2. 外语
  3. Over the past few years,outcries from food activists have changed many Americans’ eating habits: Criticism of widespread pestici

Over the past few years,outcries from food activists have changed many Americans’ eating habits: Criticism of widespread pestici

admin2012-06-18  53
问题     Over the past few years,outcries from food activists have changed many Americans’ eating habits: Criticism of widespread pesticide use led many consumers to organic foods,and early warnings prompted shoppers to shun irradiated and genetically altered food. 71 Major players have muscled laws through state legislatures. The statutes make it illegal to suggest that a particular food is unsafe without a "sound scientific basis" for the claim. These so-called banana bills are under discussion in several U. S. states.
    Banana bill backers believe the laws will protect agricultural producers from losses like those following the Alar scare in 1989,when the TV magazine show 60 Minutes publicized a Natural Resources Defense Council report charging that the chemical,which enhances the appearance of apples,causes cancer. 72
    Banana bill foes say the laws simply serve to repress those who speak out against risky food—produce with "acceptable" levels of pesticides,genetically altered tomatoes,milk from cows injected with the growth hormone rbST,which boosts milk production.
    73 They call them an insult to free speech and an impediment to covering critical food safety issues, notes Nicols Fox in American Journalism Review (March 1995). Most critics question the laws’requirement that only charges based on "reasonable and reliable" evidence be allowed. 74 After all,it’s unlikely that agribusinesses will accept even the best evidence if it threatens their bottom line. Fox notes that even though the Environmental Protection Agency affirmed that Alar posed unacceptable health risks, Washington State Farm Bureau spokesperson Peter Sternberg insists that EPA’s science is "subject to second opinion, "—opinions that challenged accepted wisdom.
    Instead of attacking what they sneer as "junk science," food producers should be listening to the public’s food worries,says Sierra’s Rauber.who cites a recent Young &Rubicam poll that found that 4 out of 5 Americans are "very concerned about food safety. " 75 A case in point is rbST maker Monsanto, who fought and eventually lost a battle to keep dairy producers from advertising that their milk came from rbST-free cows.
A. Many journalists are also outraged about banana bills.
B. Many agribusinesses seem more interested in keeping consumers in the dark about what they’re eating than in exploring ways to produce safe food.
C. But now angry agribusiness groups are fighting back.
D. The nation’s health has doubtless been improved after the banana bill has been approved.
E. Overnight,tons of apples,applesauce,and apple juice became grocery shelf untouchables,and Washington apple growers lost $130 million,according to the Washington State Farm Bureau.
F. Who determines what’s "reasonable"?
选项
答案C
解析 购买者受早期警告的影响不敢购买转基因食品，但按照法律的规定，在没有合理的科学依据情况下，提示人们某种食物不安全是违法的。C项正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/cunO777K
0

考博英语

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)