From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology

author:Doubt the explorers

Author: Skeptical Explorer

#2022世界杯 #

(No originality, welcome to forward anywhere.) But don't forward the official number. )

In this World Cup, Qatar was unfortunately out. Against African champions Senegal, Qatar performed much better than in the first match against Ecuador, which proved its quality by drawing with world-class Netherlands. Let's say 1:3. Although Qatar lost, it was good to score a goal in the World Cup, not nothing.

And in the 2002 World Cup in Japan and South Korea, that, that "white chopping chicken" ...

Forget it, don't say it. Everyone understands.

Qatar is out, but it cannot be said that it is a weak team. It is still the number one team in Asia. It won the 2019 Asian Cup. In the 2019 Copa America, Qatar lost only two goals to Argentina, lost only one to Colombia, and drew with Paraguay. In the 2021 North American Gold Cup, Qatar reached the semi-finals and lost just 0-1 against the United States, a leading team in North American football.

It can be said that Qatar is the number one team in Asia. It's second-rate in world football as a whole, but it's very, very remarkable that Asian football is second-rate.

It is worth mentioning that Qatar has been insisting on player naturalization. For example, Montari, who scored his first World Cup goal for Qatar, is a naturalized player.

From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology

Players from the Qatari team

There are currently 12 naturalized players in the Qatari national team, specifically: strikers Sebastian (Uruguay), Maksoud (Egypt), Meshaal (Sudan), midfielders Boudiaf (France), Hooch (Morocco), Tresol (Democratic Republic of the Congo), defenders Kasorla (Ghana), Yasher (Egypt), Abucar (Sudan), goalkeepers Amin (Morocco), Sofiane (Sudan) and Bari (Guinea).

In fact, it is not only Qatar that is engaged in naturalized players, other countries are also doing it, and they have been doing it for many years. Trezeguet is a naturalized player of the French team, he is Argentine. Black French players such as Henry, Wiltoud, Thuram and Kingsley Koeman came from Guadeloupe. Spain's naturalized players include Senna, Costa, Di Stéfano and others. There are too many countries that engage in naturalized players, almost all European or South American football teams are doing it, and the second-class North America is also doing it.

I would like to ask a question: is naturalized players good for the level of football competition in this country?

If there is no profit, there is no need for the host country to continue to do so, is this the truth?

Because of the naturalized players, the level has been improved.

Please think, naturalized players are they not human?

Their genes are slightly different from those of citizens of the naturalized countries, but they are still out-and-out human beings.

From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology

The genes of naturalized players also belong to humans, not aliens

For the French, Trezeguet is a human just like them, not an alien, let alone a beast freak.

From this point, I think of GM technology, which is misunderstood by many people.

Many people always fantasize that transgenic technology has transferred a certain gene, afraid that this gene is not good. However, the gene transferred by the transgenic gene was originally derived from human food crops. It was originally edible. Let me use an analogy:

Do you eat pancakes for breakfast? Pancakes aren't poisonous, are they? Today you went to the pancake stand, boss, for a tenderloin, and tomorrow, you said, for a ham sausage. Whether it's tenderloin or ham sausage, they are originally edible. In fact, tenderloin and ham sausage are equivalent to two different genes. No matter how you replace them, they are originally edible to humans. Would you make this pancake toxic because you changed a ham sausage?

If we think of the pancake with tenderloin as the Qatari team, or the French team, or any football team in the world, then the pancake of ham sausage is equivalent to the football team after absorbing naturalized players.

The same is true of GM technology. Regardless of the genetic access, it originally comes from a certain crop that humans have eaten tens of thousands of.

And some people are also worried, saying that they are afraid that bad people will deliberately transfer into the so-called "bad genes".

The problem is that this concern is purely superfluous.

In fact, GMO is not that complicated at all, it is a commercial activity.

