首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Genetically Modified Foods—Feed the World? If you want to spark a heated debate at a dinner party, bring up the topic about
Genetically Modified Foods—Feed the World? If you want to spark a heated debate at a dinner party, bring up the topic about
admin
2013-09-26
36
问题
Genetically Modified Foods—Feed the World?
If you want to spark a heated debate at a dinner party, bring up the topic about genetically modified foods. For many people, the concept of genetically altered, high-tech crop production raises all kinds of environmental, health, safety and ethical questions. Particularly in countries with long agrarian traditions—and vocal green lobbies—the idea seems against nature.
In fact, genetically modified foods are already very much a part of our lives. A third of the corn and more than half the soybeans and cotton grown in the U. S. last year were the product of biotechnology, according to the Department of Agriculture. More than 65 million acres of genetically modified crops will be planted in the U. S. this year. The genetic is out of the bottle.
Yet there are clearly some very real issues that need to be resolved. Like any new product entering the food chain, genetically modified foods must be subjected to rigorous testing. In wealthy countries, the debate about biotech is tempered by the fact that we have a rich array of foods to choose from—and a supply that far exceeds our needs. In developing countries desperate to feed fast-growing and underfed populations; the issue is simpler and much more urgent: Do the benefits of biotech outweigh the risks?
The statistics on population growth and hunger are disturbing. Last year the world’s population reached 6 billion. And by 2050, the UN estimates, it will be probably near 9 billion. Almost all that growth will occur in developing countries. At the same time, the world’s available cultivable land per person is declining. Arable land has declined steadily since 1960 and will decrease by half over the next 50 years, according to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA).
How can biotech help?
Biotechnologists have developed genetically modified rice that is fortified with beta-carotene(β-胡萝卜素)—which the body converts into vitamin A—and additional iron, and they are working on other kinds of nutritionally improved crops. Biotech can also improve farming productivity in places where food shortages are caused by crop damage attribution to pests, drought, poor soil and crop viruses, bacteria or fungi(真菌).
Damage caused by pests is incredible. The European corn borer, for example, destroys 40 million tons of the world’s corn crops annually, about 7% of the total. Incorporating pest-resistant genes into seeds can help restore the balance. In trials of pest-resistant cotton in Africa, yields have increased significantly. So far, fears that genetically modified, pest-resistant crops might kill good insects as well as bad appear unfounded.
Viruses often cause massive failure in staple crops in developing countries. Two years ago, Africa lost more than half its cassava(树薯)crop—a key source of calories—to the mosaic virus. Genetically modified, virus-resistant crops can reduce that damage, as can drought-tolerant seeds in regions where water shortages limit the amount of land under cultivation. Biotech can also help solve the problem of soil that contains excess aluminum, which can damage roots and cause many staple-crop failures. A gene that helps neutralize aluminum toxicity(毒性)in rice has been identified.
Many scientists believe biotech could raise overall crop productivity in developing countries as much as 25% and help prevent the loss of those crops after they are harvested.
Yet for all that promise, biotech is far from being the whole answer. In developing countries, lost crops are only one cause of hunger. Poverty plays the largest role. Today more than 1 billion people around the globe live on less than 1 dollar a day. Making genetically modified crops available will not reduce hunger if farmers cannot afford to grow them or if the local population cannot afford to buy the food those farmers produce.
Biotech has its own "distribution" problems. Private-sector biotech companies in the rich countries carry out much of the leading-edge research on genetically modified crops. Their products are often too costly for poor farmers in the developing world, and many of those products won’t even reach the regions where they are most needed. Biotech firms have a strong financial incentive to target rich markets first in order to help them rapidly recoup the high costs of product development. But some of these companies are responding to needs of poor countries.
More and more biotech research is being carried out in developing countries. But to increase the impact of genetic research on the food production of those countries, there is a need for better collaboration between government agencies—both local and in developed countries—and private biotech firms. The ISAAA, for example, is successfully partnering with the U. S. Agency for International Development, local researches and private biotech companies to find and deliver biotech solutions for farmers in developing countries.
Will "Franken-foods" feed the world?
Biotech is not a panacea(治百病的药), but it does promise to transform agriculture in many developing countries. If that promise is not fulfilled, the real losers will be their people, who could suffer for years to come.
The world seems increasingly to have been divided into those who favor genetically modified foods and those who fear them. Advocates assert that growing genetically altered crops can be kinder to the environment and that eating foods from those plants is perfectly safe. And, they say, genetic engineering—which can induce plants to grow in poor soils or to produce more nutritious foods—will soon become an essential tool for helping to feed the world’s burgeoning(迅速发展的)population. Skeptics contend that genetically modified crops could pose unique risks to the environment and to health—risks too troubling to accept placidly. Taking that view, many European countries are restricting the planting and importation of genetically modified agricultural products. Much of the debate hinges on perceptions of safety. But what exactly does recent scientific research say about the hazards?
