The case for regulating intragenic GMOs

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (2):153-181 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper discusses the ethical and regulatory issues raised by ‘‘intragenics’’ – organisms that have been genetically modified using gene technologies, but that do not contain DNA from another species. Considering the rapid development of knowledge about gene regulation and genomics, we anticipate rapid advances in intragenic methods. Of regulatory systems developed to govern genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, the Australian system stands out in explicitly excluding intragenics from regulation. European systems are also under pressure to exclude intragenics from regulation. We evaluate recent arguments that intragenics are safer and more morally acceptable than transgenic organisms, and more acceptable to the public, which might be thought to justify a lower standard of regulation. We argue that the exemption of intragenics from regulation is not justified, and that there may be significant environmental risks associated with them. We conclude that intragenics should be subject to the same standard of regulation as other GMOs.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,752

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

“The moral difference between intragenic and transgenic modification of plants”.Bjørn K. Myskja - 2006 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (3):225-238.
Assessment of GM crops in commercial agriculture.E. Ann Clark & Hugh Lehman - 2001 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (1):3-28.
The magic bullet criticism of agricultural biotechnology.Dane Scott - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (3):189-197.
The Other Value in the Debate over Genetically Modified Organisms.J. Robert Loftis - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (9999):151-162.
Jan Pryor.Regulating Step-Parenthood - 2009 - In Shelley Day Sclater (ed.), Regulating autonomy: sex, reproduction and family. Portland, Or.: Hart. pp. 109.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
72 (#227,676)

6 months
4 (#778,909)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert Sparrow
Monash University

References found in this work

“The moral difference between intragenic and transgenic modification of plants”.Bjørn K. Myskja - 2006 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (3):225-238.
Patenting genes and the public interest.Dorothy Nelkin - 2002 - American Journal of Bioethics 2 (3):13 – 15.
The Homiletics of Risk.Busch Lawrence - 2002 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15 (1):17-29.

View all 10 references / Add more references