People don't want GMO salmon
The GMO salmon discussion keeps going.
The pressure to the authorities is big since they take the decision to allow this fish to be sold as ordinary food to people.
Until now FDA - Food and Drug Administration (the agency within the U.S.A. Department of Health and Human Services responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation) still continue their negative answer.
The pressure to the authorities is big since they take the decision to allow this fish to be sold as ordinary food to people.
Until now FDA - Food and Drug Administration (the agency within the U.S.A. Department of Health and Human Services responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation) still continue their negative answer.
But we never now when this will turns out.
Here are some interesting facts about the discussion:
As we’ve noted before, agribusiness loves to tout the ostensible economic benefits of industrial food production, perpetually falling back on the old it’s-the-only-way-to-feed-the-growing-population-without-inducing-global-starvation-and-economic-catastrophe argument.
Of course, as I find myself pointing out ad nauseam, these economic benefits are illusory; the price of industrial food is artificially low because its production is subsidized by the government, and because it creates damages (e.g., environmental, human health, animal welfare, socioeconomic, etc.) that aren’t included in sticker prices at the grocery store.
As Clare Leschin-Hoar reported last week in an outstanding article on Grist, the USDA awarded $494,162 to the biotech corporation, AquaBounty, for the purpose of “research[ing] technologies that would render fish sterile to decrease the risk of gene flow from transgene fish.”
You should really read Clare’s post for all the details, but here’s the overview: for years, AquaBounty has been developing the genetically engineered “AquAdvantage salmon.” They used genes from Chinook salmon and ocean pout (kinda like an eel), creating a GE fish that can grow year round and reach market weight twice as fast as “standard salmon” (i.e., industry-speak for the kind that exists in the wild without genetic manipulation in a lab). AquaBounty is promoting AquAdvantage as the future of sustainable fish production (can you say, “greenwashing?”), and is fighting tooth-and-nail to get the FDA to approve the product for human consumption.
This article lays out some points why this particular fish can be unnecessary:
1: There are plenty of wild salmon
2: Farmed salmon is already pretty efficient, and getting more so without genetic engineering
3: There are fish that offer many of the advantages of the genetically modified salmon, with none of the risks
4: People don't seem to want it very much
Here are some interesting facts about the discussion:
As we’ve noted before, agribusiness loves to tout the ostensible economic benefits of industrial food production, perpetually falling back on the old it’s-the-only-way-to-feed-the-growing-population-without-inducing-global-starvation-and-economic-catastrophe argument.
Of course, as I find myself pointing out ad nauseam, these economic benefits are illusory; the price of industrial food is artificially low because its production is subsidized by the government, and because it creates damages (e.g., environmental, human health, animal welfare, socioeconomic, etc.) that aren’t included in sticker prices at the grocery store.
As Clare Leschin-Hoar reported last week in an outstanding article on Grist, the USDA awarded $494,162 to the biotech corporation, AquaBounty, for the purpose of “research[ing] technologies that would render fish sterile to decrease the risk of gene flow from transgene fish.”
You should really read Clare’s post for all the details, but here’s the overview: for years, AquaBounty has been developing the genetically engineered “AquAdvantage salmon.” They used genes from Chinook salmon and ocean pout (kinda like an eel), creating a GE fish that can grow year round and reach market weight twice as fast as “standard salmon” (i.e., industry-speak for the kind that exists in the wild without genetic manipulation in a lab). AquaBounty is promoting AquAdvantage as the future of sustainable fish production (can you say, “greenwashing?”), and is fighting tooth-and-nail to get the FDA to approve the product for human consumption.
This article lays out some points why this particular fish can be unnecessary:
1: There are plenty of wild salmon
2: Farmed salmon is already pretty efficient, and getting more so without genetic engineering
3: There are fish that offer many of the advantages of the genetically modified salmon, with none of the risks
4: People don't seem to want it very much
I like the last one: people don't want GMO salmon!
It says only about 36% of consumers would willingly eat genetically modified salmon if it were labeled as such.