Loading...
You are viewing a DELETED record.
This record information is displayed for reference purpose only and should be not used.
This document has been updated. This is not the latest published version. Click here to view the latest version of the record.
Biosafety Virtual Library Resources
(VLR)
published: 13 Feb 2012
last updated: 25 May 2012
Scientific Standards and the Regulation of Genetically Modified Insects
EN
Plos - Neglected Tropical Diseases (Open Access)
EN
2012-01
EN
EN
Copyright: © 2012 Reeves et al.
EN
Abstract
Experimental releases of genetically modified (GM) insects are reportedly being evaluated in various countries including Brazil, the Cayman Islands (UK), France, Guatemala, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Panama, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, the USA and Vietnam. GM mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti) have already been released for field trials into inhabited areas in the Cayman Islands (2009-?), Malaysia (2010-2011) and Brazil (2011-2012). Here we assess the regulatory process in the first three countries permitting releases (Malaysia, USA, and Cayman Islands), in terms of pre-release transparency and scientific quality. We find that, despite 14 US government funded field trials over the last 9 years (on a moth pest of cotton), there has been no scientific publication of experimental data and in only 2 instances have permit applications been published. The world’s first environmental impact statement on GM insects, produced by US authorities in 2008, is found to be scientifically deficient on the basis that: (1) most consideration of environmental risk is too generic to be scientifically meaningful; (2) it relies on unpublished data to establish central scientific points; (3) of the approximately 170 scientific publications cited, the endorsement of the majority of novel transgenic approaches is based on just two laboratory studies in only one of the four species covered by the document. We find that it is not possible to determine from documents publically available prior to the start of releases, if obvious hazards of the particular GM mosquitoes released in Malaysia, the Cayman Islands and Brazil received expert examination. Simple regulatory measures are proposed that would build public confidence and stimulate the independent experimental studies that environmental risk assessments require. Finally, a checklist is provided to assist the general-public, journalists and lawmakers in determining, from documents issued by regulators prior to the start of releases, whether permit approval is likely to have a scientifically high quality basis.
The Table of Contents is as follows:
Introduction
A Short History of US GM Insect Regulation 2001–2010
The 2008-EIS as a Regulatory Document of Global Scientific Value
What Constitutes a ‘‘Substantial Body of Scientific Evidence’’ in the 2008-EIS?
The Use of Unpublished Evidence in Regulatory Documents around the World
Do Restrictions to Public Scrutiny of Regulatory Documents Facilitate Practices that Undermine Public Confidence?
Established Precedents in US Regulation of GM Insects and Their Global Impact on Building Confidence in GM Insect Regulation
When Considering the Potential Environmental Impacts of Complex Biotechnological Approaches, How Useful Are Highly Generic Discussions?
Generic Considerations of GM Insects Are Often of Limited Scientific Value
The Release of GM Mosquitoes in the Cayman Islands and Malaysia (2009–2011)
Summaries of EIAs Can Be of Limited Scientific Value and May Not Build Public Confidence
Credible Risk Assessments of GM Insects Require a Documented, Multi- Disciplinary Approach
A Checklist for Assessing the Probable Scientific Quality of Regulatory Release Approvals, Based on Publically Available Pre-Release Documents
Conclusions
EN
Experimental releases of genetically modified (GM) insects are reportedly being evaluated in various countries including Brazil, the Cayman Islands (UK), France, Guatemala, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Panama, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, the USA and Vietnam. GM mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti) have already been released for field trials into inhabited areas in the Cayman Islands (2009-?), Malaysia (2010-2011) and Brazil (2011-2012). Here we assess the regulatory process in the first three countries permitting releases (Malaysia, USA, and Cayman Islands), in terms of pre-release transparency and scientific quality. We find that, despite 14 US government funded field trials over the last 9 years (on a moth pest of cotton), there has been no scientific publication of experimental data and in only 2 instances have permit applications been published. The world’s first environmental impact statement on GM insects, produced by US authorities in 2008, is found to be scientifically deficient on the basis that: (1) most consideration of environmental risk is too generic to be scientifically meaningful; (2) it relies on unpublished data to establish central scientific points; (3) of the approximately 170 scientific publications cited, the endorsement of the majority of novel transgenic approaches is based on just two laboratory studies in only one of the four species covered by the document. We find that it is not possible to determine from documents publically available prior to the start of releases, if obvious hazards of the particular GM mosquitoes released in Malaysia, the Cayman Islands and Brazil received expert examination. Simple regulatory measures are proposed that would build public confidence and stimulate the independent experimental studies that environmental risk assessments require. Finally, a checklist is provided to assist the general-public, journalists and lawmakers in determining, from documents issued by regulators prior to the start of releases, whether permit approval is likely to have a scientifically high quality basis.
