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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Van Eenennaam, Alison L., Wells, Kevin D., Murray, James D.
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