Cargando…
Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose
Dietary DNA is generally regarded as safe to consume, and is a routine ingredient of food obtained from any living organism. Millions of naturally-occurring DNA variations are observed when comparing the genomic sequence of any two healthy individuals of a given species. Breeders routinely select de...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6550240/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31304275 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41538-019-0035-y |
_version_ | 1783424158106910720 |
---|---|
author | Van Eenennaam, Alison L. Wells, Kevin D. Murray, James D. |
author_facet | Van Eenennaam, Alison L. Wells, Kevin D. Murray, James D. |
author_sort | Van Eenennaam, Alison L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Dietary DNA is generally regarded as safe to consume, and is a routine ingredient of food obtained from any living organism. Millions of naturally-occurring DNA variations are observed when comparing the genomic sequence of any two healthy individuals of a given species. Breeders routinely select desired traits resulting from this DNA variation to develop new cultivars and varieties of food plants and animals. Regulatory agencies do not evaluate these new varieties prior to commercial release. Gene editing tools now allow plant and animal breeders to precisely introduce useful genetic variation into agricultural breeding programs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that it has no plans to place additional regulations on gene-edited plants that could otherwise have been developed through traditional breeding prior to commercialization. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed mandatory premarket new animal drug regulatory evaluation for all food animals whose genomes have been intentionally altered using modern molecular technologies including gene editing technologies. This runs counter to U.S. biotechnology policy that regulatory oversight should be triggered by unreasonable risk, and not by the fact that an organism has been modified by a particular process or technique. Breeder intention is not associated with product risk. Harmonizing the regulations associated with gene editing in food species is imperative to allow both plant and animal breeders access to gene editing tools to introduce useful sustainability traits like disease resistance, climate adaptability, and food quality attributes into U.S. agricultural breeding programs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6550240 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65502402019-07-12 Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose Van Eenennaam, Alison L. Wells, Kevin D. Murray, James D. NPJ Sci Food Perspective Dietary DNA is generally regarded as safe to consume, and is a routine ingredient of food obtained from any living organism. Millions of naturally-occurring DNA variations are observed when comparing the genomic sequence of any two healthy individuals of a given species. Breeders routinely select desired traits resulting from this DNA variation to develop new cultivars and varieties of food plants and animals. Regulatory agencies do not evaluate these new varieties prior to commercial release. Gene editing tools now allow plant and animal breeders to precisely introduce useful genetic variation into agricultural breeding programs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that it has no plans to place additional regulations on gene-edited plants that could otherwise have been developed through traditional breeding prior to commercialization. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed mandatory premarket new animal drug regulatory evaluation for all food animals whose genomes have been intentionally altered using modern molecular technologies including gene editing technologies. This runs counter to U.S. biotechnology policy that regulatory oversight should be triggered by unreasonable risk, and not by the fact that an organism has been modified by a particular process or technique. Breeder intention is not associated with product risk. Harmonizing the regulations associated with gene editing in food species is imperative to allow both plant and animal breeders access to gene editing tools to introduce useful sustainability traits like disease resistance, climate adaptability, and food quality attributes into U.S. agricultural breeding programs. Nature Publishing Group UK 2019-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6550240/ /pubmed/31304275 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41538-019-0035-y Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Perspective Van Eenennaam, Alison L. Wells, Kevin D. Murray, James D. Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose |
title | Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose |
title_full | Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose |
title_fullStr | Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose |
title_full_unstemmed | Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose |
title_short | Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose |
title_sort | proposed u.s. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose |
topic | Perspective |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6550240/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31304275 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41538-019-0035-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vaneenennaamalisonl proposedusregulationofgeneeditedfoodanimalsisnotfitforpurpose AT wellskevind proposedusregulationofgeneeditedfoodanimalsisnotfitforpurpose AT murrayjamesd proposedusregulationofgeneeditedfoodanimalsisnotfitforpurpose |