Published: 14-10-2022
A new public dialogue on gene edited farm animals, by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, BBSRC and Sciencewise, challenges the notion that members of the public are incapable of contributing to complex policy and regulatory discussions
Published: 26-09-2022
Citizen views are integral to ensuring that technologies and science responds to the needs and wants of society at large. Our new review concludes it’s time to make meaningful citizen engagement part of the DNA of the regulatory process.
Published: 01-06-2022
Anything can happen between now and the final version of the new Precision Breeding Bill. But government seems to have taken to heart the suggestion from last year’s Regulatory Horizons Council report to apply “creative use of guidelines, standards [and] policies” to see if it’s possible to get it right (or get away with it).
Published: 02-06-2020
Reclaiming a baseline of accountability is the first step in building public confidence in regulatory systems that work for people as well as science that the public believes in.
Published: 24-03-2020
A new report suggests that while plant breeders of all kinds support the idea of ‘working together’ – there are few practical or regulatory pathways for achieving ‘co-existence’
Published: 10-01-2020
We need an active public debate on the ethics of gene editing technology to realise its potential and prevent it being used in nefarious ways.
Published: 16-05-2019
Synthetic biology – altering or redesigning genes to meet human objectives – is a fast-developing field. So far mostly applied in agriculture and medicine, synthetic biology could have substantial knock-on […]
Published: 25-01-2019
A new survey claims to show that GM food opponents are ignorant extremists. That’s how it’s being spun- with , arguably, too much enthusiasm – in the media but does the evidence for a dumb public with nothing to add to the GMO debate really stand up?
Published: 20-12-2018
The new USDA label for genetically engineered foods has failed to make anyone – whatever their views or opinions about GE foods – happy. WHat’s more, that many foods (including many packaged foods) will be excluded from its purview.
Published: 12-12-2018
Corporate lobbyists argue that the innovation principle would boost innovations that could be used to tackle problems facing the planet such as decreasing the impact of animal feed on the planet, while civil society groups believe it leaves regulations vulnerable to corporate lobbyists and worry that it spells the end of the Precautionary Principle – which ensures only safe products reach the EU market.
