Does over-regulation of GMOs stymie development, reduce competition?

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

Our regulatory experience over decades includes thousands of case by case reviews by the EPA and USDA (in addition to some by NIH) of exclusively low- or trivial-risk genetically engineered agricultural products. This wrong-headed, expensive, one-size-fits-all regulation has obstructed the development and acceptance of the technology, inhibited its diffusion to additional important applications, boosted the costs of R&D and discouraged entrepreneurial interest in entire once-promising sectors.

Attempts to rationalize the regulation have been obstructed by the “regulatory capture” of government agencies: With support from anti-technology activists, agribusiness companies wishing to create market-entry barriers to competition have urged over-regulation of their own products, including genetically engineered plants, animals and microorganisms. Industry lobbyists have gotten the excessive regulation they wanted, and the inflated R&D costs have inhibited competition and innovation.

. . . .


It is long past time to implement the kind of scientifically defensible, product-focused and risk-based oversight envisioned in the Coordinated Framework. . . .

Read full, original post: ‘GMO’ Regulation: After 30 Years, Let Science Finally Show The Way

Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
GLP Podcasts
Infographic: Deaths from COVID-19 are far higher than reported estimates

Infographic: Deaths from COVID-19 are far higher than reported estimates

More than 2.8 million people have lost their lives due to the pandemic, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend