"What is your first thought when it comes to genetically modified foods?"
The open questionnaire question was obtained as a "standard answer." People who mentioned "harmful, toxic, and bad" accounted for the majority, and only a few mentioned "good."
"Have you ever heard of genetic modification before?"
Fifty-nine percent of the respondents said they had "never heard of it". The percentage of respondents in rural households was as high as 66.5%, and those in urban households were 41.1%. Only 9.1% of the respondents who have heard of "genetic modification" thought that they knew "very much" or "more" about the knowledge of genetic modification...
On May 15, the results of the “Public Attitude Survey on Genetically Modified Technologies†were published. “Compared with previous surveys, public awareness of genetic modification has not changed much. The vast majority of the public think they have little or no knowledge about genetic modification.†The project leader, China Academy of Science and Technology Development Strategy and Technology He Guangxi, deputy director of the Institute of Social Development, told the Science and Technology Daily that 65.2% of respondents objected to the promotion of planting genetically modified rice in China, and 72.8% were reluctant to eat genetically modified foods. The public’s acceptance of genetic modification showed a significant downward trend.
Why does acceptance continue to decline?
He Guangxi used the data to compare with the survey. In 2011, a survey data for the public of five cities showed that 42.1% of the public explicitly supported the promotion of planting genetically modified rice in China. This is in sharp contrast with the current 25.7% support rate. Compared. The rapid decline in public acceptance of genetically modified foods is even more pronounced.
The conclusion of this survey is that the public’s acceptance attitude toward genetic modification in our country continues to show significant deterioration. The number of basic research and patents for genetically modified organisms in China is second only to the United States, and commercialization technology is almost entirely localized. Why, as time passes, people's attitude towards genetic modification is not becoming more understood but increasingly resistant?
“This is caused by public perception of risk-return imbalances. It is widely believed that GM foods endanger human and ecological safety, and there is insufficient understanding of genetic gains, especially direct benefits to individual consumers.†He Guangxi pointed out that the survey results showed that In the eyes of most respondents, if the benefits of GM crops are mainly reflected in the public interest such as food security, ecological environment, or the interests of growers, the direct benefits to consumers are very limited.
He Guangxi believes that in addition to the perceived imbalance in the risk-return of genetically modified organisms, misunderstandings caused by ignorance of genetically modified knowledge or rumors are the reason why the public opposes genetic modification. For example, the survey results showed that more than 30% (31.3%) of respondents believe that “people who eat GM foods will also be 'transgenic'â€. Of these, only 14.3% support the cultivation of genetically modified rice, and 15.7% are willing to eat. For genetically modified foods, the acceptance of transgenes was significantly lower than those who did not believe the claim (the above ratios were 33.3% and 23.4%, respectively).
Who is inciting the "reverse" nerve
“The public’s acceptance of transgenes is getting lower and lower, and the root cause is caused by rumors.†Under the funding of the National Natural Science Foundation of China, Professor Hu Ruifa, professor of Beijing Institute of Technology’s School of Management and Economics, is searching and reading the US “Science Citation Index†paper. After all the papers on the biosafety of transgenic crops in SCI, it was discovered that from the year 1981 to May 2014, 9,333 articles on the safety of genetically modified organisms were published. The vast majority of research results in these papers indicate that genetically modified technology is safe. However, the papers on the insecurity of transgenes have been rejected by further research in the scientific community.
Hu Ruifa introduced that, in fact, the most authoritative scientists engaged in biosafety research in the world were involved in the research of genetically modified organisms at the earliest, and scientists were more concerned with the safety of genetically modified organisms than the general public. The currently approved commercialized genetically modified products have also undergone the most stringent biosafety inspections and tests ever, establishing the most stringent regulatory system ever.
