New System of Food Control in Russia

  • Irina V. Ermakova
Conference paper
Part of the NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security book series (NAPSC)


Food safety is quite important for human health in all countries. Humanity has the uniform space and must take care about all parts of it. Pollution of one region leads to the same state of others regions through water, land, air, living organisms. The poor-quality or poisoned food products can pollute the territory and influence negatively on the environment. The food security is important, especially, in connection with the possibility of terrorist attacks. The Federal Service of control in sphere of protection of the rights of consumers was formed in Russia in 2004. This Service carries out the activity directly and through the territorial organizations in interaction with administrative structures in food control and inspection, namely in sanitary-epidemiological service, veterinary service, grain service, inspection of trade connections and standardization and certification. The control is carried out on the basis of laws. The law № 29-FZ concerns the quality and safety of foodstuff and how to control it. The law 134-FZ attracted the protection of the rights of legal persons and individual businessmen. The modification of the law №234-FZ about protection of the rights of consumers is connected with new food – GMOs. Great attention is paid to the safety of new food. Private companies also perform analysis of heavy metals, mycotoxins, radiation and the presence of bacteria, virus or genetically modified organisms. We would like to thank the group Pilot Study “Food chain security” for very important work concerning food safety in different countries. They help us to understand internal problems in Russia and to create the cooperation with other countries. All these steps are very important for the protection population from toxic food.


Food Safety Legal Person Genetically Modify Organism Standard Document State Registration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Altieri M.A. The myth of coexistence: why transgenic crops are not compatible with agroecologically based systems of production. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 25, 4, 2005, pp.361–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brake D.G. and Evenson D.P. A generational study of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans on mouse fetal, postnatal, pubertal and adult testicular development. Food Chemistry and Toxicology 42, 2004, pp.29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coghlan A. GM crop DNA found in human gut bugs. NewScientist. 2002.Google Scholar
  4. Ermakova I. Influence of genetically modified soya on the birth-weight and survival of rat pups// Proceedings "Epigenetics, Transgenic Plants and Risk Assessment", 2006. pp.41–48.Google Scholar
  5. Ermakova.IV. GM soybeans – revisiting a controversial format. Nature Biotechnology, 25(12), 2007, pp.1351–1354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ho M.W. and Tappeser B. Potential contributions of horizontal gene transfer to the transboundary movement of living modified organisms resulting from modern biotechnology. In Transboundary Movement of Living Modified Organisms Resulting from Modern Biotechnology: Issues and Opportunities for Policy-Makers (K.J. Mulongoy, ed.) International Academy of the Environment, Switzerland, 1997, pp.171–193.Google Scholar
  7. Kuznetcov V.V., Kulikov A.M., Mitrohin I.A. and Cidendambaev V.D. “Genetically modified organisms and biological safety” Ecos, 2004, pp.3–64.Google Scholar
  8. Mercer, D.K., Scott, K.P., Bruce-Johnson, W.A., Glover, L.A. and Flint, H.J. Fate of free DNA and transformation of oral bacterium Streptococcus gordonii DL1 plasmid DNA in human saliva. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,65,1999, pp.6–10.Google Scholar
  9. Malatesta M., Biggiogera M., Manuali E., Rocchi M.B.L., Baldelli B., Gazzanelli G: Fine structural analyses of pancreatic acinar cell nuclei from mice fed on GM soybean. European Journal of Histochemistry, 47, 2003, pp.385–388.Google Scholar
  10. Malatesta M., Caporalony C., Gavaudan S., Rocchi M.B.L., Tiberi C., Gazzanelli G. Ultrastructural, morphometrical and immunocytochemical analysis of hepatocyte nuclei from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. Cell Structure and Function, 27, 2002, pp.173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Official website:
  12. Pusztai A. Genetically Modified Foods: Are They a Risk to Human/Animal Health. Biotechnology: genetically modified organisms. 2001.Google Scholar
  13. Schubbert R., Lettmann C., Doerfler W. Ingested foreign (phage M13) DNA survives transiently in the gastrointestinal tract and enters the blood stream of mice. Molecules, Genes and Genetics, 242, 1994, pp.495–504.Google Scholar
  14. Schubbert R., Hohlweg U., Renz D., Doerfler W. On the fate of orally ingested foreign DNA in mice: chromosomal association and placental transmission in the fetus. Molecules, Genes and Genetics, 259, 1998, pp.569–576.Google Scholar
  15. Seralini G.E., Cellier D., Vendomois JS. New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 52(4), 2007, pp.596–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Traavik, T. Too Early May Be Too Late. Ecological Risks Associated with the Use of Naked DNA as a Biological Tool for Research, Production and Therapy (Norwegian), Report for the Directorate for Nature Research Tungasletta 2, 7005 Trondheim. English translation, 1999.Google Scholar
  17. Vecchio L., Cisterna B., Malatesta M., Martin T.E., Biggiogera B. Ultrastructural analysis of testes from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. European Journal of Histochemistry, 48, 2003, pp.449–453.Google Scholar
  18. Velimirov A., Binter C., Zentek J. Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice. Report, Forschungsberichte der Sektion IV, Band 3. Institut für Ernährung, and Forschungsinttitut für biologischen Landbau, Vienna, Austria, November 2008.Google Scholar
  19. Windels P., Taverniers I., Depicker A., Van Bockstaele E., De Loose M. Characterisation of the Roundup Ready soybean insert. European Food Research and Technology, 231, 2001, pp.107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. World Scientists Statement. Supplementary Information of the Hazards of Genetic Engineering Biotechnology. Third World Network. 2000.Google Scholar
  21. (World Scientists’ Statement 2000): Supplementary Information on the Hazards of Genetic Engineering BiotechnologyGoogle Scholar
  22. Website of The Federal Service of control in sphere of protection of the rights of consumers

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Irina V. Ermakova
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of RASInstitution of Russian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussian Federation

Personalised recommendations