Tito Schiva, geneticist and past Director of the Experimental Institute for Floriculture Sanremo I for 30 years, attended the UPOV Workshop (International Convention for the New Varieties of Plants Protection) as Italian delegate. In the pre-DNA period, together with A. Mercuri, he developed a method for genotype identification based on the isoenzymatic fingerprinting for plant varieties with a view to protecting intellectual property. At the advent of genetic transformation techniques, again working with A. Mercuri, he created dwarf compact plants on Limonium sp. using the ROL genes, and fluorescent flowers on Lisianthus and Rinchospermum using . GFP genes (Green Fluorescent Protein). So far the controversy on GMO has concerned essentially the wealthy and the environment not highlighting the consequences of the Patent on living matter. To apply a Patent on a gene provokes unique biological/economical synergy and has a great impact on our lives. Gunter Reimann, in “Patent for Hitler” (1942), showed how the Patent was stifling the development of technology. In this reality the food step crops appear to be the most vulnerable. Slowing down innovation is the most negative aspect of the Patent system, but the greatest tragedy lies in the political mistake of not pointing out the guidelines or worse forbidding the development of these bio-technologies, and then leaving this know-how as a privilege of the few.

The debate over genetically modified organisms: health and safety concerns, environmental impact, and scientific opinions. Since they were introduced to the market in the late 1990s, GMOs (genetically modified organisms, including genetically modified crops), have been subject to a barrage of criticism. Agriculture has welcomed this new technology, but public opposition has been loud and scientific opinion mixed. In GMOs Decoded, Sheldon Krimsky examines the controversies over GMOs—health and safety concerns, environmental issues, the implications for world hunger, and the scientific consensus (or lack of one). He explores the viewpoints of a range of GMO skeptics, from public advocacy groups and nongovernmental organizations to scientists with differing views on risk and environmental impact. Krimsky explains the differences between traditional plant breeding and “molecular breeding” through genetic engineering (GE); describes early GMO products, including the infamous Flavr Savr tomato; and discusses herbicide-, disease-, and insect-resistant GE plants. He considers the different American and European approaches to risk assessment, dueling scientific interpretations of plant genetics, and the controversy over labeling GMO products. He analyzes a key 2016 report from the National Academies of Sciences on GMO health effects and considers the controversy over biofortified rice (Golden Rice)—which some saw as a humanitarian project and others as an exercise in public relations. Do GMO crops hold promise or peril? By offering an accessible review of the risks and benefits of GMO crops, and a guide to the controversies over them, Krimsky helps readers judge for themselves.

Genetically engineered (GE) crops were first introduced commercially in the 1990s. After two decades of production, some groups and individuals remain critical of the technology based on their concerns about possible adverse effects on human health, the environment, and ethical considerations. At the same time, others are concerned that the technology is not reaching its potential to improve human health and the environment because of stringent regulations and reduced public funding to develop products offering more benefits to society. While the debate about these and other questions related to the genetic engineering techniques of the first 20 years goes on, emerging genetic-engineering technologies are adding new complexities to the conversation. Genetically Engineered Crops builds on previous related Academies reports published between 1987 and 2010 by undertaking a retrospective examination of the purported positive and adverse effects of GE crops and to anticipate what emerging genetic-engineering technologies hold for the future. This report indicates where there are uncertainties about the economic, agronomic, health, safety, or other impacts of GE crops and food, and makes recommendations to fill gaps in safety assessments, increase regulatory clarity, and improve innovations in and access to GE technology.

Due to an intricate web of psychological, socio-political and economic factors, an alliance of ill-advised forces of radical activism and powerful commercial interests encourage the rejection of so-called “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs), that is agri-food products whose DNA has been directly retouched, or “recombined” (rDNA). While the pseudo-concept has no scientific meaning, the opponents of the agro-industry insist on attacking it as an alleged symbol of the exploitation of nature for greed and profit: this socio-political struggle, in itself legitimate, but directed at the wrong target, fosters doubts and fears about the supposed negative effects of GMOs on the environment and health. Instead, scientists recommend carefully checking new individual plant varieties or animal breeds, regardless of how they are obtained (through rDNA or other processes). Similarly, the important socio-economic pros and cons of the cultivation and consumption of agri-food novelties, in richer or poorer countries as well, should be assessed independently of the developers’ biotech methods. The book explains this contemporary taboo and calls for a well-regulated use of all biotechnological innovations, ending the decades-long quagmire which stymies public research and its philanthropic repercussions.