The more reasonable doubts, the safer the commercial production will be
On the other hand, rational opposition based on evidence and logic is an excellent reference for the establishment of a good supervision and prevention mechanism. The more reasonable questions raised, the more security holes that can be blocked, and the real commercialization of genetically modified staple foods. The safer.
For example, there are queries that pollen from genetically modified crops will contaminate non-transgenic crop varieties, so there are studies under what conditions can avoid such pollution. A study from the University of Maine found that if the genetically modified corn is located 100 feet away from the adjacent traditional corn field, the cross-pollination success rate is 1%, and if the distance is 1000 feet, the cross-pollination rate is zero. The study suggests that it is feasible to prevent transgene transmission between transgenic plants and traditional plants following recommended planting distances.
Another example of a strong question about GM crops is that GM crops will reduce biodiversity, but others believe that this risk is not unique to GM crops, so the response is not to ban GM crops, but to better preserve the risk of loss. The traditional crop variety.
According to the regulations of the "Regulations on the Administration of Safety of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms", "Seeds Law of the People's Republic of China", and "Regulations for the Examination and Approval of Major Crop Variety", it is necessary to obtain two types of genetically modified insect-resistant rice from the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture in 2009. After passing the certification of the variety and obtaining the seed production license and the seed business license, it can enter commercial production. In this process, the competent authorities should not relax the supervision and management of these GM crops and should continue to evaluate their returns and risks. Even if it is actually approved for commercial production in the future, supervision and re-evaluation will continue.
Transgenics are not all good but not all bad
Although there are indeed studies that have found such problems in some GM crops, even Dr. Arpad Pusztai, who first published the unfavorable results of genetically modified potatoes, declared: “I have never said anything about GM foods. I'm only talking about the GM potatoes I studied. You can't jump from one thing to another in science.†Robert, professor of theoretical ecology and Australian scientist at the Royal College of London, UK・Mr. May once said: “If I mix cyanide (a highly toxic substance) with absinthe in a cocktail and cause harm to people, I cannot conclude that I should ban all mixed drinks. â€
By the same token, justifying the safety of a genetically modified product does not mean that all genetically modified products are safe. Genetically modified products are the general term for many products. Some products have more benefits to humans than risk, and some products have more risk than benefits. Therefore, they should be treated separately and not generalized, either the genetic modification is good or the genetic modification is bad. The two-pole thinking is not able to correctly handle such a complicated science and technology as transgenes.
When the world faces a food crisis, genetically modified foods provide us with a solution that is worth a try. However, “water can carry a boat and can also overturn itâ€. We must be cautious and cautious when dealing with such a powerful technology.
Fcob Strips,High Power Fcob Light,Mini Fcob Strips Light,Mini Pcb Fcob Light Strips
Top Lighting International (HK) Co., Limited , https://www.topled-group.com