scholarly journals Usability of genetically modified plants based on empirical research

2021 ◽  
pp. 78-82
Keyword(s):  
Indirect Effects ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Direct And Indirect Effects ◽  
Fuel Production ◽  
Gmo Crops ◽  
The Subject

In present genetically modified organisms (GMOs) constitutes a highly controversial procedure, and it is very difficult to restrain its propagation. There are quite a few questions that need to be addressed to take a stand on the subject. Should we play a role in this rapid development or stay in the background? Can this instant solution offer any advantage? Should we get on the GMO “train”? We conducted a survey in Hungary, in Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County to show how farmers perceive increased crop yields and cultivation safety of GMO crops. Are GMO crops rejected or considered for cultivation, such as for fuel production? Are farmers aware that direct and indirect effects of GMOs can endanger biodiversity? Is there any reason why one should use genetically modified products instead of naturally grown plants? The motivation may be to produce energy sources, to obtain biomass and biofuels, and possibly to create and preserve more jobs at the national and regional levels. It is still difficult to evaluate how GMO is compatible with environmental protection and sustainable economic development.

scholarly journals GMO Genetic Elements Thesaurus (GMO-GET): a controlled vocabulary for the consensus designation of introduced or modified genetic elements in genetically modified organisms

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulien Adamse ◽  
Emilie Dagand ◽  
Karen Bohmert-Tatarev ◽  
Daniela Wahler ◽  
Manoela Miranda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Controlled Vocabulary ◽  
Data Systems ◽  
Genetic Elements ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Detection And Identification ◽  
Unique Approach ◽  
The Subject ◽  
And Control

Abstract Background Various databases on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) exist, all with their specific focus to facilitate access to information needed for, e. g., the assistance in risk assessment, the development of detection and identification strategies or inspection and control activities. Each database has its unique approach towards the subject. Often these databases use different terminology to describe the GMOs. For adequate GMO addressing and identification and exchange of GMO-related information it is necessary to use commonly agreed upon concepts and terminology. Result A hierarchically structured controlled vocabulary describing the genetic elements inserted into conventional GMOs, and GMOs developed by the use of gen(om)e-editing is presented: the GMO genetic element thesaurus (GMO-GET). GMO-GET can be used for GMO-related documentation, including GMO-related databases. It has initially been developed on the basis of two GMO databases, i.e. the Biosafety Clearing-House and the EUginius database. Conclusion The use of GMO-GET will enable consistent and compatible information (harmonisation), also allowing an accurate exchange of information between the different data systems and thereby facilitating their interoperability. GMO-GET can also be used to describe genetic elements that are altered in organisms obtained through current targeted genome-editing techniques.

scholarly journals GMOs and Economic Development in Peru: A Myth or an Opportunity?

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Diego Baxerias ◽  
Carol Banda
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
Theory Of The Firm ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Market Structures ◽  
Agriculture Industry ◽  
Potential Benefits

Peru has a 10-year ban on genetically modified (GM) crops and food that was approved by the Peruvian congress in 2011. Is it scientifically justified or is it a cause and effect fallacy that will make Peru fall behind in taking advantage of this technology and its potential benefits to everyone else in the economy? In order to answer this question, a literature review was carried out to examine the three most commonly used arguments against genetically modified organisms (GMOs) by farmers and all those related to the agriculture industry, reaching the conclusion that they are not one hundred percent plausible. Further research showed the multiple, potential economic benefits that GM seeds could bring about to Peru, which are related to increased labor productivity, the development of human capital, and the expansion of renewable energy sources and its implications for trade and employment – the environmental and health benefits of GMO varieties are also discussed. This paper elaborates on such matters by applying different macro and microeconomic concepts, i.e., market structures and competition, the theory of the firm, and scarcity, among others; and provides insights about the different socio-economic realities present in Peru and possible ways to improve them.

The Mechanisms of Formation of Immunodeficiency's, Autoimmune Reactions and Hypersensitivity under the Influence of Xenobiotics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavel F Zabrodsky
Keyword(s):  
Immune System ◽  
Indirect Effects ◽  
Toxic Chemicals ◽  
Immune Homeostasis ◽  
Direct And Indirect Effects ◽  
Nonspecific Resistance ◽  
Pharmacological Agents ◽  
Toxic Compounds ◽  
Mechanisms Of Formation ◽  
The Subject

In the last 30-40 years, a new scientific direction has been formed, which is studying the effect of xenobiotics on the nonspecific resistance of the organism and the immune system immunotoxicology. The subject of immunotoxicology is the study of the effect on the immune homeostasis of xenobiotics: toxic chemicals (TCh), pharmacological agents and biological agents [1-3]. At the same time, damage to the immune system can be the result of both direct and indirect effects of xenobiotics and/or their metabolites. In addition, xenobiotics (or their metabolites) can develop an immune response with the formation of antibodies. It should be noted, and the possibility of modification of toxic compounds, as a result of which they acquire the properties of antigen. It is also possible the formation of antibodies to the complex toxicant-antigen [1-4].

scholarly journals THE FAILURES OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS (GMOS): RESISTANCE, REGULATION, AND REJECTION

AGROFOR ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
John PAULL
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Social Validity ◽  
Price Premiums ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification ◽  
Multiple Cancers ◽  
Gmo Crops ◽  
Australian Experience

