In the articles, genetically modified salmon can feed the world and say no to genetically engineered salmon. Write a paragraph in which you explain why it matters when the two authors interpret the same facts differently using specific examples from the two text describe the impact of the authors, differing in interpretations of the facts on you as a reader.
1 answer
In the two articles, the authors interpret the facts about genetically modified salmon in contrasting ways. The article "Genetically modified salmon can feed the world" emphasizes the potential benefits of genetically modified salmon in addressing global food scarcity by providing a more sustainable and efficient source of protein. On the other hand, the article "Say no to genetically engineered salmon" focuses on the potential risks and ethical concerns associated with genetically engineered salmon, such as the potential for environmental harm and the unknown health effects of consuming these fish. As a reader, the differing interpretations of the facts by the authors can impact my understanding and decision-making process regarding genetically modified salmon. I may be swayed towards supporting or opposing the use of genetically engineered salmon based on which article provides more compelling arguments and evidence to support their viewpoint. The conflicting interpretations also highlight the complexity of the issue and the importance of considering multiple perspectives before forming a definitive opinion.
3 answers