Genetically-modified salmon: Will the FDA give the go-ahead?

For years, opponents have derided genetically engineered salmon as "Frankenfish" while the aquaculture industry has contended they would be harmless.  Now the conflict is coming to a head.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration found in a preliminary report that the modified salmon "is as safe as food from conventional Atlantic salmon" and unlikely to damage the environment.

On Monday, an FDA advisory committee will meet to decide whether to approve those preliminary findings.The vote is not binding on the agency, but it would likely influence a final decision.

The fish, a North Atlantic salmon developed by AquaBounty Technologies Inc., would be the country's first genetically engineered food animal. It grows to market size in half the time of other salmon and consumes 25 percent less feed in the process, according to the company, which is based in Waltham, Mass.

The patented "AquAdvantage" salmon is produced by taking a portion of the gene that protects an eel-like fish called an ocean pout against freezing, transplanting it into the growth gene of a Chinook salmon and transferring the blended genetic material into the fertilized eggs of a North Atlantic salmon.

The FDA's seeming readiness to approve the salmon has inflamed a coalition of consumer, environmental, animal welfare and fishing groups. They accuse the agency of basing its judgment on data compiled from small samples supplied by the company, rushing the public portion of the review and disclosing insufficient information about the fish.

The FDA does not have an approval process designed specifically for genetically engineered animals. It is evaluating the salmon under the process used for new veterinary drugs. That means that much of the data provided to FDA to demonstrate the safety of  the fish is considered a trade secret.

The controversy comes at a time when the booming fish farming industry is generally under attack for excessive use of antibiotics to fight disease in confinement areas. Farmed fish can also escape pens and breed with wild salmon, endangering pure stocks, fishing groups charge. The FDA contends cross-breeding is "unlikely."

Read more in Andrew Zajac's story on the genetically-modified salmon.

-- Margot Roosevelt

Photo: AquAdvantage salmon would be the first gene-altered animal sold for food. This handout photo, released August 30, 2010, compares the size of its genetically engineered AquAdvantage Salmon (background) to an Atlantic salmon of the same age (foreground). Credit: Reuters/Barrett & McKay/AquaBounty Technologies

Comments

[Bet-Zua]

Th Salmon would all be female and sterile making it virtually impossible for them to mate and they would only be grown in inland fishtanks, so ther would be no compteting or mating with natural salmon.

[Doug Veronda]

We wipe out med flies and white flies and other insects by introducing sterile equivalents.
Natural salmon will breed with these weird fish and do nothing, if you keep introducing weird fish that’s all you'll have. Then what, we pay for the patent on the weird fish we catch or eat??? Or pay because that’s all there is, is weird salmon fish.
Dimmit follow the money, are they going to give the patent away to humanity like Dr. Salk or are they going to corner the salmon/ fish protein market like archer midland did with corn.
They grow a bigger salmon, so what, its not going to replicate, are we dependent on them after they wipe out the natural breeds.
This isn't a difficult decision for our administrators or who ever is making the decisions.

[Phillip]

"The FDA contends cross-breeding is "unlikely.""

I would say there is a strong possiblity for cross-breeding. Take Mexico for example, they have a ban on GMO's yet now they have found that corn fields have been tainted by GMO corn. Life always finds a way.

[Fred]

Bring it on - yummy.

[Bob]

Children are maturing earlier and earlier. Could it be because of all of the growth hormones they consume in their food? And now we want to add fish that grow twice as fast to the mix? No thank you.

Just say No! No! No!

[Bob]

No! No! No!!!!

Please don't approve this fish! This is terrible!

Once we alter our natural food source, there may be no going back to the original. These fish will likely breed with natural fish, forever changing our natural food source.

Further, it is cruel to alter an animal's genes to make it grow faster. How would you liked to have gotten to adult size by the time you were 7 years old?

If this were ever approved, to my horror, it had better have labels with really big type saying it is genetically modified. Then, maybe, the species will die a fast, consumer driven death, like sBST milk. But, this fish should not be approved!!!

[Cyndy Greger]

If this is approved, it better have very strict labelling rules (on packages and in restaurants) so people can make a choice.

I don't agree with making genetic alterations in the laboratory on people or fish! This franenfish mentality seems very harmless when you only focus on the benefits...especially if you were not awake during your High School or college biology class!

I love the way people make broad statements about how there is "nothing different" between the G-A fish and a "regular" fish. Oh yeah!? Don't you really mean "there is nothing we know that is different" between the two fish? Just because your tests don't show anything different, doesn't mean there ISN'T anything different--and it often takes years for this stuff to surface.

Before AIDS was identified and "discovered" doctors had "no idea" what was killing people.

Before cancer cells were identifiable, doctors had "no idea" what was killing people.

Before x-rays and MRI's and CT scans, etc etc--doctor's and medical scientists had "no idea" what was killing people.

JUST BECAUSE people didn't know that bacteria was killing soldiers in the field (before antiseptic and hand-washing was in fashion) doesn't mean the bacteria wasn't infecting their wounds and killing them. Have you read about the Civil War? Or prior wars?

Fingerprinting? DNA testing? how many examples can I list where we (as a society) went from total ignorance in one area to rapid knowledge...and the effects were dramatic.

Who knows what will happen to people's DNA if they start eating this frankenfish? I sure know I don't want it to be tested on me.

Do we really think we know everything now? Ignorance is not the same as safety.

Labeling is the only way to procted the consumer.

[s]

Oh no, not this too!

[Geox]

If they were sterile fish stock I wouldn't have a problem with it, but what happens if this faster growing fish gets out into the wild? It will absolutely overtake the wild salmon population.

[Alan]

Just like the "genetically altered Corn" was no problem right guys? Seem to recall when it got mixed with corn for human consumption the authorities freaked out and a significant quantity redirected back to livestock feed.

