There goes my salmon forever.

We're all very proud of you.

I'm not saying everyone should run right out and consume everything that comes out on the market, but there's a lot of ignorant superstition out there about genetic engineering, and people will make decisions based on superstition instead of knowledge. You've just made (or said you made) a lifetime decision based on a few online paragraphs.

We're entering an age where this is going to become a lot more commonplace. You're going to have to get used to it. Or not. You can always keep giving things up.

I agree with Sherry1959. It is ridiculous that the we are even discussing this. It should be clearly marked as genetically engineered and let the consumers make the choice. If I want to eat GM salmon because I think it is ok for me and my family then it is my choice. I have a right to know. The same companies who insist that Government should not be dictating anything to the companies and consumers but instead should let consumers decide and free markets work, are now trying to hide facts from the consumer. Why?

Why should he have to give things up??!?!

It should be labelled as to what it is, so the consumer can make an informed decision concerning what they want ot put in their body. Anything else is an attempt to muddy the water and cloud the truth.

Definitely should be labeled.

This is about INFORMED CONSENT. This is about the American public having a choice about what we put in our bodies and NOT BEING FOOLED BY POWERFUL CORPORATE INTERESTS WITH THE COMPLICITY OF THE FDA.

First, the government should NOT APPROVE FRANKENFOOD. BUT IN WHAT UNIVERSE WOULD IT BE ACCEPTABLE TO APPROVE IT AND THEN TO HIDE THE TRUTH OF THE PRODUCT FROM THE CONSUMING PUBLIC?!?!!!! We, THE PEOPLE, have a right to say we want to eat Frankenfood OR NOT. LABELING IS REQUIRED FOR INFORMED CONSENT. If the employees of the FDA cannot do their job, then someone else should.

Sherry: you should just give up farmed salmon. They feed farmed salmon chicken meal... which is (of course) not a natural diet for salmon and therefore the meat does not turn the pink color that they naturally have. They dye it pink before they sell it to you. It definitely affects the taste and I would be shocked if it didn't affect the vitamin content as well. Apparently, we learned nothing from Mad Cow disease.

You might also try:

1) Reading the article before commenting on it.

2) Visiting the company's web site - http://www.aquabounty.com/ and the web sites of other companies that are ALREADY selling genetically modified shrimp, salmon, trout, and talapia.

3) And they use Google Scholar (not regular Google) to look up the research behind it.

All this is quite transparent, has been going on since the 1980's and this company is just more successful at it that others in the past.

GMO's have proven to be bad for humans, animals and the environment.

You can argue with me all you want, but when YOU do the research on what is going on, what happens to the animals given GMO food YOU will have 2nd thoughts on why this crap is in the market.

There are several countries that ban GMO's. Well over 20 but the USA is driven by money and greed. The biotech companies own the USDA and FDA outright so our health comes in a distant second place.

Funny, the FDA had over 44,000 documents stating there is something wrong with GMO foods but they were ignored and buried.

I for one will NOT knowingly eat anything GMO and neither will my family. It's our choice, and you will have your own opinion.

When the country of Haiti burns several tons of GMO seeds donated by Monsanto, you know there is something wrong with it.

Read: Genetic Roulette and Seeds of Deception by Jeffrey Smith

Food Inc and The World According to Monsanto for DVD's.

Those of you who think these foods are safe to eat, you can have my portion.

This is a disgrace. If they want to make this crap the least they can do is label it but if they did that they wouldn't sell as much. It's about money and we are expendable.

The FDA is a freaking joke.

It's not just the FDA. Seafood marketers are just as guilty of trying to pull the wool over on seafood consumers.

Hard to imagine... For years there has been quite a lucrative business peddling stingray meat as scallops. Why? Because the price of scallops is much higher than stingray. Many consumers are unaware of this method of marketing. All they do is remove plugs of stingray flesh, shape it like a scallop, package it and - Walla! Here's some fresh scallops for tonights festive feast! Ha! - Sure, they are shysters too. But they're shysters who are skipping off to the bank also. Lobbyists for the seafood industry probably wear a suit and tie though.