As long as you know this, then you can understand what GMO is all about. According to reports, there are three main technologies in the breeding method, the first is hybridization, and conventional breeding is hybridized; Second, after the molecular technology was mastered, a breeding of molecular markers was produced; The third is GMO. GM is just one technology behind the big industry of breeding. And scientists research and development of technology, nothing more than to provide enterprises, enterprises master technology, nothing more than to occupy the market.

It is worth mentioning that all GM technology research and development projects in China do not accept any foreign funding, 100% are funded by the State Council, and all are public welfare projects. Is the State Department funding for the purpose of "poisoning"? Impossible, right? People with normal brains don't think like that, right? In addition to the fact that he is a full professor at a communication university.

In fact, whether scientists or enterprises, as long as they are honest and engage in product research and development normally, they can obtain enough fame and fortune, and they do not need to "poison", and then put themselves in prison in the dark, life is better than death. You know, GMO companies are basically listed companies, they are responsible for all shareholders, and the only thing they pursue is commercial profits. Only when product safety and quality are guaranteed and the reputation is getting better and better, can they obtain a steady stream of wealth. What good would it do them if they were poisoned to wipe out the population? Is land needed? But the people's arable land simply could not be used up. Moreover, GMO is a sensitive topic around the world, with at least billions of bloody eyes staring at these companies, and once there is any safety and quality flaw, it will immediately expand millions of times in the public opinion field, setting off a huge wave. In line with the principle of not immediately going bankrupt and going to jail, these companies will also be 120,000 cautious. Logically, GM products are safer than ordinary products.

What's more, if it is really necessary to "poison and eliminate the population", then these companies should also adopt a large number of low-price dumping products to quickly achieve the goal, but why do they spend a lot of money and countless energy to engage in what product patents? Why are there legal proceedings around the world to protect patents?

Even if it is said that there are really some "mad scientists" who take 10,000 steps back, that is, he would rather go to prison and have to be "poisoned", it is useless. Any GMO product in the world must undergo at least 15 years of toxicological experiments before going on the market, usually about 20 years. Safety experiments are done for 20 years. There are dozens of links in this experiment, and none of them can pass. In addition, feeding experiments are 100,000 times the dose, there is a "poison", and the toxicity will be amplified 100,000 times after feeding. According to the convention, 100,000~200,000 times the dose of feeding experiments are often taken, and each biological unit is generally fed more than 10 tons, if calculated according to the proportion, it is equivalent to human beings have been consumed for 1 million years, there is no so-called 2 generations, 3 generations.

Then it is not finished, the project unit has to apply to the government, and the government appoints a third-party agency with no interest in the appraisal. Until the identification results are available, the project unit does not know who the third-party organization is. The identification of third-party institutions also requires rigorous experiments, starting from more than 1 year, generally 3 years. In this way, any GMO product on the market has been tested for safety for many years, usually about 20 years.

Excuse me, is this "poisoning" useful? You can't pass the first level.

I'll use an analogy, your dream since childhood was to become a general. You go and sign up for the army now. A political review is required before joining the army. If you can't even pass the first hurdle of the political trial, you don't care what to join the army, make meritorious contributions, promote cadres, apply for military schools, participate in wars, award medals, and be promoted to general.

From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology

If you don't pass the political trial, how can you be a general?

First confirmation that there is no allergy is equivalent to a political review of GMO research. This would have been the first hurdle. After the first hurdle, scientists will continue to invest resources for the next step of research, otherwise it is a complete waste of time.

Online conspiracy theories say that Monsanto (acquired by Bayer in Germany in 2016 and no longer exists) bought more than 200 countries and the scientific community around the world, but Monsanto is just an ordinary commercial company that is as merciful as any other company. It has been engaged for hundreds of years, and its market value is not a fraction of the value of the Chinese enterprise Huawei, so how can such a little money buy the global government and scientific community? Since 1971, more than 100,000 SCI experimental papers in the global scientific community have supported GMO safety, and many of these countries and institutions have conflicting ideologies or interests, such as the Russian National Academy of Sciences, which supports GMOs, and its relations with Western countries are not friendly.

