Genetically modified salmon OK’d for human consumption in US

Thanks for the thread JacKat, I heard this earlier today on
NPR & was hoping to find a thread.
I VERY much agree on the labeling so everyone can choose.
I wonder if restaurants will be required to let patrons know where
the fish is from besides wild-caught & farm raised?
Fast food fish may end up scarier especially if they can make
salmon taste like a white fish & etc.

Hope we don't see 6 & 7 yr olds all ready tall enough for the NBA!

Cheers
Ektar

a reply to: JacKatMtn

I believe all GMOs should be clearly labeled as such, and grown in environments (domes or whatever) well sealed off from any possibility of contaminating natural stocks. That said, I wouldn't eat farm raised salmon, but this one seems as if it might be safer than non GMO farm raised, as they'll have less time to concentrate agricultural toxins.

Just. Gross. You'd be crazy to eat such garbage!

That is all...

I'm a bit surprised no one brought up the fact that this type of salmon is not kosher/halal -- because it has the genes of the ocean pout in it.

Because of that, it should require mandatory labeling. (And I still support mandatory labeling of transgenic GMOs regardless)

a reply to: JacKatMtn

There will be a controlled release by "accident" so that the population makes it to the ocean. Whether by flood or shipping incident.

Why? because it "pays".

The "rights" of the 'patented lifeforms' and thus the rights for fishing for salmon at large in just about any river/stream of the ocean will then 'be held' by the corporation and their shareholders once this happens.

I'll actually be shocked a bit if a flood or levee break or shipping spill doesn't result in a "study finding that" that salmon being caught and tested in the wild have the genetic marker of the corporations GMO patent.

They believe they have the RIGHT to profit at ANY COST after research and development expenses. The Safety aspect is not significant in any thought of their mind or consideration in regards to this.

originally posted by: woodsmom
a reply to: JacKatMtn

I will admit I hadn't had time to read the article yet, I was working on the letter s with my 5 yr old too, sorry. I had to respond though....

I simply find it massively hypocritical that they will just pick and choose whatever works best for them in the moment. The salmon is a mainstay of our lives here, and the population is already suffering in part by government picking and choosing what's best for everyone. That is an entirely different subject though.

I'm glad they are starting off the population inland. Can anyone promise that they will still be contained after twenty years though? The fact they are starting off as sterile females is great, but again nature somehow manages to find a way. Plants will revert to hermaphroditism to reproduce themselves at times. I'm not saying it's incredibly likely but it's not an impossibility either. This is the one of the rare times that I agree with Murkowski. Things start off well enough, but do we have the foresight to contain this and not potentially destroy the very wild population that the article mentioned wanting to preserve?

I really do believe that anyone processing food to sell to the public should have to label that food accordingly. Let people make their own choices as to what we put into our bodies. This is why I catch my salmon with my own two hands though to begin with.

Hmmm. sterile. Those Japanese glowing fish my daughter has in her fishtank are supposed to be sterile too, she has been giving away so many of those fish because they reproduce like crazy and they all glow. I kind of don't trust them when they say the fish are sterile.

originally posted by: Ektar
Thanks for the thread JacKat, I heard this earlier today on
NPR & was hoping to find a thread.
I VERY much agree on the labeling so everyone can choose.
I wonder if restaurants will be required to let patrons know where
the fish is from besides wild-caught & farm raised?
Fast food fish may end up scarier especially if they can make
salmon taste like a white fish & etc.

Hope we don't see 6 & 7 yr olds all ready tall enough for the NBA!

Cheers
Ektar

It's labeled as salmon, so just don't eat salmon anymore.

Don't go hating on all salmon now, just because of the GMO salmon. I sell food to restaurants, and some restaurants are very picky about the types of food they bring in. Of course, now I know which ones, and those are the places I eat.

Oh, and I fly fish for my own trout, which is a good fish to eat as well.

The salmon “are not expected to have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment,”
NY Times 2010

No stated concern for macro environmental impact.

Jaydee Hanson, a policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety, a Washington advocacy group, said that only a handful to a few dozen fish were used for some of the studies on the safety of the fish flesh or its potential to cause allergic reactions.

“We’re actually pretty amazed at how small their samples were,” he said. He also pointed to information in the documents suggesting that up to 5 percent of the fish might not be sterile because the process is not perfect.

Ibid.

When the Mutant salmon spawn and outgrow they're natural cousins twice as fast, they will soon reach a size comparison in which the smaller natural salmon are a viable meal.

This process perpetuates over the generations and soon natural salmon will be reduced to a rare curiosity...perhaps even extinct.

In the meantime, GMO contamination happens on "orgainc" grocery shelf products at a rate of around 10%.

a reply to: JacKatMtn

I'll just drive an hour or two and catch my limit of wild salmon every weekend in the summer...thankyouverymuch!



No farmed, or store-bought salmon for me...the only salmon I eat is the stuff caught by me or my family/friends!

I've eaten enough salmon I can tell the difference between wild and farm raised. The last time I ate farm raised salmon it made me sick. If I don't know the source I won't eat it. I see a lot of farmed salmon comes from Chili or China. I catch most of my own fish anyways.

Just about everything at the grocery store garbage. 99% of the stuff in the frozen food section is dog food grade.

How else is humanity suppose to feed 6 billion people and counting. 350 million people in America and we all have to eat. Not only that some greedy people look to profit from it.

Next they'll be putting stuff grown in a lab in our food.

This is a consumer blow, I see this as a public health experiment on USA citizens

I wonder if this GMO modified salmon would get exported, let's say to the EU or Asia?
Export Implications on labelling?, even if there was an export ban, how could GMO salmon be tested/verified?
This could devastate USA/Canada exports on salmon.
Could Inland Salmon be sold as Atlantic Salmon, I am just wondering how one differentiates farmed salmon from the current varieties.

Questions, questions...

originally posted by: BlubberyConspiracy
a reply to: JacKatMtn

There will be a controlled release by "accident" so that the population makes it to the ocean. Whether by flood or shipping incident.

Why? because it "pays".

The "rights" of the 'patented lifeforms' and thus the rights for fishing for salmon at large in just about any river/stream of the ocean will then 'be held' by the corporation and their shareholders once this happens.

I'll actually be shocked a bit if a flood or levee break or shipping spill doesn't result in a "study finding that" that salmon being caught and tested in the wild have the genetic marker of the corporations GMO patent.

They believe they have the RIGHT to profit at ANY COST after research and development expenses. The Safety aspect is not significant in any thought of their mind or consideration in regards to this.

Sounds like Evil Corporation, like from the TV episode Mr. Robot
Imagine if they release a few into the wild by accident, then claim rights to all the world's Salmon...
Scary

NPR reported that 60 stores including Safeway, Kroger, Target, Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, Aldi and many others already announced they will not sell this fish.

Genetically Modified Salmon Is Safe To Eat, FDA Says

a reply to: JacKatMtn

And the modified genetic materials will contaminate Canadian groundwater and waterways, then US ones too when people flush their personal waste down the toilet. Current research on horizontal gene transfer shows that genes can be transmitted through the environment to different species.

Genes that leap from one species to another are more common than we thought. Does this shake up the tree of life?

...Scientists have known for many decades that prokaryotes such as bacteria and other microorganisms – which lack a protective nucleus enveloping their DNA – swap genetic material with each other all the time. Researchers have also documented countless cases of viruses shuttling their genes into the genomes of animals, including our own.

What has become increasingly clear in the past 10 years is that this liberal genetic exchange is definitely not limited to the DNA of the microscopic world. It likewise happens to genes that belong to animals, fungi and plants, collectively known as eukaryotes because they boast nuclei in their cells. ...

Horizontal gene transfer, also known as lateral gene transfer, is the transmission of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) between different genomes. Horizontal gene transfer is known to occur between different species, such as between prokaryotes (organisms whose cells lack a defined nucleus) and eukaryotes (organisms whose cells contain a defined nucleus), and between the three DNA-containing organelles of eukaryotes—the nucleus, the mitochondrion, and the chloroplast. Acquisition of DNA through horizontal gene transfer is distinguished from the transmission of genetic material from parents to offspring during reproduction, which is known as vertical gene transfer.

Horizontal gene transfer is made possible in large part by the existence of mobile genetic elements, such as plasmids (extrachromosomal genetic material), transposons (“jumping genes”), and bacteria-infecting viruses (bacteriophages). These elements are transferred between organisms through different mechanisms, which in prokaryotes include transformation, conjugation, and transduction. In transformation, prokaryotes take up free fragments of DNA, often in the form of plasmids, found in their environment. In conjugation, genetic material is exchanged during a temporary union between two cells, which may entail the transfer of a plasmid or transposon. In transduction, DNA is transmitted from one cell to another via a bacteriophage.

In horizontal gene transfer, newly acquired DNA is incorporated into the genome of the recipient through either recombination or insertion.

Horizontal gene transfer

Horizontal gene transfer (HGT) refers to the transfer of genes between organisms in a manner other than traditional reproduction. Also termed lateral gene transfer (LGT), it contrasts with vertical transfer, the transmission of genes from the parental generation to offspring via sexual or asexual reproduction. HGT has been shown to be an important factor in the evolution of many organisms.[1]

Horizontal gene transfer is the primary reason for bacterial antibiotic resistance,[1][2][3][4][5] and plays an important role in the evolution of bacteria that can degrade novel compounds such as human-created pesticides[6] and in the evolution, maintenance, and transmission of virulence.[7] This horizontal gene transfer often involves temperate bacteriophages and plasmids.[8][9] Genes that are responsible for antibiotic resistance in one species of bacteria can be transferred to another species of bacteria through various mechanisms (e.g., via F-pilus), subsequently arming the antibiotic resistant genes' recipient against antibiotics, which is becoming a medical challenge to deal with.

Cool. But not when money-makers mess with natural systems they don't care about.

a reply to: Gordi The Drummer

The USA just seems to be a lost cause now I'm afraid. They are actively BANNING natural organic produce in some states whilst promoting this Genetically Modified crap?

That is because the G-O-D on American money actually stands for Give On Demand.

America's real god is all about gluttony and greed. Most Americans are good people who have believed in a grand ideal, but we have been duped every step of way. Just a short ride down history lane will show you that very few American Presidents were good God fearing people, that had the American's best interest at the forefront.

Americans are waking up to the fact that big business in the Master in control. We just have to stop thinking we are so damn helpless, and we need to stop making excuses for everything. If you can't control anything else, you can control where and how you spend your money.

Why would anyone change something that is working well, and keeping them rich, and in control. We have to just stop feeding the monster sitting on our chest. If you are going to go hungry and be without anyway, why not let it be the misery of your own choosing?

It takes me longer to shop then most people because I read labels, research if necessary by scanning the product, and I ask the department supervisors questions if I need to. It has become almost an obsession of mine that I have some idea of where my money is going, and which beast I am feeding. I also notice a lot more people reading labels and asking questions, most often from each other, which I think is a good thing.

I noticed a commercial the other day about "Small Business Friday", being promoted by American Express. I am not really sure why they are pushing this, but I am a big advocate of shopping our local small businesses everyday! I think the only time we should be shopping the big garbage stores is if we can't get the product from a local Mom and Pop. Even then, if time is not an issue, many of your Mom and Pops can get the item for you at just bit above cost, and usually it is a better product and often they will support it.

We have to stop building the Mega garbage stores and build our local community businesses.

Waiting for the new John west advert where he wrestles with test tubes and patents

a reply to: JacKatMtn

Yes. Americans are good nation for testing GMO. Over there u really don't care if something us bad for health. McDonalds or GMO Salomon. No big difference.

Over here in Europe we avoid everything that is made in USA. Most probably is GMO or with heavy pesticides that Monsanto use.

a reply to: woodsmom

All GMO arguments aside, what happens if this genetically altered fish makes its way into the wild population somehow?

If the GM salmon should mate with a non-GM salmon, which is unlikely, as salmon return to their point of origin when they spawn, the offspring would probably be infertile. They would be mules.

Bear in mind that the additional genetic material that the modified salmon acquired came from a different species of salmon. In theory, the same effect could have been obtained by conventional cross breeding, save for the difficulties mentioned above. It's not like they inserted human DNA: the fish are genetically all fish.

Finally, for those of you who want to have all products containing GMOs labeled as such, that is a very expensive notion. The FDA would need to inspect every farm, every storage space, every wholesaler, every food processing plant, every supermarket produce department to guarantee that no GM corn got mixed in the silo, that no GM tomatoes accidentally got mixed into the pizza sauce, and so forth. It would be much easier for farmers and food processors to label all their products: "May contain GMOs," the way they now say: "Processed at a plant that may also process peanuts."

A much more cost effective approach would be to establish a standard that would permit farmers to label their products: "Guaranteed to contain no GMOs," the way producers are now allowed to use the misleading label "organic." The FDA would not have to inspect everyone, just the producers who wish to use the "No GMO" label. This would also allow producers to charge more for their products, as they do for "organic."

