Canada exempts gene-edited plants from regulatory review, speeding new crop development

Credit: Sandy Huffaker/New York Times
Credit: Sandy Huffaker/New York Times

Gene-edited plants differ from traditional GMOs because the method used to modify their genetic codes differs, and they often don’t contain DNA from another organism. Older genetic-modification techniques added entire segments of foreign DNA to an organism’s genome to obtain desirable traits. In contrast, gene editing changes only a few base pairs — the genome’s building blocks — within the organism’s DNA to alter a specific gene.

Health Canada and the [Canadian Food Inspection Agency, or] CFIA categorize new organisms into two categories, “novel” and “non-novel.” In the context of gene editing:

“Novel” organisms have traits that are not naturally occurring and have not been previously approved for sale by Health Canada and the CFIA. Organisms that pose an obvious risk — they could be toxic or cause an allergic reaction, for instance — or that contain foreign DNA in the final product are considered novel.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

“Non-novel” organisms are organisms that have a history of safe use, show no characteristics that are new to the species and do not contain genetic material from another organism after its genome has been edited.

Currently, GMOs on the market in Canada must pass through Health Canada and the CFIA to determine if they are “novel.” If so, they are subject to regulatory oversight; seeds that exhibit “non-novel” traits will not.

Read the original post

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

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 May 26, 2026, 08_42_17 AM (1)
Viewpoint: Greenpeace and poison: How environmental advocacy groups rely on compliant (and often ignorant) journalists to spread disinformation and spark litigation
Screenshot 2025-07-30 at 10.48
Can gene editing eliminate Down syndrome? Scientists have done it in lab-grown cells
Screenshot-2026-05-28-at-1.36.28-PM
Viewpoint: Can mRNA research survive the Trump administration?
Screenshot-2026-06-02-at-11.59.11-AM
Magnifica Humanitas: Pope’s encyclical broadside against AI naivete and overreach
Screenshot 2025-11-18 at 3.45
Viewpoint—GMOs and sustainability: Why buying organic foods is the least environmentally-sensitive food choice—without offering any health benefits
ChatGPT-Image-May-26-2026-07_51_21-AM-2
Viewpoint: There are more than 1,000 chemicals in a cup of coffee—including many substances that can cause cancer. Why isn’t it banned?
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-2-2026-11_39_58-AM
Viewpoint: Who is RFK, Jr.’s newly-appointed CDC senior counselor, Sara Brenner — Vaccine skeptic and self-proclaimed “MAHA mom”
Picture1
Sounds we can’t hear — the hidden planetary signals behind science, fear, and misinformation
ChatGPT Image May 28, 2026, 08_16_38 PM
Viewpoint: Why the EPA mismeasures cancer risk of chemicals and what should be done to fix it
Screenshot-2026-04-14-at-11.11.06-AM
‘Turbo cancer’ or mRNA cancer cure? Strategies to counter misinformation
glp menu logo outlined

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