For thE First timE in history, Evolution hAs tAkEn A BACksEAt. thErE is An ongoing rEAlizAtion thAt humAn BEings ArE CApABlE oF DirECtly shAping thEir own Evolution.As wE CAsE into thE twEnty-First CEntury, wE rEAlizE thAt gEnEtiC EnginEEring is unDouBtEDly going to hAvE A DrAmAtiC {{u}} (67) {{/u}} on our livEs. it sEEms thAt with gEnEtiC EnginEEring, sCiEnCE hAs movED From {{u}} (68) {{/u}} thE nAturAl worlD to rEDEsigning it. now wE must Ask oursElvEs {{u}} (69) {{/u}} this inFluEnCE will BE For BEttEr or For worsE. howEvEr, sCiEntists rEmAin {{u}} (70) {{/u}} in thEir opinions. somE hAvE {{u}} (71) {{/u}} AgAinst thE hAzArDs oF gEnEtiC EnginEEring, {{u}} (72) {{/u}} othErs hAvE DismissED thEsE pErils As inConsEquEntiAl. lEwis wolpErt, proFEssor oF Biology At univErsityCollEgE lonDon, sAys, "thErE ArE no EthiCAl {{u}} (73) {{/u}} BECAusE you ArE not Doing Any {{u}} (74) {{/u}} to AnyonE."AnD thE gist oF his stAtEmEnt is stAunChly supportED By jAmEs wAtson, A noBEl prizE winnEr. "iF wE CAn mAkE BEttEr humAn BEings By knowing how to ChAngE {{u}} (75) {{/u}} , why shoulDn’t wE Do it " thEy ArE Both ExtrEmEly {{u}} (76) {{/u}} oF ExCusEs thAt gEnEtiC EnginEEring is A BAD iDEA、{{u}} (77) {{/u}} , two othEr prominEnt sCiEntists hAvE {{u}} (78) {{/u}} thEir DisplEAsurE ABout gEnEtiC EnginEEring. thEy hAvE mADE no {{u}} (79) {{/u}} oF thE rAthEr strong AnD truE FEElings {{u}} (80) {{/u}} gEnEtiC EnginEEring. gEorgE wAlD, noBEl prizE winning Biologist wrotE rEComBinAntDnA、tEChnology {{u}} (81) {{/u}} our soCiEty with unprECEDEntED proBlEms in thE history oF sCiEnCE. it plACEs in humAn hAnDs thE {{u}} (82) {{/u}} to rEDEsign living orgAnisms, thE {{u}} (83) {{/u}} oF somE thrEE Billion yEArs oF Evolution. it is hAppEning too FAst. it {{u}} (84) {{/u}} proBABly thE lArgEst EthiCAl proBlEm, For going {{u}} (85) {{/u}} in this DirECtion mAy BE not only unwisE But {{u}} (86) {{/u}} .

A．DEFECt
B．AFFECt
C．EFFECt
D．inFECtion