ABSTRACT
We aim to discuss the main arguments involved in the debate on the scientificity of the Principle of Substantial Equivalence (PSE), which claims that GMOs are chemically equivalent to organisms selected by traditional breeding techniques and therefore do not require additional toxicological studies. We question the scientific character of the PSE, especially with regard to the chemical question itself. Indeed, the PSE is conceptually structured in the quantitative comparison between some chemical-biological components of the transgenic plant and those of the non-transgenic plant. In this sense, the proposed chemical analyses cannot by themselves assess the possible biochemical, toxicological and immunological effects of transgenic foods, since the principle restricts the analysis to the chemical, molecular and analytical composition of transgenics. This gives rise to the problem of the locus of scientific uncertainty, whether as an epistemological question or as a normative and moral issue.
KEYWORDS:
Substantial equivalence; GMO; Transgenics; Risks