The Table of Contents is as follows:
Introduction
A Short History of US GM Insect Regulation 2001–2010
The 2008-EIS as a Regulatory Document of Global Scientific Value
What Constitutes a ‘‘Substantial Body of Scientific Evidence’’ in the 2008-EIS?
The Use of Unpublished Evidence in Regulatory Documents around the World
Do Restrictions to Public Scrutiny of Regulatory Documents Facilitate Practices that Undermine Public Confidence?
Established Precedents in US Regulation of GM Insects and Their Global Impact on Building Confidence in GM Insect Regulation
When Considering the Potential Environmental Impacts of Complex Biotechnological Approaches, How Useful Are Highly Generic Discussions?
Generic Considerations of GM Insects Are Often of Limited Scientific Value
The Release of GM Mosquitoes in the Cayman Islands and Malaysia (2009–2011)
Summaries of EIAs Can Be of Limited Scientific Value and May Not Build Public Confidence
Credible Risk Assessments of GM Insects Require a Documented, Multi- Disciplinary Approach
A Checklist for Assessing the Probable Scientific Quality of Regulatory Release Approvals, Based on Publically Available Pre-Release Documents
Conclusions
Yes
-
BCH-LMO-SCBD-101474-18 Living Modified Organism Dominant lethal Aedes aegypti mosquitoOxitec Limited, Institute for Medical Research(IMR) | Changes in physiology and/or production (Reproduction), Selectable marker genes and reporter genes
-
BCH-LMO-SCBD-103105-5 Living Modified Organism Pink Bollworm Modified for the Expression of a Fluorescent MarkerOxitec Limited | Selectable marker genes and reporter genes
Yes
-
BCH-ORGA-SCBD-101472-4 Organism Aedes aegypti (Yellow fever mosquito, AEDAE)Insects
-
BCH-ORGA-SCBD-103104-3 Organism Pectinophora gossypiella (Pink Bollworm )Insects
-
BCH-ORGA-SCBD-103107-4 Organism Ceratitis capitata (Mediterranean fruit fly , CERCA)Insects
-
BCH-ORGA-SCBD-103108-3 Organism Anastrepha ludens (Mexican fruit fly )Insects
-
BCH-ORGA-SCBD-103106-4 Organism Bactrocera dorsalis (Oriental fruit fly )Insects
Yes
-
BCH-GENE-SCBD-101475-13 Genetic element Tetracycline-controlled transactivator | Escherichia coli (ECOLX)Protein coding sequence | Conditional lethality
-
BCH-GENE-SCBD-101476-6 Genetic element DsRed2 Fluorescent Protein | Discosoma sp. (Coral anemones, Sea anemones)Protein coding sequence | Changes in quality and/or metabolite content (Pigmentation / Coloration)
-
BCH-GENE-SCBD-45846-4 Genetic element Green Fluorescent Protein gene | Aequorea victoria (Crystal Jellyfish, Water Jellyfish, AEQVI)Protein coding sequence | Selectable marker genes and reporter genes
Identifier (ISBN, ISSN, etc.)
Format
15 page PDF file
Keywords and any other relevant information
Citation: Reeves RG, Denton JA, Santucci F, Bryk J, Reed FA (2012) Scientific Standards and the Regulation of Genetically Modified Insects. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 6(1): e1502. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001502