A Different Perspective on GM Foods, by Salk Institute biologist David Schubert, published in Nature Biotechnology.
Beyond ‘Substantial Equivalence’, published in Nature; concludes that “substantial equivalence,” the regulatory concept underpinning FDA’s refusal to regulate GMO foods, is “a pseudo-scientific concept because it is a commercial and political judgement masquerading as if it were scientific.”
Making ‘Safety First’ a Reality for Biotechnology Products Scientists describe why current risk assessment is inadequate for regulating GMOs; published in Nature Biotechnology.
The Mutational Consequences of Plant Transformation, outlining the commonplace gene scrambling and other unpredictable effects of genetic engineering; published in the Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology.
GMOs and the Precautionary Principle, notes the unknowns about GMOs and the risks of unintended harm from GMOs released into the environment and the food supply warrant precautionary action; calls on scientists “to address and communicate uncertainty [about GMOs] to policy makers and the public.” Published in the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics.
Neoliberalism on the molecular scale, a Yale University biologist argues that the GMO reductionist approach is outdated and leads to unexpected outcomes. From the journal Geoforum.
The Unintended Effects of Genetically Engineering Food Plants. A Senior Scientist from the Center for Food Safety describes the risks of GMO foods.
Regulatory Regimes for Transgenic Crops. David Schubert on the inadequacies in US oversight of GMOs.
The Unintended Effects of Genetic Manipulation, a resource from the Nature Institute, including a database of scientific reports on GMO side-effects, briefing papers and updates.
The Unseen Genome New findings challenge notions of genetic determinism (from Scientific American).
Unraveling the DNA Myth: The Spurious Foundation of Genetic Engineering, by Barry Commoner (published in Harper’s Magazine)