How should public policy respond to the challenges of modern biotechnology?

Current Opinion in Biotechnology

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 258-263

  Cantley, Mark ^a  

^a EUROPEAN COMMISSION   (Belgium)

Author keywords

EC; EU; European Commission; European Union; farm scale evaluation; FSE; genetically modified organism; GMO; OECD; Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development; World Trade Organization; WTO

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICINE; BIOSAFETY; BIOTECHNOLOGY; EUROPE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; NONHUMAN; POLITICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; DISSENT AND DISPUTES; EUROPE; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; PERCEPTION; PUBLIC OPINION; PUBLIC POLICY; SAFETY;

EID: 2942521201     PISSN: 09581669     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2004.04.007     Document Type: Review

References (61)

1. Correns C: G. Mendel's regel über das verhalten der nachkommenschaft der rassenbastarde. In 1900 Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 18, 158-168. [English translation by Piternick LK: G. Mendel's law concerning the behavior of progeny of varietal hybrids, appears in Genetics [3] pp. 33-41.]
2. von Tschermak E: Über künstliche Kreuzung bei Pisum sativum. In 1900 Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 18, 232-239. [English translation by Hannah A: Concerning artificial crossing in Pisum sativum, appears in Genetics [3] pp. 42-47.]
3. Mendel G, de Vries H, Correns C, Schermak ET: The birth of genetics. 1950 Supplement to Genetics 35, 5: pt2.
4. Avery O.T., Macleod C.M., McCarty M. Studies on the chemical nature of the substance inducing transformation of pneumoccal types. I. Induction of transformation by a deoxyribonucleic fraction isolated from Pneumococcus Type III. J Exp Med. 79:1944;137-158
5. Watson J.D., Crick F.H.C. Molecular structure of nucleic acid: a structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature. 171:1953;737-738
6. Singer M.F., Soll D. DNA hybrid molecules. Science. 181:1973;1114
7. Clinton W, Blair T: Remarks Made by the President, Prime Minister Tony Blair of England (via satellite), Dr. Francis Collins, Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, and Dr. Craig Venter, President and Chief Scientific Officer, Celera Genomics Corproation, on the Completion of the First Survey of the Entire Human Genome Project. White House Office of the Press Secretary, 2000, 26 June. URL: National Human Genome Research Institute, http://www.genome.gov/10001356.
8. Carlson R. The pace and proliferation of biological technologies. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice and Science. 1:2003;203-214
9. ••]. The stated goal of the first is to 'reduce costs [of sequencing a mammalian-sized genome] by at least two orders of magnitude... within five years'. The second aims 'to reduce costs by at least four orders of magnitude, so that a mammalian-sized genome could be sequenced for approximately $1000... in about ten years'.
10. ••].
11. European Council: Presidency conclusions, Lisbon European Council, 23 and 24 March 2000; document DOC/00/8; URL: http://europa.eu.int/ISPO/docs/services/ docs/2000/jan-march/doc_00_8_en.pdf.
12. Berg P., Baltimore D., Boyer H.W., Cohen S.N., Davis R.W., Hogness D.S., Nathans D., Doblin R., Watson J.D., Weissman S., Zinder N.D. Potential biohazards of recombinant DNA molecules. Science. 185:1974;303 The 'Berg letter' was the report of a Committee on Recombinant DNA Molecules established by the National Research Council, of the National Academy of Sciences. Among its recommendations it included a voluntary moratorium on certain experiments and the holding of the international conference on recombinant DNA molecules, which took place at Asilomar, California, in February 1975.
13. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development: Recombinant DNA safety considerations: safety considerations for industrial, agricultural and environmental applications of organisms derived by recombinant DNA techniques. 1986: Paris; OECD.
14. Office of Science and Technology Policy: Coordinated framework for regulation of biotechnology; announcement of policy and notice for public comments. 1986 Federal Register 51, 123 23302-23350.
15. Council of Ministers of the EC: 82/472/EEC: Council recommendation of 30 June 1982 concerning the registration of work involving recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). 1982, Official Journal L213, 21 July, 15-16.
16. European Commission: Communication on the precautionary principle. 2000, COM(2000)1.
