Genetically modified salmon could soon be making its way to your dinner plate if the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) grants final approval to a proposal from a Massachusetts bio tech firm.
The fish, dubbed "Frankenfish" by its critics, is Atlantic salmon that has been modified with a growth hormone from Pacific chinook salmon and a gene from an eel-like fish known as ocean pout. The modifications result in a fish that matures twice as fast as regular Atlantic salmon.
The FDA has already determined the fish, created by AquaBounty Technologies, poses no health or environmental risk, according to various media reports. The proposal is now under a 60-day period of public review—the final hurdle to FDA approval.
The genetically modified fish tastes like regular salmon, meaning consumers probably will not be able to tell the difference—and ABC News reports the FDA is unlikely to require special labeling for the fish.
Meanwhile, Washington is one of several states with pending initiatives on required labeling for GMOs—genetically modified organisms. Initiative 522 would require any food sold in Washington state and made with genetically engineered crops to be labeled.
Would you be comfortable eating genetically modified salmon? Tell us in the comments section.
*every* grocer sells GMOs if they have nuts, grains, veges, etc. Even some home grown foodstuffs come from or are GMOs. You'll get mighty thin trying to stand on those unfounded fears. But that's ok. That means more food for the poor. Go get 'em tiger!
"BAAAAA"
SARCHASM MODE: Off
SARCHASM MODE: Off
http://current.com/groups/news-blog/93975745_peru-bans-genetically-modified-foods-as-us-lags.htm
http://eatdrinkbetter.com/2011/04/11/gmos-linked-to-organ-disruption-in-13-scientific-studies/ http://www.saynotogmos.org/scientific_studies.htm The world that Monsanto doesn't have in their back pocket, I might add...
"NO ON PROP. 37" was funded by Monsanto Company, E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) and more than 40 food company members.
BZZZZT! WRONG! Try again. All three links you sent are to *opinion papers*, not *scientific studies*. If you had bothered to read them you would have seen that. And a link to "saynotogoms"??? No agenda there I'm sure. But if you look deep enough into the links in the "eatdrinkbetter" opinion paper you will find links to several studies on GMOs, All they show is that confounding factors (the pesticides on the GMOs) were the issues, NOT the GMOs themselves. The only "link" between GMOS and cancer was the pesticides that were on them. Grow GMOs pesticide free and viola! A MUCH greener and better product. BTW, there is a difference between a "link" and a "cause". There is a "link" between a rooster crowing and the sun coming up. The rooster does not "cause" the sun to come up. Sorry to burst your anti-GMO-theist balloon with science. How many GMOs were in your breakfast this morning? Like the Sr-90 in there too? Better living through chemistry!
Yep. Everyone knows. Companies test for what is required by the govt. and you know who is in charge of that? He was enshrined yesterday. You voted for him, you are responsible for his decisions on FDA leadership and food safety. Eat up!
GMO Myths and Truths: An evidence-based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops (large link to the pdf document follows) - http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDoQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fearthopensource.org%2Ffiles%2Fpdfs%2FGMO_Myths_and_Truths%2FGMO_Myths_and_Truths_1.3.pdf&ei=P1oAUY-MJOmKiAKyzoC4Aw&usg=AFQjCNGwSsL_8S1ClWU9i8DdOLcyuhSz6Q&sig2=Is43FH6CoJxAD3iI5lDAjQ&bvm=bv.41248874,d.cGE