Plurality of opinion, scientific discourse and pseudoscience: an in depth analysis of the Séralini et al. study claiming that Roundup™ Ready corn or the herbicide Roundup™ cause cancer in rats

The impact of 'framing' in the adoption of GM crops

Genetically modified (GM) crops offer significant advantages in our crop improvement programs because they are created using a more targeted approach which is not possible in traditional breeding methods. Human benefit is one of the main objectives of crop improvement but the legal framework for the introduction of GM crops and the depiction and portrayal of GM crops in the media create barriers to these benefits. This article attempts to highlight the barriers to GM crop adoption particularly focusing on the idea of "framing" and the way GM technology is framed in the media. The resulting public health, economic, and ecological concerns about genetically modified plants, along with the reality of these misconceptions, are discussed with specific examples. Finally, we propose potential routes toward increased acceptance of GM crops.

Strategic science translation in emerging science: genetically modified crops and Bisphenol A in two cases of contested animal toxicity studies

When controversies develop around scientific facts or technologies, the potential of science to become a tool in plays of interests and power between different actors is not well recognized. Cordner’s concept of Strategic Science Translation (SST) shows that such actions are enabled by the uncertainty and the complexity of the scientific processes that allow the use of science in support of various, often contradictory interests and goals. Two high-profile controversies around animal toxicity studies in two different fields of European regulatory science (genetically modified food and food contact materials) were chosen as case studies to explore and expand the SST concept. Both studies involve emerging science issues, emphasizing tensions between regulatory and academic science. Communications from key Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and industry groups were used for analysis of each controversy. We found that both groups of actors try to present their own interpretation of scientific results, taking advantage of the lack of scientific consensus, of the uncertainties associated with the negotiation in the interpretation of results, and of the wider scientific and political context. In the same time, each actor attempts to challenge the credibility of the other. The lack of formal acknowledgment of the limitations of the emerging scientific fields, as well as of different research approaches between regulatory and academic research contribute to the continuation of controversies in the public domain, as the public cannot easily assess the information presented.

Molecular mechanisms underlying glyphosate resistance in bacteria

Glyphosate is a nonselective herbicide that kills weeds and other plants competing with crops. Glyphosate specifically inhibits the 5-enolpyruvyl-shikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP) synthase, thereby depleting the cell of EPSP serving as a precursor for biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids. Glyphosate is considered to be toxicologically safe for animals and humans. Therefore, it became the most-important herbicide in agriculture. However, its intensive application in agriculture is a serious environmental issue because it may negatively affect the biodiversity. A few years after the discovery of the mode of action of glyphosate, it has been observed that bacteria evolve glyphosate resistance by acquiring mutations in the EPSP synthase gene, rendering the encoded enzyme less sensitive to the herbicide. The identification of glyphosate-resistant EPSP synthase variants paved the way for engineering crops tolerating increased amounts of the herbicide. This review intends to summarize the molecular mechanisms underlying glyphosate resistance in bacteria. Bacteria can evolve glyphosate resistance by (i) reducing glyphosate sensitivity or elevating production of the EPSP synthase, by (ii) degrading or (iii) detoxifying glyphosate and by (iv) decreasing the uptake or increasing the export of the herbicide. The variety of glyphosate resistance mechanisms illustrates the adaptability of bacteria to anthropogenic substances due to genomic alterations.

Genetically Modified Products, Perspectives and Challenges

It is a common ground that humans have always modified the genome of both plants and animals. This intrusive process that has existed for thousands of years, many times through mistakes and failures, was initially carried out through the crossing of organisms with desirable features. This was done with the aim of creating and producing new plants and animals that would benefit humans, that is , they would offer better quality food, more opportunities for people to move and transport products, greater returns to work, resistance to diseases, etc. However, creating genetically modified organisms does not proceed without conflicts. One part of the equation concerns objections made by disputants of genetically modified organisms to the manipulation of life, as opposed to defenders who argue that it is essentially an extension of traditional plant cultivation and animal breeding techniques. There are also conflicts regarding the risks to the environment and human health from using genetically modified organisms. Concerns about the risks to the environment and human health from genetically modified products have been the subject of much debate, which has led to the development of regulatory frameworks for the evaluation of genetically modified crops. However, the absence of a globally accepted framework has the effect of slowing down technological development with negative consequences for areas of the world that could benefit from new technologies. So, while genetically modified crops can provide maximum benefits in food safety and in adapting crops to existing climate change, the absence of reforms, as well as the lack of harmonization of the frameworks and regulations about the genetic modifications results in all those expected benefits of using genetically modified crops being suspended. However, it is obvious that the evolution of genetically modified products is not going to stop. For that reason, research on the impact of genetic modification on medical technologies, agricultural production, commodity prices, land use and on the environment in general, should therefore continue.