17. Denmark: Ministry of Environment, National Food Agency: Environment and gene technology act, 1986. Soborg, Denmark.
18. European Commission: Biotechnology in the community, communication to the council. COM(1983)672.
19. European Parliament: Resolution on biotechnology in Europe and the need for an integrated policy. Doc. A2-134/86. Official Journal of the EC 1987, C76/25-29.
20. US Supreme Court: Diamond v. Chakrabarty. 1980 447 US 303.
21. European Community: Council Directive 90/219/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the contained use of genetically modified micro-organisms. 1990 Official Journal L117, 8 May, 1-14.
22. European Community: Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms. 1990 Official Journal L117, 8 May, 15-27.
23. Beier FK, Crespi RS, Straus J: Biotechnology and patent protection: an international review. 1985: Paris; OECD.
24. European Community: Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. 1998 Official Journal L213, 30 July, 13-21.
25. European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. URL:http://europa.eu.int/comm/european_group_ethics/index_en.htm
26. European Commission: Joint Research Centre: Database for notifications of research releases of genetically modified organisms, by country by year, under Part B of the Directive 90/220. URL: http://biotech.jrc.it/deliberate/ dbcountries.asp
27. European Commission: Joint Research Centre: Database for notifications of deliberate release into the environment of GMOs for any other purposes than placing on the market, by country by year, submitted under Directive 2001/18/EC (i.e. after 17 October 2002). URL: http://biotech.jrc.it/deliberate/dbcountries. asp.
28. European Community: Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC. 2001 Official Journal L106 17 April, 1-38.
29. European Community: Regulation (EC) no 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed. 2003 Official Journal L268 18 October, 1-23.
30. European Community: Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms and the traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and amending Directive 2001/18/EC. 2003 Official Journal L268, 18 October, 24-28.
31. European Community: Regulation (EC) no 1946/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2003 on transboundary movements of genetically modified organisms. 2003 Official Journal L287, 5 November, 1-10.
32. De Greef W: The Cartagena Protocol and public goods research. BioScience News and Advocate 2004, February.
33. European Community: Directive on Environmental Liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage. URL: http://europa.eu.int/ prelex/detail_dossier_real.cfm?CL=en&DosId=171860.
34. Cantley MF: Life Sciences & GMOs - still an un-insurable risk? In Working Paper Series of The Geneva Association, Etudes et Dossiers N°. 279, M.O.R.E. 18 - Seminar and the First Annual Roundtable of CROs, Vouliagmeni/Athens, 2003, 5-7 November, 45-55.
35. European Commission: Recommendation of 23 July 2003 on guidelines for the development of national strategies and best practices to ensure the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming (notified under document number C(2003)2624) (2003/556/EC). 2003 Official Journal L189, 29 July, 36-47.
36. European Parliament: Report (A5-0465/2003) and resolution on coexistence between genetically modified crops and conventional and organic crops. URL: http://www3.europarl.eu.int/omk/omnsapir.so/pv2?PRG=DOCPV&APP= PV2&LANGUE=EN&SDOCTA=14&TXTLST=1&POS=1&Type_Doc= RESOL&TPV=PROV&DATE=181203&PrgPrev= TYPEF@A5PRG@QUERYAPP@PV2FILE@BIBLIO03NUMERO@465YEAR@03PLAGE@1&TYPEF= A5&NUMB=1&DATEF=031218
37. European Commission: Communication to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Life sciences and biotechnology - A Strategy for Europe. COM(2002)27. 2002 23 January.
38. European Commission: Communication to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee: Life sciences and biotechnology - a strategy for Europe: progress report and future orientations. COM(2003)96. 2003 5 March.
39. European Commission: Communication to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee: Life sciences and biotechnology - a strategy for Europe: progress report and future orientations. COM(2004)250.
40. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. URL: http://www.oecd.org/document/51/0, 2340, en_2649_34387_1889395_1_1_1_1, 00.html.
41. Convention on Biological Diversity. URL: http://www.biodiv.org/default. aspx.
42. UNEP-CBD: Biosafety Protocol now operational as governments agree documentation rules for international trade. Press Release, 27 February 2004. URL: http://www.biodiv.org/doc/press/2004/pr-2004-02-27-bs-en.pdf
