Rant Reflection

     My article did shift my thinking. In my mind, I was against the conception stating genetically modified organisms and aspartame spiked blood sugar, promoted weight gain, and consumption of such organisms led to obesity. I was moderately familiar that there was no direct correlation between the two that has been scientifically proven. Also, I knew there was not enough scientific evidence to prove GMOs and aspartame are unhealthy and/or harmful. On the contrary, the article I stumbled upon mentioned that both sides of the public opinion, those for GMOs and those against them, are guilty of lack of knowledge. The article illustrated this claim by explaining that although GMOs have a notorious bad reputation, the scientific understanding of GMOs is still limited and unable to fully prove either side. Indeed, the right to question the of risks and/or benefits of consuming GMOs is rational, however, it is irrational to believe that something can emerge 100% risk free. Therefor, the public opinion for or against are both incorrect. This is true due to the lack of evidence science possesses. I added "#BeatThePublicOpinion" in my tweet for the reason that, as the article explains, there is none. The public opinion is what you believe to be untrue. My point is to rise question, not to pick a side. Ultimately, I am attempting to encourage individuals to overcome the public opinions like taking a stance and simply to question the problem as a whole.
     Furthermore, this article influenced my decision as to where and how I posted my thoughts. Throughout the article, the general public is consistently referenced. I thought, what better way to get the attention of the pubic than Twitter? Twitter is fast, simple, and effective. As the article did, I enforced questions through my tweet. I aimed to provoke uncertainty and question in the public regarding the true that there is no definite right and wrong. We can learn as much information about GMOs as far as science takes us. We should not classify GMOs as "good" or "bad", but rather what we generally do not know about them.
     Relating to my initial rant, the article walks hand in hand in the refute against false advertisement regarding the promotion of GMOs to be healthy or unhealthy. Enforcing thought of either side is ignorant since there is a lack of knowledge present in both parties. Advertising as such in the food industry can lead individuals to think in the wrong directions. In other words, it is enforcing them to chose pro or con. This was and remains to be a strategy I do not agree with as I consider it manipulation of the general public.
     In the end, us as individuals have a choice every time we sit down to a meal. We can question genetically modified organisms, or even chose to or not to consume them. However, the promotion of one idea that has yet to be fully evaluated is an inefficient and ignorant approach to understanding what GMOs really are.