 Photo: AquAdvantage® Salmon in the background; a non-GMO Atlantic salmon of the same age in the foreground. In cooking, the process of clarification entails straining out extraneous muck from liquids so that they might be pure, clear and ideal for consumption. With this series on food terminology we're attempting to do the same. The United States' Food and Drug Administration is in the midst of public hearings to determine if it will approve AquaBounty Technologies' application for fish spawned from genetically engineered salmon eggs to be allowed for use as food. These "AquAdvantage® Salmon" grow into full-sized fish in half the time that it would take a regular salmon, and if approved, would become the first "transgenic" or genetically engineered animals to be approved for human consumption. It's a deeply fraught issue for both fans and foes of the technology, but stripping politics and propriety aside, here's what "genetically modified" actually means in the context of fish farming. Before now, genetic engineering has been used widely in agriculture to make crops resistant to pests and herbicides, in the development of microbes to produce pharmaceuticals for human and animal use, and in food to produce microorganisms used in baking, brewing and cheesemaking. While various organizations have been working to develop genetically modified animals, such as the University of Guelph's "Enviropig" - which more easily digests plant phosphorous, thus excreting less of it into the environment - AquAdvantage® Salmon would be the first to be approved by the FDA for use as food. The fish's rapid growth will be boosted by the injection of a combination of a growth gene (GH-coding sequences) from the Pacific Chinook salmon and genetic material (the AFP gene) from the ocean pout - a large, eel-like fish - into the fertilized eggs of Atlantic salmon, making the recombined DNA present in cells throughout the body of the fish. The Chinook gene promotes the growth to market size, and the pout gene allows the fish to grow in the winter as well as the summer. AquaBounty Technologies claims the resultant fish are reproductively sterile due to another genetic alteration - triploidy - that eliminates the possibility of interbreeding amongst themselves or with other native breeds, while maintaining protection over intellectual property. The company will only sell female eggs and raise the fish within contained, inland systems. However, despite these assurances, the FDA indicates that up to 5% of the eggs may indeed be fertile, and the company's claims in this regard are "potentially misleading." This analysis is entirely new ground for the FDA, and their Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee is employing the regulations they would to evaluate veterinary pharmaceuticals, rather those used for than food safety. According to Section 5 of the group's overview of this engineered Atlantic salmon, "That rDNA construct meets the definition of a 'drug' under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act" as "an article intended to alter the structure or function of the body of man or animal." Previously - What does "sustainable seafood" mean? Catch up on all of Eatocracy's GMO coverage. |
All who keep claimimg that people defending SOL are employees are wanting to believe that nonsense just so they can reinforce their own belief that their failures are a result of a scam and not their own inactivity. Folks it is very easy to research the owners of these web sites to see they are truly just SOL customers with desire and ambition and they realize the fastest route to failure is doing nothing. I am a pipefitter/welder by trade but for the last 6 years I have become a web master using several different shopping carts. I have experience using Prostores, Storesonline, X-cart, and Interspire. The best shopping cart program for me is Interspire but their customer support is very bad compared to SOL. SOL's shopping cart is not very Google friendly but no matter what the people tell you here, their customer support is better than any of the rest. You can call me an employee, I don't care, but you are just deluding your own mind. There are thousands of SOL web site owners who do not have the complaints as you see in this forum. I post in many forums and yes occassionally I make time to answer a few posts in here just to help keep the balance as much as I can. This forum is a collection of the most likely to fail at any business, online or off and some posts are not even worth answering. The folks who gripe about the "piece of crap" Ipod or that just went for a free meal are the lowest in here, If a person went to a sales seminar just for a free meal and cheap Ipod then you can rest assured that person has not the desire or will to attempt anything seriously. What a waste of time.
GET OVER IT EVERTHING IS GENETICALLY MODIFIED THESE DAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Nothing is sacred or pure. God save us. Not a chance. LOL
Transgenic Mice has allowed researchers to observe experimentally the roles of genes in development, physiology and disease. Transgenic mice has become a real human pathology model and their use has dramatically increased for the past two decades. Medical devices companies have also succeeded in developing state-of-the-art miniature equipments adapted to mice enabling researchers to maximize their project study.Get a Quote Now! Save Time & Money!
hi im jake.. and i'm addicted to.. comquats
I have seen alot of discussion about this and thought i would add my thoughts. Refering to the posts about early puberty is children. I thought that the period when you go through puberty is decided by the DNA. If i remember correctly DNA at times crosses-over changing the things around and changes the periods at which this hormonal outburst happens. I will research it and post my links later. Also im 17 and I find it funny how yall are "dirt-slinging" and yall are older then me. All people on here asked for was links to actual research. Do the research and post your links its not that hard if you try.
Also case reports would be helpful to add if you can find any.
Think about it, to get a drug approved they need to test if it gives you cancer or any other illness(plus what they are testing the salmon for and other engineered food), BUT, what about testing all this geneticly engineered FOOD?! not JUST the salmon, but the corn, pig, beef, or anything. not right.
Don't buy the crap food .....
Consumers beware !!!!!!!!
WAKE UP OUT THERE ...... Consumers beware !!!!!!!!
The FDA is just not protecting us .... WAKE UP OUT THERE ...... Consumers beware !!!!!!!!
The FDA may not require GE salmon to be labeled as such ....... hmmmmmmm ......makes you wonder why not ..... I mean if it is safe ...... WAKE UP OUT THERE ...... Consumers beware !!!!!!!!
I think this process that you are doing is a very different but good thing. The out put of this will be good.
At the end of the day – and although Monsanto has been research of mine for two decades, and they are only about profit-at-any-cost – there's a simple principle by which to assess and live:
1/ Can this do harm? Don't know – then wait, do more testing (of which precious little is done, because the FDA, the USDA, and even the Supreme Court has ex-Monsanto folks on it).
2/ Can this do harm? Yes. Then don't do it. Explore something else.
3/ Can this do harm? No, most definitely not. Then, full speed ahead.
It is the rush to profit that is responsible for almost everything negative and harmful, especially in terms of our food supply. BT crops do have an impact, and the research is out there – as long as you don't simply take Monsanto & its allies' word for it (unless you want to.)
What is known about the GM Salmon is that it was 'promised' it would never get into the wild, but it already has. If you look at the profit motive for 'accidentally' releasing them from the 'farm' you can see why it's being done. It doesn't matter to these monoliths if the natural salmon is killed (the GM salmon are not only larger, they are aggressive.) The balance of nature is possibly another risk, everything being interdependent.
And, in a letter written by Monsanto, back in the day when they destroyed Anniston, Alabama with their pcbs, it clearly states, "We cannot afford to lose even one penny of profit, not matter what."
There is enough food to feed the world. It's the way in which it is handled that causes food shortages. We commodify grains – look at the price of rice, which is the staple of many economies, and you can see what occurs.
A good discussion overall, albeit with the obligatory lapse into whose stupid or ignorant or whatever. Sad that we feel we have to attack in order to make a point. For me, that automatically puts one in a category of having already lost credibility; and it makes you sound like the corporate whores of congress, who spend all their time on their knees before the Monoliths like Monsanto.
Cheers.
starlink was recalled because the corn was violating regulations because they were mixing it with non gene modified corn
If you people want to eat GMO foods and feed them to your kids, go ahead. I will continue to eat organic labeled food which (hopefully) insures that there are no GE organisms in it. What I hope for is that the USDA will start to do what they have to do in Europe, that is LABEL these potentially dangerous foods as Genetically Modified! That way the people who care about their health and their kids health can avoid them. Problem is that MOST food on the grocery store shelves are GM and it would cause a general outrage once people start to see what they are feeding their kids.
If you don't think GMO foods are potentially unsafe, tell me about Starlink Corn. Why was it recalled? Why did people who ate it get sick? I thought it was safe! Oh, then they tried to ship it off to Africa to poison the hungry people over there! Nice.
What about the crop growers who choose not to use Monsanto GM soy beans and their fields get cross contaminated and are sued for hundreds of thousands of dollars for patent infringement bankrupting them at no fault of their own? That seems like a dangerous side effect of GMO foods. Patents on food? Not good.
Genetic Modification IS NOT THE SAME as natural selection, or cross breeding. These are natural processes. Splicing selected genes into a life form from other species is potentially unsafe and if allowed should be labeled! Let the people in the stores decide for themselves!
all you do to make this is put enzymes into the fish there is nothing wrong with the fish so please learn before you post it is just a really big fish
There is no reason for GMO foods,the body knows the difference and its dangerous! You people need to wake up and stop eating everything from a box,can,wrapper etc and get back to nature! Nature does not make mistakes!!!! WAKE UP!!!!!
I'm not a biologist by any means, but these fish are 'suffering' from triploidy. Eating it sounds dangerous. What are the chances these alterations are passed over into the human genome after consumption? Let's just say I'm not going to feed my pregnant wife anything that has triploidy.
KISS - keep it simple & stupid.
If the FDA allows us to eat Pacific Chinook salmon and ocean pout – a large eel-like fish; then if the FDA determine, through its normal procedures, the recombined DNAs species is safe, then what's the problem?
Why there exist so many fakking idiots?
http://bit.ly/twitterybs
I'm from Alaska and catch/eat King (Chinook) Salmon all the time, so eating another fish with copies of its genes dosen't really bother me. I am nervous about the 5% being fertile though, if these things ever got out to the ocean and were eating 100% all year long, what would happen to the natural food chain? Assuming they could gaurentee this was an imposibility I don't have a problem with them producing the product. I would NEVER eat a farmed fish but I'm not such an douche that I'd object to some one who can't get/afford natural salmon eating it.
bingo
AquaBounty is trying to pull the same "fast one" that Monsanto and others have pulled with regard the GM foods. The card that is played is that this is for our (the consumer's) benefit, so that we don't run out of food. The real card not being shown is that this is a move to turn a food product into intellectual property. That means that AquaBounty will be in a position to drive farm raised salmon out of business and will become the only "viable" source of this product. Sounds like a violation of anti trust law to me. The "science" behind this scam is just plain faulty. http://organicconnectmag.com/wp/2010/10/the-case-against-genetically-modified-salmon/
I am an avid fisherman and I wonder what this will do to the fishing industry. I believe that this is a waste of money/time but it is a capitalistic company who is more concerned about profit and market share than anything else. I don't really care about the scientific aspect. If scientists want to play around with anything then they should be working with engineers to create the most wonderful device of all time that has only been dreamed of in Sci-Fi, Star Trek's Replicator. World hunger-solved but alas this is just a pipe dream and by the time we can do that I'm sure the world will be engulfed in war and we will all be dead or struggling to survive. Maybe we should be concerned with Iran??? Not some silly fish I would never buy, I would rather catch my own and teach my children to do it as well. Sorry to all you eggheads that want people to spout out proof and journalistic articles. This is a comment forum and not your mental bullpen.
This issue has nothing to do with science or technology. It is about corporate agribusiness. I know that science has produced and will will produce an increasing accurate and detailed description of the universe around us. I know that engineers can use scientific knowledge to produce useful tools and artifacts. What I do NOT know is what this salmon really is.
If we have learned anything about corporate behavior based on our experiences with BP, Enron, Blackwater, Halliburton, HP, AIG, etc. it is this: unless a saintly federal regulator is holding a gun to the head of the CEO, every corporation will cook the books, lie to consumers, lie to regulators, lie to investors, lie to employees, fake test results, destroy deformed animals, conceal product defects, hide scientific results that are undesireable, and conceal harm to customers.
I trust science but not corporate science.
Corporate science is to science as a whorehouse is to an art museum.
LABEL IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Technology always has it's detractors.
The fact is ocean populations are dwindling each year from over fishing. This technology may or may not be safe, but something like this is needed to support peoples huge appetite for fish.
It's okay to be cautious of progress, but really all the dumb comments here seem to forget that we've been genetically manipulating our food sources for thousands of years, both plant and animal.
if you play with Nature, Nature will soon Extinct you!
Part of the end result will be these giant Atlantic Salmon, that don't spawn and die like like the Pacific Salmon, will monopolize the fish food and the regular size fish will have less food and eventually die out. Survival of the fittest and biggest. The other part is food sources are slowly being centralized in the hands of very few corporations. These corps. have been working on breeding giant non propagating foods sources for years. They will be the only source for food. You want to eat? Buy from them or starve
Epic.
Oh Mr. Norris! He can punch an air molecule into a fish then have it smoked with his icy glare.
Just wondering...without taking sides, and just making an observation – how many people willingly put drugs into their system, even new drugs, without much fear, yet quiver over eating some new food. I feel like half the people I know are taking something for various reasons. Is there much of a difference? Histeria can be soooo entertaining sometimes.
I'm sorry everyone, I just smoked like three joints and just played Resident Evil 5.
Greedy vultures down at Umbrella.
I have read every single post here. I regret to inform you all that each and every single one of you who posted before 7:20 PM EST is incorrect. Any opinions are also not valid or improperly justified.
You see, the founder of AquAdvantage, the original founder, not the corporate figurehead who clowns around today, goes by the name of Edward Persington, Edward was an up and coming geneticist whose motives and plan I will omit to spare you the drama and self pity. Before the transfer of ownership Persington, enacting a vengeful plan on essentially everyone, genetically altered more DNA than was published. One of these strands affecting a major brain function, controlling the production of certain hormones. These hormones, the ones publicly mentioned, much like Viagra® do shorten growth time and increase size. However, there is a deadly pathogen spawning implementation implemented that the host is immune to. However after consumption, human illness will follow. All this in an attempt to become a God among man.
In a piercing and heralding closing metaphor, I state that AquAdvantage is the non-fictional equivalent of Umbrella.
How do you fight a zombie fish? With a worm shotgun? I will be first in line for that battle!! HOORAH
Well I personally dont eat salmon so that wouldnt change anything for me.. but if genetically modified salmon means a quicker reproduction for salmon then why not ? prices will also probably be reduced because of the more larger amount of salmon
People have been "genetically modifying" plants and animals ever since prehistoric man selected and re-planted wheat with the fattest grain and bred livestock with the most milk or meat. DNA from our food is broken dowh into components during digestion. The DNA from genetically modified salmon will be just as nutricious as DNA from wild salmon. These salmon are MUCH safer to eat than hormone-fed cattle because the hormones are not completely broken down in the digestive tract. The biggest question here is whether the genetically modified salmon are a potential threat to their wild brethren.
For a fish to grow like that it has to eat more so it could take over if they get out....hehehe
@ All the people freaking out about "GMO food is making people fat!"
There is a difference between correlation and causation... Just because I went Scuba diving for the first time yesterday and someone I know got into a car crash doesn't mean that the two are related. Similarly, just because GMO foods are getting more common and at the same time people are getting fatter doesn't mean that there's a causation. People tend to see a problem first, then randomly blame it on whatever thing they can think of first. There are also a lot of other, more plausible reasons as to why people are fat now, like more fat in our diets to begin with... I mean, is it more likely that people who eat McDonalds a lot are fat because the food is GMO, or because its filled with fats and sugars?
Fascinating glimpse at the significant number of strongly opinionated but poorly informed. Not really worth trying to educate. Took years for most of the commonly educated to understand and accept other bits of science. I'm glad they won't be eating it as the price will be less expensive for us.
Coming from a doctor who makes more than most of the people posting here, you are a lewd jackass and I hope your money eats you from the inside out.
We should not have to be guinea pigs for the commercial industry to test out its genetically modified products on – including salmon. As if there aren't enough problems with mercury poisoning now we also have to wonder in what other ways can eating salmon shorter our life span or contribute to devastating health problems in 10, 20, 30 years. Personally I'd like to live out my life in health and happiness and not in a hospital bed strapped to monitors.
WOW! lol, I think im on to something here! Maybe we SHOULD genetically alter humans to be 2 ft tall. Instead of modifying the whole world so we have more to eat, make us smaller so we eat and use less. How cheap would cars be for a 2 ft tall person? They would certainly use less gas than the land barges we currently drive. We would use less trees to build a house that has 3 ft celings, neighborhood homesites could be way smaller. Maybe we are on to something here!
This is by far the best idea yet. Make people smaller. I love this!! All other posts, mine included are total garbage. You have put a smile on my face and proved that cynicism is the best form of entertainment.
Also, If they put the fish out there, then they should be labled, and let consumers decide. Even then it seems that it would be impossible to keep the fish seperate from the natural environment.
Bad idea to alter samon to grow faster, especially if you are using Growth hormones. If they grow faster then they will die faster. It starts a dangerous trend. When they inevitabley mix with the natural population we will have fish that grow faster and die faster. Also, bigger, faster growing fish will need to eat more. Whats next, will we grow all animals bigger and faster? What will they eat? Will humans eventually be modified to grow bigger and faster, better athletes, bigger muscles, to look better? What about having less diversity in the gene pool, it will all be suseptable to a cingle virus causing an epidemic. Why not make all humans and all animals much bigger, and grow much faster? Remember the large dinosauruses? Eventually the earth will not sustain us. Want to help world hunger? Then genetically engineer all humans to be half the size, we would eat less, live in smaller houses, drive smaller cars, wear smaller clothes, in in general we would impact the invironment less. Thats my 2c to think about.
Frankenfoods should be banned. Anyone who would release this crap into the environment is terrifyingly stupid. This is going to cross over into native salmon and other aquatic life with potentially disastrous results. It's Russian roulette with your environment and your food.
This is all about money, not food. Your dollar is your vote. Vote NO.
Why don't we just manage our natural fisheries better by polluting them less and not overfishing, and accept that some things will remain delicacies to be enjoyed in moderation? All of us would probably be healthier if we ate more vegetables and grains rather than feeding them to livestock anyway. But I'm frankly far more concerned about our ability to contain these fish in farms than anything else. We humans have a terrible track record of introducing damaging new species to the wild – anyone forget about Asian Carp or would it take a fishing trip in the Midwest to remind you? Great to hear about how well US fisheries are managed, but are we to believe that these won't be sold to fish farms in Asia and elsewhere which don't take the same precautions? I for one am not so desperate for salmon that I think this is a trade off which even remotely makes sense.
China will be all over this in a heartbeat. I say we put logos on the side of the fish. Start selling advertising space for Budweiser and Pfizer
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh They PUT INSECT GENES IN IT! NASTY! AND ITS AHNIALATING THE NATURAL SALMON WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
Poor cats. They'll probably be eating a lot of this stuff. A lot may also end up being used to feed farm animals. This could have an effect of the quality of the health and meat from those animals (not that the meat matters to me, I'm a new vegetarian).
If you make an animal grow twice as fast in an unatural way, is this necessarily good for the animals health? And there is an ethical question about allowing a species to have a normal lifespan. That GM salmon in the picture looks bloated and sad.
Why not make humans that grow to adult size by the time they're 8 or 9. Would we really consider those humans to be "substantially equivalent" to the non GE humans?
Have they let any of these GE salmon grow for 6 years or more? What would happen to them if they were allowed to life out a full lifespan?
Look at the size of that fish! The damn thing is overweight!! They feed em Big Macs...
Not gonna lie
trade marked animal subspecies is a little disturbing to me
There are pros and cons to this fish. I choose not to eat the salmon or feed it to my family. All I ask is that these fish are labeled. If America wants these fish the company will thrive, if they don't – the fish will go away.
The reality of this fish is we do not know the long term affects of consuming them or what kind of impact they will have on the environment. If these fish do make it into lakes and eat year round and grow this fast – it will have an impact on our ecosystem whether they can reproduce or not. Salmon are carnivores and will adapt their diet to their surroundings.
My concerns (more than stated here) outweigh my acceptance.
Interesting:
http://www.raincoastresearch.org/salmon-farming.htm
I am in profession where I see what others can't.The FDA should be split into 2 divisions with 1 for food and 1 for drugs.All the research should be done by Universities worldwide.The best, brightest and unbiased minds throughout the world.FDA inspectors have to deal with manufacturing in different countries.The people KNOW when the inspections are coming and adjust.After the inspectors leave it is back to the sloppy standards.Take a look at the heparin that came from China it was contaminated with chrondroitin and other chemicals and it my opinion it was either sheer stupidity or no accident.
FDA does not have the power and does not have the staff.Take a look at Johnson +Johnson once a fairly decent drug company when it was McNeil -Johnson now it is a joke.FDA sent them numerous warning letters for YEARS to clean it up.Johnson laughed at them because they have money.The wronged patients have been become collateral damage because 1 or 2 million dollars is nothing to them.
FDA board members change over the years and now their votes are public so you can tell who is on the take.Some political groups want deregulation of companies and for companies to police themselves. This never works and now we have created some big giant monsters in all industries.Stay Healthy more later...............................
I say I wouldn't eat it but we're already eating tons of genetically modified food not to mention hormone and anti-biotic laced stuff. So, realistically what difference does it make? It's probably all slowly killing us.
Only way out is to go back to living like the farms of the 1800's.
I grow my own potatoes. I have not purchased a store potato in almost a year now. I wish I could raise my own salmon too. Yum.
I am not interested in eating genetically modified salmon. The primary reason is because the genetic modification is not to make a fish with better health benefits, nor more disease resistant, nor to address the world food supply. The genetic modification is being made to increase profit. When significant $$$$ are involved, the integrity of the FDA becomes questionable. Politicians are useless when significant $$$$ is involved. It will probably be impossible to separate out if there are any adverse effects from eating this salmon. There are numerous things in our food supply that have been damaged in the name of the almighty dollar (not just because of genetic modification) and because of this, you cannot pinpoint which of these food items cause adverse effects. Who eats a diet of only salmon? This will become a needle in the haystack. I see no reason to eat genetic salmon when it is already known that farm raised salmon does not have the same health benefits as wild salmon. Also, the taste of farm raised salmon is different to me and not as good as wild salmon. Sustainability is restoring spawning grounds to keep the salmon population healthy and growing, not creating a new fish. The things I eat are focused on what tastes the best and try to be as healthy as possible (within reason). This is unlikely to meet my criteria for what I buy for my family.
I suspect Newt actually INVENTED System Dynamics and is too modest to tell us! LOL I fear the 'needle in the haystack' though. We are so new at this particular part of science (genetics). If the population of the world keeps deciding to Pray at Science's Altar with the almighty dollar, rather than participate in science themselves, Science's output will continue to be questionable in integrity.
Did you know that salmon eat newts? Get em salmon eat that Newt!!
also @ Griffemc, take a moment and compare how much study and regulation is governed by F.C.C. on your clock radio next to your bed. That body governs transmissions and radiant energies. Much study has been done over the last ... iono 100ish years or so. They still regulate electronics and electrical systems since they can affect you. (You are in some ways, an electrical system) If we find out in 100 years some new information about electronic systems ... well, we can like, turn them off LOL.
Now consider F.D.A.s regulation of Prescription Drug compounds. More than anything it acts in an advisory role. Most research is funded and provided by the producer of the compound itself, and then 'double checked' by F.D.A. if/when they have available time. Possibly dubious research? Could be , iono I'm no investigator. But again, 100 years down the road, you find that drug X kills more than it saves, and its production is halted.
Now you stick GMO into F.D.A.s jurisdiction. A business is going to create an entirely new type of organism, and by F.D.A.s advisory body is told that "GMO organism X1 is Substantially Equivalent to non-GMO organism X, so you need not test it more than you would test non-GMO organism X" (to paraphrase). GMO organism X1 is produced, self-replicates, and is accidentally or intentionally released into our planets environment. 100 years later it is found that GMO X1 not only contains the new 'grow faster' attribute, but also an attribute that since they grow faster, they die faster and more bacteria in the ocean becomes troublesome (bacteria thriving on all those new and ever abundant corpses)
HOW do you turn THAT off?
You would use a light switch and find out it doesn't work.
It sounds like the panel punted. They didn't actually take a vote, but suggested more evidence be gathered: "The Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee did not vote on the FDA's preliminary findings that the fish was safe for people to eat and did not pose a significant environmental risk. Instead, the panel offered a series of recommendations aimed at fleshing out information, including the possibility that the fish could trigger allergies or other health problems in some consumers." This could be a tactic to delay things until the story cools off a bit. But they saw all the data and I didn't so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. In theory I don't see how you could have an allergic reaction to this fish unless you were allergic to Chinook Salmon- and specifically for the Chinook Salmon peptide growth hormone. But I suppose they want experimental evidence instead of just relying on theory. Which is pretty hard to argue with.
I hear you Wraith, but as I've seen in some other studies, an organism can have no immune reaction to an isolated DNA, AND no immune reaction to a vegetable food, and STILL have an immune reaction (stress) when the same two are genetically combined. A pure case of A & B not = A+B.
Also, ending the analysis/testing considering ONLY impact on "Taste" "Toxicity" for humans seems hugely shortsighted. Aren't there many fish varieties in the ocean that in a local gender homogenous community will spontaneously sex change? (eek) Like " all girls is only fun for a while, NOW imma boy!"
I'm thinking back to some Newton quote something like this. I was but a child, standing at the shore of a Sea of Knowledge. I am afraid that in terms of genetic manipulation, we are nearer to the center of the continent, and the shore isn't yet visible.I hope researchers and developers in that area will at least find the water prior to pretending to wade in.
Any human who believes the "world's starving" couldn't be fed right now without GMO only needs to learn one thing. The reason the "world's starving" currently aren't fed is because it is not profitable.
Thank you!! I was having this same argument with some ego-maniacal jackass on another forum telling me that this fish will feed the world's hungry people. I have yet to see any of that evidence myself. Way to put it Eric!! Keep on going.
@ Griffemc all I see in your comment is an inability to identify with other humans. You would use some "world's starving" definition to make sure that YOU aren't the guinea pig the "new food" is tested on?
Griffemc
At some point or another, the world will need genetically modified food, due to overpopulation and the over-pollution of our environment. Should we not someday offer genetically modified food to the world's starving? There has to be a "first" step sometime so why not now?? If it's properly labeled and you have the option of not eating it what's the harm.
I'm gonna have to play Frankenfish's advocate. While I don't doubt that there may be a way to produce GMO crops and/or food animals that are 100% beneficial, and could help the "world's starving" as you call them(I call them humans btw) there is no evidence that any GMO producing business has in fact done much or ANY reaserch into long term or hidden effects. Rather, they label the GMO as 'Substantially Equivalent' and require no more testing of it than they do of its naturally derived 'cousin'. The GMO organism is equivalent enough (somehow) to NOT require testing, but at the exact same time its different enough (somehow) to allow it to be patented? Come on, pick a side FDA!
This is why people need to learn more science. The modification isn't really at all scary. A gene from a Pacific coast salmon has been inserted into Atlantic salmon. The gene simply amplifies growth–the Atlantic salmon grows like a Pacific one. There are no chemicals, no growth hormones, just amplified growth. It's still Atlantic salmon flesh that one would be eating. It would be in no way different than what is currently consumed. We cannot continue to feed people high quality protein if we do not learn to understand these matters. Educate yourselves! The only danger (a bad one, albeit) is that someone should steal the modified Salmon from Salmon farms and let them go in the Atlantic. That is what should be focused on–how to safeguard the natural population. I would feed the genetically modified salmon to my children without concern for their health.
Mrs. Goodell, I agree on you terms of being not as series as people may intake this, however on http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/201862.php it clearly states there is more information needed and has still not have been certified by the FDA. I personally also have a theory that brings along to this topic, I say that anything that seems to look good on the outside, usually holds something negative on the inside. For the fact the fish have not been tested when consumed, one does not know how it will interact with our bodies, and that the injected drug will not affect us. I also was interested when you said that the danger of letting one of these mutated fish being let out to the ocean. By letting that fish reproduce with other fish not only will it give the offspring the probability of being immune to the drug, but also the fact that we will alter the actual environment and its standing. Where no action comes without an effect, which have its toll on the Eco-system. my opinion is to not go on with this because all people are trying to do is produce mass amount of salmon with a cheap rate, yet charge about the same as if would have been
Brian how did you come up with your theory "that anything that seems to look good on the outside, usually holds something negative on the inside." To me, if something looks good it probably IS good. When you stated that your opinion is "to not go on with this because all people are trying to do is produce mass amount of salmon with a cheap rate, yet charge about the same as if would have been" it kind of confused me. If people are trying to produce a "mass amount of salmon with a cheep rate" then shouldn't they go on with modifying the salmon? The genetically modified salmon grow faster so it takes less time for them to be ready to consume. Therefore, with faster growing salmon wouldn't the prices drop? Also, because of the possible benefits, wouldn't it be a wise choice to at least try the project. If this same type of ingenuity could be applied to other species of fish or animals we would have a significant gain. However you are right on one thing "Where no action comes without an effect, which have its toll on the Eco-system." Due to the probable harms on the environment i think these fish should be released into a controlled environment for a while before they are put into the ocean for us to consume.
@Gregory Abboud & your reply to Brian
Brians' comment was not elegant in form, I will admit, but his inelegant comment caused you to show your true colors! He smells the rotten fish and YOU EAT IT! Brian has the ability to question, inside him, and I salute him.
However Greg Abboud, you did not pay attention to the fact, that if these salmon are released the will harm the eco-system in a negative way. The modified salmon have higher levels of an insulin-like growth hormone that could lead to a higher risk of cancer, according to the Times. However, at some point one will think, that it is just a desperate attempt to overcompensate for a struggling economy.Bringing in DNA from outside sources and injecting it into the salmon eggs may promote dangerous allergens or other defects that may affect ourselves or children baring mother.Despite the claim that genetically engineered salmon will have a positive effect on society, but as a consumer, we should be careful of what we put in ourselves. http://www.bellona.org/aquaculture/artikler/Genetic_effects,
I agree J Goodell, ALL people need to learn more science (myself and yourself included) there are nowhere NEAR enough people on this planet interested in science, and even farther from near enough FLOPS on computers available to analyze ALL pertinent data(in regard to genetic manipulation). We co-exist in a dynamic system, and the number of individuals who recognize that are few and far between. I see much of your 'shove forward' approach on this topic to be quite un-scientific. Unfortunately, many(most?) people view science from a pseudo-theistic angle. They Pray their dollars (In God We Trust) to the priest(science) and scream for results. I dont think it's the priests fault that he/she lets you in on what he has found (to date) and that you prod him into action. The fault is ours for not teaching more people about science.
@ J.Goodell you said "The modification isn't really at all scary. A gene from a Pacific coast salmon has been inserted into Atlantic salmon. The gene simply amplifies growth–the Atlantic salmon grows like a Pacific one. There are no chemicals, no growth hormones, just amplified growth. It's still Atlantic salmon flesh that one would be eating. It would be in no way different than what is currently consumed. We cannot continue to feed people high quality protein if we do not learn to understand these matters."
One thing I definitely understand is that the population that needs high quality protein desperately at the moment lives nowhere near any Atlantic or Pacific Salmon! So ... if you intend to offer "high-quality" protein to those who actually have a high need for it now, shouldn't you modify a fish that lives in closer physical proximity to, say, Africa? If you in fact understand that we live in a dynamic system and care about such things as transportation costs over time, and cost to keep fresh etc...? Why pick a Salmon? lol Your non-logic astounds me!
@Eric- "If you in fact understand that we live in a dynamic system and care about such things as transportation costs over time, and cost to keep fresh etc...? Why pick a Salmon? lol Your non-logic astounds me!" It appears you didn't read this press release: " . . .as a condition of approval they will be raised in land-based contained aquaculture systems . . ." "They can be grown economically closer to population centers, reducing the need for long distance transportation, a huge benefit to the environment."
"This is why people need to learn more science. The modification isn't really at all scary."
I can think of many other things it isn't really at all too. Such as needed, desired, sustainable, smart,proven to be safe to humans and w/e environment it will inhabit.(which you can't fool me into calling it's 'natural environment' LMAO)
Has anyone been to the supermarket lately? I see FAT PEOPLE....Do you see them actually reading an ingredients label?What is a serving size?
FAT...FATTER...FATTEST...................OBESITY........MORBID OBESITY----–>DEATH..................IBW what is that?
Thats cRAZY talk.......................America does not care as long as it tastes GOOD.....cya!
Well, Fatts, I'm sorry that you have such a blind spot for beauty. And I'm sorry you feel the need to perpetuate through your words, the myth that none of us read labels, or in fact do not care what they say. Shop at a local farmer's market instead of the supermarket, I understand they often have no walls, so if you feel fat-o-phobic, you can easily leave, AND you wont be exposed to the "Droolers in the Oreo isle"
I love Oreo cookies, especially when they are frozen!!
However, despite these assurances, the FDA indicates that up to 5% of the eggs may indeed be fertile, and the company's claims in this regard are "potentially misleading."
That, my friends, is where the **** hits the fan.
Parhelion
"However, despite these assurances, the FDA indicates that up to 5% of the eggs may indeed be fertile, and the company's claims in this regard are "potentially misleading."
That, my friends, is where the **** hits the fan."
Yeah, and did they mean 5% or was it a typo of 50%?
Genetically altered is injections with growth hormones, feed steroids, given antibiotics and so on. None of which cooks out of the food, it is just passed on through the food chain to us. Thus we have the real reasons for America's rise in Obesity and NO ONE in the medical field is Admitting it nor are the doctors condemning what is being done to our food causing our Obesity. This is a serious cause for HEALTH PROBLEMS that is being ignored. These corporations are genetically altering FRUITS, VEGETABLES, MEATS, CHICKEN, FISH. When they use Growth Hormones on Cattle, the dairy products made from the milk of those cows contains the same Growth Hormones. As far as hamburgers are concerned, a single beef burger is only clogging your arteries if it contains those Growth Hormones, the cheese is adding to the clogging if and only if the milk to make that cheese came from a Growth Hormone Cow! Remember, Vegetables DNA are also being altered now. That means the altering of the DNA does NOT stop at the vegetable but it goes all the way down the food chain, including to the HUMANS who eat it. Bon appetite.
Genetically altered is NOT "injections with growth hormones, feed steroids, give antibiotics and so on." Genetically altered means altering an organism's genome. This change can then be inherited by the organism's offspring. Most growth hormones (such as human growth hormone and the chinook growth hormone in this salmon) are small proteins and your digestive system completely digests them the same as any other protein. They do not get into your bloodstream unless you inject them. Insulin in a peptide hormone- if you know any diabetics you know they can't take insulin in pill form- they have to inject it. Your digestive system is also great at digestive DNA you consume. You simply don't incorporate carrot DNA into your genome when you eat carrots. I know you mean well, but many of the things you just wrote do not correspond to reality.
I just wonder why you need to nitpick Angie's Layman's explanation, and then forget the issue at hand :P Angie knows at least 2 things.1: Genetic modification DOES modify living organisms, which can be dangerous (or safe).2: No food label is allowed by law (in good ole USA anyhow) to even mention if its contents are genetically modified. I still dont understand the dichotomy in Substantial Equivalence. Its identical enough to require absolutely no testing over and above its unGMO counterpart, and YET its SOOOOOOOOO different, they can patent it. Hmmm.
Correcting major factual errors is not nitpicking. In fact it's the exact opposite. I thought I gave a pretty decent layman's explanation of genetic engineering. Genetic modification involves MODIFYING GENES. Feeding antibiotics to a cow does not change its genome. If you stop giving antibiotics to the cow and wait long enough, the antibiotic is completely metabolized and/or excreted. It does not permanently alter the cow or its offspring. That's a critical difference. The reason I'm bothering to post at all is that it seems many people don't understand terms such as "genetic modification". And people simply can't make good decisions about things they don't understand.
Point taken! now i dont know why I was nit picking you! LOL ( but I still uphold the somewhat undefineable 'spirit' of her comment though :P )
"wraithnot
@Eric- "If you in fact understand that we live in a dynamic system and care about such things as transportation costs over time, and cost to keep fresh etc...? Why pick a Salmon? lol Your non-logic astounds me!" It appears you didn't read this press release: " . . .as a condition of approval they will be raised in land-based contained aquaculture systems . . ." "They can be grown economically closer to population centers, reducing the need for long distance transportation, a huge benefit to the environment."
And have they considered that perhaps (as a dynamic system) the land that the aqua-sys is built on is in fact NOT suited for aquatic life? Again, why salmon.
An artificial fish, lives in an artificial mini-ocean-ish zone, artificially implanted on land unsuited to its life processes,eating artificial food, swimming thru artificially oxygenated water with ph artificially controlled, living an artificially abbreviated life cycle. Yes I have many reservations. Big cost to maintain, big stress on the arti-fish, hope the power doesnt go out for like 5 days (as in N/E US a few years back) Why add complication by building this?
Forget salmon. Who eats fish anyways!who eats healthy?....lets talk about CHEESEBURGERS............................YUM-YUM!!!! I am eating one now....I can feel my coronary arteries clogging .....CHEESEBURGER CHEESEBURGER CHEESEBURGER...Bill Murray loves them too!
Venison burgers are the best...
You have it wrong.....stuffed venison burgers. You put the cheese, ranch and bacon inside the burger not on top the meat...
It's not whether or not something is genetically modified, it's to what degree. Our pet dogs have been selectively breed for physical characteristics from wolves, our cats...the same. Human beings have long cross-breed vegetables, created mules from mating a horse and donkey. I don't think it's abnormal to expect this to occur. However, we need to ask what degree is the modification and is there REALLY any threat? I still have not seen anything to make me believe this is any worse than a tangelo...(tangerine/orange hybrid) or a border-collie...
"I understand that un-education about a subject can lead to fear of that subject however, we need to realize that the world is getting bigger, the population is getting bigger and we are not generating more agricultural land. As such we need to find ways to generate enough food for the world with diminishing resources to do so."
Speaking of un-education(sic) you might consider taking a course in basic logic. Your conclusion preceded by "As such" is not the only one supported by the foregoing premise. In fact, the world is not getting bigger, but the population is. Engineering food to support an already overpopulated earth is at best only a stop-gap measure and at worst the creation of a larger problem than the one we already understand and can address in more ways than the one you propose.
I agree...overpopulation is the core of nearly every social issue we deal with. Looks like Thomas Robert Malthus was right...
Oh my God....I will not eat this GM Super-Salmon I watch what I eat.I am on a very strict cleanse diet ....I am all muscle....
I watch what I eat too...I watch a whole plate of cheeseburgers disappear.....HAPPY CHEESEBURGER DAY!!..I am still celebrating...In fact I celebrate everyday 3 times a day....who eats healthy? 1.5 percent of the population thats who.....you bunch of health-freaks! Super-size ME...PHAT is in!!!!!! Oprah says it is okay to be FAT!
I hope they do this with cattle too! I envision SUPER-CHEESEBURGERS! You have to open your eyes and look around...The majority of Americans could care less about food and health no matter what CNN tells them..They want a pill or cosmetic surgery to take the lipids aways....Oprah "ran" a marathon.....I am not Fat I am big-boned!...HA-HA
They should ban farm raised fish to begin with. This should never happen.
Would an AquaBounty PR person on this board address this issue brought up in an earlier post, please:
"CNN: Photo: AquAdvantage® Salmon in the background; a non-GMO Atlantic salmon OF THE SAME AGE in the foreground.