The safety of GMOs is undisputed throughout the mainstream scientific community, and who can buy scientists from the entire scientific community?

If an academician can't be trusted by you, then 61 academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences write a joint letter asking for the promotion of GMO, and these 61 academicians can be bought by Monsanto? These include Zhong Nanshan and Chen Junshi. Yuan Longping also supports GMO.

From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology

Academician Zhong Nanshan who supports the application of GMOs

If you don't believe these 61 academicians, then so far, there are 151 Nobel Prize winners in the world who have signed in favor of GMO, and the vast majority of these scientists are in the field of biophysics, these 151 Nobel Prize winners, they have all been bought by Monsanto?

If you don't believe these 61 Nobel laureates, then in the international imperial academic journals "Nature", "Science" and "Cell", there are more than 1100 top papers supporting GMO, assuming that each paper has two authors, which is 2200 authors. You know, scholars who can publish papers in journals such as Nature and Science are basically equivalent to the level of academicians. These 2200 scientists, who are equivalent to academicians in the world, have been bought?

If you don't believe these 151 Nobel laureates, then since 1971 there have been more than 100,000 top scientific experimental papers on the SCI supporting the conclusion that GMOs are safe, and these authors have all been bought? To do such scientific experiments, it is impossible for one author, usually several, or even a dozen. Assuming that each paper has an average of 5 authors, 100,000 papers are 500,000 authors. Note that these authors have studied transgenetics, not in the last decade or eight, but since 51 years ago. Over the course of 51 years, there are at least 500,000 scientists around the world conducting scientific experiments to prove the safety of GMOs. These 50 scientists, they were all bought?

If you still have doubts about these 500,000 scientists, then the authorities supporting GMOs include the World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the European Food Safety Authority, the International Society of Toxicology, the International Biological Society, the FDA and more than 30 other authoritative institutions, plus many national academies of science around the world. These organizations have scientific reports on GMOs that are certified safe. These organizations have members in more than 100 countries around the world and more than millions of members. These millions of scientists, they were all bought?

Let's do the math and buy an SCI paper author, even if it's $100,000. 500,000 authors, that's 50 billion dollars. That's the minimum.

An academician-level scientist needs at least $10 million to let him speak, right? Of the 2,200 academician-level scientists who published papers in Nature, Science and Cell, $10 million per person is $22 billion.

The editors and judges of these top international academic journals are all big bulls equivalent to the master level of Longmu Island in the academic world, and it is useless to buy one, and all the editors, judges and other big bulls who have the right to do review and review must be bought. Even if there are 300 people, one has to give at least $100 million, and 300 people get $30 billion.

More than 30 top international authorities, how can there be about 1,000 people at the top? One person gives a hundred million dollars, which is 100 billion dollars.

The National Academy of Sciences that supports GMO, there are dozens of known in the world, in recent decades, why haven't I seen an academician stand up and say that GMO has a problem? A Academy of Sciences has hundreds of people, we count less, we have to have 20,000 academicians. Give a little less, 10 million dollars for an academician, not much, almost 200 billion dollars.

Not counting the institutions that govern agriculture in various countries. Even if you count the scientists above, 50 billion + 22 billion + 30 billion + 100 billion + 200 billion = 402 billion US dollars.

Well, then the legendary "Monsanto" who bought scientists, does it have this money? Before the delisting, Monsantocity was worth a total of 560 billion, less than a fraction of Huawei's market value. If it can really shell out $402 billion, what else will it do hard to do scientific research to gag other people's mouths?

Moreover, the scientific community's support for GMO has not been ten years or eight years, but 51 years. The longer the time and the larger the number of participants, the bigger the problem, which is that the risk is growing geometrically. Quite simply, a matter that cannot be made public can remain unexposed for several years at most, but it involves millions of scientists, so many people have joined forces to keep it secret, and the time span is 50 years, which is almost impossible. Let's assume this extreme scenario, where millions of scientists are paid, and they have banded together to deceive the world for half a century, is that what a measly $402 billion can do? How can you get 100 times, right? That's more than $40 trillion.

