(1) The fear of genetically modified foods is not based in facts. (2) The Food and Drug Administration holds genetically modified foods to the same standard as traditional foods, which means that these new products are equally as safe as products that are already on grocery shelves. (3) In addition, common fruits, including nectarines and seedless grapes, are a result of genetic breeding.

1. What would be the best way of revising the second sentence for a presentation?
OPTION 2. BREAKING INTO TWO SENTENCES

2.Which rewrite of the third sentence could be appropriate for a speech, but not an essay?
B. Do you eat nectarines or seedless grapes? Then you already eat foods modified by genetic breeding.
ANSWER ON EDGENUTY

1. OPTION 2. BREAKING INTO TWO SENTENCES

2. B. Do you eat nectarines or seedless grapes? Then you already eat foods modified by genetic breeding.

Explanation:

Since the answers are given in the question I would like to explain it to you so it can be more understandable.

1. For sentence two in this excerpt, we can say that it should break in two sentences because of its better understanding of presentation and the people who will be able to listen or read it. It could split into two-sentence, for example ''The Food and Drug Administration holds genetically modified foods to the same standard as traditional. That means that both products are both equally safe.'' (or you can give a further explanation of it).2. ''Do you eat nectarines or seedless grapes? Then you already eat foods modified by genetic breeding.'' This sentence is referring to a perfect one for the speech or presentation because it will be more understandable for people and they can pay more attention to it since the author of the presentation is talking to them and asking the question. It can open their eyes more about the situation. It would be inappropriate if those two sentences are used in an essay because it is informal for the essay.