AquAdvantage website: "As demonstrated in the growth chart above, the AquAdvantage® Salmon grow faster and reach mature size earlier than standard salmon, but they DO NOT GROW TO BE LARGER. Mature AAS are INDISTINGUISHABLE from their conventional counterparts." http://www.aquabounty.com/products/products-295.aspx "
The pic we can see with our own eyes shows a tremendous size difference. This stands in stark contrast to claims made on the AquaBounty web site. Why would AquaBounty misinform?
The fish in the photo are not mature. "OF THE SAME AGE" does not imply "Mature". The growth curve data on the company website has some issues (it looks like they ate both fish before they reached their maximal size and there are no error bars which implies this data is only from one fish of each type). But your statement: "The pic we can see with our own eyes shows a tremendous size difference. This stands in stark contrast to claims made on the AquaBounty web site." Is logically incorrect. While I'm not a PR person for AquaBounty (or any other corporation), I do consider myself a PR person for logic.
Hey watch my show on CNN on "how to pick the right escort with taxpayer money"
It may not be a good thing............. but not having it be legal with all the McFood on every corner? The percentage of people that said they wouldn't eat this ? but they'll happily go through the drive thru for poison? Americans just don't make much sense.
EXACTLY! People cannot handle the truth......Most of the people are goofing on the them...FATZ is concerned about super -salmon but eats whoppers and big macs.What a bunch of hypocrites!!!...Hey see all you "healthy eaters" in Hawaii for the Ironman Championship next month..........
Naw Brian if you take a moment and consider that EVERY human currently alive is motivated by the profit structure, it all makes perfect sense. Individuals are told over and over that McD is cheap! (dollah menu) McD is fast! What they are not told (since it is illegal to label food products as GMO) is that McD is GMOville lol.
Then their brain does its age old logic/emotion calculation of available data. (cheap + fast + honey do list + no toxicity data = quadruple quarter pounder yes please!)
And on the way to deliver the food to Honey, they stop at the bank, deposit their pay. Silly bank forgot AGAIN to remind its customers that without prior notice, it can effectively steal every electronic penny in your account, simply by turnin off the juice. Front door sign says "Welcome" ... not "Warning" lol. We get SOME of the positive info and little to none of the negative info on items that are profitable. be they Fish, Burgers, or Dollars.
Are we absolutely 100 percent sure that Lady Gaga has not eaten the Freak GM Super-Salmon? Lady Gaga has some catchy songs but she looks like a Super-Salmon and that is being polite! Poker-face or Salmon-Face????
At some point or another, the world will need genetically modified food, due to overpopulation and the over-pollution of our environment. Should we not someday offer genetically modified food to the world's starving? There has to be a "first" step sometime so why not now?? If it's properly labeled and you have the option of not eating it what's the harm.
You are missing the point. The corporation is fighting to NOT label this 'fish'.
I keep thinking of Jurassic Park... Yes, in theory, they should not breed and have been engineered to be sterile however; There is always some chance that this fish can mix with other populations... Remember the case on the devil-fish in DC? That was scary and at the same time the Cicadas had their cycle. It was like something out of a horror movie! Devil -fish AND LOCUSTS! EGADS!!
I think the fear is mostly that although yes, we do produce foods which have been genetically modified, this is a stepping-stone toward other opportunities for intentional "mutations" of the animal kingdom. Think, "The Island Of Dr. Moreau" people... That is enough to make anyones liver quiver despite the need for "alternative" food production.
*I'm referring to the fish evolving to self-procreate, like certain frogs when environmental conditions allowfor such behaviours.
Before you know it they will start growing like crazy just like in a SCIFI movie
I think I'll sit back and wait to see if people start turning into mutants or something from eating them first.
As a Nutritionist and having a Science background, I'm not sure how much of a health threat eating Genetically Modified Salmon would be. I doubt the fact that it is Genetically Modified will cause it to be unhealthy for us to eat, however, the fact that these fish will be farm raised is more of a concern. It has been scientifically proven that farm-raised fish are not as healthy for us to eat as the wild raised fish and may even pose health risks. Farm-raised fish are often fed antibiotics and growth hormones that are having a detrimental effect on our bodies. They are also not fed their natural diet, which leads to them not having the proper and healthy balance of fatty acids (omega3:6:9). Salmon not fed their normal diet will have a grayish colored flesh, so the farmers will then add food colorings to the feed to make the salmon flesh pink. I would also be concerned about what would happen if these fish got out into the wild. Their rapid growth could upset the balance of stream/ocean ecosystems. I know they say these "GM" fish would be sterile, but nature has a way of working around things like that. We need to focus on raising fish and animals in general in their natural and more healthy environments. Healthy and happy animals leads to healthy food for us.
I respect your point of view. The main problem is that there are too many people in the world to feed them all with fish and animals raised in their natural environment. And given that human beings have evolved to eat both meat and plants, I doubt you're going to turn everyone into a vegetarian. The most practical thing is to use technology to improve the yield of domesticated plants and animals until the world population stabilizes. I agree with both you (and Jurassic park) that nature finds a way and simply engineering these fish to be sterile isn't a very good safeguard. But at least according the documents the FDA released, making the fish sterile is one of four different measures they are taking to keep their fish from breeding with wild fish. As a rough guess I'd say the odds of all the different containment strategies being breached at once is similar to the odds of a meteorite hitting your house tomorrow. But that's just a rough guess.
More food does not equate to feeding people all over the world, it just equates to fatter people in the richest countries.
I wouldn't eat their freak fish for love or $. I hope the FDA is planning on labeling this crap stringently, because otherwise, I'm just crossing salmon off my shopping list entirely.
You've had too much coffee this morning.
shut the fuck up ! it's a good thing they're making these mother fucking fish! if i ever got ahold of one i'd let it into the wild so that it could kil the iother god damn fish. If you ask me the wild needs these super awesome fish
i don't have any problem with eating salmon from a fish farm, but i do have a problem with a handful of companies owning the world's food supply. ideally, i'd rather buy locally grown produce, etc. cooperatives simply cannot compete with corporations throwing around big money and cheap labor, inking distribution contracts with grocers, thus driving joe average farmer out of business. a genetically enhanced and steroid infused food supply is a bane self induced by corporate greed.
wow...the "fake" salmon looks way different from the real one...
why mess with the whole body? what we SHOULD do is test them on human cells taken from the scientist's (or, even better, the company's) family members and test the effects both short and long term that the salmon have on people. More so, we should be careful of what excactly we put IN the fish/foods. What's the most common (or it might NOT be, but most of my friends have it) alergy? Peanuts! and what do they like to put in some of their plants? peanut extracts. The least they can do is LABEL IT
This is so wrong! STOP the craziness of big companies making "making" our food not food anymore! Stand up people and just say NO, NO, NO!!!
I think that most people have chosen the "Not on your life" to answer to the survey because their eyes have been opened to how corrupt our government and corporations have become. Science is not the issue. People do not trust the scientists any more because there have been many "scientific" studies and trials that have been later shown to be fraudulent or flawed. How many drugs approved by the FDA have later been pulled off the market because they have caused great harm? Why is aspertame (nutrasweet) still being used in products when there is witness testimony that during the initial study, many of the lab animals died and were excluded from the study. Ongoing studies have linked aspartame to brain cancer. The public has become keenly aware that financial interests are at odds with science. Science has lost credibility as a result. The same people who work at the FDA used to work at Monsanto and other large corporations in the industry. The "revolving door" between the industry and the regulatory agencies has compromised the FDA's ability to objectively test products.
Since diet coke is my beverage of choice, I followed up on your claim that "Ongoing studies have linked aspartame to brain cancer". I'm sure you'll happy to learn that this has been debunked by none other than the National Cancer Institute: "A study of about half a million people, published in 2006, compared people who drank aspartame-containing beverages with those who did not. Results of the study showed that increasing levels of consumption were not associated with any risk of lymphomas, leukemias, or brain cancers in men or women." An amazing amount of false information gets spread on the internet. Please do truth a favor and correct anyone who makes the same erroneous statement about aspartame and cancer. Thanks!
I agree with Johnny Danger.
“set up human clinical trials using volunteers of genetically engineered scientists and their families, because I think they are so convinced of the safety of the products that they are creating and I’m sure they would very readily volunteer to become part of a human clinical trial.”-by New Zealand Parliament member Sue Kedgley.
If these foods are so harmless, why aren't they labeled to identify them? The companies responsible for the vast majority of these GM foods have, at best, a checkered history in their tests and disclosures. Many of these foods have already impacted our food safety. GM corn has had as negative impact on native varieties in Mexico. A study of lab rats fed on GM corn in England identified serious kidney and blood issues. The responsible megacorporation held these results secret because they felt it wasn't a result of the GM corn. One megacompany created a GM corn and recieved permission to do field tests after giving assurances that the field was protected from contaminating the rest of the fields from the GM corn. You guessed it, of course it contaminated the other fields and the test became an impact study on the other crops. There are many examples of corporate misbehavior, collusion, and corruption in GM approvals worldwide. Why should we trust anything these folks tell us? If they are so damned sure of the safety, let the executives and scientists stand open to criminal prosecution when their products begin harming the environment or the consumers. The prosecution should include the stripping of any wealth those individuals and their investors gained from using these foods. Otherwise you'll see them duck out with their ill gotten wealth and leave the injured with no recourse against the bankrupted shells left behind. These foods may be OK but some of the companies making them have showed themselves to be irresponsible. Time and again, corporate greed wins over corporate morality.
"A study of lab rats fed on GM corn in England identified serious kidney and blood issues" Are you referring to Spiroux de Vendômois et al., Int J Biol Sci 2009; 5:706-726? If so, I read that paper when someone posted it on slashdot. Basically a group of independent scientists reanalyzed some data from Monsanto trying to find something Monsanto missed. The had to slice and dice the data quite a bit to find any difference between any of the GM corn fed rats and control rats. This is the logical equivalent of saying "if we only look at small male rats born on a Tuesday, we see a difference. Otherwise we don't." The lead scientist even had this to say: "Dr. Vendômois and colleagues are quick to say their findings are merely “signs of toxicity rather than proofs of toxicity”; no mention of organ failure in rats is made in the article." Basically he Huffington Post blew things way out of proportion. And the incorrect assumptions are alive and well all over the internet. I'm pretty sure the results from this paper are statistical noise and will not repeat if they run the experiment again. That's the primary danger with data mining studies.
Everything is genetically modified one way or another. I have a large garden and collect many of my own seeds. Each year I pick several bean plants that are smallest bushes with the most long and strait beans. I then let them go to seed for next year. Over several years my beans plants produce more and are better quality than plants that I started with. What science is doing today, is simply speeding up the process. Eating them doesn't scare me. BUT...my beans won't grow wild and take over the whole garden. That would.
Personally I don't find the issue to be "is genetically modified food dangerous to our health?", rather the issue is one of quality and nutritional value. Take farmed salmon as a prime example (basically any salmon on the market called Atlantic Salmon is farmed). Farmed Atlantic Salmon does not contain any appreciable amount of healthy omega-3s, it is pumped full of antibiotics to fend off disease courtesy of its captive environment, is fed low grade food which among other things includes dye to make its flesh pink to look like salmon, the health risks associated with farmed salmon are potentially serious due to the types of chemicals that are found in them (high levels of PCB among others), and most importantly as a base product it doesn't even remotely taste good–unless you like the flavor of muddy aquarium. And I'm sure all of that applies to AquAdvantage® salmon as well. Any animal that is farmed in such a manner and that consumes low grade / low nutritional value grains in pellet form, rather than the foods it would in the wild, will produce a subpar end product that is incomparable to the real thing. If you feed a fish a low grade diet of soy and wheat it will taste just like that–flavorless. Having grown up consuming significant quantities of wild alaskan salmon the difference in flavor, texture, and smell is striking, not to mention the myriad of health benefits of eating wild vs. farmed. Farmed Atlantic salmon has been proven time and again to contain up to 10 times the contaminants of wild salmon, does not contain anywhere near the quantity of healthy omega-3s, does not taste as good, and is labelled as AVOID by the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood WATCH due to its negative health implications. I firmly believe that all of the above detractors of farmed Atlantic Salmon will also be applicable to this new genetically modified fish–a farmed product with mediocre nutritional value, poor flavor, and quite possibly negative health implications due to poor farming practices.
Cheap and abundant does not equal healthy. Look at America's current food crisis: a majority of what we eat is corn derived in some form. Corn fed to cattle and farmed animals, corn based vegetable oil, corn syrup, corn chips, corn everything. The corn derived low nutritional value of the processed food that we all eat everyday is killing us prematurely. The people in this world that live long healthy lives almost overwhelmingly eat nutritious healthy diets composed of regional fresh foods. The people in this world that are obese, have a myriad of health problems, and die young, all have diets composed of cheap, low grade, nutritionally lacking, high sugar foods consumed in vast quantities.
Smarten up people! Nutritional value of a food is what counts for your health, and the flavor and texture of the food is what counts for your gastronomic enjoyment. Bigger is often not better, cheaper is rarely healthier. A genetically modified fish that grows twice as fast as the real deal and is farmed in a swimming pool is only masquerading as the real thing. Don't be fooled. If it tastes like crap, is proven to not be very nutritious, and most likely contains high levels of chemical contaminant... why eat it? But I guess if you enjoy your overwhelmingly corn based happy meal then by all means go ahead and enjoy your low grade unhealthy food: AquAdvantage® or farmed Atlantic Salmon.
Have the entities who want to sell this fish contribute a significant amount of money up front plus a decent % of profits to and "escrow" to handle any issues that may crop up down the road. Health issues aren't what I'm really addressing with that as I doubt those won't be the biggest issue, but more along the lines of their claim that these fish will not be able to reproduce in any way. If there is one of these fish that is able to reproduce then the who experiment fails... We need more than their word to protect us.
Unless I'm completely crazy, the big question should not be whether this food is dangerous to eat, but whether the modified fish will be dangerous to the ecology/environment. Afterall, if I kill this fish, then cook it, then eat it...the genetic tampering is not going to affect me. Our digestive system does not absorb DNA, so it isn't as if we are going to suddenly take on strange new characteristics...we are going to digest the fish and turn it into to it's base compounds/elements, just like we do with everything else we eat.
On the other hand, will this fish's increased size and aggressiveness cause it to push out the local indigenous species? Will it change the overall balance of nature when it eventually escapes to the wild, something you all HAVE to know will happen sooner or later. It seems like we are playing too many games with nature without understanding the long term consequences.
well said. That's what I was getting at in my post.
Science /Math
2+2=4 but somehow – smart gene say 2+2=100 somehow science borrow 96 somehow to inject it into salmon to become 100. Wow cool – Now, what happen when people eat it?
I think Cow – have a lot of MAD Cow disease – Chicken have a lot of chicken disease -. I don't think we seen this when our great great grand parent age.... I think god want big salmon – he created it already. Food for thought!
Well – I don't like genetic stuff – who know – what will alter in human when we eat that funky gene alter by crazy human. Cancer my increase a big fold – just my take...F-D-Crazy-Human – try to make crazy thing....
Beware – Sterile or not, "Nature will find a way!"
I would like to place a little context into this debate. It would be one gene, or possibly two that would be altered. That's it. Nothing more. Geneticists cannot replace entire swaths of the genome in mammalian cells. Every time a gene is altered it must be bred through numerous generations to ensure germ-line transmission and characterized to ensure proper placement and development. So given that it is likely a single gene being altered, we can begin to speculate about the consequences from both a dietary and developmental standpoint in terms of consumption and its effects on humans. The production of a greater amount of a gene that is already present within an animal, that is made with the same animo acids, same sugars, and is encoded by a DNA sequence consisting of the four nucleotides present within all animals is while interesting highly unlikely to cause any harm to anything, including the animal with this specific, yes specific, genetic change. No previously undiscovered amino acids, sugars, nucleotides will be introduced, so nothing the body has not already seen before. The sequence of amino acids might differ, but the amino acids themselves are the same. This is not a dismissal or trivialization of the real concerns people have about GM foods, its just stating several facts about GMO's and plausible speculation based on what is known. This brings us to a discussion of how introducing this animal into a given population and potentially by accident into the wild can alter local ecosystems. There are many interesting facets to the topic of GM foods. This one is especially prominent with crops. Cows, not so much. But it is a valid concern. The FDA is charged with determining whether new products like GMO's and GM-foods are fit for human consumption, meaning they are safe to eat. There is no reason currently that suggests they are not safe. However, this is also no evidence that each and every single GMO/GM-food will be safe or will not represent a threat to local ecosystems is released into the wild. So saftey concerns are valid for each GMO/GM-food, and it is good to have robust discussion. Fear-mongering is not ok. Frankenfish headlines do a disservice to journalists as a group of professions. And it is possible to genetically modify through epigenetic modifications your genes through diet, eating wholly organic and mother-nature produced foods that have never been touched by humans. So tone down the fear on this.
You can't honestly answer the question raised by this story. Would you eat it depends on the taste of the fish. The price. And of course food safety.
Anyone who has studied food knows that grains, fruits and farm animals have been grown and bread to produce desired characteristics. We need adequate food supplies for our future. This is an alternative, but a lot depends on those points I've raised.
Ha, i learn more from the comments that follow then the article in the first place. Thank you everyone! ;)
Most of what Elizabeth Cohen and her staff of flunkies write about and how the article is written is a JOKE. I always enjoy the comments they crack me up on my lunch hour.I think CNN wants the hits and does not care about accuracy.
Nonsense. We've been eating genetically-altered food for centuries..Corn, cattle, wheat, tomatoes, etc...None of these exist in nature in the forms we use. Chickens and cattle are fed steroids to make them grow faster, larger, lay more eggs, or give more milk. Veggies have been modified to make them more pest-resistant, larger, more colorful, or ripen faster.
So, what's the big deal with the salmon? The only difference is that that now, we know how to modify genes directly, instead of using selective-breeding. It's more precise and consistent. Other than that, it's not much more different than what we've been doing all along. Dpmestic cattle in Africa have never replaced Cape Buffalo. Chickens have never replaced any wild birds. Tomatoes have never 'gotten loose' into the environment and replaced Sumac (a closely related species).
When you remove all the hype, and politics, it's just agriculture. Nothing we haven't already been doing for over 5000 years.
Joel must work for a biotech industry. Note to Joel: what humans have been doing for centuries, i.e., hybridizing, is NOT the same as BIOTECH where industry takes genetic material from another species, attaches it to a virus, gene gun blasts it into the cells of a host plant and then reproduces it for seed. Not the same JOEL.
Every time my gorgeous girlfriend begs "eat me," I tell her that genetically modified salmon doesn't taste good! :)
I want to see what the effects on humans and other wildlife are if these fish are consumed. They claim that these fish are sterile, but even the FDA says that 5% of the eggs could be fertile.... that sounds (please excuse the pun) fishy to me. I wouldn't be agenst introduceing them into the wild as long as we have difinitive proof that they won't cause massive harm to the ecosystem with effects such as pulling a locust sworm and wipeing out the given food of another spiecies altogether.
The worse of all the genetically altered food is that we are already eating it and dont know it because its not labeled as such. We are not even given a choice in the matter since there is no label telling you your buying food with genetically altered ingredients.
I would love the option of not buying this junk. I guess we just wont be buying salmon along with processed foods and most everything. If its not whole and organic its not worth it. And of course you have to have money to buy healthy foods. Healthy food isn't for the lower income people. They can stay sick on the processed cheap garbage.
Its all wrong. Our food is toxic trash. Its not even food anymore.
I live by the Ocean and catch my own fish. That fish just looks like a freak but with more people over populating the earth we may need just need frankien fish so long as it healthy and Raised without a chance of mixing with native species
Freak it! I am going to marry KEISHA. Everyone is invited.
Where the danger lies with this is the same with GMO crops. The company owns the rights to the GMO product. So, lets say the fish by some accident gets lose in a river and breeds with other fish. The company owns the rights to the new fish with the gene in them. Yes you can catch the for sport but, you cant reproduce them for sale or distribution. Just think of all the fish hatcheries that stock lakes and streams suddenly getting a call from a lawyer and being told to shut down or pay up in court. This is what is happening to farmers all over the world that try to produce their own seed for next years crop, only to find out the seed is contaminated with GMO from some company that is now taking the farm in a lawsuit. Lets hope some company doesn't get a pattent on air!
I really prefer to look at primary documents instead of reading the random nonsense many people spew on internet message boards. So I encourage you to do a search for the FDA document entitled UCM224760. I learned all sorts of things from this document that the main stream media completely mangled. If you at least skim this, you'll see the company is only seeking approval to grow these salmon in "land-based culture"- i.e. artificial tanks far from the salmon's natural habitat. They are also using "redundant containment measures". They were probably forced by the FDA to do this. But nonetheless they are agreeing to do all of this. And I imagine they will lose their approval if any of their fish escape into the wild and interbreed. This is a very different situation than genetically engineered crop species. So I find your premise of lawyers suing innocent fish farmers because their fish contain this engineered gene from this salmon extremely unlikely.
@Heather: Stop being ridiculous. The fact that they would make money isn't a bad thing. The reason they make money is because the product (fish) is cheaper to produce this way. That will make it cheaper for the consumer too. This is how economics works in a democratic, capitalist country
I sincerely hope that people realize this is going to be the trend in the coming decades. Our population is still rising at rapid rates and in order to keep our current diets these transitions are gong to occur as "Lone" said.
To those complaining about how wrong this is or are linking it to disease in some way applications of this process are currently being used in up to 80% of our corn products in the United States (including high fructose corn syrup) to increase crop yield and to make crops more pest and weather resistant.
I personally don't want them altering salmon! They don't know what the consequences will be. They just want to make more money. This isn't managing a resource. Will it be like corn and be the dominate gene? Then there won't be any natural salmon? I don't want them screwing around with our food period. Then they will own it and everyone who eats it will pay a premium. Stop it already.....
Your ignorance is offensive
Reading some of these responses is like reading the "scientific" results from the internal studies of the companies producing this mess.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are employees of Cargill and the like assigned to swaying public opinion in such ways. They certainly spend enough money on lobbyists...
An earlier commenter had it right; it all boils down to the economy, stupid. These "farmers" need to see their profit margins grow, and they will execute any degree of science to fulfill that goal. The FDA is an understaffed and largely impotent organization that is not only unable to fully evaluate all the matters presented them, but it is an organization specifically structured to cater to the larger corporations responsible for this stuff.
But forget all that. While we're at it, forget the scientific results of this testing as well. Consumers have a right to know how their food is produced. The growing number of consumers who actively choose a natural diet should be able to live that lifestyle without a corporation undermining that goal. If these salmon are produced, there should be a clear label indicating their origins and raising. When corporate America lobbies against that information availability (as they are now), they infringe on my rights, and THAT's the government's job to prevent.
Most other countries have seemed to figure this out, but so long as these Factory Farms spend millions on their lobbying of Capitol Hill, I'm in serious doubt of what my "freedoms" actually mean.
The FDA may well cater to large companies- I can't really say since I work for neither the FDA nor a large company. I'd never heard of AquaBounty before this story broke, but at least according to their website they are a tiny company hoping to commercialize technology developed by academic scientists at two universities in Canada. The dream of many a researcher slaving away in academic labs all over the world is to develop something that makes a difference in people's live's. Otherwise they work their whole careers to produce words on a page in some obscure journal no one reads. So after these guys finally get something to work and slogging through 15 years of back and forth with the FDA, they elicit all sorts of hysterical comments including: "Gene Transfer. In other words the potential for alteration of the human gene sequence leading to unintended consequences. For instance it is being found that the puberty age in the United States has been dropping leading to girls developing breasts as early as the age of 7 and 10 year old boys standing 6 feet tall.". I still can't believe someone actually wrote something that indicates such profound ignorance. But I digress. If you want to encourage people to actually invent and create things to improve humanity, please show them at least a little respect. It's fine to kick the tires and make sure their new creation won't cause more harm than good. And by all means label things clearly so people know what they're buying. But 15 years of research for approval? And people still say more research is needed? Do they also advocate discarding potentially dangerous cell phones and computers? Or moving back into nice cozy caves and wear nothing but animal pelts?
how many FDA appoved products are linked to many diseases cancers and or disorders, too many to mention, I am totally against anything cloned or genetically modified, just the government finding ways of controlling each industry, as we speak scientists are creating cloned meat for human consumption, in labs for human consumption, what happens to the millions of people who make a living in the meat industry.... they dont care about anything but our money, I wont support it in any form, and I dont even eat seafood, next they will be doing it with beef and pork.
How come nobody talks about the over consumption of fish around the world and the dwindling population of fish in the sea. A lot of people here are talking high and tall about God and Nature when their suggestion is to keep eating the unsustainable fish we have left. Pathetic
Get used to it. Static or declining arable land + ever increasing populations = need for boosted foods. That or expect Walmart to become the size of a 7-11 because it's sole product will be nutrient pastes.
My vote is Frankinfish!
What we need is genetically altered politicians in Washington. Inject them with intelligent DNA that last for four years with an added chromosome that will make them self-destruct when becoming corrupt. Patten that!
Soylent Green here we come
Regarding Genetically Modified food, I will not put this type of food into my body. Our FDA thinks a lot of these are safe and time will tell down the road if they are safe at the expense of our health. A lot of allergy and other health problems could be the result of these and other foods. I think there should be labeling required as in Europe. It is illegal to sell such food without labeling in stores in Europe and let the people choose what they want in their body. My father was an avid fly fisherman and always caught his Trout in streams and this tasted so good. This more about greed making money, then let us know about what is in our food.
There has never been a fish farming operation that has not had a release of fish into the environment. throughout the range of Atlantic salmon anywhere where there are salmon farms there are declining runs or runs that have disapiered. This GM fish could be the end of wild Atlantic salmion in the UK, Norway, Canada and the US.
The end of hunger. USA delivers. I just think it needs to be first given to countries suffering from hunger. People lives could be saved while FDA can study its effect on humans. As far as I know trout do not live in hunger stricken places.
And if anyone says it is cruel, then ask the hungry, the sht they eat is far worst then any possible side effect from salmon :-)
dare you to disagree
Oh h3ll NO! if they approve this – its WAR!
Overact much Yosemite Sam?
I am willing to bet the FDA will approve the product. In addition, they will issue patten rights as Monsanto corners the market on corn seed. In addition as with most genetically altered food in the US it will not be properly disclosed to consumers as "genetically altered" leaving consumers ignorant as to what they are purchasing. Spin the wheel and take a big bite. It's about as honest as congress voting themselves raises by secret ballot. Only in America.
ever seen a fish with 3 eyes? Fiiish..and it looks delicious
But we don't care about survival. We care about eating them.
WHY do salmons only produce growth hormone 6 months out of 12 ?? May be the "rest" is essential to their survival !!!!
These days the FDA is seeming less like Food and Drug Administration and more like Fish Drug Administration.
As we all know (some of ya don't?) wild caught salmons taste better than fertilizer-grown, farm harvested salmons and then they're also healthier (without chemical fertilization) for people to eat than the ones grown in aquafarm.. This gives me a certain perspective, though it might be somewhat different analogy: Any fish, or crops, farm-raised animals for human consumption seem less in quality, and less desirable for us to eat than wildly existent ones. I prefer pork meat and veggies, etc that're organically grown with less use of pesticide $ growth hormones, and i even prefer wildly caught turkey, fish, wild hog..than organically grown ones.. So, why'd those salmon harvesting industries attempt to use genetic modification of salmon eggs to expediate growth cycle of salmon synthetically, just to make this great food source more widely available to people, and maximize their profits? Isn't farm raised salmons as in natural cycle enough for us to do with? After this genetic alteration, what' d be the next then?
Instead of increase of natural produce by artificial way, we should preserve our natural food resources as they're in nature: water, soil, mountain..
Do we have to take up a collection to start an agency that will protect us from things that make it past the FDA? Seems like it.
I love fish. If the new salmon are happy about it, then I am all for it. The problem is that the normal salmon might be jealous. It's a tough call.
are you being serious...?
The FDA is so bought off...
Larger fish are not necessarily healthy fish...they are probably sicker fish. Look at humans that eat genetically modified corn. The quality of their lives is poor. They are inflamed because their body doesn't recognize that corn as food. These fish probably can't reproduce...why are we creating a sick fish for human consumption? It's just not a good idea. STOP IT!
They probably can't even reproduce...so they would have to be bought from some company...that profits from things like this.
Better idea: clean the environment so healthy salmon can make it back to where they were born so they can spawn more successfully than they currently are.
They are making them sick so they gain weight faster. Then trying to feed them to us.
Why are we genetically modifying FISH to grow faster? Should we not be concentrating on modifying HUMANS to live longer?
KFAT, We are making steps to prolong human life and it is called Stem Cell Research.
Ughhh. Even after reading this article, which most posters clearly didn't, people seem to have some comic book understanding of "genetically modified." It means that beneficial traits have been introduced through breeding. "Genetic modification" is just the trendy term for concepts that have been used for decades in farming and animal breeding but have been recently improved by an advanced understanding of genes. It doesn't involve some evil scientist twirling his mustache while he hooks fish up to electrodes or spawns deadly clones. Eating it won't poison you. It won't alter your DNA or give you super powers. It just makes food cheaper and easier to produce. Grow up, get a clue, and start worrying about important things.
You might need an update. These are not healthy fish.
Maybeben, I agree with you that it seems that many of the readers have been reading too many science fiction comic books. I noticed that people are treating GMO and hormone drugs as the same thing. Hormones are introduced to the body (via food or injection) to enhance the growth of the animals. This hormones WILL STAY IN THE FAT AND LIVER TISSUES AND WHEN EATEN IS PASSED TO THE HUMAN CONSUMER. The result is documented like early development of male and female plus OBESITY. These process is done for economic purposes – sell meat at affordable price. Research on the marginalized population and you will be surprised of very high percentage of obesity. GMO is modifying the genetic sequence of a plant or animal. If animal and plant genes can affect us, we would have grown leaves in our ears and tails in our donkey by now. Every plant and animal have genes and what the biochemist and genetic engineers are doing are just tweaking this genes to make them grow faster and bigger. The world have been eating genetically modified products and nobody had a side effect from it. One of the blogger was right GMO of plant and animals is the way to feed the fast growing population of this planet. In my book I call it evolution.
What makes them think this "Frankenfish" will be any better than introduced species such as the Asian Carp. Increasing the size of a fish more rapidly could cause it to require a greater amount of nutrients. This could be detrimental to the health of the waters these fish could frequent. Modified crops are one thing, but I really don't want to eat modified fish just because someone got way to big-headed about playing God. There is still no telling what the effect of such a fish will have once it is consumed on us or the environment. I for one hope the FDA rules against the Frankenfish.
We have been genetically altering our beef, pork, chicken and turkey for at least three decades, possibly longer. These animals today look nothing like their ancestors from the 1940's and 1950's. In addition we have pump them full of growth hormones and antibiotics, due to the confined space they are raised in. a farmer
While we have genetically improved animal food-stock in order to make the food more appealing to people through specialized breeding programs, most of the animal food we eat is less likely to be genetically altered as provided with antibiotics for health. The research has been there, but as the article said, this would be the first vertebrate which would essentially be a GMO.
Unless there is something concrete to suggest it's unsafe for consumption, I'm not worried about it. This isn't much different from what happens naturally in nature. The difference is that humans are doing it in a lab, rather than nature doing in the wild.
Actually, there's a gigantic difference. These fish haven't been 'bred' – where humans isolate desirable traits that already exist in the animals genetic code, they've been engineered. A genetic sequence from an entirely different species is forced into the animals genetic code. The resulting animal could never be created by nature. It now exists outside the normal chain of evolutionary checks and balances. Once released into the wild – and they will escape – there will be nothing to control them form out competing every other natural species in the wild.
And the argument that 'Oh, they're all sterile so they can't reproduce in the wild,' has been proven wrong so many times, I'm stunned they still try to pass that off on us. Even engineered species mutate, and the most likely mutation will be that they can start reproducing.
My wife and I have a summer home on Northern Vancouver Island in an isolated fishing village (Quatsino). Our neighbor works for a fish farm located about 10 miles up the sound. For won't touch the fish. He feeds them and adds the food coloring to give them the pink texture, but won't eat them himself. He tells me the fish just swim in a circle in the nets their entire lives and the flesh is soft and gray if they don't feed them the artificial coloring. To get the flesh firm, they then starve the fish for 3 weeks before harvesting. What ever happened to catching wild fish. Hats off to Alaska that has made salmon farming illegal. They are real stewards of their wild fish stocks and it has paid off. But the bottom line is that millions don't care where their food comes from because they have not the self worth to care for their bodies. If it tastes good and is cheap they will eat it. Their blood is on their own heads, along with a shortened life.
The FDA has become a complete joke. They can't approve corporations' toxic crap fast enough. They don't care who they kill as long as the corporate bribes keep on rolling.
Might want to research the concept of DNA crossover.
"What are the impacts of genetically modified organisms?
While not all impacts have been fully researched, specific aspects have been documented. Genetically modified organisms are theorized to reduce production costs due to reduced chemical and mechanical needs in planting, maintenance, and harvest. Conceivably, this savings could in turn be passed on to the consumer. The most obvious benefits to consumers are the nutrition implications. The biotechnology of gene splicing allows for the opportunity of creating plants that will produce food that is more nutrient dense. This is the case with a product termed “Golden Rice,” which contains beta carotene, a source of vitamin A and iron. Rice is a dietary staple in most developing countries. These are the same countries that suffer from high rates of childhood blindness and maternal anemia. Iron and vitamin A have been identified to prevent or treat maternal anemia and blindness, respectively. Research efforts are underway to identify other ways to increase efficiency and productivity of our food sources, thus allowing us to prevent diseases and feed the growing population as well."
Smith, Nick. April 13, 2000. “Seeds of Opportunity: An Assessment of the Benefits, Safety, and Oversight of Plant Genomics and Agriculture Biotechnology.” For the One Hundred and Sixth Congress Second Session.
I will continue to do research on this and question the benefits. Everything is genetically altered, I think it is a great thing that man has come to the point where there is an understanding of how genetics works and how it can be altered. In the right hands of those who want to help humanity, it can be a powerful tool. It is time for mankind to take responsibility for our future and stop leaving it up to an system of "faith" that "god" will take care of everything....this "god" that so many believe in is nothing more than a way to not be accountable for what happens. Don't eat the GMOs and don't give them to your children, and don't come crying when my kid is healthier and more intelligent than your kid.
that normal salmon doesn't look adult size. anyone agree?
Regardless of whether it's adult or not, it's being compared w/a GMO salmon of the same age. Whether they're both 10 days old or 100 years old, the relative comparison stands.
Edwin, did you know that part of FDA's decision is going to be NOT to allow labelling of GM fish as such? Check out http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html
There is already hormones in all kinds of things we eat..that's why we have 8 and 9 year old girls with breasts. I don't need bio or chem engineered food. We already have hot house tomatos, potatoes, peppers. We have beef and chicken with hormones.
Enough already. I will eat tuna till I die, FDA is just a GUIDE, we have to take into consideration all aspects of any kind of food we put into our mouths. Ask questions, where DID this beef/chicken/fish come from?
Otherwise, we will be in the hospital with an unknown new cancer they have to find to cure.
No thanks, just give me a taco and a fish.
I cannot take anymore.
We are in the process of stripping the oceans of edible fish. More than 70% are already gone. If this creates large fish faster, why should it be banned? Why not instead label it genetically altered (or enhanced) fish? That way, those of you who won't eat it can still avoid it, but those of us who are too poor to eat 'normal' salmon can still buy some.
The FDA is not exactly a bastion of perfect decisions, it is true, but the fact of the matter is that these genes are extremely unlikely to produce compounds in the salmon that are absent in the other (edible) species. Thus, they will not create toxins, nor carcinogens - they will simply make bigger fish that mature early. Will they taste as good? I don't know, but that is hardly a reason to ban their consumption.
Consider the fact that beef we eat is fed mixes that contain amazing combinations of chemicals - antibiotics, hormones, and more - and yet people here are complaining about fish genes. I understand the fear of unknown chemicals and tinkering, but this change will not kill or harm you, especially if you choose not to eat it. Let the rest of us eat it, and that way maybe there will still be 'organic' fish available for you to eat in 30 years.
CNN: Photo: AquAdvantage® Salmon in the background; a non-GMO Atlantic salmon OF THE SAME AGE in the foreground.
AquAdvantage website: "As demonstrated in the growth chart above, the AquAdvantage® Salmon grow faster and reach mature size earlier than standard salmon, but they DO NOT GROW TO BE LARGER. Mature AAS are INDISTINGUISHABLE from their conventional counterparts." http://www.aquabounty.com/products/products-295.aspx
Well, well, someone must be flat out LYING, then?
I am amazed at the number of posts in support of GE Salmon on this blog. Please disclose your affiliation with Aquabounty or your corporate affiliation before stating your position.
I am a consumer with no financial gain or loss associated with my position and my position is simple – I REQUIRE proper labeling. If the FDA approves, let the consumers decide.
Unfortunately FDA will not require the fish to be labelled as GM. Check out http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html and spread the word. We've got to save the day like the Indians did.
If the salmon would be sterile, how would the company produce the salmon- by cloning? I am assuming that they are not going to inject the DNA to the fertilized eggs every time they need to produce the salmon.
A few years ago I started to react badly to eating farm raised fish. With some I sneeze and cough uncontrollably until I take benadril . With others I vomit within moments of eating the fish. I grew up on the north pacific and ate fish my whole life with no bad effects. now I can not eat most fish. I suspect it is some sort of human tinkering on the fish farms. I try to eat organic and local grown food now. Watch Food Inc if you trust the FDA and the food industry. We need to stand up and take back control of what we feed ourselves and our children.
I am sorry to hear that you suffered the consequences already. Your story should force people to think twice about this. Check out http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html
It is really about growth isn't it? With a growing population you can create a growing economy and with a growing economy you get increasing personal wealth, listen to any politician, they all preach growth to a better life. Then comes the irony, in order to feed a population that is out growing it's food supply you have to create food sources that are not of nature. That is where our world is right now. It is possible the people who eat frankenfish salmon will see no side effects but maybe their grandchildren or great grandchildren will suffer from the genetic tinkering. Human evolution doesn't run on a fast time line but with the right amount of tinkering with the food supply maybe scientists can speed up nature.
I also worry about the fish interbreeding with wild fish as the article states a small percentage of the eggs may be fertile. I also distrust what big companies tell me. When they say, dont worry....I think asian carp
Food has been genetically modified for many decades now, all over the world.
It is in your refrigerator RIGHT NOW.
How else can all the people have all this variety of fresh food, all year round available and it doesn't go bad within just a few days.
For starters, attempt to grow your own vegetables and learn how long and how much effort it takes to grow real food and what it really tastes like and its natural size.
And forget about the silly labels. Not everything that is actually in the foods, is documented on the labels.
Duh...
It is the saddest commentary on America that the FDA labels cannot be trusted.
