from the two-cars-in-every-garage-and-three-eyes-on-every-fish dept.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration gave the green light Friday to genetically modified salmon that grow about twice as fast as normal.
The FDA lifted an alert which
Prevented AquaBounty from importing its salmon eggs to its Indiana facility, where they would be grown before being sold as food. The agency noted the salmon has already undergone safety reviews, and that it lifted its alert because the fish would be subject to a new regulation that will require companies to disclose when a food is bioengineered.
Compliance with the disclosure regulations will start showing up in 2020 and becomes mandatory in 2022.
As one might expect, the FDA is under suit by various groups opposed to the sale of the fish.
Called AquAdvantage, the fish is Atlantic salmon modified with DNA from other fish species to grow faster, which the company says will help feed growing demand for animal protein while reducing costs.
The fish are bred female and sterile in containment tanks to help allay fears about them entering the environment.
Previous Coverage here
Related Stories
The Food and Drug Administration has given its first approval for human consumption of a genetically modified animal. AquAdvantage salmon grow twice as fast and year-round compared to salmon that have already been honed by selective breeding.
A kind of salmon that's been genetically modified so that it grows faster may be on the way to a supermarket near you. The Food and Drug Administration approved the fish on Thursday — a decision that environmental and food-safety groups are vowing to fight.
This new kind of fast-growing salmon was actually created 25 years ago by Massachusetts-based AquaBounty Technologies. A new gene was inserted into fertilized salmon eggs — it boosted production of a fish growth hormone. The result: a fish that grows twice as fast as its conventional, farm-raised counterpart.
AquaBounty has been trying to get government approval to sell its fish ever since. Five years ago, the FDA's scientific advisers concluded that the genetically modified fish, known as AquaAdvantage salmon, is safe to eat and won't harm the environment.
[More after the break.]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 11 2019, @03:45AM (14 children)
I swear, some folks just don't get the concept. If they want to grow GMO fish that can't reproduce, fine. If you don't want to eat them, also fine. STFU telling other people they're not allowed to eat them though. You don't need to go out of your way to let us know how big of a shithead you are. Rest assured we were already well aware.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @03:55AM (8 children)
All I see is: Great, another mutant that generates low quality meat for poor people I need to not buy. They already fucked up the chickens around here, why not the fish? Tenderloins are getting to be the same too. Grass fed or organic is worth like 2x as much as "regular", because there is something wrong with "regular".
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 11 2019, @04:14AM (6 children)
I won't disagree on the chickens. They're essentially all the next best thing clones. Seriously, their gene pool really is absolutely that tiny. They're perfectly acceptable for eating though, the layers just produce lame, flavorless eggs.
Oh, but fuck vegetarian-fed chickens. Chickens are omnivores and if you don't let them do their omnivore thing, you get scrawny, sickly birds and shitty tasting eggs.
Beef cattle and pork are not remotely the same though. Not even a little bit. They have amazingly varied gene pools and many different breeds and crossbreeds. Grass fed beef tastes like ass compared to beef that gets some grain, fat, and vitamins/minerals that the cow wouldn't normally have easy access to in its diet as well, just in case you were wondering. It's way lower in fat content and well placed fat is what makes meat juicy and delicious. I'll take a feed lot finished cow any day of the week because I know it's going to be from a healthier animal, have better marbling, and cost less.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @04:21AM (3 children)
Do you ever have any of these symptoms?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_poisoning [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 11 2019, @04:34AM (2 children)
Not even kind of. I get most of my calories per day from fats. I use heavy cream in my coffee and big heaping wads of real no-bullshit butter anywhere it wouldn't be grossly inappropriate to put butter. Why? Because it's delicious, duh. Fuck cholesterol. It's possible I'll die sooner but I guarantee I'll have wrung more enjoyment out of life in my shorter time than you will if you live to be two hundred.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @03:59PM (1 child)
Why so serious!!?!
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 11 2019, @05:35PM
That wasn't serious. That rant was entirely faux-hysterical. Over the top isn't just a crappy old Stallone movie, it's also a humor style.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @11:15PM (1 child)
Feed lot finished cows aren't healthier. Feed lots use corn, and corn-fed cows have GI troubles. Feed lots also have issues with waste disposal. Feed lot finished cows do cost less.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday March 12 2019, @03:47AM
They don't live long enough for corn to give them any serious issues. Waste issues are a problem but again, they don't spend long periods in a feed lot; just enough to add some fat so they weigh more and taste better.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Monday March 11 2019, @08:04PM
I am a crackpot
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @02:03PM (4 children)
And I swear, some people like you NEVER grasp the concept that whatever CAN happen WILL happen.
These GMO fish that are "bred female and sterile", at some point, will NOT be female, and/or will NOT be sterile. They WILL escape in the environement, they WILL interbreed with wild salmon species, and they WILL screw-up the ecosystem.
Why can't you people get that ? What the fuck is wrong with your brains ? Is this some kind of genetic defect that prevents you from learning ANYTHING from history ?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 11 2019, @03:02PM (1 child)
I suppose I should just go ahead and sell my fishing gear and buy good booze then because we're all going to die in a nuclear holocaust. It can happen so it must happen, right? Dipshit.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @03:56PM
TLDR - yes
(Score: 3, Insightful) by HiThere on Monday March 11 2019, @04:49PM (1 child)
That's not the problem. The problem is that the ecosystem has only a limited amount of space for species to live in, and we're already pushing fish out of it. It's not clear whether this fish is even a part of a solution. It certainly isn't going to end up feeding poor people, so that's pure PR gibberish. They are designed to out-compete native salmon and to require artificial support to keep the species going. I don't find this at all desirable. And genes don't stay confined within even a phylum. This is probably due to viral "accidents" attaching a part of a species gene to the reproducing virus, and then infecting the other species and embedding itself in the DNA, but that's just my guess as to the mechanism. It's a low frequency event, though, so expecting to see it happening is unreasonable. (That said, merging the genomes of various salmon species shouldn't prove a risk if they weren't sterile.)
For salmon to be feasible the fish needs to swim free in the ocean to eat and put on mass. Then it needs to return to it's spawning site (to either reproduce or be captured). The limiting feature here is probably mainly the spawning sites...but in that it's competing against the unmodified salmon.
I worry about environmental degradation caused by these modified salmon, not about whether the meat is safe to eat. But it's also worrying that they are engineered to grow extra large. This probably means that it will require artificial support, as there's usually a good reason for a species to be the size it is.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday March 12 2019, @04:47AM
I feel I jumped to an assumption here. Though I'm not sure. Indiana doesn't sound like a place that has native salmon to compete with. That being the case, they're probably growing them in holding tanks, so the main problem is likely to be "How do they get the stuff to feed them?"
At all events, other comments have made it seem as if these salmon are being grown confined, so the viral vectors are the only genetic problem, and that's a really low frequency event. I don't see how the fish could get from Indiana to the ocean, but that may be my lack of geography. Perhaps salmon migrate up the Mississippi. But fish grown in holding tanks still need to eat, can they can't feed themselves, so someone has to get the food for them. Salmon are carnivorous, so that means other fish. This will either not be cheap or will be very destructive...unless you can feed them on something like jellyfish.
I'm a lot less worried about the genetics than I am about environmental destruction. I doubt that these salmon could compete against wild salmon without artificial supports, because there's usually a reason a species has a particular set of characteristics. And mixing the genes from a variety of different salmon strains/species shouldn't cause any real problem...except a bunch of fish that can't compete on their own. Fish farms, however, have a record of being hugely destructive. I heard of one approach being taken in Norway that sounded ecologically sound: they were going to put a fence across an entire fjord and keep the fish that were large enough within it, while allowing the smaller fish that the big fish ate to swim in and out. Done right that should be a sound way to farm fish. But I don't think it would work with salmon. Salmon generally swim away from their spawning areas when they're small, swim around in the ocean eating what they can find for a few years (I was told 5, Google says 3 to 8), and then come back to spawn when they're large. So small holes in the net would keep them out.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @04:02AM (3 children)
View from a sometimes fish snob:
So, what does this new fish taste like? There are already big differences in taste between existing varieties of salmon and the wild caught usually tastes a bunch better than any of the farmed varieties (although we have one store that carries an organic-farmed that is really delicious).
