Will Trump continue Obama-era ‘streamlining’ of crop and animal biotech and gene-editing regulations?

rt obama trump er x

[Editor’s note: Hank Campbell is president of the American Council on Science and Health.]

President Donald Trump spent a great deal of his early days in the White House rolling back decisions made by his predecessor. … But there is one science policy initiative Trump has not touched so far — and shouldn’t.

That beneficial policy relates to modernizing how genetic alteration of organisms is approved.

…

To try to streamline approval for the 21st century, the FDA has produced new guidance on genetic editing of “animals,” which will include mosquitoes — a few species of which are ecologically useless disease vectors for yellow fever and Zika and can be controlled with biology better than chemicals — and the invasive diamondback moth, which eats crops such as cabbage and broccoli. Transgenic solutions for those are in the works. Meanwhile, USDA proposed new rules for biotech plants, which would mandate approval based on risk to the environment and human health — not just because they have been genetically modified.

That’s a big change. It would mean we would upgrade our approval process for genetically engineered crops to one similar to food additives, which provides a pass for ingredients designated “generally recognized as safe.”

…

Though these new recommendations were produced during the Obama era, they would be a good foundation in biotech for President Trump’s mandate to make policy decision-making more evidence-based.

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Read full, original post: An Obama food-science policy worth keeping

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-10-2026-10_36_07-AM
Viewpoint: Even lousy scientific articles can shield authors when they hype dubious health claims and products
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-23-2026-02_36_39-PM
Viewpoint: After firing the entire National Science Board, Trump reshapes funding initiatives. Here’s the good and the bad.
generated-1790707585414
Facts & Fallacies podcast: America's health care system is broken. A doctor explains how to fix it
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-21-2026-03_15_09-PM
Viewpoint: Chipotle-inspired lesson: 10,000 sick customers suggest that processed foods can be safer than fresh ones
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-21-2026-11_54_00-AM
Viewpoint: Activist environmental NGOs are turning from public funding to activist billionaires to support their campaigns. It won’t end well.
Screenshot 2026-08-12 at 1.22
Activists vs. Scientists: Could “Butterfly Effect” fears derail gene-drive research targeting the flesh-eating screwworm?
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-22-2026-11_17_31-AM
The exploding controversy over AI’s built-in survival drive
sorghum farmers in kenya FARMERS TREND
Here are all the ways CRISPR gene editing is transforming Africa’s staple crops—and there’s a lot more innovation to come
Screenshot-2026-09-16-at-10.27.33-AM
Viewpoint: SCOTUS poised to address First Amendment tension between mandatory vaccines, children’s health and religious freedom 
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.