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been contentious for more than three decades. Only 24 countries grow GMOs commercially. Four countries (USA, Canada, Brazil and Argentina) account for 85% of the global GMO hectares. Four crops (soy, corn, cotton and canola) account for 99% of GM hectares. Despite the veneer of social validity that regulators cast, the GMO sector has failed to gain a social licence. Where GM labelling is required, food manufacturers avoid GM ingredients. GMOs have failed to gain price parity with their non-GM counterparts, and they attract price penalties. Segregation of GMOs and non-GMOs has failed (with a tolerance of 0.9% GM contamination in so-called non-GM canola). GM has failed the coexistence test with a GMO growers contaminating neighbouring farms. GMOs are a biosecurity fail, with test plots of GM canola planted in the late 1990s still monitored two decades later for rogue canola plants. Most GMO crops are glyphosate dependent. Glyphosate is globally subject to massive litigation claims and awards, and is implicated in the causation of multiple cancers. Mechanisms for compensating farms contaminated by GMOs are lacking. The GMO industry has taken no responsibility for contaminations. GMOs are a threat to the organic sector and the maintenance of certification and price premiums. Most countries (88%) do not grow GMO crops. This paper considers the global experience of GMOs and the Australian experience as a microcosm of the global experience and as a case study.

Not the Same Old Chestnut

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-167
Author(s):  
Evelyn Brister ◽  
Andrew E. Newhouse ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Castanea Dentata ◽  
American Chestnut ◽  
Conservation Value ◽  
Regulatory Review ◽  
Alternative Framework ◽  
Gmo Crops ◽  
Conservation Values

We argue that the wild release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) can be justified as a way of preserving species and ecosystems. We look at the case of a genetically modified American chestnut (Castanea dentata) that is currently undergoing regulatory review. Because American chestnuts are functionally extinct, a genetically modified replacement has significant conservation value. In addition, many of the arguments used against GMOs, especially GMO crops, do not hold for American chestnut trees. Finally, we show how GMOs such as the American chestnut support a reorientation of conservation values away from restoration as it has historically been interpreted, and toward an alternative framework known as rewilding.

scholarly journals Organizações não governamentais mobilizando o Direito contra os transgênicos: estratégias, alianças e enquadramentos

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 72
Author(s):  
Luiza Duarte Bissoli
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Alternative Agriculture ◽  
Protection Agency ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Social Use ◽  
Institutional Participation

Este artigo é fruto de reflexões produzidas a partir de duas pesquisas já finalizadas. Nele adotamos, principalmente, as abordagens teóricas da mobilização do Direito ao trazer o caso de duas organizações não governamentais (ONGs) — o Instituto de Defesa do Consumidor (IDEC) e a Assessoria e Serviços a Projetos em Agricultura Alternativa (AS-PTA) — na luta contra os transgênicos. Para McCann (1991), a grande contribuição desta agenda foi trazer aspectos de atores não tradicionais do Direito para os estudos envolvendo a busca da sociedade pelo Judiciário. Ambas as associações estudadas possuem significativos recursos de mobilização e certo acesso às arenas estatais. Desde a chegada dos transgênicos no Brasil, pautaram o debate, ainda que diante de grande fechamento institucional à participação e deliberação sobre o tema. Concluímos que houve adoção de estratégias diferenciadas que compuseram essas lutas e que, partindo da perspectiva de Rutch (2004), há demarcação de diferenças entre aliados. Para ele, nem toda aliança se dá entre atores com objetivos específicos e estratégias iguais. A mobilização do Direito se mostrou essencial para repertórios de ação coletiva dessas organizações e seus parceiros, não correspondendo somente ao Direito ligado às cortes, mas também à formação de frames e adoção de estratégias que constroem significados e motivações.Non-governmental organizations mobilizing the law against genetically modified organism (GMOs): strategies, alliances and frameworks This article is the result of two studies already finalized. Our mainly theoretical approach is the mobilization of law by two non-governmental organizations (NGOs) — Instituto de Defesa do Consumidor (IDEC, Brazilian Consumer Protection Agency) and Assessoria e Serviços a Projetos em Agricultura Alternativa (AS-PTA, Consultancy and Services for Projects in Alternative Agriculture) — in the fight against Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). According to McCann (1991), the great contribution of this agenda highlighted aspects of non- traditional law actors for studies aimed at learning the social use of the judicial system. Both organizations have significant resource mobilization and access to certain state arenas. Since the arrival of GMOs in Brazil, they guided the debate over this issue even when institutional participation and deliberation on the subject have been restricted. We concluded that there have been different strategies that made up these struggles and, starting from Rutch perspective (2004), there are differences in the way the alliances were established. Per this author, not every alliance occurs between actors with the same objectives and strategies. The mobilization of law proved essential for collective action repertoires of organizations and their partners, not only in court decisions, but also in the formation of frames and the adoption of strategies to build meanings and motivations. 

Safety management and risk communication of genetically modified organisms

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinying Li ◽  
Ying Wang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Safety Management ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Transgenic Technology ◽  
Management Schemes ◽  
Long Acting

With the rapid development of transgenic biotechnology, social economic benefits generated from it becomes more and more; however, the doubt on its safety never fades away. Whether transgenic technology is safe or not is always disputed. Different countries have released and established relevant genetically modified organisms safety management schemes and biotechnology risk communication mechanisms to ensure the long-acting, stable and healthy development of transgenic biotechnology. This study analyzed and compared the genetically modified organisms safety management schemes of United States and European Union and the biotechnology risk communication mechanisms of counties such as United States and Japan and then proposed some suggestions to perfect genetically modified organisms management regulations and risk communication long-acting mechanisms such as establishing sound laws and regulations, strengthening transgenic technology support, establishing information open monitoring platform and perfecting the risk communication function of relevant institutions, with the intention of ensuring the health and continuous development of transgenic organism industry. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document