The genetically modified salmon should definitely be labeled. It is up to consumers to make an informed choice as to whether or not they want to eat this modified salmon. If they really have the science to show that this is safe to eat, they should not be afraid of letting the public know when they are buying the product.

ThunderProof - It is skate not stingray that you are talking about (same family, but a different fish), and it has to be disclosed that it is skate on the packaging. Restaurants used to pawn of skate for scallops years ago but they were stopped from doing this. You can definitely tell the difference between the two i the texture. They taste pretty much the same but real scallops are more tender and, as I said, they have a clearly different texture.

JS in SD - Thank you for the clarification on that matter. The practice may have been slowed down considerably, however it has not been stopped. To this day, Costco stores still check to verify.

Either label it or I suggest a nation wide boycott of Salmon

Witchking -

On the surface, that's a grand idea. Unfortunately the first ones to suffer would be the real fishermen, and women (along with their families) who depend on earning an honest living harvesting wild Atlantic salmon. In time, this is most likely going to spill on over to include the wild Pacific salmon also.

My understanding is that there is no "Wild Atlantic Salmon". Atlantic salmon is synonymous with farm-raised salmon. Wild salmon is from the Pacific.

ThunderProof

Witchking -

On the surface, that's a grand idea. Unfortunately the first ones to suffer would be the real fishermen, and women (along with their families) who depend on earning an honest living harvesting wild Atlantic salmon. In time, this is most likely going to spill on over to include the wild Pacific salmon also

Thunderproof - You just stumbled onto the main reason why the "real fishermen..." should be fighting this whole-heartedly. You are correct when you say they would be the first to suffer. However, the blame for their suffering would lie solely with the FDA, not the general public that refuses to eat genetically modified foodstuffs. The public has a right to know exactly what they are eating, not just a general idea of what they are eating. As a precaution, the fishermen need to begin prominently labeling their product as natural, wild-caught salmon immediately, just in case the FDA refuses to do the right thing. That will be the easy way to differentiate and the GE salmon producers will be violating the law if they try to use the same labeling. Otherwise, I will never eat another piece of salmon that I did not catch myself. Judging from many of the other comments on this board, I will not be alone in taking that stance.

At least, never eat FARMED salmon again, since (supposedly) this fish will not be introduced to the wild. SUPPOSEDLY it can't reproduce. That's still a lot to risk, in my opinion.

Or it means the FDA are in the pockets of giant agribusiness. It's only in America where GMO food is not labeled. Can you say "Payoff?"

Just watch... In a short while these genetically engineered salmon will be released or inexplicably escape into the wild, crossbreed and then it will all eventually become a mutated form of 'Frankenfish'. This is also going to happen to the wild Pacific salmon also. It is not nice to fool with Mother Nature, folks. Mother Nature has a set of her own rules and they are not negotiable. Mother Nature will simply adapt, modify and improvise a method wherein the natural balance of life will prevail. Goodbye mankind! We never were suited to play the role of God. Checkmate.

According to federal guidelines, the fish would not be labeled as genetically modified IF the agency decides it has the same material makeup as conventional salmon.

The above quote alone should tell readers that this is going to be reduced to a word game. OBVIOUSLY these genetically engineered fish DO NOT have the same material makeup! Their genes have been altered! Hence the term - "Genetically Engineered" (GE). Something has been modified in their gene structure so they cannot possibly be of the same makeup! This is nothing more than a piss-poor attempt to justify and cover-up what the FDA has already decided to do from the get-go. Surely one must wonder just how much pocket lining Aqua Bounty paid out to get this passed. The FDA has been for sale for quite a spell now. The pharmaceutical and seafood industries must be their best clients!

Barely a day had past when the Deepwater Horizon oil drill site was 'capped' and the FDA was all ready-freddy busy hypnotizing the lamestream media that the gulf area seafood was perfectly safe to eat. Would be willing to bet not a bit of it has since been served up and eaten in Washington though!

