Пища для ума - Food for thought. Коломейцева Е.М - 21 стр.

UptoLike

ВУЗ: 

ТГТУ | Тамбов

Составители: 

Рубрика: 

2. When does a patent holder have a right to control the use of crops?
3. What is the essence of the technology "Terminator"?
4. What is "terminator" in this context?
5. What is the technology "traitor" intended to do?
6. What companies develop this technology?
7. What did the terminator gene technology create?
The European Union funds research programmes such as Co-Extra, that investigate options and technologies on the coexistence
of GM and conventional farming. This also includes research on biological containment strategies and other measures, that prevent
outcrossing and enable the implementation of coexistence.
If patented genes are outcrossed, even accidentally, to other commercial fields and a person deliberately selects the outcrossed
plants for subsequent planting then the patent holder has the right to control the use of those crops. This was supported in Canadian
law in the case of Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser.
An often cited controversy is a hypothetical "Technology Protection" technology dubbed 'Terminator'. This yet-to-be-
commercialized technology would allow the production of first generation crops that would not generate seeds in the second
generation because the plants yield sterile seeds. The patent for this so-called "terminator" gene technology is owned by Delta and
Pine Land and the United States Department of Agriculture. Delta and Pine Land was bought by Monsanto in August 2006. Similarly,
the hypothetical Trait-specific Genetic Use Restriction Technology, also known as 'Traitor' or 'T-gut', requires application of a
chemical to genetically-modified crops to reactivate engineered traits. This technology is intended both to limit the spread of
genetically engineered plants, and to require farmers to pay yearly to reactivate the genetically engineered traits of their crops. Traitor
is under development by companies including Monsanto and AstraZeneca.
In addition to the commercial protection of proprietary technology in self-pollinating crops such as soybean (a generally
contentious issue) another purpose of the terminator gene is to prevent the escape of genetically modified traits from crosspollinating
crops into wild-type species by sterilizing any resultant hybrids. The terminator gene technology created a backlash amongst those
who felt the technology would prevent re-use of seed by farmers growing such terminator varieties in the developing world and was
ostensibly a means to exercise patent claims. Use of the terminator technology would also prevent "volunteers", or crops that grow
from unharvested seed, a major concern that arose during the Starlink debacle. There are technologies evolving which contain the
transgene by biological means and still can provide fertile seeds using fertility restorer functions. Such methods are being developed
by several EU research programmes, among them Transcontainer and Co-Extra.
E x e r c i s e F o u r. Put the verbs in brackets into the correct form.
Allergenicity
A gene for an allergenic trait (transfer) unintentionally from the
Brazil nut
into genetically engineered soybeans while intending
to improve soybean nutritional quality for animal feed use. Brazil nuts already (know) to produce food allergies in certain people
prior to this study. In 1993 Pioneer Hi-Bred International (develop) a soybean variety with an added gene from the Brazil nut. This
trait (increase) the levels in the GM soybean of the natural essential amino acid methionine, a protein building block commonly
added to poultry feed to improve effective protein quality. Investigation of the GM soybeans (reveal) that they produced
immunological reactions with people suffering from Brazil nut allergy, and the explanation for this is that the methionine rich protein
chosen by Pioneer Hi-Bred (be) the major source of Brazil nut allergy. Pioneer Hi-Bred (discontinue) further development of the GM
soybean and disposed of all material related to the modified soybeans.
This study (indicate) some of the possible risks of GM foods. In particular that there is no law or regulation in either the United
States or Canada that required Pioneer Hi-Bred or any other company for testing for allergenicity or toxicity of GM foods prior to
them being licensed to be grown and consumed in their respected countries. Food allergy problems (occur) with many conventional
foods, and Kiwi fruit, for instance, as a relatively new food in many communities, (become) widely eaten despite provoking allergies
in certain individuals.
Another allergy issue (publish) in November 2005, when a pest resistant field pea developed by the Australian CSIRO for use as
a pasture crop was shown to cause an allergic reaction in mice.
Respected plant scientist Maarten J. Chrispeels (make) interesting comments about this example that illustrate how foods offer
many different types of risks.
The immunologist who (test) the pea noted that the episode (illustrate) the need for each new GM food to be very carefully
evaluated for potential health effects.
E x e r c i s e F i v e
. Read the article and decide whether the statements are true or false.
1. GM crops are healthy both for people and animals.
2. GM crops kill weeds.
3. GM crops provide for food security and environment protection.
4. Growth of cities extinguishes farm land.
5. Consumer diets are against animal protein.
6. Global food security may be supported by genetic resources.
7. GM technologies will benefit developing countries.
Environmental and ecological impacts
There has been controversy over the results of a farm-scale trial in the United Kingdom
comparing the impact of GM crops and
conventional crops on farmland biodiversity. Some claimed that the results showed that

Страницы