Finally, since there is currently no official regulation concerning the use of the "No GMOs" label, there is no assurance that your "organic" produce does not contain GMOs, whatever the label says.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: woodsmom

All GMO arguments aside, what happens if this genetically altered fish makes its way into the wild population somehow?

If the GM salmon should mate with a non-GM salmon, which is unlikely, as salmon return to their point of origin when they spawn, the offspring would probably be infertile. They would be mules.

Bear in mind that the additional genetic material that the modified salmon acquired came from a different species of salmon. ...

...there is currently no official regulation concerning the use of the "No GMOs" label, there is no assurance that your "organic" produce does not contain GMOs, whatever the label says.

Nice thought. But. Current research on horizontal gene transfer shows that genes can be transmitted through the environment to different species - and across genus, family, order, class, phylum - even kingdom and domain.

…Species barriers might protect the integrity of a genome as a whole, but when an individual gene has a chance to advance itself by breaching those boundaries, it will not hesitate.

That’s the thing about DNA: its true loyalty is to itself. We tend to think of any one species’s genome as belonging to that species. We have a strong sense of ownership over our genes in particular – an understanding that, even though our genome overlaps with that of other creatures, it is still singular, is still ‘the human genome’. So strong is our possessiveness that the mere idea of mixing our DNA with another creature’s – of any two species intermingling genes – immediately repulses us. As far as DNA is concerned, however, the supposed walls between species are not nearly so impermeable. Up in the branches of the great tree of life, we are no longer immersed in the ancient communal pool that watered its tangled roots. Yet we cannot escape the winds of promiscuity. Even today – as was true from the start – ‘our’ genes are not ours alone.

Genes that leap from one species to another are more common than we thought. Does this shake up the tree of life?

...Scientists have known for many decades that prokaryotes such as bacteria and other microorganisms – which lack a protective nucleus enveloping their DNA – swap genetic material with each other all the time. Researchers have also documented countless cases of viruses shuttling their genes into the genomes of animals, including our own.

What has become increasingly clear in the past 10 years is that this liberal genetic exchange is definitely not limited to the DNA of the microscopic world. It likewise happens to genes that belong to animals, fungi and plants, collectively known as eukaryotes because they boast nuclei in their cells. ...

Horizontal gene transfer, also known as lateral gene transfer, is the transmission of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) between different genomes. Horizontal gene transfer is known to occur between different species, such as between prokaryotes (organisms whose cells lack a defined nucleus) and eukaryotes (organisms whose cells contain a defined nucleus), and between the three DNA-containing organelles of eukaryotes—the nucleus, the mitochondrion, and the chloroplast. Acquisition of DNA through horizontal gene transfer is distinguished from the transmission of genetic material from parents to offspring during reproduction, which is known as vertical gene transfer.

Horizontal gene transfer is made possible in large part by the existence of mobile genetic elements, such as plasmids (extrachromosomal genetic material), transposons (“jumping genes”), and bacteria-infecting viruses (bacteriophages). These elements are transferred between organisms through different mechanisms, which in prokaryotes include transformation, conjugation, and transduction. In transformation, prokaryotes take up free fragments of DNA, often in the form of plasmids, found in their environment. In conjugation, genetic material is exchanged during a temporary union between two cells, which may entail the transfer of a plasmid or transposon. In transduction, DNA is transmitted from one cell to another via a bacteriophage.

In horizontal gene transfer, newly acquired DNA is incorporated into the genome of the recipient through either recombination or insertion.

Horizontal gene transfer

Horizontal gene transfer (HGT) refers to the transfer of genes between organisms in a manner other than traditional reproduction. Also termed lateral gene transfer (LGT), it contrasts with vertical transfer, the transmission of genes from the parental generation to offspring via sexual or asexual reproduction. HGT has been shown to be an important factor in the evolution of many organisms.[1]

Horizontal gene transfer is the primary reason for bacterial antibiotic resistance,[1][2][3][4][5] and plays an important role in the evolution of bacteria that can degrade novel compounds such as human-created pesticides[6] and in the evolution, maintenance, and transmission of virulence.[7] This horizontal gene transfer often involves temperate bacteriophages and plasmids.[8][9] Genes that are responsible for antibiotic resistance in one species of bacteria can be transferred to another species of bacteria through various mechanisms (e.g., via F-pilus), subsequently arming the antibiotic resistant genes' recipient against antibiotics, which is becoming a medical challenge to deal with.