Identification of the first glyphosate transporter by genomic adaptation

The soil bacterium Bacillus subtilis can get into contact with growth-inhibiting substances, which may be of anthropogenic origin. Glyphosate is such a substance serving as a nonselective herbicide. Glyphosate specifically inhibits the 5-enolpyruvyl-shikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP) synthase, which generates an essential precursor for de novo synthesis of aromatic amino acids in plants, fungi, bacteria and archaea. Inhibition of the EPSP synthase by glyphosate results in depletion of the cellular levels of aromatic amino acids unless the environment provides them. Here, we have assessed the potential of B. subtilis to adapt to glyphosate at the genome level. In contrast to Escherichia coli, which evolves glyphosate resistance by elevating the production and decreasing the glyphosate sensitivity of the EPSP synthase, B. subtilis primarily inactivates the gltT gene encoding the high-affinity glutamate/aspartate symporter GltT. Further adaptation of the gltT mutants to glyphosate led to the inactivation of the gltP gene encoding the glutamate transporter GltP. Metabolome analyses confirmed that GltT is the major entryway of glyphosate into B. subtilis. GltP, the GltT homologue of E. coli also transports glyphosate into B. subtilis. Finally, we found that GltT is involved in uptake of the herbicide glufosinate, which inhibits the glutamine synthetase.

The impact of Genetically Modified (GM) crops in modern agriculture: A review

Genetic modification in plants was first recorded 10,000 years ago in Southwest Asia where humans first bred plants through artificial selection and selective breeding. Since then, advancements in agriculture science and technology have brought about the current GM crop revolution. GM crops are promising to mitigate current and future problems in commercial agriculture, with proven case studies in Indian cotton and Australian canola. However, controversial studies such as the Monarch Butterfly study (1999) and the Séralini affair (2012) along with current problems linked to insect resistance and potential health risks have jeopardised its standing with the public and policymakers, even leading to full and partial bans in certain countries. Nevertheless, the current growth rate of the GM seed market at 9.83-10% CAGR along with promising research avenues in biofortification, precise DNA integration and stress tolerance have forecast it to bring productivity and prosperity to commercial agriculture.

Advocacy Science: Explaining the Term with Case Studies from Biotechnology

The paper discusses the use of term 'advocacy science' which is communication of science which goes beyond simple reporting of scientific findings, using the case study of biotechnology. It argues that advocacy science should be used to distinguish the engagement of modern civil society organizations to interpret scientific knowledge for their lobbying. It illustrates how this new communicative process has changed political discourse in science and general perception of the role of science in contemporary society.

Characterization of scientific studies usually cited as evidence of adverse effects of GM food/feed

GM crops are the most studied crops in history. Approximately 5% of the safety studies on them show adverse effects that are a cause for concern and tend to be featured in media reports. Although these reports are based on just a handful of GM events, they are used to cast doubt on all GM crops. Furthermore, they tend to come from just a few laboratories and are published in less important journals. Importantly, a close examination of these reports invariably shows methodological flaws that invalidate any conclusions of adverse effects. Twenty years after commercial cultivation of GM crops began, a bona fide report of an adverse health effect due to a commercialized modification in a crop has yet to be reported.

