EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Ewen Mullins, Jean-Louis Bresson, Tamas Dalmay, Ian Crawford Dewhurst, Michelle M. Epstein, Leslie George Firbank, Philippe Guerche, Jan Hejatko, Francisco Javier Moreno, Hanspeter Naegeli, Fabien Nogué, Nils Rostoks, Jose Juan Sanchez Serrano, Giovanni Savoini, Eve Veromann, Fabio Veronesi, Josep Casacuberta, Ana Afonso, Paolo Lenzi, Nikoletta Papadopoulou, Tommaso Raffaello
{"title":"关于欧盟委员会建议书 COM (2023) 411 附件 I 的 ANSES 分析的科学意见(EFSA-Q-2024-00178)。","authors":"EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Ewen Mullins, Jean-Louis Bresson, Tamas Dalmay, Ian Crawford Dewhurst, Michelle M. Epstein, Leslie George Firbank, Philippe Guerche, Jan Hejatko, Francisco Javier Moreno, Hanspeter Naegeli, Fabien Nogué, Nils Rostoks, Jose Juan Sanchez Serrano, Giovanni Savoini, Eve Veromann, Fabio Veronesi, Josep Casacuberta, Ana Afonso, Paolo Lenzi, Nikoletta Papadopoulou, Tommaso Raffaello","doi":"10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>EFSA was asked by the European Parliament to provide a scientific opinion on the analysis by the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES) of Annex I of the European Commission proposal for a regulation ‘on plants obtained by certain new genomic techniques (NGTs) and their food and feed, and amending regulation (EU) 2017/625’. The Panel on genetically modified organisms (GMO) assessed the opinion published by ANSES, which focuses on (i) the need to clarify the definitions and scope, (ii) the scientific basis for the equivalence criteria and (iii) the need to take potential risks from category 1 NGT plants into account. The EFSA GMO Panel considered the ANSES analysis and comments on various terms used in the criteria in Annex I of the European Commission proposal and discussed definitions based on previous EFSA GMO Panel opinions. The EFSA GMO Panel concluded that the available scientific literature shows that plants containing the types and numbers of genetic modifications used as criteria to identify category 1 NGT plants in the European Commission proposal do exist as the result of spontaneous mutations or random mutagenesis. Therefore, it is scientifically justified to consider category 1 NGT plants as equivalent to conventionally bred plants with respect to the similarity of genetic modifications and the similarity of potential risks. The EFSA GMO Panel did not identify any additional hazards and risks associated with the use of NGTs compared to conventional breeding techniques in its previous Opinions.</p>","PeriodicalId":11657,"journal":{"name":"EFSA Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11237874/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scientific opinion on the ANSES analysis of Annex I of the EC proposal COM (2023) 411 (EFSA-Q-2024-00178)\",\"authors\":\"EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Ewen Mullins, Jean-Louis Bresson, Tamas Dalmay, Ian Crawford Dewhurst, Michelle M. Epstein, Leslie George Firbank, Philippe Guerche, Jan Hejatko, Francisco Javier Moreno, Hanspeter Naegeli, Fabien Nogué, Nils Rostoks, Jose Juan Sanchez Serrano, Giovanni Savoini, Eve Veromann, Fabio Veronesi, Josep Casacuberta, Ana Afonso, Paolo Lenzi, Nikoletta Papadopoulou, Tommaso Raffaello\",\"doi\":\"10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8894\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>EFSA was asked by the European Parliament to provide a scientific opinion on the analysis by the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES) of Annex I of the European Commission proposal for a regulation ‘on plants obtained by certain new genomic techniques (NGTs) and their food and feed, and amending regulation (EU) 2017/625’. The Panel on genetically modified organisms (GMO) assessed the opinion published by ANSES, which focuses on (i) the need to clarify the definitions and scope, (ii) the scientific basis for the equivalence criteria and (iii) the need to take potential risks from category 1 NGT plants into account. The