Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2212:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 1612:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
You’re first to know: Save $200 on GMAT prep starting tomorrow, 4/13. Get 6 official practice tests and study with real questions. Be ready to save!
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
05 Oct 2024, 22:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 0
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Recent breakthroughs in molecular biology, particularly through the development of CRISPR-Cas9, have revolutionized the field of genetic engineering. CRISPR-Cas9, derived from a bacterial immune mechanism, allows precise manipulation of DNA, enabling targeted gene deletions, insertions, or replacements with far greater simplicity and efficiency than previous technologies such as zinc finger nucleases and TALENs. Its introduction has been heralded as a transformative leap forward in gene editing, accelerating research in genetics, medicine, and agriculture.
However, while many researchers view CRISPR-Cas9 as a tool of unparalleled promise, others express caution, noting its potential for misuse and unintended consequences. Proponents argue that the ability to edit genes in model organisms such as fruit flies and mice has already advanced the understanding of numerous genetic conditions, paving the way for breakthroughs in therapeutic interventions, including the correction of genetic disorders in humans. They emphasize that CRISPR-Cas9's versatility across a wide range of organisms could lead to innovations in crop engineering, disease resistance, and even climate adaptation strategies.
Critics, however, caution that the technology’s power comes with profound ethical dilemmas. The ability to edit human embryos, for example, raises fears of “designer babies” and unintended social inequalities. Moreover, the long-term ecological effects of altering the genomes of species within complex ecosystems remain poorly understood. Some argue that the rush to apply CRISPR-Cas9 in agriculture and medicine has outpaced the necessary ethical frameworks, with policymakers struggling to catch up.
Central to this debate is the question of whether the potential benefits of CRISPR-Cas9 outweigh its risks. Advocates of regulation believe that stringent guidelines are essential to prevent misuse, but others contend that such restrictions might stifle scientific progress. Some even posit that delaying the full deployment of CRISPR-Cas9 could hinder advances that might address pressing global challenges, such as food security and genetic diseases.
Ultimately, the future of CRISPR-Cas9—and genetic engineering more broadly—depends on striking a balance between innovation and caution. As this technology continues to evolve, scientists, ethicists, and policymakers must grapple with how best to manage its potential to reshape biology and society alike.
According to the passage, which of the following is mentioned as a concern raised by critics of CRISPR-Cas9?
A. The technology has been rushed into agricultural applications before its ecological effects are fully understood.
B. It has failed to advance the understanding of genetic conditions in model organisms.
C. Ethical dilemmas related to the use of CRISPR-Cas9 in gene therapy have already led to its restriction in several countries.
D. Policymakers have put in place overly strict regulations that prevent its development.
E. There is uncertainty surrounding whether CRISPR-Cas9 will be effective in climate adaptation strategies.
However, while many researchers view CRISPR-Cas9 as a tool of unparalleled promise, others express caution, noting its potential for misuse and unintended consequences. Proponents argue that the ability to edit genes in model organisms such as fruit flies and mice has already advanced the understanding of numerous genetic conditions, paving the way for breakthroughs in therapeutic interventions, including the correction of genetic disorders in humans. They emphasize that CRISPR-Cas9's versatility across a wide range of organisms could lead to innovations in crop engineering, disease resistance, and even climate adaptation strategies.
Critics, however, caution that the technology’s power comes with profound ethical dilemmas. The ability to edit human embryos, for example, raises fears of “designer babies” and unintended social inequalities. Moreover, the long-term ecological effects of altering the genomes of species within complex ecosystems remain poorly understood. Some argue that the rush to apply CRISPR-Cas9 in agriculture and medicine has outpaced the necessary ethical frameworks, with policymakers struggling to catch up.
Central to this debate is the question of whether the potential benefits of CRISPR-Cas9 outweigh its risks. Advocates of regulation believe that stringent guidelines are essential to prevent misuse, but others contend that such restrictions might stifle scientific progress. Some even posit that delaying the full deployment of CRISPR-Cas9 could hinder advances that might address pressing global challenges, such as food security and genetic diseases.
Ultimately, the future of CRISPR-Cas9—and genetic engineering more broadly—depends on striking a balance between innovation and caution. As this technology continues to evolve, scientists, ethicists, and policymakers must grapple with how best to manage its potential to reshape biology and society alike.
According to the passage, which of the following is mentioned as a concern raised by critics of CRISPR-Cas9?
A. The technology has been rushed into agricultural applications before its ecological effects are fully understood.
B. It has failed to advance the understanding of genetic conditions in model organisms.
C. Ethical dilemmas related to the use of CRISPR-Cas9 in gene therapy have already led to its restriction in several countries.
D. Policymakers have put in place overly strict regulations that prevent its development.
E. There is uncertainty surrounding whether CRISPR-Cas9 will be effective in climate adaptation strategies.
05 Oct 2024, 22:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Recent breakthroughs in molecular biology, particularly through the development of CRISPR-Cas9, have revolutionized the field of genetic engineering. CRISPR-Cas9, derived from a bacterial immune mechanism, allows precise manipulation of DNA, enabling targeted gene deletions, insertions, or replacements with far greater simplicity and efficiency than previous technologies such as zinc finger nucleases and TALENs. Its introduction has been heralded as a transformative leap forward in gene editing, accelerating research in genetics, medicine, and agriculture.
However, while many researchers view CRISPR-Cas9 as a tool of unparalleled promise, others express caution, noting its potential for misuse and unintended consequences. Proponents argue that the ability to edit genes in model organisms such as fruit flies and mice has already advanced the understanding of numerous genetic conditions, paving the way for breakthroughs in therapeutic interventions, including the correction of genetic disorders in humans. They emphasize that CRISPR-Cas9's versatility across a wide range of organisms could lead to innovations in crop engineering, disease resistance, and even climate adaptation strategies.
