This article was written by the Organic Consumers Association's Political Director, Alexis Baden-Mayer. To take action to stop Frankenfish, please click here.
Obama's FDA is regulating genetically engineered salmon, a genetically modified organism (GMO) that is the first of its kind, not as an animal, but as an animal drug.
Normally, a veterinary drug would be used for health purposes, but there's no therapeutic benefit associated with jacking up an Atlantic salmon with the genes of a Chinook salmon and the eel-like ocean pout to make it grow twice as fast. On the contrary, genetic engineering increases the salmon's mortality, disease and deformity.
So, why would the FDA treat a the first genetically engineered animal for human consumption like a drug? The idea came from the biotech industry. They knew that the FDA's animal drug process would keep companies' "proprietary" information secret, while limiting public participation and downplaying food safety concerns. Genius.
Obama's FDA is regulating genetically engineered salmon, a genetically modified organism (GMO) that is the first of its kind, not as an animal, but as an animal drug.
Normally, a veterinary drug would be used for health purposes, but there's no therapeutic benefit associated with jacking up an Atlantic salmon with the genes of a Chinook salmon and the eel-like ocean pout to make it grow twice as fast. On the contrary, genetic engineering increases the salmon's mortality, disease and deformity.
So, why would the FDA treat a the first genetically engineered animal for human consumption like a drug? The idea came from the biotech industry. They knew that the FDA's animal drug process would keep companies' "proprietary" information secret, while limiting public participation and downplaying food safety concerns. Genius.
So will these frankenfish bring any positive vibrations to the table?
Yep... to the GMO-producers and the fish farm owners bank account!
Is it sustainable?
Not at all!
This is GMO.
A genetically modified organism. A LIVING ORGANISM which escape and mix their semen and eggs with the wild salmon. Same story as with the GE crops.
THE GMO industry are not able to prevent the patented genes from spreading into the wild salmon.
GMO = GENETIC POLLUTION
The GMO industry are not responsible!
The scientists payed by the GMO industry say what the GMO industry tell them to say!
SAY NO TO GMO!
SAY NO TO FRANKENFISH!
SAY NO TO FRANKENFOOD!
TAKE THE GMO producers to the court!
Tore_B_Krudtaa: So will these frankenfish bring any positive vibrations to the
The thing is that U.S. FDA does not care about your health. It only cares about the multinational companies and their products.
Why did U.S. FDA classify GMO as GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe)?
Because the biotech industry and politicians wanted it to be so!
You do not belive me?
Look here: http://www.biointegrity.org/FDADeception.html
The GMO-producers like Monsanto does not like to hear this simple fact about GMOs used in e.g. agriculture:
Neither the GMO-industry nor the GMO-farmer are able to control the patented genes which are forced into these genetically modified crops. Plant GE-crops next to conventional crops, then the patented genes will sooner rather than laiter move into the conventional crops because of crosspollination.
What does this mean?
GMO = GENETIC POLLUTION
Negative sides of the use of GE crops:
Either the crops produce toxic stuff 24 hours a day as long as it lives because it is engineered to do so. Thereby killing living organisms both in the soil and above the soil... not only the targeted species.
Or the GE crops are engineered to withstand Monsanto's highly toxic ROUNDUP or GLYPHOSATE or other highly poisionous chemicals. Monsanto once claimed this shit beeing as safe as table salt. Anyone remember PCB, DDT or Agent Orange?
You like your neighbors, more or less? Right? Me too. That's why I have a FRANKEN stamp. Don't get excited, Senator Franken, it's not about you. The ink stamp is for when I go shopping and see GMO products on the shelves that aren't adequately labeled. Sometimes the words "corn" or "soy" *need* a big ol' FRANKEN in front of them.
Senator Franken, blame Mary Shelly. I had nothing to do with the name thing. Thanks!
Brett_Schnaper: You like your neighbors, more or less? Right? Me too.
I just hear of the Chinese returning genetically modified Sturgeon into the wild because they've destroyed their natural cycles .... the fishes are out of the bag.
cemery50: I just hear of the Chinese returning genetically modified Sturgeon
"8. Frankenfish DNA Could Change the Bacteria of Your Gut
A human study conducted by the UK's Food Standards Agency found that consuming genetically engineered soy can result in "horizontal gene transfer," where the bacteria of the gut takes up the soy's modified DNA. With GMO salmon, the bacteria of our digestive tracks could take up the engineered salmon genes, but the FDA isn't looking into whether this would happen or how it might effect our health..."
Source: Nature Biotechnology
What this article refuses to say is that in that study that they are referring to, they say, "we conclude that gene transfer did not occur during the feeding experiment." False fear mongering much?