How biological background assumptions influence scientific risk evaluation of stacked genetically modified plants: an analysis of research hypotheses and argumentations

Scientific risk evaluations are constructed by specific evidence, value judgements and biological background assumptions. The latter are the framework-setting suppositions we apply in order to understand some new phenomenon. That background assumptions co-determine choice of methodology, data interpretation, and choice of relevant evidence is an uncontroversial claim in modern basic science. Furthermore, it is commonly accepted that, unless explicated, disagreements in background assumptions can lead to misunderstanding as well as miscommunication. Here, we extend the discussion on background assumptions from basic science to the debate over genetically modified (GM) plants risk assessment. In this realm, while the different political, social and economic values are often mentioned, the identity and role of background assumptions at play are rarely examined. We use an example from the debate over risk assessment of stacked genetically modified plants (GM stacks), obtained by applying conventional breeding techniques to GM plants. There are two main regulatory practices of GM stacks: (i) regulate as conventional hybrids and (ii) regulate as new GM plants. We analyzed eight papers representative of these positions and found that, in all cases, additional premises are needed to reach the stated conclusions. We suggest that these premises play the role of biological background assumptions and argue that the most effective way toward a unified framework for risk analysis and regulation of GM stacks is by explicating and examining the biological background assumptions of each position. Once explicated, it is possible to either evaluate which background assumptions best reflect contemporary biological knowledge, or to apply Douglas' 'inductive risk' argument.

New GMO regulations for old: Determining a new future for EU crop biotechnology

In this review, current EU GMO regulations are subjected to a point-by point analysis to determine their suitability for agriculture in modern Europe. Our analysis concerns present GMO regulations as well as suggestions for possible new regulations for genome editing and New Breeding Techniques (for which no regulations presently exist). Firstly, the present GMO regulations stem from the early days of recombinant DNA and are not adapted to current scientific understanding on this subject. Scientific understanding of GMOs has changed and these regulations are now, not only unfit for their original purpose, but, the purpose itself is now no longer scientifically valid. Indeed, they defy scientific, economic, and even common, sense. A major EU regulatory preconception is that GM crops are basically different from their parent crops. Thus, the EU regulations are "process based" regulations that discriminate against GMOs simply because they are GMOs. However current scientific evidence shows a blending of classical crops and their GMO counterparts with no clear demarcation line between them. Canada has a "product based" approach and determines the safety of each new crop variety independently of the process used to obtain it. We advise that the EC re-writes it outdated regulations and moves toward such a product based approach.  Secondly, over the last few years new genomic editing techniques (sometimes called New Breeding Techniques) have evolved. These techniques are basically mutagenesis techniques that can generate genomic diversity and have vast potential for crop improvement. They are not GMO based techniques (any more than mutagenesis is a GMO technique), since in many cases no new DNA is introduced. Thus they cannot simply be lumped together with GMOs (as many anti-GMO NGOs would prefer). The EU currently has no regulations to cover these new techniques. In this review, we make suggestions as to how these new gene edited crops may be regulated. The EU is at a turning point where the wrong decision could destroy European agricultural competitively for decades to come.

The receptor for activated C kinase 1 (RACK1) functions in hematopoiesis through JNK activation in Chinese mitten crab Eriocheir sinensis

Receptor for activated C kinase 1 (RACK1) is a WD-domain repeating protein which involves in the mediation of various biological processes, including innate immune response. In the present study, a RACK1 (designed as EsRACK1) gene from Chinese mitten crab E. sinensis was cloned by rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE) technique. The full-length cDNA sequence of EsRACK1 was of 1117 bp with an open reading frame (ORF) of 957 bp encoding a polypeptide of 318 amino acids containing seven WD repeats. EsRACK1 shared 62%-99% similarities with previously identified RACK1s in amino acid sequence, and it was clustered with the RACK1 from Pacifastacus leniusculus in the phylogenetic tree. The mRNA transcripts of EsRACK1 were constitutively expressed in various tissues with the highest expression level in hepatopancreas. The expression of EsRACK1 mRNA in hemocytes were significantly up-regulated post the stimulations with Vibrio anguillarum and Pichia pastoris. After exposure to CdCl2 and pentachlorophenol, the transcripts of EsRACK1 in hemocytes were up-regulated at the late phase from 12 h. When EsRACK1 was knocked down by dsRNA based RNAi, the total hemocyte counts, new-born hemocytes and phosphorylation of JNK were all significantly decreased. In addition, EsRACK1 transcription and phosphorylation of JNK were both decreased in hematopoietic tissue post Aeromonas hydrophila challenge. All the results suggested that EsRACK1 was involved in the innate immune response of the crab and participated in the production of new-born hemocytes through activation of JNK.