Check out http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html
Irresponsible journalism.
My thoughts exactly. Read a good response to this article at
http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html
Question to wrathnot.
Thank you for reply on hormone "Excesses".
You might know why the "nutrient" companies sell the human growth hormone for oral consumption? Thanx.
I'd suggest being really skeptical about taking human growth hormone as an oral supplement. Supplements are generally not regulated by the FDA and they can say pretty much anything short of a specific medical claim. I did find a reference to: "The third option available is natural hgh releasers which are mostly vitamins and taken in tablet form. They work by helping pituitary gland to create it's own hgh." This didn't look like a very reliable website so I'd urge caution. But this is at least plausible.
Thanks,
But my question was about efficacy of hormones taken orally. You said that "Your digestive system breaks down proteins into their constituent chemicals- the only way to get such a peptide hormone into your bloodstream is to inject it." So, hgh "additive" would be ineffective. Besides marketing lies there should be some reasons for selling hgh "nutrient".
I am going to eat the HECK out of this fish when it gets to market. I know what it is, how it got that way, and where it comes from.
Dave,
You are welcome, it's a free country. Bon appétit.
Dave – do yourself a favor and read this before you eat the salmon:
http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html
The reason we have antibiotic resistant bacteria is because we invented antibiotics. Before antibiotics, people would die horrible deaths from simple infections. Now the vast majority of previously fatal infections can be easily treated by popping a pill. I would definitely consider that an improvement on nature!
This was supposed to be a reply to Mon in MA's comment: "..hello antibiotic resistant bacteria and patent owned food! Yeah .. we soooo improve on nature....". Must have hit the wrong button . . .
I believe people should appreciate what nature, or God, gave us.I wouldn't eat this. Everything humans have manipulated – wheat,corn,milk,cows,etc.- makes it harder for the liver to identify and filter, hard to digest, causes allergic reactions, weight gain, candida.Most people are sick from the food they eat and they don't even realize it.IF the FDA goes ahead with approval they better label it! I would bring a law suit if ever I ate it and didn't know!!!!!
you probably have GMO products in your kitchen right now...but they don't have to label, do they? X(
Unfortunately not everything is labelled as expected and GM-salmon will not be labelled either. Check out the complexities that CNN hasnt talked about but NPR has
http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html
Label it. Whether it's based in a gut feeling or something all polished up and peer reviewed, people have their opinions on these fish. I don't know which side is right, but given the diversity and strength of opinions, the only thing to do is label the fish as what they are and let people make their decision. Some people will buy it, some people won't. There's money in "faster and cheaper" and there's a market for "fair and honest," regardless of the accuracy of those labels. Mark the fish and let the people purchase what they please.
What we should do is make sure that the corporation that promises that this is safe is financially liable for the eradication of any escaped incredible hulks. They claim it's safe; if they're confident they can accept responsibility for the cleanup. They said nuclear power was safe, look at chernobyl (and Indian country); they said offshore drilling was safe, look at the gulf. I don't believe everything they're saying, but if they want to sign something ironclad, there is a market for this product. At least we're not likely to ever have to bail them out...
I completely agree- people should be able to know what's in their food. The trick will be in what the label says. I think "Genetically modified organism" would be a useless label since every domesticated plant or animal has had their genome's modified by many generations of selective breeding. For this salmon, a label that says something like "this salmon contains genetic material from chinook salmon and artic pout" seems pretty reasonable. Far more reasonable than banning this fish completely and taking away my freedom of choice because some people fear the unknown.
Don't any of you understand that that this is just a more efficient way of doing what;s been going on for 100's of years? Instead of taking the time to breed these traits into plants and animals scientists can now expedite the process through gene splicing. The same thing happens in nature through selective breeding. It's also one of the processes of natural selection, which will also be the end of civilization if the religious right is successful in their drive to turn the American public into a bunch of ignorant religious zealots.
we've been polluting the earth for hundreds of years, should we just keep doing it? We've been killing off tigers for thousands of years, should we just keep killing? JUST because we've been doing it for a long time does not mean it's the right thing to do. Don't you understand? We're using it the wrong way! This could be a major leap forward into helping those in need but instead, they just want to make cash. That's what this is all about. For those of you wondering why they put a claim on it? So they can sue innocent people's asses out of every cent they have because they are a big ass company that can do what ever they please. The science is important! but the companies just want money. And come on, who doesn't right? :|
Yeah Mike.. the key word being Natural ... if you have to manipulate it .. well then it's not natural.. meaning nature will not allow the changes you are trying to force on it.. hence the 'manipulation' word. If you try and breed a cat and a rabbit.. welll it just will not work.. 'nature' won't allow it.. however if you start splicing genes and artificially manipulating cells.. well then you will force that mutation on the world. ... well then nature will rebel.. ...hello antibiotic resistant bacteria and patent owned food! Yeah .. we soooo improve on nature....
Mike, read "Growth hormone" article in Wikipedia, section "Excesses."
Why? The fish will have elevated level of the hormone, and you will eat it.
Can you be sure that nether you or your children won't have: type 2 diabetes, acromegaly, or pituitary gigantism, etc?
Please read the first sentence of that article. The part where it says "protein-based peptide hormone". Your digestive system breaks down proteins into their constituent chemicals- the only way to get such a peptide hormone into your bloodstream is to inject it. Insulin is also a peptide hormone- that's why diabetics have to inject it rather than simply pop a pill. The only way you get "Excesses" of growth hormone are if your body makes too much or you inject it. And I would strongly recommend against injecting a salmon (genetically altered or otherwise) into your blood stream.
as long as it tastes like chicken :o)
The problem with Frankenfish is, where's the limit? Once we say yes to Frankenfish, it will be used to justify every other GMO that a lab creates. Don't bother mentioning the GMO plants, we know about them. They say these fish are sterile.........go ahead and believe everything you read. 5% fertile eggs from a billion pounds of fish is a LOT of fertile eggs. They said they will all be female.....b.s., they say they'll grown in inland tanks.......so what. The birds will carry the eggs anywhere they want. Instead of tougher regulations on fishing, educating the stupid consumer, and cleaning up the oceans, let's just create a crutch in a lab somewhere.
Dont people realize that we are all geneticallly modified organisms. Just look to meiosis for the proof. Recombination and random alignment. All the differences in the world arise from this wonder of DNA combination and replication. We are simply helping speed along this naturally occuring process. Yes we are changing the animal and the nature of the game but in no way does it make it unsafe. More people need to educate themselves befroe jumping to rash conclusions.
Ben – I think you need some education. Try your luck at
http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html
Genetic engineering involves designing artificial constructs to cross species barriers and to invade genomes. In other words, it enhances horizontal gene transfer – the direct transfer of genetic material to unrelated species. The artificial constructs or transgenic DNA typically contain genetic material from bacteria, viruses and other genetic parasites that cause diseases as well as antibiotic resistance genes that make infectious diseases untreatable. Horizontal transfer of transgenic DNA has the potential, among other things, to create new viruses and bacteria that cause diseases and spread drug and antibiotic resistance genes among pathogens. There is an urgent need to establish effective regulatory oversight to prevent the escape and release of these dangerous constructs into the environment, and to consider whether some of the most dangerous experiments should be allowed to continue at all.
You seem to have a decent understanding of modern genetic engineering techniques. Which is why I'm surprised that you don't know that there is actually an agency that does just what you propose- it's called the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee and they've been around since October 7, 1974. I also noticed that your comments include "typically" and "has the potential". But you don't address any of the specifics of the particular salmon this story is about.
Hey, wraithnot,
I wonder if the "Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee" can interfere with this potentially?, probably?, possibly? harmful fish?
@Alex>63yo – I assume this has already gone through the RAC since it's advanced to this stage. You usually have to get through the "unlikely to whipe out all human life on the planet" test prior to the "is it safe to eat test". But I don't know for certain that the RAC has already given its approval.
ur all retards
Do we need one more agression to our bodies?
ummm...our bodies are built a specific way, and YES they can tolerate SOME things, (lol, sry i use caps a lot i just like to put emphasis on things i can't italicize) but we have our limits...out bodies are still not fully adapted to modern day life. We're just moving too far forward too fast. If we push ourselves too far bad things happen. (not like they already have)
Please put this comment section on the top of the page. Since the FDA is holding hearings that means they waiting to see how much money they can collect under the table from PACs and lobbyistst. Don't worry this crap will be on the market unlabeled in no time they have a lot of illegal money to get rid of. Screw the American public and thier safety this is big money for the FDA to line thier pockets. Another crooked deal goes sailing thru. Bet on it. What a joke FDA what a laugh what a shame what a sham!. What a rats nest Washington DC must be. Make them start labeling GMO'S
Maybe I don't completely understand how the FDA functions. But I'm pretty sure they can't accept contributions from PACs. I think you're confusing a government agency with elected officials and/or corporations.
The FDA can study the short term effects of eating GMO food all they want. There can be long term side effects that don't show up in your body until years later or until you have consumed enough off it. I have read some of the comment on here and Yes man has been helping nature in modifying our food sources but helping nature select the strong and altering the DNA code are two very different things. Man has been playing genetic for along time a lot longer then we have been told but to say this fish is safe to eat because know one dies when they took a byte is naive at best. A long term study has to be done!
"Yes man has been helping nature in modifying our food sources but helping nature select the strong and altering the DNA code are two very different things."
No. They aren't. And the fact that you don't realize that is at the heart of the debate here. There is no altering of the DNA code, at least not in any way that is different from selective breeding in any way that is relevant to this discussion.
I will NEVER eat altered food, like beans, corn, milk, bananas (get it?), beef, tomatoes, .........
I have no problem with genetically-engineered food; I trust (and hope) that the FDA will determine if this new fish is safe to eat. Where I do have a problem, however, is that companies can claim intellectual property for their genetic creations. If you alter nature, it's still nature, and you shouldn't be allowed to claim ownership. If these super-fish ever cross-breed into the wild (and it will inevitably happen at some point), this company will be able to sue local fishermen for "stealing" their creation, and many hardworking Americans will have their lives destroyed. Sound ridiculous? Look what Mansanto has done with their crop seeds....
They will not all be STERILE. And some will get into the environment by accident or deliberately. I believe this will happen. And it will be tragic.
but maybe some of us out here just simply do not want to eat "geneticly engineered" food....I would not trust it.
So, I think we have a right to some alternative, like natural fish that God placed on this earth, in their unaltered state.
Then quit eating because 'genetic engineering' has been going on for 150 years. Go back to 6th grade.
Is this not the same FDA that approved Vioxx? The same FDA that has approved numerous drugs that have been taken off the shelves over the years?
OH MY GOD I HATE THESE PEOPLE! They don’t give a ding dong dang about the fish; all they want is an easy way to get the fish to our dinner plates at minimal cost! Instead of trying to repopulate the NORMAL fishies, they want to make a NEW breed of SUPER fish that, if introduced into the wild, will eventually wipe out the normal fish. And it’s not just fish! It’s also tomatoes, grains, even some cows! Look what they’ve done to the chickens! The poor things can’t even stand up because they’re chests are too big! And WHO bred them to be like that? The same big fat company. They don’t care that these animals have LIVES that they FEEL PAIN, they’re treated like poop! And even if they did make it humane there’s still the question of the effects on people! We are used to consuming NORMAL food; these chemicals in this certain mix are unknown to our bodies. Some people have serious allergic reactions whereas some people walk off scot-free! And all those people who say it can cure world hunger, it sure as heck can! But where is all this food going? Right onto OUR plates! Not the kids in third world countries, US! It goes right onto our plates and then into the trash! If we shipped it to the places that NEEDED it, there would be no world hunger! But this technology is being used for cheap, effective ways to make us consumers “happy”. What I’m trying to say is, until we discover a way to engineer things without ANY threat WHAT SO EVER of it getting into the wild, ACTUALL FACTUAL PROOF that there is NO harm to ANY ONE who eats these foods, that at LEAST HALF of it is going to somewhere that NEEDS it, and that they LABEL IT, I am sticking to REAL food. I cannot stress the labeling ENOUGH. If they don’t label it it’s obvious they want to sneak it into our foods! You’re right! We DON’T know what we’re eating because they want to hide it from us! They KNOW a lot of people don’t WANT to eat it so they try to force it into our homes.
Take a deep breath. And please consider that if your standards of "without ANY threat WHAT SO EVER" and "ACTUALL FACTUAL PROOF that there is NO harm to ANY ONE" applied to anything that could impact human health, then I suggest you give away your cell phone. People have raised concerns over the radiation from cell phones causing harm. No one has found any real evidence of this, but it can't be ruled out to your standards of proof. If you live above ground, I also suggest that you relocate to a bunker since it is quite possible that a meteorite could hit your house tonight. It's not very likely. But it can't be completely ruled out either.
yeah yeah i know...i just got worked up...my overall opinion is that the least they can do is label what does and doesn't have it so that i can know what's in my food.
1. If you don't like it, grow your own food.
Oh, that's right, we, as a society, decided years ago(hundreds), to live in subdivisions without available land and purchase our food.
2. Let's be concerned about GMO animals–why??
We have been eating GMO plants for atleast 10 yrs. That is correct–genetically modified corn, soy etc. So all of you nature nuts feeding your kids soy milk have been pumping them full of GMO soy. I wonder what has happened to those phytoestrogens under genetically modified conditions (probably nothing, but let's worry anyway because we have nothing else to do).
3. Genetically modified crops were approved quickly with out regard to nature. Now these GMO crops are cross breeding with "weeds" and causing problems with successful invasive weed control. Animals are much easier to control. The aquabounty fish do raise some concern with only 95% success in tetraploidy, but still more successful than plants and likely to be raised in sealed ocean cages. Failures can be monitored, controlled and addressed accordingly. Plants on the other hand, just breed sending their gametes into the air–no control whatsoever.
Just my 2cents–grow a garden, hunt, fish, and gather your own food or quit your bitchn' and starve.
or a clue.
This is a perfect example of a discussion that most of America can't intelligently participate in due to the efforts of the Republican party and the Religious Right in the dumbing down of America. This is no different than what has been going on since Mendel started working with creating hybrid peas. Get a grip!
The level of modification by selective breeding is quite a bit smaller. You can get better results from a population that has large numbers of repetitive genes (Dogs are one example). When you start taking DNA from one species and inserting it into another, you can get drastic results. Take a snip from the peanut and put it in a fish. You may get a very tasty fish, but it might also kill people with an allergy.
Take a snip of human DNA and put it in a fish, you may get a fish that can carry human diseases. Put a bunch more copies of a gene that regulates growth hormone levels, you could get super fish that kill off all the competition, then give the people who eat them cancer.
The main concern for gene-altered foods is producing homogeneous populations that can become susceptible to catastrophe – wiping out the food supply.
Genetic diversity is a good thing. Lets try to keep some of it.
There is a HUGE difference between selective breeding and gene manipulation! ONE can be patented.. the other can not.. ask the farmers who are trying to grow soy beans and get sued because of blow over pollination from Monsanto's 'patented protected, genetically altered' soybeans! The are in constant litigation that the farmers are 'stealing' their patent protected "PRODUCT" by allowing their normal soy beans to be pollinated by their protected product. You really thing the Salmons will be different... FOOLS!
Both can be patented, Mom. Check out U.S. Patent No. 7,795,508.
Again, what is going on with the Monsanto litigation is a problem that has nothing to do with the modified soybeans themselves. In some cases, the people being sued are people who (allegedly) intentionally violated the conditions under which the seeds were sold. Who the bad guy there? If you say Monsanto, tell me why. The farmers bought the seeds at a specific price with the condition that the seeds be used for 1 season only. For those whose crops really did involve unintentional fertilization, that is a different issue and the company should lose those cases.
Wow double speak at its best! I guess whats done in nature and whats done in a lab can no longer be considered different as to what you are saying. This is more than just selective breeding engineered proteins were introduced to the eggs and sperm but I guess according to you that can take place in a holding pen!
Not sure what you're referring to, Jerri. Please tell me how it's different.
Not sure what you're referring to, Jerri. Please tell me how it's different in any relevant way.
dude, what the f*ck? sorry if i offend you, but seriously!? Yeah, so SOME farmers do it on purpose but the f*cking trucks that drive by with Monsanto's stupid seeds is VERY uncontrolled. Instead of putting the seeds in SECURE boxes, they just let them fly away on the breeze, while unsuspecting farmers find themselves with super crops. You can't tell the f*cked up plants from the normal pure ones! How would you like it if one day you wake up and get a note from Monsanto that their seed is in your food, therefore you have to pay everything you worked for in life? One farmer had to give up his entire collection of seed. It took him like fifty forty years to get that much. He had to throw it all away. Now tell me that your darling little Monsanto is nice.
also, one more thing. You said they could only use it for one season right? well guess what! They're super crops! You'd have to pull them up by the roots to get rid of them, and even then some of the genetics could be crossed with the rest of the plants. Plants have "sperm" too you know! So what then? does the farmer have to wipe out his entire field?! how is THAT fair?
Im only 5'9 and would like to grow another six inches so of course im gonna eat this on the faint hope that it helps me grow some
It would be more likely to make you grow the wrong direction. I don't think you want to get fat. :)
It's ironic that a lot of Americans turn their noses up at eating entrails, innards and insects, but genetically modified, hormone injected meat makes their mouths water.
Go ahead, America– eat up the 'Frankenfish', hormoos, and chicken McSteroids, and don't forget to have a heaping helping of Soylent Green!
What happens when this fish gets out into the wild and mates with regular fish? We have no idea what our noodling is really doing to the fish when it comes to the long term. How does the new fishes feeding habits tie into the natural system? Will it push other fish and animals out of their nature slot in the chain of the web of life.
Humans just don't know what this will do to our oceans when it gets out! What happens when someone who doesn't own the right to catch this fish but does, will someone like Monsanto sue you? I bet they will.
SAY NO TO GMO!
i dont think you read the article, but you decided to let every one hear what you had to say... just like most voters.... but it says theyre sterile.... so i hope that answers your question amigo
"However, despite these assurances, the FDA indicates that up to 5% of the eggs may indeed be fertile, and the company's claims in this regard are "potentially misleading.""
Yeah read the article. Nature seems to always find a way of getting out of our grasp.
IDK people fear it cuz it's modified, although I believe there needs to be more testing on GMO fish. (on the effects of human cells in a lab where no1 can be harmed)
You know, I used to be against abortion; but after reading all the 100% bullshit you people have posted as arguments both for and against, I'm inclined to change my position.
And your point is?
I think his point may be that he wants everyone who does not believe exactly the way he does to die.
you sure as hell should! Abor-no, wait, I'm not bringing abortion into an article about food. :(
YOU SHOULD WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY "FOOD, INC" FOLKS! We already eat genetically modified chicken whose breasts are so big they can hardly walk just 'cause everyone likes whitemeat. Sad. Many of our foods are engineered or treated in such a way that it's not authentic anymore. The best tasting food is grown locally–even in your own garden. I should know.
DISCUSTING! who recreats mother nature? seriously, its mutiny!!! if you sold this to a restaurant, then tell them that 'our frankenstein fish is quiet scrumpshious'
Ya. i thought not.
How can people just outright say no to this. It must be considered, How will we be able to feed the world with the over population now and in the future.
LOL... ENVIROPIG... LOL
god please.get PETA involved, they are the experts at this,. If not they will be fighting these hybrids next.
You know god damn well we are already eating it...Everything in COSCO is farmed...Tilapia, Steelhead, Salmon, Catfish, Shrimp...Don't tell me you all think they aren't throwing steroids into the tanks of those critters!!!
1. If you don't like it, grow your own food.
This is a silly debate. If the genetic modification is not harmful to the salmon, it sure isn't harmful to those who eat it. Unless of course it is outright poisonous in some way. If not, it will be digested, absorbed into the body and by that time whatever genetic modification was done, it is all gone.
They make it bigger by adding more copies of the gene that makes growth hormone. Higher levels of growth hormone in food may lead to cancer. This is not an easy question.
Assuming that salmon growth hormone would be functional in a human.
Which it wouldn't. So it's not an issue. Salmon GH is less than 40% identical to human growth hormone. Less than 40% means it's going to do nothing in a human even if it did survive stomach acid (which it wouldn't).
Please remember, "You are what you Eat" is just a saying, it's not actually true (except for vegetarians and vegans, who's brains are in a "vegetative" state). If you eat Fish DNA, you don't become a fish, corn DNA doesn't turn you into corn, etc, etc.. Your digestive system (acids, enzymes, bacteria, etc.) doesn't really care about the DNA of your food, modified or not.
How about artificially high hormone levels?
Frankenfish on an artificial Bagel with artificial cream cheese!
Lets see, no heavy metal poisoning, super healthy salmon meat. Hell yeah I'll eat it!
this makes me hungry, and besides its not like the FDA hasn't approved things that never hurt people. don't get me wrong its not that i don't trust the FDA its just that i think they are behind the times with their regulations
Budget cuts. They don't have the people to keep rat droppings out of our food or keep sick animals off the market. Now people want them to screen for genetic modification?
i bet this genetically modified will be safer and healthier than all the fast food and soda we consume.
genetically modified salmon*
Apparently no one here eats fast food. This Salmon is great and will help with food cost and help feed the growing population. The big problem with fish farming is the waste and decease that effect the wild populations and environments. If you don't eat fish don't comment and enjoy your hormone infused burgers and deep fried potatoes.
Do we really have a choice? At least it's better than hormones, additives, pesticides, etc. It started with fruit. Can you buy a non-genetically engineered tomato or watermelon? I can't even in the farmers' markets! Dana–San Diego
I have no issue with eating genetically modified food. My issue is with genetically modified food breaking into the wild and out competing the natural organisms leading to a monoculture.
If all wheat has the Monsanto gene and a virus comes along that likes the Monsanto gene, we could live in a world without wheat (and rice and corn and...)
MOAR MEAT! mmmmmmmm
Maybe this movie will set things into perspective.
/the-future-of-food
WOW! that GMO salmon is significantly larger than the regular salmon! I'm sure with a little more research it's possible for the military to use the same type of science on humans to make GMO soldiers! Imagine soldiers who are 10 ft tall and have 10 times the strength of a regular human and reduce pain threshold. I remember a movie like these with Kurt Russell... looks like the realm of sci-fi is not within grasp with today's advancement in technology.. you know it's only a matter of time before the US military weaponize such powerful research! imagine the possibilities of the US Army/Marines with hundred of thousands of soldiers 10 ft tall carrying cannons as their weapon! It's a very scary thought especially for our enemies!! what do you guys think?
I would rather have a 4 foot tall super soldiers. Ten foot tall sounds like a big easy target. Make them strong more importantly make them fast but make them small. Remember, you can pack more munchkins into a transport than you can NBA stars. If you grow fighter pilots smaller, you can make the jets faster, better able to turn and fly farther. You can also make them harder to spot on radar.
like ant people?
i am horrified at how long i just spent reading comments on this subject!
We wonder why so many people have cancer and diseases we can not find cures for. All the hormones they put into food now days is killing off humanity. I guess it is the new form of population control. Either way I just hope they label the food so the consumer can make the choice themselves.
The FDA has already denied the lableing Geneticaly Modified foods. So rather providing the consumer a chioce of which fods they want to eat. The FDA has determined the consumer doesn't need to know which foods have been modified. After all the FDA wouldn't approve or pull of the market anything they new wasn't good for us.
All I can think of is how over the years and the use of hormones in Chicken how we have noticed that females are developing eariler and larger – ie breasts and hips, so will we end up with mini-fins? We can wait for nature to take er course
I have a hard time believing that fish DNA will affect me in some way– I am not a fish and I am reproducing with it, so wtf?? The fish DNA would all go in my stomach and be destroyed by acids anyway..... Anyone know about the soybean market these days? Something like 95% of soybeans available have been genetically modified to resist a herbicide. You know soybean products are practically in EVERYTHING? All of you who are sooo afraid of genetically modified foods- you better stop eating NOW!
Phosphorus, an element, is a noun; phosphorous is an adjective.
mmmm that fish looks so tasty .... why wouldn't I eat it. Calm down people, they are more worried about fish reproduction. There is no effect on people.
Get me some lemon and dill, that big salmon looks might tasty!
did we learn nothing from jurassic park?
Well we are going to kill off every other species, why not screw around and create a new one.
The efforts are in all the wrong places. Save what was already created, then play God.
Our FDA can't even protect us against e.Coli and Salmonella so how can we trust them? It won't help feed the starving because there is already enough food to go around, but it's not distributed to the people that need it. This is just another attempt for corporations to make profit without true concern for potential risk.
Effelbee....that's the problem. They don't label GM food so we can't make that decision. They insist GM food is like regular food but we all know it isn't. They know we won't buy it and so they've come up with this lame reason for not labeling it.
As for your comment about 'you eat it anyway', it's because we don't know. Does that mean that if I put feces in your food and you eat it anyway because you don't know, then you should just shut up and enjoy it once you find out??
SOME people are living longer but it's not due to our food. It's in spite of our food. People are getting checkups and having procedures done earlier so they are still injured by the food, but just not killed.
There is a planet to feed. This is a great thing. Just keep them out of the wild population and give them proper feed w/o chems and dye.
There has always been only one Genetic Engineer. We as Humans know after five million years of evolution that He/She did not get it right. Has our arrogance grew to the point that we think we can?
The food we eat and the water we drink are the most important things in our lives. I don't understand how people let the government get away with poisoning us on a daily basis.
grown and raise your own then. Easy?
Interesting. If you do not want to eat GM food, then don"t. There, feel better now? A great deal of the current food supply in the US is processed in ways you don't know about but you eat it anyway. Also, very little of what you eat is inspected by anyone.
Since we know everything in nature is coded and we have no access to the code and all we do as experiment is front end trial and error, welcome to more cancers and untreatable diseases. It is like putting unauthorized software in a system. It may seem to work but it will ultimately crash and destroy the system. That is why current GMOs are hurting us. We like self-destruction. We will surely reap what we sow. Garbage in, garbage out and destruction of the machine. This is just so everyone will fall ill and we will stat spending money on unnecessary research looking for cures for self inflicted diseases. Good luck to everyone who eats this if the FDA makes the mistake of approving it. Our creator alone has the code and He alone knows the language. No computer can change itself except the manufacturer that put it together and has the code. So is every natural computer in nature including humans and animals. Pride indeed comes before a fall. The pride of man is leading to self-destruction. Better pray hard for grace and mercy.
According to the picture, I'm more concerned that GMO salmon looks like a rainbow trout.
That fish looks good though - I'm sorry - I love seafood - I just hope it doesn't bite back! haha
How hard is it for news sources to not blatantly state their opinion in the title of an article. Apparently difficult enough that CNN needed to post a second poll about it. The first article might as well have been called "FISH THAT WILL KILL YOU vs. safe to eat (unlikely but lets have a poll anyways)"
I bet there is a direct correlation between people who fear eating genetically modified food, and those who claim to have or believe that Fibromyalgia is a real disease. Hopefully someday soon, science will genetically modify humans to remove the "Moron" gene responsible.
I don't care I hate fish !!!!!!!!!!!
I like that if you're anti-frankenfish you're also "a foe of technology". What garbage.
hello you all naysayers. What is food ? Its chemical, all of it, chemical !!!! The DNA that was used to make the salmon will not change you or your kids into fish. That's basically what your fear mongering is based on.
If it were as simple as whether or not it's safe to eat, that would be easy. More likely than not, it is. And genetic engineering should not scare us because as soon as we can use it to regrow brain cells, spinal cords, livers, lungs, etc. we'll all be using it to correct injuries or disease complications so we can live longer and better lives. However, the danger lies in the possible/probable damage to our natural ecosystems, either through eventual escape and cross breeding/outcompeting endemic species, or through increased introduction of antibiotic laced feeds into the environment or water systems. Mother Nature did a pretty damn good job and any time you start messing with her work, you will generally see consequences down the line. The question is can we live with the consequences? The answer is not always no. Here the inevitable release to the wild is pretty much a given, and like non-genetically enhanced farmed fish, it's pretty clear that it poses a significant threat to wild stocks and is fun science, but a bad overall idea if you care about the natural balance and species conservation as well as bioaccumulation of potential toxins, and antibiotics in the water systems.
I would eat it! I will continue to watch for the antlers to grow and maybe some gills but definitely would eat it.
CNN needs to have relevant pre-post tests to prevent unfounded opinions.
That's you, dude! Keep up the good work!
no thanks
It's sad we have to prove something is bad before anyone cares. When I was a child, companies had to prove things were good before the FDA approved them. We err'd on the side of caution because prevention was always better than cure and even one victim was one too many. Now with layoffs, laziness and lobbyist bearing gifts ($$), the FDA approves everything then yanks it off the market after so many are injured or killed.
The argument about chicken and beef already being injected with steroids and hormones is dumb. It's like saying you already eat food with arsenic so you shouldn't complain about adding cyanide too. Many people have stopped eating chicken, pork and beef because of all the additives.
Despite years of research and so called advancements, people are dying from cancer at alarming rates. Heart disease is still number one due in part to man-made hydrogenated oils which have the FDA's blessing. That can't be right....something the FDA allows is harmful and serves no purpose but to increase profits by extending shelf life? I'm amazed none of the geniuses on this board have found a cure for cancer. Good time to buy some land outside the city limits so you'll have room to grow / raise your own food. Be sure to put up an electric fence for when the "experts" come to their senses and expect you to share your alternatives to franken food.
If FDA tests prove that it's safe, then there is nothing to worry about. Chances are that fish growth hormones have less of an impact on us that growth hormones for warm blooded animals.
Manipulating the genes that would make fish more tasty should silence some hungry fear mongers! :)
I don't trust the FDA but I would still eat the salmon. YUM!
we get enough growth hormones in all the other meat we eat. Now to do this to fish also. I think that this is why girls are developing at such an early age
if everyone stopped eating so much we would have to do this type of stuff
WAY? We have been eating genetically modified food for tens of thousands of years now, and people are living longer than ever. Besides you can't fool mother nature into creating anything that would not be natural, so forget the 5 arms and 3 eyes arguement. Relax it is OK .... especially when used to feed a hungry world from crops to animals. Why would we want people to starve if we have safe genetic technology that can prevent it... those generally against it have a full belly and no solution for producing the food where needed.
Holly catfish Batman, that is a trout not a salmon ! fooled by the Joker administration again !
Wow, that's a massive difference.
'm OK with it being sold, as long as it is identified as being a GM fish, so I can be the LAST on my block to try it.
If the little kids down the street eat it, and turn out fine, and they have kids who turn out fine, then I guess it won't hurt me to try some too. However, I've seen a lot of science which didn't survive the test of time (DDT, DES, thimerisol, 1,1,1-trichoethane, CFCs), so I'm in no hurry.
BTW, how come kids are entering puberty so much earlier now?
1. GMO salmon isnt a chemical pesticide like some of your list, your body would digest it the exact same as if you ate both the chinook and pout.
2. thimerisol- you obviously have not read all of the studies that have found no harm caused.
@Mark - my bad. You are correct. I was thinking of thalidomide, but typed thimerisol.
My point was simply that each of the compounds mentioned was believed to be safe for its intended purpose, when it was approved for use. It was only later, after "the test of time", that we discovered the problems.
There will always be "first-adopters", particularly when they get a big price break for doing so - I'm fine with that - they do me a favor (testing the fish), I do them a favor (subsidzing their GM fish dinners). If all goes well, eventually I'll join them. However, this presupposes that both they and I know what we're consuming - which is why it is important that products be accurately labelled.
(This is also why I am pissed at fructose manufacturers for trying to rename fructose to "corn sugar" - fructose is fructose, regardless of what you call it. If fructose has gotten a bad rap, well, there's a reason. So please don't try to deceive me. I'm fine with fructose in some products, I just don't want it in others. If you want to make products with fructose, go for it. Maybe I'll buy your product, maybe I won't, but it's my decision, not yours, to make.)
Very simple. Let the people decide. Label the package with "Genetically engineered, recombinant DNA injected," and see if the public buys it.
Oh, wait. That's what the other FDA hearing is about–whether or not they should even tell the public. :)
people want corn with straight rows and uniform kernals, you know how it gets that way? genetic engineering. I worked in a produce department in my school years and no one would take the unshiny apple or small orange or the soft banana. seedless grapes, lettuce with thinner stalks is all GM. wake up. you demand it they will make it!!
on the other note, research animals, like beagles are not alowed to be pets bc they are used experimentally, i know researchers who have been attached to these dogs and have had to say goodbye when the experiment is done. if they want us to eat them, why can't we have them as pets? GM is a very inconsistent and versitile issue....
This is so different than when an infertile woman is pumped full of synthetic fertility drugs so she can have a child. Is said child too dangerous to live?
Fertility treatment is endocrine-engineering - it is not genetic-engineering (at least we don't think so).
OTOH there may be side-effects that the Doc "forgot" to mention (lupron-induced permanent HSDD).
Um, virutally all our primary crops have been "genetically modified" – go have a look at what corn looked like before generations of farmers selectively bred it to be as big as it is now.
The chinese have been feeding these fish to us for three years now. So – yah, their fine.
Humans have been genitically modifying their food for years. How do you think we have those foot and a half ear corn that we have or the beef that we eat, or the bacon we have with our jumbo sized eggs. Each one of those traits were specifically chosen to be passed on to produce better quality and quantity of food to feed an ever growing population. The only reservation that I have is when you introduce new genes into a specie you essentially creat a new one. They say it can't reproduce, but lifes only goal is to keep on living. That fish will find a way to reproduce. Didn't anybody see Juassic Park?
Commercially grown GMO-corn does not increase the yield per plant, it increases the yield per acre by allowing corn to be planted closer together.
This should be a simple NO! they have no clue what effects it could have by consuming genetically altered food. just look at what growth hormones do and now you want to split genes.
Eating modified genes won't affect you. The resulting protiens that they produce can be another story. and that is what the FDA has to look into.
And what, pray tell, do growth hormones do? Oh right, they promote growth.
One thing that people don't seem to realize is this salmon has been engineered to express a peptide growth hormone from another type of salmon. You're digestive system will treat this peptide just like any other protein and digest it. Insulin is an example of a peptide growth hormone that most people are familiar with. If you know any diabetics, you know that they have to inject their insulin rather than taking it in pill form. The only way I can see to get the peptide growth hormone from this salmon into your blood stream would be to put the fish in a blender and then inject the results. But that would be a really bad idea for all sort of reasons.
People have no problem eating genetically engineered crops. Plant is as much a living entity as a fish is. But I'm sure 99% of the people voting no never realized how the agriculture system works before one sentence in an article today told them.
This is very exciting technology and has great promise if used wisely. I think this is a good use of it.
All of the food we eat is genetically engineered. Just differently. you would not recognize the original plant corn came from. Also, all domesticated animals have been genetically engineered. Just by selecting them over a long period of time.
In this case, it was just done faster but could have eventually been done over a few hundred years.
So stop eating anything except ancient plants and undomesticated animals. if you can find any.
Whether you know it our not if you have bought your food from a supermarket chain or eaten at a restaurant chances are you have bought and consumed genetically modified food. For the most part if your food does not say that has been certified organic not just labeled organic it probably has been genetically modified.
They should spend their time and energy on doing something more productive, like perfecting barley and hops!
better modified genes than mercury
I don't get why people are so afraid of GMOs. I'm pretty sure all of the arguments against are fueled by zombie flicks. "Oh gods, what next??" The truth of the matter is that everything you eat is a GMO. Your kids play with GMO dogs. Ruby red grapefruit is GMO (shot with gamma radiation a few decades ago). The only thing scientists have done is taken the uncertainty of artificial selection out of the picture and replaced it with targeted gene introduction. GMOs are the only thing that allow 7 billion humans to exist on this planet. If we all ate 'organic' we'd starve out pretty quickly.
Why cannot they genetically modify genes to eradicate thugs, terrorist and lunatic morons? The world will be safer place to live.
Then who would the Tea Party nominate to run for office?
LOL, nice one.
Incomprehensible to those of us with a brain how this is moral to some and is encouraged yet stem cell research – which has been proven to save lives – is wrong and should be forbidden.
Join the discussion on genetically modified foods on Holosfitness.com. Holosfitness.com is a free online fitness tool with a wide array of health, fitness, and nutrition-related information.
It always crack me up when people who're so "environmentally friendly" insist on natural food. Really, natural food is better for you. OK, then explain to me how come average life span of human has been steadily increasing as more and more genetically modified food are introduced into our system in general?
All of you people out there cry foul on genetically modified food, but have no trouble taking synthetically synthesized vitamin pill and various forms of medication. Do you drink water from your faucet (which is chemically treated) or drink from the creak in your backyard?
I am not saying the increased level of genetic modification in our foods does not warrant concern, but blindly stating consuming modified food is "NO WAY" is just ignorance and hypocrisy.
Well to all those opposed, either quit breeding more people or live with it.
This is one of so many reasons that I'm a vegetarian
It's probably safer than the steroid, hormone and antibiotic injected chicken and beef that most people already eat on a daily basis.
since evolution is a continual chain of gene modifications that have been taking place for millions of years ... our entire food supply has been genetically modified.
"AquaBounty Technologies claims the resultant fish are reproductively sterile "
- Life finds a way.
I don't believe your anger will allow you to be objective. I suggest YOU do the research and prove it to yourself. Most of your statements are conjecture and you offer no proof to their linkage. Simply assuming one causes the other is not acceptable.
Oh yeah! Please stop eating corn! It must make you miserable...
Intended for Ms. Morse Code (...-...)
Remember Ned Ludd.
The tally of the poll so far suggests where the true intelligence and ignoranceof this country lies. If the most popular fish on the table can be produced better and with less expense and time, then why not? As for FrankenFish??? That means to say with those ignorant, that if a genetic modification was available to humankind to eliminate Cancer or Heart disease Oppps! the line forms right outside and I'm sure we wouldn't call ourselves Frankensteins. Today, much research and treatments extending our lives resides in altering our bodily functions and chemistries and we're supposed to be the highest form of life. From the poll results, its apparent in brainpower, we're not and perhaps replaced from that summit by the mind of a Salmon!.
Do sick overweight animals look healthier to you? You're nuts. Use your brain to figure out how to clean up our water supply. Atop this nonsense and stop using my body. I didn't volunteer to be your research project. Get the hell away from our food! Bunch of junior chemistry set users...get them out of here. DO NOT FUND THESE PEOPLE!!!
You can't keep using my body like this. STOP IT!
Fish growth hormone? Won't affect me because I'm not a fish. Two thumbs up for researchers. Salmon is my favorite food and you've just found a way to make it cheaper and tastier.
Does a fat overweight sick person with allergies look like a healthier person to you? You are so off base...and you are completely infatuated with your own idea and your own technology, and fathead buddies that you can't even see what you are doing. GET A W A Y FROM OUR FOOD SUPPLY! Nuts. Research gone wrong. STOP FUNDING THESE PEOPLE!!!
