Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (1):3-28 (2001)
|Abstract||The caliber of recent discourse regarding geneticallymodified organisms (GMOs) has suffered from a lack of consensuson terminology, from the scarcity of evidence upon which toassess risk to health and to the environment, and from valuedifferences between proponents and opponents of GMOs. Towardsaddressing these issues, we present the thesis that GM should bedefined as the forcible insertion of DNA into a host genome,irrespective of the source of the DNA, and exclusive ofconventional or mutation breeding.Some defenders of the commercial use of GMOs have referred to thescientific work of GMO critics as ``junk science.'''' Such a claim isfalse and misleading, given that many papers critical of both theutility and safety of GMOs have been published in peer reviewedjournals by respected scientists. In contrast, there is a dearthof peer reviewed work to substantiate the frequently heardassertions of either safety or utility in GMOs. The polarity,which now characterizes much of the public discourse on GMOs,reflects not simply scientific disagreement, but alsodisagreement in underlying value assumptions. Value differencesstrongly affect the assessment of both benefit and harm fromGMOs.|
|Keywords||biotechnology genetic engineering junk science risk assessment substantial equivalence|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Zahra Meghani (2009). The Us' Food and Drug Administration, Normativity of Risk Assessment, Gmos, and American Democracy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (2):125-139.
Kathrine Hauge Madsen & Peter Sandøe (2001). Herbicide Resistant Sugar Beet – What is the Problem? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):161-168.
A. Wendy Russell & Robert Sparrow (2008). The Case for Regulating Intragenic Gmos. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (2):153-181.
Mikael Karlsson (2003). Ethics of Sustainable Development – a Study of Swedish Regulations for Genetically Modified Organisms. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16 (1):51-62.
Alan McHughen (2008). Learning From Mistakes : Missteps in Public Acceptance Issues with GMOs. In Kenneth H. David & Paul B. Thompson (eds.), What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology?: Social and Ethical Lessons for Nanoscience From the Debate Over Agrifood Biotechnology and Gmos. Elsevier/Academic Press.
Soemini Kasanmoentalib (1996). Science and Values in Risk Assessment: The Case of Deliberate Release of Genetically Engineered Organisms. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 9 (1):42-60.
Anne Ingeborg Myhr (2010). A Precautionary Approach to Genetically Modified Organisms: Challenges and Implications for Policy and Science. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (6):501-525.
Dane Scott (2005). The Magic Bullet Criticism of Agricultural Biotechnology. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (3):189-197.
Kristian Toft (2012). GMOs and Global Justice: Applying Global Justice Theory to the Case of Genetically Modified Crops and Food. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (2):223-237.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #101,269 of 739,353 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,353 )
How can I increase my downloads?