[Novel food sources: from GMO to the broadening of Russia's bioresource base].

The modern strategy of humanity food providing is aimed at finding the exit from the food crisis in the shortest possible time, by the end of XXI century food and feed production should increase by at least 70%. These tasks solution implies not only the use of science-oriented technologies, but also the expansion of the food base by means of novel food sources, which don't have a history of safe use. In the Russian Federation the formation of novel food's safety assessment approaches is regulated at the state level and is the most important requirement for the possibility of usage. Russian experience of the second half of the XX century in the area of novel food sources' biomedical research unites two stages. The first of them dates back to the middle of the 1960s', when the Soviet scientists, in particular, the workforce of the Institute of Nutrition of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences, under the leadership of Academician A.A. Pokrovskii, have developed the evaluation approaches of the biological value and safety of microbial synthesized protein. The second stage of the safety assessment research development was the work with the genetically modified organisms of plant origin (GMO), that begun in the middle of the 1990s'. Since the moment of formation in 1995-1996, 9 methodical guidelines that regulate methods of safety assessment and control over GMO have been developed. Comprehensively formed by 2020, safety assessment system has been used in the framework of 27 GMO lines state registration that passed a whole cycle of medical and biological research and were allowed for use in nutrition of the population of the Eurasian Economic Union. Within the framework of these research a considerable amount of factual material has been accumulated, a regulatory and methodological basis has been built, and a substantial background for further fundamental and applied scientific research in the field of development and safety assessment of novel food has been created.

Cell-cultured meat: Lessons from GMO adoption and resistance.

This article discusses the choices and strategies that can hasten or delay the adoption of novel food technologies. We start by examining how genetically-modified food became an object of controversy in the United States and Europe. Then, we present lessons suggested by the history of GMOs for cell-cultured meat adoption. The history of GMOs suggests at least eleven concrete lessons for cultured meat adoption that remain under-discussed in the literature. This paper's findings diverge in several ways from received wisdom on cultured meat adoption. We argue, among other things, that genetic engineering firms understood their work to be humanitarian and environmentally-friendly and so were unprepared for popular backlash, that technology adoption is more readily affected by consumer activism when buyers in a supply chain exert more pressure on sellers than the reverse, and that focusing on the positive aspects of a technology is more successful for encouraging its adoption than responding to negative perceptions.

Consumer perception of genetically modified organisms and sources of information.

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been available for commercial purchase since the 1990s, allowing producers to increase crop yields through bioengineering that creates herbicide-resistant and insect-resistant varieties. However, consumer knowledge about GMOs has not increased at the same rate as the adoption of GMO crops. Consumers worldwide are displaying limited understanding, misconceptions, and even unfamiliarity with GMO food products. Many consumers report that they receive information about GMO food products from the media, Internet, and other news sources. These sources may be less reliable than scientific experts whom consumers trust more to present the facts. Although many in the United States support mandatory GMO labeling (similar to current European standards), consumer awareness of current GMO labeling is low. A distinction must also be made between GMO familiarity and scientific understanding, because those who are more familiar with it tend to be more resistant to bioengineering, whereas those with higher scientific knowledge scores tend to have less negative attitudes toward GMOs. This brings to question the relation between scientific literacy, sources of information, and overall consumer knowledge and perception of GMO foods.

Unintended compositional changes in genetically modified (GM) crops: 20 years of research.

The compositional equivalency between genetically modified (GM) crops and nontransgenic comparators has been a fundamental component of human health safety assessment for 20 years. During this time, a large amount of information has been amassed on the compositional changes that accompany both the transgenesis process and traditional breeding methods; additionally, the genetic mechanisms behind these changes have been elucidated. After two decades, scientists are encouraged to objectively assess this body of literature and determine if sufficient scientific uncertainty still exists to continue the general requirement for these studies to support the safety assessment of transgenic crops. It is concluded that suspect unintended compositional effects that could be caused by genetic modification have not materialized on the basis of this substantial literature. Hence, compositional equivalence studies uniquely required for GM crops may no longer be justified on the basis of scientific uncertainty.

The tragedy of the commodity and the farce of AquAdvantage Salmon.

The US Food and Drug Administration is expected to approve AquAdvantage Salmon as the first genetically modified animal for human consumption. The genetic modifications allow the proprietary fish to grow at a rate twice as fast as a wild salmon, leading to greater 'efficiency' in terms of reduced costs and reduced time to market. This article provides an analysis of the ways in which AquAdvantage Salmon exemplifies capitalist market forces controlling and guiding the terms of salmon recovery and conservation. The authors trace historical developments within the salmon industry to demonstrate how capitalist commodity production has impacted fishing communities. They reject the oft-cited 'tragedy of the commons' hypothesis offered to explain fisheries crises. In its place, they offer the conceptual framework of the 'tragedy of the commodity' to explore how capitalist market forces and complicit state regulations amplify rather than resolve global environmental problems.

