Scientists say gene-edited animals, not process itself, should be regulated

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

The existing regulatory system is broken. The first GE animals predated the development of GE crops, but the first GE animals were approved for human consumption only in November 2015. . . This decision on. . . AquAdvantage GE salmon. . . took ~20 years, with development and regulatory costs that exceeded $77 million.

. . . . Given that DNA is generally regarded as safe to consume, and that genome editing can be used to produce precise analogs of the naturally occurring mutations we routinely consume in conventionally bred plants and animals, there would appear to be no scientific or other logical reason to single out the ‘process’ of genome editing for onerous regulation.

. . . .

The current recombinant DNA process-based trigger for the regulatory evaluation of GE animals is discouraging the developmenof beneficial GE applications to the detriment of global food security and agricultural sustainability. Given that the United States has no specific legislation regulating animal breeding, there would appear to be no authority for the FDA to regulate varieties that carry naturally occurring alleles produced using genome editing. 

. . . .The products of editing should be subject to the same oversight as other food products, based on the result rather than the process that yielded the result. . . . 

Read full, original post: Regulate genome-edited products, not genome editing itself

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

As Europe sees record coronavirus cases and deaths, Slovakia is testing its entire adult population. WSJ's Drew Hinshaw explains how ...
mag insects image superjumbo v

Disaster interrupted: Which farming system better preserves insect populations: Organic or conventional?

A three-year run of fragmentary Armageddon-like studies had primed the journalism pumps and settled the media framing about the future ...
dead bee desolate city

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

The media call it the “Insect Apocalypse”. In the past three years, the phrase has become an accepted truth of ...
globalmethanebudget globalcarbonproject cropped x

Infographic: Cows cause climate change? Agriculture scientist says ‘belching bovines’ get too much blame

A recent interview by Caroline Stocks, a UK journalist who writes about food, agriculture and the environment, of air quality ...
organic hillside sweet corn x

Organic v conventional using GMOs: Which is the more sustainable farming?

Many consumers spend more for organic food to avoid genetically modified products in part because they believe that “industrial agriculture” ...
benjamin franklin x

Are most GMO safety studies funded by industry?

The assertion that biotech companies do the research and the government just signs off on it is false ...
favicon

Environmental Working Group: EWG challenges safety of GMOs, food pesticide residues

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies for tighter GMO legislation and famously puts out annual "dirty dozen" list of fruits and ...
m hansen

Michael Hansen: Architect of Consumers Union ongoing anti-GMO campaign

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be the prime mover behind the ongoing campaign against agricultural biotechnology at Consumer Reports. He is an ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend