From Asilomar to industrial biotechnology

Risks, reductionism and regulation

Datos Bibliográficos

ID12205608
AutoresSheldon Krimsky (0000-0002-0647-9951, Tufts University, autor de correspondencia)
Año2005
Volumen14
Número4
Páginas309-323
Fecha de publicación2005-12-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaScience as Culture (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0950-5431 • E-ISSN: 1470-1189
EditorialTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/09505430500368998
PMID16619467
OpenAlexW2001297626
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas15
Referencias citadas14

Pacific Grove, California, set in motion the first scientific evaluation of genetically modi-fied organisms. It left a legacy that remains influential decades later when the world is faced with the prospect of a cornucopia of new products derived from gene-splicing tech-nology. Unlike the initial concerns over the risks of recombinant-DNA molecule technol-ogy (r-DNA), which was the centrepiece of the early controversy during and for several years after the 1975 Asilomar meeting, the contested issues today are about the social, environmental, economic, and ethical consequences of creating products from the pro-genitor technology. The public’s attention has turned from the risks of r-DNA in basic research to the risks of biotechnology primarily in agriculture and the pharmaceutical industry. In this paper, I focus on the cultural, political and epistemological components of risk analysis for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their impact on the regulation of the biotechnology industry. The guiding questions are: (1) in what ways did the Asilomar ’75 framework for risk assessment set the stage for the social management of biotech-nology in the United States during the start of its industrial development? and (2) what

Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Political science · Reductionism · Bioeconomy and Sustainability Development · CRISPR and Genetic Engineering · Genetically Modified Organisms Research · Philosophy