Have you thought about eating a genetically modified animal?
No?
But may you will if you eat salmon.
By now, you’ve probably heard that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the first-ever genetically engineered animal for human consumption.
It’s an Atlantic salmon modified for fast growth with genes from two other edible fish, and it has been — and will undoubtedly continue to be — a lightning rod for all the issues associated with genetically modified foods.
There’s safety, there’s escape into the environment and there’s labeling: a trifecta of discord.
...
On both of those issues, there will always be some doubt. Safety can’t be proved (we can only infer it from absence of harm so far), and any containment system can fail.
So the questions aren’t “Is it safe?” and “Could they escape?”
The question is whether the risk in those two areas is outweighed by the benefits.
...
So let’s talk about the benefits.
According to AquaBounty, the advantages are that the fish reaches market weight in about half the time taken by conventional salmon and requires 25 percent less feed to get there.
If that’s true (and there’s no reason to suppose it isn’t), what we have here, finally, is a GMO that can benefit people and planet — unlike the other genetically engineered foods approved for use in the United States, which chiefly benefit farmers.
Growing healthful fish in less time, with less feed, is a win for humans (in the form of more affordable salmon) and environment (in the form of reduced feed requirements and less pressure on forage fish stocks).
Great!
But who needs more salmon in the world?
Me? You?...Well, maybe the people that already have kilos of salmon every year served in their plates which travels half planet and arrives by airplane directly to their supermarket shelf.
We do not need more salmon in the world and it is not because salmon is cheaper that poor people will eat better.
Food inequalities are only based in unbalance distribution, not in producing more and cheaper food.
I believe we have the right to decide what type of production we want to support.
There are not only environmental but also ethical issues important for some people.
We can keep developing more efficient ways to produce food but there are ethical limits we need to settle regarding to the life we impose to farmed animals.
So at least, we should know when we buy salmon if it is genetically modified or not.
But it will not be possible since FDA did not find any risk of eating GM salmon and they do not see the point in informing consumers!!!
This fish is not the same as any other fish...
The AquAdvantage salmon contains a growth hormone gene from the Chinook salmon and a genetic switch from the ocean pout, an eel-like creature, that keeps the transplanted gene continuously active, whereas the salmon’s own growth hormone gene is active only parts of the year.
The company has said the fish can grow to market weight in 18 to 20 months, compared with 28 to 36 months for conventionally farmed salmon.
And some critics from Consumers Union to the FDA decision are:
This assessment of a genetically engineered (GE) salmon is the first evaluation of a GE animal and will set a precedent for future approvals of GE animals.
FDA should be especially cognizant of the scientific quality of the data and the rigor of the analysis needed to do a proper safety assessment of GE animals in this case.
Unfortunately, the evidence of FDA’s evaluation of the AquAdvantage salmon suggests that FDA has set the bar very low.
There is sloppy science, small sample sizes (only 6 fish per group for the allergenicity study), questionable practices (manipulating IGF-1 data), and woefully inadequate analysis (a conclusion of growth hormone levels in the flesh, despite having no data at all on growth hormone levels due to use of insensitive test methodology).
This analysis does not conform to FDA standard for assessment of a New Animal Drug (NAD).
But may you will if you eat salmon.
By now, you’ve probably heard that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the first-ever genetically engineered animal for human consumption.
It’s an Atlantic salmon modified for fast growth with genes from two other edible fish, and it has been — and will undoubtedly continue to be — a lightning rod for all the issues associated with genetically modified foods.
There’s safety, there’s escape into the environment and there’s labeling: a trifecta of discord.
...
On both of those issues, there will always be some doubt. Safety can’t be proved (we can only infer it from absence of harm so far), and any containment system can fail.
So the questions aren’t “Is it safe?” and “Could they escape?”
The question is whether the risk in those two areas is outweighed by the benefits.
...
So let’s talk about the benefits.
According to AquaBounty, the advantages are that the fish reaches market weight in about half the time taken by conventional salmon and requires 25 percent less feed to get there.
If that’s true (and there’s no reason to suppose it isn’t), what we have here, finally, is a GMO that can benefit people and planet — unlike the other genetically engineered foods approved for use in the United States, which chiefly benefit farmers.
Growing healthful fish in less time, with less feed, is a win for humans (in the form of more affordable salmon) and environment (in the form of reduced feed requirements and less pressure on forage fish stocks).
Great!
But who needs more salmon in the world?
Me? You?...Well, maybe the people that already have kilos of salmon every year served in their plates which travels half planet and arrives by airplane directly to their supermarket shelf.
We do not need more salmon in the world and it is not because salmon is cheaper that poor people will eat better.
Food inequalities are only based in unbalance distribution, not in producing more and cheaper food.
I believe we have the right to decide what type of production we want to support.
There are not only environmental but also ethical issues important for some people.
We can keep developing more efficient ways to produce food but there are ethical limits we need to settle regarding to the life we impose to farmed animals.
So at least, we should know when we buy salmon if it is genetically modified or not.
But it will not be possible since FDA did not find any risk of eating GM salmon and they do not see the point in informing consumers!!!
This fish is not the same as any other fish...
The AquAdvantage salmon contains a growth hormone gene from the Chinook salmon and a genetic switch from the ocean pout, an eel-like creature, that keeps the transplanted gene continuously active, whereas the salmon’s own growth hormone gene is active only parts of the year.
The company has said the fish can grow to market weight in 18 to 20 months, compared with 28 to 36 months for conventionally farmed salmon.
And some critics from Consumers Union to the FDA decision are:
This assessment of a genetically engineered (GE) salmon is the first evaluation of a GE animal and will set a precedent for future approvals of GE animals.
FDA should be especially cognizant of the scientific quality of the data and the rigor of the analysis needed to do a proper safety assessment of GE animals in this case.
Unfortunately, the evidence of FDA’s evaluation of the AquAdvantage salmon suggests that FDA has set the bar very low.
There is sloppy science, small sample sizes (only 6 fish per group for the allergenicity study), questionable practices (manipulating IGF-1 data), and woefully inadequate analysis (a conclusion of growth hormone levels in the flesh, despite having no data at all on growth hormone levels due to use of insensitive test methodology).
This analysis does not conform to FDA standard for assessment of a New Animal Drug (NAD).