Retracting Inconclusive Research: Lessons from the Séralini GM Maize Feeding Study

In September 2012, Gilles-Eric Séralini and seven coauthors published an article in Food and Chemical Toxicology claiming that rats fed Roundup©-resistant genetically modified maize alone, genetically modified maize with Roundup©, or Roundup© for 2 years had a higher percentage of tumors and kidney and liver damage than normal controls. Shortly after this study was published, numerous scientists and several scientific organizations criticized the research as methodologically and ethically flawed. In January 2014, the journal retracted the article without the authors' consent on the grounds that the research was inconclusive. In June 2014, Environmental Sciences Europe published a slightly modified version of the retracted paper. The publication, retraction and subsequent republication of the Séralini study raise important scientific and ethical issues for journal editors. Decisions to retract an article should be made on the basis of well-established policies. Articles should be retracted only for serious errors that undermine the reliability of the data or results, or for serious ethical lapses, such as research misconduct or mistreatment of animal or human subjects. Inconclusiveness, by itself, is not a sufficient reason for retracting an article, though a flawed study design might be. Retracted articles that are submitted for republication should undergo scientific review to ensure that they meet appropriate standards. Republished articles should be linked to the original, retracted publication. Journals that are reviewing studies with significant scientific and social implications should take special care to ensure that peer review is rigorous and fair.

The food and environmental safety of Bt crops

Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) microbial pesticides have a 50-year history of safety in agriculture. Cry proteins are among the active insecticidal ingredients in these pesticides, and genes coding for Cry proteins have been introduced into agricultural crops using modern biotechnology. The Cry gene sequences are often modified to enable effective expression in planta and several Cry proteins have been modified to increase biological activity against the target pest(s). Additionally, the domains of different but structurally conserved Cry proteins can be combined to produce chimeric proteins with enhanced insecticidal properties. Environmental studies are performed and include invertebrates, mammals, and avian species. Mammalian studies used to support the food and feed safety assessment are also used to support the wild mammal assessment. In addition to the NTO assessment, the environmental assessment includes a comparative assessment between the Bt crop and the appropriate conventional control that is genetically similar but lacks the introduced trait to address unintended effects. Specific phenotypic, agronomic, and ecological characteristics are measured in the Bt crop and the conventional control to evaluate whether the introduction of the insect resistance has resulted in any changes that might cause ecological harm in terms of altered weed characteristics, susceptibility to pests, or adverse environmental impact. Additionally, environmental interaction data are collected in field experiments for Bt crop to evaluate potential adverse effects. Further to the agronomic and phenotypic evaluation, potential movement of transgenes from a genetically modified crop plants into wild relatives is assessed for a new pest resistance gene in a new crop. This review summarizes the evidence for safety of crops containing Cry proteins for humans, livestock, and other non-target organisms.

The food and environmental safety of Bt crops

Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) microbial pesticides have a 50-year history of safety in agriculture. Cry proteins are among the active insecticidal ingredients in these pesticides, and genes coding for Cry proteins have been introduced into agricultural crops using modern biotechnology. The Cry gene sequences are often modified to enable effective expression in planta and several Cry proteins have been modified to increase biological activity against the target pest(s). Additionally, the domains of different but structurally conserved Cry proteins can be combined to produce chimeric proteins with enhanced insecticidal properties. Environmental studies are performed and include invertebrates, mammals, and avian species. Mammalian studies used to support the food and feed safety assessment are also used to support the wild mammal assessment. In addition to the NTO assessment, the environmental assessment includes a comparative assessment between the Bt crop and the appropriate conventional control that is genetically similar but lacks the introduced trait to address unintended effects. Specific phenotypic, agronomic, and ecological characteristics are measured in the Bt crop and the conventional control to evaluate whether the introduction of the insect resistance has resulted in any changes that might cause ecological harm in terms of altered weed characteristics, susceptibility to pests, or adverse environmental impact. Additionally, environmental interaction data are collected in field experiments for Bt crop to evaluate potential adverse effects. Further to the agronomic and phenotypic evaluation, potential movement of transgenes from a genetically modified crop plants into wild relatives is assessed for a new pest resistance gene in a new crop. This review summarizes the evidence for safety of crops containing Cry proteins for humans, livestock, and other non-target organisms.

