A rejeição aos transgênicos como "passing fad" (Fuvest 2001)
It is a nice irony, given that scientific genetics started with the manipulation of a crop plant, the pea, that the most vehement public opposition to it in recent years has come from those who object to the genetic manipulation of crops. At the moment, so-called genetically modified (GM) crops are in disgrace. Consumers, particularly in Europe, are wary of buying food that may contain them. Environmental activists are ripping up fields where they are being tested experimentally. And companies that design them are selling off their GM subsidiaries, or even themselves, to anyone willing to take on the risk. Yet the chances are that this is just a passing fad. No trial has shown a health risk from a commercially approved GM crop (or, more correctly, a transgenic crop, as all crop plants have been genetically modified by selective breeding since time immemorial). And while the environmental risks, such as cross-pollination with wild species and the promotion of insecticide-resistant strains of pest, look more plausible, they also look no worse than the sorts of environmental havoc wreaked by more traditional sorts of agriculture.
THE ECONOMIST JULY 1ST 2000
Fonte: The Economist, July 1st 2000.
Which of these statements is true according to the passage?
- A) Consumers will become more receptive to GM foods when trials show that they are not hazardous to health.
- B) The hostility to GM crops is likely to be short-lived.
- C) The environmentalists' hostility to GM crops is unfounded, as they pose no danger to the environment.
- D) GM foods are unlikely to be accepted even in the long run.
- E) Even if environmentalists stop protesting, consumers will keep on regarding GM foods with suspicion.