tagged w/ Fish Farms
-
"Since foreign fish farms are not held to US regulatory standards, those antibiotics might include those that US fish farmers aren't allowed to use, like nitrofuranzone, enroflaxin, and chloramphenicol. The findings are a little worrying, as 90% of the shrimp Americans eat comes from such operations, and only 2% of imported shrimp is inspected by the FDA.""Since foreign fish farms are not held to US regulatory standards, those... more
-
-
Cabal
-
added this
-
7 hours ago
- |
-
-
-
-
The alarming condition of sea life and the seafood supply present even before the 2010 oil spill in Louisiana; also what's in your new car smell can hurt you. Nancy Mroczek PhD - www.nancymroczek.comThe alarming condition of sea life and the seafood supply present even before the 2010... more
-
-
One of the arguments against expanding the FDA's powers over food safety is that the agency has repeatedly shown an unwillingness to enforce existing laws and to regulate aggressively in the face of corporate lobbying.
Unfortunately, we now have more evidence that the FDA may indeed be a bad-faith regulator.
The Center for Food Safety has unearthed convincing evidence that the FDA is attempting to freeze out marine and fisheries experts from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in its rush to approve biotech company AquaBounty's genetically modified salmon for human consumption.
According to documents obtained by the consumer group via a Freedom of Information Act request, the FDA has held only "preliminary" discussions with these agencies regarding AquaBounty's product and has not allowed government scientists to review some of the company's "confidential" data. According to an email sent between staffers at Fish and Wildlife and NOAA, they've been kept out of the loop for some time:
Shortly after the Atlantic salmon was listed as endangered, several of us from USFWS and NMFS spent 2 days down in Maryland meeting with AquaBounty and FDA about development of genetically modified salmon and discussion around the need for FDA to engage in Section 7 consultation with the Services. We never heard a peep out of FDA or AquaBounty after that.
It's ironic that the FDA, an agency so bureaucratically unprepared to regulate GE foods that it considers AquaBounty's salmon the same way it would a "veterinary drug" has decided that this process has no place for scientists who actually understand fish biology and marine ecosystems.
Specifically, the Center for Food Safety accuses the FDA of having "knowingly withheld a Federal Biological Opinion by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) prohibiting the use of transgenic salmon in open-water net pens pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act."
cont.One of the arguments against expanding the FDA's powers over food safety is that... more
-
-
TAKE ACTION ON GM SALMON:
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september062010/ge-salmon-as.php
NOTE: Excellent video interview on GM salmon:
http://t.co/Cr1ZXiE
Jeffrey Smith on genetically engineered salmon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCNGRdAq5X8
______________
Chefs weigh in on genetically modified salmon
http://www.foodanddrinkdigital.com/news/andy-arndt/chefs-weigh-genetically-modified-salmon
*Restaurateurs have reservations over serving the modified fish
Producers of genetically modified salmon might have difficulty finding acceptance in restaurants even if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration deems the fish fit for human consumption.
The FDA said a 60-day consultation period will begin Sept. 19 and include a series of public meetings as the agency decides whether to allow the fish to be sold as food. If it wins approval, the fish should be available by 2012.
The salmon was developed by AquaBounty Technologies Inc. of Waltham, Mass., and involved adding genetic material from King salmon to Atlantic salmon, allowing the fish to reach maturity in half the time it takes for typical farm-raised Atlantic salmon. Most farm-raised salmon is Atlantic salmon.
Company material states that the fish is designed to be raised in contained, land-based facilities and that the fish are all sterile females, meaning that even if they escaped from their facilities they would not be able to cross-breed.
However, many restaurant chefs said they would not serve the fish.
Some expressed moral doubts about private companies patenting organisms, some expressed concerns about possible health effects of genetically modified food, and others expressed concern for the environment.
“There is no way I would be interested in serving [genetically modified] salmon,” said Chris Carriker, executive chef of The Gilt Club Restaurant in Portland, Ore. “The eventual damage to the environment would be catastrophic. Scientists say they have sterilized the GMO fish, but eventually one will adapt and destroy the natural process.”
Michael Maddox, chef of Le Titi de Paris in Arlington Heights, Ill., said his customers would not likely approve.
“It sounds kind of weird,” he said of the fish. “We have people ask all the time where the food is from. I think customers want to know where the cheese or the pork or the mushrooms are coming from … I think with the big green movement over the past couple of years, they'd be against [genetically modified salmon].”
