These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11924640)
1. Plans for more rigorous review of bioengineered foods. FDA Consum; 2000; 34(4):7. PubMed ID: 11924640 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. US calls for early data on transgenic crop safety. Check E Nature; 2002 Aug; 418(6898):571. PubMed ID: 12167819 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Labelling laws for transgenic food come into effect. Nelson L Nature; 2004 Apr; 428(6985):788. PubMed ID: 15103341 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Caution: may be harmless if swallowed. Nat Biotechnol; 2002 Aug; 20(8):753. PubMed ID: 12147982 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Two views of the emperor's new clones. Schubert D Nat Biotechnol; 2007 Mar; 25(3):282-3. PubMed ID: 17344873 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Food labels should state the benefits of GMOs. Righelato R Nature; 2002 Sep; 419(6905):337. PubMed ID: 12353008 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Europe gets tough on labelling genetically modified foodstuffs. Butler D Nature; 2002 Jul; 418(6894):114. PubMed ID: 12110851 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Beyond food and evil. Chen J Duke Law J; 2007 Apr; 56(6):1581-6. PubMed ID: 17679180 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The world according to Codex. Levy AR Altern Ther Health Med; 2005; 11(6):14-7. PubMed ID: 16320855 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. European Parliament vote encourages industry to proclaim green biotech. Hodgson J Nat Biotechnol; 2002 Aug; 20(8):756-7. PubMed ID: 12147985 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Strategies to evaluate the safety of bioengineered foods. Delaney B Int J Toxicol; 2007; 26(5):389-99. PubMed ID: 17963126 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cloned animals deemed safe to eat, but labeling issues loom. Fox JL Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Mar; 26(3):249-50. PubMed ID: 18327214 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Biotech crops' seal of safety does not convince skeptics. Keogh B J Natl Cancer Inst; 2012 Apr; 104(7):498-501. PubMed ID: 22440678 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. A risk-based classification scheme for genetically modified foods. I: Conceptual development. Chao E; Krewski D Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Dec; 52(3):208-22. PubMed ID: 18778747 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A risk-based classification scheme for genetically modified foods. II: Graded testing. Chao E; Krewski D Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Dec; 52(3):223-34. PubMed ID: 18768151 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Product development strategies for foods in the era of molecular biotechnology. Kondo JK; Johansen E Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek; 2002 Aug; 82(1-4):291-302. PubMed ID: 12369196 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A risk-based classification scheme for genetically modified foods. III: Evaluation using a panel of reference foods. Chao E; Krewski D Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Dec; 52(3):235-41. PubMed ID: 18765265 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. FDA not yet moved by biotech food critics. Fox JL Nat Biotechnol; 2000 Jan; 18(1):15. PubMed ID: 10625375 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]