Retraction of a study on genetically modified corn: Expert investigations should speak louder during controversies over safety

Over the past few years, genetically modified organisms (GMO) have gradually become more familiar after numerous reports of problems with GMO safety, such as genetically modified (GM) potatoes disrupting immunity, GM corn inducing tumors, and GM rice being fed to unwitting Chinese children. Every time, these reports cause panic among the population and lead to objections to GMO in various fora. After each incident, the scientific community has delivered its academic appraisal and refuted rumors through slow and cautious investigations and evaluations. Unfortunately, during each event media outlets quickly scare the public about food safety and ignore the ensuing comments from scientists. Although scientists have investigated each GMO crisis and reached scientific and rational conclusions, they have less ability to disseminate information than the media, so the public is not promptly informed of their rational and objective viewpoints as experts. Thus, scientists need greater ability to disseminate information from scientific investigations and evaluations in order to correct the intemperate reporting by attention-seeking media.

Public funded field trials with transgenic plants in Europe: a comparison between Germany and Switzerland

Field trails are indispensable for the scientific analysis of risks and potential benefits of genetically modified plants (GMP). The dramatic reduction of field trials in the European Union (EU) coincides with increasing safety demands, decreases in funding, and changes in the European directives. In parallel, opposition from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has grown, and public acceptance has decreased. The cultivation of events approved by the EU is still allowed in principle, nevertheless, at least in Germany, there is a de facto moratorium on cultivation. In Switzerland, where development was much more hesitant compared to Germany, field trials are now possible, and a protected site has been established by the government. Public acceptance for scientific trials in Switzerland has risen, despite the continued moratorium on the cultivation based on a referendum.

A 90-day subchronic feeding study of genetically modified rice expressing Cry1Ab protein in Sprague-Dawley rats

Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) transgenic rice line (mfb-MH86) expressing a synthetic cry1Ab gene can be protected against feeding damage from Lepidopteran insects, including Sesamia inferens, Chilo suppressalis, Tryporyza incertulas and Cnaphalocrocis medinalis. Rice flour from mfb-MH86 and its near-isogenic control MH86 was separately formulated into rodent diets at concentrations of 17.5, 35 and 70 % (w/w) for a 90-day feeding test with rats, and all of the diets were nutritionally balanced. In this study, the responses of rats fed diets containing mfb-MH86 were compared to those of rats fed flour from MH86. Overall health, body weight and food consumption were comparable between groups fed diets containing mfb-MH86 and MH86. Blood samples were collected prior to sacrifice and a few significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed in haematological and biochemical parameters between rats fed genetically modified (GM) and non-GM diets. However, the values of these parameters were within the normal ranges of values for rats of this age and sex, thus not considered treatment related. In addition, upon sacrifice a large number of organs were weighed, macroscopic and histopathological examinations were performed with only minor changes to report. In conclusion, these results demonstrated that no toxic effect was observed in the conditions of the experiment, based on the different parameters assessed. GM rice mfb-MH86 is as safe and nutritious as non-GM rice.

Prevalence and impacts of genetically engineered feedstuffs on livestock populations