Zen Gaian,

I am 66. For all of my lifetime ALL corn has been genetically modified except for some "heirloom" varieties. Even popcorn is highly genetically modified. This is because virtually all corn varieties for over 80 years has been hybrids. The big company isn't Monsanto, it is DeKalb. And of soybeans grown commercially, for the past 20 years or so approaching 100% is genetically modified.

The problem that you cite at the very end is the only valid one you make. As you increase crop or meat yields, there is a slight increase in nutrition per acre that quickly levels off. After that, you may get much higher crop yields but the nutritional value per acre tends to remain the same. I know this is true for beef as well. You could easily breed giant cattle, but the nutritional value of the meat per pound would actually fall. I have never seen any data for fish, but I would assume, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, that there is a possibility that the nutritional value of the salmon would be slightly lower per pound.

Geneticists pretty much understand why this happens and increasing crop and meat yields without having nutritional value drop is the "holy grail" of genetics. Until then, they will continue to fool around with insect resistance, roundup resistance, disease resistance and other crop and meat production issues that increase yields without dropping nutrition.

Unless science continues to try to increase crop nutritional yields and meat output, the eventual result will be the starvation of billions of people. This is especially true of aquaculture because fish are the primary source of protein for over half the world and the seas are being dramatically and unsustainably over-fished.

Much of the attempts to create crops that are naturally disease and pest resistant are also attempts to stop a lot of the chemicals that go into out environment via agriculture. Even so-called "organic" food has pretty much the same pesticides, insecticides, and fungicides that "non-organic" because the big agri-corps wrote the rules.

Chris, I must contest. You make a lot of statements, but you do not cite your references.

Corn has not been genetically modified in labs for 80 years. I ask you to cite where that is stated, scientifically. There have been corn hybrids, by cross-pollination, but not patented gene splicing.

Monsanto co-owns a patent with the USDA which is commonly referred to as the 'terminator switch'. It causes the seeds of GMO plants to be sterile. That is done so that the farmers must buy new seed every year from companies like Monsanto, with whom they contract. What if these 'terminator seeds' cross-pollinate with regular plants, which then stops producing viable seed? Without viable seed in nature, the only place we could then get the seed is from the "manufacturer".

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Transnational_corps/TerminatorSeeds_Monsanto.html

And here's a PDF of the contract: http://www.deltaandpine.com/dp-content/files/Overtreating_Agreement_2009.pdf

Furthermore, if an organic or otherwise non-GMO farmer is found to have GMO crops growing in his field, he is almost always sued by the GMO company - even if the GMO crops have blown in from GMO fields and contaminate the farmers fields. In these cases, the farmer loses his crop and is forced to pay a huge fine. Watch 'David VS Monsanto'.

If, down the road, something is found that is terribly wrong with GMO foods (one or all), it's too late. Once it's out there, you can't get it back.

Monsanto is disgusting. The organic and non-GMO farmers should file a class action lawsuit against Monsanto for polluting their crops with Monsanto's disgusting GMO-seeds and unscrupulous business practices.

Layerpeeler -

Your argument is nonsensical. Are you trying to say I work for some company that taints food and that's why I'm against GMOs? That's beyond absurd.

I'm against GMOs because they are NOT natural. Natural means it is nature made, not forced to combine in a laboratory petrie dish. Furthermore, GMOs are not labeled - none of them. Why, if they are so safe???

Methinks it is you, Layerpeeler, that is on someone's payroll.

@Chris: There is a BIG difference between cross pollinating varieties of corn to make hybrids and inserting pig genes or herbicide "factories" into crops. The former occurs in nature on a daily basis. The latter takes place only in test tubes, and it's playing with fire.

Good for consumers, bad for business.

Okay. I see the statement. Where is the proof of how THESE fish were made?

Scientists add pig genes to plants, and create built-in herbicide factories that may permanently affect your intestinal flora. I'm convinced this can and will hurt you, as studies are beginning to come in from Europe about the adverse health effects of GMO corn. Don't be a lemming. Avoid GMO foods like the plague. They may very well BE the plague.

