Skip to main content

Regulatory and Biosafety Issues in Relation to Transgenic Animals in Food and Agriculture, Feeds Containing Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) and Veterinary Biologics

  • Conference paper
Applications of Gene-Based Technologies for Improving Animal Production and Health in Developing Countries

Abstract

Development of an effective regulatory system for genetically engineered animals and their products has been the subject of increasing discussion among researchers, industry and policy developers, as well as the public. Since transgenesis and cloning are relatively new scientific techniques, transgenic animals are new organisms for which there is limited information. The issues associated with the regulation and biosafety of transgenic animals pertain to environmental impact, human food safety, animal health and welfare, trade and ethics. To regulate this new and powerful technology predicated on limited background information is a challenge not only for the regulators, but also for the developers of such animals, who strive to prove that the animals are safe and merit bio-equivalency to their conventional counterparts. In principle, an effective regulatory sieve should permit safe products while forming a formidable barrier for those assessed of posing an unacceptable risk.

Adoption of transgenic technology for use in agriculture will depend upon various factors that range from perceived benefits for humans and animals, to safe propagation, animal welfare considerations and integrity of species, as well as effects on bio-diversity. A regulatory framework designed to address the concerns connected with the environmental release of transgenic animals needs to also take into account the ability of genetically modified animals to survive and compete with conventional populations. Regulatory initiatives for biotechnology-derived animals and their products should ensure high standards for human and animal health; a sound scientific basis for evaluation; transparency and public involvement; and maintenance of genetic diversity.

Feeds obtained by use of biotechnology have to be evaluated for animal and human safety by using parameters that define their molecular characterization, nutritional qualities and toxicological aspects, while veterinary biologics derived from biotechnology must be shown to be pure, potent, safe and effective when used according to label recommendations.

The Canadian regulatory system relies on the “precautionary principle” in its approach to regulate the “product” instead of the “process”. The regulatory framework captures transgenic animals under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). Food from transgenic animals is assessed for safety by Health Canada under its Novel Foods Regulations of the Food and Drugs Act. Feed containing any genetically modified organism is considered Novel Feed under the Feeds Act and Regulations. The regulation of veterinary biologics, in an effort to prevent and diagnose infectious diseases of animals, relies on effective science-based regulatory controls under the Health of Animals Act and Regulations. The Canadian system of regulation for feeds, veterinary biologics and transgenic animals could be useful to developing countries in the process of establishing an effective framework for new regulations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Berkowitz, D.B. 1993. The food safety of transgenic animals: implications from traditional breeding. Journal of Animal Science, 7: 43–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • CCAC [Canadian Council on Animal Care]. 1997. CCAC guidelines on transgenic animals. Canadian Council on Animal Care, Ottawa, Ontario. Available at: http://www.ccac.ca/englishgdlines/transgen/transge1.htm#download.

    Google Scholar 

  • CFIA [Canadian Food Inspection Agency]. 1998. Session report on “Consultation on regulating livestock animal and fish derived from biotechnology”. Available at: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/sci/biotech/tech/aniconsulte.shtml

    Google Scholar 

  • CFIA. 2003a. Canadian Food Inspection Agency-Feeds section. Available at: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/feebet/feebete.shtml

    Google Scholar 

  • CFIA. 2003b. Canadian Food Inspection Agency-Veterinary Biologics section. Available at: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/vetbio/vbpbve.shtml

    Google Scholar 

  • EC/HC [Environment Canada/Health Canada]. 2001. Guidelines for the notification and testing of New Substance organisms, pursuant to “The New Substances Notification Regulations of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999”. Published by Environment Canada and Health Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, B.R. 1999. The prospects for international regulatory interventions in embryo transfer and reproductive technologies in the next century. Theriogenology, 51: 71–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J.R., Edwards, J.F., Sawyer, N., Blackwell, C. & Cibelli, J.B. 2001. Placental anomalies in a viable cloned calf. Cloning, 3: 83–88.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, T.H., Homan, E.J. & Bremel, R.D. 2001. Transgenic livestock: Regulation and science in a changing environment. Journal of Animal Science, 79(Suppl.): 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, Y.K., Park, J.S., Koo, D.B., Choi, Y.H., Kim, S.U., Lee, K.K. & Han, Y.M. 2002. Limited demethylation leaves mosaic-type methylation states in cloned bovine preimplantation embryos. EMBO Journal, 21: 1092–1100.

    PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Kappeli, O. & Auberson, L. 1997. The science and intricacy of environmental safety evaluations. Trends in Biotechnology, 15: 342–349.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Kapuscinski, A.R., Goodman, R.M., Hann, S.D., Jacobs, L.R., Pullins, E.E., Johnson, C.S., Kinsey, J.D., Krall, R.L., La Vina, A.G., Mellon, M.G. & Ruttan, V.W. 2003. Making ’safety first’ a reality for biotechnology products. Nature Biotechnology, 21: 599–601.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Kuroiwa, Y., Kasinathan, P., Choi, Y.J., Naeem, R., Tomizuka, K., Sullivan, E.J., Knott, J.G., Duteau, A., Goldsby, R.A., Osborne, B.A., Ishida, I. & Robl, J.M. 2002. Cloned transchromosomic calves producing human immunoglobulin. Nature Biotechnology, 20: 889–894.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Maredia, M.K. 1998. The economics of biosafety: implications for biotechnology in developing countries. Biosafety, 3: 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuffield. 1999. Nuffield Council on Bioethics in Genetically Modified Crops: The ethical and social issues. The Nuffield Foundation, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmiter R.D., Brinster, R.L., Hammer, R.E., Trumbauer, M.E., Rosenfeld, M.G., Birnberg, N.C. & Evans, R.M. 1982. Dramatic growth of mice that develop with eggs microinjected with matalotheonein-growth hormone fusion genes. Nature, 300: 611–615.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, A.C.F., Wakayama, T., Kishikawa, H., Kasai, T., Okade, M., Toyoda, Y. & Yanagimachi, R. 1999. Mammalian transgenesis by intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Science, 284: 1180–1183.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, C.J., Koike, C., Vaught, T.D., Boone, J., Wells, K.D., Chen, S.H., Ball, S., Specht, S.M., Polejaeva, I.A., Monahan, J.A., Jobst, P.M., Sharma, S.B., Lamborn, A.E., Garst, A.S., Moore, M., Demetris, A.J., Rudert, W.A., Bottino, R., Bertera, S., Trucco, M., Starzl, T.E., Dai, Y. & Ayares, D.L. 2003. Production of alpha 1,3 galactosyltransferase-deficient pigs. Science, 299: 411–414.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Pursel, V.G. & Rexroad C.E. Jr. 1993. Recent progress in the transgenic modification of swine and sheep. Molecular Reproduction and Development, 36: 251–254.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Robl, J.M. 1999. New life for sperm mediated transgenesis? Nature Biotechnology, 17: 636–637.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Schnieke, A.E., Kind, A.J., Ritchie, W.A., Mycock, K., Scott, A.R., Ritchie, M., Wilmut, I., Colman, A. & Campbell, K.H. 1997. Human factor IX transgenic sheep produced by transfer of nuclei from transfected fetal fibroblasts. Science, 278: 2130–2133.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Scientists’ Working Group on Biosafety. 1998. Manual for assessing ecological and human health effects of genetically engineered organisms. Edmonds, WA: Edmonds Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, M.S., Gifford, G.A. & Samagh, B.S. 1997. Canadian regulatory requirements for recombinant fish vaccines. Developments in Biological Standardization, 90: 347–353.

    PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Tuboly, T., Yu, W., Bailey, A., Degrandis, S., Du, S., Erickson, L. & Nagy, E. 2000. Immunogenicity of porcine transmissible gastroenteritis virus spike protein expressed in plants. Vaccine, 18(19): 2023–2028.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Wilmut, I. & Clark, A.J. 1991. Basic techniques for transgenesis. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, 43: 265–275.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilmut, I., Schnieke, A.E., McWhir, J., Kind, A.J. & Campbell, K.H. 1997. Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature, 385: 810–813.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  • Young, L.E., Sinclair, K.D. & Wilmut, I. 1998. Large offspring syndrome in cattle and sheep. Reviews of Reproduction, 3: 155–163.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 IAEA

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kochhar, H., Gifford, G., Kahn, S. (2005). Regulatory and Biosafety Issues in Relation to Transgenic Animals in Food and Agriculture, Feeds Containing Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) and Veterinary Biologics. In: Makkar, H.P., Viljoen, G.J. (eds) Applications of Gene-Based Technologies for Improving Animal Production and Health in Developing Countries. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3312-5_35

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics