Genetic Engineering in the United States: Regulation of Crops and Their Food Products

2019 ◽  
pp. 263-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Rosso Grossman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Food Products ◽  
The United States

scholarly journals Divergent Approaches Regulating Beta Agonists and Cloning of Animals for Food: USA and European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 613-632
Author(s):  
Terence J. Centner ◽  
Ludivine Petetin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Dairy Products ◽  
Food Products ◽  
The United States ◽  
Beta Agonist ◽  
Spongiform Encephalopathy ◽  
Beta Agonists ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Production Technologies

Abstract Technologies being used to produce nonhuman animals who are used for meat and dairy products are viewed by some people as meaningful. Two technologies receiving scrutiny in agriculture are beta agonists that are fed to food animals to improve weight gain and cloning animals to secure offspring with specific traits. The technologies enhance the productive capacities of animals so that fewer resources are needed to produce meat and dairy products. Yet consumers are not sure they want food products with beta agonist residues and that are produced from clones. In overseeing the safety of food products and animals, legislators and regulators in the United States (US) and European Union (EU) have developed contrasting provisions regarding the usage of these technologies. An evaluation of heuristics involving information and experiences with bovine spongiform encephalopathy and animal production technologies offers support in explaining the US’s and EU’s divergent provisions.

Dietary free glutamate comes from a variety of food products in the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 67 ◽  
pp. 67-77
Author(s):  
Minami Sugimoto ◽  
Kentaro Murakami ◽  
Shoji Fujitani ◽  
Hideki Matsumoto ◽  
Satoshi Sasaki
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Food Products ◽  
The United States

scholarly journals Reevaluating the Risk of Smallpox Reemergence

2020 ◽  
Vol 185 (7-8) ◽  
pp. e952-e957 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Raina MacIntyre
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Synthetic Biology ◽  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Gene Editing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Variola Virus ◽  
Preparedness Planning ◽  
High Security ◽  
Bioterrorism Agent ◽  
New Treatments

Abstract Introduction Smallpox, caused by variola virus, was eradicated in 1980, but remains a category A bioterrorism agent. A decade ago, smallpox ranked second after anthrax in a multifactorial risk priority scoring analysis of category A bioterrorism agents. However, advances in genetic engineering and synthetic biology, including published methods for synthesizing an Orthopoxvirus, require the assumptions of this scoring for smallpox and other category A agents to be reviewed. Materials and Methods The risk priority framework was reviewed and revised to account for the capability for creation of synthetic or engineered smallpox and other category A agents. Results The absolute score for all agents increased because of gene editing and synthetic biology capability, which was not present when the framework was developed more than a decade ago, although new treatments revised scores downward for smallpox, Ebola, and botulism. In the original framework, smallpox scored 0 for global availability, given the high security around known seed stocks of variola in two laboratories in the United States and Russia. Now, smallpox can be created using synthetic biology, raising the score for this criterion to 2. Other agents too, such as Ebola, score higher for availability, based on synthetic biology capability. When advances in synthetic biology and genetic engineering are considered, smallpox and anthrax are now equally ranked the highest category A bioterrorism agents for planning and preparedness. Conclusions Revision of a risk priority framework for category A bioterrorism agents shows that smallpox should be elevated in priority for preparedness planning, and that gene editing and synthetic biology raises the overall risk for all agents. The ranking of categories A, B, and C agents should also be revisited, as there is an endless possibility of engineered threats that may be more severe than any agent on the category A list.

scholarly journals Food packaging and its regulations in Mexico

2019 ◽  
pp. 9-17
Author(s):  
Araceli Hernández-Tinoco ◽  
Oscar Carbajal-Mariscal ◽  
María Cristina Morán-Salas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Food Packaging ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Food Products ◽  
The United States ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Food Groups

Objective: To identify the context in terms of legislation for food packaging in Mexico. Methodology: A qualitative documentary investigation to obtain from Mexican national official and institutional primary sources the existing published information regarding food packaging. The information was recovered, analyzed, classified and organized by food groups, as is done in other international references. Contribution: This paper presents a description of the parameters that regulates food packaging based on the existing regulations for food in Mexico and its sources. From the analysis of the information obtained, this paper contributes to the dissemination of the existing Mexican regulations for the packaging of food products and the degree of inclusion of the needs of Mexican consumers in this matter regarding the form as presented in the United States in its CODEX and in the European Union. A brief discussion of the food groups, their social impact and the comparison in proportion of existing legislation for their packaging and the number of products marketed are presented.

Medicine, Animal Experimentation, and the Moral Problem of Unfortunate Humans

1996 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. G. Frey
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Gene Therapy ◽  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Technological Innovation ◽  
Research Work ◽  
The United States ◽  
Animal Experimentation ◽  
Moral Problem ◽  
Distant Future

We live in an age of great scientific and technological innovation, and what seemed out of the question or at least very doubtful only a few years ago, today lies almost within our grasp. In no area is this more true than that of human health care, where lifesaving and life-enhancing technologies have given, or have the enormous potential in the not so distant future to give, relief from some of the most terrible human illnesses. On two fronts in particular, xenograft or cross-species transplantation and genetic engineering of animals on behalf of gene therapy in humans, such relief appears very promising, if not actually on the horizon. Certainly, extensive research work on both fronts is underway both in the United States and abroad.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document