Let Them Eat Frankenfish!

Sushihunter

Active Member
http://reason.com/archives/2010/09/24/let-them-eat-frankenfish


Let Them Eat Frankenfish!

After 15 years, the FDA is about to let genetically modified fish enter the food supply. It's about time.
Katherine Mangu-Ward | September 24, 2010

We humans developed a bad habit of killing too many fish. But it's their own fault. Aside from being delicious, they're lazy. Atlantic salmon, for instance—one of the tastiest, fattiest fish—attain full size only after years of maturation. Did I mention they're delicious?

But humans are eating too many of them. And while dedicated enviros go vegetarian, most of us just want to order another slab of succulent, heart-healthy omega-3s without thinking too much. Enter modern science. In the early 1990s, a merry band of geneticists inserted a gene from fast-growing Chinook salmon into slow-growing Atlantic salmon (along with a gene from another fish famed for cold-water tolerance). The result: so-called "super salmon," which grow to full size in nearly half the time. The altered species entered the federal approval process in 1995, and have been swimming upstream ever since.

On Monday, a panel of FDA advisers began two days of hearings on whether to allow the first genetically modified (GM) animal into the human food supply. And so far, they are skeptical. Such unnatural creatures have existed since the 1970s, but haven't become part of the common cuisine—and despite the protests of natural foodies everywhere, this needs to change.

Yes, messing around with DNA is serious business, and the registered trademark symbol at the end of "AquAdvantage® Salmon" is a little creepy. The equally unpleasant word "Frankenfish" has been floating around the blogosphere atop scare stories about the future of food. And there is serious (and legitimate) concern that modified fish will sneak out of their aquaculture pens and join Atlantic salmon for wild aquatic *** parties, crossbreeding with—and potentially out-competing—their genetically pure peers. The specter of piscine promiscuity understandably makes people nervous.

But they needn't worry. The FDA briefing packet is clear that years of study have found no reason to keep tweaked seafood off the market. Salmon 2.0 will be grown in isolation on land, far away from Salmon Classic, and—even if one or two make a break for it—it's unclear how serious the effects of minor cross-contamination would be. We've grown genetically modified crops in America, such as corn and soy, since the early 1990s—exercising similar caution with the locations of fields—without any serious damage to genetic diversity or incidents of runaway genes. As an extra layer of insurance, the salmon eggs will grow into sterile females only, making freelance reproduction extremely unlikely.

Concerns about risks to human health are less well-founded. The remote chance of new allergens—a fear thoroughly investigated by the FDA—is offset by the known health benefits of eating more salmon. Government experts have essentially concluded that if it looks and acts like Atlantic salmon, contains "the expected amounts of nutritionally important omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids at the appropriate ratio," and is "as safe to eat as food from other Atlantic salmon," it might as well be labeled as such.

Instead of endangering the ecosystem, salmon 2.0 will protect it. Irresponsible human behavior caused overfishing and shortages, but clever human invention has discovered a way to fix these problems. As we learned to do in kindergarten, we're cleaning up our own mess. Don't worry, just dig in and feel good about your healthy dinner and your environmental impact. (For extra flavor, try serving with a homemade salsa—genetically-modified tomatoes, naturally.)

Katherine Mangu-Ward is a senior editor at Reason. This article originally appeared at Esquire.com on September 21, 2010.


Jim's Fishing Charters
www.JimsFishing.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/Sushihunter250

jfc_banner-2009-01.jpg
 
I have mixed feelings about this issue.

While, as Jim points out, there is no genetically engineered fish on the market for consumption at this point, we have been messing around with our food for a very long time. I don't know if anyone else here has seen the documentary called FOOD INC., but it's available in a lot of video rental outlets.

Before you make a decision as to wether we should "play with our food", I highly recommend watching this show. It will forever change the way you look at what you eat. Hence why I hunt and fish all I can.

Jim pointed out the uncertainty of having a registered trademark on the frankensalmon, and there's good reason why you should all be concerned.

In the documentary, they open your eyes to what Monsanto has done to the American Soy farmers once they introduced the genetically engineered version of the crop.

Monsanto OWNS the genetic signature for the beans. They have investigators that go around testing farm crops that are not seeded with the Monsanto product to check for cross contamination from field to field. If the plants on your farm show the genetic markers patented buy the Monsanto company, they take it. NOT THE CROP, YOUR FARM!!!

Patent laws internationally are super strict when it comes to genetic engineering technologies. What happens if these super salmon get into the natural population (even though Jim's post states they should never be able to and that "it's unclear how serious the effects of cross contamination would be"

Well, let me tell you. For the fish them selves, not so big a deal. For people, huge repercussions.

If the genetic marker appears in the wild population as cross contamination, there is a potential that LEGALLY, the company can lay claim of ownership to ALL effected salmon.

Now you have corporate control of ownership on a publicly and naturally occurring stock. If you thought the government and the DFO were bad, just try fighting corporate law for intellectual property rights!

Maybe we could grow a salmon faster, but at what potential long term effect? Other genetically engineered foods we eat are all domesticated stocks. I'm not sure how many wild chickens or cows are still running around North America, and I know that the US has a substantial problem with ferrel hogs (Domestics Gone Wild! Watch for the video:D), but there are currently no genetically engineered stocks that also co-exist with wild specimens of the same species.

If you don't think we already have a problem with the food we already play with, think about this.

Kentucky fried chicken currently cooks enough chicken each year, that if you placed them stretched head to toe they would go to the moon and back. TWO AND A HALF TIMES[:0]

We need chickens that grow fast and have large breasts for the most popular meat.

Now look at our little girls today. We have 8 year olds having their periods and wearing bras! I'm not that old, but I can remember when it was a big deal when a girl got here first period' or breasts for that matter, in high school.

What we feed and do to our food effects us.

DDT killed bugs. But when a bird eats the bugs the poison built up and killed the bird which then got eaten by something else, or the bird was killed by something else and the poison continues to accumulate in higher and higher amounts through the food chain until we, as top predators, eat the poison.

As a species we have done a lot of things over the coarse of history that at first seemed to be totally harmless decisions, but in the long term have turned out to be horrible, if not irreversible, disasters.

Get the movie and watch it with your friends and family over a big steak dinner. while it hasn't stopped me, It might be the last one you ever eat.

Extinction is Forever
 
Back
Top