Steelhead trout is another favorite (similar/better taste than salmon). Our previous source has switched from Norwegian to another country (forget where) and we've given up on that store. The new source might be cheaper by a buck a pound, but if the flavor isn't there the price hardly matters.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @04:06AM (1 child)
The problem is you are too addicted to interesting, exceptional "capitalist" fish. It is time for you to accept your new global warning induced future of bland, conforming "socialist" fish.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 12 2019, @02:18AM
I was afraid someone was going to say that. Well, maybe it won't happen in my lifetime, I'm already 65 and don't have any kids to worry about, so I'll stick with the "capitalist" fish as long as I can afford them.
(Score: 1) by Goghit on Tuesday March 12 2019, @03:07PM
It's not just taste. Farmed salmon of any sort usually tastes like soya bean flavoured mud due to a lack of plankton and forage fish in the diet. Pelleted feeds are big on plant-based proteins - fish meal is expensive and in high demand world-wide. This diet produces fish that have very low or non-existent levels of the magic omega-3 fatty acids.
Its GMO status is irrelevent - I'm still not eating it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @04:41AM (3 children)
Grilled fresh salmon is awesome, but all other preserved kinds seem worse than turnip.
Smoked salmon sucks. It's the garbage sushi.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday March 11 2019, @03:56PM
My wife tried getting some water packed Salmon in a sealed pouch. She said it didn't have that fishy taste you would normally get with canned fish or the like. So, maybe try that?
Otherwise, as is true in most cases, you can't beat fresh. Unless you're love smoked food or something like that.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday March 11 2019, @04:52PM
You need to broaden the tastes acceptable to your pallet, but it's true that fresh fish (of any sort) is always better than preserved. And fresh beef is better than corned beef. Frozen salmon can be quite good, but that depends on how it was handled while being frozen...and whether it got thawed while sitting on a loading dock.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 12 2019, @02:26AM
We wash the salmon (or steelhead) fillet, dry on paper towels, lay on a big piece of Aluminum foil on a baking sheet. Sprinkle Worcestershire sauce over the fish (maybe a tablespoon, enough to cover thinly), then seal the foil up, raise the ends so nothing can leak out.
Bake in hot oven, 425F, time is 10 minutes or so, more if the fish is thick. Open the foil and with spatula or fork, open the thickest part of the fillet, make sure all the "transparent" is gone -- return to oven for a few more minutes if needed.
The Worcestershire sauce flavor mostly goes away, but the fish comes out very moist and tender.
(Score: 4, Informative) by richtopia on Monday March 11 2019, @06:49AM (4 children)
The fish are not actually swimming upstream; the commercialization of these GMO salmon is progressing.
I had to read the summary closely before realizing the title is not to be taken literally. I was originally worried that these farm salmon entered the wild. While sterile, they would still affect the existing salmon run, either through displacing the native fish or perhaps providing a more attractive (larger) mate than the native fish.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @07:49AM (1 child)
More attractive mate isn't too much of an issue if my knowledge of fish biology is correct. Don't the males just jizz into the open water and hope for the best?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @01:04PM
Is this why the sea is so salty?
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday March 11 2019, @04:59PM
If they're raising the fish in holding ponds, I find it hard to see how it could possibly be economic. Salmon are carnivores. Normally they take about five years to reach maturity. (Google says 3 to 8 years to maturity, I assume that varies by species/variety.) There have already been complaints about "fish farmers" dredging places and taking all the fry so that they never have a chance to grow up, to feed their fish. If I'm eating farmed fish, then I prefer to choose tilapia or some other vegetarian, but that won't give you the omega-3's that salmon are high in.
Also, every herder I've heard of has occasional escapees.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 12 2019, @10:25PM
This. PLEASE submittors and editors, puns are fine, but don't mislead with them. Having GMO salmon in breeding streams would be a Big Deal.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @06:57AM
finds a way