Globally, food-producing animals consume 70 to 90% of genetically engineered (GE) crop biomass. This review briefly summarizes the scientific literature on performance and health of animals consuming feed containing GE ingredients and composition of products derived from them. It also discusses the field experience of feeding GE feed sources to commercial livestock populations and summarizes the suppliers of GE and non-GE animal feed in global trade. Numerous experimental studies have consistently revealed that the performance and health of GE-fed animals are comparable with those fed isogenic non-GE crop lines. United States animal agriculture produces over 9 billion food-producing animals annually, and more than 95% of these animals consume feed containing GE ingredients. Data on livestock productivity and health were collated from publicly available sources from 1983, before the introduction of GE crops in 1996, and subsequently through 2011, a period with high levels of predominately GE animal feed. These field data sets, representing over 100 billion animals following the introduction of GE crops, did not reveal unfavorable or perturbed trends in livestock health and productivity. No study has revealed any differences in the nutritional profile of animal products derived from GE-fed animals. Because DNA and protein are normal components of the diet that are digested, there are no detectable or reliably quantifiable traces of GE components in milk, meat, and eggs following consumption of GE feed. Globally, countries that are cultivating GE corn and soy are the major livestock feed exporters. Asynchronous regulatory approvals (i.e., cultivation approvals of GE varieties in exporting countries occurring before food and feed approvals in importing countries) have resulted in trade disruptions. This is likely to be increasingly problematic in the future as there are a large number of "second generation" GE crops with altered output traits for improved livestock feed in the developmental and regulatory pipelines. Additionally, advanced techniques to affect targeted genome modifications are emerging, and it is not clear whether these will be encompassed by the current GE process-based trigger for regulatory oversight. There is a pressing need for international harmonization of both regulatory frameworks for GE crops and governance of advanced breeding techniques to prevent widespread disruptions in international trade of livestock feedstuffs in the future.

Conflicts of interests, confidentiality and censorship in health risk assessment: the example of an herbicide and a GMO

We have studied the long-term toxicity of a Roundup-tolerant GM maize (NK603) and a whole Roundup pesticide formulation at environmentally relevant levels from 0.1 ppb. Our study was first published in Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) on 19 September, 2012. The first wave of criticisms arrived within a week, mostly from plant biologists without experience in toxicology. We answered all these criticisms. The debate then encompassed scientific arguments and a wave of ad hominem and potentially libellous comments appeared in different journals by authors having serious yet undisclosed conflicts of interests. At the same time, FCT acquired as its new assistant editor for biotechnology a former employee of Monsanto after he sent a letter to FCT to complain about our study. This is in particular why FCT asked for a post-hoc analysis of our raw data. On 19 November, 2013, the editor-in-chief requested the retraction of our study while recognizing that the data were not incorrect and that there was no misconduct and no fraud or intentional misinterpretation in our complete raw data - an unusual or even unprecedented action in scientific publishing. The editor argued that no conclusions could be drawn because we studied 10 rats per group over 2 years, because they were Sprague Dawley rats, and because the data were inconclusive on cancer. Yet this was known at the time of submission of our study. Our study was however never attended to be a carcinogenicity study. We never used the word 'cancer' in our paper. The present opinion is a summary of the debate resulting in this retraction, as it is a historic example of conflicts of interest in the scientific assessments of products commercialized worldwide. We also show that the decision to retract cannot be rationalized on any discernible scientific or ethical grounds. Censorship of research into health risks undermines the value and the credibility of science; thus, we republish our paper.

Long-term toxicity study on transgenic rice with Cry1Ac and sck genes

In the present work, we evaluated the chronic effects of the transgenic insect-resistant rice carrying Cry1Ac and sck genes on Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats through a 78-week feeding study. Based on the gender and weight, 180 SD rats were randomly and evenly assigned into three groups. GM rice and non-GM rice were separately formulated into diets at high levels. AIN-93 diet was used as a nutritional control. Body weight, food consumption, hematology and serum chemistry were monitored regularly. Rats were sacrificed for organ weight measurement and pathological examination at 52 weeks and 78 weeks. Body weight, food consumption, mortality rates, tumor incidences and pathological findings showed no significant difference among the three groups. Although certain differences in some hematology, serum chemistry parameters and relative organ weights were observed between GM rice group and control groups, they were not considered as treatment-related. Taken together, long-term intake of transgenic rice carrying Cry1Ac and sck genes at a high level exerts no unintended adverse effects on rats.

