Text 4
With medicine, the boon of biotechnology has been obvious. People readily accept it when they see how better drugs and clearer diagnoses improve their lives. Why is it different when biotech is applied to agriculture? The answer is that the clearest gains from the current crop of genetically modified (GM) plants go not to consumers but to producers. Indeed, that was what their developers intended: an appeal to farmers offered the purveyors of GM technology the best hope of a speedy return. For consumers, especially in the rich world, the benefits of superyielding soybeans are less clear: the world, by and large, already has too much food in its stores; developing countries principally lack money, not food as much, Yet companies still pitch their products as a cure for malnutrition even though little that they are doing can justify such a noble claim. In hyping the technology as the only answer to everything from pest control to world hunger, the industry has fed the popular view that its products are unsafe, unnecessary and bad for the environment.
Of the two main charges against GM crops, by far the weaker is that they are unsafe to eat. Critics assert that genetic engineering introduces into food genes that are not present naturally, can not be introduced through conventional breeding and may have unknown health effects that should be investigated before the food is sold to the public. GM crops such as the maize and soybeans that now blanket America certainly differ from their garden variety neighbours. But there is a broad scientific consensus that the present generation of GM food is safe. Even so, this does little to reassure consumers. Food frights such as “mad cows” disease and revelations of cancercausing dioxin in Belgian food have sorely undermined their confidence in scientific pronouncements and regulatory authorities alike. GM food have little future in Europe until this faith can be restored.
The second big wrong about GM food is that it may harm the environment. The producers argue that the engineered trait—such as resistance to certain brands of herbicide or types of insects and virus—actually do ecological good by reducing chemical use and improving yields so that less land needs to go under the plough. Opponents retort that any such benefits are far outweighed by the damage such crops might do. They worry that pesticideresistant genes may spread from plants that should be saved to weeds that have to be killed. They fear a loss of biodiversity. They fret that the inbuilt resistance to bugs that some GM crops will have may poison insects such as Monarch butterfly, and allow other, nastier bugs to develop a natural resistance and thrive.
Many of the fears are based on results from limited experiments, often in the laboratory. The only way to discover whether they will arise in real life, or whether they will be any more damaging than similar risks posed by conventional crops and farming practice, is to do more research in the field. Banning the experimental growth of GM plants as some protesters want simply deprives scientists of their most fruitful laboratory.(524 words)
1. GM crops are crops that_________
[A] have a super-yielding quality.
[B] cannot be grown with conventional methods.
[C] may have unknown health effects.
[D] have unnatural genes introduced into them.
2. Companies introduce GM food to the market as a solution to all these problems EXCEPT_________
[A] world hunger.
[B] environment.
[C] malnutrition.
[D] pest control.
3. The author suggests that the public does not accept GM food because_________
[A] biotech already caused problems like mad cow disease.
[B] GM foods are cheap to produce but dear to buy.
[C] the public no longer believes in scientific pronouncements.
[D] consumer confidence collapsed in recent food scares.
4. Critics of GM food argue that the pesticide-resistant genes_________
[A] may poison good insects and let bad insects thrive.
[B] may kill the plants instead of the harmful weeds.
[C] have benefits far outweighing the damage they might do.
[D] do ecological good by reducing the use of chemicals.
5. By presenting GM food, the author of the passage probably aims to _________
[A] expose its risks.
[B] answer various charges against it.
[C] propose an objective attitude to it.
[D] exhibit its advantages diagnoses purveyors.
核心词汇
pitch n. 程度,投掷,音高;v. 投,向前倾跌,扎牢,定调,用沥青覆盖
malnutrition n. 营养不良
maize n. 玉米
dioxin n. [化] 二氧(杂)芑
herbicide n. 除草剂
outweigh v. 比…重,比…重要,比…有价值
pesticide n. 杀虫剂
fret n. 烦躁,磨损,焦急;v. 烦恼,不满,磨损
bugs a. 疯狂的,发疯的
nasty a. 污秽的,下流的,险恶的,脾气不好的,恶意的
www.59wj.com
难句剖析
1. Critics assert that genetic engineering introduces into food genes that are not present naturally, can not be introduced through conventional breeding and may have unknown health effects that should be investigated before the food is sold to the public .
