+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Developing U.S. oversight strategies for nanobiotechnology: learning from past oversight experiences



Developing U.S. oversight strategies for nanobiotechnology: learning from past oversight experiences



Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37(4): 688-705



The emergence of nanotechnology, and specifically nanobiotechnology, raises major oversight challenges. In the United States, government, industry, and researchers are debating what oversight approaches are most appropriate. Among the federal agencies already embroiled in discussion of oversight approaches are the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Agriculture (USDA), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and National Institutes of Health (NIH). All can learn from assessment of the successes and failures of past oversight efforts aimed at emerging technologies. This article reports on work funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) aimed at learning the lessons of past oversight efforts. The article offers insights that emerge from comparing five oversight case studies that examine oversight of genetically engineered organisms (GEOs) in the food supply, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, chemicals in the workplace, and gene therapy. Using quantitative and qualitative analysis, the authors present a new way of evaluating oversight.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 052540674

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 20122110

DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2009.00441.x


Related references

Recommendations for oversight of nanobiotechnology: dynamic oversight for complex and convergent technology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 13(4): 1345-1371, 2011

Introduction: The challenge of developing oversight approaches to nanobiotechnology. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 37(4): 543-545, 2010

Introduction: designing nanobiotechnology oversight. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 13(4): 1341-1343, 2011

Gene therapy oversight: lessons for nanobiotechnology. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37(4): 659-684, 2010

Does nanobiotechnology oversight present a uniquely complex challenge to interagency cooperation?. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 13(4): 1419-1425, 2011

Evaluating oversight of human drugs and medical devices: a case study of the FDA and implications for nanobiotechnology. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37(4): 598-624, 2010

Oversight mechanisms in public managed care programs: from little oversight to negotiations to shared decision-making. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration 22(2): 139-155, 2000

Improving protection for human research subjects: better oversight, not just more oversight. American Journal of Bioethics 8(11): 13-15, 2008

Designing Oversight for Nanomedicine Research in Human Subjects: Systematic Analysis of Exceptional Oversight for Emerging Technologies. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 13(4): 1449-1465, 2011

How can nanobiotechnology oversight advance science and industry: examples from environmental, health, and safety studies of nanoparticles (nano-EHS). Journal of Nanoparticle Research 13(4): 1373-1387, 2011

Regulatory oversight in developing nations. Nature Biotechnology 20(6): 547-548, 2002

Regulatory oversight of clinical trials in Africa: progress over the past 5 years. Vaccine 27(52): 7249-7252, 2010

Ethical oversight of research in developing countries. Irb 25(2): 1-10, 2003

The recombinant DNA advisory committee and oversight of human gene transfer Past and future. Gene Therapy 2(SUPPL 1): S39, 1995

An algorithm for the oversight of field trials in economically developing countries. Bio/Technology 13(9): 955-959, 1995