Does a fat overweight sick person with allergies look like a healthier person to you? You are so off base...and you are completely infatuated with your own idea and your own technology, and fathead buddies that you can't even see what you are doing. GET AWAY FROM OUR FOOD SUPPLY! Nuts. Research gone wrong. Stop funding these people.
If that salmon could talk, like we can, but they don't listen to us...it would say that it lived a lifetime of being sick all the time. It was no life. We have a voice and we are telling you, "This stuff is making us sick." but, you aren't listening. You hear dollar signs or getting off on yourselves with your buddies...but you don't hear us. Rapists. Gang rapists.
They are doing the same thing to us. Do you think people feel good when they do this stuff to people? No. They live a lifetime of being sick. They look like large people on the outside, but they have spent a lifetime of being sick from genetically modified corn. PEOPLE ARE SICK OF BEING SICK. STOP THIS!!!
So why does the average life span for humans keep increasing? And those "large people on the outside" need to go outside and exercise...
Better question: Why do we have so many overweight people that can't seem to get their hormones straightened out? Why are we seeing so many people that can't handle the corn that they are given. Why so fat? They are reacting to this stuff. They try to take antibiotics because it makes them feel better (but they won't give antibiotics anymore). Antibiotics kill the good bacteria along with the bad bacteria and leave the yeast to grow. They need antifungals to deal with the antibiotics. If they are fortunate enough to get that under control...which is a huge mess by the way...then eat grain again...they start the whole mess over again. It's an allergic response. People, as well as animals, are being put through this crap by corn...mostly genetically modified corn.
If you have an infection (fungal, bacterial), it's going to raise your blood sugar. Your body is going to send insulin to deal with it. Insulin loves to store fat and hates to let go of fat. Very difficult to lose weight with an infection. So, whatever method you happen to have (antibiotics that lead to a fungal infection...often undiagnosed because there's no fever of 102 and most people don't articulate the symptoms in words that fit what doctors think they need to diagnose it...not to mention that the way they diagnose it is just plain stupid and wrong...and that ding dongs have decided that over the counter drugs work – vaginally – not quite where we need to be on this...the whole thing is totally covered up or completely missed...whatever...but makes plenty of money for them and world class frustration for us.), or allergies from corn (mostly genetically modified. So prove to me...that it's not genetically modified corn that causes this. The burden of proof is on you...get off of my body. YOU PROVE IT TO ME. Because I am definitely NOT convinced.)
This is the same as eating anything that's been bred over time to introduce new traits. It's just all done in the lab beforehand.
We do this with cattle (big cattle + big cattle = more big cattle).
We do this with horses (race horses)
Dogs
And pretty much anything else. People fear this like it's some kind of alchemy. It's not. It's selectively breeding in a lab setting, just on a microscopic level than in a fish tank. It's not like solyent green.
Someone please shoot me, I'm sick of reading this same false argument over and over again. All it takes is a simple opening of a dictionary to know that your statement is false.
No need, I will simply stop reading these ridiculous comments as of now. Phew, I feel so much better.
Well, the next article will inform us again that our "kids" are starting pubity earlier! Wonder why? This has been going on for years. We're talking fish here. Why eat just salmon, when all of those carp are literally diving into the boat?
I just don't like it when my food's messed around with – I'm super-picky about where my food comes from. I shop organic at the local co-op whenever possible, and I avoid processed foods like the plague. I think we need to leave things the way nature intended them!
Speaking of the plague... yet another disease remedied by Science and genetic engineering... One less thing you have to avoid. You're welcome.
Don't forget that because of our awesome science, we now have superbugs, such as staph, which have evolved to resist our science powers. Red queen. At least with letting disease exist naturally, populations eventually develop genetic resistances. Sickle cell being a great example.
@John How is sickle cell a great example? It is a genetically based disease that people still suffer and die from. It's only by the use of medications and treatments developed by modern science that people with sickle cell live longer, healthier lives; if anything, sickle cell is a counterpoint to your argument.
And John, your "super bug", staph, is actually a CLASSIFICATION of bacteria known as Staphylococcus. There are 32 species and 8 sub-species. To which are you referring? I suggest you brush up on your Microbiology before getting too much deeper.
holy crap you people are stupid.
Holy crap, you people are stupid.
Smart enough to know how to punctuate.
well put
no punctuation intended
Reminds me of Jurassic Park. The fish are infertile, huh? Ian Malcom said "Life will find a way". If these GMO Salmon are allowed to run, they will ruin the world's Salmon population.
Additionally, a solution for food on our planet is not to genetically alter our supply. This will only create abundance in the short term which will indefinitely lead to population increase which will lead to new food shortages. Population has always followed food supply. India and chemical agriculture is a perfect example. More food, more people, poisoned earth, 2x as many sick and starving people. It's just a bad idea.
Not that I like the idea of allowing the genetically altered fish into the wild, but please explain what you mean by, "ruin the world's Salmon population?" Ecologically speaking, Natural Selection would ensure that the strongest species would survive. Whether or not it causes the extinction of another species or eliminates your most favorite entree is irrelevant. Scientists are manipulating very small things with potentially huge ecological impacts, but to think anything will be "ruined" is completely ARROGANT!
Arrogant? Not quite.
Salmon are a part of one of the most complex life cycles on our planet. The biomass responsible for contributing to a salmon that grows that much bigger that much quicker is significantly different than the native species. Just because the salmon is genetically altered doesn't mean it magically grows new meat. That mass comes from somewhere, which means that mass is no longer available somewhere. To think that we can see ahead to what this means for the ecosystem is what is ARROGANT. To not be worried about these genetically modified salmon working their way into our ecosystem is foolish. This is clearly a quick fix, and in my life experience I've come to see that quick fixes tend to be short lived and sometimes create a bigger issue than they were intended to fix.
Yes, arrogant. For the species losing out it SUCKS (even if it's humans). The big picture will resolve itself. My point is that the macro-ecology is ALWAYS in balance and it is arrogant to think humans are above it. If we kill ourselves off, the Earth will go on and the next super critter will ascend to the top of the food chain. The "quick fix" would definitely cause a shockwave, but it would eventually be resolved. It's happened so many times in history – check Australia's ecological history. And track what's happening with Killer Bees. So whether it happens slowly (naturally) or fast (engineered) it doesn't matter.
In what way is the fish harmful for human consumption? What will it do to people?
I doubt you'd get sick eating it. There are several pretty rough issues though. The fish are most likely not going to be 100% infertile. We've seen time and again what happens when non-natives are introduced. Salmon are a part of a very complex life cycle. It would be foolish to think we could manage it and make decisions based on what we think will happen.
Also, population growth is directly correlated to food supply. Look at India. Chemical agriculture introduced, people stop starving for a couple decades, population doubles, land becomes toxic and water supply poisoned, now 2x as many people starving and suffering from chemical related diseases.
"Also, population growth is directly correlated to food supply. Look at India. Chemical agriculture introduced, people stop starving for a couple decades, population doubles, land becomes toxic and water supply poisoned, now 2x as many people starving and suffering from chemical related diseases."
Exactly.
Wow look at all the paid bloggers go!
Trevor from austin...I being a fellow austin resident challange you to go to a whole foods, central market, or any place that insists on having naturally raised chicken, buy a chicken breast...then go to you local HEB, Randall's...walmart and buy the same...the breast is the most desireable meat...to hold both in the hand is to see the GMO difference...the larger breasted chicken lived for 1/3 of the time of the smaller....trillions of lives forced to growing for an unappreciatve population which only searches for ways to burn through more lives...respect the animal that gave its life for yours....
I completely agree, however the chickens you are speaking of are not genetically modified. They are hormone fed. I avoid processed foods as much as possible but GM foods are much safer.
Why should I respect an animal that I'm eating? What is worthy of respect? Would you request the same respect for a plant? What about the bacteria in my yogurt today? As humans, we must take lives to continue to exist, whether that is a plant or an animal, we all kill to eat.
I'd be more concerned with potential effect on wild population, than concerned with eating the fish. Even if tests showed all of them are infertile (which they don't) genes do not politely stick with an engineer's plan. You can't be certain the genes would not make their way into the wild population.
If I were hungry enough I would eat it. So would you.
People, please understand that this should be looked as something that is positive for our environment. If we are able to farm fish at an increased rate will likely bring an end to over fishing. This will help bring balance to our oceans if we are able to find a way to feed our ever increasing populations with out wiping out the species that we share our planet with.
Fish farming is safe...genetic altering is safe. Humans do it everyday...is a bi-racial child "unnatural?". Hormones are what we need to be concerned about...not mixed breeding.
I really haven't seen anyone vehemently saying this should be banned, only that they should have a choice as to whether or not to eat it. Without a label, that right is taken away.
Those that really believe it could cause harm seem to be in the opinion that those who do choose to eat it will get their just desserts and they don't seem to mind that at all. Those that don't believe it is harmful seem to want to force it down the throats of those that do by making sure there is no label.
Eat today, hungry tomorrow. Let's say the fish are farmed and over-fishing in the oceans stops. Eat today. What will happen when the population once again grows to a point where more must be produced? It is an endless cycle, and there isn't an infinite supply of land/water to make fish farms. We're just delaying the inevitable. Hungry tomorrow.
We too get altered by animals around us. The parasite Toxoplasma gondii is a worm that lives in cats has its larva passed in the cats litter. The larva then gets picked up and ingested in the cat's owner, it alters the pheromone recpetors in the pets owner. Making the cat more appealing. Thus insuring that two beings are bound together so the worm can continue its life cycle.
This is the dark side of the free market. I can't wait to see cows as big as elephants and chickens as big as an ostrich.
Me neither, especially if they can reach maturity quickly. Imagine the t-bones. Imagine the drumsticks.
GMO's result in less flavor, mistreatment of animals, and cause many of the illness we see in our society today. We have completely mistreated our food, and it IS killing us. Processed foods are killing us! The best part of cooking is the tasting as you go. Taking small steps can make huge changes. I cut red meat and pasta to a minimum in my diet and lost 50 pounds. I still enjoy these things, but in smaller quantity and frequency. Eat happy and healthy! Have eating adventures!
It's ridiculous to claim that GM Salmon would taste any different than natural salmon. This also doesn't qualify as "processed" food in the traditional since. Get real.
Even this article plays fast and loose with the facts. They claim up to 5% of the eggs may be fertile, while the PDF linked to says that 99.7%-99.9% of the eggs were triploid (3 copies of each chromosome rather than 2, making them infertile). There's a big difference between 95% and 99.8%.
This is the ONLY reason to be concerned about this, as the introduction of fertile "frankenfish" into the ocean could be potentially devastating for native salmon species. But if only 0.2% of fish are fertile, this makes the chances of them reproducing in the wild virtually nil.
I for one can't wait to taste the frankensalmon.
I am pretty sure these fish will not be introduced into the oceans...it is meant for fish farming...which is done in contained fish farms.
hunnicupp: Many fish farms are pens on the ocean shoreline. Fish escape from them all the time.
Let's see what that .2% yields: Say we have 1 million fish. Conservative number, considering some farms have 50,000 at a time. 1,000,000X.002= 2000 who can be fertile. Small percentages are misleading when large numbers are not considered.
John – I actually did the math, but then consider this: Salmon reproduction is enormously difficult. Most importantly, they swim up river to the ponds WHERE THEY WERE SPAWNED to lay their eggs.
If you think you are not already ingesting GMO's you are fooling yourself everything from Wheat to Corn to Pork and Chicken all have been altered. You don't think normal chickens have breasts that size do you? People need to start supporting small family farms and get educated. It could put your money back into your local economy.
GM pork and chicken is not allowed to be sold for human consumption, as stated in the article. Keep spreading the lies Bill!
Trevor,
As a farmer raising heritage stock I think I just may know a little on the subject. And if you think you are not eating genetically engineered meat your are sorely wrong. from the steriods pumped into cattle through ball guns to the elimination farmers raising just a few hundred head of Pork to supplement their farming income that have been eliminated because the (strain) oscar meyer is raising no longer has any marbling and is being produced and fed engineered feed. Did you know that pork is not supposed to be white? that is because of all of the Monsanto corn they are being fed smart guy. There are ways around every rule the FDA has and they are being exploited just because you cant eat a pig that is genetically modified does not mean you can't eat the pigs he/she produces. Having worked with heritage animals and dealing with the university of Iowa and Minnesota studying growth rates and fat to meat ratio's there is no doubt that these animals have been tampered with.
Next in line you question chickens, been to a poultry plant lately the birds grow so large in the thighs and breasts they cant even walk tell me thats natural or simple breeding I know about hybrid vigor and that is not what is happening, if you like burying your head int he sand be my guest but don't presume it's true because it was in the article.
Bill, nothing you mentioned is genetic modification. If a pig eats genetically modified corn, that does not make the pig itself genetically modified. If a chicken is pumped full of hormones, that does not make it genetically modified. This is all Biology 101. I prefer to eat naturally raised meat, but you clearly don't understand what constitutes GM food (the actual modification of an organism's genetic code).
Also: "There are ways around every rule the FDA has and they are being exploited just because you cant eat a pig that is genetically modified does not mean you can't eat the pigs he/she produces."
Yes it does. If a genetically modified pig gave birth to more pigs, they would all be considered genetically modified, since they had non-pig DNA in their cells. You are very ignorant on the subject of genetic engineering.
"genetically" is a loaded term that is pretty meaningless. We have been modifying, and creating, life forms for tens of thousands of years. There is not a single plant or animal that we consume that we have not modified to meet our desires. To ban genetically modified foods would be about as scientifically bankrupt an idea as saying there is not such thing as human induced climate change. It all comes down to a case by case situation. How are we modifying the lifef orm we intend to eat? What are we hoping to gain? What are the potential pitfalls (not boogy man pitfall but empirical pitfalls)? Then go from there.
Would your business benefit from a software that enabled you to leave thousands or even millions of personal messages in business website contact forms Nationally or locally?
Contact Page Submitter is a new software from Icon Target Marketing which allows you to automatically leave a message or invitation in tens of thousands of websites per day. You can use the software to find thousands of websites by keyword, and automatically set the submitter and forget it. Our customers report 30x the sucess rate as email campaigns.
Target businesses on a National or local level. Personalize your message to attract business owners.
For more information and a live demonstration call 1-888-846-4266
or visit us at http://www.internetadvertisingcompanies.net/Auto_Contact_Submitter.html
People should read the "Jurassic Park" series again.... Infertile and Female only. Hah. At least it isn't Velociraptors and frog DNA this time.
You guys know that you already eat this gene if you have ever had Edy's slow churn ice cream right? It allows proteins to stay intact at lower temperatures so (in the case of ice cream) the milk stays colder or in salmon world- they can metabolize protein in colder temps.
How much of our food is already "altered" from its "natural" state? Selective breeding have made cattle, swine and fowl all different from their "wild" kin. Corn, tomatoes, potatoes, wheat, strawberries, all have been "altered", and many other foods as well. This is just one more step in the scientific process of providing enough food for an expanding population. The fear-mongers tend to be among the hypocritical Neo-Luddites who does what OTHERS to have the high standard of living THEY enjoy.
Safe? Just like the "Green" compact fluorescent bulbs that have been giving off waves of electromagnetic pulses and causing many unexplained health issues?
What's wrong with the salmon that has been naturally bred? NOTHING!!
If it's not broken, then don't fix it!!!
It's either produce more food or restrict birth rates. We cannot produce more humans without producing more food.
While ensuring safety should be of utmost importance, genetically altered food animals could potentially feed more people for less cost and less environmental impact. Should our ancestors have not domesticated plants and animals that are grown on farms today? After all, hunting and gathering wasn't broken.
Where is the evidence of this? Also, EM waves are everywhere already. Nearly every energy emitting thing in the universe emits them, not just some cavalier new human invention called compact florescent light bulbs. Even your body, which is filled with a ferrous substance you call blood, creates them as it passes around in Earth's magnetic field, as do all ferrous substances that pass through a magnetic field.
It's truly depressing to read the comments and realize just how little the average person understands about DNA, genetics and science in general. No wonder the U.S. falling behind other countries in technology and science.
I agree, it is very depressing. Makes me want to round them all up and send them back to school. But it probably wouldn't do any good. After all, you can't fix stupidity and ignorance.
Darwin had a pretty nifty solution for stupidity and ignorance. It's called Natural Selection.
Remember: You don't have to be the smartest. You just have to be smarter than the idiot posting before you!
I agree about U.S. is falling behind in science and math but I arrived late.I think people were playing and goofing on people because sarcasm is hard to send thru an internet post. The guy above me is right GM Food has been around for years and his list his pretty accurate.I eat healthy and have been labeled a health-freak but I am in the very small percentile.I care what goes in my body and bring on the Super-salmon if the FDA okays it. You can keep the beef,pork,eggs and other junk.If you don't approve of the GM salmon don't eat it but what baffles me is all the other junk people put in their body...Peace Out
"Frankenfood"? Come on. The scientifically-illiterate masses don't need to be further confused by negative-sounding, inaccurate, invented terms like that. The same dummies who think irradiated meat is actually radioactive will happily go out and risk consuming an E.Coli burger. Biological advances like this should be encouraged, not condemned out of un-warranted paranoia.
With such a large portion of the worlds population starving we cannot, in good conscience, toss aside the ability to produce more food in less time in less space because we (not starving at our computers) are full & happy!
My turds are getting bigger too from all this genetic altering...
No, you just eat too much.
I'm fine with it as long as there's proper research done, which is never the case. Businesses are all about making money and if there is a bigger fish that sells for the same cost, what price do we consumers actually pay? Remember the swine flu and its "vaccinations", totally unnecessary but made Pharm companies a lot of money.
Except that the flu vaccines offered every year are last years' strains. Blame the media for the fire storm, since most public health officials only considered swine flu somewhat more virulent than the average flu. While they don't offer total protection, there is very good evidence that in a population flu vaccines offer significant protection at minimal cost.
Do NOT play with nature, you'll be sooorrrrrryyyyy....
yeah, dont play with nature or you might increase the human lifespan by 2, reduce infant mortality by 10 times, and make it easier to communicate with everyone via the internet. Unjustified fear due to ignorance alert!
ITS disgusting ...I dont want it nor anyone in my family to eat it ,, man is the destructor of his own self ,,, quit coming out with all this crap,, people are already obese and got probloms as is, no body wants cloned or fake nasty fish ,,,
I bet you would vaccinate your children, therefore agreeing that man doesn’t necessarily have to be destructive to his own species. -Making you a hypocrite btw. Or maybe you don’t vaccinate, making you an ignoramus.
carlie- Genetic modification involves the introduction of genetic material into the system that otherwise would not be present. This can be done in a number of ways one of which is the slow time honored method of trial and error until the desired genetic material is introduced into the system through cross pollination or selective breeding. Or the material can be introduced quickly saving in the generational modeling that has occurred for centuries. Please do not demonstrate a total lack of science by making believe that one way is better over the other or that by artificially introducing the desired changes we are somehow creating creatures from the black lagoon. Since it appears that farming of Fish is another no-no here because fish swim in their own wastes, I wonder just what people thing fish swim in when they are in oceans, rivers, lakes or ponds. Do not forget get that great wild flavor comes from the wide variety of food found nature rather than the corn meal in farm pellets. Those natural enhancers being plant matter, other fish, dead animals, animal waste, and yes human waste and remains also, after all it is all natural. In a world that refuses to control growth and refuses to accept science in the feeding of the population, sooner than later a breaking point is going to come and then we will see who eats what.
If you wish to change the scientific definition of a word or a term like genetic modification to meet your own purposes, then please don't pretend to have any scientific superiority to others who accept the scientific community's, or Webster's dictionary's definitions. I could resort to your tactics and call you an illiterate uninformed idiot who can't even bother to open a dictionary before he spouts off nonsense but I won't. I'm sure in your mind you really believe that you have the power to decide that the definition of genetic modification should be what you deem it is. It is your choice. More power to you. the people who wish to not eat the GM salmon just wish to have the same right to chose for themselves what they put into their mouths. or is it only you that has the power of making a "stupid" choice.
Read this article about Norman Borlaug. Many of you may owe your existence to him. Genetic engineering in crops has been going on for well beyond 40 yrs (2 – 3 generations?). It's lead to SAVING lives (literally hundreds of millions). And I don't see any mutants walking around today...
http://reason.com/blog/2009/09/13/norman-borlaug-the-man-who-sav
Apples and oranges, BSSniffer.
Really?? Get your facts strait! Genetic engineering is genetic engineering – no matter what YOU choose to believe. The methods may vary – crossbreeding, inter-species breeding, gene-splicing, even cloning. they're all part of genetic engineering. Why would you consider this apples vs oranges??? Because it's plants? Once you've reached the genetic level it doesn't matter if it's plants or animals any more.
Eating them isn't the problem. It's still is a salmon just one that grows super quick. The problem is what will happen when, not if but WHEN, they escape into the natural habitat of native salmon. Most likely they will cause havoc in the ecosystem, tipping a delicately balanced scale. Will they plow through and devour the fry of native salmon so that in a few years there are much less numbers of salmon? Even factoring in that they will be bigger than an average salmon will it matter if they eat 500 fry to get that large? A thousand fry? I don't know any of this, but neither does anyone else.
I think i'll pass on the genectically altered salmon. We get enough of the steroid altered stuff from china now.
Anyone remember jurassic park? Life WILL find a way...
The problem will come when they begin cost cutting programs and start hiring mcdonalds employees that need a 2nd job.
I believe salmon have already been genectically modified before they are caught and after they hit my plate.
Ok so now im seeing that you are really just concerned about big companies and how much the govt should get involved, not genetically altered salmon. Im not here to talk about that since it will get nowhere.
**Well , actually I'm concerned about both, but because I'm not a Biologist/Geneticist, I can only speak about patents. ....Does the idea of Big Business altering the genetics to plants and animals, so they can control their out-put, not worry you at all? Do you not see the implications?
As far as our ability to keep the mutant fish out of our natural ecosystmes-It would be stupid not to persue benefitial things based on our history of poor regulation. Why not just regulate better. Are you saying its impossible?
**African honey bees, Chinese Koi, shell fish in Lake Michigan, Fire ants, all of these things came from outside the US, and they are creating havoc on our Eco-systems. We have yet to see how genetically altered plants and animals within the US will impact our Eco-system...that will be in the long term. The short term effect has already shown its face in court.
To me its as simple as this: if we can keep the altered fish out of where they dont belong then im all for it, if it is impossible than we shouldnt do it. I dont think its impossible. We just need to focus on keeping control on everything first and foremost.
**I understand your good intentions...but you need to remember, the Human Race has a pretty lousy record when it comes to doing things for the right reasons. 8-)
This post was part of a thread to McCluck... see asterisk's for my responses......
Lol, unfortunately I can only speak from a biologist/geneticist side of things and not about patents. I’m interested to hear what implications you see in this as far as huge corporations and their power (the bad ones I mean), because I may see only the good implications from the science side.
I could understand if you were to say "we are not ready for GE due to our bad history and poor regulations". I do believe that there will come a day when, much like a dangerous yet eradicated pathogen that only exists in a lab, we can keep these things under human control. Looks like a fundamental disagreement to me.-I believe that despite the risks, the rewards may be worth it (even at this point in time) while you believe the rewards are not enough to outweigh the risk (a risk which is very real given our history).
We need to be better at regulation so we can be free to pursue the most dangerous and potentially rewarding of scientific endeavors.
So we agree to disagree...but the realization of what I'm saying (one company owning patent rights to the food supply) may come to light sooner than we both think. ...Just one more thing...I believe in the good work, of hard working scientists...and I also believe science has done an incredible amount of good in our society. Let's just not bury our heads in the sand and turn the switch to our brains off.......................
It is off-topic but florida has the worst evasive of non-native animals and plants in the nation.We have pythons eating family pets.....
Or take a looksie at the invasive brown tree snake and its effects on Guam (some 9/13 bird species gone). Or the zebra mollusk in the great lakes, etc. etc.
World hunger will never be solved as long as an overabundance of food is produced. A paradox.
It's an easy equation: if you make more food, you make more of the organism. Everytime, without fail. If you could feed every mouth on earth right now, you'd have more mouths to feed the next year. Always. This means that no matter how many GMOs we produce, no matter how much work we put into it, unless we start turning to sustainable, local food, the hunger crisis will never be solved. Never ever ever ever. Unfortunately, GMO's are just delaying the inevitable collapse of the whole system. There will be a point where we have too many people in developed countries and not enough food even for them because we will have run out of space. Ending world hunger through mass-produced food is a dream and a lie.
You assume that food is the only thing that factors into a population's carrying capacity. Other than that, I likey.
What this could do, however, is make American food technology an expensive necessary export to the rest of the world thereby helping us here at home. Let’s do this, regulate it like naught has been regulated before, and not listen to the uneducated fear mongering.
Food and space are my assumptions. The interactions they create are secondary to those two factors. With more food, more space is used; with less space designated for living, people live closer, there's less biodiversity because of human development, and much more tension with inter- and intra- species competition arises. The carrying capacity, I believe, will be most influenced by those two primary factors.
American food technology has already been exported the world-over. Monsanto being a great and depressing example. And if not through a company, through how low-cost something like high fructose corn syrup is to produce and integrate into pretty much everything. We already see the sickness that has caused for us in America's obesity epidemic as well as a more controlled environment such as Polynesia, more specifically, Pohnpei. Basically, we need to do two things: 1) stop the subsidies for farmers to overproduce and 2) drastically increase the price of HFCS. And those two things are anathema to the government and to agribusiness. Thus, it's unlikely there could ever be regulation; it must start at the bottom. Even more, this has to be a world-wide phenomenon; we can't horde the benefits as you suggest because it will come back to haunt us. If only it were possible to ignore the uneducated fear-mongers; to politicians, they're votes. And there a lot of'em. As Machiavelli said: it is better to rule with fear than with love if one can't rule with both.
There is no way in hell I would eat that. Who cares if the FDA approves it? Anyone notice on TV they advertise a medicine, say, to cure asthma. Then the possible side effects are increased risked of asthma related death, diarrhea, stomach pain, stomach cramps, gas with an oily discharge, and in some cases death, and by this time you forgot what the medicine was for? Then a few months later, they play this quiet commercial. Have you or one of your loved ones died from taking our medicine? If so, please dial 1-800-OUR-BAD.
This is an ongoing debate and we may never know the full impact of genetically engineered foods. Corn is one food caught up in this modification because of its high demand for food and fuel. We need also to focus and other aspects of the foods we consume eg MSG (monosodium glutamate) which is widely used to season foods especially in the food retail business. MSG adds flavor to foods and makes mediocre chefs master chefs. To my mind, the FDA needs to inform the public about the ill effects of MSG. I am well informed that Canadian restaurants are required to display conspicuous notices as to whether their foods contain MSG. Most packaged seasonings hide their MSG contents under the term "other spices" but the Corporate giants would not bow to pressure to disclose the various elements in the "spices"-it would harm their business. True, we cannot stay away from it all but we can be more selective in acquiring foods. What about those protective coatings on farm produce eg tomatoes? Are they harmless? We can go and and on and starve in the process.
I didn't read all the commentary and someone may have addressed this issue. I'm Jewish and eat strictly Kosher, Salmon is one of the main stays in Kosher cooking. By injecting these Atlantic Salmon with Pout yields them unKosher per Kosher guidelines found on many certified kosher websites. Furthermore, I don't want my food farmed in the way it's being done now, fish were not meant to be farmed or raised. The eco system can't handle the farming that is done now, leaving dead areas in the ocean beds/farms. Not to mention these fish need vast amounts of antibiotics since they are penned in and left in their own filth and excrement. No matter how quickly they grow and are out of the water, it's still not eco friendly nor animal friendly. With the more GMO vegetables coming to our tables it will be much harder to find nutritious healthy foods for anyone to consume.
I'm surprised one of these battle hardy proponents haven't told you your kosher beliefs are completely unfounded and you should be forced to eat it whether or not you want to because believing in Jewish tradition is completely unscientific and makes you an idiot.
Adding the genetic material of an unkosher animal into a kosher animal renders the kosher animal completely unkosher.
Karlie,
Kosher beliefs are completely founded. They are found in Leviticus 11 of your bible.
Kosher laws are not meant to be "scientific." Whoever thinks that they are has totally missed the point. They are laws without explanation. Period. They are meant to be specific so as to separate Jews from non-Jews. That's it. Nothing else. No other reason given. There isn't any "reason" to the kosher laws other than the mere fact that G-d himself decreed – and I take his knowledge over man's any day. There is nothing wrong with following the kosher laws, but there is everything wrong for a Jew to ignore them.
Noah also knew the difference between kosher and unkosher, so too he would stand in agreement that using the genetic material of an unkosher animal in a kosher animal, would render the kosher animal no longer kosher, and on that ground alone, would be prohibited by the bible for a Jew to eat. Period. The world seems to enjoy coming up with creative ways to make things more unkosher. A sign of the times I suppose.
I think it's exciting really. It's not they are altering it with plutonium, or experimental synthetic drugs. They are just taking the best traits from other breeds and incorporating them into this fish. This is essentially what dog breeders or crop farmers have been doing for decades but just cutting out the evolutionary portion and jumping right to the end result. I don't see any difference myself.
I have always believed that in a crisis – such as our current global food shortage problem – that man will always find a way to overcome. This story is proof to me.
Now on to Peak Oil...
If people are so worried about 'greed' from this company making 'fake' fish, go buy a fishing pole and catch your own fish.
IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY !!! PERIOD
I buy only wild salmon from Alaska. It is a little bit expensive and what I know the coloring is added to make it pink in color.
The FDA says that you do not need to know if your meat is cloned.
The FDA says that you do not need to know if you food is irradiated.
Do you really think you'll know if your fish is modified?
The FDA does not need to adhere to peer reviewed scientific evidence.
The FDA operates at its discretion, bowing to money and politics.
Do You trust them? Should you trust them?
The fish is probably safe, but shouldn't you know it is altered, I'll bet they will not tell you.
Did you see the movie Food Inc.? Want salmon, buy the sterile female eggs here.
Seems God's creation need improvement.
The same people that fear to eat this fish are the same ones that think irradiated meat will make them glow in the dark. Your ignorance of scientific matters is both pitiful and annoying. It's a fish, not a monster. Eating it will not cause you to burst open and a creature to crawl out and terrorize the neighborhood. Stop watching movies if you can't tell science from science-fiction.
I'm sure the modified fish, if approved, will be clearly labeled as such, so you can avoid purchasing it. Fish are running out world-wide. People are eating species they never have before that can't supply the demand, like the Orange Roughy that takes 25 years to reach reproductive age. Modifying these salmon is one way to increase the supply. Come out from under your rock and realize that your government isn't trying to kill you. I highly doubt anyone could tell the modified salmon from the original by eating it. I'm a parent too, and I wouldn't have a problem feeding it to my kids. Try it before you condemn it.
HAAAAAA....What a shame hopefully you can sleep well at night with those thoughts.. Its actually a shame.. You cant be or stay healthy by eating GMO ANYTHING.. Do you know that in parts of Africa, India, etc.. they are actually turning away the GMO crop seeds.. DO you know WHY... BECAUSE THE EFFFFFFIN ANIMALS WONT EVEN EAT THEM WAKKKKKEEEEE UP..ans SYOP POISOINING YOUR CHILDREN
Go smoke another genetically-modified joint.
Here's an open question for anyone: Why do you believe the makers of the Food, Inc and opponents of GMOs over AquaBounty and proponents of GMO?
Actually I grow my own ORGANIC HERB. WITH FRESH ORGANIC SEEDS AND ORGANIC DIRT AND ORGANIC HERB I REAP FROM IT AND ITS GOOOOOOOD. Your just a dumbed down flouride water drinking, Gmo eating idiot... If Not for yourself.. PLEASE DONT POISON YOUR CHILDREN for real..... NO BS... RESEARCH IT...
Bless you my friend. If these idiots would smoke a joint the world would not suck so much!
Why is it that you have to be rude and call people names? Someone is not a dummy just because they made a different choice from you. It's this kind of attitude that makes me sick. You have no strong argument so you resort to name calling, and generalizations?. I have 2 scientific degrees and am working on my third. I've actually done this science and made "glow in the dark" cells. Regardless of whether this is "100% safe" or not, people should have the choice to eat what they like. Regardless of whether the basis of their choice meets with your approval or not.
Are you also in favor of Eugenics.....
You said:::::: "Regardless of whether this is "100% safe" or not, people should have the choice to eat what they like. Regardless of whether the basis of their choice meets with your approval or not."
FOR REAL......of whether this 100%safe or not......The same scientist that is making these sick satanic foods are a THE SAME PEOPLE THAT ARE IN CHARGE OF GETTING RID OF ORGANIC FARMING AND CULTIVATING....WAKE UP AND TAKE YOUR BS DEGREES AND FLUSH THEM DOWN THE TOILET.. BECAUSE IF YOU CAN ACTUALLY LIVE WITH YOURSELF TELLING PEOPLE THIS 100% SAFE THEN MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON YOUR SOUL.....
i doubt anyone couldn't tell the difference
http://www.sectionz.info/issue_1/facts_footnotes.html
And that my friend IS the problem....
Whoever finds this FRANKENFOOD Salmon to NOT be a problem are actually dumbed down idiots who dont really care about the health of themselves or their children.. WAKE UP.....
YUCKITY YUCK YUCK!!!
Why does this sound like jurassic park?
If you've eaten at fast food you have been eating genetically altered food! geez folks wake up and smell your "genetically altered" coffee. As far as "natural" food goes guess what? The amount of toxic we dump into our oceans etc has "alter" the fish we eat. Would you eat fish raise in a carefully maintain farm or one caught in a river or area that has oil, sewage, plastic in it etc?
Last but not least most of us take medications (OTC/Perscription)! that is about as "unnatural" as all get out but most of us take pills to cure our ailments!
Humans = Enigma!
okay, I really don't get this argument. So your point is that we've been force fed GM plants, basically our choice was taken away, so now we shouldn't fight to have a choice with GM animals?
Honestly, what is it to you if a fraction of the population is not interested in eating this stuff? Ok so you think they are wrong but is it in every case that when you think people are wrong, they should have no right to choose to do what they believe is best for them?
I don't get your argument either.. I didn;t say to replace ALL salmons with GM ones.. I'm saying what's wrong with options?
Just like today you can eat a steak from a cow bred in a family farm or you can eat a BigMac.
Unless we cure over population we need new ways to feed these folks. Our Earth is limited.. there are only so much animals and plant life to sustain the exponentially growing human populations. Maybe China has it right with their one child policy.. sure osme may think it's cruel but in the long run they are doing the world a favor. Imagine what this world will be if familaies can't have more than 2 or 3 kids. Not only will be solve over population BUT with fewer kids they will be given more attention which will have a new positive effect on society.
so its ok to pollute the wild stocks out of existence as long as we have fish farms
I don't have so much a problem with them developing a genetically modfied animal or question it's safety. My problem is that we allow such products on the market and then, not only do we not require that you be told you're eating a GMO, we basically make it crime for anyone else to tell you you are so as to protect the companies that develop this stuff from "slander". I think it's a crime what they've allowed Monsanto to do with soy to the point they basically terrorize any farmer that doesn't want to plant their genetically modified soy. Personally, I think they should be charged with illegally releasing an invasive species harmful to argriculture into the wild, instead of being supported in their quest for a monopoly.
I completely agree and for the life of me cannot understand those who would not.
All you people have been eating modified grains, wheat, corn, barly, for almost a century. Eggs been modified forever.
Get a grip!!
Heather, What are your fears of GMO salmon? I simply do not understand. I have actually eaten GMO salmon since I work in the industry and believe me, they taste no different and can increase yields substantially so as to actually reduce prices in the long term. As for concerns regarding genetic manipulation of our foods, can you please tell me which foods you eat ARE NOT modified genetically from their distant ancient relatives (e.g. corn, cattle, broccoli, pork, etc...)? That is correct. NONE! Everything we eat has been modified genetically. It has just taken decades and decades with absolutely no idea what was being done at the cellular/molecular level. Now we can change organisms with exact information and create new forms of food which are better for our environment and for ourselves. I simply do not get why people are scared of this since it has been going on for thousands of years and our life span has never been greater than it is now.
good gods, I wish you people would have paid attention in school.
1. genetically altering a critter involves transferring a minute fraction of the mass of a single cell. by the time the organism is an adult, there will not be any of the original chemicals left.
2. The critters that make it to market are downstream of the alteration event by dozens, if not hundreds, of generations. They will have had no alterations done to them whatsoever.
3. You cannot have your own DNA altered by eating another critter with altered DNA. It simply does not work that way. If this were the case, eating ANY critter with DNA (which would be all organisms..) would have the ability to alter your DNA.
4. The increased levels of growth hormones that lead to the rapid development in these fish are not transferable in an active state after ingestion. Growth hormones are broken down into their component amino acids in the stomach, just like any other protein. In order for growth hormones to be active, you must inject them into the blood stream. Furthermore, ALL animals contain growth hormones, wild or not. They wouldn't have grown otherwise.
5. The reason kids are developing faster these days is not due to growth hormones in the food supply (as noted in 4 above). It is because our diets have become ridiculously high in calories and nutrients. An over abundance of these spur faster and earlier growth in any living organism, not just humans.
Ouka, most people prefer to eat seafood in their natural state.. which is to say they prefer to eat fish swimming in waters full or toxic goo.. i.e plastic, oil, chemical contaminants, sewage etc.
Uh do you think we're idiots? We know the fish DNA isn't going to become part of our DNA by eating it. It's the effects this can have on our body, eating something unnaturally altered with life-changing amounts of growth hormones and strange DNA.
DNA took billions of years to evolve. Do you think just splicing it into organisms and eating them sounds like a very safe idea? Even the most MINUTE thing can be life changing- like Sickle Cell Anemia, for example. The mutation in the Protein in the gene is MINUTE- ONE SINGLE Amino Acid is changed, and it's a death sentence.
There isn't much we understand about what causes many horrible diseases and drastic problems. It's a slippery slope when it comes to GMOs. Humankind has NEVER eaten spliced food before created by scientists, and pretty soon all of our food will be freaks of science.
@Bree Odds are neither you or anyone else will read a post buried this deep in a CNN message board, but on the off chance . . . You made this perfectly reasonable statement: "Uh do you think we're idiots? We know the fish DNA isn't going to become part of our DNA by eating it." But sadly whoever wrote the material at the link Jenna and her friends have been repeatedly spamming this messageboard with are not as reasonable as you. Here is a quote: "Gene Transfer. In other words the potential for alteration of the human gene sequence leading to unintended consequences. For instance it is being found that the puberty age in the United States has been dropping leading to girls developing breasts as early as the age of 7 and 10 year old boys standing 6 feet tall." By your definition, the people that wrote this are "idiots". I completely agree.
We have absolutely no current process for learning the natural genetic changes of any of our foods. Longterm genetic mutation is common in nature; some would call that "evolution". Much of our botanical products are genetically engineered. Our corn, potatoes, tomatoes, etc. aren't your grandmothers' veggies.