While you make a reasonable argument, you did not identify the exact process used to create these fish. So really, you, like the rest of us, are just guessing. Let the company come forward and explain exactly how they did it, and then make them label their product. With full disclosure, we can better decide if we want to eat this or not.

It takes an organism MILLIONS of years to adapt to a niche in the environment. These 'engineers' created a monstrosity in a few years, and have no idea what will happen when these fish escape into the wild; just like Monsanto's corn pollen. Monsanto has nearly wiped out natural corn and soybeans in this country and created a monopoly. This is not fair, but that is corporate business in the U.S. NOTHING must impede the ability make a buck. Not ethics or fair play.

Why would they resist labeling it? What are they hiding? Why the dishonesty? Or do they simply want to protect their future profits at ANY cost, even the freedom of choice of consumers? Not only do they create a suspect product, they want to monopolize production. Dishonest no matter how you look at it.

Then you eat it and feed it to your family. I would choose not to.

Clevella,

The source of the genes was specified in the article, did you not read it? The exact process is well-known and used a lot. It is so well-known that you can go to Edmund Scientific Products and buy the kits to teach 9th grade biology students to transfer a gene for photo-luminescence from one plant to another. The kits for 30 students are less than $100. (The teaching materials are extra.) It really is a lot better to read the articles before commenting on them. You can go to the company's web site and they have more explanation than you can handle. Not much guessing required.

Monsanto has not "wiped out" natural corn and soybeans. I was brought up on a farm and I guarantee that "natural" corn had disappeared from commercial (versus subsistence) fields before WWII. Soybeans came along later, but only because their profitability was not established until the 1970's. When you drive through Iowa --- you see signs in every cornfield telling what hybrid is planted there (most are DeKalb, not Monsanto.)

I eat scallops that are actually made from rays at least monthly. No one has to mark them because no one can tell the taste, texture, or appearance apart. Long ago the courts ruled that if they are indistinguishable, they do not have to be labeled. (Real scallops usually have a little sand in their siphon and these days are much smaller.)

The bottom line, Chris, is that if we are paying for it we have a right to know if it has been modified. What you choose to eat is your business.... and if it doesn't bother you thats fine.... But you, the government, and big business do NOT have the right to take the choice away from the rest of us. You coming on here calling people ignorant and uneducated does not help your cause...you merely come across as arrogant and condescending.... much like the FDA. The FDA consistently approves drugs that are proven killers.... why should we trust them on this? Many of us have little or no faith left in their ability to protect us.

It is OUR choice. We aren't saying keep it off the market...well at least until their modified fish get loose and start decimating the wild population....but we are demanding that the label be added.

Chris, you are mixing up the delibrate result of "breeding" a process that normally takes a few generations, (at the very least 2) to get the desired result, with picking and chosing of separate genes in a petri dish to produce something that may or maynot be viable.

They (the FDA and their pals) have been telling us for years, that the hormones given to milk cows don't harm humans, and yet, we have a rash of little girls developing breasts at ages that have never been seen before, and the answer so far is to give these little girls more hormones to turn puperty off. That took a couple of human generations to show up. All people are asking for is a choice, and the FDA and others want to take it away from us.

We have a RIGHT to make that choice, unless you just want to throw the towel in and give up on the US of A right now. Let the corporations, and the government they own take over and watch the country fall.

This isn't about what this fish is, it's what this fish represents. I say it should be labled, or not allowed to be sold.

DDT was safe. It's just not safe when you put too much on your hamburger. Look at how many people have died from malaria since it was discontinued. But the planet's too crowded anyway, so who cares?

Don't eat prepared foods, shop and buy only organics, (including beef, pork and chicken) support your local CSAs. Learn to cook your own cookies, cakes, breads etc and you will naturally avoid all that junk that has been put into our foods. You will also automatically begin to lose weight, and be healthier.