【解析】 本句的主干是Critics assert that…。第一个that引导宾语从句，第二个that引导定语从句修饰food genes，第三个that是代词，指代food genes。
【译文】 批评家认为基因工程引进的食物基因不是自然存在的，不能通过传统饲养方法引进，可能有未知的健康危害，因此应该在食物出售给公众之前对其进行检查。
2. The producers argue that the engineered trait—such as resistance to certain brands of herbicide or types of insects and virus—actually do ecological good by reducing chemical use and improving yields so that less land needs to go under the plough.
【解析】 句子的主干是The producers argue that…。that引导宾语从句, 宾语从句是“the engineered trait…actually do ecological good”;such as…是对engineered trait的进一步解释说明 。
【译文】 生产者认为像抵抗某种除草剂或一些种类的昆虫和病毒这样的特点确实对生态有益，因为它们减少了化学用品的使用，并且提高了生产量从而减少了对耕地的需要。
3. The only way to discover whether they will arise in real life, or whether they will be any more damaging than similar risks posed by conventional crops and farming practice, is to do more research in the field.
【解析】 本句子的主干是The only way…is to do more research in the field。to discover 不定式短语作状语，两个whether引导的句子作discover的宾语。
【译文】 去发现它们在现实生活中是否会出现，或者他们是否比传统作物带来的类似的危险更具破坏性的唯一办法，是做更多实地研究。
文章类型： 科普类——转基因产品
作者首先分析了为什么转基因技术应用于农业没有像其他生物技术一样被人们接受，并列举了人们对转基因食物的控诉，作者分析了产生那么多担忧的原因，并提出解决方案，即要给予它们更多的实地研究。
1. 基因作物_________
[A] 具有高产能。
[B] 不能用传统方法种植。
[C] 可能会对健康有影响。
[D] 含有非自然的基因。
细节事实题【正确答案】[D]
原文对应信息第二段第一句“Of the two main charges against GM crops, by far the weaker is that they are unsafe to eat. Critics assert that genetic engineering introduces into food genes that are not present naturally, can not be introduced…”可知，基因作物的基因不是自然的。
2. 企业把基因产品推向市场，它所能解决的问题除了_________
[A] 世界饥饿。
[B] 环境。
[C] 营养不良。
[D] 害虫防治。
判断题【正确答案】[B]
原文对应信息是第一段最后一句“In hyping the technology as the only answer to everything from pest control to world hunger, the industry has fed the popular view that its products are unsafe, unnecessary and bad for the environment.”对于环境，作者没有提到。
3. 作者认为公众不接受基因食物的原因是_________
[A] 生物技术已经导致的疾病，如疯牛病。
[B] 基因食物生产便宜但价格高。
[C] 公众不再相信科学的声明。
[D] 消费者在最近的食物恐慌中失去了信心。
细节事实题【正确答案】[D]
