Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Science-based risk assessment requires careful evaluation of all studies

Nature Biotechnology volume 31, pages 1077–1078 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

To the Editor:

In a Correspondence in the May issue, Romeis et al.1 argued that in the science for risk assessment of genetically modified (GM) crops, a “careful evaluation of test protocols is a critical step that is sometimes missed.” We fully agree with this point. However, we completely disagree with their argument that this careful evaluation is only necessary or important “when a study's conclusion challenges an accepted body of knowledge.” If science claims universality and impartiality, then the idea of selecting only certain studies for careful evaluation is not scientific. The proposal from Romeis et al.1 to select and evaluate only those studies with findings challenging the dominant wisdom seems even worse.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Romeis, J. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 386–387 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wickson, F.J. J. Risk Res. 12, 749–770 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Dolezel, M. et al. Environ. Sci. Europe 23, 33–48 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bøhn, T. et al. Environ. Sci. Europe 24, 22 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hilbeck, A. et al. Environ. Sci Europe 24, 10 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wickson, F. & Wynne, B. Ethics Policy Environ. 15, 321–340 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Marvier, M. et al. Science 316, 1475–1477 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Millstone, E. et al. Risk Assessment Policies: Differences Across Jurisdictions http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC37719.pdf (Joint Research Centre, European Commission, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kuntz, M. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 498–500 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations and World Health Organisation. Food Safety Risk Analysis: A Guide for National Food Safety Authorities ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/a0822e/a0822e00.pdf (FAO and WHO, 2006).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. GenØk Centre for Biosafety Society, Tromsø, Norway

    Fern Wickson, Thomas Bøhn & Angelika Hilbeck

  2. UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway

    Thomas Bøhn

  3. Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.

    Brian Wynne

  4. Centre for Biosafety, Tromsø, Norway

    Angelika Hilbeck

  5. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland

    Angelika Hilbeck

  6. University of Bergen, Centre for the Study of the Sciences and Humanities, Bergen, Norway

    Silvio Funtowicz

Authors
  1. Fern Wickson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Bøhn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brian Wynne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Angelika Hilbeck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Silvio Funtowicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Silvio Funtowicz.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wickson, F., Bøhn, T., Wynne, B. et al. Science-based risk assessment requires careful evaluation of all studies. Nat Biotechnol 31, 1077–1078 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2761

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2761

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing