US Pork Ad Initiated by Scientific American: BAPHIQ|美豬業配爭議 防檢局:科學人主動邀約

Controversy lingers even after Scientific American removed its Facebook post, in which it claimed ractopamine is "not only profitable but also eco-friendly." The magazine admitted the seemingly informative article is actually an advertisement placed by the Council of Agriculture.


Controversy still continues even after Scientific American removed its Facebook post on September 19, in which it claimed that leanness-enhancing agent ractopamine is "not only profitable but also good for the environment. The internationally renowned Science magazine further explained that the post was actually an "advertisement" placed by the Council of Agriculture. In response, the Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine issued a statement, saying it was the magazine who approached them in the first place and it is also not the first time for both sides to put out an "advertorial" together. But the Council of Agriculture said the content was entirely created by the magazine and it felt "regrettable" that the post has been removed. Premier Su Tseng-chang personally came forward and explained.

The Council of Agriculture did not provide such controversial information. The magazine had clarified the issue and apologized publicly.

Minister of Agriculture Chen Chi-chung was trying to clarify the issue back on the 21st. He said the Council of Agriculture only provided technical information and the Scientific American should be held accountable for the controversial wordings. The Kuomintang, meanwhile, accused the Council of Agriculture of shifting the blame.

In fact, the Council of Agriculture wants to whitewash the fact that ractopamine pork is harmful to the human body. Once this was disclosed, the Minister of Agriculture Chen Chi-chung, however, evaded his responsibility immediately. We should also be asking if the Council is spending budgets on ads somewhere else.

The opposition party further criticized the Council of Agriculture for attempting to brainwash Taiwanese on the effects of the leanness-enhancing agent. In response, the Chief Editor of Scientific American Li Chia-wei said on the telephone that he will no longer comment on the issue publicly.



科學人19號在臉書聲稱，加入瘦肉精-萊克多巴胺，「可以增加收益又環保」，事後緊急下架道歉，說這是農委會下的廣告。21號晚間防檢局聲明回擊，廣編貼文其實是「科學人」主動邀約的，而且其實過去也合作多次，基於信任，這次的廣編內容，都是由「科學人」，撰寫。「科學人」，自行下架貼文，令人遺憾。22號行政院長蘇貞昌也親自滅火。

行政院長 蘇貞昌表示：「這(爭議字眼)不是農委會提供的資料，該雜誌也已經出面道歉，並且澄清。」

回顧21號農委會主委陳吉仲就已澄清，官方只提供專業資訊，至於爭議的字眼為何出現？要問「科學人」，不過，國民黨批評農委會「切割」、把責任推給「科學人」。

國民黨文傳會主委 王育敏表示：「你其實就是，想要去漂白這整個"萊克多巴胺"美豬，對人體危害的這件事情。但是被揭發之後，我們可以看到農委會主委，他竟然，陳吉仲這麼地"秒切割"。而我們要質疑，農委會只有在科學人這邊，下(廣編)預算嗎？」

國民黨還批評農委會為了洗白瘦肉精的危害，企圖洗腦國人。記者致電總編輯李家維，李家維表示，不再針對風波對外說明。