Genetically engineered (GE) crops were first introduced commercially in the 1990s. After two decades of production, some groups and individuals remain critical of the technology based on their concerns about possible adverse effects on human health, the environment, and ethical considerations. At the same time, others are concerned that the technology is not reaching its potential to improve human health and the environment because of stringent regulations and reduced public funding to develop products offering more benefits to society. While the debate about these and other questions related to the genetic engineering techniques of the first 20 years goes on, emerging genetic-engineering technologies are adding new complexities to the conversation. Genetically Engineered Crops builds on previous related Academies reports published between 1987 and 2010 by undertaking a retrospective examination of the purported positive and adverse effects of GE crops and to anticipate what emerging genetic-engineering technologies hold for the future. This report indicates where there are uncertainties about the economic, agronomic, health, safety, or other impacts of GE crops and food, and makes recommendations to fill gaps in safety assessments, increase regulatory clarity, and improve innovations in and access to GE technology.

Between 1973 and 2016, the ways to manipulate DNA to endow new characteristics in an organism (that is, biotechnology) have advanced, enabling the development of products that were not previously possible. What will the likely future products of biotechnology be over the next 5â€"10 years? What scientific capabilities, tools, and/or expertise may be needed by the regulatory agencies to ensure they make efficient and sound evaluations of the likely future products of biotechnology? Preparing for Future Products of Biotechnology analyzes the future landscape of biotechnology products and seeks to inform forthcoming policy making. This report identifies potential new risks and frameworks for risk assessment and areas in which the risks or lack of risks relating to the products of biotechnology are well understood.

Research on gene drive systems is rapidly advancing. Many proposed applications of gene drive research aim to solve environmental and public health challenges, including the reduction of poverty and the burden of vector-borne diseases, such as malaria and dengue, which disproportionately impact low and middle income countries. However, due to their intrinsic qualities of rapid spread and irreversibility, gene drive systems raise many questions with respect to their safety relative to public and environmental health. Because gene drive systems are designed to alter the environments we share in ways that will be hard to anticipate and impossible to completely roll back, questions about the ethics surrounding use of this research are complex and will require very careful exploration. Gene Drives on the Horizon outlines the state of knowledge relative to the science, ethics, public engagement, and risk assessment as they pertain to research directions of gene drive systems and governance of the research process. This report offers principles for responsible practices of gene drive research and related applications for use by investigators, their institutions, the research funders, and regulators.

Challenges and Opportunities with GM Crops in Vietnam: the Case of Bt Cotton; Cotton Production in Vietnam; Consideration of Problem Formulation an Option Assessment (PFOA) for Environmental Risk Assessment: Bt Cotton in Vietnam; Transgene Locus Structure and Expression; Non-target and Biological Diversity Risk Assessment; Potential Effect of Transgenic Cotton on Non-target Herbivores in Vietnam; Invertebrate Predators in Bt Cotton in Vietnam: Techniques for Prioritizing Species and Developing Risk Hypotheses for Risk Assessment; Potential Effects of Transgenic Cotton on Non-target Insect Parasitoids in Vietnam; Potential Effects of Transgenic Cotton on Flower Visitors in Vietnam; Potential Effects of Transgenic Cotton on Soil Ecosystem Processes in Vietnam; Environmental Risks Associated with Gene Flow from Transgenic Cotton in Vietnam; Resistance Risk Assessment and Management for Bt Cotton in Vietnam; Challenges and Opportunities with Bt Cotton in Vietnam: Synthesis and Recommendations.

In the United States, some populations suffer from far greater disparities in health than others. Those disparities are caused not only by fundamental differences in health status across segments of the population, but also because of inequities in factors that impact health status, so-called determinants of health. Only part of an individual's health status depends on his or her behavior and choice; community-wide problems like poverty, unemployment, poor education, inadequate housing, poor public transportation, interpersonal violence, and decaying neighborhoods also contribute to health inequities, as well as the historic and ongoing interplay of structures, policies, and norms that shape lives. When these factors are not optimal in a community, it does not mean they are intractable: such inequities can be mitigated by social policies that can shape health in powerful ways. Communities in Action: Pathways to Health Equity seeks to delineate the causes of and the solutions to health inequities in the United States. This report focuses on what communities can do to promote health equity, what actions are needed by the many and varied stakeholders that are part of communities or support them, as well as the root causes and structural barriers that need to be overcome.

This book provides in-depth insights into the regulatory frameworks of five countries and the EU concerning the regulation of genome edited plants. The country reports form the basis for a comparative analysis of the various national regulations governing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in general and genome edited plants in particular, as well as the underlying regulatory approaches.The reports, which focus on the regulatory status quo of genome edited plants in Argentina, Australia, Canada, the EU, Japan and the USA, were written by distinguished experts following a uniform structure. On this basis, the legal frameworks are compared in order to foster a rational assessment of which approaches could be drawn upon to adjust, or to completely realign, the current EU regime for GMOs. In addition, a separate chapter identifies potential best practices for the regulation of plants derived from genome editing.