GMO scare 2.0? ‘Arduous’ regulation may increase public distrust of CRISPR-edited crops

unnamed file
For many, perception of genetically modified foods has changed little from those of this protester dressed as a genetically altered ‘Killer Tomato’ marching through downtown San Diego, June 24, 2001. Image: Joe Cavaretta/AP Photo

Modern biotechnology (transgenesis and gene editing) helps achieve an increase in food production without the need for more land area for agriculture. It is expected to continue contributing to achieving global food production and thus it is necessary for this technology to be widely accepted. For this reason, experts from DowDuPont published a review on how government regulations of gene-edited crops and public acceptance of these crops are affect each other.

The paper showed a comparison between the regulatory oversight of traditional crops and genetically modified crops. Government authorities rarely assessed traditional crops due to their remarkable track safety records. As for genetically modified crops, some have suggested that the rigorous regulatory oversight will instill consumer acceptance. However, this contradicts …. the history of GM crops’ acceptance which exhibited that arduous regulation has likely led to public distrust. This contributed to the notion that GM crops are risky. But in reality, the risks are similar to those of traditional crops’. Thus, the authors investigate if risk-disproportionate regulation leads to the validation of the public’s fears and distrust towards controversial yet safe technologies.

The paper also states that risks are always involved when trying to gain the public’s trust towards an underlying technology. These risks include confusing the purpose of risk assessment. For instance, when a voluminous data on risk assessment is presented to meet regulatory requirements, the real safety risks are not readily distinguishable from negligible risks. Another risk mentioned was the obstruction of the delivery of beneficial technologies to the market due to the time and cost it takes the developers to gather non-risk based regulatory approvals.

Related article:  Viewpoint: US farm productivity shows Europe why rejecting biotech crops was a mistake

It was concluded that separating the goal of regulating technologies to protect public safety from the goal of attaining public acceptance may help avoid the risk of meeting neither goals. The authors also emphasized that education and outreach are a better use of government resources to gain public acceptance of beneficial technologies. However, it was noted that these efforts will be maximized if aimed at an audience who are willing to consider new information instead of an audience who already believes that they know everything about the technology. Factual communications from trusted and reliable sources were also highlighted to oppose misinformation commonly spread through social media.

Read full, original article: Crop Biotech Update, July 17, 2019

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Nigeriacotton

Video: We can ‘finally’ grow GMOs—Nigerian farmer explains why developing countries need biotech crops

Nigerian farmer Patience Koku discusses the GMO crop trials she is conducting on her farm, and why growers can "rise ...
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 ...
breastfeeding bed x facebook x

Infographic: We know breastfeeding helps children. Now we know it helps mothers too

When a woman becomes pregnant, her risk of type 2 diabetes increases for the rest of her life, perhaps because ...
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 ...
gmo corn field x

Do GMO Bt (insect-resistant) crops pose a threat to human health or the environment?

Bt is a bacterium found organically in the soil. It is extremely effective in repelling or killing target insects but ...
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