Did any of you watch the future of food? What truly disturbs me about this story is the fact that they say "Up to 5% of the eggs may be fertile". If you watched the future of food, the GMO creators used this to virtually wipe out all breeds of corn EXCEPT their GMO. It's a patent on life- If their corn bred with other corn "accidentally", even on other peoples farms by drifting into the wind, the creator of that GMO can sue the farm owner, saying that corn is all their property since they illegally were bred with their property.
So if these "5%" fertile eggs somehow make it into the wild, and breed with natural salmon, the offspring will LITERALLY be the PROPERTY of the gmo creator, who patented those genes. They will own all fish with any trace DNA of "their creation", even if it was a "mistake" that it got their. The GMOs are usually stronger and have an advantage, until they wipe out all of the natural salmon and all will be the GMO Salmon, and all will be the property of the same company. This is freakish stuff we're dealing with here.
They are all witches!
AquaBounty Technologies seeks to be like Monsanto. No thanks!
I hope the FDA reconsiders their decision not to label these frankenfish as what they really are..
As long as the corporations have the money to fight it, we'll never get labeling on foods that accurately (and in plain language) describes what's in it. We used to have a bumper sticker that says "What's in this stuff? Our health is at stake. We demand the right to know!" Most people today haven't seen this bumper sticker in a long while, because the lobbyists had a way of making it go away.
You're right Bonnie... it doesn't sound like "The American Way" either does it?? So much for Freedom.
the corporations and their supporters would rather have you believe that since they say there is nothing wrong with it, you should not have the right to decide whether it goes into your body or the trash can.
How many of you are willing to state that your greatest fear is that genetically modified humans are the next target? How many of you are willing to state (emphatically) that you don't believe GE foods (like corn) are partially to blame for all those unexplained illnesses (like the surge in autism, or auto-immune disorders)?
We've already tried to genetically modify humans, with terrible results.
while the worlds population continues to increase the land needed to grow plants and harvest animals decreases. This is the only way to keep food plentiful throughout the 21st century,
already refuted.
What are people so scared of? If the FDA approves it, it's O.K. for me! Those who run scared on false info are crazy here for nothing. But what if these fish get out and some reproduce in the ocean? A new fish....
False info? Really?
Sounds like you have some reading to do.
"If the FDA approves it, it's O.K. for me! " O_o
Didn't we go through this with Growth Hormones in milk? At first they wouldn't even label which milk had it. Now at least you can find out which suppliers allow it in the cows. And now we have girl children developing at age 7. We were told it wouldn't effect people and would supply more milk at lower costs to the consumer. Also, we are now finding out that farmed salmon are sometimes gene mixing with wild salmon and affecting the full gene pool. We know that eventually some of the same thing will occur with these genetically altered fish, as well, and we will have changed our ability to even choose eventually. Just leave well enough alone and start caring about our environment and fishing limits and we will be able to build up fish supplies naturally again.
"We know that eventually some of the same thing will occur with these genetically altered fish, as well"
We attack the people who make scientific discoveries when we should be attacking our regulations. We most certainly do not KNOW that this will happen. Why cant we have scientific discoveries and prevent the problems too? Because we dont complain enouph as a population to get politicians to do anything.
Lets regulate carefully and stay in control. To stop progress in science is a terrible idea when we can have control and scientific benafit at the same time.
So they mixed the genes of two species of salmon together and added some from a pout. We have been doing this to animals for hundreds if not thousands of years. It just now the process is quicker and can tailor the results better than just having different species interbreed. Its not like their pumping these fish full of chemicals to get them to grow. We eat these 3 different types of fish so our bodies are ingesting this genetic makeup already. The only question is combining these naturally occuring genes into one fish have any harmful side effects. Lets wait and see what the FDA finds. The only real question is were do we draw the line in altering nature. Now before you say no, you have to realize nature alters itself all the time and nature does not always get it right.
no we have not been adding eel genes to salmon genes for thousands of years. But I know you'll just ignore this and continue with the erroneous assumption.
Almost all food we eat is genetically modified and has been for hundreds if not thousands of years. The only thing that is different now from selecting the breeding pairs of cattle or cross pollination of select plants is the power of the tools.
With the added power of the tools, much more careful scrutiny is certainly needed, but most people need to understand that we've been making genetic freaks for both agricultural purposes as well as pure entertainment purposes for thousands of years. Look at all of the miniature dog breeds out there and compare those to their wild ancestors...
This is nto the same thing as selective breeding! As for dog breeds...do you think Corgis were created by inserting a dachshund gene into Collie DNA in a petrie dish and then injecting it on a virus into an egg and implanting it into a dog? That's how "natural" this is.
I'm starting to think there is NO point to introducing logic to anyone who equates GM with natural selection or breeding. They're warped ideas have been restated over and over here even with the obvious definitions being plastered all over the place in response.
Humanoids from the Deep...tastes just like chicken (a mutated, seven foot tall chicken, that is)
What are genetically enhanced foods? They're crap. And as these genetically modified fish make it into the food chain, as always occurs, then they alter the base DNA permanently, which will have what kind of effects on future generations of both fish and humans? And that's the point: No one knows, but these Frankenscientists are apparently willing to take the risk to make a few bucks. Besides, they'll all be dead long before our great grandchildren, and theirs, start growing gills and snacking on fresh worms.
You pussies! Just eat the fish and enjoy...
now thats keeping it real!
Keeping it real!
The genetically modified fish will turn your children into deep ones (fish people) and make them start worshiping the dread god Cthulhu. For the love of Jeebus and Zeus we must prevent this scourge from mutating our crotch fruit.
This is just another excuse for big corporations to avoid cleaning up the environment so that the natural species can return to fishable levels. Now that they can grow fish in tanks, who the heck needs the Ocean.
If you believe that sustainable levels of fish are possible with an exploding human population, you really need to get a clue.
The newest poll in CNN asks if I would eat "Genetically Modified Salmon" or GMS... Of course, I would... I would f uck a GMS if possible... why not?
if you have eaten of the food on this list, you have eaten GM food.
Maize (corn)
Wheat
Rice
Oilseed rape (canola)
Chicory
Squash
Potato
Soybean
Alfalfa
Cotton
Good luck trying to stay away from GM foods, we've been eating them for years and thats just a short list.
I’ve somehow avoided it for years and years. You make it sound like we have no choice, silly! There is always a choice.
So i suppose you don't eat potato chips, or corn, of anything with corn syrup, which is to say anything sweet, or anything with soy, or cereal, or bread or any number of foods. I suppose you just grow all of your own food and don't step foot in a grocery store.
We all eat modified foods all the time. Most the fruit we eat today didn't exist naturally on earth. If you think you can stay away from GM foods your insane. You've been eating GM foods for years and haven't even known it.
The sad sad truth even if the FDA labels it GM Super Salmon or whatever and says it is known it may be a carcinogen or any health problems if it tastes good Americans will eat it and eat it again....Look around do you really think Americans care what they put in their body?If it tastes like a Big Mac or a Whopper it will sell and sell well.............Obesity is out of control and morbid obesity is getting there.Now look at Oprah is she overweight, obese or morbidly obese?I think there is a species called Frankenfish already
I am 19 years old and I weigh 250 pounds..I am going to get gastric by-pass and a boob job with the new healthcare plan.WOO-HOO
It doesn't sound as if this "clarification" has done much clarifying for some people...on either side of the argument!
I'm not worried about eating genetically modified food but I am worried about it's affect on the natural environment. You would not use genetic engineering to produce something that you could do by selective breeding. For example, you could not introduce human genes into a sheep (no matter how much some farm boys may try) but you can do that with genetic engineering. The consequences are unpredictible and anyone who says otherwise has a vested interest. You do not know what would happen if and when genetically engineered fish get into the ecosystem: maybe nothing, or maybe they will cause the extinction of some other species of fish. Who knows? It's like when the Aussies introducied cane toads to eat bugs and now they are overrun with poisonous toads, or when Hawaiian farmers brought in mongooses to eat rats, which they did not do, but they did kill indiginous birds. There are dozens of these incidents where an animal was brought in for one purpose and caused the extinction of another species or simply became an uncontrollable pest. If we could not predict the affect of introducing animals that were genetically modified what makes anyone think they can do better with ones that were?
It's bad enough that companies like Monsanto own the food that is grown by farmers. If companies can own animal species as well there will be big time problems for the general population.
So.... as a result of the residue left in the fish, are we going to grow bigger boobs, bigger ears, bigger feet or bigger cancerous tumors?
Well, FDA's approach is "The proof of the pudding is in the eating"...so I guess we'll find out! :)
After all the recalled decisions the FDA has done in the last decade, the use of hormones/steroids on chicken and cattle, the latest reports of children developing at an earlier age than previous generations, breast cancer becomming more prevalent, all this considered you would think that these scientist and the FDA would get a clue! I think they should direct their energies more towards cures than playing god with our food supply.
The real question here (besides being healthy food) is as soon as these animals reproduce with untouched salmons will they become property of the company? We see the same in seeds and grains were farmers are now forbid to farm because "free" seeds interbred with the companies seeds and now about 85 to 90 percent of the seeds planted are company owned and WILL sue farmers whom do not have a permit to use the seed. This is sad how we want to own everything and anything....even seeds.
I believe so and that's what I'm worried about too. Seems like the beginnings of an apocalyptic future, where all living creatures are owned by a company, even humans. We'll have serial numbers on our foreheads and are sold into slavery by the corporations. These are the subtle beginnings... They did it, they patented life now. How could humans say they OWN anything? We're at a very unique time in the world. We are manipulating DNA that took billions of years to evolve, then saying we own it.
The end is near.
All of you from a scientific background are blind to the real issue. The issue is not the ability of the scientific method to produce really useful things that are not found in nature, like iPods, corn, and automobiles.
The issue is fake science. Corporations fake scientific results, conceal negative results, conceal and destroy defective animals, hire scientists who are known to produce user-friendly experiments whose results are reliably favorable, and conceal product defects.
I trust the scientific method to produce a reliable description of the phenomenon under study over time. I do not trust the corporations I deal with, such as my employer and every other corporation I do business with. The more I know them, the more I read about them, and the more I learn from the relatively few corporate scandals that become public knowledge, the less I trust them.
I think CHOICE is the most important issue of all.
There has got to be some shady reason why all these proponents want to take away our choice to eat what we want.
The same could be said about politicians, oil companies, the military, oh, probably even Wal-Mart... If only the few bad apples didn't ruin it for everyone...
Oh my God.....What is next.............
Soylent Green, how funny someone remembers that movie from that far back. That might be next if we don't get a handle on this.
Just a few seeds (no pun intended) for thought. Before any GM crops can be sold or any claims made about them, they must gain government approval. This government approval requires reams and reams of data to be submitted by the developers. Say what you like about how the data was "tainted" or "made up" or whatever you like, the process is set and the rules are in place to avoid that. If you believe the conspiracy runs that deep, you may as well stop reading now, because there's no way to educate you.
No such rules exist for anti-GMO claimants. According to Wikipedia, Organic Certification "is handled by state, non-profit and private agencies that have been approved by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA)." Private agencies? you mean like... businesses? who might be out to make a profit? hmmmmm.
As for many of the other arguments, I can propose another viable explanation... Maybe the reason more kids have autism is because they were also prone to die in infancy prior to our advances in medicine and FOOD QUALITY. Maybe the reason kids are physically developing earlier is because they are getting better quality food and NUTRITION and vitamin fortification and aren't suffering from tainted foods that killed children in this country for centuries. Maybe the reason more people are getting cancer is because they're living long enough. In spite of all of these terrible terrible things we're being told, since 1980:
US Infant Mortality has dropped nearly in half. It's dropped nearly 4-fold since 1960. All in a fairly linear fashion.
Life Expectancy in the US has risen by over 5 years. Also fairly linear.
Cancer death rates are dropping in the US.
Organic Foods didn't really get started in a widespread way in the US until around 1990. Death rates due to cancer have dropped slightly faster since then, infant mortality is dropping considerably more slowly and life expectancy gains are about the same. Sounds like a wash to me.
But back to Salmon... If you're eating salmon caught from the ocean, there are potential mercury issues. If you're eating farmed salmon, they are not eating a diet natural to salmon, but rather pelleted food which may or may not contain fillers, preservatives, etc.
Nice choice of words, Jules. Actually, our bodies ARE made to process crap. Our bodies get rid of crap they have no use for and eliminate it as... well... you get the idea.
The bottom line is your food comes from SOMEWHERE and, like it or not, all you have to go on that it is what they claim it is and that it's safe is their word. Even if you grow your tomatoes at home, are you SURE they haven't been modified in some way? You're trusting the seed company that sold you those seeds to be telling the truth about their safety and history. To me, a GM crop with tons of data sounds safer than a conventional crop with none.
Thanks, Don! I’ll shut the f up and go out an buy some GM corn and shove it down my gullet! You're an "expert", after all!
anything over a paragraph is just babble!
Thanks for your in-depth and scientific replies. You have shown me the error of my ways.
Funny how something like this causes such an uproar from people who know nothing on the topic. Coming from someone with an Animal Science degree and who is attending veterinary school, genetically modified foods are no harm to us whatsoever. Any "harm" to the environment or other wild fish, corn, etc. occurs no more often from genetically modified animals/plants than those that are in nature. Cross breeding and cross pollination are unavoidable. If you're against that, good luck stopping the plants and animals that do it. If you're looking for someone to blame, I suppose you can blame Mendel for ever discovering such a thing. How irresponsible of him... And my, how irresponsible of us, the agriculture sector, for developing new ways to feed the billions of hungry mouths who don't enderstand where their food comes from...
The funny thing is what someone all ready mentioned.People oppose this Super-salmon or Frankenfish but "pound cheeseburgers."
Very funny... and intriguing...that people would rather eat 2000+ calories and 35g of fat in a burger than risk the genes of a modified organism. Hahaha...
so, you're an "expert" on genetic modification, right?
Oh, most definitely not. But 4 years of undergrad and my veterinary education makes me just a bit more educated than most of the people in this uproar. Only trying to pass it on and hoping they take time to learn the real story being genetic modification.
Genetic modification? Isn't that what they did to O'Bamas ears?
Nothing to add as usual from the right.
The fear of these products is fear from ignorance.
There is no more danger from eating genetically modified food as there is eating food such as 99% of the chicken in the country that is filled with hormones and antibiotics, or the 99% of fruits and vegetables that are filled with pesticides.
Genetic modification is a way to make for instance larger tomatoes that could feed more people while consuming less land
or making genetic modifications to plants or animals that make them insusceptible to say...ecoli
or for in this case, making the animals grow quicker.
There is no danger. They aren't being pumped full of growth hormones. I'd be more worried about eating NATURAL salmon that IS FULL OF MERCURY (which, consuming large amounts of sushi and salmon in a short time is shown to cause mercury poisoning) than eating fish bred in captivity.
okay then... if a medical student says so, we must obey! I love experts!
no danger right? ok medical student please do some research into HOW you genetically modify an organism. I mean method. Also please look into why genetically modifying patients has failed. I mean the introduction of the missing gene into the patient to recover from diseases like diabetes. If you really care to be informed, please look into it and get back to us.
First off you imply that there is a danger without providing any evidence. From your earlier posts you will talk about the methods involved in making these changes and say that you use a viral vector or chemical treatment to insert the gene. Also you say a marker used for validating which cells were genetically altered would be used. So these chemicals and snippets of dna/rna may end up in the fish’s cells as well. What you failed to do is to provide evidence why these things can be detrimental to the humans that would eat the fish. Or are you just using the “nature” fallacy and saying that if its not natural its bad for us.
How does this have anything to do with genetically modifying patients? Because scientists failed at treating patients with LOCAL genetic therapies if follows that the people who will eat these altered fish will have bad consequences? This does not follow from what I have heard you say. And if anything, it would only have an effect on the fish and not the humans eating the fish. With the background you claim, you should no that one gene inserted into a human to cure diabetes would shed NO LIGHT on the mechanisms involved in inserting completely different and unrelated genes into a fish.
You will need to be more specific for me to follow your argument. I work in a molecular biology lab, I am genuinely interested but skeptical. Feel free to use big fancy words if you decide to continue.
oops. allow me to make a little more sense of that previous post
I said:
"Because scientists failed at treating patients with LOCAL genetic therapies if follows that the people who will eat these altered fish will have bad consequences? "
I meant to say:
Because scientists failed at treating patients with genetic therapies it follows that the people who will eat these altered fish will have bad consequences?
oops again.
Substitute "know" for "no". I swear im not that stupid. I obviously like science better that english :)
well if you are talking about the viruses then you just need to stop while you're behind. I'm starting to get the feeling that you are staying that we're going to get viruses from genetically modified food even though there is no viral DNA left in said virus once the desired DNA has been introduced to it. You are not going to get sick from eating the DNA of an organism, you may however get sick for the environmental factors that affect that organism.
I am not implying that there is a danger. The original poster clearly stated that "there is no danger" without providing any evidence. Did you all attend the same debate class where you were taught to change the subject when your claims are refuted? I have made no claims whatsoever. I have only countered those who claim there is NO difference. I understand your homocentric point of view but NO DANGER also applies to the animals, (humans are animals too btw).
You can't pretend that the only gene that is introduced is the gene of interest and expect me to swallow that as you would expect me to swallow this salmon.
I am not interested in convincing anyone that they should make the same choice I am making in deciding not to eat this. But please stop trying to take away the choice, period. And please stop with the name calling, the superiority complexes, and the false allegations.
Do you really think it's perfectly ok for you to ask someone to prove a negative when you have no evidence either to support your claims that this is perfectly 100% safe?
"You can't pretend that the only gene that is introduced is the gene of interest and expect me to swallow that as you would expect me to swallow this salmon."
Forgive me then. It's just easy to read statements like these and see how you are portraying the GE salmon in a bad light. One can only assume that the mocking statement made to the med student above when he said there were "no dangers" (you imply that there are dangers and he needs to do research) was talking about danger to humans, since the salmon are food and i didn't think we were worried about dangers to them. Also i asked you if it was the fish you were worried about in an earlier post and you responded with "I'm really just worried about my freedom of choice whether to eat this or not" contradicting yourself and implying you don't care about the fish. If i misread i am sorry but i stand by my interpretation of what you wrote as reasonable.
@carlie:
If you don't understand why the situation is different between genetically modified organisms and genetically modified foods, then please do us all a favor and stop acting like you have insight here. Gene transfer experiments in humans have to use different methods than gene transfer methods in crops or other foods because with respect to the former they have tried to have transfer efficiencies that are MUCH higher than that needed for foods. Stated another way, viral vectors have been tried for gene therapy because they are generally much more efficient for transferring nucleic acids than other methods. If you are making transgenic crops, or mice, or fish, you don't care if the efficiency is suboptimal – those that fail either don't have the gene you want them to or, in some instances, they might die. If any particular salmon egg dies, who cares? But if little Johnny has SCID and needs an ADA gene, you have an entirely different series of concerns.
Frankenfish and Super-salmon? The day is finally here so I can reveal my true self...Let me get the Coven back together again....
Eye of Newt? Toad wart anyone? We meet at Midnight and sacrifice to the Prince Of Darkness.....
Whether we want to eat it or not is irrelevant since the food industry has fought hard to remove any labeling that in any way lists the item as being engineered or modified. In the future, you will never know what has been done to the food unless you purposely purchase from someone who lists it as normal.
I figure if I keep eating salmon I'll end up eating genetically modified salmon some day. I'll probably eat it and not even know.
Put a label on it. That will ensure the price is low. The rich will pay the premium for the non-GMO food and the poor can eat the GMO food. Since I consider myself poor and have no care about eating GMO food, all the better.
Personal Responsibility? What is that? I prefer to blame someone else...who are we blaming today?........Its that darn FDA and SUPER-SALMON's Fault! Hold on.. I am at the drive-thru at Mickey D's! 10 BIG MACS........ yum-yum
The science of genetics is not the issue here. Agribusiness is the issue here.
If we have learned anything from Enron, BP, Blackwater, Halliburton, Exxon, HP, and all the rest of the rogues' gallery of global corporations it is this: Unless a saintly federal regulator is holding a gun to the head of the CEO, every corporation will lie, cheat, steal, cook the books, bribe legislators, lie to inspectors, bribe inspectors, lie to consumers, lie to investors, buy pretty girls for influential friends, bribe the county commissioner for a zoning variance, deliver cheap asphalt when high quality asphalt was called for in the contract, conduct "stealth" recalls of defective products, and never, never, never, never tell the truth about anything to any audience. They deliver one message to consumers, another to investors, another to government, another to competitors, and another to suppliers.
Global corporations are wild beasts to be tamed and put in harness. We have to forget that Libertarian/Ayn Rand/Gary Cooper romantic vision of the brilliant entrepreneur. It does not describe what we see happening in front of our eyes. We are so accustomed to corporate lying that we think it is unremarkable when the corporation always downplays problems. It never just tells the damn simple truth. They say the leak is only 5,000 gallons, knowing it is much more, but hoping to cover up the difference. They say there is no defect in the product, but finally they admit that a number of people have been killed and very reluctantly they order a recall. They admit the truth only when they are unable to cover up the reality.
What I do NOT know about this genetic salmon is which tests were faked, which test animals were destroyed so no federal regulator could see them, which regulators were bribed to produce user-friendly reports, which critics were bought off, which scientists were selected for their purchasability rather than their scientific integrity. In fact, I will probably never know that. So I prefer not to eat this fish because I do not trust the industry that produces it to be competent or honest.
We all know that product defects are routinely concealed from regulators and consumers. Toyota knew about its sticking gas pedal long before that knowledge became public. Arthur Anderson knew about Enrons illegal manipulation of energy prices in California and certainly Enron employees knew about it. I read daily of this or that corporation that agrees to pay a few million dollars in fines "without admitting any guilt" and that makes me think that they are guilty as hell.
What I DO know about this Frankensalmon is that it will not be honestly labeled so that consumers can choose whether to eat it or not. It will be called "WILD ALASKAN-PACIFIC brand SALMON: from Mother Nature, with love, to you."
The trouble is.. most of the federal regulators are ex CEO's of the companies they are supposed to protect us from. The FDA is run by mostly ex CEO's of the food industry :(
@ El Kababa – Love this!
This will be news when they can make it taste like a T-Bone......
Have you ever compared a real banana with the banana flavor put into some foods, mostly candies. A VERY poor substitute. I don't understand how some people can't tell the difference. Steak and steak flavor taste completely different to me.
In 1960 the Ford and Rockefeller Foundation establich Rice Research Institute in the Philippines for the purpose of developing a strain of rice that is resistant to deseases, increase the yeild and shorten time to maturity. They use all the technique from cross breeding to exposing seeds inside a nuclear reactor to alter the genes. The result a strain of rice called "MIRACLE RICE " which is what we are eating now.
Philippine Fish farmer also learn selective breeding and using aquaculture raise a strain of shrimp we called "SUGPO" which is 5-10 times bigger than what we have in the United States market.
My point, we have been eating modified rice and crustaceans we just did not know about it, but now everybody is running scared because it has a description "GENETICALLY MODIFIED" .
Human are the only species that is over populating the earth, we have no natural enemies, we have not had a major war for the past 60 years to cut our population, our species are living longer, H1N1 or HIV failed to control our growth, and therefore we are multiplying exponentially. Unless we figure out a way to produce more food source within 100 years we will all starve.
I'm sure we'll find a way to solve that problem...Soylent Green is people!
Genetically modified fish present the best chance for creating a healthy and sustainable source of food for the future. Right now, our rivers, lakes and oceans are so polluted with mercury that it is literally toxic to eat too much seafood. I know someone who got mercury poisoning because of it. Fish that grow faster make the fish farm alternative much more attractive economically, and that is a huge benefit to all of us.
Good to see sane intelligent people still exist in the world.
I hate to tell you all this but without science intervening in food production most of us would be starving right now.
Besides it can't possibly be More harmful than 90% of the crap we eat now.
Please, this kind of science could end world hunger. I would eat it in an instant. If you eat twinkies you can eat this salmon. ppl will stick processed food that have no natural ingredients in them but not this fish? you ppl are nuts!
like the other GM crop ended world hunger right?
you think one crop is going to end world hunger. The fact that you believed that shows your ignorance. It will take a whole lot more then just 1 crop to end world hunger. My point is that this KIND of science will lead to the end of world hunger. Nothing happens over night!
The problem with world hunger is not with the crop itself. Make sure that you are arguing the right issue. The GMO crops would do better at reducing starvation than non-GMO crops would. Getting it growing in an affordable manner is an economic problem, not a scientific problem.
To all those people who commented with a "oh no, it's genetically modified, we are all going to die" type comment, I say go learn some basic science.
Human beings are genetically modified apes. Birds are genetically modified dinosaurs. Every child is a genetic modification of it's parents DNA. Yes, for those examples Nature was the one doing the modifications, but now we have learned by watching nature and trying stuff out for ourselves. Switching a few genes around doesn't suddenly make the animal poisonous (unless we added poison genes). They are simply switching a couple of genes to be the same as another couple of species of fish. It's not like they added elephant DNA. For all we know, long ago, a fish that was the precursor to the current salmon already had those genes but lost them because the natural ecosystem couldn't support fish of that size. Since we can raise them in captivity, we don't have to worry about changing the ecosystem.
As long as the fish produces no chemicals that are harmful to life, then it'lll be fine to eat. It's still the same as any other living creature on the planet. The stomach acid inside us that helps break stuff down doesn't care about the order the DNA of the food we eat, it, like us, is just a big bag of chemicals.
shooting steroids into an animal does not equate to genetic modification. Steroids activate genes that are already present. Selective breeding does not equate to genetic modification. It only selects for desired mutations of genes already present. Natural selection does not equate to genetic modification as spontaneous mutations are the root cause. Genetic modification involves introducing a foreign gene from another organism or one created in the laboratory into another organism where it is not naturally found and would not naturally occur. So please refrain from this fallacious argument.
You do know that natural selection also produces faulty genes that result in the decreased survivability of the organism don't you?
It doesn't say they are shooting steroids. I never said they were shooting steroids... They added GH-coding sequences from the Pacific Chinook salmon and the AFP gene from the pout.
Natural selection isn't just genetic modification, but the actions of the parents and their choice to mate is. By making that choice they are choosing to combine bits of each other's DNA to form a new set of DNA that did not previously exist.
"Genetic modification involves introducing a foreign gene from another organism or one created in the laboratory into another organism where it is not naturally found and would not naturally occur. So please refrain from this fallacious argument."
No, you are choosing to define genetic modification in it's most limited way to support your conservative view point. I am not. I define it as anything that modifies the genetics of a creature, be that by the hand of an intelligent creature, a tiny virus or some non-life based force. Enough radioactivity can cause genetic modifications. The wrong chemicals being absorbed by a fetus can cause genetic modifications. There are also large bits of human DNA that come from retro-viruses that managed to implant themselves in our DNA long ago (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endogenous_retrovirus). I'd say that was genetic modification by nature itself. For all we know, that virus DNA is what caused us to evolve into intelligent beings.
We, humans, are animals just like the fish we are modifying. If modifying the fish's DNA was such a heinous thing, we wouldn't be able to do it (the embryo wouldn't be viable). Nature has had a few billions years of shuffling DNA around this planet. We figured out how it works, and now we can try shuffling DNA, we've just figured out a better way to do it. We are learning to adapt the creatures around us, the tools nature has used to operate this planet, to better deal with us. The wondrous possibilities are endless. Imagine fish that eat hydrocarbons and store oil, or birds that breath CO2 and give off oxygen.
DNA is the programming language of life and now we have a chance to code in it.
okay, so you want to create your own definition, fine. But don't think everyone is going to be okay with you forcing it on them and using that to support your argument. Fact remains the accepted definition (by Webster AND the scientific community of which I am a part) does not equal yours.
im startign to think that carlie is really just worried about protecting the fish's health. What does this have to do with why we shouldnt genetically engineer salmon?
I'm really just worried about my freedom of choice whether to eat this or not.
Darn FDA! That Obama Healthcare better pay for my liposuction............I was forced to eat Mickey d's and Burger King because of this SUPER-SALMON!
or Gastric By-Pass.....Blame the government!
I realize that this is science and has been developed to "help humanity". However, the film JURASSIC PARK came to mind as I read this article.
it has not been developed to help humanity but to maximize profits. If you really believe this is going to solve world hunger please explain why GM corn and other crop has not solved world hunger and why Monsanto sues farmers for breach of copyright when their GM crop infest the farmers non modified corn.
I'm with you 100% on this Carlie.....It's not just about controlling genetics...it's about controlling the food. Anyone who doesn't understand this, is blissfully ignorant. ......Open your eyes America!!!!
cloning dinosaurs = genetically modified salmon?
the bias of this article is apparent immediately, in the definition of genetic engineering as the process of "introducing desirable traits of one living being into another." the biased word is "desirable." the genetic engineers may hope that the traits are "desirable" (or may not), but whether they are or not, or what other effects may ensue, is outside the objectivity of the journalism required for this article.
It doesn't matter what you do... you're gonna eat what some guy you don't know says is "safe". Organic.... modified... it's all the same, really. You don't know what EXACTLY is in it or what it is. We just take our best guess. There's so much we don't know about our own bodies, it will be centuries before we know exactly what this stuff is doing.
I'm enjoying the humor....but all of you really should watch 'FOOD INC. ......You'll see that there is more to this than just modifying these grains and animals for better food production.....
How many people commenting on this article work for this company?
NEWS FLASH>>>>>>
Cotton has been genetically modified ... so everybody rip off your clothes and burn them before we all get skin cancer!!!!!!
WHAT????? BAN COTTON NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
um...okay
COTTON CAUSES DISEASE AND AUTISM!!.......................BAN COTTON NOW!!!.......COTTON=AUTISM=DISEASE
SAVE OUR KIDS!
BREAKING NEWS*************************Cotton causes SKIN cancer!!!! DISEASE and AUTISM!!!! 3 reliable sources!!!!....Don't worry I will BLOG about it so you can become empowered!! BUY MY BOOK TODAY! before COTTON kills again!!!!
Ha,Ha.....
a totally baseless argument since we do not EAT cotton. I don't know about you but I care far more about what goes into my mouth than what i wear on the outside.
Cottonseed oil, yes...
You shouldn't talk about what goes in your mouth.....
it is making you stupid!
COTTON nearly killed my child and caused my child's AUTISM........He is 85 percent recovered due to chelation therapy....Please pray for him....Cotton KILLS and causes AUTISM......God Bless
There must be no rush to approve this. It should be fully studied. It should not come to market if there is ANY prospect of contaminating natural fish stocks. And at the VERY, VERY least, the GMO salmon MUST be labelled as being such, so that consumers will have the choice. I have the right to know if what is being sold is part eel and part salmon. If this is not done,
Good luck with all that... afraid you're living in the wrong place (USA) if you want ANY of that to happen!
If this is approved, I’ll never eat salmon again!
I thought this too but I do like it so a better choice may be just to stock up on the real stuff right now before the GM stuff gets out there.
All I see is a fish......How do I see E-coli? What does it look like?
First stop confusing selective breeding with genetic modification, because they are two separate things.
Next label and test. Why shouldn't a compensated small group say 200 random people eat this fish as part of a health diet for 6 months before selling it to everyone.
Or if 200 people is too complicated, feed it to rats first and see how well they do. You need to test and that is something the food companies do not do. I simply ask where are the numbers from the test where the salmon was fed to something for a few months. This test was never conducted.
hmmm i wonder why there is a rise in obesity, hypertension, heart disease, neurological disorders....
....and you wonder if the Earth is flat???
I would guess it would have to do with people eating too much, not necessarily what they eat.
shooting steroids into an animal does not equate to genetic modification. Steroids activate genes that are already present. Selective breeding does not equate to genetic modification. It only selects for desired mutations of genes already present. Genetic modification involves introducing a foreign gene from another organism or one created in the laboratory into another organism where it is not naturally found and would not naturally occur. So please refrain from this fallacious argument.
I would have no problem eating salmon that were bred from salmon who grow larger naturally from a spontaneous mutation.
YOU GO GIRL!!!!!! 8-)
And what makes the natural mutation any better than an artificial one? If you are going to bring up the markers/viral vectors also ending up in the salmon's genome you will need to say why that is a problem and back it up or your argument is baseless.
Quit being stupid... they are both of the same species(salmon) and can interbreed naturally and quite possibly have the same effect! They are not putting material from an elephant into a fish, for gosh sakes....you are being fallacious!!!
Quit being illiterate, salmon and eels are not the same species.
Okay for the record its not the genes of an animal that have anything to do with the safety of the food. Every single living organism on the planet uses DNA and its just the way that that DNA is set up that determines the species. It is what is fed to the animals, like growth hormones and other chemicals that are harmful to our health. The genes have absolutely nothing to do with it. You wont get sick from eating a fish with altered genes, in fact they can alter the genes so that the fish is better for us, not only in the capacity that it grows larger so there is more meat, or more resilient so that it can grow in tougher conditions, but also in that the proteins in the fish are more accessible to us to take in when we eat it, making it a healthier food source. Honestly, go back and take high school biology again before making stupid statements about genetics.
That is actually not true. Have you ever genetically modified something? I have. You don't just take a gene and put it in. You either have the gene in a virus particle (vector) or you chemically treat the cells so they will take it up. And then you have to select for the cells that have replaced their own DNA with the foreign DNA and that involves another chemical selection and a genetic selection marker in the vector. This is not just bigger salmon. Genetic modification has so far been unsuccessful in medical applications because of "side effects" like cancer. It is not unreasonable to think that he genetic modification may negatively affect the salmon.
Good for you, for stepping up to the plate (no pun intended).......8-)
If the salmon were unhealthy and died of cancer, no one would be able to make money off of it. And why would it matter if the salmon got cancer? If you eat cancer, you don’t get cancer. Are you worried about the fish?
In medical applications you would be injecting dna/rna straight into cells in human beings. This is much different from changing cells early on and allowing them to divide into an organism. What is the point of this comment exactly and how does it favor avoiding genetic alteration of salmon? Do you have any reason to believe that the genetic markers or viral rna/dna that would now be in the fish’s cells, would cause bad health effects in humans?
Read the article, these fish develop faster and can be brought to market before the cancer, if they develop any, can grow to a size that would be prohibitive to profits. Eating fish with cancer is not the point, the point is this is not completely safe or no different from regular fish as some would claim.
well of course they are not identicle, so depending on out seriouse you take the statement that they are "no different" you could always argue that they have different genes. This in truth is about safety and health. And in that category there seems to be no justifiable reason to think the are different
uhg, i cant type today.
*Depending on how seriously you take
Have you ever tested a genetically modified organism to verify its effects on humans? Or any other animal for that matter? Weather you have performed genetic modifications in a lab or not is irrelevant. You don't get sick from eating genes. Maybe if I put it that way my point gets across better. What the genes produce may be detrimental to the health of a consumer but if the FDA approves it then it means it has passed some rather large hurdles and tests to make sure that it is safe for human consumption. If it wasn't then there would be lawsuits left and right and some people high up would lose their jobs. I'm quite certain they don't want that. Not to mention we have been eating genetically modified food for thousands of years now. Take corn for instance, corn used to not even be a plant species until it was bread from maze. Do you eat corn? GENETIC MODIFICATION in its simplest form.
hurray for tiosinte (maize)! -we have no idea how helpful that was. Thanks indians, sorry for giving you smallpox!
Just say NO to SUPER-SALMON................................Cheeseburgers,twinkies,doughnuts and hot dogs for my kids.....
It's always those who have money and enough food to eat who are telling those without money and not enough food to eat WHAT they should and shouldn't eat.
Genetically altered/modified and genetically engineered are two totally different methods. One is proven beneficial, the other is questionable. Stop confusing the two. In re the photo, this is a typical sales gimmick. I'm sure that AquAdvantage took their best looking fish and compared it with the smallest natural salmon of the same age they could find. Looks good in the photo, but that is far as it goes.
"Modified" and "Engineered" are both used, in different parts of the world. 'Engineered' is more correct to describe the kind of manipulation of genes that goes on, & I guess why some people read "modified" and are thinking it's the same as selective breeding which it is NOT.
People, you have been eating genetically modified meat for a while now. We have been cloning animals for close to 10 years and that meat has went to food and guess what, every one is fine. If we don't stay ahead of the food supply some day there is going to be too many people and not enough food and we could have big problems.
The reason people are getting bigger is not because of GMO foods its because of bigger portion size, less physical activity and poor nutrition. In many cases GMO's in crops have allowed farmers to reduce their chemical usage (I know this because I farm) and most of what they use is not a contact killer which means they only kill plants they come in contact with vs a chemical with a residual which means that it stays active in the soil for a certain period of time killing plants as they come up.
So many people have no clue where their food comes from, how it is raised, or any of the practices involved any more and its pretty pathetic.
For those of you taking issue with people's general disgust with this story, go ahead and feed your kids with this crap. That's your choice as a parent. I, for one, refuse to pump my kids full of artifical junk that is market for the purpose of catering to this country's lazy, out-to-make-a-buck lifestyle. We grow as much of our own as possible, buy locally raised produce and are selective in the amount of meat and animal products we feed our children (all organic, hormone free). All of the health problem this society has are coming from SOMEWHERE...could it possible be the doo doo that these food conglomerates push on us? Come on people, use your brains. Our bodies are not made to process crap. Duh.
Actually, people are living longer so that's why you see new forms of cancer or other diseases than even 50 years ago...but you keep believing it's from the food
No...it's from all you ignorant people that think the food is the problem!!!
Kids are eating too much of ALL food and that is the problem!!!
Maybe God is doing it to us because he hates that we have become too stupid to live!!!!
Dr. Elizabeth Cohen M.D. can you please take up the cause about maple bats in baseball? Did you see the Chicago Cubs player Tyler Colvin get injured in yesterday's game? Tyler was impaled by a broken bat suffering pnuemothorax. Dr.Cohen please BLOG about it and ban maple bats once and for all.Empower us all Dr.Cohen!
What? BAN BASEBALL BATS NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BASEBALL BATS CAUSE AUTISM.............and DISEASE!.............BAN BASEBALL BATS NOW!!!!!
Because genetically modified foods have been pushed upon us – because it is without our consent – because no one knows the long term results – because it is experimental – because it is about greed – because it is about Corporate control of food growth – seeds (do your research) – now control of water sources (do your research) – because of the disaster and shame of what has happened to India's farmers and their crops and their earth depleted all due to genetically modified seeds (do your research) because Genetically altered food is just that "ALTERED" and growth hormones are dangerous to ones health – because we are more and more subjected to chemicals additives and preservatives and hormones- think about the waste product "floride" because there is a majority who prefer that their food NOT be altered in any way – because it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that an accumulation of chemicals – pollutants – additives – preservatives will and is having an affect upon our health. What happened to MSG once used in baby food? GONE – WHY?( do your research) – how long did it take to find the damage it had done? (do your research). What happened to Red Dye # 2? BANNED in Europe – USA? nope – well it took 20 years for it to finally be banned after serious claims were finally addressed. BUT a new "chemical dye" was introduced into foods and the FDA accepted although containing the same properties as in #2 DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH -
Make the distinction between added chemicals and crossing genes!!!
