【802-803】特朗普宣布全国紧急状态修建隔离墙&Dog DNA Testing on the Rise
AS IT IS
Dog DNA Testing on the Rise
February 15, 2019
In this Thursday, January 31, 2019, photo Lisa Topol poses for a photo with her two rescue dogs, Schmutzy, right, and Plop, in New York. Topol recently had the DNA tested for both dogs.
More and more Americans are examining their own genetic information to find answers about health issues and family history.
And more and more are also doing the same for their dogs.
Genetic testing for dogs has increased in recent years. Several companies offer in-home DNA tests that are similar to those designed for humans.
These tests offer a deep look at an animal’s genetic history. The tests require just a small amount of material collected from inside a dog’s mouth.
More than 1 million dogs have been tested in the last 10 years.
The growing popularity of the tests has led to debate about their abilities and limitations. But to many dog owners, DNA tests are a good way to get to know their beloved pets.
Lisa Topol of New York has two dogs: Plop and Schmutzy. Both competed in this year’s Westminster Kennel Club dog show. The two animals are mixed-breed, meaning their genetic history includes many different kinds of dog. Topol recently had both dogs genetically tested. She told the Associated Press that the results “put some pieces of the puzzle together.”
The company Embark became Westminster’s first DNA-testing partner last fall. The move is likely to bring the company more attention, especially from people who raise dogs professionally.
Embark’s test results showed what Topol already believed: her high-energy dogs are more Australian cattle dog than anything else. But part of Schmutzy’s genetic information showed some unexpected things, including large amounts of Labrador retriever and Doberman pinscher.
Topol was surprised at first. But then she noted Schmutzy does walk like a Doberman and shares Labradors’ love of water.
Topol said the results “make me understand them better.”
The testing of dog DNA goes back over 20 years. In the past, it was mostly done to test for medical conditions and other purposes. But the industry grew quickly in 2005, after scientists mapped a full set of dog genes and published the results.
Wisdom Health launched a breed-identification test in 2007. The company added a health examination a few years later and says it has now tested over 1.1 million dogs worldwide.
The tests have led to greater research possibilities. They also have helped animal rescue groups; they can use DNA results to help possible owners know more about their dogs. DNA can also be used as proof that a dog’s family history only includes one breed, and help breeders end some common diseases.
The technology has even been used to identify dogs whose owners do not pick up their waste. It has helped in dog biting investigations. It proved, for example, that a Belgian Malnois dog accused of killing a Pomeranian was innocent.
Some veterinarians – or doctors for animals – feel that DNA testing improves care. Ernie Ward is a veterinarian and television performer in North Carolina. He recommends that owners test all young dogs.
“I want to know as much about my patients as possible,” said Ward.
But not all animal experts agree with Ward. Last year, a Boston-based veterinarian and two scientists wrote comments that appeared in the science publication Nature.
“Pet genetics must be reined in,” they wrote. Their comments started with a troubling story. The owner of a pug understood the results of her dog’s DNA test to mean that she had a rare brain disorder that would only worsen over time. With that information, the owner decided to end the dog’s life.
Lisa Moses is the veterinarian who helped write the criticism in Nature. She argued that the pug’s illness could have been something more treatable.
“These (tests) should be used in a limited way until we get a lot more information,” Moses said.
One concern is that tests can show genetic conditions that are linked to disease in some breeds but have unknown effects in the breed being tested. This means the tests in themselves cannot necessarily tell pet owners how much they should worry. They also cannot tell professional dog breeders whether or not a dog should reproduce.
But test companies say their work offers many benefits and useful information, such as whether a dog’s genes suggest bad reactions to some medicines.
For Rennie Pasquinelli, the benefit is a new way of looking at her dog, Murray. The pet adoption agency told Pasquinelli that Murray was a mix between border collie and Boston terrier. But an Embark test last month identified only a small amount of border collie mixed with six other breeds. It found no Boston terrier at all.
“Obviously I don’t love him more, or less,” Pasquinelli said. “It’s like when you know something new about someone. That doesn’t negatively or positively change your opinion on them, but you still look at them in a different way.”
I’m Susan Shand.
And I’m Pete Musto.
Jennifer Peltz reported this story for the Associated Press. Pete Musto adapted it for VOA Learning English. Ashley Thompson was the editor.
We want to hear from you. How common is genetic testing of pets in your country? Write to us in the Comments Section or on our Facebook page.
_______________________________________________________________
Words in This Story
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) – n. a substance that carries genetic information in the cells of plants and animals
pet(s) – n. an animal, such as a dog, cat, bird, or fish, that people keep mainly for pleasure
breed – n. a particular kind of dog, cat, or horse
pieces of the puzzle together - idm. to make sense of something by analyzing multiple pieces of information and drawing a conclusion
reined in – p.v. to limit or control someone or something
benefit(s) – n. a good or helpful result or effect
adoption – n. the act or process of taking a pet or child of other parents legally as your own
AS IT IS
Trump Declares National Emergency to Build the Wall
February 15, 2019
American President Donald Trump on Friday declared a national emergency so that he can get the money needed to build a wall along the nation’s border with Mexico.
The move is seen as a way to go around Congress. It is sure to face opposition from legislators.
Speaking from the White House, Trump said he is declaring the national emergency because of, in his words, “an invasion of our country with drugs, with human traffickers, with all types of criminals and gangs.”
Trump added that he is planning to use money from the military and other parts of the government to pay for the building of the wall.
As a presidential candidate, Trump often said that Mexico would pay for such a wall.
Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney said the president “will have access to roughly $8 billion worth of money that can be used to secure the southern border.”
Trump had demanded $5.7 billion for the wall. But Congress, which is powered with making spending decisions, only provided $1.4 billion for barriers.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer quickly denounced the move as an “unlawful declaration over a crisis that does not exist.”
The two leaders released a joint statement while Trump was still giving his speech. They said, “The President’s actions clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, which our Founders enshrined in the Constitution. The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the Courts, and in the public, using every remedy available.”
Trump admitted that his declaration of a national emergency will face opposition in the courts. He said, "Sadly, we'll be sued and sadly it will go through a process and happily we'll win."
National Emergency Act
The president defended his decision, saying other presidents have declared national emergencies in the past.
In 1976, Congress passed the National Emergency Act, which gave presidents special powers during a crisis. Congress can end a state of emergency with a joint resolution and the president’s signature. If the president vetoes the resolution, Congress would need two-thirds of lawmakers to vote to end the declaration.
American presidents have declared national emergencies 59 times since 1976.
President Jimmy Carter made the declaration as Iran took American hostages in 1979. Ronald Reagan used the power to ban trade with Nicaragua in 1985.
In 1990, President George H.W. Bush blocked financial dealings with Iraq. In 1996, Bill Clinton used the power after two airplanes were shot down near Cuba. George W. Bush declared a national emergency after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
And President Barack Obama used the special power in 2011 to freeze the assets of Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi.
Trump has declared national emergencies three other times: in December 2017 against Myanmar generals for their part in the Rohingya refugee crisis; in September 2018 against persons related to Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election; and in November 2018 after the Nicaraguan government acted against protesters.
But until Friday, no American president in history had used the power to get additional money to pay for projects without the support of Congress.
Hai Do wrote this story for Learning English. Ashley Thompson was the editor.
_________________________________________________________________
Words in This Story
secure - v. to make (something) safe by guarding or protecting it
enshrined - v. to remember and protect (someone or something that is valuable, admired, etc.)
purse - n. an amount of money that government has available to use
remedy - n. a way of solving or correcting a problem
sue - v. to bring a lawsuit against someone