The controversial issue of GM food in the scientific community, which is recognized by both sides, has become a topic that only Ark is qualified to talk about and liberal arts students are not allowed to talk about in China, and it has become a topic that some people say they can eat, while others say they can’t eat or are cautious about eating. What it seems to deprive is a scientific controversy, but in fact what it deprives is the right of 1.3 billion Chinese people to choose their own dinner table and to worry about their own food safety and even life safety. This crude gesture of using the name of science to cover up one’s personal colorful judgment on the science of GM food is a serious violation of scientific prudence, a serious trampling on people’s right to choose, and a serious desecration of the true meaning of science. This is an artificial barbarism that is more panic than the GM food panic itself. The problem is that the worship and reliance on a theory of GM food that does not yet constitute the truth and has not yet reached a consensus conclusion. This is a very unserious, irresponsible, and dangerous attitude. The final scientific assertion of GM food should be left to scientists and to time. But eat it or don’t eat it, no one has the power to silence the opponents. Those who should shut up are the ones who are clamoring to shut up the naysayers. Whether he is a science popularizer, or a grassroots in the liberal arts. –Author: Liu Xuesong: 2013.12.26, Issue 80, Issue 80 http://news.ifeng.com/opinion/wangping/zhuanjiyin3/ Cui Yongyuan: Say what you have to say on GMOs, even if you can’t stop the car December 22, 2013 02:45 Source: 北京华时报 Source: http://news.ifeng.com/mainland/special/jujiaozhuanjiyin/content-5/detail_2013_12/22/32360129_0.shtml Original title. The first time I saw the movie, I had to go through the whole thing. In the meantime, Cui Yongyuan went to Japan and the United States three times at his own expense to investigate the issue of genetic modification, and accelerated his eventual departure from CCTV. The night before last, Cui Yongyuan got off the plane and immediately faced reporters directly, saying that in the “big right and wrong” issue of genetic modification, even if the mantle, but also to say the words, or sorry for their conscience. The company’s main goal is to provide the best possible service to its customers. After investigating the GM market in Japan, why did you go to the U.S. to investigate GM, twice in a row? Cui Yongyuan: Chinese experts who support GM technology say that the safety of GM food is well established in the scientific community and there is no controversy, and that Americans have been eating with confidence for 20 years without any problems. Is there any controversy? Have Americans eaten it safely for 20 years? Is it okay? Because of this I went to Japan first, and then to the United States. The first time I went to the U.S. was on my own, and I tweeted while learning about it, but I felt that some issues were not clear on Twitter, and people might not believe it, so I decided to say it by making a documentary. This time, I went to Los Angeles, San Diego, Chicago, Seattle, Springfield, Davis and other places to make a documentary, which was very rewarding. All of these were at my own expense. Beijing Times: What are the rewards? Cui Yongyuan: Experts say Americans have been eating genetically modified foods since around 1996, and have been eating them with confidence for 17 years, but more than half of the Americans I coincidentally met in my interviews, like tour guides, drivers, salesmen, etc., didn’t know what technology genetic modification was and whether it was safe to use for food. I saw data from a survey conducted by an NGO in one U.S. state in 2005 showing that only 25% of the people knew about GM technology. So my conclusion is that Americans have been eating GM for 17 years in a muddled manner, not at all with confidence. Although the two surveys in the United States were conducted only one month apart, there were also changes. This time, I saw that the shelves of supermarkets in the United States began to be labeled “non-GMO”, and only one of the six kinds of tofu bought in Chinese supermarkets was not labeled “non-GMO”. Some restaurants have begun to emphasize that the beef and chicken they serve are not genetically modified feed. Beijing Times: Some experts say that 70% of the food Americans eat contains genetically modified ingredients, is that true? Cui Yongyuan: The fact is that 70 to 80 percent of processed food in the U.S. may contain genetically modified ingredients. Processed food and whole food are two different things, like canned food, condiments, soy sauce, etc. are processed food, and you can’t eat much of them in your lifetime. One of the most controversial issues in China is whether staple foods should be genetically modified. The top two most consumed foods in the United States are beef and chicken, and then wheat, which is still in the laboratory stage. The experts we interviewed