We aren't talking about chemical additives here!!
Get your discussion straight!
Um...she is talking about the same agency being in charge of both...the point being you can't trust them on one, why assume you can trust them on the other..?
Safe or unsafe it will be sold and you should be able to make an informed choice to eat the salmon so... It must have a label stating it is genetically modified.
Doubt it. Then they might have to think about labelling all the other GM foods and ingredients out there...industry would never agree. Then people might start to think about wait, they did what? And decide they didn't want to eat it...
btw for all you claiming that organic and unprocessed is the way to go...fact, it can only sustain 300 million people and not for long since it ruins the soil quicker than now. Also, organic food is fertilized with manure or sewage containing potentially harmful organisms...so have fun eating your sh*tty food...literally :)
Stop fucking with our food.
(Like)
What is really concerning is all the people who actually don't want you to have a choice to eat this salmon. If there is really nothing wrong with the salmon, what's wrong with my not wanting to eat it? I choose to not wear yellow clothing, I don't like it. Why aren't you trying to pressure me into wearing yellow clothes? But something as significant as what i put inside of my mouth and swallow, you want me to have no choice in? I don't care if you want to eat it, go ahead. I don't and it is not right to take away my choice. if the FDA won't label it, I won't eat salmon anymore, period. Or maybe I'll stock up on real salmon right now before approval just in case.
As for all the wannabe scientists asking people who want a choice to test it out on themselves, what a false point?
I am a scientist, and it would be illegal for me to create a chemical and prove that it is safe by testing it out on human beings. This may not be a new chemical but it's an old chemical (GH) in a new environment (salmon). There are many things out there that don;t become dangerous until they are mixed with something else.
And whether it's dangerous or not is a moot point. The point is is this a free country or what where I get to choose what i put into my body.
Nobody is telling you that you have to eat the crap......just don't eat it and shut up!
you should take your own advice unless you are illiterate. The main point of the FDA review is to decide whether or not to label the modified fish. I can't choose not to eat it if my choice is taken away by making sure it is not labeled or making sure non modified fish can't be laebled as such.
best post yet-we deserve to know what we are eating to make our choices. the consumer's power of choice can really affect the food industry...then there are those who just tell us to shut up and deal with it. that's fine, they can have the salmon on steroids.
You know, you don't have an argument against genetically modified foods if you can't illustrate what the risk actually is. "I think there could be an unknown risk" is not an argument any more than arguing against the use of cars because "I might get in a wreck today." is.
In some other countries, you have to be able to illustrate that it IS safe, first, not just "We don't know for sure that it is dangerous in the immediate future". It's like consumer safety is more important to them than profits or something..!
I have to wonder if all this "engineering" has had any effect on people that would cause them to gain weight or be more prone to disease. It seems food allergies and weight problems have grown at the same time "food engineering" has increased. Maybe we need a real study, not done by the seller, to examine just what all this engineering is doing to our bodies. As for only selling femaile eggs and no cross breeding, did any of you see Jurasic Park? Yes, it's only a movie, but a lot of the underlying science was real and you can't fool around with Mother Nature without someone paying the price... maybe we already are with OUR weight and health problems. Wake up America!
"I have to wonder if all this "engineering" has had any effect on people that would cause them to gain weight or be more prone to disease."
Rubbish
As an Alaskan wild salmon fisherman I am deeply distressed by this article seeing that our industry is being attacked by corporate america from Exxon to Pebble mine, now scientists destroying our market share. It is time to stand up and fight back Alaskans
Yes, you are so right! No one seems to care that these superfish may and probably will displace a large portion of the wild salmon population. Farmed fish needs a lot of additives that can be harmful to human health and to marine life.
A statement made by an actor in the movie Jurassic Park very much applies here, because it is not Hollywood visuals, it is reality. "Nature will find a way." Any organization or company who claims they can control nature by making statements like "eliminate the possibility" of reproduction instantaneously proves it is led by morons. I never put salmon with "added color" into my mouth or that of members of my family, regardless of how the colorant gets there. You think I'm going to buy GMO salmon and give it to my wife, children or other loved ones? Not not, not hell no, but rather f*** no.
I thought I saw a SUPER-SALMON once but it was just Rick Sanchez................Save Brooke-->FreeBrookeB.com
As we keep adding more and more people to this world, the resources with which to feed them are becoming more and more scarce. We have to pack more food production into less space. Do we not need every edge possible to generate the maximum food production from the limited resources at our disposal?
What does that have to do with giving people a choice whether to eat it or not?
Why do you want to take away the right to choose?
It has been proven in the labs in the UK that within only three generations of hamsters fertility stops. So, GMO foods CAN solve the food crisis by first solving the population crisis. It does NOT create more/better food.
Maybe it's all part of the plan....
I think they made a movie about this called GREMLINS... super fast growing mutant creatures that love to eat massive amounts of food and then when exposed to water...BEWARE.
I sort of remember hearing about how thousands upon thousand of varieties of corn have died off because of the GMO corn. Go abroad and eat some corn. It actually tastes like some thing. I just don't see how this salmon is going to be contained with its Master Race DNA. I don't know about you guys but I enjoy the difference between Sockeye salmon and King Salmon. I don't want to wake up one day 20 years later eating out of a flavored tube. And for all you responders, FYI, no I don't eat other GMO foods and I don't eat Meat from america. Your chicken is full of GMO corn and taste like plastic.
Shouldn't this be an international issue? Its is everyone's ocean we are messing with...
Of course the bottom line here is money. More fish for your buck! The result will almost certainly taste somewhat less like salmon and more like giant tadpoles. Like the monetarily modified shrimp from Asia that is now just about the only soggy vestige of what was available in the past. Keep it up and I'll be switching to chocolate covered ants.
There is no one here that has not consumed a genetically modified product. It you grow your own food and purchase your seeds they are genetically modified, if you eat chicken from the store odds are its received steroids, your beef the same way. Actually farmers have been genetically modifying their products for years, its called breeding. "...farm raised salmon that has been fed corn/pellet food, swimming in their own waste..." and wild fish do not swim in their own waste and the waste of other animals and humans and lets not forget the dead bodies ,animal and human in our lakes rivers and water ways, but that's alright because its natural right.
We can't trust corporations to do anything honestly, they only care about $$$$$. People diseased or dying are colateral damage unless someone blows the whistle on them. We have certainly come to a sad place in our existance.
shooting steroids into an animal does not equate to genetic modification. Steroids activate genes that are already present. Selective breeding does not equate to genetic modification. It only selects for desired mutations of genes already present. Genetic modification involves introducing a foreign gene from another organism or one created in the laboratory into another organism where it is not naturally found and would not naturally occur. So please refrain from this fallacious argument.
I would have no problem eating salmon that were bred from salmon who grow larger naturally from a spontaneous mutation.
It is interesting to note that many of the people here who "care what my kids eat" are worried about genetically altered salmon and other GMO's, but you don't rise up in protest of things like Kool-Aid and Twinkies. Is it better to fill you children with chemicals that have never had any place in the food chain (until we started adding them) or is it better to take the viable genes from one animal and add them to another animal. One thing you should know is that dangerous mutations frequently result in the death of the animal. As long as the animal (or plant) is capable of normal life cycle without obvious deformities, etc, it "should" be perfectly safe for humans. If it tastes better, I'll eat it. GMO is not the threat you think it is, but all your demented children probably drank Kool-Aid when they were young and graduated to Coke when older. However, you pump them full of Ritalin and think everything is good.
I would imagine most of these people are not the same ones who buy crap like that, they probably think about their food and their children's food in the first place. Otherwise good point! Probably why FDA kowtows to the food industry anyway to keep labelling of GM out, because "the great unwashed" might start to think about what they're eating & damage some profits!
My family and I – and all my friends who will isten – will stop ordering salmon dishes at restaurants. Additionally, if Whole Foods does not find a way to label this frankenfish – my household will stop buying salmon. Full-stop. If frankenfish creators and their PR trolls are so sure of their "spawn", they can surely reallocate all the $$$ they are spending trying to fight labeling towards educating consumers about why their fish is superior, and then let the market vote with their dollars.
Bizarre. I'm about as conservative as they come and I think this is a great idea. It's not about the company making "more money" (although I'm sure they will). The benefits from this could be astounding. Theoretically, we could DOUBLE the amount of food available to the world. That's a wonderful thing, given the proper health regulations.
I would also imagine the end result would be cheaper food.
It's not bizarre at all that you're conservative and think this is a great idea, just the opposite.
You'll just have to skip that "proper health regulations" detail!
This is just another hot buzz topic where people immediately respond without understanding any of the actually facts. First, GMO's are already all over the market (RoundUp resistant corn, Milk baker's yeast), second we already take advantage of GMO's for human benfit (penicillin, insulin), lastly there is absolutely ZERO risk from eating the altered DNA. It has the same basic compenents of any other DNA you consume. The last time I checked, people where not paranoid about eating anything besides non-living matter for fear of ingetesting DNA. The only reason a person would have to worry about DNA being intergrated into their genome would be through viral activity. These virsues have a few specific things that would NEVER, EVER be found in any salmon (reverse transcriptase, cell surface binding proteins, lysomoe repellent proteins). Finally, the only real concerns that should come about are the real risk of the salmon escaping and breeding with the native species (statistically it would be bound to happend sometime) and the possible altered nutritional value of the fish due to altered growth cycles. The last point seems awful ticky-tacky though considering we are the fast food, frozen dinner capital of the world.
Well said and I hope others who jump on the GMO-feat-band-wagon read and understand your post. From one biologist to another, I can only hope that the general public will stop jumping the gun and injecting knee-jerk emotions into various issues without doing any kind of research.
Please do your research into why genetic modification has been unsuccessful in humans for disease treatment. it is not unreasonable to think that the same problems that plague the guinea pig patients will plague these salmon.
As for molecular biology, where were you good scientists when they began poisoning us with preservatives, artificial colors, plastic, steroids.... Now we Americans have a propensity for all sorts of diseases we never had before and we are an obese nation – no thanks to all that yummy corn syrup we've been fed in pre-packaged foods all our lives. Why do you think European and Afican counties refuse to allow our genetically modified foods into their countries? They know some things are sacred and should not be tampered with in the name of innovation.
THANK YOU. But "innovation"? You mean in the name of $$$.
If you were a real biologist you would know that the way we introduce novel genes into an organism is through viruses or chemical modification.
TO TK .....so this is a T.Rex fish????
Get a grip....its a FISH. It cannot eat the other salmon!!!
Grow up and get your heads out of your _ _ _ _ _!
now if we could just do this with humans and gorrillas, I would be 10 feet tall and the strongest guy in the world!!!!
I have 2 reliable sources(Oprah +Jenny) .................STOP SUPER-SALMON NOW!!!!! Before its too late......
I must blog about it................................and write a book about it......Save our KIDS!!!!!
SUPER-SALMON KILLS!!!Pull it from the market NOW!!!!
Oh my God they killed Kenny
LOL.....
You Bastards!
No, No Kyle...it should be..........."You Salmon bastards!!!!"
My husband ate super-salmon once and it nearly killed him....Sure he weighs 320 pounds and smoked 2 packs of cigarettes a day since his teens but I will tell you it was the SUPER-SALMON!.............. SUPER-SALMON KILLS! The only thing that saved him was chelation therapy...He is about 85% recovered ........please pray for him....
I keep seeing references to 'organic food'. Where can I obtain non-carbon-based food? I didn't know it was so plentiful that carbon based food needed to be referred to as 'organic'.
No and not so much because he may be harmful, but rather because we now become dependent on a food product that requires more processing etc.to meet the need of an expanding population that needs more food and we rush into that tipping point when we no longer have enough room to make food to feed people.
Almost without exception, every time we've tried to do nature one better, we've failed. Oftentimes, the cost and futility of trying to correct those failures results in bigger, even costlier mistakes. Most of the government-funded recovery programs to save wild species are a direct result of our concerted efforts at one time to actually eliminate those very species. Genetic diversity is of paramount importance to any natural system, including the food chain - our efforts should be focused on allowing natural systems to be self-sustaining, not trying to 'cook the books', genetic or otherwise with our management practices.
its a little to much to ask for ...but if we could just preserve the naturel spawning grounds for wild salmon then we wouldn't need to consider eating these laboratory experiments...frankenfish...if you will.
I realize this is not the first food item we are genetically ultering; Pigs also look nothing like they used to; cows and chickens are feed food to fster growth ... I want to say no way I will eat this salmon, but let's face it we won't even know ....
Only answer is to move to countries where they don't legally poison the food. Only way to be certain you're not eating the modified salmon. Many countries don't allow genetically modified foods to be sold/produced. btw, I'm not seriously suggesting you move, just making a point.
Well if the US gets their way in WTO eventually you won't be able to get away from it.
The problem wiith GMOs is that we do not know what the consequences and long term effects are. We won't in a million years. We just know that introducing the GMO introduces more uncertainty.
mmm genetically modified farm raised salmon that has been fed corn/pellet food, swimming in their own waste and has brilliant red food coloring added to make it look like wild caught salmon. i can't wait for the day this incredible science is available to buy so i can have a football star son and supermodel daughter.
I say we need "Labels"...
In principal I'm a "Techie" and am amused and excited by the advance of science. However, this is pure corporation trash. Anything to make a profit for investors as fast as possible, and mmmmaybe the scientists got "Daily wages" before they were LAID OFF to avoid paying them royalties. That's even assuming they didn't "Outsource" the development, but suck suck suck the teat of government subsidy and tax breaks.
Simply put, ALL "GM" food must have a "Warning Label".
We should also put labels on food for country and state of origin.
Labels for a full year after if there's an "Immigration" or serious "Safety" violation.
And labels with teeth, where false labeling could bankrupt a company or get a "Charter Revokal" to a big corporation.
Can't you Americans stop always being so cheap! Have you ever considered producing some high quality products? Maybe you should consider making your car industry transgenic too?
BREAKING NEWS********************************Super Salmon Causes Autism and Disease*****************************
GMO foods are modified with bacteria (e-coli) and viruses,to invade the cells wall. Then have antibiotic markers injected into them to tell them apart. Yeah, lets put diseases and antibiotics in the same organism. The FDA right now is a joke. It can not recall tainted meat or egg products. Does not have the authority to shut down problem factories or farms. Most people who control/write the policies for the FDA used to work at a agro multi-national corperation. This system is just one huge conflict of interest.
"GMO foods are modified with bacteria (e-coli) and viruses,to invade the cells wall. Then have antibiotic markers injected into them to tell them apart. Yeah, lets put diseases and antibiotics in the same organism."
You obviously have no idea how this works. Yes, the process to introduce new genes often involves using bacteria or viruses to allow the new DNA to enter the target cell. But, the antibiotic markers are antibiotic-resistance genes, which helps to show whether or not introduction of the new gene into the host DNA was successful. It has nothing to do with actual antibiotics.
WHAT? This causes autism and disease? oh my god...Don't worry I will BLOG about it......Buy my book empowered patient............................................I am not a doctor but I play one on T.V.
To JasonB....you are NOT a biologist(unless you were last in your class and they graduated you to make room for more promising students), otherwise you would know better than the trash you just spouted!!!
some of the pure crap thats out there on store shelves, and people are saying they would never eat this type of salmon....are ya kidding me? People are starving and you wouldn't eat this fish because......why? You think you're not getting exposed to a load of chemicals and alterations already..?? Wake up people. This is the future..this is how they will feed the hungry....this will be the norm.
From my own personal experience... I have been going organic and not eating any GE food for two years now. I have noticed a sensation of being more full with consumption of organic food and way more energy. People have argued with me but when you start to think clearer, have more energy and less health problems such as not getting sick ever then you know your giving your body the right food. I eat all the same things as I did before. Potatoe chips, steaks, fish. The only difference.... Is it has not been genetically enhanced.
Take it from me, take it from my personal experience.
I work in these stores Justin. We substitute regular foods for Organic foods all the time....just to jack the price up.
The fact is that humans have been genetically modifying fooe for thousands of years. Either by cross polination or selection of the best animal specimins with little to no ill effects. DNA modification just makes the process faster. You think the Turkey on you Thanksgiving table is the same as a Wild Turkey? Think again A famed Turkeys breasts are so big they cant even mate and they are dumb to boot. If you leave them out in the rain they will drown because they stand there looking strait up with their mouths open. Nearly everything we eat today even in third world countries has been modified in some way.
Don't do it.. causes disease and autism......................
It does? ..........................STOP AUTISM=STOP GENETICALLY -ENHANCED SALMON
So what do you eat? Seeing as Beef, Pork, Chicken, Turkey, nearly all farm raised fish and some wild breeds of fish, Corn, Peas, Potatoes, Broccoli, Coliflower, Cabbage, Squash, Apples, Peaches, Pears, Avocadoes, Nectarines, Tangarines... have all been genetically modified.
The one thing everyone here seems to ignore is (Including the author of this article) is the testing process:
Currently as a food engineer you are allowed in the US to mix virus DNA, Bacteria DNA, and Plant DNA to create an entirely new organism and release it on the US market unlabeled and untested. For example, did you know that the process to approve the salmon for Human consumption did not include feeding this new food item to a small set of people to see how it affects them. It didn't even include feeding this food item to cats or rats or anything like that. Nothing has eaten this food yet, it is un-tested. So, should we have GMO food Yes, Should the food be labeled Yes, Should the food be tested Yes. Unfortunately it is currently untested. It is unlabeled.
Guys, just like in the gulf this is going to affect fisherman! Fisherman are not left-wing liberals! Look at Monsanto and their war of lawsuits on right-wing middle America farmers for stealing their intellectual property (AKA Monsantos pollen flew into their crops). GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD, NATURE IS OK! Nature does it best. 99% of all our foods are not GMO and the fool who said that is plain wrong. Europeans are systematically banning these terminator plants and Im sure these crazy sounding fish will be next. One thing Europeans do well is food, dont argue. 5% fertile? I give it 10 years before we basically make Chinook extinct in the wild. 5% of some mega-fish farms monthly spawn will be thousands of potential thorns in our environment. They wont escape? LMAO, how many times has that been said? The only way I could see myself supporting an idea to change something I already enjoy in its current genetic make-up is if I worked for this company......
If you know anything about digestion in the gut, then you will realize that everything we consume on earth– including "foreign DNA" from tomato seeds etc. etc.– is all cut into small units that are the same throughout our biosphere. The mixture in the gut is indistinguishable from "natural" foods that have not been genetically modified. Avoiding pesticides is wise. But GM foods aren't going to hurt anyone, and may help to feed the world. It is a shame that folks don't understand more basic science, and then would stop be worried by fear-mongers amongst us.
I am a Chef, and I was raised on a farm in Iowa and I need to put it to everyone this way. Either you are going to pay astronomically high prices for fish caught wild, and fish them out of existence. Or you suck it up and start eating GMO’s. Most of you have been already doing it for years with corn, soybeans, and tomatoes. Now you are all worried because someone called it “frankenfish”? If you were so worried about your health you would not eat high fructose corn syrup or artificial sweeteners. But, you don’t. Instead you attack farmers and scientists because you are ignorant and have no idea what it takes to produce your food- and you really don’t know what it takes to make cheap food. If you want a natural object, then you need to learn how to live naturally, and eat local and sustainable. And that means no Salmon for you unless you live in the Pacific Northwest. Whiners….. so entitled.
docs to watch:
Food inc.
The Future of Food.
There is evidence that GMO food is harmful. The people that have invested in GMO food are in position to make alot of money. Do you want to place your health in their hands? "FDA approved" is laughable. Consider all the recalls and ask yourself the question why.
I turned into a mutant from eating BigBoy Tomatoes and Silver Queen Corn, so don't let any 'elites' with high school book learning fool you into thinking that DNA from your food doesn't show up in your children. You know how children born in corn country are ALL blonde, and children born in cattle country moo and have horns? Well, it's the same with fish, so wake up America! Don't let them shove food down your throat and turn you into a salmon.
As a biologist, I feel I'm rather aware of what is healthy and what is not. I won't eat anything injected with growth hormone and I wont eat anything genetically modified to overproduce growth hormone. But mostly, I won't eat farm raised salmon at all. When you farm raise salmon, you strip away most of what makes salmon a healthy food.
Hey Abudu.....our children eat WAAAAY too much sugar and carbs.....its not what they eat, but the quantity!!!
This is going to come about whether we like it or not. The government has been in bed with these big greedy corporations and it's not likely to stop anytime soon. I agree with Norman J Smith Jr about the fish getting in the wild, breeding with the other salmon, and then the company claiming that all the salmon in the wild is now there because it's their intellectual property. There is a documentary called "The Future of Food" which I saw on Hulu some time back. This is pretty much what happened with the genetically modified items Monsanto has patented. Small farmers all across the country have been ruined because Monsanto has sued them since Monsanto genetically modified crops have been growing on their land. For example, one farmer was doing his thing as he had been doing for 50+ years. A truck carrying Monsanto seed was driving by this farm and some of the seed got on his farm because the truck's tarp opened up on one corner. Monsanto took them to court and actually won; you'd think the small farmer would've won because Monsanto's seed was invading his farm but that's not the way the idiot judge saw it. Apparently, the farmer didn't build a wall 10 miles high to keep Monsanto's seed out so it was his fault. He was made to destroy all his crops as well as several silos worth of seed he had accumulated during his 50+ years of farming. He lost everything. Monsanto has been doing this to hundreds if not thousands of other small farmers. They been strongarmed into paying Monsanto some kind of bribe money or lose everthing in a lawsuit. That movie also talks about how the European government does more to protect its people from genetically modified foods than our government. Watch that documentary and it will really open your eyes to this stuff.
The argument that genetically modified food (be it plant or animal) can make you sick is complete rubbish. As stated by JW earlier in the comments, food is broken down by digestion, and in no way shape or form do you take up any genetic information from the food. However, the environmental implications of GMOs is a very real problem, and steps should be taken to prevent any outbreeding.
How much you want to bet 15 years from now we are dealing with a problem with this or some other genetically modified fish wiping out other species because it got out into the wild and found a way to produce, they said they controlled the genes so it's sterile, yea right, I remember the same line in the movie Jurassic Park, and the one thing that movie stated correctly is nature finds a way, just take a trip to the Mediterranean , they are completely stymied on how to control a genetically modified algae spreading all over the bottom. It was in a lab, they said it could never get out, IT GOT OUT.
Hey Bond- think about it... what could corn possibly have to do with colds and flu(e)?(I have heard of no increase from the CDC.) The different varities you MAY refer to(bird flu, etc.) are part of a NATURAL evolution of many types of viruses. You are listening to 'old wive's tales' again!
You eat both varities of salmon(you could put them on the same plate!) and, though the 'eel' is probably not palatable, it is edible.
There is NOTHING unnatural introduced into the atlantic salmon. It is just a 'short cut' into cross-breeding, which people have been doing for thousands of years(there is only one NATURAL breed of dog, for example). Genes are always changing, naturally, so no harm to help a change. Our genes have changed as we evolved, so why is it so awful to 'evolve' a better fish?
Hello. My name is Mark Krajewski. I am an Internet Marketing Expert. I happened to come across your web site in the course of my work and it looked to me that you could possibly use some help. I help people do the right things on the Internet for their particular organization to expand. My work is founded in implementing the exact correct strategies for your particular situation so I am very effective and efficient which means you get to maximize your potential and ROI.
My team is proficient in web design, search engine optimization, keyword research & implementation, link strategies, paid search, email marketing, web video production and distribution, blog implementation, social media, copywriting and much more.
I use a very comfortable, educational, gradient approach so you always feel like you know what Im doing, feel like I am making progress and never feel locked into any long-term commitment.
Contact me anytime with any inquiries or to make an appointment. There is no fee for an initial consultation. If this message has reached someone not in charge of such things, would you kindly forward it to the correct person?
Sincerely,
Mark Krajewski
Buzzazz Internet Marketing
312-869-4748
mkrajewski@buzzazz.com
So you are a spammer AND a troll at the same time? Gosh, were you genetically modified for this task?
Pay no attention to him Buster......he's only a drone.....there is no hope for him!!!!!
Unless you eat sushi that salmon you eat has been cooked. That modifies food far more than genetics. There is so much idiocy on the web about nutrition.
As far as good salmon is concerned...it's the diet and the water temperature that gives it the best taste and texture...I grew up on Lake Ontario, and fished for Chinook and Coho since I was a kid...Loved catching them...Always threw them back, or gave them away...But I'll eat Alaskan or Norwegian salmon any day (especially smoked...with capers, onions, and cream cheese on those little toast crackers!).
YAY! Finally the science has been cleared up for those who have no idea what genetic engineering entails. I would definitely eat GMO salmon if it was less costly than normal salmon, as long as sustainable practices are in effect for the farming of these fish. What a great opportunity to allow the natural salmon populations to rebound. Thank you science.
Fear of this kind of change stems from lack of knowledge of the technologies involved. I have no doubt that nearly all who object to this use/eat products/processes now which were modified in some way both natural and synthetic. Anyone eat cereal that is fortified with vitamins ...
Eat local, support organic farming, become a vegetarian-not just for health reasons or because you care for animals, but because there are a lot of us to feed.
.FDA’s modern regulatory functions began with the passage of the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act, a law a quarter-century in the making that prohibited interstate commerce in adulterated and misbranded food and drugs.
How is not adulterated salmon??
You people have been eating genetically modified foods for years. I guess the joke is on you. Sure the approval for consumption needs to be scrutinized to ensure its safety, but it isn't this super novel thing and if our population is going to continue to grow unchecked unfortunately this is something that probably needs to be considered. I am not a huge fan of the idea personally, though.
Everybody is discussing the GMO angle. My question is this: what is a fish like that matures too fast? Is it as healthful as a normal fish? Is it as tasty?
So the growth of the fish is enhanced or speeded up and with consumption over several generations the build up in the bodies of humans of these genetically altered DNA's cause the children to beging to experience a more rapid groth rate but the draw back is that most of the children several generations from now will not be able to reproduce. So much for the human race. Then maybe we can start over and do a better job next time as a people on this planet.
Looks like my point is proven.
This is another issue for those with little cerebral content. The ones who think the world will end next Tuesday. Ignorance already has Europeans against modified wheat. I wonder how many 'I won't ever eat it' posters here graduated from High School, and even then how many got an A in science and biology. And I'll bet many of the no eaters think the world was created 5,000 years ago. This does not bode well for the US in world competition and development. A nation of uneducated people will never rise to the level needed to assure our survival. Pitiful.
This picture would be great, if THE FIST WERE ACTUALLY SALMON AND NOT RAINBOW TROUT.
Very observant Trey......LOL....
The real danger here is in the patenting of these genetic creations into intellectual property owned by the company. We could eventually relinquish control of our entire food supply to a few huge corporations who "own" entire life forms and their progeny, including any crossbred species originating from one of their products, intentional or accidental, in captivity or in the wild. This has already been happening in agriculture for years in the form of genetically modified seed. This is the real issue, and they're happy nobody is talking about it. Health concerns aside (valid as they may be), the legal concerns need to be addressed, and proper labeling should be a no-brainer. Come on, why even try to argue against simple labeling? There's a reason companies like AquaBounty and their trade groups are spending lots of money to avoid telling you where your food came from – they don't want you to have a choice.
There are two realities this article does not address 1) that virtually all food humans now eat is "genetically modified" in one way or another; and 2) the reason for developing GMO grains and now potentially proteins – the population of the world is growing at such a pace that it would be difficult to feed the population without developing these types of foods that grow quickly and are resistant to drought, pestilence etc. and if salmon and in the future, other proteins can be matured more quickly, this is a good thing for a growing population. The reality is that this science may well be the key to feeding the world in the future. We need to embrace this reality, promote the science behind GMO's and work to ensure the safety of it going forward. Those worried about the health of their children eating GMO food, are not considering whether there will even be enough food for them to eat if the population of world continues to explode over the next decades. Don't stand in the way of science and progress!
I looked upon this article for a current event in my class but before i read it again i will like to say that i believe genetically engineered food to me seems like it has the potential to cause physical harm to the body and I cant believe scientists actually do this!!!! If this is possible, can humans be genetically engineered to have a clone? WTF is the world coming into?!!!!!!!
As others have already said, we all have been eating genetically modified foods for years already. Selective breeding done on crops is a form of genetic modification by way of selecting crops that have desirable traits and cross-breeding them. Any modified DNA from genetically modified foods is broken down in your stomach and does not get incorporated into your own DNA. Know your basic biology and think about it before jumping on the band-wagon. That being said, I'm neither for nor against eating these particular commercial fish but I don't understand why people are so quick to label it as bad without knowing the science behind it. Yes, meat that's been jacked up on hormones is producing a noticeable affect on children but that is an entirely different pathway from gene modifications. Again, ingested genetic material has absolutely no affect on the body whereas ingested hormones may.
I wouldn't eat it if presented to me but unfortunately many of these companies don't have to fully divuldge that info to us and we are already eating genetically atered animals like beef and poultry as well as the many crops. We have already begun to see the effects those growth hormones they feed the cattle have on our young children. they are physically developing at a far faster rate than when I was growing up.
Are you ignorant people who are debating to not to eat and unnecessarily creating another pandemic about the nutrition, mutation, GMOs, rDNA, money really these dumb or are you pretending? I hate the people who unnecessary create fear in the dumb idotic mind like yours. technologiophobia. Ignorant uneducated people please go and find something better to do than these stupid quieries and debate.
A lot of the food we eat is genetically engineered now and has been for some time. Pretty much all of the food we eat has been genetically engineered if you count selective breeding, which is actually the same thing, just slower. I certainly see no problem with eating it. I'm not a science-phobe so it just isn't an issue for me. In fact, I think it's a great idea.
No. It is too early to udnerstand the postional and background effects on introduced genes in a new 'forgien' genetic background.
In the long run, they truth of the matter is that they really do not know how genetically engineering animals and plants can effect both our natural environment as well as the health of adults and in particular growing children.
Where's the citation?? Where's the study? Who yet can study 100 years + of development. I say start the studies now, and with sufficient time, perhaps then we'll have a better understanding of such long term effects.
But wait - this isn't about health or feeding starving populations - its about M O N E Y.
A word of advice -- DON'T buy it, eat it, avoid it in restaurants (ask), and they won't MAKE it.
Will we eat it?
Yes, we will eat it whether we want to or not, because the FDA does not require that it be labeled. (The US, unlike most of the developed world, does not require labeling of genetically engineered food.)
Thank you!!! I was just about to make this comment. All of these people saying they will just avoid the GMO's is so irritating because they're probably all eating something GM right now without even knowing it!
Correction: Monsanto does not own the patent to 'all' the corn seed........just most of what is being used by our farmers today. My question is......once other varieties of corn seed is altered by Monsanto corn seeds.......does this give Monsanto
rights to that corn seed as well..........This is important, because if a company owns the 'rights' to natural selection....then it means they control nature......which to me, is the scariest kind of DICTATORSHIP ever to show it's face on this planet!!!!!
The thing that bothers me is the US doesn't require GM food to be labeled as such. In Europe all GM food is required to carry that label but the FDA doesn't require labeling. So even if you want to avoid eating the GM salmon, tomato, watermelon, etc you will have no way of knowing which it is because it could simply carry another company or the grocery store's label.
There's something fishy about this whole business.
Oh, and remember the next time you take a bite of an orange carrot, organic or not, it's a GMO. Original carrots were purple, they were rarely orange.
We should remember that the Pope,Pastor Jones or any other bible thumper did not create any of these creatures we choose to eat and surely can not improve on them whatever the producers tell you. They engineered the fat to increase weight and profit.
If genetically modified salmon does pass. And as tends to happen in the United States, I'll bet it will. We should at the very least install laws in which supermarkets that sell this type of genetically modified products AS WELL AS restaurants who use these products, clearly label them as such on the packaging and menus. As consumers we deserve to be informed and be able to make decisions about what is going into our bodies.
grow your own food in your backyard!
wait, you'll get fined for $5000.00 if you grow "too much", though!
People don't realize that "genetically modified organisms" have been in existence for a very very VERY long time. Everything we eat has been genetically modified by natural selection at some point (we're obviously not consuming dinosaurs). Even humans a long time ago have been man making "genetically modified organisms" that we consume when they mate two different breeds of the same species to create something completely different. This salmon is just another technique that humans have more control over. People are just ignorant when they hear the word GMO...ooooo. As a scientist who constantly works with rDNA, what they have done to this salmon poses no threat to humans.
I care most about the envirement (water quality) that the fish grow up in. The same is true for me regarding wild caught salmon. Besides, we are raping our Oceans way too much as it stands now. The Oceans need a break from us. The only concern I have for genetically modified fauna is their possible effects on the eco system should these 'new' species be somehow left to go wild. Will they take over and dominate? How can it be garranteed that they do not take over? Would it be a good thing or a bad thing. As far as eating their flesh, I see no problems there, just benefits. Bio-chemically speaking of course.
If you are really worried about the food supply you should demand meat that has not been raised on growth hormones.Some who never saw a normal chicken running loosen on a farm or a domestic turkey do not understand that either of these birds can fly.When you start seeing chickens and turkeys weighing what they do in the market you are looking at birds that are not normal . We eat these fat yard buzzards that are fed growth hormones, we get fat.
The scientist in me says this is definitely an amazing feat.... but the common sense in me says this is a very dangerous path for mankind.. and quite possibly the peak of mans Arrogance and Ignorance... and possibly more dangerous then nuclear weaponry...If the idea of producing genetically altered animals in mass actually does become a mainstream trend...there is literally no way to predict the possible outcome and waaaay "downstream" affects it could have on environments and the planet as a whole... also... The world doesn't have hunger issues because there isn't enough food for everyone...the world has hunger issues because there are far more greedy and fearful people in the world then there are Givers...
Atlantic Salmon is OK but I prefer Chinook Salmon it's much tastier and healthier for you. Pardon the pun but something smells fishy about this Genetically Modified Farm Salmon. First clue is that it is purposely unable to reproduce to protect proprietary rights. Yeah tell me another fish story. When it starts cross breeding with Atlantic Salmon the company will claim that all of the fish in the ocean is theirs and take over the market. I think I'll pass on it for now. At the current rate that industry is trying to push GM products it won't be long before we just take pills and drink water for all of our foods as seen in some of those science fiction movies. Science fiction does become science fact sooner or later.
go to Democracy Now and read about percy schumeiser vs. monsanto!
The sad thing about this poll is that you won't even be given this choice in the supermarket. Since the FDA does not require labeling of genetically modified foods, it is nearly impossible to know what you are buying. And why do the producers of these foods lobby so heavily against labeling? Because they know that many of us would choose to eat natural foods.
The long-term effects of GM foods, in terms of both the health of the individual and the sensitivity to environmental factors, has not been well-studied.
The argument that we've been eating GM foods for thousands of years does not hold, because previous techniques continued to produce genetic variation in the stock; the newer methods of direct genetic manipulation create more homogeneity across stocks, a situation which makes them more sensitive to environment factors such as parasitic destruction.
The argument that GM foods could be part of an answer to worldwide hunger have some merit, but these are not without problems. First, as has been pointed out by a few others on this board, the problem of worldwide hunger is one of distribution of foods – not amount. For example, in the US, a typical American consumes approximately 30% more calories than they need for healthy sustainability; this would imply that about 150 million starving people could be fully satiated without causing harm to the US populace (I'm ignoring hunger *in* the US in this statement). Another issue with this argument for GM foods, though, is that the foodcrop itself would generally fall under the IP rights of the development company. While this is good for the company's profit motive, it is in conflict with a motivation of mitigating the risk of worldwide hunger.
For these reasons and more, I'm not in favor of approving any form of GM foods – but especially animal products. And, before anyone retorts in this way, I am also against the mass use of antibiotics and growth hormones in feedstock.
It is kind of funny. Apparently your concerns are the same as mine. Except I still largely am okay with the idea. Have you actually read any reports or research on these particular fish? Until I have seen something I am going to remain open to the idea. Just a quick note. This was NOT an attack on you I am not necessarily disagreeing just having a general discourse.
Do you ever read whats in the food you eat most packaged foods have soy,(GMO) Corn (GMO) etc fillers have you ever wonder why you see so many fat people . They bring beef to market in six months with grooth hormones and feeding them GMO soy and corn, always thought cattle ate grass don't eat that poision stay healthy.
The simple fact is, =EVERYTHING= you eat, even if you grow it yourself, has been "genetically modified", by man, by selective breeding, as long as man has been herding animals and planting crops. The vast majority of the things we eat have been selectively breed to the point where they CAN NOT SURVIVE if not under human care.
There's a significant difference between breeding and GM foods. Yes, both result in 'genetic modification' but the latter results in much more homogeneity in the crop than breeding; the result is a stock which could be far more susceptible to pathogens or other environmental factors.
We simply do not have the understanding to be messing with such a crucial human system yet.
For those of you who are in agreement with this....I would strongly urge you to watch the documentary: FOOD INC.
It is very disturbing to me..................You see, they don't mention patent rights.........or how they are going to run all the
fish farmers out of business.......And what if the genetically engineered salmon are 'accidentally' set lose in the wild....
they'll own the rights to all the salmon which are found with the altered gene in them. And trust me......this will happen!!!!
Open your eyes.....America.....Monsanto already 'owns' the patent to all the corn 'seed'..........Which means they control what 'seed', farmers can and cannot use..............Stop this madness!!!!!!!! Wake up America!!!!!!
wow, fearmongering at its finest.
"running fish farmers out of business"
=capitalism...you are american arnt you?
"And what if the genetically engineered salmon are 'accidentally' set lose in the wild...."
There are ways to avoid this. You are going to need to provide evidene for why "This will happen". -otherwise, you are assuming we are unable to regulate things.
"Monsanto already 'owns' the patent to all the corn 'seed'..........Which means they control what 'seed', farmers can and cannot use"
Ummm, its a patent. They must be paid for their pattented seeds to be used. They have no say in what farmers can and cant use outside of what they have pattented.
wow, fearmongering at its finest.
**Try watching the documentary: FOOD INC., if you think this is just fear mongering ........
"running fish farmers out of business"
=capitalism...you are american arnt you?
**Born and bred American.........I won't talk about 'capitalism' here...not the right subject, but I am concerned how this might affect the fish farmers in the coming years and who will be controlling them . They should be regulated, not dictated.....
"And what if the genetically engineered salmon are 'accidentally' set lose in the wild...."
There are ways to avoid this.
You are going to need to provide evidene for why "This will happen". -otherwise, you are assuming we are unable to regulate things.
**We assume in this country...if it is controlled by our Gov. or Big Business, all is well...not to worry, they will look out for the other 98% of us. But just look at what happened to most of the manufacturing in this country!!!! ...Gone!!! ...So with this synopsis in mind, don't you think we should be just a bit concerned that a single company might control the entire salmon market? ...And what, or who will be next?
