The use of DDT as a pesticide is an example of how new technology can have favorable and dangerous long-term outcomes. How does this relate to the use of DNA technology? Only positive outcomes can result from new technology in science. Scientists should conduct long-term studies of DNA technology to determine the consequences. There is no connection because they are different technologies. Scientists should not use new technology; they should use the methods for pest control that are already available.

The right answer is Scientists should conduct long-term studies of DNA technology to determine the consequences.

DDT is a potent insecticide: it kills by opening the sodium channels of insect neurons, destroying them instantly, leading to spasms and then death. Some genetic mutations acting on the sodium channels can make some insects resistant to DDT and other insecticides working on the same principle.

The US Environmental Protection Agency has categorized DDT into the B2 class, that is, potential carcinogen for humans. This supports the fact that the insecticide acts on human DNA.

The correct statement is that scientists should conduct long-term studies of DNA technology to determine the outcomes.

DDT refers to a potent insecticide, which kills by opening the sodium channels of insect's neurons, damaging them instantaneously, resulting in spasm and then death. The researchers should conduct the experiments to make sure that these pesticides will not harm other species, mainly at a molecular level, as this could influence the whole species of the organism.