Alex_VZ: "8. Frankenfish DNA Could Change the Bacteria of Your Gut
Here's the complete abstract Alex VZ is quoting from:
"The inclusion of genetically modified (GM) plants in the human diet has raised concerns about the possible transfer of transgenes from GM plants to intestinal microflora and enterocytes. The persistence in the human gut of DNA from dietary GM plants is unknown. Here we study the survival of the transgene epsps from GM soya in the small intestine of human ileostomists (i.e., individuals in which the terminal ileum is resected and digesta are diverted from the body via a stoma to a colostomy bag). The amount of transgene that survived passage through the small bowel varied among individuals, with a maximum of 3.7% recovered at the stoma of one individual. The transgene did not survive passage through the intact gastrointestinal tract of human subjects fed GM soya. Three of seven ileostomists showed evidence of low-frequency gene transfer from GM soya to the microflora of the small bowel before their involvement in these experiments. As this low level of epsps in the intestinal microflora did not increase after consumption of the meal containing GM soya, we conclude that gene transfer did not occur during the feeding experiment."
There's evidence of a "transgene that survived passage through the small bowel," but because the human subjects had already experienced "gene transfer from GM soya to the microflora of the small bowel before their involvement in these experiments" they concluded "gene transfer did not occur during the feeding experiment."
Alexis_BadenMayer: Here's the complete abstract Alex VZ is quoting from: "The
The interesting thing is that the group at FDA isn't at all involved in food safety. It's the Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee people evaluating AquaBounty's salmon. How sleazy is that?
And the one you don't mention: patents. Someone in a corporate boardroom, or a lab somewhere, is making a mint off the patents. The # motivation to get wild fish out of the marketplace, IMO.
PammySpam: And the one you don't mention: patents. Someone in a
The stuff about allergenicity and carcinogenicity is hard to interpret without knowing something about the clinical significance of those numbers.
For example, saying the GM salmon has "40% more IGF1" doesn't tell me how dangerous that is. It sort of depends on whether the amount of IGF1 in regular salmon is trivial to start with. Is it?
Chris MacDonald
Food-Ethics.com
ethicsblogger: The stuff about allergenicity and carcinogenicity is hard to interpret
The FDA decided it wasn't significant, because people are already exposed to IGF-1 through a variety of animal products, including dairy products from cows given bovine growth hormone known as rBGH or rbST (Monsanto's first genetically modified organism to enter the food supply).
But, a team of scientists at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, lead by Dr. Michelle Holmes, used data from a large, 25 year study of more than 1,000 nurses who record their diets carefully and who were then watched for changes in health. The study found that higher serum levels of IGF-I were found in the women who consumed the most dairy products and noted that other studies had found a link between increased dairy intake and increased serum IGF-I levels. As the study noted: “Our most consistent dietary finding was the positive association of IGF-I levels with total dairy and milk intake. . . Two other studies have supported an effect of milk intake on IGF-I levels. A randomized trial of 204 men and women where the intervention was to encourage consumption of three servings/day of nonfat milk to affect bone remodeling found that the 101 subjects in the intervention group had a statistically significant 10% average increase in serum IGF-I levels, whereas the control group had no change in levels. . . . These results raise the possibility that milk consumption could influence cancer risk by a mechanism involving IGF-I.”
Alexis_BadenMayer: The FDA decided it wasn't significant, because people are already
Holmes, M.D., Pollak, M.N., Willett, W.C., and S.E. Hankinson. 2002. Dietary correlates of plasma insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 concentrations. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 11: 852-861.
In an interview discussing this study, Dr. Michelle Holmes stated, “We concluded that greater milk consumption was associated with higher levels of IGF-1. This association raises the possibility that diet could increase cancer risk by increasing levels of IGF-1 in the blood stream."
Alexis_BadenMayer: Here's the cite for the nurses study: Holmes, M.D., Pollak,
If they try to sell these fish as "Salmon" we should sue them for false advertising. This is a completely new fish that should be given a new name and should not be allowed to be sold as "Salmon." AtlanticChinookPout fish would be appropriate since it has genes from all three different fish.
To help support labeling of all GM foods please consider joining the Food Bloc page on votingbloc.org here:
Horizontal gene transfer is not exactly unknown in the wild. And I don't think it typically calls for a new species name. Even if there are legitimate concerns, here, "completely new" seems an exaggeration.
ethicsblogger: Horizontal gene transfer is not exactly unknown in the wild.
what if concerned chefs took salmon off the menu of their restaurants for a month and put a note in saying "due to our concern for the health of our customers, we will not be serving salmon until the FDA..."
then we could write to and/ or call our senators, congressmen, the president, the FDA, aquabounty, our newspapers and explain why we were doing this
imagine if salmon spoiled in grocery store ice chests, if fishermen couldn't unload their haul- yes, it would hurt them but then they could call/ write their "representatives" and say "what's up? no restaurants or stores will buy my salmon?"
it might give the poor salmon a chance to repopulate.
can we do this? we have the internet, facebook, twitter and all those ways to get the word out. There are many groups centered around food and health on facebook. We just have to get together. obama used the internet to great advantage during his campaign. other countries, france and italy come to mind, are always striking over this and that and it seems to work for them. let's go on a salmon strike. now, right now- BEFORE this gets approval.
i'm pretty sure that a few thousand or even million on-line petitions aren't going to matter a damn to these guys. money seems to be the only language they speak so let's talk to them in words they can understand!