Grapes with skins so thick you can actually peel it as Julius Ceasar once joked.

I'm not against progress as an engineer. But we didn't do a good job with nuclear knowelege. How is everyone advocating genetics so confident similar mistakes aren't being made? There are many reasons to pursue genetic engineering, the question is whether or not we are responsible enough to pursue it. If corporations are in charge of deciding, then we are doomed to catistrophic outcomes.

[Catherine Wachs]

When will we learn that genetically modified food is plainly a bad idea? GMO Corn that is "RoundUp Ready" has already spread to non GMO fields.

We are going about this all wrong. Instead of trying to supply our insatiable appetites for disappearing fish, we should be looking for ways to sustain what we have. How about eating lower on the food chain a few times a week? And healthy choices- not processed, genetically modified corn). If we all did that, there would be no need to create frankenfoods.

[Kennedy Shirley]

I think it is against God's will to genetically alter part of his creation just so mankind can have bigger and cheaper salmon. So therefore I am against it.

[johnsmithee]

If I were the Ben and Jerry's people I would be outraged that the homepage features a photo with my logo on it-while the article has absolutely nothing to do with the company. )And yes, I do realize that the photo is of a protesters sign-but still-I'd be unhappy with the Times' choice.)

[Dallas Weavefr]

It is about time this got approved. With another 3 billion people on the way and another several billion wanting meat and fish proteins, the superior ability of fish and shrimp to convert waste proteins like feather meal into high quality meat is critical for the ecology of this planet. Using GMO to further improve the superior food conversion efficiency of salmon by 25% is very significant.

This is just one step in helping prevent the clash between increasing populations and wealth and a finite agricultural land supply. This is only one small step in preventing such a clash from creating major global ecological problems and destruction of ecological services. We need a million more steps in this direction.

Now all we need is permits to build a billion dollar offshore aquaculture industry in the US instead of buying our fish from China, Chile and Canada. In southern California, we could actually use the 15,000 to 30,000 jobs that would be created with an offshore aquaculture industry.

[LAhuman]

Eating the fish is probably not harmful to humans (who, after all can eat a lot of junk), and the focus on that side of the story is a red herring (sorry, couldn't resist).

The bigger problem is the fish in the environment. the FDA says it's "not likely" the fish will cross breed. First, when is the last time the FDA was really to be trusted? they are moreover basing their statement on the company's claims. So, second point: why should we trust the company? Of course they're going to say whatever lies it takes to get their frankenfish approved! Just have a look at the Monsanto roundup debacle(s) to see a template for how this will all play out.

I'm a vegetarian, so will never eat this fake food anyway, but the environmental repercussions are what worry me most of all.

[Frank Hecke]

The FDA is been a joke for decades, Monsanto's people still control it.

Not sure if Monsanto does animal DNA manipulation but they definitely
screw up the agriculture in America, ruined Mexico's farms along with NAFTA.

Oh but they make people think their it's going to be cheaper....
yeah, cheaper to produce and make millions, not cheaper for the consumer to buy.

[gern]

Nature will find a way. The hidden concern is that these modified salmon will escape back into the wild and multiply, and at some point threaten or overtake "natural" (or real) salmon.

Don't think this could happen? It has already happened with the Monsanto GMO crops.

You can't put the genie back in the bottle.

[Tyrone]

The best part of the anti-GM-food ranks is that they do a lot of thier ranting from their iPhones, which of course are made under contract by Foxconn for Apple, over in China, in one of the most polluting factories on the planet. But for them, out of sight is out of mind.

[Matt]

Consumers should always be able to tell the difference. Labeling it is the only fair option.

[jsa26]

I would buy it. I like salmon, and fresher, cheaper, better for the environment works for me.

[Frank]

Alright, seriously what is the problem here, this is an awesome advancement that will reduce the cost of food and permit less interference into wild areas. If you read it correctly it doesn't change anything in the fish besides the fact that it grows faster, the final fish would be indistinguishable from an unmodified fish. Genetically modified fruits and vegetables are far fresher and generally more desirable than natural ones, since the need for excessive pesticide is reduced. Lighten up people...

[wildone]

I am all for reducing the pressure on and the take of wild salmon.
But we need true transparency when it come to what's going on with genetically altered salmon.

[Valerie From Oregon]

I don't know anyone in their right mind that would buy this fish. Consumers Unite. We are being spoon fed what is not real and swallowing every bite. And if you haven't heard, now big industry wants to be allowed to list" corn sugar" instead of high fructose corn syrup to mislead the public even further.

[Jennifer Miracle]

Agrobacterium was used for decades to transfect D.N.A. in plants before it was discovered that it can also transfect D.N.A. in humans.
It took many millena to gives us the stability we had once enjoyed across the kingdoms of D.N.A..

Now we have many completely new occurences such as the mimivirus and what is a Novel Flu and Morgellons Disease.
By the way the original creator of the kingdoms of life left insrtuctions not to cross certain lines , everything after itself.
Heres one warning for the Scientist that are current mixing synthetics with nano technology and D.N.A.
Daniel 2
And whereas you saw iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not join one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

Stop playing with the kingdom before you open the gate of hell.
Many Morgellons victims feel hell has already opened for them.
F.D.A. why is it the C.D.C. will not release the results from their investigation into the causal agent of Morgellons Disease. It is over a year late? Seems they are hiding something.

[Beth]

This is outrageous. I mean, I get genetic engineering when it comes to human life and the controversy that surrounds that but, our food? Not a chance. If the FDA approves theses Frankenfish - The White House needs to do an investigation into the practices of the Food and Drug Administration as a whole.

Give us your two cents at www.beyondmytwocents.com