43. The Cartagena Protocol. URL: http://www.biodiv.org/biosafety/protocol.asp
44. Codex Alimentarius Commission: Guidelines for assessing the food safety risks posed by foods derived from biotechnology, including genetically modified foods. 9 July, 2003. URL: ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/standard/en/ CodexTextsBiotechFoods.pdf
45. WTO: The texts of the world trade agreements signed at Marrakech in April 1994. URL: http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/final_e.htm.
46. Nuffield Council on Bioethics: Genetically modified crops: the ethical and social issues. 1999. Nuffield Council on Bioethics; London. URL: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org
47. Nuffield Council on Bioethics: Discussion paper: the use of genetically modified crops in developing countries. 2003. Nuffield Council on Bioethics; London. URL: http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/gmcrops/latestnews.asp
48. UNIDO: The final statement of the global biotechnology forum. Concepción, Chile, 2-5 March 2004; URL: http://binas.unido.org/ global_forum/.
49. Kessler C, Economidis I: A review of results: EC-sponsored research on safety of genetically modified organisms. European Commission, 2001; URL: http://europa.cec.int/comm/research/quality-of-life/gmo/
50. Phipps R.H., Park J.R. Environmental benefits of genetically modified crops: global and European perspectives on their ability to reduce pesticide use. J Animal Feed Sci. 11:2002;1-18
51. Gianessi LP, Silvers CS, Sankula S, Carpenter JE: Plant biotechnology: current and potential impact for improving pest management in US agriculture: an analysis of 40 case studies. National Center for Food & Agriculture Policy, June 2002. URL: http://www.ncfap.org/40CaseStudies.htm
52. The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA): Crops and farm scale evaluations. URL: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/gm/fse/index. htm
53. Dale P: Letter to ACRE, on the Farm Scale Evaluations of herbicide-tolerant crops. 2003. URL: https://www.livegroup.co.uk/ acrefarmscaleevaluations/SSL/files/Philip%20J%20Dale%20Evidence%20101103.PDF
54. Squire G.R., Brooks D.R., Bohan D.A., Champion G.T., Daniels R.E., Haughton A.J., Hawes C., Heard M.S., Hill M.O., May M.J., et al. On the rationale and interpretation of the farm scale evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 358:2003;1779-1799 The FSEs of genetically modified herbicide tolerant (GMHT) crops (sugar beet, maize and spring oilseed rape) were conducted over three years, at 60 fields throughout the UK, each divided between a GM and a conventional variety. Studies measured the effects on weeds and insects and the results were published in eight papers on 16 October 2003, by the UK Royal Society. They demonstrated that herbivores, detritivores and many of their predators and parasitoids in arable systems are sensitive to the changes in weed communities that result from the introduction of new herbicide regimes. These trophic groups were influenced by season, crop species and GMHT management. Many groups increased two- to fivefold between early and late summer, and differed up to tenfold between crop species. GMHT management superimposed relatively small (less than twofold) shifts, depending on the relative efficacy of comparable conventional herbicide regimes; demonstrating differences that were statistically - but not necessarily biologically - significant. The choice of crop species had much greater impact than the use of GM crops.
55. Dixon B. Media pounce on GM data. Curr Biol. 13:2003;R856
56. Marks L, Kalaitzandonakes N, Vickner SS: Consumer purchasing behavior towards GM foods in the Netherlands. In Consumer Acceptance of Biotechnology Foods. Edited by Evenson RD, Santaniello V: Wallingford UK: CABI Publishers Ltd.; 2004:23-39.
57. GM Nation? The public debate. URL: http://www.gmnation.org.uk/
58. European Federation of Biotechnology: Task Group on Public Perceptions of Biotechnology: Lessons from the Swiss biotechnology referendum. 1998, Brief 8. URL: http://www.efbpublic.org/site/page.liones.php?pointer=1-2-20-123-857.
59. Gaskell G, Allum N, Stares S: Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002: Eurobarometer 58.0 (2nd Edition: March 21st 2003): a report to the EC Directorate General for Research from the project 'Life Sciences in European Society' QLG7-CT-1999-00286. European Commission, DG Research.
60. Durant J, Bauer MW, Gaskell G (eds): Biotechnology in the Public Sphere: A European Sourcebook. 1998: London; Science Museum.
61. Gaskell G, Bauer MW (eds): Biotechnology 1996-2000: the Years of Controversy. 2001: London; Science Museum.