If your data led you to conclude that your hypothesis was rejected, which of these should you do next? Write a report declaring the experiment to be a failure.

Throw out your results and try again to get data that proves your hypothesis.

Form a new hypothesis and repeat the steps of the scientific method.

"1. it should be, it has been for about 20 years, and it's really not much different in the end than breeding animals to have particular traits. there are always concerns about genetically engineered animals/plants affecting the environment in unexpected negative ways, but i can't think of an example where the fears didn't turn out to be baseless.  

first, as you point out, it would be a great advance in pharmacology, to be able to tailor drugs and their doses to me. the pros involve better medical treatment. the cons involve privacy issues like insurance companies denying coverage to people with genetic risk factors. looking at dna markers wouldn't affect the frequency of genetic diseases, but it would allow detection of them earlier. and ok, actually i suppose that if people used this information to avoid having children with genetic diseases, some might decrease in frequency."

answer: national resource conservation services

national resource conservation services is the us. based approach that provides technical and financial assistance for natural resource management. nrcs society in conservation of resources by involving in activities like farmland protection, flood prevention, watershed protection, urban conservation, conserves economic and environmental conditions. it conducts soil surveys and implements the policy of natural resources management on the society.