"Monsanto already 'owns' the patent to all the corn 'seed'..........Which means they control what 'seed', farmers can and cannot use"
Ummm, its a patent. They must be paid for their pattented seeds to be used. They have no say in what farmers can and cant use outside of what they have pattented.
**That is true...(Please see my correction...) I do respect the scientific community...am a big fan of the scientific community, and also think they should be 'paid' for their laborious duties. but the companies they work for, should only be allowed to collect patent rights for 7 years. ...Would you agree with this? ...In the mean time...farmers are either being controlled by these large companies, or just plain, being put out of business by them.
Ok so now im seeing that you are really just concerned about big companies and how much the govt should get involved, not genetically altered salmon. Im not here to talk about that since it will get nowhere. As far as our ability to keep the mutant fish out of our natural ecosystmes-It would be stupid not to persue benefitial things based on our history of poor regulation. Why not just regulate better. Are you saying its impossible? To me its as simple as this: if we can keep the altered fish out of where they dont belong then im all for it, if it is impossible than we shouldnt do it. I dont think its impossible. We just need to focus on keeping control on everything first and foremost.
Ok so now im seeing that you are really just concerned about big companies and how much the govt should get involved, not genetically altered salmon. Im not here to talk about that since it will get nowhere.
**Well , actually I'm concerned about both, but because I'm not a Biologist/Geneticist, I can only speak about patents. ....Does the idea of Big Business altering the genetics to plants and animals, so they can control their out-put, not worry you at all? Do you not see the implications?
As far as our ability to keep the mutant fish out of our natural ecosystmes-It would be stupid not to persue benefitial things based on our history of poor regulation. Why not just regulate better. Are you saying its impossible?
**African honey bees, Chinese Koi, shell fish in Lake Michigan, Fire ants, all of these things came from outside the US, and they are creating havoc on our Eco-systems. We have yet to see how genetically altered plants and animals within the US will impact our Eco-system...that will be in the long term. The short term effect has already shown its face in court.
To me its as simple as this: if we can keep the altered fish out of where they dont belong then im all for it, if it is impossible than we shouldnt do it. I dont think its impossible. We just need to focus on keeping control on everything first and foremost.
**I understand your good intentions...but you need to remember, the Human Race has a pretty lousy record when it comes to always doing things for the right reasons. 8-)
Here, here!!!
what if changing the DNA sequence actually makes the fish produce a by-product never known before that is dangerous to our minds and we all become docile and controllable by the dolphins. I've seen video's of people being humped by dolphins.. what if they want to start some crazy interbreeding so they can walk on land? scary stuff right there... time to do your research people.
Right now our kids are growing fast enough from the steroids and hormones injected into today's food market. Next step turn them into giants – what are the clinical trials on human consumption of this steroid?
When we allow corporations to start creating and patenting what use to be a natural resource they will own and control every aspect of our lives and existence. Big Mine Co will say who cares if we dump toxins in the oceans and lakes and streams, Big Fish Co can grow all the fish we need. As long as they make their political contributions who's going to get in their way?
This side by side makes clear that evolution takes much less than the hand of God. Any being with the capacity to work successfully with dna can completely change the life of a planet. Re-read ALL of the world's scriptures, lore and histories. We are not/ nor have we ever been alone here. Happy enlightrenment!
OK na sayers, how do you suggest we produce enough to feed a growing world. Really tell us exactly how it is going to be done.
The worldwide hunger problem is one of distribution, not sufficiency in production.
@A.J.R. PhD – Lucky for us there is a thing called "research" that enables us to not need to blow hundreds of thousands of dollars on a title that in this economy can't even land us a job. So yes in fact we dont need a PhD to be educated. Let's go get some genetically altered sushi!
The medical field is doing just fine. Molecular biology has many many medical applications.
Re the poll, "Would you eat genetically modified salmon?" – we won't know whether or not we're eating it. GMOs aren't labeled.
DNA sequences are not dangerous to eat; the only real issue is what their insertion to the salmon makes them produce. A better piece of useful information is what is being made. A chinook salmon is perfectly fine to eat. So that gene's product would seem to be safe to eat. What about the gene from pout? is pout safe to eat? Do people eat them? If so, its product is probably safe to eat too. Do you worry about eating some food you have never tried before? that it might be dangerous,etc? I doubt it. Give the reader some useful info and stop pandering to fear! Tabloids do that!
Well being a biotechnology student, all I can say is this fish will not harm humans in any way. The genes in fish and those in humans have very little (less than 1% similarity) or none at all. Humans have been using different organsims for different things. For example – all the vaccines – are taken from microorgansims and injected in your blood line. Even the cockroach or the bed bug spray have some toxins but they do little harm to humans while they kill those insects. Pestricide and hebicide are another examples on how they treat other organsims and being in this field they have to make sure that these do not harm humans in any way. Cheese, bread,etc are made with help of organisms. Try finding about Bovine serum – which is the serum taken from young Cow and used in the food industry.
I am not promoting to consume the modified fish but it will be better if people know the basics and then debate about the betterment.
For those who are debating on poverty and trying to say about the food distribution and hunger, many parts of the world have fish and rice as their staple food. Due to excess fishing, hunting, killing; we are disturbing the eco-system and global warming is changing the breeding pattern. This is just one another way of trying to cope and give us a OPTION.
Finally, the world today is capitalist, if they get all the things right and the FDA approval, I see no harm in consumption. And please if you do not have any knowledge about the genetics then I see no point in a healthy debate as "half knowledge is dangerous" and then there is no point in explaining as this all will go to deaf ears but please just google some things which i said and you will be surprised by how we are exploiting the organisms in our daily use commodities. Just do not freak out ow since the name is – genetically modified. Hope this helps you upto a certain limit.
Then you need to return to school. According to comparative genomic analysis, humanity shares about 60% of its genetic material with drosophila.
I will consider all of your arguments once each and every one of you hold a PhD in molecular biology. Until then, your uneducated minds will simply dislike something because it was created in a lab. FYI...I could make these genetically-modified foods/animals in the field, iit would just take me 100yrs of breeding vs. 6months in the lab.
It depends on what is genetically modified. My guess is that is proprietary and we will never know what is being introduced or induced in these fish, which is a huge problem.
And what is the point? Are they better for you? Will they help feed poor countries? Will the price of salmon drop? If the answer is no to these questions, then the answer should be no to aquabounty. But, this may be the future of food as we know it. The poluting of our oceans is not just growing, but at a faster rate year after year.
Fish farming technologies may be necessary when everything is used up and dead in the ocean.
The government is killing us!
When we eat a food our digestive system breaks it down to energy we use to live. Genes from the food does not become part of us. It is digested. End of story.
thank you, JW, for your comment is the first in the 50 or so comments that i have read that actually has a basis in scientific fact.
GMO = Genetically Mutated Organism
I can remember eating Thompson seedless grapes in the 50's. They were wonderful. Today, thanks to scientific improvements made to help the farmer, the grapes sold as Thompson seedless are not worth buying.
@Mary. Better start checking whats in your city drinking water. What every hostess product is made out of. You basically can't eat anything anymore except what you grow / raise yourself. Do you really want to worry about all this crap plus the evil of politics and the destruction of America too? I think I will just order a steak and watch it all burn.
GMO foods are utterly disgusting. Bad enough that American food staples have absolutely no taste when compared to European food. But now GMO mutations!?! Give me a break!
Bring on the "soilent green"! Why you all freak on GMO is beyond me. We haven't eaten "organic" for nearly 100 years. No matter what the package says. Get used to it...
why o why r we doing this...you know its not going to stop at fish...but i do say if you are going to allow it be specific on package...they have already screwed us with the word organic...
Think I'd like a choice of my food and a label identifying the genetically modified fish. Since the introduction of GMO tomatoes and corn in the late '80s, early '90s, I rarely buy it since I don't know what I'm buying. Since everything now is about money and profits for corporate America, with no regard to human health or health risks, when this fish is put on the market, my family and I will steer clear of it and go organic or wild. The FDA knows that if a label is put on this fish, the American public won't buy it; heck, no profits for big corporations. Everything is driven by the profit motive. Our Congressman should be forced to eat this fish before it is put on the market vs. taking money from lobbying companies determined to put this in our grocery stores. This is not an Obama issue; this has been going on for decades.
Why does everyone freak out over this stuff? The FDA can't even determine what the long term effects of exposure to microwave ovens is, and i bet all of you have one of those in your house. Don't seem to be to worried about that. Plus if you've ever eaten kfc or any tyson chicken, those chickens have been genetically engineered to produce so much meat they can't even stand under their own weight. Pretty sure that's been workin' out just fine
bring on the "soilent green"!
I am not for, or against it.
That being said, I would not eat it although others might.
My suggestion would be to CLEARLY label it as genetically modified so I can make the choice to pay more for natural, or less for GMO.
If the company isn't willing to do this, it would be because they fear no one would buy it. If that is the case, it should not be on the market.
Every darn time we mess with nature using chemicals, we end up with new autoimmune diseases. I am beginning to think the FDA is behind killing us off so the Government don't have to pay social security for us any more than 5 years. All kidding aside, chemicals are toxins that our liver and immune systems can't handle very well. Wild salmon is better for us then the farm raised salmon. Leave the fish alone. The FDA don't even monitor and regulate the fish and shellfish industry anyway, my feeling is once the government allows industry to alter the genetics on fish or shellfish, the FDA should regulate the entire industry (farm and wild) of what we eat and be held accountable for not doing the job. If they can't afford to do that, then they should not allow industry to change the fish in anyway.
@Craig I understand your point. But taking a look at slaughterhouses in general would make you stop eating meat. I however do enjoy how HUGE chicken wings seem to be now days. I just noticed that the other day, got some spicy garlic chicken wings and thought to myself.. these must of been off MONSTER chickens they were so big. I enjoyed every last bite of the whole 4 i could eat before i was stuffed.
I could only see this as being *needed* if there was some problem with current salmon – which there isn't. It is indeed simply a way for companies to make more profit, and although *most likely* not a risk, it is still a risk that we don't have to take. At least not at this point in time.
GMOs kill. They are poison to our bodies and the environment. Research Monsanto and GMOs before considering eating anything but organic produce.
Altering genetics can be done in many forms. Take for example, the human form. If you look at a DNA string for a baby in the womb, you can determine what this child will be born like. They're supposedly working on a way to repair bad DNA in the womb, as to help a child be born healthy. That's one way...
However, because of the Capitalist society that we live in. Corporations and their teams of R&D scientists have begun to re-engineer the DNA of plants and animals. Why? To produce a healthier, faster growing stock for sale. Stock that is resistant to diseases, etc. or grows twice as fast as to turn a quicker profit.
As long as we the consumer continue to purchase their goods, they'll continue to provide them for us.
The article states, "Genetic engineering entails introducing desirable traits of one living being into another." But whose definition of desirable? We already have bred chickens to the point that their breasts and thighs grow so quickly and are so muscular that, even if not butchered and allowed to live, they can hardly stand up, and have short, miserable lives.
Do humans care at all about the quality of life for other living creatures that are under human "care?" If the creature is your "pet," then maybe yes. If you want to eat them, apparently not. What is the difference, except in human attitude? Is there a larger principle here?
If you were a salmon, what would you find "desireable?" Does the "Golden Rule" extend to other species? If not, where does it stop?
The only reason to modify natural organisms is PROFIT. It's all about how much profit the producer can make. Which brings up the question: how much is enough? If this fish matures in half the time, why not create one that matures in 10% of the time, just to maximize profit? To heck with mother nature and food safety.
Guess it's time to learn the difference between pharmacutical floruide and the stuff they put in your city drinking water which so happens to be the by product (toxic waste) from fertalizer. After you can a hold of that situation and the spin put on it to get it into our drinking water (which by the way has been proven to give no value to your teeth).. then start worrying about the fish.
Why does this story remind me of a scene in jurasic park. I sure hope we dont end up with 20 ft long salmon ripping peoples legs off and stuff like that.
LOL, oops crossbred them with the wrong genes...the undead and barry mannilow genes and now they sing when you mount them on the wall.
As long as it isn't ill tempered sea bass...ill eat it
Without this kind of technology we would be a starving planet. It is this technology that has let us survive- the cancers, colds, and such to which you refer are mostly due to over population, natural patterns in evolution, and (honestly) people's inability to understand the world around them. It will be fine- my only concern is that the fish must breed in an isolated tank- not in fresh running water.
We haven't had genetically modified fish thus far- and yet, people are STILL starving to death every day. It sucks, but there is no quick answer to world hunger. This fish isn't going to save lives, the company itself doesn't even claim that (according to their website). Even in isolated tanks, there is ALWAYS going to be the chance at escape- and without any sort of legislation REQUIRING this company to destroy the fish in a certain manner or breed them in a certain way, there's that chance this fish can escape into the natural environment.
Without OVERPOPULATION we wouldn't be a starving planet. As long as people keep having babies like there's no tomorrow (and in fact, there isn't), then they will continue to starve. The Earth is completely capable of sustaining a very large, healthy population. But that population is far less than the current 6.8 billion.
Didn't they do this in "Jurassic park"?...and the dinosaurs began to breed even though they were all female. I would've hoped we would have learned our lessen from that disaster. I'm sure they're still have trouble with rogue dinosaurs on that island.
Life finds away.
Terrifying. We just do not know enough about the effects/ consequences of doing this to species- and then eating them. No- I would not eat a genetically modified Salmon, and I do NOT want them introduced into the environment.
I agree- no research is done by these companies into health effects- and the little they are required to do is always biased. The sterile fish findings by the FDA itself is a good example of Big Business's attempts at lying and making this seem like the perfect idea.
Every time we alter genetics that we eat we see the effects in our bodies. Eating genetically altered corn has seen an increase in colds and flue in humans. Keep messing with genetics to make a buck and we will suffer in our bodies. We have used genetics to fatten cows and now our population is more over weight than ever. what we eat is what we become.
As a student who has studied GM and it'seffects on plants and animals I am ALL FOR this idea.
Furthermore, as a promoter of agriculture (this falls into the realm of agriculture); this is needed. All of the "organic" people out there do not understand that we need advances like this to keep up with the growing demand for food in our country. Right now we have the cheapest food supply, mainly because of technological advances and smart land practices. We only spend 10% of our disposable income on food in a year. For a reality check, Americans spend 77 days earning money to pay taxes and just under 30 days earning enough money to buy food for a year.
Thank a scientist, thank a farmer- without these two you'd have less time to sit on CNN and make false assumption all day.
False assumptions? The FDA hasn't even approved this idea yet. If they end up denying this company's GM fish, you'd look like the idiot. How much I spend on food is completely irrelevant to why I don't want this garbage in my diet or the environment- read some of the comments and open up your mind to the opposing side. You're obviously in the dark as to the opinion of the MAJORITY of people who read this article (according to the poll, at last).
The only person in this thread that comes across as an idiots is Keisha and John. The two poorly educated fear mongers of GM food.
Le Chugg, unfortunately for you, the majority is with John and I, so go troll a different article. Your complaining and griping isn't a sound argument to eat this sad excuse for food.
Le Chugg:
Perhaps you're not a people person because you're not communicating that effectively... I am actually engaging in a dialog about sustaintability. You on the other hand are saying that people aren't educated. Would be happy to exchange ideas if you have any.
you are with the majority so you are right? Less than 25% of our population is considered scientifically literate, and most cant answere a few simple questions after reading a science article. If you want ill dig up the study that makes me believe this.
Keisha as far as i can tell you must be a troll, every time someone asserts their desire for this to be passed by the FDA you bash their opinion with facts facts facts where are the facts, where are yours? I'm for it, if you don't want it on your plate then don't get it, the FDA is anal about labeling stuff because of people like you so I'm sure if you read the food you get it will have "a label" saying whether or not its genetically altered, as for my proof which i so know your going to bring up again, i don't have any i only have basic knowledge of this stuff but from what iv seen from nay and hey Sayers I'm all for it. (and for you idiots that just brisk through this, as stated in an above post this is"an opinion")
We have one of the cheapest food supplies because the government subsidizes much of our food production... corn, wheat, etc... all grown and sold below market production prices. Farmers who grow these crops can survive because of government subsidies.
I agree with you on the land management practices however; many GM foods require additional herbices and pesticides to be applied, not to mention nitrogen fertilizers (GM Soy & Peas in particular). All of these chemicals flow into the Gulf of Mexico, killing our fish livestock, exacerbating the need to grown our delicious salmon dinner in florescent-lit warehouses, in pools with thousands of other fish, eating their own feces before ending up on your dinner plate.
Makes you wonder...
ITA. – Jennifer
Cheap food is because all we eat is made from subsidized corn–and therefore is not really "food" in my humble opinion. (I mean, what ever happened to real sugar??) Anyway, I believe to start modifying our food genetically will begin a snowball process of bad things, whatever they may be, that will be irreversible. (ie. the Monsanto pest repellent seeds that blow in the wind into other farmers fields.) Lets choose NOT to go down this dangerous path. Please read Oryx and Crake. It's a little glimpse of what could possibly happen. If you want to eat cheaply, buy dry beans and legumes. Pasta. Vegetables. Meat, chicken and fish do not have to be the center of every meal. This is a very NEW concept in the whole scheme of things. Meats used to be a luxury, not a staple. And our obesity rates are a blatant proof of this.
Not gonna eat it, no way. c_c
I wonder how much they're paying the FDA to approve this. This is disgusting.. is there any normal food left out there? I also find it ironic that most people say they wouldn't eat it, but they won't realize when they buy it from the grocery store, they're buying right into their hands.
So, what about these white chicken (broilers) which grow in half the time? We eat them!
It is my opinion that the lack of understanding of genetic modification leads people to be scared of it. Get an education.
BTW, look up the skeptical breakdown of organic food and find out how people are once again stupid and uneducated. Just because something is natural doesn’t mean its any better for you. That is a logical fail.-companies are using America's scientific illiteracy to make money.
I'm sure it's a lovely fish but that same lack of education you speak about often leads our elected officials to approve things that are not safe. There is a constant lack of a systemic study or understanding of what the long-term environmental, not to mention legal, implications of GM crops / organisms, not to mention moral and ethical implications. GM fish and pigs today, GM babies tomorrow...
Elected officials don't approve food at the FDA. Perhaps after you are done reading up on genetics you can start reading up on US government and the FDA.
Original poster is right, you guys lack a LOT of education apparently. You just spout a bunch of heresy then pretend its truth and fact, which it isn't.
Le Chugg:
FDA scientists can do whatever they want but ultimately the decision comes down to appointed officials. Read up on the process a bit before spouting rhetoric about not being "educated".
JP
Washington, DC
Right, you're the only educated person who read this story. Attacking people who have an opinion that differs from yours is the cheapest argument in the book. I don't lack an understanding about genetics- in fact, I think I know too much as " Dave" commented above you- "I'd be more worried about a Jurassic Fish type situation where they get loose, and destroy the ecosystem of the ocean with the rapid growth rate." I'm not saying these fish have any worse or better health impact than normal salmon (which last I checked, wasn't even that fantastic to begin with), but the multitudes of other issues that involve this Pandora's box of altering food in this manner is beyond our complete understanding. This company is quite obviously putting Big Business before the environment, before our health, and before research into their own product's potential disasters (sterile? not sterile? make up your mind).
You're welcome to your own opinion but you aren't welcome to your own facts. When your opinion is based on a lie or isn't true then people should call you on it and that is exactly what they are doing.
If you said I don't like organic food because it tastes bad <- this is an opinion.
If you said I don't like organic food because it causes illness <- this is a lie.
This comment of mine had no opinion in it, dear. Read slower.
Don't listen to Le Chugg. He can't believe that non-organic foods don't have high pesticides that cause disease. He obviously works for the company that made this GMO. He is reciting from the big business script and no one here agrees with him.
Keisha you probably know as much about genetics as you know about fission. Which is to say you only know what other stupid people have told you. You're like a dumb christian – completely sold on your own ignorance.
Le Chugg is stopping to name calling now... he called Keisha a "dumb christian"... wow. This guy is a moron.
Well said. These are just a few issues that make this problematic. From the article it looks like up to 5% of the eggs could be fertile. This means that if the salmon were to make it into the wild it could multiply rapidly given its genes.
Living in Chicago, we are dealing with the threat of Asian carp. Due to its large size and rapid rate of reproduction its poses a huge risk to the ecosystem of the freshwater lakes. Its pretty easy to throw the balance off... It does seem like a poorly researched pandoras box. I would want to know more information and be better assured that the fish are in fact sterile (let alone that the injection of growth hormone is harmless).
Also, should they even be called salmon? I mean, if genetic material from the ocean pout is injected into the fertilized eggs of Atlantic salmon, is it really salmon anymore?
I should have been more specific. Those that are worried about the health implications are the ones that show the lack of understanding. They would need to show that the fish are indeed sterile before the environment would be safe. I was simply speaking about the knee-jerk reaction of most people that hear the term “genetic modification” and run for the hills.
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4019
To hear the skeptical breakdown of organic food and what it had become. Many companies are simply cheating the system in order to get that "organic" sticker. They use fertalizer with different toxins in them, and have to use three times as much. This is just a good example of the "nature" fallacy.
There's nothing wrong with this. It is just using science to make the production of the food we need more efficient. I love Salmon and if this makes it cheaper, I am all for it! Mmmmmmmm!
Personal preference, I guess... I kind of like to think that my food had a natural life and wasn't shoved into a cramped pool of fish poop with other fish before it ends up on my plate. I guess you are what you eat :)
Well john it sounds like you don't leave your house to often. Ever been fishing? I would rather drink the water out of a hatchery than out of a lake. Fish tend to pack together and it doesn't stress them out. If it didn't they would travel in schools.
http://www.pnwsalmoncenter.org/images/spawn%20salmon%20school.jpg
They seem ok here.
word john, and as a side note maybe te earth and it's rescources were not meant to support the mass population increase... survival of the fittest baby, we need to not populate so much, how about that?
My God people! Why are we debating this – a companies profits are at stake!!!
We eat tons of genetically engineered plants now. Corn for example, has been so altered by humans that it can no longer reproduce without our assistance. We thinned out the husk that used to protect it.
I bet this stuff is perfectly fine for our consumption.
I'd be more worried about a Jurassic Fish type situation where they get loose, and destroy the ecosystem of the ocean with the rapid growth rate.
i think this is a terrible idea!!! they havent even studied to see how it would affect humans. the growth horomones will stay in the body and people will grow when they are not supposed to naturally. they do the same with the cows to make hamburger for fast food places. the FDA needs to stop this genetically modified crap and do something right for once.
That isn't how genes work...
Ever eat grain? That is genetically modified. Ever eat chicken? Again, genetically modified.
Have they not studied it, or have they just not produced the results you agree with?
We have been eating genetically altered grains and other farm products for many years. I don't get why it's such a big deal.
It's a bad idea because like the grains and other farm products, systemic studies of the implications of doing so are not well understood. GM Corn for instance, crossfertilizes with other corn species, at which time should that corn pass on its trait for resistance to targeted herbicides and pesticides, corporations can come in and file a lawsuit against an unlicensed grower, even though this happened "naturally" in corn fields. Not to mention allergic reactions, moral and ethical implications of doing so, etc... But again, the scariest thing is the fact that you can PATENT a gene - a marker of life.
Ahh the old "if its genetics are different it will destroy the earth" crap.
Genetic Manipulation is a good thing. What if we removed or replaced the genes that cause cancer? or allow the body to be infected with influenza? People like yourself would still be making your stupid argument of "we'll never know what really happens".
Where were you when we started dropping nuclear weapons and testing those. People are worried about genetic changes to their dinner plate and 'what ifs' when the true forces that will destroy humans and the entire planet get a free pass.
not understood = there is no research to support my position that it's dangerous
I thought very recently there was as lawsuit that ruled against patenting genes?
I agree that there is a need to be very careful as to not let anything mess with natural ecosystems but all they are doing is taking already existing genes from other fish and using them in salmon. This does not imply any bad health benefits. If they could indeed make all sterile fish, i am all for it. Why would we need to be worried about allergic reactions? People can be allergic to almost everything. They just don’t eat it. And tell me, without being using a circular argument (i.e. religious), could you tell me why this has any moral and ethical implications?
The problem with genetically modified corn and other plants, is that they have been using animal genes in these plants, and there is no long term studies to tell us what that does to our health. We have an epidemic of cancers, obesity, and many health problems in the U.S. and yet no answers as to why.
GM does not just mean using chemicals and DNA from other organisms; it also means simply modifying genes. Like selective breeding. You choose one organism with favorable traits (like corn that grew taller than the rest), allow that particular one to reproduce, and continue choosing the 'best' to grow/harvest/whatever. That is modifying genes, and we've been doing it for thousands of years.
At Val, not to be a jerk, but that is ridiculous. Why are you worried about animal genes? We eat animal genes every time we eat an animal. Just because they are in corn means they may be dangerous? You show a lack of understanding here. Corn didn’t even exist until it was bred from a grass, tiosinte, into what we now know as corn. Should we be scared of that? Should we be scared of our polyploidy tomatoes with like 8 copies of each chromosome?
There is something about using animal genes in plants that has unintended harmful effects. I don't pretend to understand the entire concept of how you put pig genes into a plant. If you just google genetically modified corn you can see that it does kill insects, including the monarch butterfly, and therefore is disrupting the ecosystem in some form. I think perhaps using animal genes in other animals is better than mixing two completely different kingdoms.
bring on the cancer. idiots.
What would be the mechanism for that?
I don't think the mechanism for right handed versus left handed Thalidomide was understood at the time, but it looked like a damn fine sedative – at the time.
Is this company publicly traded? You own stock?
the mechanism acts on the "i dont understand so it must cause cancer" pathway leading to oncogenes
Absolute dork!! Go back to your cave!!
This is just bad, bad, bad! Especially in these days where we are trying to go organic. Are they putting genetically modified things in our bodies just for more money? I really hope this doesn't go through OR if it does, they have to display that it is genetically modified. If it goes through I hope it doesn't sell. Next thing you know we're going to be fed cloned hamburgers.
Suckers are trying to go Organic. The nation doesn't give a crap about marketing schemes. People little brains and to much cents are buying 'organic' food.
People that buy into that crap should take a long read about what they are buying. I would rather have a genetically altered apple from Missouri than a organic apple from china grown in pig feces.
I'd rather eat pig feces than drink pesticides.
They don't use pesticides on fish. (guy above me apparently thinks they do or he fails at reading)
He wasn't saying there are pesticides in fish- he was referring to YOUR analogy in your previous comment in this tree. Pot calling kettle black on intelligence, eh? HA
You are aware that they use pesticides in organic food are you not?
they do treat farm fish with pesticides
http://www.farmedanddangerous.org/page/sealicechemical
they do use pesticides on farmed salmon
Just about everything you've ever eaten, unless you eat rocks, has been genetically modified. The cow of today is not the cow of ten, twenty, a hundred years ago because we humans do selective breeding. Same for corn, tomatoes, apples, grapes...
First let me preface this by saying that I am a medical school student who majored Microbiology in undergrad. I think that you are a little misinformed. There is a huge difference between selectively breeding animals and plants for desired traits and introducing foreign rDNA into them. While selective breeding enhances and emphasizes characteristics that naturtally occur, introducing foreign rDNA gives these animals traits that they were not intended to have. The reason that this is even being proposed is so that this company can maximize its profits. As we have seen from several food recalls and salmonella outbreaks, many of these companies have a complete disregard for our saftey when it comes to their bottom line. Their first priority is making money. More importantly, the long term ramifications on ecosystem, the native wild food supply, and our health is unknown. When you alter an organisms gentic make up, you often times have uninteded results. There needs to be much more study and much more analysis before we should allow GMO salmon, especially without labeling indicating that it has been genetically modified, to be approved for consumption.
nice con job! how much do you get paid for your con job by monsanto and the likes? how do you sleep at night?
Khalil:
You speak of traits that animals are not "intended to have." Intended by whom? We cross-breed animals to create sub-species all the time, giving them odd characteristics that could never happen in the wild and would not survive otherwise. Is that also morally reprehensible?
I'll eat an untested geneticaly altered salmon after President Obama and BP officials eat shrimp, crabs, or other sealife from the Gulf of Mexico. Our 'leaders' should lead by example. After Monsanto execs feed their children geneticaly altered crops and BP 'safe' proclaimers chow down on Gulf seafood, I'll think about it.
If they feed their children any form of crop or animal these days, they are feeding their children genetically modified food. We humans have been doing selective breeding for many thousands of years now, which is altering genetics.
The kind of genetic engineering that humans have been doing for millions of years is NOT the same thing as using recombinant DNA to modify animals and plants.
Humans have crossed short peas with long peas to get medium peas. They've crossed white pigs and black pigs to get spotted or banded pigs. We've been doing this for millions of years and it's been proved to be safe.
This DNA altering is taking the DNA from organism that normally can't even breed with each other, they're so genetically different, and mixing it. I would say that the fact that they can't reproduce with each other is a pretty good indication that they shouldn't. Also, we've only been doing this kind of genetic engineering for less than 1 generation wheres we've been cross-breeding organisms for millions of generations. 1 generation isn't enough to tell me that it's safe.
Do not be mislead by the industry. Genetic engineering using recombinant DNA is NOT the same and simply pollinating a large pea plant with a small pea plant.
Sorry Lauren but there is a HUGE difference between selective breeding and gene manipulation! ONE can be patented.. the other can not.. ask the farmers who are trying to grow soy beans and get sued because of blow over pollination from Monsanto's 'patented protected, genetically altered' soybeans! The are in constant litigation that the farmers are 'stealing' their patent protected "PRODUCT" by allowing their normal soy beans to be pollinated by their protected product. You really thing the Salmons will be different... FOOL!
I bought a huge bag of gulf shrimp this week, I'll eat that before I eat farmed shrimp from China.
Phillip,
I share your apparent outrage over the BP spill, but your anger is misplaced. GM salmon have nothing to do with the Gulf oil spill.
NO WAY! Stop altering food so you can make more money faster. I'm not a crazed environmentalist or anything, just a mom who cares what my kids eat!
I completely agree with you.
I've read maybe 4 of your posts and they are as pointless and without citation as you claim everyone else to be! Have you eaten genetically modified food before? No but you've eaten steroid injected chicken and beef I'm sure. Why don't you just sit back and relax and wait for the salmon to come out. Then go get a full physical and find out your state of health. Then when you've found that your in good shape( I'm assuming ) go eat genetically engineered salmon for a month. Get another physical and post your findings on CNN! Now please do some research into genetic engineering and stop making statements when you clearly are extremely biased. Just because the FDA doesn't approve something right away doesn't mean it won't eventually and polls are a terrible use of credibility when talking about the "American People" because theres over 300 million of us and I'm sure the poll didn't take that into account :P
It's all about greed and owning the the rights to the food we eat so they can control the prices just as they do with the oil etc.... The people of the U.S.A. need to demand the right to have correct labeling on the foods they eat I am sick of all the lies.. The F.D.A. is a joke.just like the Goverment is.
I find this chat somewhat entertaining for a few reasons. First and foremost it is a prime example of how far removed Americans are from the production of their food and agriculture in general. Does the American public actually understand that 99% of the crops we ingest are GMO's? There are a lot of people up in arms because of the term GMO but have no idea what it actually entails and how long the world has actually been utilizing this type of technology. Secondly, i am amazed on how many "experts" there are claiming that this will have long term effects on the ecosystem and public health. These fish are raised in fish nurseries until they are ready to harvest so they are not introduced into nature. As for public health, i challenge any person in here to produce a citation from a peer reviewed scientific journal that talks about the detrimental effects on humans that have utilized GMO agricultural products! I understand that un-education about a subject can lead to fear of that subject however, we need to realize that the world is getting bigger, the population is getting bigger and we are not generating more agricultural land. As such we need to find ways to generate enough food for the world with diminishing resources to do so.
The simple fact is, =EVERYTHING= you eat, even if you grow it yourself, has been "genetically modified", by man, by selective breeding, as long as man has been herding animals and planting crops. The vast majority of the things we eat have been selectively breed to the point where they CAN NOT SURVIVE if not under human care
Brett, that is an excellent point! We no longer eat what would be termed "wild food" anymore. It is not productive as what we have selected for and in most cases has a much more variable harvest than our currently developed crops.
Dear Keisha,
I can not believe how much time you have wasted posting the same comment over and over again. Your comments do not consist of any facts and its simply a waste of time for us readers who have any intelligence. Please do not continue to respond to an article about an advanced scientific subject with nothing more than an opinion that it will not help anyone. This will help many people afford salmon, which is a good source of protein. If you have tested GM food before and can prove scientifically that it is harmful then I would love to hear from you. I am guessing you're part of that group of people that doesn't understand science and therefore fear it. Science is founded on the repeatability that something known is going to happen. For you're lesson I'll use a soccer ball. If you kick a soccer ball you know its going to go in the direction you kick it. The fact that you know that before you kick makes you a scientist at the most basic level.
The first lesson is free. For more you will have to pay tuition at the University I teach at.
Hey Matt and Sam, there's a huge difference in selective breeding and scientist physically altering the genes of animals in a lab. It's also clearly obvious that genetically altered foods are having a great and perverse effect o us. We can see it in our children for sure and it's common sense that when anything is altered the very meaning of the term says it has been changed. If you are eating a fish that has been genetically altered to grow 5 times faster and 5 times larger it's only common sense that if you are eating that genetically altered fish's meat that contains the altered genes then in some kind of way you're going to be affected too. Why do think that the average size of a defensive lineman in the NFL has increased by 62 pounds in the last 20 years? Females are growing full breast at much earlier ages.
There is no shortage of foods. There's just a shortage of people to harvest it and an overage of people who are destroying the environment to grow the animals and vegetation to be harvested.
Dear David,
If you think it is a soccer ball and it is just a cannon ball coated to look like a soccer ball, then the kick is going to throw your leg in the other direction. The term 'science' seems to give everyone a freedom to arbitrarily quote 'repeatability','proof', etc and justify anything.
Have a good day!
"If you have tested GM food before and can prove scientifically that it is harmful then I would love to hear from you. I am guessing you're part of that group of people that doesn't understand science and therefore fear it. Science is founded on the repeatability that something known is going to happen."
David, isn't that a bit of reverse logic? Can you prove to us that this salmon is absolutely NOT harmful in any way? Chastising someone for having legitimate concerns is a rather interesting approach. Is that what you teach at your university? Or do you tell your students that we should just blindly accept everything that comes down the pike?
Abudu:
What you're referring to has nothing to do with direct genetic modification. The actual genes themselves will not alter anything through direct consumption. Nucleotides etc. will be dissolved in your stomach acid upon consumption. You can't just have genes spliced into your own DNA through consumption, if that were the case we'd all be walking around with random pig, cow and plant genes. What you're referring to his hormonal alterations in livestock, such as pumping cows full of steroids/hormones then the potential problems with drinking that cows milk etc. The genes they seem to be describing just cause the fish to mature faster and grow year round instead of seasonally. So if they're not continuously injecting hormones etc. you don't have to worry about what you're referring too, even though that isn't as big of an issue as you're claiming. Just like we select for larger cattle and drought resistant plants, humans have naturally selected for themselves. Have you not noticed over the past several decades the sensationalism of larger breasted women and bulkier muscular men? As long as those people continue to serve a purpose and we have a niche for them in our society the extremes will continue to get pushed. Same with tall skinny people or even short fat people. As the population expands so will the variation of people who make up that population. Also if you continue to have people in certain populations of society that breed at younger ages continuously you will select for women/men who mature faster and become full bodied faster. There are a lot more possibilities for these things than freaking out over your food.
David-
Your inability to use proper english (i.e., you, your and you're; ending a sentence with a preposition) is telling. Correctness and facts elude you, negating your opinion
haha suddenly everyone's a teacher, professor, or student. I doubt it. Most of us are Joe Schmoe's with our own opinion. I am no better than you; you are no better than myself. I find those with elitist "OMGZ I AM SO SMART" posts to be so dry and predictable. Before you throw mud: look at what YOU are typing.
Matt is correct mostly, we have a huge appetite for many delicacies including fish. As the world middle class grows, we as a species should make it a point to protect the wild Atlantic and pacific fish hatcheries. I see this as a great step forward to help the environmental health of our oceans. We will always need to be diligent regarding the introduction of any species to an unfamiliar environment ( Asian carp in the US rivers, the rabbit in Australia, and many other human screw ups). lets proceed with an optimistic and critical eye on this new technology.
Yes Keisha that is correct, we are all joe schmoes and have no clue what we are talking about. Yet you are the only clueless one, you eat genetically modified food all the time, drink soda and other sugary artificial food items, yet you don't complain about that. Instead of throwing mud at you, i will throw stones because there is no chance in making you stupider than you already are.
I would rather eat this then the be forced to continue to eat high fructose corn syrup in just about everything that is produced.
Hey Sam. It is obvious you are not a scientist. I am. I am not worried about eating genetically engineered food but I am very worried about turning it loose in the environment. Whatever. Your testing methods and assuptions would never get past a review committee.
To those of you who think genetically modified foods are no big deal, ask yourselves if you are okay with toddlers going through puberty.
im a 12 year old and i wouldnt care less i mean its way better than the lunch quality food this is for a project and seriously who cares if they feed u geneticly mutated salmon or something i mean its better than cloned chicken lol.
i am very surprised to read a well worded and educated discussion on CNN. most of the time its just pointless drivel. thanks for both sides for presenting well thought out points.
yes kiesha, the people you think are smart elitsts or w.e yeah, they are people with half a brain, and they are also people who know what they are talking about. everything that you say doesnt make any sense. we digest DNA polymers all the time, our acids break it into monomers and those monomers are later used to build our own DNA..the monomers dont contain info themselves, they are just building blocks so to speak..our cell replicates the DNA using those monomers, its like making different words with alphabets..this has been simplified for your sake, now if you need me to explain anything else to you just ask..oh yeah sorry for any typos,,there is some really annoying add in my way
Are you people serious? No evidence that GMO is harmful? tell that to the Farmers in India that were given Monsanto cotton seeds and when they didn't grow killed themselves. But don't worry "they" are worried about your health :( I would go on but the list is too long and I'm sure that they did this themselves some how in your eyes.
People here like Paul Stone have no clue what they're talking about, but after him Matt gives a great rebuttal. Some of you remind me of why we had witch trials in Salem to begin with. Anytime there's something you don't understand you try to vilify it. Same thing with science. Paul Stone, the only thing I want to say to you is that this planet is not getting any larger, but the population is. Would you like to explain how we're going to feed all these people? Do you have a better plan?
I'm definitely not eating that thing.
@ Dr. Kavorkjian:
Stupider is not a word.
Some people have a GOD complex! When you tamper with nature...LOOK OUT! First, freak fish...then GODZILLA!