Carolyn_Kostopoulos: part 2 what if concerned chefs took salmon off the
Carolyn, this is a great idea. Enormous to organize. Who would be able to get the word out effectively? I admire how there are so many 'pink' things going on in October for Breast Cancer. Perhaps you could choose a Non-GMO month and give it a color?
Pinksmink: Carolyn, this is a great idea. Enormous to organize. Who
part 1
as happy as i am to sign on-line petitions, i really don't believe that anyone reads them and if they do, they certainly ignore them. our country seems to have crossed over into the land of oligarchy while everyone was too entertained to notice and i'm afraid that the only thing that counts is money.
i'm not sure they even care about our votes anymore, at least not once they have them.
i'd like to propose something more radical. what about a month long total boycott on all salmon? of course, many of us have decided that once this creature is approved, we will sadly never eat salmon again, but by then it will be too late.
we need to show now what will happen big time and permanently if they pass this. what if all these groups- food and water watch, slow food, the union of concerned scientists, natural news, fresh, weston price groups, etc- got together and picked a starting date and appealed to their members to stop buying and eating any and all forms of salmon for a month?
what about readers of David Kirby, Michael Moore, Michael Pollan, Jeffrey Smith, Wendell Berry- what if those authors came out and said "we are boycotting salmon right now and we urge you to do the same.”
Carolyn_Kostopoulos: part 1 as happy as i am to sign on-line
Post a Comment
Yep... to the GMO-producers and the fish farm owners bank account!
Is it sustainable?
Not at all!
This is GMO.
A genetically modified organism. A LIVING ORGANISM which escape and mix their semen and eggs with the wild salmon. Same story as with the GE crops.
THE GMO industry are not able to prevent the patented genes from spreading into the wild salmon.
GMO = GENETIC POLLUTION
The GMO industry are not responsible!
The scientists payed by the GMO industry say what the GMO industry tell them to say!
SAY NO TO GMO!
SAY NO TO FRANKENFISH!
SAY NO TO FRANKENFOOD!
TAKE THE GMO producers to the court!
Why did U.S. FDA classify GMO as GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe)?
Because the biotech industry and politicians wanted it to be so!
You do not belive me?
Look here:
http://www.biointegrity.org/FDADeception.html
The GMO-producers like Monsanto does not like to hear this simple fact about GMOs used in e.g. agriculture:
Neither the GMO-industry nor the GMO-farmer are able to control the patented genes which are forced into these genetically modified crops. Plant GE-crops next to conventional crops, then the patented genes will sooner rather than laiter move into the conventional crops because of crosspollination.
What does this mean?
GMO = GENETIC POLLUTION
Negative sides of the use of GE crops:
Either the crops produce toxic stuff 24 hours a day as long as it lives because it is engineered to do so. Thereby killing living organisms both in the soil and above the soil... not only the targeted species.
Or the GE crops are engineered to withstand Monsanto's highly toxic ROUNDUP or GLYPHOSATE or other highly poisionous chemicals. Monsanto once claimed this shit beeing as safe as table salt. Anyone remember PCB, DDT or Agent Orange?
Study link Roundup to child cancer and deformed chick embryos:
http://www.truth-out.org/war-over-genetically-modified-crops-gets-ugly-birth-defects-superweeds-and-science-intimidation64915?print
Senator Franken, blame Mary Shelly. I had nothing to do with the name thing. Thanks!
A human study conducted by the UK's Food Standards Agency found that consuming genetically engineered soy can result in "horizontal gene transfer," where the bacteria of the gut takes up the soy's modified DNA. With GMO salmon, the bacteria of our digestive tracks could take up the engineered salmon genes, but the FDA isn't looking into whether this would happen or how it might effect our health..."
Source: Nature Biotechnology
What this article refuses to say is that in that study that they are referring to, they say, "we conclude that gene transfer did not occur during the feeding experiment." False fear mongering much?