Critics, however, caution that the technology’s power comes with profound ethical dilemmas. The ability to edit human embryos, for example, raises fears of “designer babies” and unintended social inequalities. Moreover, the long-term ecological effects of altering the genomes of species within complex ecosystems remain poorly understood. Some argue that the rush to apply CRISPR-Cas9 in agriculture and medicine has outpaced the necessary ethical frameworks, with policymakers struggling to catch up.
Central to this debate is the question of whether the potential benefits of CRISPR-Cas9 outweigh its risks. Advocates of regulation believe that stringent guidelines are essential to prevent misuse, but others contend that such restrictions might stifle scientific progress. Some even posit that delaying the full deployment of CRISPR-Cas9 could hinder advances that might address pressing global challenges, such as food security and genetic diseases.
Ultimately, the future of CRISPR-Cas9—and genetic engineering more broadly—depends on striking a balance between innovation and caution. As this technology continues to evolve, scientists, ethicists, and policymakers must grapple with how best to manage its potential to reshape biology and society alike.
According to the passage, which of the following is mentioned as a concern raised by critics of CRISPR-Cas9?
A. The technology has been rushed into agricultural applications before its ecological effects are fully understood.
B. It has failed to advance the understanding of genetic conditions in model organisms.
C. Ethical dilemmas related to the use of CRISPR-Cas9 in gene therapy have already led to its restriction in several countries.
D. Policymakers have put in place overly strict regulations that prevent its development.
E. There is uncertainty surrounding whether CRISPR-Cas9 will be effective in climate adaptation strategies.
(A): Correct Answer. The passage mentions that critics raise concerns about "long-term ecological effects" and rushing the technology into agricultural use without fully understanding these effects.
(B): Incorrect. The passage mentions CRISPR-Cas9 advancing studies in model organisms, not failing to do so.
(C): Incorrect. There is no mention of restrictions due to ethical dilemmas, only concerns about future ethical implications.
(D): Incorrect. The passage does not suggest overly strict regulations; it focuses on concerns about needing more ethical oversight.
(E): Incorrect. The passage mentions agriculture and disease resistance but does not discuss climate adaptation uncertainties.
Answer: A
Recent breakthroughs in molecular biology, particularly through the development of CRISPR-Cas9, have revolutionized the field of genetic engineering. CRISPR-Cas9, derived from a bacterial immune mechanism, allows precise manipulation of DNA, enabling targeted gene deletions, insertions, or replacements with far greater simplicity and efficiency than previous technologies such as zinc finger nucleases and TALENs. Its introduction has been heralded as a transformative leap forward in gene editing, accelerating research in genetics, medicine, and agriculture.
However, while many researchers view CRISPR-Cas9 as a tool of unparalleled promise, others express caution, noting its potential for misuse and unintended consequences. Proponents argue that the ability to edit genes in model organisms such as fruit flies and mice has already advanced the understanding of numerous genetic conditions, paving the way for breakthroughs in therapeutic interventions, including the correction of genetic disorders in humans. They emphasize that CRISPR-Cas9's versatility across a wide range of organisms could lead to innovations in crop engineering, disease resistance, and even climate adaptation strategies.
Critics, however, caution that the technology’s power comes with profound ethical dilemmas. The ability to edit human embryos, for example, raises fears of “designer babies” and unintended social inequalities. Moreover, the long-term ecological effects of altering the genomes of species within complex ecosystems remain poorly understood. Some argue that the rush to apply CRISPR-Cas9 in agriculture and medicine has outpaced the necessary ethical frameworks, with policymakers struggling to catch up.
Central to this debate is the question of whether the potential benefits of CRISPR-Cas9 outweigh its risks. Advocates of regulation believe that stringent guidelines are essential to prevent misuse, but others contend that such restrictions might stifle scientific progress. Some even posit that delaying the full deployment of CRISPR-Cas9 could hinder advances that might address pressing global challenges, such as food security and genetic diseases.
Ultimately, the future of CRISPR-Cas9—and genetic engineering more broadly—depends on striking a balance between innovation and caution. As this technology continues to evolve, scientists, ethicists, and policymakers must grapple with how best to manage its potential to reshape biology and society alike.
According to the passage, which of the following is mentioned as a concern raised by critics of CRISPR-Cas9?
A. The technology has been rushed into agricultural applications before its ecological effects are fully understood.
B. It has failed to advance the understanding of genetic conditions in model organisms.
C. Ethical dilemmas related to the use of CRISPR-Cas9 in gene therapy have already led to its restriction in several countries.
D. Policymakers have put in place overly strict regulations that prevent its development.
E. There is uncertainty surrounding whether CRISPR-Cas9 will be effective in climate adaptation strategies.
(A): Correct Answer. The passage mentions that critics raise concerns about "long-term ecological effects" and rushing the technology into agricultural use without fully understanding these effects.
(B): Incorrect. The passage mentions CRISPR-Cas9 advancing studies in model organisms, not failing to do so.
(C): Incorrect. There is no mention of restrictions due to ethical dilemmas, only concerns about future ethical implications.
(D): Incorrect. The passage does not suggest overly strict regulations; it focuses on concerns about needing more ethical oversight.
(E): Incorrect. The passage mentions agriculture and disease resistance but does not discuss climate adaptation uncertainties.
Answer: A
05 Apr 2025, 14:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
I don’t quite agree with the solution. No mention of whether the technology has been implemented, just that there is a rush to implement it?