In addition, Hu Ruifa also traced the domestic network's view on genetic transformation, and found that large areas such as "Xianyu 335" corn planting led to the extinction of rats and stillbirth of sows. The "Dika" series of corn planting resulted in the reduction of spermatozoa of Guangxi college students. Experts found that the high incidence of tumors in China's genetically modified soybean oil concentrating areas came from rumors made by stakeholders. The idea that GM crops do not increase production is that interlocutors intentionally mislead the public.
Compared with the above domestic rumors, Hu Ruifa’s team also found that in the “scientific†and “digital†view of genetic safety issues in China, more than half of the opinions came from the blog post published by the Hexun blogger “speaking outâ€. By falsifying reports made by the US Academy of Sciences and misrepresenting rumours made by relevant UN agencies and official U.S. government documents. From February 2010 to March 7, 2016, 450 articles on genetic modification were published. These postings have maliciously incited public hatred against scientists through fabricated "unsafe evidence" of GM in sensational "panic" language, thereby stimulating domestic public opposition to the government's relevant GM policies.
“The foregoing rumors and malicious tampering with scientific reports have severely abducted the public. Some media celebrities and professional 'inversing people' have used these rumours to 'pull the waves', hampered the public’s return to rationality, seriously affected the country’s decision-making, and caused the country to lose its preemption. The opportunities for biotechnology research and development at the international commanding heights.†In Hu Ruifa's view, regarding genetic rumors, especially those involving food safety, if the government does not react in time or even makes mistakes, it will affect the credibility of the government.
How to eliminate concerns and concerns
As one of the fastest-growing technologies in the world, 18 million farmers in 28 countries in the world benefited from planting genetically modified crops in 2015. However, with the rapid growth of planting areas of genetically modified crops, the debate over the safety of genetically modified crops has intensified.
“The debate over the safety of genetically modified crops has not occurred within the group of scientists engaged in research and development of genetically modified crops and scientific research on the safety of genetically modified crops, but has arisen from non-professional debates by external non-specialist researchers.†Hu Ruifa said that in opposition to genetically modified There are few people in the public who truly understand GM. Studies have also shown that public awareness of genetically modified foods is not high. This situation makes them more inclined to link high-risk, low-yield foods with genetically modified foods.
“The current situation is that when rumors happen, real GM scientists dare not speak out, and they will escalate their personal attacks when they make a statement.†Hu Ruifa bluntly stated that the conclusions of the research on the safety of GM are no different from those of 20 years ago. Under conditions where the level of science and technology has proven to be safe, the fierce GM debate is meaningless.
"Whether it is 20 years ago or now, or 20 years after it is approved for commercialization, there will be no difference in the scientific community's conclusion on the safety of genetically modified products." Hu Ruifa said that the current process of transgenetic commercialization is not blocked because of genetic modification. The scientific nature of technology cannot cross this step, but the fierce debate has led to too many non-professionals to participate in the change of public opinion. This has seriously affected the scientific decision-making of the government.
So, how to eliminate public concerns about genetic risk and face the development and application of genetically modified technology? He Guangxi said that letting the public more aware of the benefits of genetically modified technology, especially the benefits directly related to consumers’ immediate experience, is equally important, and relevant research abroad also supports this conclusion.
"At present, supporters and opponents are not talking about 'one channel' on the issue of genetic safety. An effective way to get the public to change their wrong ideas is to provide relevant scientific evidence when it is affected by rumours," said Hu Ruifa. (Technology Daily, Beijing, May 16)
Cable
safety lockouts are incredibly versatile making them perfect for all of your
unusual energy isolating devices that are difficult to lock out. Cable Lockouts ensure that lockout is successfully enabled across multiple energy sources, and stops individuals from initiating anything that needs to be switched off while maintenance teams carry out work.
With the help of our range of Adjustable Cable Lockout, you can be consistently guaranteed of a secure fit. The integrated safety hasp and cable is perfect for multiple circuit breaker panels and side-by-side gate valve lockouts.
Cable Safety Lockout,Master Cable Lock,Wire Cable Lock,Safety Valve Lockout
Lockey Safety Products Co., Ltd. , https://www.lotolockey.com