|
Why GM is good for us
Farm-raised pigs are dirty, smelly animals that get no respect. They're also an environmental hazard. Their manure contains phosphorus, which, when it rains, runs off into lakes and estuaries, depleting oxygen, killing fish, stimulating algae overgrowth and emitting greenhouse gases.
Doing away with the pig is not an option. Pigs provide more dietary protein, more cheaply, to more people than any other animal. Northern Europe still maintains the highest pig-to-human ratio in the world (2-1 in Denmark), but East Asia is catching up. During the 1990s, pork production doubled in Vietnam and grew by 70 percent in China-along densely populated coastlines, pig density exceeds 100 animals per square kilometer. The resulting pollution is "threatening fragile coastal marine habitats including mangroves（红树林）, coral reefs and sea grasses," according to a report released in February by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
As it turns out, there is a solution to the pig problem, but it requires a change of mind-set among environmentalists and the public. Two Canadian scientists have created a pig whose manure doesn't contain very much phosphorus at all. If this variety of pig were adopted widely, it could greatly reduce a major source of pollution. But the Enviropig, as they call it, is the product of genetic modification-which is anathema（忌讳） to many Westerners.
The Enviropig is one of many new technologies that are putting environmentalists and organic-food proponents in a quandary: should they remain categorically（无条件的） opposed to genetically modified (GM) foods even at the expense of the environment? Elsewhere, trees grown for paper could be made amenable to much more efficient processing, reducing both energy usage and toxic chemical bleach in effluents from paper mills. The most significant GM applications will be ones that help alleviate the problem of agriculture, which accounts for 38 percent of the world's landmass and is crowding out natural ecosystems and species habitats.
In fact, although all commonly used pesticides dissipate so quickly that they pose a miniscule health risk to consumers, allergic food reactions to natural products kill hundreds of children each year. Genetically modified foods could greatly reduce this risk. U.S. Department of Agriculture scientist Eliot Herman has already created a less-allergenic soybean-an important crop for baby foods. Through genetic surgery, Herman turned off the soy gene responsible for 65 percent of allergic reactions. Not only was the modified soy less allergenic in tests but, as Herman explained, "the yield looks perfectly normal, plants develop and grow at a normal rate and they seem to have the same kinds of protein, oil and other good stuff in them." Other scientists have reported promising results in shutting off allergycausing genes in peanuts and shrimp. Should these advances be turned into products, organic soy or peanut products will be certifiably more dangerous to human health than comparable nonorganic products.
Unfortunately, this won't happen any time soon. Because no society has ever banned allergenic foods, conventional farmers have no incentive to plant reduced-allergy seeds. And many members of the public have been led to believe that all genetic modifications create health risks. In this climate, much of the needed research isn't being pursued. Chances are, farmers will continue to grow their polluting organic pork, their allergenic organic soy and their neurotoxinsprayed organic apples. Worse still, they will make sure that no one else gets a choice in the matter of improving the conditions of life on earth-unless, that is, others rise up and demand an alternative. 参考译文：
为什么转基因食品对我们有好处？
农场饲养的猪又脏又臭，得不到人的好感。它们同样对环境也是一种威胁。它们的排泄物含有磷，下雨的时候，将被冲刷进入湖中和江河口，耗尽水中的氧气，杀死鱼类，刺激藻类的生长，并且释放温室气体。
但是不养猪也不是办法。猪比任何其他的动物都能够提供更多的更便宜的食用蛋白质给更多的人。北欧地区依然是世界上人平均拥有猪的比例最大的（丹麦2：1 猪/人），但是东亚这一比例正逐渐赶上来。在20世纪90年代，越南的猪肉生产翻了一倍，中国则增长了70%--在人口稠密的沿海一带，猪的拥有密度超过了每平方公里100头。根据联合国食品和农业组织2月份的一份报告，这种情况所导致的污染"正威胁着脆弱的海岸生态，包括红树林、珊瑚礁和海草"。
事实上，是有办法解决这个由猪导致的污染的问题的，但是它需要环保人士和公众改变一些根深蒂固的观点。两名加拿大的科学家培育了一种粪便当中不含有多少磷的猪种。如果这种猪被广泛采纳，将会极大减少污染的来源。但是这种被我们称为“环保猪”的猪种是一种基因变异产品，这是很多西方人所忌讳的。
环保猪就是那些使得环保人士和有机食品支持者陷入两难境地的新科技之一：他们到底是否应当无条件地继续反对转基因食品，哪怕是要以牺牲环境为代价呢？在其他一些领域，被用来造纸的树木可以被改得更加容易处理，这样一来就会减少能量消耗和造纸厂化学漂白物的排放。更加重要的是，转基因将被用于缓和农业问题，农业如今占据了世界土地的38%，正排挤着生态系统和物种的栖息地。
事实上，尽管所有常用的杀虫剂都会很快挥发，对消费者的健康危害很小，但是对自然界食物过敏反应却每年都导致成百上千的儿童丧生。转基因食物将减少这一风险。美国农业部的科学家Eliot Herman 已经制造出了一种少一些过敏性的大豆--一种重要的婴儿食物。通过基因手术，Herman 将导致65%的过敏反应的大豆基因去除。这种改变不仅仅在试验当中少一些致过敏性，而且正如Herman 所说明的，该产品看起来完全天然，植株的生长比例完全正常，并且似乎含有相同种类的蛋白质、油和其他的有益物质。其他科学家也称在减少花生和虾的过敏性基因方面取得了积极的成果。如果这些技术进步被用到生产中，有机的大豆或者花生产品将比非有机的产品对人体的健康危害更大了。
但是，这不是会马上发生的事情。因为没有哪个国家曾经禁用过敏性的食品, 所以传统的农民没有任何动力去种植低过敏的作物。并且公众被引导认为所有的转基因都会产生健康威胁。在这种环境下，大多数需要的研究都没有进行。可能的情况是，农民将继续生产他们的污染环境的猪肉、过敏的有机大豆以及喷有神经毒素的有机苹果。更糟糕的是，他们将确保没有其他人能够有机会改进这地球上的生物状况--除非其他人站出来要求另外的选择。
相关资料
| 