The use of whole food animal studies in the safety assessment of genetically modified crops: limitations and recommendations

There is disagreement internationally across major regulatory jurisdictions on the relevance and utility of whole food (WF) toxicity studies on GM crops, with no harmonization of data or regulatory requirements. The scientific value, and therefore animal ethics, of WF studies on GM crops is a matter addressable from the wealth of data available on commercialized GM crops and WF studies on irradiated foods. We reviewed available GM crop WF studies and considered the extent to which they add to the information from agronomic and compositional analyses. No WF toxicity study was identified that convincingly demonstrated toxicological concern or that called into question the adequacy, sufficiency, and reliability of safety assessments based on crop molecular characterization, transgene source, agronomic characteristics, and/or compositional analysis of the GM crop and its near-isogenic line. Predictions of safety based on crop genetics and compositional analyses have provided complete concordance with the results of well-conducted animal testing. However, this concordance is primarily due to the improbability of de novo generation of toxic substances in crop plants using genetic engineering practices and due to the weakness of WF toxicity studies in general. Thus, based on the comparative robustness and reliability of compositional and agronomic considerations and on the absence of any scientific basis for a significant potential for de novo generation of toxicologically significant compositional alterations as a sole result of transgene insertion, the conclusion of this review is that WF animal toxicity studies are unnecessary and scientifically unjustifiable.

GMOs in animal agriculture: time to consider both costs and benefits in regulatory evaluations

In 2012, genetically engineered (GE) crops were grown by 17.3 million farmers on over 170 million hectares. Over 70% of harvested GE biomass is fed to food producing animals, making them the major consumers of GE crops for the past 15 plus years. Prior to commercialization, GE crops go through an extensive regulatory evaluation. Over one hundred regulatory submissions have shown compositional equivalence, and comparable levels of safety, between GE crops and their conventional counterparts. One component of regulatory compliance is whole GE food/feed animal feeding studies. Both regulatory studies and independent peer-reviewed studies have shown that GE crops can be safely used in animal feed, and rDNA fragments have never been detected in products (e.g. milk, meat, eggs) derived from animals that consumed GE feed. Despite the fact that the scientific weight of evidence from these hundreds of studies have not revealed unique risks associated with GE feed, some groups are calling for more animal feeding studies, including long-term rodent studies and studies in target livestock species for the approval of GE crops. It is an opportune time to review the results of such studies as have been done to date to evaluate the value of the additional information obtained. Requiring long-term and target animal feeding studies would sharply increase regulatory compliance costs and prolong the regulatory process associated with the commercialization of GE crops. Such costs may impede the development of feed crops with enhanced nutritional characteristics and durability, particularly in the local varieties in small and poor developing countries. More generally it is time for regulatory evaluations to more explicitly consider both the reasonable and unique risks and benefits associated with the use of both GE plants and animals in agricultural systems, and weigh them against those associated with existing systems, and those of regulatory inaction. This would represent a shift away from a GE evaluation process that currently focuses only on risk assessment and identifying ever diminishing marginal hazards, to a regulatory approach that more objectively evaluates and communicates the likely impact of approving a new GE plant or animal on agricultural production systems.

EFSA's scientific activities and achievements on the risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) during its first decade of existence: looking back and ahead

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and derived food and feed products are subject to a risk analysis and regulatory approval before they can enter the market in the European Union (EU). In this risk analysis process, the role of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which was created in 2002 in response to multiple food crises, is to independently assess and provide scientific advice to risk managers on any possible risks that the use of GMOs may pose to human and animal health and the environment. EFSA's scientific advice is elaborated by its GMO Panel with the scientific support of several working groups and EFSA's GMO Unit. This review presents EFSA's scientific activities and highlights its achievements on the risk assessment of GMOs for the first 10 years of its existence. Since 2002, EFSA has issued 69 scientific opinions on genetically modified (GM) plant market registration applications, of which 62 for import and processing for food and feed uses, six for cultivation and one for the use of pollen (as or in food), and 19 scientific opinions on applications for marketing products made with GM microorganisms. Several guidelines for the risk assessment of GM plants, GM microorganisms and GM animals, as well as on specific issues such as post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) were elaborated. EFSA also provided scientific advice upon request of the European Commission on safeguard clause and emergency measures invoked by EU Member States, annual PMEM reports, the potential risks of new biotechnology-based plant breeding techniques, evaluations of previously assessed GMOs in the light of new scientific publications, and the use of antibiotic resistance marker genes in GM plants. Future challenges relevant to the risk assessment of GMOs are discussed. EFSA's risk assessments of GMO applications ensure that data are analysed and presented in a way that facilitates scientifically sound decisions that protect human and animal health and the environment.