Literature DB >> 20650337

Lessons from the 'Humanitarian Golden Rice' project: regulation prevents development of public good genetically engineered crop products.

Ingo Potrykus1.   

Abstract

Compared to a non-Genetically Engineered (GE) variety, the deployment of Golden Rice has suffered from a delay of at least ten years. The cause of this delay is exclusively GE-regulation. Considering the potential impact of Golden Rice on the reduction in vitamin A-malnutrition, this delay is responsible for an unjustifiable loss of millions of lives, mostly children and women. GE-regulation is also responsible for the fact that no public institution can deliver a public good GE-product and that thus we have a de facto monopoly in favour of a few potent industries. Considering the forgone benefits from prevented public good GE-products, GE-regulation is responsible for hundreds of millions of lives, all of them, of course, in developing countries. As there is no scientific justification for present GE-regulation, and as it has, so far, not prevented any harm, our society has the urgent responsibility to reconsider present regulation, which is based on an extreme interpretation of the precautionary principle, and change it to science-based regulation on the basis of traits instead of technology. GE-technology has an unprecedented safety record and is far more precise and predictable than any other 'traditional' and unregulated breeding technology. Not to change GE-regulation to a scientific basis is considered by the author 'a crime against humanity'.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20650337     DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2010.07.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Biotechnol        ISSN: 1871-6784            Impact factor:   5.079


  7 in total

1.  Status and market potential of transgenic biofortified crops.

Authors:  Hans De Steur; Dieter Blancquaert; Simon Strobbe; Willy Lambert; Xavier Gellynck; Dominique Van Der Straeten
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 54.908

2.  Genetically Modified Plants: Nutritious, Sustainable, yet Underrated.

Authors:  Kendal D Hirschi
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 4.798

3.  Policy: Reboot the debate on genetic engineering.

Authors:  Jennifer Kuzma
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 4.  Nutritionally enhanced food crops; progress and perspectives.

Authors:  Kathleen L Hefferon
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2015-02-11       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 5.  Plant-based vaccines for Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Shoichi Ishiura; Taiji Yoshida
Journal:  Proc Jpn Acad Ser B Phys Biol Sci       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 3.493

6.  From Golden Rice to Golden Diets: How to turn its recent approval into practice.

Authors:  Hans De Steur; Alexander J Stein; Matty Demont
Journal:  Glob Food Sec       Date:  2022-03

7.  The application of GMOs in agriculture and in food production for a better nutrition: two different scientific points of view.

Authors:  M Buiatti; P Christou; G Pastore
Journal:  Genes Nutr       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 5.523

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.