In a poll conducted on Wednesday and Thursday on the NRN blog Food Writer's Diary, 26 out of 32 respondents, or 81 percent, said they would not eat the genetically modified salmon or serve it in their restaurant. Only two respondents said they would try the fish, and four said they might.
"It goes against my principles,” said Andy Arndt, executive chef of Aquariva Restaurant in Portland, Ore. He argued that the practice of genetically engineering fish wouldn't be necessary if fisheries were better regulated.
"I'm not interested in seeing 'genetically altered' anything in my restaurant,” said Antonio Bettencourt, chef-owner of 62 Restaurant & Wine Bar in Salem, Mass. "Local, fresh, honest, farm-to-table as much as possible is our mantra. I think people will pay the extra few cents to make sure they know where the food comes from. Maybe larger chain restaurants will have other thoughts, but that is my feeling."
"I don't think that I would serve any genetically modified salmon at Eve," said Troy Graves, chef at the Chicago restaurant. "I do believe that we need a sustainable way to farm-raise fish because the oceans cannot keep up with human consumption. [But] as soon as the government allows a corporation to patent a method of raising fish, there is a certain stranglehold on the fish supply in the future.”
Jonadab Silva, executive chef and co-owner of Jacky’s on Prairie in Evanston, Ill., argued that genetically modifying salmon was unnecessary.
"My opinion is we are looking at the whole issue in the wrong manner," he said. “Instead of making salmon grow faster, why don't we educate consumers to eat other varieties of fish, rather than just salmon, which is on every menu?"TAKE ACTION ON GM SALMON:... more
-
-
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced on August 25, 2010 that it will potentially approve the long-shelved AquAdvantage transgenic salmon as the first genetically engineered (GE) animal intended for human consumption. The GE Atlantic salmon being considered was developed by AquaBounty Technologies, and genetically engineered to produce growth hormones year-round, creating a fish the company claims grows at twice the normal rate. This could allow factory fish farms to crowd the salmon into pens and still get high production rates.
We have only a short window to tell FDA to reject these GE fish - Can you send a comment today?
Each year millions of farmed salmon escape from open-water net pens, outcompeting wild populations for resources and straining ecosystems. Any approval of GE salmon would represent another serious threat to the survival of native salmon populations, many of which have already suffered severe declines related to salmon farms and other man-made impacts. Research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences notes that a release of just sixty GE salmon into a wild population of 60,000 could lead to the extinction of the wild population in less than 40 fish generations. Wild Atlantic salmon are already on the Endangered Species List in the U.S.; approving these GE Atlantic salmon will be the final blow to these wild stocks.
The human health impacts of eating GE fish are entirely unknown, but some scientific research raises cause for alarm: for example, some scientists have asserted that foreign growth hormones in transgenetic fish may increase production of other compounds such as insulin in the fish. Additionally, FDA has recognized that a transgene cannot be “turned off” once it is inserted in the organism, and will therefore have effects that are uncontrollable.
These GE farmed salmon will also carry with them all of the health hazards of other farmed salmon, but transgenic fish may be more susceptible to disease than fish currently grown in aquaculture facilities because transgenic fish are identified as “macro-mutants” with a reduced ability to survive. Consequently, the amount of antibiotics given to transgenic fish may be higher than the amount currently given to farmed fish; already farmed salmon are given more antibiotics than any other livestock by weight, threatening the health of those who eat them and the continued efficacy of these antibiotics to treat human disease.
The company first applied for approval of the fish in 2001, but the Bush Administration delayed its approval until it was out of office. Ironically, the Obama Administration, who came to office promising a more environmentally sound and transparent process, is using the Bush Administration-developed framework for the approval of genetically engineered animals. This process uses the fiction that the genetically engineered salmon is, in effect, an animal “drug.” The failure of the FDA to develop a transparent process for the approval of GE animals and instead use the secretive process of the New Animal Drug regulations means that consumers will be deprived of basic information as to the safety of these animals.
Tell the Food and Drug Administration not to approve GE salmon AND, if the Obama Administration insists on approving these genetically engineered fish, it should require the fish to be labeled when marketed to fish farmers, fish retailers and food companies, restaurants, and when marketed to consumers.
Please take action today! The hearing for approving the salmon is scheduled for Sunday, September 19, and no public comment period has been established for the approval of genetically engineered fish outside of this meeting, so this may be our only chance to oppose this dangerous approval! Only a public comment period on labeling of the GE fish has been opened.The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced on August 25, 2010 that it will... more
-
-
PART ONE...
The Beings We Eat
Worldwide, more than 80 billion land animals, of many kinds, are raised and killed each year as food for one particular group called Homo sapiens. Similar numbers of animals are taken from the water, so humans eat around 160 billion animals each year. In comparison, just about 100 billion humans have walked this planet in our known history.
We present these facts not to make ourselves or our readers feel overwhelmed. No one wants to feel bad. We can, however, feel responsible. Think of it as the power to change things, beginning today. Because we can, by becoming vegan.
Here is an overview of the realities of animal farming. Goats, sheep, and other animals not covered here are also respected by vegan values. These beings are just a few of the many conscious beings humans have dominated and now use daily. This domination and use is not inevitable, so you need not accept the objection that vegans are idealists and the world won’t go vegan overnight. The world of one person changes with each individual who does opt out of animal use, and that’s just what a movement means.
__________
The Chickens and the Eggs
Of the 80 billion land animals killed each year, well over half are chickens. In the United States, nine billion out of the ten billion land animals killed each year are chickens raised for their flesh, their ability to reproduce, and their eggs.
The chickens bred and confined to lay eggs are commonly referred to as battery hens. Most are kept in small, wire cages; a small number are kept in crowded sheds, and a tiny fraction of the overall number have some access to the outdoors. Nearly all of them have much of their beaks seared off (to prevent pecking), and are quickly exhausted from the egg-laying, and at that point slaughtered for their flesh. Osteoporosis and frequent bone breaks are the norm for their bodies, purpose-bred to lay egg after egg.
Male chicks are not wanted in this business. They may be suffocated or ground alive to be used as fertilizer or feed. Egg production is a deadly business for birds.
Some feminists -- including Priscilla Feral, Lee Hall, and Richard Twine -- have pointed out the commodification of the female reproductive system in the egg industry, as well as in the dairy industry, is, and should be treated as, an issue of exploitation every bit as oppressive as the production of flesh.
__________
Cage-Free Eggs?
The idea behind eggs marketed as “cage-free” is to switch from keeping hens in a wire cage to keeping them in a shed or on the stacked floors (known as tiers) more common in Europe. Then the customer feels that the conditions were improved. Some proprietors keep birds in both sheds and cages to take advantage of both markets.
The conditions found in cage-free operations are virtually identical to the conditions endured by chickens raised for their flesh. These “broiler” chickens spend their days in one big cage, often with many thousands of other birds, the air heavy with dust and ammonia from their waste.
So “cage-free” is no bargain for the chickens, and removing these purpose-bred animals from cages can actually increase bone breaks, stress, and competition for food. Friends of Animals president Priscilla Feral visited a company considered a pioneer in this market, and asked the tour facilitator to please pick up some of the dead birds whose bodies the crowded birds had to walk around and over, and the facilitator did so, without any sign of surprise at the dead birds. Priscilla noted that these birds too had much of their beaks taken off. The males were mostly missing. Priscilla remembers this as an appalling scene. “And they all get slaughtered at the end.”
“We have no need for eggs,” continues Priscilla. “So the vegan thing to do is to advocate peaceful and respectful alternatives. I urge everyone who is thinking about vegan living to learn how to cook and bake wonderful foods, including egg-free desserts, from Dining With Friends: The Art of North American Vegan Cuisine.”
CONTINUED...PART ONE...
The Beings We Eat
Worldwide, more than 80 billion land animals, of... more
-
-
Millions of sockeye salmon have disappeared mysteriously from a river on Canada's Pacific Coast that was once known as the world's most fertile spawning ground for sockeye.
Up to 10.6 million bright-red sockeye salmon were expected to return to spawn this summer on the Fraser River, which empties into the Pacific ocean near Vancouver, British Columbia. The latest estimates say fewer than 1 million have returned.
The Canadian government has closed the river to commercial and recreational sockeye fishing for the third straight year, hitting the livelihood of nearby Indian reserves.
"It's quite the shocking drop," said Stan Proboszcz, fisheries biologist at the Watershed Watch Salmon Society. "No one's exactly sure what happened to these fish."
Salmon are born in fresh water before migrating to oceans to feed. They return as adults to the same rivers to spawn.
Several theories have been put forward to try to explain the sockeye's disappearance:
continued at the linkMillions of sockeye salmon have disappeared mysteriously from a river on Canada's... more
-