also told us that there is no sweet corn in the seed catalogs of genetically modified crops in the U.S. We saw popcorn that stated non-GMO and, most infuriatingly, also found non-GMO corn produced in China in the mall. In the U.S., if you care so much about this, you can go your whole life without eating GMOs, because the organic certification is very clear and the barcode can find the producer, so don’t worry. The price is more expensive than GMO food, but I think the average person can still afford to eat it. Beijing Times: In the American scientific community, is there any controversy about the safety of GM food? Cui Yongyuan: Chinese experts who support GM often say that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Department of Agriculture, and the “community of scientists” all believe that GM foods are substantially the same as conventional foods and that there are no differences. Are those who say GM is harmful not mainstream scientists? Some people told us that there is no problem, while others told us that the problem is very big. So I think the safety of GM food is controversial among mainstream scientists in the U.S. This is a fact that is not controversial. Beijing Times: Some people think that the GM investigation you did in the U.S. was not rigorous enough, and that you did not interview the FDA, the Department of Agriculture and other government departments in the U.S. What do you think? Cui Yongyuan: The first time I went to the U.S. to investigate, the U.S. side approached me and offered to let me go to Washington to interview government departments, but it was too short to do so, so I met with officials from the U.S. Embassy before I left this time, but when I gave them the outline of the interview, they changed their story, for example, it was almost Christmas and the government departments couldn’t find anyone, and they just refused anyway. I was very angry and protested. So it wasn’t that I didn’t want to interview the U.S. government, but that they suddenly didn’t accept the interview. I think the reason is that some of the questions are too sharp and they don’t want to answer them. Beijing Times: How did you choose the locations and people to interview in the U.S.? Do you think the survey was objective? Cui Yongyuan: I think it was very objective. In the interview sample, about one-third of the scientists and farmers who supported and approved of GM were interviewed, why was this percentage? Because I think there are already a lot of voices in support of GM, and the views of this one-third of people are almost exactly the same as what we hear in China. We interviewed the head of the University of California, Davis, which is the best agricultural research in the country, and filmed the lab. In addition to interviewing scientists with different opinions, we also interviewed private associations, ordinary families, doctors, patients, etc. From a journalist’s perspective, individual feelings may not necessarily have scientific value, but the audience is more receptive and can hear the voices of ordinary American consumers about GM. Beijing Times: Mr. Chen Yifen is the representative of the “anti-GM” camp in China, so would hiring him as a translator for your investigation make the information you obtained one-sided? Cui Yongyuan: When I asked questions, Mr. Chen would sometimes tell me what to ask. After that I told him, I am a journalist, it is my freedom to ask what I want to ask, I can give you time to communicate with them, but don’t care what questions I ask. Beijing Times: Fang Zhouzi questioned your documentary on genetic modification, which is actually a documentary on organic farming. Cui Yongyuan: This is a trap he designed, to do a GM investigation must say organic agriculture, he also understands that you want to do a comparison, so you say you are the spokesman for organic agriculture, took their money, but are quotation marks and question marks, you can not sue him. If you want to say that I am the spokesman for which organic farming, then show the evidence, there is evidence that everyone has nothing to say. We didn’t do this, but I was contacted by someone who was genetically modified and was willing to pay a high price to shut me up. The company is willing to pay a high price to shut up. The company’s main business is to provide a wide range of services to the public. The company’s main business is to provide a wide range of products and services to the public. Cui Yongyuan: Because CCTV has rules, we all have to sign an agreement, not to send such microblogging, even the introduction of the program content of the microblogging can not be sent, so this is also a big reason that prompted me to leave. I used the fastest speed to negotiate with the station repeatedly, three years ago I proposed to leave, but this time the strongest bargaining, before a talk on the shrink back, people so sincere to retain you, this time I obviously violated the rules of the station, that simply resigned. The company’s main business is to provide a wide