As new breeding techniques create new ethical debates over food, we think the ethical toolbox needs updating. Talking about crossing species lines simply isn’t enough. If Darwin had known about gene editing, we think he would have agreed.
Innovation is built upon an ecosystem that takes decades to mature. Yet, China has already made substantial advances in computer science, chemistry, engineering, and robotics -- all of which pose a direct challenge to U.S. technological supremacy. However, the U.S. will remain dominant and largely unchallenged in biotech and medicine for the foreseeable future.
Biomedical scientists today stand in a position not dissimilar to that of our ancient ancestors. A thousand years from now, we will be viewed as naïve and of limited means. Yet, it's quite possible that historians of science will look back at the 20th and 21st centuries as periods in which great marvels were accomplished. If there's ever a list called The Seven Wonders of the Biotech World this is what should be on it.
The Trump Administration recently issued two executive orders relating to biomedical science. The first involved the regulation of biotechnology products; the second involved transparency in healthcare costs. We believe both are a step in the right direction.
The New York Times has done something that it very rarely does: It wrote an editorial in support of biotechnology. Unfortunately, the newspaper has a long history of spreading misinformation about GMOs and chemicals, which seriously undermines the important message in its pro-vaccine editorial.
Food labels serve one purpose, and one purpose only: To provide nutritional information to consumers. The process by which a food is produced is not relevant to its nutritional content or safety profile. Therefore, products made using animal cell culture techniques absolutely should not require special labeling.
How profound. This concept, from the preeminent Harvard scientist and noted optimist, is worth examining in the context of biotechnology.
A blog posting on the NYTimes site discusses the Green Revolution in Africa. While gratifying to read about progress being made, some major omissions need to be addressed in this piece, including the lack of Dr. Norman Borlaug s contributions.
Newsweek s recent cover story puts it bluntly: YOU ARE TOTALLY WRONG ABOUT GENETICALLY ALTERED FOOD. And author Tom Parrett eloquently explains why in his article: GMO Scientists Could Save the World From Hunger, If We Let Them.
In his op-ed in Sunday s NYTimes, former anti-GMO activist Mark Lynas explains his conversion to supporting biotechnology as a means of feeding the world s increasing population, many of whom are or are fated to be malnourished without higher crop yields
In his latest slate.com article, ACSH friend and former trustee Dr. Henry Miller, and co-author Kavin Senapathy, criticize television doctor Mehmet Oz for his
Bioengineered crops save lives, so why are so many against it? The CDC has good news on vaccination rates in the U.S., but we're not at 100% yet. More Ebola fears, this time, a community takes it a bit too far.