Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
a group generally in favor of biotechnology, to consider and recommend legalizing the frankenfish. But
even this pro-GE panel raised serious concerns around the company's science, citing the poor methodology
and construction of the studies, to the disappointment of the biotech industry.
The FDA disclosed four studies that were used in their approval process. One was nearly twenty years
old, and the other three were conducted by AquaBounty or its contractors and were not peer-reviewed. The
nutrition and allergenicity studies were of special note because they used an extremely small data set: six
GE salmon. The sparse data, the poor design, and the fact that the company killed off salmon that were
deformed prior to doing a physical analysis for comparison with non-GE fish are scandalous.
Recently, at a long and tedious VMAC meeting, where Food & Water Watch physically delivered thou-
sands of letters to the committee opposing the legalization of the GE salmon, the committee showed an
appalling lack of scrutiny about the risk to human health. The FDA even said in the analysis provided to
the public, “Primary deference was given to controlled studies submitted by ABT [AquaBounty Techno-
logies].” 44 This is not good enough when the stakes are so high, especially since the studies did show that
GE salmon displayed some statistically significant differences in its composition and nutrition. 45
In fact, there have been no long-term studies on the safety of eating GE organisms, though scientists re-
cognize and have already documented their ability to harm human and animal health. In the case of salmon,
a highprotein food, the risk for allergic reactions is high because protein is more likely to cause reactions
than other components of food. A New England Journal of Medicine study found that soybeans engineered
with Brazil nut proteins caused allergic reactions for consumers with Brazil nut allergies. 46 In another case,
a harmless protein found in certain beans that acts as a pest deterrent became dangerous once it was trans-
ferred to a pea, causing allergy-related lung damage and skin problems in mice. One study showed high rat
pup mortality in litters from mothers fed GE soy flour. 47 Another found irregularities in the livers of rats,
suggesting higher metabolic rates resulting from a GE diet. 48
A 2007 study found significant liver and kidney impairment in rats fed GE corn with the insecticidal Bt
gene and “with the present data it cannot be concluded that GE corn MON863 is a safe product.” 49 Even
GE livestock feed may have some impact on consumers of animal products. Italian researchers found bi-
otech genes in the milk from dairy cows fed a GE diet, suggesting the ability to survive pasteurization. 50
Another concern is the possible escape of GE salmon into the wild, and it turns out that not all the fish
are sterile when you read the small print in AquaBounty's materials. Even a small number of GE fish on
the lam could cause extinction of wild populations in as little as forty generations. 51 Because of their com-
petitive advantage as big, voracious fish, GE salmon could out-compete other wild fish for food and habit-
at. An additional concern about escaping GE salmon is the disease they could spread to wild populations.
Farmed salmon, which are raised in stressful, densely crowded environments, have already been linked to
the spread of disease in wild populations.
AquaBounty's promises to prevent escapes seem especially weak given the widespread problem of reg-
ular farmed salmon escapes from existing farms. In March 2010 nearly one hundred thousand farmed At-
lantic salmon escaped into the wild through one hole in a net at a UK fish farm. 52 Globally, the numbers of
escapees are much higher, with an estimated 2 million farmed salmon escaping into North Atlantic waters
every year, 53 while millions of others escape into the Pacific. 54 One biotech corporation doing experiment-
al GE breeding in New Zealand is even suspected of accidentally releasing genetically modified salmon
eggs into the wild, 55 demonstrating the logistical difficulties of preventing escapes, even in tightly con-
trolled experimental settings.
The FDA's sloppy analysis was further exposed in the fall of 2010 when Food & Water Watch received
numerous recent internal documents and e-mails from the U.S. Department of Interior's Fish and Wild-
life Service (FWS) from a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request exposing startling concerns with
AquaBounty.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search