To Abudu: "there's a huge difference in selective breeding and scientist physically altering the genes of animals in a lab." What's the difference exactly? Seems like just one of speed and process, the end result is still altered genes.
To Robert: Though there may be a many instances to raise concern about GMO's the situation of farmers in India is not one of them. The problem there is contractual, the farmers in exchange for using the GMO crops enter into a messed up contract obligating them to buy only certain herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers that the same company provides. This leads to a runaway situation driving the farmers deeply in debt. That debt is the reason for the suicides, it has nothing to do with the consumption of the products themselves.
If anything this argues against allowing these sort of contracts to be entered into, not against anything directly related to the product itself.
Animals and seeds escape all the time? how many species have already been affected with " genetic contamination"? I believe that "modification" means pursuing a few genetic strains of a plant or animal to make it produce more, what about gene pools and biodiversity? one disease and a staple food stuff could be wiped out. thats when the seed bank in svalbard comes in, to sell you back what they took from you in the first place... check it out. I think in the future, some people out there will cause famine to make profit. how much food is wasted because its "imperfect" or to lessen supply to increase its price, terrible when they show starving kids to make you reach into your wallet.
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_21655.cfm
HERE IS A CITATION, IN REPLY TO THE CHALLENGERS AND POO-POOERS WHO BLINDLY FOLLOW
@Dr. Kavorkjian – Hostility is the calling card of a weak intellect. I feel as if I've become "stupider" after reading your post. lol
I'm not worried about the safety at all. I am worried about if and when these fish get into the wild. The would out compete natural ones and the effects are not predictable. Eg. Africanized killer bees.
Dear Dave,
You teach at the university level? Then you should know to not end your sentences in prepositions. You should know that research is most often comprised of a series of opinions. Most people were against GMF before the take over of corn and soybean and remain so today. The fish are just another reason to voice an opinion.
Its still natural....just selected genes are turned on to make them grow. The meat does need to go under further testing for cancer or hyperthyroid diseases but I think it is worth a shot!! DNA and the genetic code is unbelievably amazing and complex. This particular event may not be sufficient for human consumption but it could lead the way to future discoveries in genetic science.
I guess you don't care about other peoples children eating?
I love how people are 'scared' of genetics. You realize every fish you've ever eaten had different genetics right? You've never consumed anything that had the same genetics.
Man has been 'messing' with food since the advent of eating. We've just become profoundly better at it.
I can't tell if you're trolling. Assuming you're not, your comments have had NO facts on them and just ranting at everyone who dissents to this idea. You're annoying, Le Chugg. Go away.
Hunger has always been about poor distribution of food, not lack of food. This GMO will not help even one starving child, so get off your high horse. And it will escape, there is no doubt about that – check back in 10 years.
@werehawk I agree, I just made a comment below saying basically the same thing: We haven't had genetically modified fish thus far- and yet, people are STILL starving to death every day. It sucks, but there is no quick answer to world hunger. This fish isn't going to save lives, the company itself doesn't even claim that (according to their website).
We have been eating genetically altered grain and it has caused lots of problems. Some people don't even realize that alot of their health issues have been caused by this because the medical community is so backwards and untrained in nutrition. Try asking your doctor about nutrition and how much time owas spent on it. You might be shocked to find that they spend little or no time on it which should scare you if they get aan opionion oon it. They criticize us for making comments on medicine because we have no training ont it and yet here they are completely in the dark on nutrition and acting like they know something when they DON"T
after eating this fish for 10-20 years, it will be interesting to see all the new mutant babies, people born with 3 eyes, and, all the beautiful new strains of cancer that will be produced! Cant wait!!
The food you eat has a DIRECT effect on your body. Kids raised on gorowth hormones develop MUCH faster than we did growing up. Nowadays 11 year olds look like 15 year olds! Although it may not be rationally sound at this point due to lack of evidence, I can imagine that with foods that are genetically modified to GROW faster would somehow make our kids GROW faster. So maybe in the future our 7 year old will look 15. I'll pass. The FDA needs to be more proactive in testing the LONG TERM effects of these experiments. So many times have we learned, 20 years later after the damage has been done that these things are bad for us. THEN they regulate. It is up to us to avoid this stuff on our own as the gov't can't look out for us, and business only cares about money. I'll pass and enjoy my WILD salmon!
go ahead and feed your own kids with genetically modified salmon! i hope you have no offsprings, though.
Just because the FDA approves something does not necessarily make it safe. How many times has drugs been recalled after years of use because of ill effects or death. If you want to claim genetically engeering food is totally safe; then tell that to millions of Americans that suffer from undiagnosed illnesses; that they have no idea why or what is causing it; or hundreds of new diseases that crop up each year. Isn't it safe to say that there is a possibility that our genetically altered food could be a culprit in some of these cases.
@ Joshua: Your logic is fallacious. There's a huge difference between using hormones to speed up growth and altering the DNA of an animal to speed up its growth. If you give hormones to an animal, and then eat that animal, it's easy to see how you could ingest residual hormones and in turn be affected by them. However, thinking that eating an animal that has been genetically modified to grow faster will make YOU grow faster is like suggesting that your neck will grow longer if you eat a Giraffe, or you'll live to be 150 if you eat enough Tortoises. The DNA from foods you eat can't 'splice' itself into your genes. I'm sensing a disturbing lack of even the most basic understanding of genetics within these comments...
I believe in survival of the fittest...sorry if you and your children don't fit into that
@Keisha
You're an idiot and you obviously do not know what trolling is. Please visit 4chan.org and find out what trolling truly is. :)
Its interesting how many people here herald the banner that this GMO salmon is so much different from the cows and pigs that had growth hormone artificially injected into them because their modified DNA isn't the same as directly injecting them with these hormones.
Its even more interesting how many of those people claim this on scientific grounds, because apparently none of those people have a firm grasp on biology/genetics in the first place.
An organism's DNA is the set of instructions the body uses to produce everything, from how the organs ought to be arranged to the color of the various pigments to how fast an organism matures and dies. They don't need to artificially inject growth hormone because the altered DNA would instruct the fish to PRODUCE said hormones by itself. This other breed of salmon doesn't magically grow faster than the Atlantic Salmon just because. Splicing in their DNA in just means that the Atlantic Salmon would be producing the growth hormones at the rate of this other breed of salmons, thus growing bigger and faster than its natural variety.
That being said, these growth hormones from a different breed of salmon are pretty unlikely to affect people anyway. If you've eaten anything, you've eaten growth hormones. Things don't grow without them.
@Ryan:
If you had even the least understanding about what "genetically modified" means here, or how transgenic animals differ from non-transgenic animals, you'd have answered all your own questions. Quick question to all you fear mongers: the article states, "the fish's rapid growth will be boosted by the injection of a combination of a growth gene (GH-coding sequences) from the Pacific Chinook salmon and genetic material (the AFP gene) from the ocean pout". Assuming the ocean pout is edible (don't know. Maybe it tastes like crap), would you during the course of your lifetime consider eating both Pacific Chinook and ocean pout? If you would (and there is no reasonable argument that you would not), and yet you are claiming that there is something dangerous about this particular fish, then you are suffering from a phobia. Do some research, try to educate yourself a little bit, and perhaps you'll realize how untenable your current position really is.
Keisha so you are saying that eating something with different genes is dangerous? every animal has its own distinct genes and in those species they have similar yet varying genes. People who use HGH or Steroids or any other pharmaceutical drug, is genetically modified, you are genetically modified retard.
@Ryan:
My bad. That comment was NOT directed at you. I agree with what you said. My previous comments were directed to the people you were talking to.
And by the way. To the person that said that it is improper English to end a sentence with a preposition. WRONG! There is no current agreement that ending sentences with prepositions is grammatically incorrect. That "rule" is so out of fashion as to be irrelevant.
haha! same with KFC "they dont metion kentucky fried chicken" thats why its called KFC what about this one? Americas Genetic salmon jaja would also be known as "AGS" at stores. man... this is getting to the point that its too much!!!
and 50 years ago cigarettes were considered safe and today there are so many hormones in our food that little kids, toddlers, are going through puberty. Come on, Le Chugg, don't kid yourself. This is about profits not feeding the world's children, there's plenty of food in the world (distribution is a problem however), we just have to make sure that food isn't toxic to us or our environment.
@ Keisha:
You have no right to speak of fact and truth when you yourself spread them so nonchalantly. You speak of thought before action, fact over opinion. Yet I see no fact in your statements. You would do well to abandon your verbal attacks.
Genetically modifying the food in no way will harm your child, unless they modify it to start producing some toxin, which doesn't seem to be the case. People are so blissfully ignorant of genetics its disgusting.
Cite your research. Thanks.
Blissfully ignorant like saying something is safe and good but providing no data or arguments to back your assertion?
They said the same thing about antibiotics in food, cigarette smoking, cocaine in coke, HFCS, aspartame. . .the list goes on and on. At this point, if it's not straight from the source, DO NOT EAT IT!
Keisha:
Every time you eat anything, you consume alien (to your body) genetic material. It never harms you. Why? Because your stomach's acids denature the DNA into a stray collection of disorganized molecules. There is no risk of genetic contamination from eating. Viruses may present that risk, but even there it's not likely to do anything to you. Your DNA is already chalk full of junk sequences attached to humanity by viruses over hundreds of thousands of years.
The biggest risk here is environmental: i.e. the salmon making a break for it and surviving in the wild.
Thats great that genetics are safe and the fish will be edible and everything, but what about the door that this opens up. Its been proven time and again that the organic and unprocessed foods are the best for us. We already take too many shortcuts in life and give ourselves health risks because its cheaper and makes money faster. You wanna destroy the Atlantic Salmon population and open up pandora's box of genetically modified cuisine?! I'm a fan of good, fresh food and nice restaurants and I refuse to support an effort to destroy that for money (especially when it's gonna help put honest, hardworking people out of business).
I've done my research on genetics and modification (thus by definition I'm not blissfully ignorant), and have determined that GE foods are neither safe nor unsafe (though I lean toward unsafe). We simply don't know for sure how safe GE foods are. I do however have a problem with biotech companies shoving these GE foods down our throats. And don't tell me we have a choice, because they've fought labeling laws and we have no idea whether what we're eating is GE or not unless you buy 100% organic. All of us in the U.S. have eaten GE foods without knowing it.
In my experience, the people who are in favor of GE are the blissfully ignorant people. They just figure "science must be right, right?"
Joshua, please explain how the side effects those chemicals have would have any bearing on this matter. We eat all sorts of foods that have widely varying DNA codes, from wheat to rice to cattle to chickens, and yet having all those varying DNA sources in our digestive system have done absolutely no harm. We even eat different hybrids of the same food which we humans modified via natural selection. No ill effects from that either. Why you ask? Because their DNA does not alter our DNA. We will not get a third eye from eating something with modified DNA any more than you can get a third eye from eating white corn on the cob or movie theater popcorn, both of which were also created by human modification.
Tim, you need to read up on organic. Organic and natural are not the same thing. You can have organic tomatoes correct? Tomatoes are genetically engineered though not through direct manipulation of genes but rather artificial selection. Are you sure you are not blissfully ignorant?
I work with transgenic animals. They pose no threat as the recombinant DNA has been incorporated into the genome of the animal. I would not recommend that anyone inject themselves with recombinant DNA but eating a GMO is hardly a danger. If you want citations on how transgenics are created check out pubmed.gov. Here you will find a vast amount of literature on the subject. Also, "The Cell" by Alberts et al. has a great little section on GMO and transgenic mice that anyone can understand. Good luck learning. Science is fun!
All of you people with this fear of genetics. Almost all food species have been created by the combining of genes from different groups, by cross breeding. This resulting salmon is no different than if they bred a salmon to the pout. You get the same results, mixing of genes from different species. However with typical hybridization, only a portion of the resulting offspring will have the desirable traits and there is a very good chance the meat would taste different due to all the rest of the pouts genes being in the mix. Doing it in vitro with only the desired gene means all the resulting offspring will have the desired trait and the salmon will still taste like salmon. Its not like they are mixing spider venom genes into the fish. Disease resistance means less need for antibiotics and faster growth means less environmental toxins the fish can absorb before hitting the food chain.
Not to mention, we've been making and eating genetically modified food for thousands of years. Our ancestors started eating genetically modified food as soon as they started picking and choosing which cattle got to breed and which seeds were replanted. The only difference is that now we understand how it works and can do it much faster. A prime example: the Belgian Blue cow. Go ahead and google it and look at that monstrosity. Genetically modified, but no needle required.
you are blissfully ignorant of how to genetically modify an organism. The new gene is introduced through a virus or chemical modification of cells so that they will take up the new DNA (competent). It is not just the gene they want that is in there, the viral genes as well as selection markers are in there as well.
Cay, you sound so relaxed when you talk about eating genetically modified foods. The very fact that scientist are still at odds over the safety of these very foods leads me to question your acceptance of these foods. How do you know they are safe. look at everything the FDA has said is safe for us, toothpaste for instance, has a poison control warning.....people like you scare me because you don't think and you trust your government way too much..
Nichole,
Disease resilience isn't necessarily a good thing. Just because an animal can survive having various infectious agents inside their body without getting sick or showing symptoms of it doesn't mean those things won't be there when you slaughter them for food.
Cigarettes are not harmful to your health. Yeah! Right! Cell phone radiation is not harmful to your health. Wait and see? Stop playing with mother nature. Eat healthy natural grown foods. Oh! No! Wait! We live in a capitalist society where we strive to make money. Greed! Power! We brought down the banks because of greed. Cigarettes are not harmful to your health.
@FreshFood Actually, that is a persistent myth that organic farmers and sellers spread. There has not been a peer-reviewed scientific study that has shown that organic food is in any way better for you; nor have any studies shown that non-organic produce is in some way worse for you. Now if you're talking about whether an organic apple is better food than Doritos or something, then you are spot on, the organic food would be better for you. But an organic apple is as nutritious as a non-organic apple of the same size.
are you familiar with the issue of how monsanto is growing genetically modified soybeans so that they are resistant to Round Up weed killer? so nothing else can grow except these soybeans and Round Up stays in the soil for eons.
and have you seen toddlers walking around with boobs? the hormones being added to meat and dairy are causing little children to go through puberty.
If you actually trust our food manufacturers, enjoy McDonalds for breakfast, lunch and dinner and see how you feel in a month.
I'm with you on that Heather, I'm no natural zealot either but altering foods genetically seems like we're just asking for trouble. Anytime you try and cut corners it almost always means problems later. I'd rather trust nature to make my food the old fashioned way. I remember when Bush 41 and Quayle blessed the advent of genetically modified foods to remove the rotting gene in fruits and vegetables with only a single clinical study and grocery stores didn't have to tell us if they modified. Oat Bran needed a mountain of research to get the FDA to allow health claims to be made on it. I'm not surprised in the rise of cancer and other odd illnesses we have seen in the last 20 years.
You are so right! Americans have been asking for a label since genetically modified foods were being discussed back in the late '80s but the powers that be decided it would be against the interests of big business to do so. This is just the tip of the iceberg with the health issues and cancers. We allow these companies to answer only to Wall Street and not to the American public and there seems to be no one looking out for the interest of the American people. If people want to eat this food, fine. Just put a label on it so Americans have a choice and can make an intelligent decision as to what they want to eat.
From the article it looks like up to 5% of the eggs could be fertile. This means that if the salmon were to make it into the wild it could multiply rapidly given its genes.
Living in Chicago, we are dealing with the threat of Asian carp. Due to its large size and rapid rate of reproduction its poses a huge risk to the ecosystem of the freshwater lakes. Its pretty easy to throw the balance off... It does seem like a poorly researched pandoras box. I would want to know more information and be better assured that the fish are in fact sterile (let alone that the injection of growth hormone is harmless).
Also, should they even be called salmon? I mean, if genetic material from the ocean pout is injected into the fertilized eggs of Atlantic salmon, is it really salmon anymore?
They should not. They would qualify as a new species.
Corn and wheat products have been engineered for years. They're doing it under our noses! Soylent Green is People!
Corn and wheat products have been engineered for years. They're doing it under our noses! you know Soylent Green is People!
That's why people are getting bigger!
Spot on. There's tweens in my neighborhood that hover at 6 ft. HOW THE HELL CAN KIDS GROW TO 6 FT. BY THE AGE OF 13?!!!
the stupidity of that comment radiated from your point to all across the globe
i was referring to johnny but i suppose m&m fits te bill too
This article barely scratches the surface. A much better explanation of all the problems involved is in this article: http://tinyurl.com/24h2e2l
Genetic mutation happens in nature. Sometimes it's for the best and causes a species to become immune to certain diseases, grow a thicker coat, etc. Those that have the genetic mutations that cause them to be more apt to survive go on to reproduce and make more of their kind with their genetic mutations in place. It's called evolution. What's happening here is evolution on a scientific level at a much faster pace than the thousands/millions of years it would take nature to accomplish. People are paranoid because they're simply ignorant of the facts. Unless you're growing your own food or buying organic, the food you eat, from cereal to meat has all been modified with hormones, chemicals, etc. to improve size/yield, disease resistance, etc. Get used to it.
Evolution demands a change of an organism in relation to it's environment. Scientists are ripping out that second half: environment, which is a big no-no, considering that now we have an animal that has no natural environment which means we have 0 idea of the long-term implications when using this fish, understanding that it WILL get out into the local environment. At least with plants, Mendelian genetics demanded that there was at least some rudimentary environment, even if just a plot; at least they had to rely on climate for the selection. A 5% fertility rate for eggs is potentially and very likely dangerous for the local ecosystem.
Justin, have you considered the possibility that you may not know as much as you should know? Let me take a guess – you probably think an FDA certification is all it takes for you to be sure that you are eating ok. Check this http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html and test your knowledge.
Heather They are not doing just to make money, They are doing because if we don't in your childs lifetime there will be a shortage of food becasue there are simply TOO many people to feed.
Not doing it to make money?
- Seriously?
And that is the problem. Overpopulation is the cause that needs to be fixed. GM foods are not the solution, but the cause for more problems
People need to understand what this means- it means fish grow faster. That is it.
I would bet (my life) that you allow your kids to eat chicken nuggets, hot dogs and McDonalds- If you fed them Genetically modified Salmon you would be doing them a big favor over the other processed foods you allow them to eat.
- Lastly- if you feed your kids "Gogurt" you may as well buy them a diabetes test kit.
Have you checked your facts lately as to what GMO means? Try this http://livegreenseegreen.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-poison-on-your-plate-gm-salmon.html
People need to understand what this means- it means fish grow faster. That is it.
I would bet (my life) that you allow your kids to eat chicken nuggets, hot dogs and McDonalds- If you fed them Genetically modified Salmon you would be doing them a big favor over the other processed foods you allow them to eat.
sooooooo true!!
You realize humans have been eating 'genetically engineered' food for nearly as long as there has been farming right? In the past it was done through cross-breeding different species and by selective breeding with in a species to get the best results. Even the organic animals, fruits and vegetable options have been 'genetically engineered.'
This method is more direct but injecting the genes instead of breeding and waiting to see what you get – but the net effect is the same.
Mutations, cancer and other disease etc that come from eating them would be from what these fish are fed – like all the growth hormones, antibiotics and other chemicals in the feed – not the fact hey have been bred a certain way.
breeding for type is not genetic engineering
"Breeding for type is not genetic engineering"?
Really? What the heck do you think it is? You are engineering genomes that you want in the next generation. Breeding for type is just an incredibly INEFFICIENT form of genetic engineering.
My undergrad degree is in Biology – Botany to be specific. I had to take courses on genetics.
I have no issue with GMO food and I will eat it. The only concern I have with GMO is that people MUST be told where the extra genetic material came from in order to prevent allergic reactions. That is the only relevant concern in my mind since all amino acids, organic compounds, and enzymes can cause allergy issues. As far as nutritional value, I do not see any difference. The natural process of digestion precludes the integration of this genetic material directly with ours. These building blocks are just put together differently creating different organisms.
This firm that has created these fast-growing salmon just wants to protect their investment and recoup those costs. If it allows the food to be grown abundantly and less expensive with less environmental impact on the ‘natural’ population – fine.
Gregor Mendel cross-bred peas to do his pioneering work on genetics back in the 1800’s. Man has been ‘interfering’ in the genetics of the items we eat from times even further back…potatoes, corn, beans… our societies and cultures have grown on the basis of these changes. This is just the next step.
Oh yeah…will someone do me the favor of passing the salmon sushi and cold smoked salmon down this way? I am hungry.
Firstly...I graduated with a b.s. in Plant biology and I think that you sum things up nicely.
Secondly...salmon sushi is AMAZING...(but also tuna...can we get some gmo tuna?)
The allergy issue is HUGE, and this kind of transparency is something the food conglomerates consistently resist. Perhaps not such a big deal with it's a fish with genes from different kinds of fish, but when you've got, say, a tomato with fish genes (and that's not far-fetched...in fact, it's something they came out with several years ago), people with fish allergies really DO need to know if the tomatoes they're buying have been so modified. I think it's very important that GMO food be labeled as such.
Audrey,
There actually was a case of a product making out into the world without approval – StarLink corn. It was described as transgenic since it had a gene introduced from Bacillus thuringeinsis for repelling insects. It was not as 'isolated' as the farmed salmon will be. It managed to escape into the food chain through a series of errors. It is used officially in animal feed.
To date (and this happened in 2001), I have not heard of any wild problems associated with StarLink. So what does that say about this entire thing? I am not saying it is the ultimate answer...but nature does have a way of balancing itself or correcting itself. If the gene is useful, it will remain in the process...if it serves no purpose...it will eventually inactivate or be 'bred' out in favor of something more desireable. That is the way of Biology – adapt, serve a purpose, or be replaced.
Living systems are not inherently stable...change is the way of the world. The fact that we are speeding up the evolutionary process is not inherently a bad thing.
No – you are a crazed environmentalist ... its 2010 .. come join the rest of the world
Indeed, you are the true voice of reason...and a good mom. I wont even eat any sort of farm raised seafood. I spend a lot of money on imported foods (including beef) to ensure there are no steroids or antibotics.
Is your car made of tungsten? That'd be another example of wasting money based on paranoia. But it's your money, so have fun with that.
Keisha read a post and try to understand before you comment on it. I might be hard to have a rational thought to someone who seems so irrational. Maybe Le Chugg was talking about opening the door to be able to mass produce food. If people can get over common misconceptions then there might be a hope for the future where food will be so expensive that hunger will be a thing of the past. PLEASE NOTE, I have only read this article and not done a lot of research on this particular project, but it looks like to me they are just cross breading fish. Both fish are eatable but instead of trying to cross breed them thousands of times to get the desired results they do it on a genetic level. What is the difference between that and all the cross breading of different kinds of cows to create a cow that has better meat and grows faster. Our you opposed to that also?
The difference is the impact on the environment if these were to escape, especially because most of these traits are dominant. The species could be changed forever, causing a severe disruption in a huge food chain. So yes, I am opposed to that.
Brad, please read the article more carefully; this in NOT crossbred fish, this is specifically produced fish. Also, it would "edible" and not "eatable." Until the FDA crosses its Ts and dots its Is, i.e. figures out how quickly they can multiply if they escape and are fertile, until Fish Wildlife evaluates the possible displacement of wild species, we should all be leery of this newfangled superfish. The FDA would be well advised not to rush this one.
It's not always about making more money faster. Often, it's about addressing a particular issue. This would be really good to help fight world hunger. There are starving nations in Africa that could certainly use genetically modified food to feed their starving citizens. It's easy to sit back and demand no genetically modified food when you don't have to worry about if you're going to have a next meal.
They gave Indian farmers genetically engineered seeds and people are still hungry and half the farmers have killed themselves because of the cost of the seeds. They can't use the seeds from the plants for the following season and have to buy new seed each time.
All the development in the world is not going to feed Africa because non of these companies are going to give away the food. Non of them are producing these products for the purpose of feeding the hungry.
The starving people of the world won't be eating any farmed salmon. they are poor and can't afford it.
Yeah, I agree in principle that genmod food is not on my wish list. However, folks, the world's population is pushing 7 billion (it was only 5 billion in the 1980's). I'm from the Pacific Northwest, and I can tell you, we've been having problems sustaining natural fish stocks for over 30 years now. I don't think the world can handle another 2 or 3 billion. And, while we'd all say "then the world should have less babies", the next pragmatic question I'll leave you with is, how exactly would you ever enforce that?? I don't like genmod food, but it might be the only answer....there isn't going to be enough nature-grown fish, at any price, to feed people. We live in quite a world.
What if your kid was starving to death? That's the reality that you don't have to face, but that nearly 500,000,000 moms around the world do. I wouldn't eat it either, but I want the technology to help those that need it.
I don't think there is any choice. World populations continue to grow and native harvests are unpredictable, subject to pollution, and affected by climate change. Ideally the "meat" would simply be protein that could be grown in vats quickly, on-demand and without requiring the killing of anything sentient (not that fish are that sentient).
here's the thing..
nature will find a way.. this fish will breed.. and it will become an invasive species..
there is a balance to ecosystems.. this will not help..
as far as feeding the world.. when people are fed, they breed.. creating more mouths to feed.. therefore straining the system even more.. DO NOT FEED THE HUNGRY.. LET EM FIND FOOD THEMSELVES... SUFFERING SUCKS.. but when people don't suffer they manufacture ways to suffer..
Jay, for your own good, stay away from the Discovery Channel offices. They've got some crack shot snipers in those parts.
The real issue is: Make food that contains GMOs be labelled as such. If people don't know what's in their food, how they make a decision about what they're consuming?!!?
well im just a human being an me an the other 299 million humans in the U.S. like to eat food (the other 1 million are people that are the extremists who don like people to have kids, or eat food), im quite sure that engineering a fish to grow faster is not in any way harmful to people? an i would not have any qualms about eating a fish, engineered or not, its just like all the other husbandry people eat, all of them have been engineered in some way and im sure you like beef, chicken, pork, etc.
Heather, What are your fears of GMO salmon? I simply do not understand. I have actually eaten GMO salmon since I work in the industry and believe me, they taste no different, or just as good for you and can increase yields substantially so as to actually reduce prices in the long term. As for concerns regarding genetic manipulation of our foods, can you please tell me which foods you eat ARE NOT modified genetically from their distant ancient relatives (e.g. corn, cattle, broccoli, pork, etc...)? That is correct. NONE! Everything we eat has been modified genetically. It has just taken decades and decades with absolutely no idea what was being done at the cellular/molecular level. Now we can change organisms with exact information and create new forms of food which are better for our environment and for ourselves. I simply do not get why people are scared of this since it has been going on for thousands of years and our life span has never been greater than it is now. If genetic change of our foods would have caused problems, we would have seen it by now.
Who cares if it's been altered if it's safe and healthy to consume?
Don't buy it than!
While I am not a scientist or geneticist I am a consumer who likes to think he's rational. After reading many of the comments posted here, some that appear to have merit and some that are driven by emotion, I have to toss my hat into the ring so to speak and stir things up a bit so here goes;
1. Genetically engineered food (Fish, Salmon in this case) are bigger, stronger and grow faster than their natural counterparts. More food for the masses is a good thing but at what costs?
2. The FDA cannot (in its current state) regulate our current beef/pork industry reliably, so how the hell are they going to regulate this? One of the biggest problems we have in this country is greed (from top to bottom) and that alone puts us as a people, as humans at risk.
3. From an environmental viewpoint, I can't help but think that if altered fish were to be introduced into the natural habitat(s) of the fish they are replacing, the balance within that environment will be thrown out of sync beyond repair and how will this impact us in the future.
4. I think that genetics has its value, but we have to careful to ensure we are being responsible with its use and not allow this science to become the tool by which big corporations or governments for that matter, control the people or policy for profit. ( which is where we are now in many ways).
if genetically engineered foods are so good and abundant, why are they so expensive? If you tell me that the processes involved need to be paid for, then haven't we paid more than 10-100 times the cost by now?
Most outlets are charging between 6.99 to as much as 9.99 a pound or more depending on where you live and this is suppose to be farm raised! And as quiet as its kept, its more for farmed raised than wild caught.
I think we need to really do some do-diligence here! The science and processes must be made available to all to keep corporate greed at bay. Unlike grains and vegetables, meat/fish/poultry proteins are adsorbed faster so it seems to reason that the FDA must step up its game to ensure the safety of not only existing products, but of Genetics based products as well.
I'm a firm believer in separation of church and state, and I say this because there needs to be a clear and decisive separation of FDA regulators and the industries that they are suppose to protect us from.
have a great day!
Do you really believe that "good and abundant" = cheap and available? Not so much. First off, good rarely = cheap, especially when getting to "good" is expensive in and of itself. They might be cheap eventually, but if you don't incentivize people or companies to make these things, they'll never be here. And you incentivize by allowing the companies/people to reap a reward for their efforts, at least in the short term. And these things are definitely not "abundant" by any stretch of the imagination (at least not the fish, yet). For those things that are abundant, do you believe that most foods nowadays are expensive? I would say not, at least not in relation to the costs associated with producing it and getting it to the consumers. If it were profitable to grow food in this country (absent all the government subsidies), everyone would be doing it.
"Q. With AquAdvantage® Salmon growing much larger than other salmon, could they gain a mating advantage or out-compete native salmon for food or space?
A. No. AquAdvantage® Salmon grow faster in early life stages than other salmon but they do not grow larger than Atlantic Salmon. Male salmon do not gain a mating advantage because of size. In fact, “precocious parr,” (only 6 inches in length), father about one-fifth of each new generation before they go to sea. Studies of escaped farmed salmon, which are almost always larger than wild fish, have found them to mate successfully only 16 percent as often as native salmon. Farmed salmon are fed on small, dry pellets similar to those fed to other farmed livestock and pets. If they escape, they are generally not adept at finding new feed. More than 85% of the farm escapees caught off British Columbia and Alaska were found to have no food in their bellies and are probably more exposed to predators themselves. "
The GMO salmon don't actually grow bigger, they just grow faster.
And though I like to think that all this is to help feed the world, I probably have to agree that, yeah, it's probably just to make money...
Your precious little snowflakes have been eating genetically modified corn everyday day of their special little lives.
You have been eating altered food for a long long time.. Everything from rice to the "healthy" seedless grapes have been altered by humans....
In reading the company's website and all of the comments I cannot seem to find the reason as to WHY we need genetically modified salmon? Aside from the monetary benefit, I am curious... is there a shortage of salmon? Has the demand for salmon exceeded the natural production and harvest time? I would simply like to know the reasoning. The company's website states the following:
AquaBounty is developing advanced-hybrid salmon, trout, and tilapia designed to grow faster than traditional fish. AquAdvantage® Salmon (AAS) reach market size twice as fast as traditional salmon. This advancement provides a compelling economic benefit to farmers (reduced growing cycle) as well as enhancing the economic viability of inland operations, thereby diminishing the need for ocean pens....
Monetary gain. "This advancement provides a compelling economic benefit..." Also, what is the HEALTH benefit (if any) to consuming this type of fish?
Can I get an HONEST answer please.
Is there a shortage of salmon? The answer to your question is a simple "Yes" currently, and that will only get worse. Salmon is an outstanding food. There's not enough now (or at least, there could be more people eating salmon), and as the world's population continues to explode, the benefit of "more" salmon will be even clearer.
Yes, every year the NW has had to cut back on quota's for wild salmon, because the rivers are dammed, polluted, making breeding difficult or impossible. Salmon are rapidly becoming a rare thing, and I believe, but will double check, Atlantic salmon are even rarer due to their location and slower growth rates. The oceans are being over-fished and poorly managed, so it is good that scientists are trying to figure out how to feed too many humans , who are crowding out everything including the species we live off of
Control of the food supply, and money. I think that is the game.
Does the explanation sound a bit familiar? About control of the modified population, and assurances that they will be infertile, and can not get into the ecosystem, etc, etc. The genetic engineers assure us they will control the biology.
Like in Jurassic Park?
I think that the bottom line comment there was something like, "Life will find its own way."
After you let the Genie out of the bottle, it is beyond your control.
you are comaring life to a movie.....im just gonna leave it at that
Oh, really, Heather?
So, then, do you you feed your kids nothing but organic food? Do you avoid all food with chemical additives? How about high fructose corn syrup, which is the result of an engineered variety of corn?
If you've answered yes, then I'd like to know what exactly you do feed your precious children, because just about everything we eat has been altered by science in some way, relative to the way that food source would be naturally.
So, please, enough with the phony outrage over scientists tampering with your food. I'd like all the anti-science clowns to have to rely entirely on herbal remedies any time they get sick.
Then perhaps you should focus on the real threat – fatty and high cholesterol foods – Americans are so dumb – they freak out over threats that don't exist and ignore the ones that do exist....just plain dumb....
I think anyone with questions about genetically altered foods should watch the feature film on hulu.com "the future of food". This is just another example of the things that most people doesn't know or care about when it comes to where our food comes from. This is disgusting.
It all breaks down into protein and carbs when it hits your stomach. Genetically modified food is not as much about making more money as feeding more with less. Organic farmers have an ideal that, if put into practice on a worldwide basis, would result in the starvation deaths of more than a billion people.
They've created a monster!! now it's going to destroy them,
I never never seen a legitimate study that condemns genetically modified food as unhealthy.
Heather ( and others) I will be happy to eat GMO salmon only after it has been in the food chain for fifty years. I can't stop big business from making it, and it may end up being fine, but in my gut I don't trust it. For those of you who consider yourself scientific I suggest that you take a thorough and close look at GMO food before you try to tell me how safe it is. It will take decades of real life consumption before we can say that.
Do you have a more reasonable explanation for your aversion that what your gut tells you? Unless you are a trained geneticist or have done a lot of research on the subject, what your gut tells you is about as relevant as what your cat might tell you. This is not meant as a shot at you personally, but having gut feelings about subjects that we know little to nothing about is about as good a basis for decision making as relying on Miss Cleo's visions.
dont worry bill fron corvallis, those decades of consumption has already happened, you probably have some Gmo vegetables sitting in that gut of yours...have you grown a third eye? seriously....people who are freaked by genetically modified fish cant give one legitamite reason why
Heather, the genetic altering of food products or the once living beings has been done since the beginning of existence. For example, wheat used to resemble grass with minuscule seed pods, but after thousands of years and cross pollination and breeding done by both humans and nature, it became the hearty food source that we now consume on a daily basis. The current level of genetic modification basically speeds up the evolutionary process from one that would take thousands of years to complete to one that takes a handful of years. Besides, pretty much all food has been modified already to produce higher and more nutritional yields or to make sure the plants are sterile so the seed companies can maintain profit.
holy catfish Batman, that's a trout not a salmon. Foiled again by the Joker !
Yep, top one looks like a Brown Trout to me. Might be an Atlantic Salmon, AS and BT are closely related. Hard to tell with the smaller one.
I wish they'd release these bad girls for stocking in lakes. Salmon need running water to reproduce, so lack of running water + triploidy would ensure no reproduction. These things would be great for fishing.
As I look through the replies most of the respondents don't seem to know the difference between a gene and a chromosome with some of the comments. Those comments lack understanding of the field and the issue, and are based only on fear of the unknown. .
chill out man..its science, not monster creation...honestly...we eat genetically modified orgnaisms all the time, crops plants etc. the triplody in these fish renders them sterile beccause their egg and sperm have an incorrect number of chromosomes so their offspring cant really develop...so no enviornment damage...look there are no differences between the fish you eat now and the these, its not like they have dangerious chemcials, jsut different genes, just like you and i, these genes are not going to finfest you and change you or anything...seriously i dont know where people get that idea from..we digest nucleotides..break them into individual monomers and use them for ourselves...but if you dont know how our body works it could be frightening...so chill out
rRNA and DNA create proteins. So, modifying the genetics would make different proteins. I'm not at all certain why this would cause any problem for a human being. I think with proteins we'd find out fast.
By the way, carrots are white or yellow not orange. Tomatoes don't have as much wax on them as our versions now create. And apples look a whole lot less pristine. People! It is all genetically modified.
Reality: we are fishing all the fish out of the sea and the population is still growing.
We can stop population growth, kill off people, or try a new fish.
Will I be out day one eating it? Can't say for sure. But, genes make proteins.
Not sure there are so many problem proteins that would hurt us.
The egregious errers by these supid 'journalists' who are unable to profread their insipid crap: "...rather those used for than food safety...:. WTF is wrong w/you ???
Amen! CNN posters continue to prove the world right.. America really is full of idiots. Hey no problem, go ahead and genetically engineer our food.. what could possibly happen right?? Just ask our American Soy Bean growers who is suing them for not buying their 'genetically altered'.. AND "patented" soy bean seeds. Go on children .. do some damn research. I mean humans have only made nature better with all their interference right.. right??? My God remove the blinders... you don't think that those who 'alter' the salmon.. make them 'bigger and better' won't apply for patent rights on those altered fish?.. the genetics that make those altered fish??? Think again.. and then when the owners of that patents own the fish, and the rights to the fish and everything remotely associated to the 'altered' fish since that's all that will exists in a few years... then maybe you'll wonder what the hell you were thinking when you said this would be a 'good thing'... sigh
oh please.....of all the rubbish ive heard, this takes the cake, the only idiot here is you...PATENTING genetics...HAHA, loll if you are so concerned about a monopoly on these fish..let me assauge your fears, its called variety, no one is going to own the rights on this technology, the field is expandng, with hundrds of differenct companies already. You are simply scared of tampering is becasue you dont know what the tampering s, go read a biology book, then go and tell one legitimate concern that you may have k?
I HIGHLY recommend watching this documentary
/the-future-of-food. It is a view point rarely discussed. It will open your eyes and you will see farming from an entirely different perspective.
Put profits before knowledge and you open yourself up for bad results and unintended consequences. The examples are nearly endlless.
David, please let me know where you teach so I can make sure my children don't go there – you give teacher's (let alone "scientists") a bad name. What is known about this GM "Salmon"? You are biased and elitist. You are wasting our time here.
Opinion matters.
Hey Heather Octomom, I'm sure you care about what your kids eat and you've never taken them to McDonalds. Oops, they use GM potatoes, better not give them any more happy meals!
What I have a problem with is not the fact that the fish has been altered genetically.
Instead, it's that this kind of effort represents the beginning of the end of "open source" food. At some point will the engendering of all organisms be controlled by corporations?
Where are we going with all this? What is the plan? Human beings have a some degree of technological know-how at this stage in the game, but can we really claim that our technology can compare to the highest technology that we know, namely the natural world developed over millions of years through evolution?
Why allow corporations to mess with things we don't fully understand just for profit?
they are trying to meet demand
I agree. There has been a good bit of medical press regarding children reaching puberty years ahead of what, historically, was the norm. The general hypothesis seem to point toward just this sort of thing. I'm not being reactionary, but nobody can say for a fact what effect this might have 3 or 4 generations from now. Nobody.
Leave it to the uneducated to see something they don't understand and immediately discount its myriad benefits.
I will eat the F out of this fish when/if it becomes available.
Hell yeah