A quantitative safety assessment model for transgenic protein products produced in agricultural crops
Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (6):545-558 (2004)
|Abstract||Transgenic plants are now being used to develop pharmaceutical and industrial products in addition to their use in crop improvement. Using confinement requirements, these transgenic plants are grown and processed under conditions that prevent intermixing with commodity crops. Regulatory agencies in the United States have provided guidance of zero tolerance of these new industrial crops with commodity crops. While this is a worthy goal, it is theoretically unattainable. In spite of the best containment practices, there is a potential risk using any system of production due to unforeseen incidences including natural disasters or exposure to workers. The precautionary principle has been used for numerous regulated articles in addressing the potential risks of new products and technology based on a risk assessment in similar situations. We present here a risk assessment model that could be used as a start to develop an accepted model for the industry. The model is based on current risk models used for other regulated articles, but adapted for these types of products. This could be used to determine action levels in the event of an unintended exposure or to ensure that detection or confinement methods are adequate to avoid risks. As an example, aprotinin, a therapeutic protein now being produced in maize, was evaluated for potential risk to humans using this model.|
|Keywords||aprotinin industrial enzymes maize pharmaceuticals plants risk transgenic|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
James Wilson (2007). GM Crops: Patently Wrong? [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (3):261-283.
Charles Blatz (2007). Hugh Lacey, Values and Objectivity in Science: The Current Controversy About Transgenic Crops:Values and Objectivity in Science: The Current Controversy About Transgenic Crops. Ethics 117 (4):774-776.
Sean A. Weaver & Michael C. Morris (2005). Risks Associated with Genetic Modification: – An Annotated Bibliography of Peer Reviewed Natural Science Publications. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (2):157-189.
Daniel Gregorowius, Petra Lindemann-Matthies & Markus Huppenbauer (2012). Ethical Discourse on the Use of Genetically Modified Crops: A Review of Academic Publications in the Fields of Ecology and Environmental Ethics. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):265-293.
Jonathan Wolff (2006). Risk, Fear, Blame, Shame and the Regulation of Public Safety. Economics and Philosophy 22 (3):409-427.
Joan Duckenfield (2013). Antibiotic Resistance Due to Modern Agricultural Practices: An Ethical Perspective. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (2):333-350.
Hugh Lacey (2002). Assessing the Value of Transgenic Crops. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):497-511.
Paul Weirich (ed.) (2008). Labeling Genetically Modified Food: The Philosophical and Legal Debate. OUP USA.
Celina Ramjoué (2007). The Transatlantic Rift in Genetically Modified Food Policy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (5):419-436.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1 ( #292,381 of 739,345 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?