range of products and services to the public. Cui Yongyuan: When I saw the news, Fang Zhouzi said that he wanted to create conditions for all the people in China to eat genetically modified food, and I was disgusted when I heard that. Later on, the battle with Fang Zhouzi on Weibo became more and more unpleasant, and the bottom line was crossed. In fact, GM is such an important matter, clearly speaking, a program host should not show his head, but our scientists are not very strong, whenever the people have questions, they call him low level, “stupid”, but GM knowledge is precisely the need for subtle, little by little patience to explain clearly, research and popularization of science is not contradictory, attack, invective is not a scientific attitude. Research and science popularization do not contradict each other, and attacking and abusing is not a scientific attitude. Beijing Times: Some people on the Internet said you did it to vent your personal anger? Cui Yongyuan: Fang Zhouzi said on the microblogging site, I also said that the words are not good, I do not want to establish the public image before, that is useless, for me is not a dog, I think the safety of public life is more important, at this time to give up the face. I can’t say that I used to be a famous host, a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, or something like that, so I don’t hold back, that’s not me, if you think I used to have a good image, then you’re wrong, Cui Yongyuan has his bandit side. The actual fact is that you will be able to get a lot more than just a few of the most popular and popular items. Cui Yongyuan: I’m sure I don’t have the expertise, but I used a very professional way of interviewing, using all opposing viewpoints when interviewing supporters and all supporting viewpoints when interviewing opponents, actually letting the two sides collide instead of agreeing, not letting the other side think you’re setting the stage and letting him say what he wants to say. The first thing you need to do is to get a good idea of what you want to do. Cui Yongyuan: Definitely continue to scold. If you don’t put him down, the academic world will always be filled with such hostility. I am willing to be the cannon fodder, after this battle to let the scientific community are quiet, we properly in the academic scope of the discussion, do not personal attacks, do not weave lies. I think science is to withstand the questioning, is in the questioning, discussion, and continuous practice of step by step development, there is no science to tell you categorically will never be controversial, that would not be scientific. The company has been worried about the illegal cultivation of genetic modification, the lack of supervision, and the damage to consumers’ right to know, so are you using social issues to counter scientific issues? Cui Yongyuan: I have never been against GM technology research. I made it very clear that GM technology itself is neutral, and can do both good and bad things, and I personally strongly support GM technology research, and I also think that research is too slow, and most of the patents are now in American hands, and it would be better if they were in Chinese hands. But there is an inexplicable assertion by Chinese experts pushing GM products that they have no incentive to research if they are not commercialized, which is strange. The scientists I’ve met in the U.S. who do basic research in the lab have nothing to do with commercial cultivation, which is a matter for two fields, not for scientists. The Beijing Times: What you are doing now may involve the interests of companies and governments, have you ever felt pressured and threatened? Cui Yongyuan: There are threats on Weibo every day, telling me to be careful, countless curses, “Cui stupid” “Cui idiot” this and that, fortunately I don’t care, otherwise I would have taken poison and killed myself, but I think there are still big things I need to do, so it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t hurt me. It doesn’t hurt me. The pressure is certainly not at all, since I dare to do this thing, it is all thought out, the age of the man is still afraid of this. The Beijing Times: Under what circumstances do you think China can promote genetically modified staple foods so that the people can eat them with confidence? I don’t have a say in this, but if you want to ask my opinion, you have to let the people know that there is no problem with it, and we want to eat with understanding. The newly established National Safety Council can be involved, and scientists from other fields should also be involved. In the United States, there are still people who oppose GM for religious reasons, believing that God’s creation cannot be changed indiscriminately, and we do not believe in religious people, but from a sociological point of view we cannot ignore it. I think since GM food safety scientists are still controversial, it is best not to give it to the people first, at least the public should be given the right to choose.