Rules on Bioengineered Animals
FDA to Release Guidelines for Stages of Genetic Modification
By David Brown
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 18, 2008; A02
The Food and Drug Administration will release today long-awaited regulatory guidelines governing genetic engineering of animals for food, drugs or medical devices.
Although none of the provisions is likely to surprise the biotech industry, their formal appearance after years of discussion is expected to energize a field whose commercial potential is huge but so far unrealized.
The agency's regulatory control of animals will be considerably stronger than its oversight of genetically engineered plants and microorganisms. The latter -- or substances derived from them -- are on the market and, in some cases, have proved controversial.
The guidelines tell companies what the FDA wants to know about their work at virtually every stage of creating an engineered animal.
For example, biotech firms will be asked to provide the molecular identity of snippets of DNA inserted in an animal's genome, as well as where the genetic message lands and whether it descends unaltered through subsequent generations. The FDA also wants to be told how the genetic alterations might change an animal's health, behavior and nutritional value.
The companies also should inform the agency how they will keep track of animals, prevent them from mingling with their non-engineered cousins and dispose of them when they die.
Genetically engineered animals -- salmon, pigs, cows and goats are in development -- are expected to have two main uses. Some will be food animals whose new genetic endowment makes them disease-resistant, faster-growing or more nutritious. Others will be genetically engineered to produce medically useful substances, such as hormones or antibodies, in their organs or body fluids.
Pigs that are able to more easily absorb phosphorus, and therefore need less feed supplementation, are being developed in Ontario. Goats that produce spider silk in their milk are being made in Wyoming.
Full story here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/17/AR2008091703518_pf.html
2 comments:
This is why I fully and completely oppose GMO products. We need full disclosure, as in clear labelling on food products, then let consumers decide what they will eat. Whoops, there goes that free market again! My bet is they will reject this.
- Blackstar
I might add, we have evidence that companies can't even be trusted to inspect themselves for cleanliness, specifically listeriosis. Within this recent incident there is also evidence that left to manage their own affairs, corporate entities won't even wash their meat slicers, just keep using them when they are dirty. There is only one way to get this type of contamination and that is an aversion to soap and water. Ask anyone if they would cook in a kitchen without cleaning it first?
And we are supposed to just trust them to keep these abnormal creatures out of the reproductive cycle? To track what was done to them?
They can't even stop feeding animal by-products to herbivores, a well-known fact that this is the cause of BSE.
But let's elect those Conservatives and be sure they stop inspecting feed too while we are at it.
- Blackstar
Post a Comment