A new window of opportunity to reject process-based biotechnology regulation

REFERENCES

• Bradford KJ, Van Deynz A, Gutterson N, Parrott W, Strauss SH. Regulating transgenic crops sensibly: lessons from plant breeding, Biotechnol Genomics 2005; 23:439-44
   Google Scholar
• Breyer D, Herman P, Brandenburger A, Gheysen G., Remaut E, Soulmillion P, Van Doorsselaere J, Custers R, Pauwels K, Sneyers M, et al. Genetic moidification through oligonucleotide-mediated mutagenesis. A GMO regulatory challenge? Environ Biosafety Res 2009; 8:57-64; PMID:19833073; http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/ebr/2009007
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Camacho A, Deynze Av, ChiHam C, Bannett AB. Genetically engineered crops that fly under the US regulatory radar. Nat Biotechnol 2014; 32:1087-91; PMID:25380439; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3057
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canadian Food Inspection Agency. The Safety Assessment Process for Plants with Novel Traits (PNTs). 2012. Available from http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/plants-with-novel-traits/general-public/assessment-process/eng/1338189630096/1338189929476
   Google Scholar
• Collard BCY, Mackill DJ. Marker-assisted selection: an approach for precision plant breeding in the twenty-first century 2008; 363:557-72; PMID:17715053
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• EU Parliament and Council, Regulation (EC) 1829/2003 on genetically modified food and feed. 2003. Available from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32003R1829 EU Parliament and Council, Regulation (EC) 1830/2003 traceability and labelling of GMOs. n.d. Available from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:l21170
   Google Scholar
• Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. 7 U.S.C. § 136.
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration. Statement of policy: foods derived from new plant varieties. Fed Regist 1992; 57:22,983-23,001
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985; c. F-27 (Can.)and Regulations. Available from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-27/
   Google Scholar
• Fuentes I, Stegemann S, Golczyk H, Karcher D, Bock, R Horizontal genome transfer as ab asexual path to the formation of new species. Nature 2014; 511:232-5; PMID:24909992; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature13291
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey F. Genome editing of crops may be restricted by EU rules, warn scientists. Guardian 2014; July 21; Available from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/21/genome-editing-crops-restricted-eu-rules-scientists-warn
   Google Scholar
• Holdren JP, Shelanski H, Vetter D, Goldfuss C. Memorandum for Heads of Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Agriculture: Modernizing the regulatory system for biotechnology products. July 2, 2015. Available from https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/modernizing_the_reg_system_for_biotech_products_memo_final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hu S, Lubberstedt T. Getting the ‘MOST’ out of crop improvement. Trends Plant Sci 2015; 20:372-9; PMID:25899781; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2015.03.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Institute of Medicine. Best care at lower cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Kusaba M. RNA interference in crop plants. 2004; 15:139-43; PMID:15081052
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lusser M, Davies HV. Comparative regulatory approaches for groups of new plant breeding techniques. New Biotechnol 2013; 30:437-46; PMID:23474021; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2013.02.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marchant GE, Allenby A, Herkert J. (Eds.), The growing gap between emerging technologies and legal-ethical oversight: the pacing problem. Dordrecht, Germany: Springer, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• McAllister P. The Canadian regulatory process for plants with novel traits, North American biotechnology council, NABC report 25: biotechnology and North American specialty crops: linking research, regulation, and stakeholders. Proc Twenty-Fifth Annu Conf N Am Agr Biotechnol June 2013 at 161. Available from http://nabc.cals.cornell.edu/Publications/Reports/nabc_25/25_4_4_McAllister.pdf
   Google Scholar
• McGinnis EE, Meyer MH, Smith Ag. Analysis of U.S. genetically engineered crop regulation and litigation. Crop Sci 2012; 52:991-1002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHughen A. Fatal flaws in agbiotech regulatory policies. Nat Biotechnol 2007; 25:725-7; PMID:17621292; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt0707-725
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris Sh, Spoillane C. GM directive deficiencies in the European Union. EmBO Rep 2008; 9:500-4; PMID:18516083; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/embor.2008.94
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. Genetically modified pest-protected plants: science and regulation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. Safety of genetically engineered foods: approaches to assessing unintended health effects. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center. Public and scientists’ views on science and society; 2015; Available from http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/01/PI_ScienceandSociety_Report_012915.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Podevin N, Devos  , Davies HW, Nielsen KM. Tramsgenic or not? No simple answer! EMBO Rep 2012; 13:1057-61; PMID:23154464; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/embor.2012.168
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollack A. By ‘editing’ plant genes, companies avoid regulation. NY Times 2015; Jan. 1.
   Google Scholar
• Schultz D. GMO or no? New tech raises new regulatory dilemmas. Chem Reg 2015; Reporter (Bloomberg BNA), 39:1046, Aug. 31
   Google Scholar
• Seeds Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-8 (Can.) and Regulations. Available from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/S-8/
   Google Scholar
• Smyth S, McHughen A, Regulating innovative crop technologies in Canada: the case or regulating genetically modified crops. Plant Biotech J 2008; 6:213-25; PMID:18028290; http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7652.2007.00309.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Telem RS. Wani SH, Singh NB, Nandini R, Sadhukhan R, Bhattach RYS, Mandal N, Cisgenics – A sustainable approach for crop improvement. Curr Genomics 2013; 14:468-76; PMID:24396278; http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/13892029113146660013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy. Coordinated framework for regulation of biotechnology; announcement of policy; notice for public comment. Fed Regist 1986; 51:23302-50; PMID:11655807
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy. Coordinated framework for regulation of biotechnology; announcement of policy; notice for public comment. Fed Regist 1986; 51:23304; PMID:11655807
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wiedemann PM, Schütz H. The precautionary principle and risk perception: experimental studies in the EMF area. Environ Health Perspect 2005; 113:402-5; PMID:15811829; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7538
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolt JD, Wang K, Yang B. The regulatory status of genome-edited crops. Plant Biotechnol J 2016; 14(2): 510–518; PMID:26251102; http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pbi.12444
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar