Novel and transgenic food crops: Overview of scientific versus public perception

Transgenic Research

Volumn 7, Issue 5, 1998, Pages 379-386

  Ruibal Mendieta, Nike L ^a   Lints, Frédéric A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Consensus conference; Genetically modified food crops; Plant biotechnology; Public information; Public perception; Scientific perception

Indexed keywords

CROP; EUROPE; FOOD; PLANT PRODUCT; RECOMBINANT DNA; TRANSGENIC PLANT;

AGRICULTURE; BELGIUM; BIOTECHNOLOGY; DNA, RECOMBINANT; EUROPE; FOOD LABELING; FOOD TECHNOLOGY; HUMANS; PLANTS, EDIBLE; PLANTS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; PUBLIC OPINION;

EID: 0032171135     PISSN: 09628819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1008845323046     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. ADA (1995) Position of the American Dietetic Association: Biotechnology and the future of food. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 95 (12), 1429-32.
2. Anonymous (1994) The Lay Panel Final Report: UK National Consensus Conference on Plant Biotechnology, 2-4 November 1994, Science Museum, London SW7 2DD, UK, pp. 5-20.
3. Anonymous (1996) Norwegian 'no' to engineered food. GenEthics News 15, 4.
4. Astwood, J.D. and Fuchs, R.L. (1996) Preventing food allergy: Emerging technologies. Trends in Food Science and Technology 7, 219-26.
5. Berg, P., Baltimore, D., Brenner, S., Roblin, R.O. and Singer, M.F. (1975) Asilomar Conference on recombinant DNA molecules. Science 188, 991-4.
6. Berg, P. and Singer, M.F. (1995) The recombinant DNA controversy: twenty years later. Bio/Technology 13, 1132-4.
7. Bieri, F. (1994) Public information and the ethical responsibility of the industry. Meth Find Exp Clin Pharniacol 16 (7), 491-6.
8. Cantley, M. (1992) Public perception, public policy, the public interest and public information: the evolution of policy for biotechnology in the European Community, 1982-92. In Durant, J. ed., Biotechnology in Public: a Review of Recent Research, pp. 18-27. Science Museum for the European Federation of Biotechnology, London SW7 2DD, UK.
9. Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association (1991) Biotechnology and the American agricultural industry. JAMA 265, 1429-36.
10. Dixon, B. (1993) Who's who in European antibiotech. Bio/Technology 11, 44-8.
11. Durant, J. (1994) Preface and introduction. The Lay Panel Final Report: UK National Consensus Conference on Plant Biotechnology, 2-4 November 1994, Science Museum, London SW7 2DD, UK, pp. 1-4.
12. Ellahi, B. (1995) UK National Consensus Conference on Plant Biotechnology. Trends in Food Science and Technology 6, 35-41.
13. European Commission (1997) Les Européens et la biotechnologie moderne. Eurobaromètre 46.1. DG XII, Science, Research and Development, Brussels, Belgium, pp. 70-84.
14. Frewer, L.J., Shepherd, R. and Sparks, P. (1994) Biotechnology and food production: knowledge and perceived risk. British Food Journal 96 (9), 26-33.
15. Frewer, L.J., Howard, C. and Shepherd, R. (1995) Genetic engineering and food: what determines consumer acceptance? British Food Journal 97 (8), 31-6.
16. Frewer, L.J., Howard, C. and Shepherd, R. (1997) Public concerns in the United Kingdom about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: risk, benefit, and ethics. Science, Technology, & Human Values 22 (1), 98-124.
17. Gaull, G.E. and Yeaton Woo, R.W. (1996) Biotechnology and society: We scientists have responsibilities too. Journal of Nutrition 126 (4), Supplement 1017S-9S.
18. Hamstra, A.M. (1992) Consumer research in biotechnology. In Durant, J. ed., Biotechnology in Public: a Review of Recent Research, pp. 42-51. Science Museum for the European Federation of Biotechnology, London, UK.
19. Hileman, B. (1995) Views differ sharply over benefits, risks of agricultural biotechnology. C&EN August 21, 1995, 8-17.
20. Lints, F.A. (1996) Biotechnologie et société. Revue Louvain April 1996, 27-34.
21. McCullum, C. (1995) The New Biotechnology Era: Issues for Nutrition Policy. Washington, DC, Community Nutrition Institute, USA.
22. Marlier, E. (1992). Eurobarometer 35.1: opinions of Europeans on biotechnology in 1991. In Durant, J. ed., Biotechnology in Public: a Review of Recent Research, pp. 52-108. Science Museum for the European Federation of Biotechnology, London, UK.
23. Mellon, M. (1996) Ripen-on-command: In a society with ample food, why bother? Nature Biotechnology 14, 800.
24. O'Brien, C. (1994) Lay UK panel savors debate. Science 266, 964-5.
25. Pelt, J.M. (1996) Contrôle du génie génétique: appel des scientifiques. Préventique-Sécurité 26, 30-2.
26. Sandberg, P. and Kraft, N. (eds) (1997). Fast salmon and technoburgers. Report from the consensus conference on genetically modified food, 18-21 October 1996. The National Committees for Research Ethics, The Oslo Research Park, Gaustadalléen 21, N-0371 Oslo, Norway, pp. 8-9.
27. Straughan, R. (1992) Ethics, Morality and Crop Biotechnology. ICI Seeds, Fernhearst, Surrey, UK.
28. Urban, D. (1996) Quantitative measurement of public opinions on new technologies. Scientometrics 35 (1), 71-92.
29. Vasil, I., Srivastava, V., Castillo, A.M., Fromm, M.F., and Vasil, I.K. (1993) Rapid production of transgenic wheat plants by direct bombardment of cultured immature embryos. Bio/Technology 11, 1553-8.
30. Vasil, I.K. (1996) Milestones in crop biotechnology-Transgenic cassava and Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of maize. Nature Biotechnology 14, 702-3.
31. Veszely, J.M. (1997) Faut-il avoir peur de . . . manger? Le Soir Illustré, January 1, 1997, 32-3.
32. Zechendorf, B. (1994) What the public thinks about biotechnology Bio/Technology 12, 870-5.