The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!
GE Salmon Headed to Your Dinner Plate
Today, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released its final environmental assessment on the so-called “frankenfish,” a salmon that has been genetically engineered by Massachusetts-based AquaBounty Technologies Inc. (ABTX:LSE). This would be the first-ever genetically engineered animal intended for human consumption to enter the marketplace despite widespread public outcry and a faulty assessment based on incomplete company data.
“It’s clear that the public doesn’t want to eat genetically engineered fish, and the FDA’s assessment is fatally flawed and fails to take into account the very real risk that these fish pose to the environment, public health and fishing communities on both coasts,” said Eric Hoffman, food and technology policy campaigner for Friends of the Earth.
“The decision to move towards final approval of the first-ever genetically engineered animal for human consumption without a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement under federal law is irresponsible and inexcusable,” continued Hoffman. “This approval is a holiday gift to AquaBounty and its shareholders, who have been lobbying for over twelve years for this decision and will open the floodgates for other genetically engineered animals, including pigs and cows, to enter the food supply.”
The assessment, which relies heavily on data provided by AquaBounty, ignores the fact that up to five percent of the fish may be fertile at a commercial scale. This opens the possibility that fertile, genetically engineered fish could escape into local waterways and wreak havoc on the ecosystem and already threatened wild salmon populations. The FDA also ignores risks posed to the public, since genetically engineered salmon have higher levels of IGF-1, a growth hormone that, according to the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health, may increase the risk of several types of cancer. Additionally, some tests on allergenicity had a shockingly small sample size of six to twelve fish.
Despite receiving nearly 400,000 public comments, letters signed by more than 300 environmental, public interest, fishing, and animal welfare organizations and restaurants, a letter signed by forty members of Congress, and letters from state legislatures demanding that the FDA deny approval of this fish, the Obama administration has taken the final step towards approval of this genetically engineered salmon. Numerous polls show that the vast majority of Americans feel the FDA should not allow genetically engineered fish and meat into the marketplace and support labeling of genetically engineered food. A 30-day comment period on this assessment will be opened in the Federal Register before the fish is officially approved for human consumption.
“Today the Obama administration stated loud and clear that it is more interested in protecting the profits of the biotechnology industry than public health, wild fisheries or our environment. We call on President Obama and FDA Commissioner Hamburg to complete their due diligence and conduct proper environmental and public health studies before making a final decision about the fate of this genetically engineered salmon,” continued Hoffman. “Once independent and comprehensive reviews have occurred, we are confident the FDA will reject this application since the genetically engineered salmon pose serious threats to the environment and the public.”
Visit EcoWatch’s GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM page for more related news on this topic.
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
georgeclerk / E+ / Getty Images
By Jennifer Molidor
One million species are at risk of extinction from human activity, warns a recent study by scientists with the United Nations. We need to cut greenhouse gas pollution across all sectors to avoid catastrophic climate change — and we need to do it fast, said the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
This research should serve as a rallying cry for polluting industries to make major changes now. Yet the agriculture industry continues to lag behind.
"The Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources Conservation and Tourism wishes to inform the public that following extensive consultations with all stakeholders, the Government of Botswana has taken a decision to lift the hunting suspension," the government announced in a press release shared on social media.
Company Safety Data Sheets on New Chemicals Frequently Lack the Worker Protections EPA Claims They Include
By Richard Denison
Readers of this blog know how concerned EDF is over the Trump EPA's approval of many dozens of new chemicals based on its mere "expectation" that workers across supply chains will always employ personal protective equipment (PPE) just because it is recommended in the manufacturer's non-binding safety data sheet (SDS).
By Grant Smith
From 2009 to 2012, Gregory Jaczko was chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which approves nuclear power plant designs and sets safety standards for plants. But he now says that nuclear power is too dangerous and expensive — and not part of the answer to the climate crisis.
By Brett Walton
When Greg Wetherbee sat in front of the microscope recently, he was looking for fragments of metals or coal, particles that might indicate the source of airborne nitrogen pollution in Rocky Mountain National Park. What caught his eye, though, were the plastics.
In a big victory for animals, Prada has announced that it's ending its use of fur! It joins Coach, Jean Paul Gaultier, Giorgio Armani, Versace, Ralph Lauren, Vivienne Westwood, Michael Kors, Donna Karan and many others PETA has pushed toward a ban.
This is a victory more than a decade in the making. PETA and our international affiliates have crashed Prada's catwalks with anti-fur signs, held eye-catching demonstrations all around the world, and sent the company loads of information about the fur industry. In 2018, actor and animal rights advocate Pamela Anderson sent a letter on PETA's behalf urging Miuccia Prada to commit to leaving fur out of all future collections, and the iconic designer has finally listened.
If people in three European countries want to fight the climate crisis, they need to chill out more.
"The rapid pace of labour-saving technology brings into focus the possibility of a shorter working week for all, if deployed properly," Autonomy Director Will Stronge said, The Guardian reported. "However, while automation shows that less work is technically possible, the urgent pressures on the environment and on our available carbon budget show that reducing the working week is in fact necessary."
The report found that if the economies of Germany, Sweden and the UK maintain their current levels of carbon intensity and productivity, they would need to switch to a six, 12 and nine hour work week respectively if they wanted keep the rise in global temperatures to the below two degrees Celsius promised by the Paris agreement, The Independent reported.
The study based its conclusions on data from the UN and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) on greenhouse gas emissions per industry in all three countries.
The report comes as the group Momentum called on the UK's Labour Party to endorse a four-day work week.
"We welcome this attempt by Autonomy to grapple with the very real changes society will need to make in order to live within the limits of the planet," Emma Williams of the Four Day Week campaign said in a statement reported by The Independent. "In addition to improved well-being, enhanced gender equality and increased productivity, addressing climate change is another compelling reason we should all be working less."
Supporters of the idea linked it to calls in the U.S. and Europe for a Green New Deal that would decarbonize the economy while promoting equality and well-being.
"This new paper from Autonomy is a thought experiment that should give policymakers, activists and campaigners more ballast to make the case that a Green New Deal is absolutely necessary," Common Wealth think tank Director Mat Lawrence told The Independent. "The link between working time and GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions has been proved by a number of studies. Using OECD data and relating it to our carbon budget, Autonomy have taken the step to show what that link means in terms of our working weeks."
Stronge also linked his report to calls for a Green New Deal.
"Becoming a green, sustainable society will require a number of strategies – a shorter working week being just one of them," he said, according to The Guardian. "This paper and the other nascent research in the field should give us plenty of food for thought when we consider how urgent a Green New Deal is and what it should look like."
- Reduced Work Hours as a Means of Slowing Climate Change ›
- How working less could solve all our problems. Really. | ›
- Needed: A shorter work week – People's World ›