Two years ago in Edinburgh, Scotland, eco-vandals stormed a field, crushing canola plants. Last year in Maine, midnight raiders hacked down more than 3,000 experimental poplar trees. And in San Diego, protesters smashed sorghum and sprayed paint over greenhouse walls.
This far-flung outrage took aim at genetically modified crops. But the protests backfired; all the destroyed plants were conventionally bred. In each case, activists mistook ordinary plants for genetically modified varieties.
It’s easy to understand why. In a way, genetically modified crops—now on some 109 million acres of farmland worldwide—are invisible. You can’t see, taste or touch a gene inserted into a plant or sense its effects on the environment. You can’t tell, just by looking, whether pollen containing a foreign gene can poison butterflies or fertilize plants miles away. That invisibility is precisely what worries people. How, exactly, will genetically modified crops affect the environment—and when will we notice?
Advocates of genetically modified or transgenic crops say the plants will benefit the environment by requiring fewer toxic pesticides than conventional crops. But critics fear the potential risks and wonder how big the benefits really are. "We have so many questions about these plants," remarks Guenther Stotzky, a soil microbiologist at New York University. "There’s a lot we don’t know and need to find out. "
As genetically modified crops multiply in the landscape, unprecedented numbers of researchers have started fanning into the fields to get the missing information. Some of their recent findings are reassuring; others suggest a need for vigilance.
The far-flung outrage destroys fields and plants because they misidentified______.
选项
答案
ordinary plants for genetically modified varieties
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/pm27777K
0
大学英语六级
相关试题推荐
FlatswerealmostunknowninBritainuntilthe1850swhentheyweredeveloped,alongwithotherindustrialdwellings,forthela
VideogameshavebecomeincreasinglypopularinbotharcadesandtheaverageAmericanhome.Peopleofallagesandfromallwalk
Howeverimportantwemayregardschoollifetohe,thereisnogainsayingthefactthatchildrenspendmoretimeathomethanin
A、Thecomparisonincostsoflivingbetweendifferentcountries.B、Theadvantagesanddisadvantagesofworkingindifferentplac
A、Ahousewife.B、Asinger.C、Ateacher.D、Amusician.DWhatwasMidori’smother?信息明示题。由文章第一段可知,她的母亲是个音乐家,所以D正确。
Exceptionalchildrenaredifferentinsomesignificantwayfromothersofthesameage.Forthesechildrentodeveloptheirfull
AreWeTurningintoaNationofLoners?Marriageisdown,andsoischildbirth.Butdivorceisup,alongwithsingle-person
Researchonfriendshiphasestablishedanumberoffacts,someinteresting,evenuseful.Didyouknowthattheaveragestudenth
Itiscommonlyheldthatdrinkingmoderateamountsofalcoholcanreducetheoddsofhavingadeadlyheartattack.More【B1】_____
A、Tiredness.B、Freedom.C、Loneliness.D、Fear.D
随机试题
用天然气置换空气阶段是最危险的时间,因此置换速度一定要慢,按规定用氮气进行置换。()
A、碱洗B、水洗C、酸洗D、盐洗E、纯水煮沸效率较高的清洗方法是
A.<6个月的婴儿无热性支气管肺炎应考虑B.年长儿发热、咳嗽,同时伴有其他器官受累,中毒症状不重,应考虑C.新生儿及婴幼儿多见,肺部体征出现早,中毒症状重,应考虑D.6个月以内婴儿多见,中毒症状不明显,胸片以气肿改变为主,应考虑E.6~2
创伤 的X线表现为
【2003年第2题】如图3—3所示平面内平衡力系中,P3的正确数值是多少?(与图中方向相同为正值,反之为负值)
某建筑采用筏形基础底面尺寸为10m×20m,底面压力为220kPa,基础底面下设300mm褥垫层,基础埋深2.0m,勘察资料如下:I.0~10m,淤泥质土,γ=19.5kN/m3,qsk=7kPa,fak=80kPa,Es=8.8MPa;Ⅱ.10~20
某远洋运输企业2004年3月发生以下经营业务:为A公司出口货物提供运输业务,取得运输收入456000元、装卸费4000元、货物保鲜费8000元;将5号远洋运输船舶以“期租”方式出租给A公司,租期1年,3月份收取租金250000元;将8号远洋运输船舶以“光租
某企业2008年有关会计资料如下:(1)年度会计利润总额为180万元;(2)全年销售收入为1200万元;(3)“管理费用”中列支的业务招待费30万元,广告费和业务宣传费480万元;(4)“营业外支出”中列支的税收罚
城市因水而生,因水而兴,因水而美。我们可以列举湖泊给城市带来的一系列好处,比如人工湖的修建对于改善人居环境,改善生态环境,治水治内涝等方面都能起到积极作用。但是,人工湖是不是越多越好、越大越好,大规模开挖人工湖是否会加重财政负担,政府这样大手笔的投入,到底
Giventhechoicebetweenspendinganeveningwithfriendsandtakingextratimeforhisschoolwork,AndyKliseadmitshewouldp
最新回复
(
0
)