Pardon my language, but let’s call a spade a spade, shall we? The AquaBounty AquAdvantage® salmon issue is just so fraught with bullshit all around that I find myself compelled to rant about it.
For those not up to speed: AquaBounty is a company that has submitted a genetically engineered salmon for approval by the FDA. If approved, this will be the first genetically engineered animal intended directly for human consumption.
One AquAdvantage® Salmon and one normal Atlantic salmon. They are the same age.
AP Photo/AquaBounty Technologies
Let me start this off by saying, first of all, that I am not categorically opposed to the idea of genetic engineering. I’m inclined to believe, in a perfect world, that there could be a way that the genetic engineering of our crops, and/or our livestock, could potentially be manipulated in a manner that would not prove harmful to humans or to our global environment. I can, theoretically anyway, conceive of this ever-so-slim possibility. It is certainly true that farmers the world over have been practicing their own form of engineering through genetic selection since the dawn of agriculture. But I believe that to accomplish such a thing – GE foods in such a way – is such an extremely difficult proposition and requisite of the kind of knowledge, empirical and verified, that we simply don’t have and may never have, to the point of essentially being impossible.
And what happens, what actually happens – in our country, with GE foods – falls so far short of acceptable as to not even be measurable on the same scale.
See? I mean what the hell kind of graph is that. Really.
AquaBounty AquAdvantage® Salmon is a transgenic creature created from Atlantic salmon, spliced with growth genes from a Chinook salmon (Pacific Ocean salmon), and anti-freeze genes from an eel. Not sure really how those anti-freeze genes come into play, even after a bit of digging.
AquaBounty has been testing and researching this fish for 10 years now. They have submitted the claim that the AquAdvantage® Salmon has “no biologically relevant different” from regular Atlantic salmon.
And the FDA – for the most part – agrees. Though currently, the issue has been divisive enough for it to be effectively stalled, one can’t help but feel that AquaBounty will eventually win out – seeing as how these issues have tended to go in the past. I would like to point out, though, some empowering information has been written…
If ever readers wondered if their opinion counts, The Center for Food Safety indicated the strong response from the public helped to stall a decision on the GE salmon. Over 160,000 comments were submitted, and in addition, some 300 organizations and individuals wrote and signed joint letters to the FDA to oppose approval of the salmon.
I called. It was easy. I know some of my friends did, too. Maybe you’re one of them.
Anyway, let’s get to the dirt. Here’s where the bullshit comes in.
The FDA has agreed with AquaBounty’s claim that their salmon has no biological difference from a regular Atlantic salmon. The problem is, it’s truly a leap of faith to conclude from what we know about biological traits that we’ve studied in two different fish, that an equivalence in what we know to observe indicates safety for human consumption. It entirely neglects the concept of synergy, which is absolutely critical when discussing food and nutrition.
It’s been said, by a man wiser than me, that reducing food to nutrients is like taking apart a watch and asking which piece of it tells time. Food is the ultimate representation of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. We can isolate individual parts of food that affect us and indicate direct correlations, but we can’t account for the “what,” which really constitutes the whole of a food.
So then how can we assume to say that a thing created one way, exhibiting all the same biological traits as another thing created an entirely different way, is one and the same? We can’t. We just don’t know.
And GE foods in general have been around about 15 years now. That’s a long time, and a long time for us to see how it has effected us. But is it really? Perhaps it is, as man measures. But it is most certainly not as measured by nature. It’s not even one generation. And if we were to use the current generation’s health and general fitness as an example to measure how well we’re doing in consuming GE foods? Let’s just say I wouldn’t be impressed.
And we’re not even close to through with the bullshit.
In reviewing the case, the FDA has only received evidence submitted by AquaBounty themselves. That’s because, of course, AquaBounty is the only one to have studied the fish – it’s their “property,” so they would be loathe to submit it to any study other than their own. This means, however, that no independent studies of the fish have been done – none has been submitted to the FDA. Is anyone really comfortable with knowing that? I’m not.
More bullshit…
Salmon are already way over-farmed. Ocean farmed salmon destroy their environment, kept in nets in pockets of the sea and creating so much waste that they create a dead zone all around them. Corporations push for more farms, and – in this case – for bigger (mutant) salmon. More farms means more damage to their ecology. Meanwhile in Alaska – a state that has outlawed salmon farming – the wild caught and sustainable methods used to catch salmon has resulted in an astronomical increase in total salmon yield.
AquaBounty would be farmed in ponds or factories, so as to never be released into the wild and potentially (I’m being generous with the “potentially” – they would decimate) effect the global wild salmon population. So that’s good. But not really very reassuring. All it takes is one fish, two fish getting into a river somewhere. Red fish, blue fish.
And then, there’s this other bullshit.
This is the bullshit that trumps it all. Labeling. GE foods are not required by the FDA to have any indication that it is different from any other food. This would also be the case should the AquAdvantage® Salmon be approved. The claim is, again, that there is no observable difference in the biological traits of the creatue to warrant labeling it as distinct (entirely despite the fact that it was created in a completely different manner) – as the labeling would surely disparage the company marketing the product, and cause them damage commercially. Epitome of bullshit right here. Really. This thing gets approved, you will never even know what kind of salmon you’re eating. Too bad, so sad, consumer concern entirely dismissed in favor of commercial interests. How utterly common.
Truth be told, I feel like I have barely even scratched the surface of the bullshit here. I feel like there’s so much more to say here, but I’m aware I’m getting awfully verbose at this point. Maybe there will have to be a part two next week or something.
Does this piss you off as much as it does me? Call the presidential comment line and let them know. It only takes a minute, and there are helpful scripts at the link.
