b'CANADA WONT REGULATE GENE EDITING LIKE IT DOES GM. THE EU MIGHT SOON FOLLOW SUITIts hard to imagine that something microscopic can have such big effects on the political world. Marc ZienkiewiczMENDEL PERKINSand Petra Jorasch live with that realityUnlike Canadas approach, the EU emphasizes the process of every day as they wade through regulations surroundingdevelopment rather than the final product.gene editing. This decision has restricted researchers and businesses in the Perkins serves as lead scientist for Calgary-based AgGeneEU, leading to frustration and a potential brain drain as scientists while Jorasch works as manager of plant breeding innovationseek more accommodating jurisdictions for their work, Jorasch advocacy for Euroseeds. On a recent episode of Seed Speaks,says, something Perkins can attest to.both helped shed light on the enormous political implications ofDespite the challenges faced by the EU in regard to gene gene editing on the political sphere. editing, theres a glimmer of hope for the EU, as discussions sur-Perkins remarked on the recent significant changes inrounding potential changes in gene editing regulations are ongo-Canadas gene editing regulations, which took years to craft anding. The EU Commission is considering a verification process to which the seed industry waited for with bated breath. Earlier thisdetermine if a product derived through gene editing could be year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) providedexempt it from GMO regulations. This would align the EU with clarity on how they would regulate gene editing, stating thatcountries like the UK, which have taken a more relaxed approach it would not be subject to the same regulations as geneticallyto gene editing. However, the timeline for implementing such modified organisms (GMOs). changes is uncertain, given the complexities of EU policymaking. Perkins emphasized the importance of this decision forAfter the UKs exit from the European Union, they initiated researchers, businesses, and investors, as it allows them todiscussions on how to regulate genome editing and genome-proceed with confidence in their projects. Canadas approachedited products. What theyve established is known as the focuses on the characteristics of the end products rather thanprecision breeding bill. This bill adopts an approach like that the technology used to create them. This is a sensible way tofollowed by several other countries globally, including South regulate, as it fosters ongoing innovation, accommodates newAmerican nations, Australia, the U.S. and Canada.gene editing tools, and aligns with decades of safe and effectiveThe core principle is that if a product resulting from these use of technology, he says. technologies can be achieved through conventional breeding The recent clarity provided by Health Canada and themethods, it is not classified as a GMO and thus escapes GMO reg-Canadian Food Inspection Agency has been a game-changer forulations. However, if it differs from what can be achieved through us. It has not only given us the confidence to push forward withconventional breeding, it remains under GMO regulations. The UK our work but has also garnered support and confidence from thehas already drafted and adopted its regulation, with secondary investment community, he says. legislation pending. They anticipate having a fully operational The regulatory framework in Canada places significantsystem by the end of the next year, Jorasch says. On the other emphasis on evaluating the end results of the gene editing pro- hand, the EU has proposed a system that shares similarities with cess, specifically focusing on the characteristics of food productsthis approach.and animal feed, as well as potential risks. Notably, these regula- If the EU adopts a more lenient stance on gene editing tions adopt a process-agnostic approach, meaning they do notregulations, it could have positive global implications. It would overly concern themselves with the specific technologies usedfacilitate agricultural trade and promote food production, align-but rather concentrate on assessing the safety and attributes ofing with EU sustainability goals, Jorasch says.SWthe final products.In stark contrast, the European Unions approach to geneWHERE editing regulations has been considerably more stringent.ON THE WEBJorasch explained the historical background of gene editing reg-ulations in the EU, highlighting the European Court of JusticesWatch our full episode on gene editing and the political sphere. ruling in 2018 that classified gene-edited products as GMOs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEoSCZftKSU100/ SEEDWORLD.COMDECEMBER 2023'