EFSA GMO Panel considered the ANSES analysis and comments on various terms used in the criteria in Annex I of the European Commission proposal and discussed definitions based on previous EFSA GMO Panel opinions. The EFSA GMO Panel concluded that the available scientific literature shows that plants containing the types and numbers of genetic modifications used as criteria to identify category 1 NGT plants in the European Commission proposal do exist as the result of spontaneous mutations or random mutagenesis. Therefore, it is scientifically justified to consider category 1 NGT plants as equivalent to conventionally bred plants with respect to the similarity of genetic modifications and the similarity of potential risks. The EFSA GMO Panel did not identify any additional hazards and risks associated with the use of NGTs compared to conventional breeding techniques in its previous Opinions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11657,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EFSA Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11237874/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EFSA Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8894\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EFSA Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8894","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
欧洲议会要求欧洲食物安全局就法国食品、环境和职业健康安全署(ANSES)对欧盟委员会关于 "通过某些新基因组技术(NGT)获得的植物及其食品和饲料,以及修订条例(欧盟)2017/625 "的提案附件一的分析提供科学意见。转基因生物(GMO)专家小组对 ANSES 公布的意见进行了评估,其重点是:(i) 澄清定义和范围的必要性,(ii) 等效标准的科学依据,以及 (iii) 考虑第 1 类 NGT 植物潜在风险的必要性。欧洲食物安全局转基因生物专家小组审议了 ANSES 对欧盟委员会提案附件 I 标准中使用的各种术语的分析和评论,并讨论了基于欧洲食物安全局转基因生物专家小组先前意见的定义。欧洲食物安全局转基因生物专家小组得出结论认为,现有科学文献表明,在欧盟委员会的提案中,作为确定第 1 类 NGT 植物的标准,确实存在含有自发突变或随机诱变基因修饰类型和数量的植物。因此,就基因修饰的相似性和潜在风险的相似性而言,将第 1 类 NGT 植物视为等同于传统培育的植物是有科学依据的。与传统育种技术相比,欧洲食物安全局转基因生物专家小组在以前的意见中并未发现使用 NGT 会带来任何额外的危害和风险。
Scientific opinion on the ANSES analysis of Annex I of the EC proposal COM (2023) 411 (EFSA-Q-2024-00178)
EFSA was asked by the European Parliament to provide a scientific opinion on the analysis by the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES) of Annex I of the European Commission proposal for a regulation ‘on plants obtained by certain new genomic techniques (NGTs) and their food and feed, and amending regulation (EU) 2017/625’. The Panel on genetically modified organisms (GMO) assessed the opinion published by ANSES, which focuses on (i) the need to clarify the definitions and scope, (ii) the scientific basis for the equivalence criteria and (iii) the need to take potential risks from category 1 NGT plants into account. The EFSA GMO Panel considered the ANSES analysis and comments on various terms used in the criteria in Annex I of the European Commission proposal and discussed definitions based on previous EFSA GMO Panel opinions. The EFSA GMO Panel concluded that the available scientific literature shows that plants containing the types and numbers of genetic modifications used as criteria to identify category 1 NGT plants in the European Commission proposal do exist as the result of spontaneous mutations or random mutagenesis. Therefore, it is scientifically justified to consider category 1 NGT plants as equivalent to conventionally bred plants with respect to the similarity of genetic modifications and the similarity of potential risks. The EFSA GMO Panel did not identify any additional hazards and risks associated with the use of NGTs compared to conventional breeding techniques in its previous Opinions.
期刊介绍:
The EFSA Journal covers methods of risk assessment, reports on data collected, and risk assessments in the individual areas of plant health, plant protection products and their residues, genetically modified organisms, additives and products or substances used in animal feed, animal health and welfare, biological hazards including BSE/TSE, contaminants in the food chain, food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids, food additives and nutrient sources added to food, dietetic products, nutrition and allergies.