79 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
superdem1 says:
Those of you saying we've been doing this all along are incorrect - we have NOT been taking genes from one species and inserting them into different species to thwart natural processes, read this article again and see if you are comfortable with that. Gene manipulation by industry has given us tomatoes that never really ripen, have no juice and no flavor, with the consistency of hard wax, just so they can be shipped and displayed on shelves without damage or rot. This is NOT an advancement, you cannot find a decent tomato anywhere, nor can you raise one in your garden as the changes are born in the seeds. I long for the day when tomatoes were juicy and only good for a week. Science is a wonderful thing, but nature has rules which we violate at our own risk.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
fedup12 says:
It looks delicious...

I love Salmon done on the grill! This would not scare me.

Were going to need to do a lot of this in order to feed the changing (bursting at the seams) world.

We still don't know what global climate change will do to farming in this country. And before all of you get all head up over what I said here the debate is not over whether climate change is happening it is over what is causing it. SHeesh.
reply
displeased replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Were going to need to do a lot of this in order to feed the changing (bursting at the seams) world.
by fedup12 September 20, 2010 2:15 PM EDT


If busting at the seams is a problem, then maybe we should stop having so many babies. Or at least stop rewarding people to have babies.
fedup12 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
f busting at the seams is a problem, then maybe we should stop having so many babies. Or at least stop rewarding people to have babies.
-----------------

You would think that wouldn't you. But it aint gonna happen. We are like a virus killing the host. Using up the natural resources till we cant sustain it. Grow, immigrate, deplete and move on.

Dont let all the good Catholics hear me...
linkicon reporticon emailicon
IMP578 says:
Here we go playing with mother nature again. Considering that our population will double in 50 years that's a feeble attempt to find other food sources. What are they going to do about water? We are going to run out of water. Instead genetically modifying animals and crops, how about modifying people so they don't muliply like rabbits anymore. Population control is the solution and nothing else!!!
reply
subsailor911 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
China, the most populous country on the face of the earth, has been trying to control population for decades with no success. What would you suggest, genocide?

It is easy to point out problems. It is quite another thing to suggest a solution.
croft777 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
IMP578, stop worrying about the population growth, nature and humans takes care of that problem. You have natural disasters that kill many people each year and man seem to have no problem of killing their own. Look at past civilizations, the plagues, wars,etc. etc. We don't have a problem to fix, it will take care of itself. People need to stop trying to be God.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Myopinion046 says:
I'd eat it.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
subsailor911 says:
The Luddites will always reject new technology out-of-hand. They will also try to reject the biological law of Survival of the Fittest because they know they are the least fit. Nature will always take care of her own, no matter what man does.
reply
superdem1 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
This statement makes no sense on many levels. No one is rejecting technology out of hand, we are debating the pros and cons of taking genes from one species and putting them into another to thwart natural processes. This has nothing to do with survival of the fittest, and it is insulting to suggest people with entirely plausible concerns are somehow "Luddites" or anti-intellectual. We are using science to make rational arguments. Nature took care of its own by engineering this fish over millions of years to have natural growth cycles, and man has interfered with that. Nature has no defense against this, other than longterm ecological collapse, do we want that ? That is also Nature taking care of its own. Nature is not conscious, it has no favorites in the struggle to survive. Many magnificent creatures have and are going extinct. Anything that can spur the unnatural growth of fish could spur the unnatural growth of tumors or the fetus - no one can say right now, the industry doesn't know, and can't be trusted with all the money at stake, and most people on this site are only thinking of big, juicy salmon steaks. Once we were told Thalidomide was a good morning sickness drug. The result was the birth of thousands of children with deformed limbs. A scientific, rather than emotional, response is called for here. Independent testing is critical.
thesevenveils replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Hey the positive side of the fish hormones always at a high level in this salmon is fading movie stars won't need to get their lips lipo injected anymore.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
fittinguy says:
We have been genetically modifying our food...plants & animals, since we stopped being hunters & gathers. Whether it is in the field or in the laboratory, the simple act of "choosing" what we eat, modifies the supply chain. The debate is whether the lab modified products require special labeling. The labeling should not be a red-flag warning, but more of an informative nutritional factoid. I vote YES. I read the labels on most things I buy.
reply
subsailor911 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Well put.
thesevenveils replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Using breeding techniques vs adding genes to an organism is a big difference.

I'm am not opposed to genetically altered salmon as long as there is a study and proof that the high level of fish hormones in this new version of salmon will not negatively interact with my body's hormonal balance.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
thesevenveils says:
In essence people eating this fish will be taking doses of salmon growth hormone. And what is the long term effects of salmon growth hormone on humans?
reply
IMP578 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
We'll get even fatter and our daughters will reach puberty at 6 instead of 7 thanks to the growth hormones in beef, milk, etc.
dwiseriver replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
The question seems awfully fishy to me.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
dwiseriver says:
We have been modifying genetics for thousands of years, just not in a test tube. example, cattle, dogs, corn. I am not afraid to eat the fish and in fact I am looking forward to it.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
ffrecster says:
In little tiny print Walmart/Sam's Club labels some of its beef, most pork, chicken and turkey with the announcement that the product contains up to 20% "solution". This is a major ripoff. They make you think you are getting a price per pound deal when in reality they are making huge profits by adding water to your meat. I didn't think they could such a thing to beef but after tasting a STEAK HOUSE steak there I found it to be very salty. I went back to check the package and sure enough, they adding their "solution". Buyer beware.

The buyer should be able to make the choice as to whether something is modified via added "solution" or genetically. And the print needs to be at least half the size of the largest print on the package.

CBS, please do an expose on this meat packing process Walmart is employing to boost their profits and rip-off the consumer!
reply
dwiseriver replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
I thought everyone knew this.
ffoulkes-2009 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
This is why I usually go straight to a slaughterhouse for my beef.
rf35 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
This is why I usually cut my beef straight from a live steer.
rf35 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
This is why I usually cut my beef straight from a live steer.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
addict42 says:
This is something that should not be done until absolutely necessary when world food supplies have reached the critical level, which hasn't happened yet.
reply
ffoulkes-2009 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
So...by your thinking, we should wait until world food supplies are all but depleted before starting to think of solutions? Fairly shortsighted, isn't that?
3/5