Viewpoint: President Trump should end FDA-USDA turf war over animal gene-editing regulation to foster innovation

lab meat war usda fda minimized

In more than two decades, only one biotechnology food animal has been approved for production and sale in the United States …. New products in the pipeline, particularly those produced using genome editing, hold tremendous promise for the United States …. but regulatory uncertainty has all but destroyed investment.

That is why our organization, the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), is working closely with the U.S. government and stakeholders on improving our regulatory system for animal biotechnology ….

[Editor’s note: Dana O’Brien is the Executive Vice President of BIO]

Like FDA, USDA also has authority and experience overseeing the health and safety of animals, and we have shown USDA and the White House how FDA and USDA could partner to share regulatory oversight. And we have even shown the White House how the President could move animal biotechnology oversight to USDA – an approach championed by key livestock and scientific stakeholders.

Now is the time to set aside the bureaucratic wrangling over turf and deliver a meaningful solution to innovators, farmers, and consumers. We call on the President to help us drive results and achieve a favorable outcome on this matter in the next three months.

Read the original post

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}
screenshot at  pm

Are pesticide residues on food something to worry about?

In 1962, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring drew attention to pesticides and their possible dangers to humans, birds, mammals and the ...
glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

* indicates required
Email Lists
glp menu logo outlined

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