• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>New biotechnology >Genomic misconception: A fresh look at the biosafety of transgenic and conventional crops. A plea for a process agnostic regulation
【24h】

Genomic misconception: A fresh look at the biosafety of transgenic and conventional crops. A plea for a process agnostic regulation

机译：基因组误解：重新审视转基因和常规作物的生物安全性。要求过程不可知的调节

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The regulation of genetically engineered crops, in Europe and within the legislation of the Cartagena biosafety protocol is built on false premises: The claim was (and unfortunately still is) that there is a basic difference between conventional and transgenic crops, this despite the fact that this has been rejected on scientifically solid grounds since many years. This contribution collects some major arguments for a fresh look at regulation of transgenic crops, they are in their molecular processes of creation not basically different from conventional crops, which are based in their breeding methods on natural, sometimes enhanced mutation. But the fascination and euphoria of the discoveries in molecular biology and the new perspectives in plant breeding in the sixties and seventies led to the wrong focus on transgenic plants alone. In a collective framing process the initial biosafety debates focused on the novelty of the process of transgenesis. When early debates on the risk assessment merged into legislative decisions, this wrong focus on transgenesis alone seemed uncontested. The process-focused view was also fostered by a conglomerate of concerned scientists and biotechnology companies, both with a vested interest to at least tolerate the rise of the safety threshold to secure research money and to discourage competitors of all kinds. Policy minded people and opponent activists without deeper insight in the molecular science agreed to those efforts without much resistance. It is interesting to realize, that the focus on processes was uncontested by a majority of regulators, this despite of serious early warnings from important authorities in science, mainly of US origin. It is time to change the regulation of genetically modified (GM) crops toward a more science based process agnostic legislation. Although this article concentrates on the critique of the process-oriented regulation, including some details about the history behind, there should be no misunderstanding that there are other important factors responsible for the failure of this kind of process-oriented regulation, most importantly: the predominance of politics in the decision making processes combined with the lack of serious scientific debates on regulatory matters within the European Union and also in the Cartagena system, the obscure and much too complex decision making structures within the EU, and the active, professional, negative and intimidating role of fundamental opposition against GM crops on all levels dealing with flawed science, often declared as better parallel science published by 'independent' scientists.
机译：在欧洲和《卡塔赫纳生物安全议定书》的立法范围内，对转基因作物的监管建立在错误的前提下：声称（不幸的是，现在仍然是）传统作物和转基因作物之间存在根本差异，尽管事实是多年来，基于科学的理由，人们一直拒绝这样做。这项贡献收集了一些主要观点，以便重新审视转基因作物的调控，它们的创造分子过程与常规作物基本没有区别，常规作物的繁殖方法基于自然突变，有时是增强突变。但是六十年代和七十年代对分子生物学发现的迷恋和欣喜，以及植物育种的新观点导致错误地只关注转基因植物。在集体框架的过程中，最初的生物安全性辩论集中在转基因过程的新颖性上。当关于风险评估的早期辩论合并到立法决策中时，仅对转基因的这种错误关注似乎就没有争议。有关科学家和生物技术公司的联合组织也提出了以过程为中心的观点，既有既得利益，至少可以忍受安全阈值的上升，以确保获得研究经费并阻止各种竞争者。对分子科学没有深入了解的有政策意识的人和反对派激进主义者同意这些努力而没有太大阻力。有趣的是，尽管来自重要科学部门（主要是美国血统）的重要预警发出了警告，但大多数监管机构都没有将重点放在流程上。现在是时候将转基因（GM）作物的法规改为更加科学的过程不可知性法规了。尽管本文着重于对过程导向型法规的批评，包括有关背后历史的一些详细信息，但不应误解还有其他重要因素导致此类过程导向型法规的失败，最重要的是：政治在决策过程中占主导地位，再加上在欧盟内部以及在卡塔赫纳体系中缺乏关于法规事务的严肃科学辩论，欧盟内部模糊而过于复杂的决策结构，以及积极，专业，消极的态度以及在根本上反对转基因作物的水平在处理有缺陷的科学方面的令人生畏的作用，通常被宣布为“独立”科学家更好的平行科学。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号