"The inclusion of genetically modified (GM) plants in the human diet has raised concerns about the possible transfer of transgenes from GM plants to intestinal microflora and enterocytes. The persistence in the human gut of DNA from dietary GM plants is unknown. Here we study the survival of the transgene epsps from GM soya in the small intestine of human ileostomists (i.e., individuals in which the terminal ileum is resected and digesta are diverted from the body via a stoma to a colostomy bag). The amount of transgene that survived passage through the small bowel varied among individuals, with a maximum of 3.7% recovered at the stoma of one individual. The transgene did not survive passage through the intact gastrointestinal tract of human subjects fed GM soya. Three of seven ileostomists showed evidence of low-frequency gene transfer from GM soya to the microflora of the small bowel before their involvement in these experiments. As this low level of epsps in the intestinal microflora did not increase after consumption of the meal containing GM soya, we conclude that gene transfer did not occur during the feeding experiment."
There's evidence of a "transgene that survived passage through the small bowel," but because the human subjects had already experienced "gene transfer from GM soya to the microflora of the small bowel before their involvement in these experiments" they concluded "gene transfer did not occur during the feeding experiment."
http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/VeterinaryMedicineAdvisoryCommittee/ucm226083.htm
For example, saying the GM salmon has "40% more IGF1" doesn't tell me how dangerous that is. It sort of depends on whether the amount of IGF1 in regular salmon is trivial to start with. Is it?
Chris MacDonald
Food-Ethics.com
But, a team of scientists at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, lead by Dr. Michelle Holmes, used data from a large, 25 year study of more than 1,000 nurses who record their diets carefully and who were then watched for changes in health. The study found that higher serum levels of IGF-I were found in the women who consumed the most dairy products and noted that other studies had found a link between increased dairy intake and increased serum IGF-I levels. As the study noted: “Our most consistent dietary finding was the positive association of IGF-I levels with total dairy and milk intake. . . Two other studies have supported an effect of milk intake on IGF-I levels. A randomized trial of 204 men and women where the intervention was to encourage consumption of three servings/day of nonfat milk to affect bone remodeling found that the 101 subjects in the intervention group had a statistically significant 10% average increase in serum IGF-I levels, whereas the control group had no change in levels. . . . These results raise the possibility that milk consumption could influence cancer risk by a mechanism involving IGF-I.”
Holmes, M.D., Pollak, M.N., Willett, W.C., and S.E. Hankinson. 2002. Dietary correlates of plasma insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 concentrations. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 11: 852-861.
In an interview discussing this study, Dr. Michelle Holmes stated, “We concluded that greater milk consumption was associated with higher levels of IGF-1. This association raises the possibility that diet could increase cancer risk by increasing levels of IGF-1 in the blood stream."
To help support labeling of all GM foods please consider joining the Food Bloc page on votingbloc.org here:
http://www.votingbloc.org/Food_Bloc.php
because really, what's next? pigs with no pain sensors? chickens with no feet? cows with no bones?
i really think we have to get serious. All the strides you are making towards changing the food system will be nullified if this passes.
what if concerned chefs took salmon off the menu of their restaurants for a month and put a note in saying "due to our concern for the health of our customers, we will not be serving salmon until the FDA..."
then we could write to and/ or call our senators, congressmen, the president, the FDA, aquabounty, our newspapers and explain why we were doing this
imagine if salmon spoiled in grocery store ice chests, if fishermen couldn't unload their haul- yes, it would hurt them but then they could call/ write their "representatives" and say "what's up? no restaurants or stores will buy my salmon?"
it might give the poor salmon a chance to repopulate.
can we do this? we have the internet, facebook, twitter and all those ways to get the word out. There are many groups centered around food and health on facebook. We just have to get together. obama used the internet to great advantage during his campaign. other countries, france and italy come to mind, are always striking over this and that and it seems to work for them. let's go on a salmon strike. now, right now- BEFORE this gets approval.
i'm pretty sure that a few thousand or even million on-line petitions aren't going to matter a damn to these guys. money seems to be the only language they speak so let's talk to them in words they can understand!
as happy as i am to sign on-line petitions, i really don't believe that anyone reads them and if they do, they certainly ignore them. our country seems to have crossed over into the land of oligarchy while everyone was too entertained to notice and i'm afraid that the only thing that counts is money.
i'm not sure they even care about our votes anymore, at least not once they have them.
i'd like to propose something more radical. what about a month long total boycott on all salmon? of course, many of us have decided that once this creature is approved, we will sadly never eat salmon again, but by then it will be too late.
we need to show now what will happen big time and permanently if they pass this. what if all these groups- food and water watch, slow food, the union of concerned scientists, natural news, fresh, weston price groups, etc- got together and picked a starting date and appealed to their members to stop buying and eating any and all forms of salmon for a month?
what about readers of David Kirby, Michael Moore, Michael Pollan, Jeffrey Smith, Wendell Berry- what if those authors came out and said "we are boycotting salmon right now and we urge you to do the same.”