Exploring the resilience of Bt cotton's "pro-poor success story".

Expectations play a powerful role in driving technological change. Expectations are often encapsulated in narratives of technological promise that emphasize potential benefits and downplay potential negative impacts. Genetically modified (GM, transgenic) crops have been framed by expectations that they would be an intrinsically "pro-poor" innovation that would contribute powerfully to international agricultural development. However, expectations typically have to be scaled back in the light of experience. Published reviews of the socio-economic impacts of GM crops among poor, small-scale farmers in the developing world indicate that these effects have been very mixed and contingent on the agronomic, socio-economic and institutional settings where the technology has been applied. These conclusions should modulate expectations about the pro-poor potential of GM crop technology and focus attention on the conditions under which it might deliver substantial and sustainable benefits for poor farmers. However, the idea of GM crop technology as an intrinsically pro-poor developmental success story has been sustained in academic, public and policy arenas. This narrative depends upon an analysis that disembeds the technology from the technical, social and institutional contexts in which it is applied. Agricultural development policy should be based on a more rigorous and dispassionate analysis, rather than optimistic expectations alone.

Understanding the evolution of rice technology in China - from traditional agriculture to GM rice today.

This paper provides an historical survey of the evolution of rice technology in China, from the traditional farming system to genetically modified rice today. Using sociotechnological analytical framework, it analyses rice technology as a socio-technical ensemble - a complex interaction of material and social elements, and discusses the specificity of technology development and its socio-technical outcomes. It points to two imperatives in rice variety development: wholesale transporting agricultural technology and social mechanism to developing countries are likely lead to negative consequences; indigenous innovation including deploying GM technology for seed varietal development and capturing/cultivating local knowledge will provide better solutions.

Dynamics of list-server discussion on genetically modified foods.

Computer-mediated discussion lists, or list-servers, are popular tools in settings ranging from professional to personal to educational. A discussion list on genetically modified food (GMF) was created in September 2000 as part of the Forum on Genetically Modified Food developed by Science Controversies: Online Partnerships in Education (SCOPE), an educational project that uses computer resources to aid research and learning around unresolved scientific questions. The discussion list "GMF-Science" was actively supported from January 2001 to May 2002. The GMF-Science list welcomed anyone interested in discussing the controversies surrounding GMF. Here, we analyze the dynamics of the discussions and how the GMF-Science list may contribute to learning. Activity on the GMF-Science discussion list reflected some but not all the controversies that were appearing in more traditional publication formats, broached other topics not well represented in the published literature, and tended to leave undiscussed the more technical research developments.

Preferences need no inferences, once again: germinal elements in the public perceptions of genetically modified foods in Colombia.

This paper explores the public perceptions of genetically modified foods in Colombia in a phase considered germinal: the topic was too novel at the time of research. The analysis covers media, informal conversations, and the word associations made by a sample of residents in the city of Bogotá. The results show that the public capability of associating with the topic, even intuitively, is due to the availability of culture themes, the primary categories that help conceptual elaborations, and the construction of common-sense theories. Three themes are proposed: natural/artificial, tradition/change, and health/disease. It is argued that cultural themes are not only cognitive, but also affectively laden entities, which explains the evaluative force expressed by social beliefs. Acknowledging the relevance of the non-attitude thesis, the author suggests that people associate novel objects with latent cultural meanings, explaining why words, images, and metaphors are readily available in elaborating social knowledge.

Genes in food--why the furore?

Although unprecedented and perhaps unique in its irrationality, the recent furore over genetically modified (GM) food holds extremely important lessons for scientists. Some sections of the media undoubtedly bear a heavy responsibility for giving the expression 'GM' threatening connotations that are quite unwarranted. However, influential contributions to the hysteria have come from a surprising range of other sources, including some scientists. The research community has failed in its responsibility to society in three ways. Firstly, plant scientists did not appreciate that certain techniques (such as the use of antibiotic resistance genes as markers during plant transformation) would inevitably provoke public consternation. As a result, they took no steps to address such concerns. Secondly, researchers overlooked, minimized or in some cases simply dismissed the significance of public fears that they were 'interfering with Nature' or 'playing God'. Thirdly, plant breeders apparently saw no need to take pro-active measures with regard to the media and public in placing potential environmental and nutritional benefits of GM crops on the agenda in a positive fashion. Partly because of this failure, GM food is now firmly established in the public mind as wholly objectionable. One measure of how far we have travelled down that road is that it hardly matters any more whether objections are based on alleged environmental risks of cultivating GM crops or alleged toxicological hazards of eating them. 'Genetically modified organism', like 'radioactivity', has become an odious, generic shibboleth. Given that millions of people throughout the world are already benefiting from pharmaceuticals made by GM organisms, this is bizarre.