모기불통신

(sorry for typing in English, I cannot type in Korean at this moment) I'd like to ask following: how can you be so sure that the '식의약청의 식품첨가물데이터베이스' which you have consulted all the time is the right and ultimate criteria to determine all possible disadvantages of such chemicals? As you mentioned at the '평가 (Evaluation)' section above, there is no '보다 타당한 독성연구' yet, still there is the same possibility that there will be '보다 타당한 독성연구' sooner or later as the possiblity that there is actually no toxcitity or disadvantage of such chemicals. Indeed, individual human body has different sensitivity for different chemicals or natural substances. Therefore, we can talk about general tendency though, we cannont say with 100% certainty that specific chemicals or substances do not work in a bad way in the human body. Even well-conceived scientific experiments have not tell everything about human body and health and do not tell everything either. (from a science major student)

Still I agree with you in the sense that there are lots of pseudo scientific facts all around, and those can confuse people who are not familiar with related fields. In that sense, your postings to inform certain confusing facts can be very helpful for the people. I think, however, you might want to consider more possibilities as I mentioned above. Thank you for reading this.

제가 볼 적에 게스트씨는 과학을 전공하지 말고 전공을 바꾸는 것이 본인의 정신건강을 위해 좋겠습니다. "의심할 바 없고 확실한 진리" 를 추구하시는 것 같은데, 그렇다면 제가 추천하는 전공은 신학입니다.

haha don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I am pursuing the untouchable, perfect truth, but I am saying that even scientists need to consider the possibility that what scientific results tell us can be not true. There comes the history of science, the history of proof and disproof. I understand that we cannot help but basing on what already has done, but still need to consider upcomming evidence. Additionally, I don't think I will be ever into 신학 academically in my life. Anyways thanks for your suggestion.