Critical Scientists Switzerland (CSS) and the European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER) have published a scientific critique in response to the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina and the European Academies Science Advisory Council (EASAC) demanding in recent statements that the EU stops regulating 'genome-edited' plants.
Critical Scientists Switzerland (CSS) and the European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER) have analysed two statements by the German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina and the European Academies Science Advisory Council (EASAC) in which both called on the EU Commission to end the regulation of so-called ‘genome-edited’ organisms and also older transgenic genetically modified organisms (GMOs). ENSSER and CSS found both statements to be seriously lacking in scientific objectivity and rigour. The literature quoted by Leopoldina and EASAC was selected to support their preconceived conclusion. We list more than 200 relevant scientific publications which suggest another conclusion. 'Genome editing', just as much as the older transgenic techniques, demonstrably poses risks to the environment and human health. Moreover, the relative ease of use and low cost of CRISPR, the best-known and most widely used 'genome editing' tool, gives rise to a considerably higher potential for dual use, abuse and accidental misuse. The application of 'genome editing' as gene drives (which are intended to permanently modify, replace or eradicate whole populations or species in the wild) is an additional cause for great concern.