« “Special snowflakes”: Eddie S. Glaude, Jr. on campus free speech debates | Main | Changing the culture: Kate Harding on accountability for sexual misconduct »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


1. Aside from salt and fat, Carroll also discussed food fear toward cholesterol, meat, gluten, monosodium glutamate (MSG), genetically modified organism (GMO). I think in this way, he made himself more persuasive. That is, he not only gave the readers a sense of what "food fear" is like, but he also dispelled rumors about the ingredients.

2. Carroll used the case of MSG and GMO to illustrate the problem of unscientific food fear. For MSG, although anti-MSG cultures related certain symptoms with the consumption of MSG, there was no scientific evidence showed that people suffer from the symptoms after they eat MSG-contained food. As for GMO, a poll showed that almost 60 percent people believed that GMOs were unsafe, while only 11 percent of the scientists believed so. I agreed that the phenomenon is alarming. Scientists are well-educated in their professional field of research, and they know better than regular people. If people don't trust them but believe in scary rumors instead, that will be a concerning situation. But I also understand some people's concern that it is likely that scientists can be bribed by the food company to cover the facts about some ingredients.

Man Yee Au

I agree with Carroll’s argument that we should use our critical mind to consider whether the food is healthy or not. Due to the progress of society, more people start to be aware of the food they eat, and these people have the ability to purchase healthier and expensive food. Therefore, they want to avoid all unhealthy food to maintain their health. In addition, because of the rapid development of technology, people can easily get the information in regard to food through the internet. However, this kind of information usually exaggerates the negative sides of food and ignores some significant criteria, such as the people’s body conditions and the frequency of consumption. Unfortunately, many people still believe the information and stay away from the “unhealthy” food. I agree with the author’s argument since people should keep a critical mind to understand the nutrients and body reactions. People should not have an early conclusion to any food. For example, some people claim that GMO food is unhealthy and unsafe to humans’ bodies because the change of the gene may increase the risk of mutation. According to the article “Five Good Reasons to Support GMOs,” the author refutes people’s unbiased claims and further discusses the advantages of GMO food. The author writes, “The testing process can take 7-10 years, and must include evaluations of potential risks to humans and livestock as well as potential risks to wildlife and the environment” (“Five Good Reasons to Support GMOs”). This statement shows that growing and eating GMO food is safe and healthy to people, and those opponents’ claim is wrong. This is a good example to show that many people do not think critically before avoiding some food. Indeed, people should do more research when they get the information about food. As the result, they can eat a variety of healthy food and get the desirable nutrients through eating properly. Consequently, I agree with Carroll’s argument.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)