Since it has more than 40 trillion US dollars, what else to do, go directly to the moon to build a country.

Let's think about it again, assuming that Monsanto really has this heavenly power, it likes to spill money and play with nothing, the purpose is to gag scientists, then, is it stupid? Spending money to buy millions of scientists, and buying a bloody sprinkler that has been scolded every day for 51 years, why doesn't it directly use its "huge energy" to make those famous opponents "quantum evaporate on the earth"? Why should it cost tens of trillions of dollars to spend tens of trillions of dollars and thankless what can be done at a very small cost?

What we see is that whether at home or abroad, these anti-GMO people who are very happy in public every day, they are all jumping alive, opening organic farms, publishing books and cursing, selling 300 yuan a chicken thigh... Aren't they all flavorful?

At least 40 trillion dollars of "hush money" "interest groups" want to deal with them, and even send them to the moon to mine is easy, how can these opponents live dashingly and happy?

Here, I want to say something for scientists, whether you like to listen to it or not, that is my heartfelt words:

Although there are a very small number of black sheep in the scientific community, this does not deny the whole group. Just because we found out that Math Teacher Zhang ran a red light, we can't think that teachers all over the world are bad people. As far as I have personally come into contact with, the vast majority of scientific researchers are respectable and selfless people. It can be said like this:

The wisdom, logic, judgment, knowledge, experience, morality, sense of distress, and sense of social responsibility of the group of scientists are all above ordinary people, and far above these malicious self-media. The possibilities that ordinary people think of have long been thought of by scientists, and they think more deeply. Scientists will worry even more about the worries of ordinary people, and they will start worrying many years in advance. Scientists are not only worried, but have long begun to test in practice. Why hasn't mainstream science denied GMOs for decades?

I don't believe they were all "bought" by Monsanto!

Let's take a look at the official statement of the Voice of China of the Central Radio and Television Corporation on August 20, 2018, linked to:

Just take a screenshot of one of the paragraphs:

From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology


The text is:

In fact, genetically modified products that have undergone scientific and strict safety evaluation and obtained government approval are safe. In 2016, more than 100 Nobel Prize-winning scientists from more than 10 countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Australia, and Russia, signed an open letter calling for respect for scientific judgment and conclusions on the safety of GMOs. From the perspective of production and consumption practices, GM products approved by the government for marketing are safe. Since the commercial cultivation of genetically modified crops began in 1996, more than 34 billion mu have been planted so far, and billions of people in more than 60 countries and regions around the world consume genetically modified food, and there has not been a single confirmed safety problem. At the same time, the scientific community has carried out long-term follow-up studies on the safety of transgenetics, and the results show that GM products on the market are safe.

I conveniently retweet the rumor-refuting popular science article "Don't be fooled, you must know about GMO problems" released by the official public account of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of China "China Agricultural GMO Management" on August 2, 2022, link at:

A random excerpt from one of them:

Myth 1: People in developed countries and regions such as the United States and Europe do not eat genetically modified foods

Is this really the case? This question is most true in terms of data. According to data released by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 92% of corn, 96% of cotton, 94% of soybeans, and 99% of sugar beets grown in the United States are genetically modified. In 2019, the United States produced 96.68 million tons of soybeans, with an export volume of about 52.39 million tons, and corn production of 361 million tons, with an export volume of about 41.57 million tons, it can be seen that 46% of soybeans and more than 88% of corn are consumed domestically in the United States.

In addition to corn, cotton, soybeans, sugar beets, the United States also grows a large number of genetically modified canola, alfalfa, potatoes, papaya, zucchini and apples. According to the American Grocers Association (GMA), 75%-80% of foods in the United States contain genetically modified ingredients. There is no phenomenon that "all genetically modified agricultural products are exported, and Americans do not eat them themselves."

From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology

Against rumors

The EU imports a large amount of genetically modified agricultural products every year, mainly soybeans, corn, cotton, rape, sugar beets and their processed products. In 2019, the EU soybean consumption was 17.71 million tons, and the imported soybeans were 14.65 million tons, of which 12.75 million tons of genetically modified soybeans, accounting for about 87% of the total imports and 72% of the total EU soybean consumption, not only for feed, but also for oil extraction and other food industries; 23.77 million tons of corn were imported, of which 6.42 million tons were genetically modified corn, accounting for about 27% of total imports and 8% of EU corn consumption. EU member states choose whether to plant GM crops according to their own needs, and a few countries in Spain and Portugal currently plant a part of GM insect-resistant maize, planting an area of 1.68 million mu in 2019.

Although Japan does not grow genetically modified crops, it also imports and consumes a large number of genetically modified agricultural products. In 2019, 3.22 million tons of genetically modified soybeans, 15.19 million tons of corn and 2.242 million tons of rapeseed were imported, accounting for 90%, 95% and 97% of domestic consumption, respectively.

Looking at such a long list of numbers, some friends must feel that their eyes are spent, so let's talk about what most people in the world have drunk and eaten, such as the beer that bravely broke the world with our youth and invincibility; Those long nights with you watching the drama "creaking" into the mouth crispy snacks. Many of the brewer's yeast used to ferment beer in these foods and food additives used to make snacks delicious are produced by genetically modified technology and have long entered our daily lives.

See? The beer consumed by fans every day during the World Cup is genetically modified!

Linking GMO to "cancer" and "infertility" is ""

As for the so-called "cancer" problem, there is no experimental data to prove an association between GM foods and cancer. Cancer is related to several factors, the most important is the increase in life expectancy, the higher the life expectancy, the greater the incidence of cancer. In 2018, the National Cancer Center released national cancer statistics, and the national cancer incidence rate was 278.07 per 100,000 people (302.13 in urban areas / 248.94 in rural areas). Distribution by age: 0-14 years old ~ 0.59%, 15-44 years old ~ 10.4%, 45-59 years old ~ 27.7%, 60-80 years old ~ 49.2%, 80 years old ~ 12.3%. It can be seen that increasing age is the most absolute factor in cancer incidence. Secondly, it is related to the human diet, such as exposure to nitrosamines, aflatoxin, benzopyrene and other carcinogens, more than 60 million people in China like to chew betel nut, and betel nut is a high incidence of carcinogens. There are also some bad eating habits, such as eating hot food for a long time, or too much salt, which will also increase the probability of cancer. Epidemiological investigations and statistical analyses conducted by public health scientists have also proved that GMOs are not associated with cancer. For example, there are obvious regional differences in the distribution of nasopharyngeal carcinoma, and before genetically modified foods entered the country, Guangdong was already a high-incidence area. The mainland's Ministry of Health has conducted a survey that the incidence of cancer in Guangdong and Qinghai is among the lowest in the country, and these two regions are the most concentrated consumption of genetically modified soybean oil. In other words, the two provinces that consume the most genetically modified soybean oil have the lowest cancer incidence rates in the country.

Let's look at the international survey data. After 1996, the United Kingdom was a country that rarely consumed genetically modified foods after 1996, so the incidence of 8 tumors in the United States and the United Kingdom in the same period was compared, and the result was that there was no statistical difference in the incidence of cancer between the United States, which ate a lot of genetically modified food, and the United Kingdom, which ate very little genetically modified food. In other words, eating or not eating genetically modified foods will not affect the incidence of cancer.

From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology

Chart of cancer incidence

The World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research jointly released the "2018 World Cancer Prevalence Overall Ranking", and China ranked 70th. The top 10 countries for cancer incidence are: Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Hungary, the United States, Belgium, France, Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands. These countries are among the highest in life expectancy, which is in line with the scientific judgment that the higher the life expectancy, the greater the cancer rate. Counting cancer cases per 100,000 people, Australia 468 and the Netherlands ranked tenth with 334.1. The prevalence of cancer in mainland China is at the upper middle level internationally (the incidence rate is 271.7 people). It is worth mentioning that except for the United States, the top ten countries basically do not grow GM crops. This proves that cancer incidence has nothing to do with GMOs.

From the World Cup Qatar team to GM technology

In the 2017 ranking, China did not enter the top 20

There is also the so-called "infertility", which is actually the most directly related to modern people's late marriage and late childbearing.

Many places in the Yangtze River Delta region recently released big data on marriage registration in 2021. According to the Civil Affairs Department of Anhui Province, the average age of marriage registration in Anhui Province in 2021 is 33.31 years old, the average age of first marriage is 31.89 years old for men and 30.73 years old for women, and the average age of marriage registration in Jiangsu Province is 31.22 years old, and the average age of first marriage is 27.29 years old. "After 2008, the age of first marriage in Anhui has gradually increased, from about 26 years old at the beginning to more than 30 years old now." Fan Hesheng, a professor at Anhui University's School of Social and Political Science, said in an interview that at present, most of the first marriages in the Yangtze River Delta region are around 30 years old. (March 13, China News Network)

In addition to age, environmental hormones are also worth paying attention to. On March 7, 2022, the People's Political Consultative Conference Daily reported: "Environmental hormones are an important cause of the decline in male reproductive capacity and the significant increase in infertility rates in China. At the National Two Sessions, Gu Jianwen, member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference and director of the Special Medical Center of the Strategic Support Force, said in an interview with reporters.

In addition to age, environmental factors are also considered to be the main causes of decreased male fertility. Environmental hormones, also known as environmental hormones and environmental endocrine disruptors, are a class of synthetic chemicals that can interfere with the endocrine system by binding to human hormone receptors and affect the development of human reproduction.

Gu Jianwen said that environmental hormones are widely present in the environment we live in, which can enter the human body through respiratory, drinking water and food, such as phthalates contained in plastic drinking water pipes and containers, bisphenol A contained in household daily necessities, and organophosphorus compounds (OPs) widely used in furniture as additives. Even a variety of estrogenic substances can be detected in the natural rivers of the mainland, which mainly come from urban tailwater discharge, aquaculture discharge, industrial wastewater and so on.


The national team brought in naturalized players, which improved the overall strength of the team.

No matter which country they are imported from, they are originally humans, not demonic monsters.

The same is true of GM technology. Regardless of which gene is transferred, it originally comes from crops that humans have eaten for thousands of years.

I think that the effect of similar information cocoons often makes the inverse lose themselves, and they create the wrongs in the history of science. The University of Colorado at Poulder, Washington University (St. Louis), the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Toronto in Canada jointly completed a research project entitled "Extreme "inverse groups" know the least, but think they know the most, the conclusions of which were published in Nature Human Behavior. The findings suggest that the less extremists know about GMOs, the more they think they know. And these people often have the illusion of "I see through your conspiracy, everything is in my hands" and "I am the great hero who worries about the country and the people". Many people draw conclusions that he is "more reliable" just on the basis of "this person dares to speak and is a man", but they scoff at scientists and scientific institutions. Some people directly sentenced the death sentence to GM technology with "intuition", such as "insects do not eat, people can eat", but will not spend half a minute to understand the scientific principles behind it. These people are actually in a kind of psychological closed loop.

If you want to break the information cocoon effect that brings ignorance to people, you can only arm the human brain, accept more knowledge, communicate more with mainstream scientific researchers, and improve your own scientific literacy. For ordinary people, if they want to get close to the scientific truth, one of the easiest ways is:

Do not participate in any WeChat groups involving religion, metaphysics, and sinology. As much as possible, join WeChat groups where science popularization workers or scientific researchers are located.

I myself am involved in some of the mainstream scientific groups, including the official groups of the vice-ministerial media. Some netizens were also introduced to join the study. A netizen called "Heart to Warm Sun" said:

I used to be afraid of GMOs, and now in this group, I'm not afraid anymore. I know it's scientific, so I'm not afraid. Follow the bees to find flowers. It used to be following flies to find toilets.

#2022世界杯 #

Read on