原文对应信息是第二段第六行“But there is a broad scientific consensus that the present generation of GM food is safe. Even so, this does little to reassure consumers. Food frights such as “mad cows” disease…”说明，消费者因为最近的食物恐慌损害了他们对科学声明和监管机构的信心。
4. 基因食物的批评表明抗虫害基因_________
[A] 可能会杀死益虫而使得害虫猖獗。
[B] 可能杀死植物而非杂草。
[C] 益处远远大于坏处。
[D] 对生态有益，因为它们减少了化学用品的使用。
细节事实题【正确答案】[A]
原文对应信息是第三段最后一句“They fret that the inbuilt resistance to bugs that some GM crops will have may poison insects such as Monarch butterfly, and allow other, nastier bugs to develop a natural resistance and thrive. ”(他们——转基因的反对者——担心某些转基因作物中对虫子的内在抵抗力可能会毒害帝王蝶等昆虫，而使其他更有害的虫子产生自然的抵抗力，从而繁盛。)可知，可能会杀死益虫而使得害虫猖獗。
5. 通过表述基因食物，作者的可能目的是_________
[A] 暴露它的危险。
[B] 回应各种价格反对它。
[C] 表明一个客观态度。
[D] 展示它的优势。
作者态度题【正确答案】[C]
文中作者分析了为什么转基因技术应用于农业没有像其他生物技术一样被人们接受，并列举了人们对转基因食物的控诉。从前三段看作者好像站在反对者一边，但在第四段作者分析了产生那么多担忧的原因，并提出解决方案，即要给予它们更多的实地研究。从整体看作者对转基因技术的态度是客观、公平，所以C项正确。
试题解析
在医药方面生物技术的益处是明显的。当人们看到更好的药物和更清晰的诊断改善了他们的生活时，人们欣然的接受了它。为什么当生物技术应用到农业上则不同呢?原因是从现有的转基因作物中得到最明显益处的不是消费者，而是生产者。诚然，转基因技术的开发者的目的正是：通过迎合农民要求的转基因技术的承办商带来迅速回报。对消费者,尤其是富裕国家的消费者而言,大豆的超高产带来的利益是不明显的。世界大体上已经有了太多的食物储存，发展中国家缺少的主要是钱，而不是食物。而公司依然标榜它们的产品是对抗营养不良的良方，即使他们所做的事几乎不能证明这样一种崇高的声明。转基因行业大张旗鼓地宣传转基因技术是虫害控制、世界饥饿等一切问题的唯一解决办法，反而让大家都认为它的产品不安全、不必要、对环境有害。
目前对转基因作物的指责中较站不住脚的是它们吃起来不安全。批评家认为基因工程引进的食物基因不是自然存在的，不能通过传统饲养方法引进，可能有未知的健康危害，因此应该在食物出售给公众之前对其进行检查。像现在覆盖美国的玉米和大豆这样的转基因作物肯定不同于它们在花园里的各种“近邻”。但科学上广泛一致认为当前这一代转基因食物是安全的。而这丝毫不能让消费者放心。疯牛病和比利时食物中发现的致癌二噁英等食物恐慌损害了他们对科学声明和监管机构的信心。直到信心恢复前转基因食物在欧洲的前景不容乐观。
第二大担忧是转基因食物对环境可能有害。生产者认为像抵抗某种除草剂或一些种类的昆虫和病毒这样的特点确实对生态有益，因为它们减少了化学用品的使用，并且提高了生产量从而减少了对耕地的需要。反对者反驳说，这些益处远小于作物可能带来的害处。他们担心抗杀虫剂基因可能从应该保护的植物扩散到必须斩除的杂草中。他们也忧虑生物失去多样性。他们担忧的是某些转基因植物中对虫子的内在抵抗力可能会毒害像帝王蝶这样的昆虫，并使得其他害虫形成一种自然的抵抗力从而繁盛。
大部分担忧都是以有限的实验为依据，通常是实验室中的实验。去发现它们在现实生活中是否会出现，或者它们是否比传统作物带来的类似的危险更具破坏性的唯一办法，是做更多实地研究。抗议者禁止转基因作物的生产只是剥夺了科学家最多产的实验室。
第一段：生物技术在农业上的应用生产者益处大于消费者。
第二段：转基因作物吃起来是安全的。
第三段：关于转基因食物对环境的影响。
第四段：作者提出解决方案，即要给予它们更多的实地研究。
www.59wj.com 如果觉得《2017年考研英语备考：英语阅读专项特训(4)》复习指导,kaoyan不错，可以推荐给好友哦。