Appendix 2: Consultation questions Question 3.1.1: Do you agree, as a general principle, that food derived from organisms containing new pieces of DNA should be captured for pre-market safety assessment and approval? Should there be any exceptions to this general principle? Question 3.1.2: Should food from null segregant organisms be excluded from and approval? If yes, should that exclusion be conditional on specific criteria and what should those criteria be? If no, what are your specific safety concerns for food derived from null segregants? Question 3.1.3: Are foods from genome edited organisms likely to be the same in terms of risk to foods derived using chemical or radiation mutagenesis? If no, how are they different? If yes, would this apply to all derived food products or are there likely to be some foods that carry a greater risk and therefore warrant pre-market safety assessment and approval? Question 3.2: Are you aware of other techniques not currently addressed by this paper which have the potential to be used in the future for the development of food products? Should food derived from other techniques, such as DNA methylation, be subject to safety assessment and approval? Should food derived from other techniques, such as DNA methylation, be subject to pre-market safety assessment and approval? Question 3.3: Do you think a process-based definition is appropriate as a trigger for approval in the case of NBTs? If no, what other approaches could be used? If yes, how could a process-based approach be applied to NBTs? Are there any aspects of the current definitions that should be retained or remain applicable? Question 3.4: Are there other issues not mentioned in this paper, that FSANZ should also consider, either as part of this Review or any subsequent Proposal to amend the Code?
Appendix 2: Consultation questions Question 3.1.1: Do you agree, as a general principle, that food derived from organisms containing new pieces of DNA should be captured for pre-market safety assessment and approval? Should there be any exceptions to this general principle? Question 3.1.2: Should food from null segregant organisms be excluded from and approval? If yes, should that exclusion be conditional on specific criteria and what should those criteria be? If no, what are your specific safety concerns for food derived from null segregants? Question 3.1.3: Are foods from genome edited organisms likely to be the same in terms of risk to foods derived using chemical or radiation mutagenesis? If no, how are they different? If yes, would this apply to all derived food products or are there likely to be some foods that carry a greater risk and therefore warrant pre-market safety assessment and approval? Question 3.2: Are you aware of other techniques not currently addressed by this paper which have the potential to be used in the future for the development of food products? Should food derived from other techniques, such as DNA methylation, be subject to safety assessment and approval? Should food derived from other techniques, such as DNA methylation, be subject to pre-market safety assessment and approval? Question 3.3: Do you think a process-based definition is appropriate as a trigger for approval in the case of NBTs? If no, what other approaches could be used? If yes, how could a process-based approach be applied to NBTs? Are there any aspects of the current definitions that should be retained or remain applicable? Question 3.4: Are there other issues not mentioned in this paper, that FSANZ should also consider, either as part of this Review or any subsequent Proposal to amend the Code?
NBT%20Preliminary%20report.docx