According to BBC news, Fugu fish is a lethal fish whose deadly poison, Tetradotoxin, is 200 times more dangerous than cyanide. However, Japanese people still love to eat it because of its extraordinary texture and taste. Japanese people have a method to cut Fugu so that its poison cannot harn eaters. Japanese Fugu cheif has to get an authorized license before he can serve Fugu in the restuarant. Nevertheless, the Japanese government has recently allowed Fugu to be sold by non-authorized seller in an off-site. This results in the outcry from the former authorized cheif who tried very hard to get the license.
I do not agree to the Japanese government 's consensus. I think if Fugu can be bought easily, even in the bar and marketplace, and who sells it is not an authorized Fugu cheif, the mistake when cutting or cooking it can occur and then cause a harm to the customers.
I also wonder why Japanese people have an eager to eat strange things like Fugu even though they know their dangerousity and in the past many people died from misusing it. As I know, the tetradotoxin can make the body numb, paralyzed and finally dead. For me, it is not at all worthwhile eating Fugu and ending with paralyzed or dead only for trying the so-called beautiful texture and taste.
Maybe the possible result of Japanese government's consensus such as having more people died from Fugu will enlighten the Japanese how dangerous it is why it should not be eaten.
P.S. I know eating Fugu is their culture, but I am only talking in scientific way.
References
Poupee, I think Japanese people eat Fugu with no worries as they trust whatever dishes are cooked by their people. Like Muslim people, as I heard, they don't eat chicken menu cooked and served by non-muslim people. If I have a chance, I'll ask my Japanese friend why Japanese love eating Fugu. But I've never seen my friend recommended Fugu to me, perhaps, she likes Thai food better than her country's food.
ReplyDeleteWow...I was lucky that I didn't have any trouble trying the Fugu porridge and some fried fugu fish when I traveled to Kyushu, Japan last year. But I think I won't want to try it again and not suggest anyone to try since I understand how risky it is from your blog. Actually, I've been knowing blow fish is poisonous. The silly reason why I still tried it is I don't want to be seen as a fear-death, chicken person by my friends. If I travel with my family, I couldn't have the chance to try because they will stop me, especially my mom who is the fist person to yell "No,No,No!".
ReplyDeletei would guess that part of the thrill of the meal is the risk. Should it be illegal? No. If adults want to take risks, it's their business, and the argument that risky behaviour should be banned simply because it's risky seems deeply flawed to me. So laws requiring adults to wear seatbelts in cars must be immoral. Or have I made a mistake?
ReplyDeleteShould the government limit the number of licenses? Again, I'm inclined to think that people should be allowed to prepare and sell it if they want, without needing any special licence, provided that they are accountable for the risks. The risk will be greater, and a sensible customer would want someone well qualified, but there is no good reason I can think of why that certification should come from or be endorsed by the government. The government's job is law enforcement and defence, not running businesses, certifying people's education and other such things all of whcih can be perfectly well done by private groups, who will not be wasting money stolen from tax payers.
Forgot to mention that I would probably try it - but only with some solid assurance that the chef doing the preparation was competent.
DeleteI heard the different way about the Fugu. There is a problem in Thailand about the Fugu that sell in the market. The merchants sell a Fugu but they say it is a chicken. The consumer do not see the different between them because it look similar. They pretend the product because the price of Fugu is cheaper than chicken.
ReplyDeleteKon,
DeleteAre you sure about this? It sounds very surprising to me. I would have thought that the fugu was much more expensive than chicken.
Do you have any source for this information?
It might be right, but I think some support from a reliable source would be very helpful here. Would you believe something so surprising without some solid support?
And now that I think of it, Kon's fugu-as-chicken report shows one of the great advantages of free speech: the overwhelming advantage of free speech is that it actually makes knowledge possible. Conversely, the logically certain disadvantage of all censorship and restrictions on free speech is that such restrictions necessarily and in every case guarantee ignorance on the topic being censored and protected so that opinion on that topic is made largely worthless. Academics do not support any restriction on a topic where knowledge and worthwhile opinion is important.
Delete