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 story of DDT serves as a cautionary tale in the use of technology, illustrating that while innovative solutions can boost agricultural productivity, they may also lead to unintended long-term environmental consequences. Similarly, DNA technology shows promise for solving diseases and improving food security, yet it necessitates meticulous scrutiny to ensure that genetic modifications do not inadvertently disrupt ecosystems or lead to new health issues. Incorporating DNA technology into modern science has revolutionized fields like medicine, agriculture, and forensics. However, just like with DDT, it's crucial for scientists to prioritize long-term studies and ethical considerations. The goal is to strike a balance between benefiting society and minimizing potential risks that could echo over generations, ensuring that we learn from the past to shape a responsible future.