In this blog post, we explore how science and technology make our lives more convenient while simultaneously harming the environment and our health, and consider how we should embrace this duality.
We live increasingly convenient lives under the protection of science and technology. While science and technology have provided us with abundant lives, few may realize that this very technology can also become a poison. Here, we aim to contemplate the dual nature of science and technology—how it can be both a blessing and a curse. Let’s begin with a few examples.
First, let’s discuss food additives. Food additives are chemically synthesized substances permitted for manufacturing, processing, importing, using, storing, or displaying for sale only when they pose no risk to human health. In Korea, there are approximately 600 types of designated food additives. They are considered essential substances for maintaining food freshness and quality.
However, the crucial question here is whether the use of these approved food additives is truly safe. Of course, food additives approved by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety can be considered safe to a certain extent. However, food additives have a set acceptable daily intake (ADI), and exceeding this limit through excessive consumption can pose problems. Therefore, when purchasing food, it is important to carefully check the ingredient labels and avoid foods with high levels of additives whenever possible. In other words, while there is no need to be unconditionally anxious about consuming food additives, minimizing their intake is advisable.
Nevertheless, the debate over whether food additives are harmful to health persists. Sodium glutamate (L-glutamic acid sodium), commonly known as MSG, is a prime example of this controversy. Konrad Weyroither, a professor and neuroscientist at Heidelberg University in Germany, explained that Alzheimer’s disease involves the death of nerve cells, stating, “L-glutamic acid sodium is a poison for nerve cells.” Additionally, American author Jean Kupper has described L-glutamic acid sodium as a “cell-killing serial killer.” Although the U.S. FDA and the European Union currently classify L-glutamic acid sodium as one of the safest food additives, there are still many experts who hold differing opinions. For example, in 1969, Professor John Olney of the University of Washington discovered that MSG caused damage to the brains of rats. This research led to a ban on adding MSG to infant formula in the United States. Professor Olney continued his research thereafter, suggesting links between MSG and various diseases such as stroke, epilepsy, and Alzheimer’s.
However, the Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety explicitly states that there is no need to unconditionally fear food additives or avoid their consumption. Additives approved through scientific verification can be safely used within specified limits. However, it is advisable to use only the minimum amount necessary to maintain food freshness. Consumers should also carefully check ingredient labels for food additives and refrain from consuming foods with excessive additives for better health. Even after 2020, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety reaffirmed the safety of monosodium glutamate (MSG). Nevertheless, many consumers still prefer additive-free products, and foods emphasizing natural ingredients continue to gain popularity.
Next, let’s discuss flush toilets. Many may wonder why flush toilets, which we use daily, are a subject of controversy. Yet flush toilets are simultaneously praised as a great invention that saved humanity from disease and criticized as a major culprit of environmental destruction.
The flush toilet is a hygienic facility that cleans waste by simply flushing water after use, once hailed as humanity’s greatest invention. Yet, it also faces criticism as the worst invention from an environmental perspective. Flush toilets are often singled out as the main culprits of water waste, water pollution, and resource depletion. So, let’s examine whether the flush toilet is humanity’s greatest invention or its worst.
First, it is undeniable that the flush toilet is a hygienic waste disposal method that saved humanity from disease. In the past, people relieved themselves anywhere or used chamber pots at home before dumping waste onto the streets, filling them with filth and foul odors. In medieval Europe, residents of high-rise buildings would even throw their waste out the window. One cause of the Black Death, which claimed the lives of one-third of Europe’s population, was precisely unsanitary toilets and unhygienic living conditions. Beyond the Black Death, millions more perished from drinking contaminated water, succumbing to typhoid, dysentery, cholera, and hepatitis.
In this context, the flush toilet was an invention that liberated humanity from disease and foul odors. Sir John Harrington’s flush toilet, first developed in 1596, was a groundbreaking invention for its time, but it had the problem of the stench from the cesspit where waste collected. Later, in 1775, Alexander Cumming developed a technique to block odors rising from the cesspool by introducing a U-shaped drainpipe. Such drainpipes are still used today in toilets, sinks, and washbasins, preventing odors and insects from rising up from the sewer. Thus, the flush toilet was a crucial invention that saved humanity from filth, foul odors, and disease. Initially, sewage flowed directly into London’s Thames River, contaminating drinking water sources and spreading waterborne diseases. However, as urban water and sewage systems were improved, these problems were largely resolved. As a result, flush toilets became even more widespread.
Yet despite the convenience of flush toilets, environmental issues remain serious. Each flush uses approximately 13 to 15 liters of water, and even water-saving toilets consume about 6 liters. Considering how many times we use the toilet daily, it becomes clear how much water is used to flush it. This contaminated water flows through sewers to treatment plants for purification, a process requiring enormous costs and effort. The tap water wasted annually by Koreans through flush toilet use amounts to approximately 1.1 billion tons. This water flows into rivers, becoming a primary cause of river eutrophication and red tide phenomena in the sea. No matter how thoroughly sewage treatment plants attempt to clean it, certain pollutants cannot be filtered out, inevitably leading to water contamination. Therefore, flush toilets can be considered the worst water-wasting facilities and a primary culprit of environmental destruction, posing a particularly problematic issue in South Korea, a country classified as water-scarce.
Modern society has used human cloning technology to treat incurable diseases, increased food production through genetic modification, and enabled robots to explore Mars thanks to advances in space science. Furthermore, every time war breaks out, we are horrified by the emergence of new weapons and their destructive power.
However, as these two examples illustrate, the advancement of science and technology does not necessarily bring only beneficial outcomes. What truly makes humanity happy depends not merely on technological progress, but on how that technology is used. Science and technology should contribute to making human life more prosperous and abundant; when they fail to do so, they can instead harm both humans and the environment. For this reason, we must regulate the development of science and technology and carefully consider its direction.
We must seek ways for the Earth, the environment, and humanity to coexist, which becomes a crucial task to prevent the development of science and technology from flowing in a direction that hinders human life. Indeed, human life grows more prosperous each year with the advancement of science and technology, but blind pursuit of that speed can instead bring negative consequences. We need to prepare for the side effects technology may bring and regulate the development of science and technology so it positively impacts human life.
Since the advent of advanced science and technology, people have discussed its dual nature. While it has brought us many benefits, there is also fear that it could threaten human life. To prevent technological progress from tilting toward harming human life, we now stand at a moment of choice.
That choice is to continuously examine whether science and technology are being used correctly and whether the technology is advancing in the right direction. We must wisely harness the power of science and technology to build a safer and more sustainable future. While science and technology have brought us remarkable progress, the resulting side effects cannot be ignored. Therefore, we must think critically about science and technology and strive to ensure it develops in a direction that truly enhances human welfare and the sustainability of our planet.
Finally, we must recognize that the advancement of science and technology no longer merely serves to make human life more convenient; it possesses the potential to threaten our very existence. We bear the responsibility to carefully manage its use and development so that science and technology remain tools that make human life happier and safer. Otherwise, the bright future we hoped for through science and technology could instead turn into a great danger for us.
