The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
Big fish: A genetically engineered salmon (in back) designed to reach market size twice as fast as an unaltered fish (in front) will come under FDA review this month. Both fish in the image are the same age.
AquaBounty
The FDA is poised to decide whether biotech animals should be sold as food.
A genetically engineered strain of Atlantic salmon that's designed to grow twice as fast as its unaltered cousins may soon be eligible for dinner. After a decade of debate, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration this month will review an application to market fish created by AquaBounty Technologies, a company headquartered in Waltham, MA. If approved, the salmon would become the first "transgenic" animal--one that has DNA from another animal--in the world to be sold for human consumption.
The agency released a report on Friday stating that the animals appear to be as safe to eat as traditional salmon and do not pose a significant risk to the environment. However, it will likely not make a final decision regarding the salmon until the weeks after the hearing.
"The decision will affect whether and how transgenic animals are approved and regulated here and around the world," says Eric Hallerman, head of the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Other genetically modified animals are waiting in the wings. They include other types of fish, cattle that are resistant to mad cow disease, and the so-called enviro-pig, which was designed to generate more ecofriendly manure. Even if the government approves, however, it remains an open question whether food producers and consumers would accept such animals.
The FDA will decide not only whether to allow the fish, but also whether it would require it to be labeled as genetically modified. That could have a strong impact on how consumers respond. Genetically modified plants, such as the soybeans used in tofu, do not carry special labeling. Although these crops generated strong suspicion when first introduced over a decade ago, many have now become seamlessly integrated into the food supply.
The new fish wouldn't be bigger than conventional salmon--but they would reach full size twice as fast. Created in the early 1990s, the salmon were engineered to carry the gene for growth hormone from a closely related species, Chinook salmon. (Conventionally bred Atlantic salmon produce little of this hormone in cold weather.) A short stretch of DNA derived from a third type of fish is added to control the gene's ability to produce the hormone. This genetic on-switch increases hormone production during the salmon's first year of life, leading the animals to reach market size in about half the time it takes their conventionally bred counterparts. The engineered fish also convert food into flesh more efficiently. As a result, AquaBounty, which aims to sell eggs to fish farmers, says the technology will make salmon farming more economically viable by reducing the time producers need to rear the fish.
At the hearing, scheduled for September 19 to 21, a panel of experts convened by the FDA committee will decide whether the fish are safe to eat, and whether they pose environmental risks. It's this latter question that has been the topic of intense debate and extensive research over the last few years; some fisheries scientists and ecologists worry that the fish might escape their farms and endanger wild salmon strains. Farmed salmon, which now generate most of the world's salmon supply, are typically grown in ocean pens, and the animals can escape through broken nets. Lab studies suggest that when food is scarce, the engineered salmon can outcompete unaltered ones.
Are Genetically Modified Salmon Headed to the Supermarket?
I freaking love genetically modified organisms.
Re: Are Genetically Modified Salmon Headed to the Supermarket?
Haha. Funny. I think it would be great if they could engineer salmon to taste like yellow tail tuna. Should not be too hard: just splice a few tuna genes into the salmon genome and voila. Nothing like genetically altered fish for sushi and sashimi. The mind boggles at the possibilities.
It will pass muster by the FDA, simply because it is about money. Eventually, natural foods will be the rage and very expensive. Why must we mess with Mother Nature?
Natural foods? I think we're already there. They're called "organic"...
As for me, they only have to answer one question: is it as safe as non-modified salmon for human consumption? If it is, and if the FDA approves I'm assuming it is safe, then maybe I'll try it out. I'll probably let it stay in the market for a year and see if anyone reports adverse side effects, but if this turns out to be good, it could be a great advancement. Yeah, "natural" food will be a more valued commodity in the world of genetic engineering, but with this, salmon that is grown twice as fast, as a start, you could make a wide variety of foods very cheap and allow people in poorer countries to purchase them, minifying the impact of world hunger (hopefully for more than a few years).
Please do not assume anything that a government agency says is correct and in your best interests!
Wind blown seed into a Monsanto clean field will become the property of Monsanto if found by Monsanto, who must pay a fine to Monsanto for stealing their patent. Look it up.
Early puberty in females, early breast development in girls, leading to high and early breast cancer....Genetically Modified foods.
I thought the early puberty was caused by hormones in food.
The size of wild salmon has been defined by its ecological niche: how deep the water is, how much food is available, what is the competition, etc. Obviously, some gigantic salmon could never survive in shallow streams.
But if salmon occupied another ecological niche, then today we could have gigantic wild salmon.
So, it is all rather arbitrary - the rolling dice of nature. To antagonize Einstein, we could say "God does play dice".
So, don't get too excited about giant salmon. It's no big deal.
It's not that it's giant. It's that it grows twice as fast.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
MITBeta
43 Comments
Reminds me of Jurassic Park...
...the animals there needed a special enzyme in their diet and were also sterile... supposedly.
Reply
martinaatayo
112 Comments
Re: Reminds me of Jurassic Park...
Bioengineered food fom both plant and animal
achievable through targeted genetic alteration,
as opposed to integrated infusion of multiple
genes originating from distinctive sources with
the goal of complete elimination of causative
defect or ailment in humans, pose no anxiety
for FDA approval in consumer market place.
Concern arises when application indicates
incorporation of genes of varying specie
origins for quantitative or qualitative
agenda,apparently, in disregard for
integrity and dignity that comes
with sound moral science.
And science and technology has
been slow in forthcoming with research
exploitations in food and agro-allied
fields directed along this tendency.
Reply
patz
1 Comment
Re: Reminds me of Jurassic Park...
Exactly. Natural diversity is already endangered http://www.thefutureoffood.com/onlinevideo.html
Presently, there is simply no way to know what future generations of transgenic mutations of mutations will bring. While genetic research should be protected, patenting life is a huge mistake that should be rescinded.
Firms like Monsanto should be liable for the natural seed banks and crops their genetically modified seeds have polluted - not vice versa.
Reply