AUSTRALIA

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 456.

CANADA

USA

In 2004, Mendocino County, California became the first county in the United States to ban the production of GMOs. The measure passed with a 57 % majority. In California, Trinity and Marin counties have also imposed bans on GM crops, while

ordinances to do so were unsuccessful in Butte, San Luis Obispo, Humboldt, and Sonoma counties. Supervisors in the agriculturallyrich counties of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Solano, Sutter, and Tulare have passed resolutions supporting the practice.

In 2005, a standing committee of the government of Prince Edward Island in Canada began work to assess a proposal to ban the production of GMOs in the province. PEI has already banned GM potatoes, which account for most of its crop. Mainland Canada is

one of the world's largest producers of GM canola.

Several states of Australia have had moratoria on the planting of GM food crops dating from around 2003. However, in late 2007 the states of New South Wales and Victoria lifted these bans while South Australia and Western Australia continued their bans.

Tasmania has extended their moratorium to June 2008. The state of Queensland has allowed the growing of GM crops since 1995 and has never had a GM ban.

Currently, there is little international consensus regarding the acceptability and effective role of modified "complete" organisms such as plants or animals. A great deal of the modern research that is illuminating complex biochemical processes and disease

mechanisms makes vast use of genetic engineering.

E x e r c i s e Fi v e.Read, translate and make up questions covering the main points of the article.

Crosspollination concerns

Some critics have raised the concern that conventionally bred crop plants can be cross-pollinated (bred) from the pollen of modified plants. Pollen can be dispersed over large areas by wind, animals, and insects. Recent research with creeping bentgrass has

lent support to the concern when modified genes were found in normal grass up to 21 km (13 miles) away from the source, and also within close relatives of the same genus (Agrostis). GM proponents point out that outcrossing, as this process is known, is not new.

The same thing happens with any new open-pollinated crop variety–newly introduced traits can potentially cross out into neighbouring crop plants of the same species and, in some cases, to closely related wild relatives. Defenders of GM technology point

out that each GM crop is assessed on a case by case basis to determine if there is any risk associated with the outcrossing of the GM trait into wild plant populations. The fact that a GM plant may outcross with a related wild relative is not, in itself, a risk unless such

an occurrence has consequences. If, for example, a herbicide resistance trait was to cross into a wild relative of a crop plant it can be predicted that this would not have any consequences except in areas where herbicides are sprayed, such as a farm. In such a setting the farmer can manage this risk by rotating herbicides.

E x e r c i s e S i x.Read the article and decide whether the statements are true or false.

1.The American population is not interested in their food calories.

2.Fat-free products lead to overweight.

3.Sugar is as useful as fat.

4.Dietary guidelines attract many consumers.

5.Replacement shakes are healthy.