GM fish could hit dinner plates soon
Salmon created by Singaporean scientist set to be approved by US food watchdog
A genetically modified salmon created by Singapore scientist Hew Choy Leong more than 20 years ago looks set to be the world's first GM animal to hit dinner plates.
The transgenic Atlantic salmon - inserted with genes from the Chinook salmon and ocean pout so it can grow twice as fast - is safe to eat and will not harm the environment, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has decided after lengthy evaluations.
A final hurdle remains: a public consultation process on the environmental assessment. But industry players say it is almost a foregone conclusion that the FDA will give the final nod after the deadline for voicing concerns is up at the end of this month.
Most countries take the lead from the powerful watchdog agency, so a "yes" by the FDA would open the doors to the world market, said Professor Hew.
And farms in the United States and China have already indicated interest in breeding the fish.
The approval will bring no great riches to the 70-year-old emeritus professor at the National University of Singapore's (NUS) Department of Biological Sciences, who created the fish while doing research in Canada.
The pending decision by the FDA comes some 17 years after the company behind the fish - AquaBounty Technologies in Boston - applied to produce the fish commercially.
Prof Hew left the company he formed in 1999 to focus on his duties at NUS, although he still has a small number of shares. There will also be no royalties from his patent as it runs out this year.
"If you're looking for fast returns, this was definitely not the venture to be in," he said. "But as a scientist, looking back I have no regrets. This technology can contribute to solving food shortages given the increasing world population."
He has eaten the fish himself many times, and said that detractors who call GM salmon a "Frankenfish" are missing the science.
"The science is solid and the FDA has made its decision based on science," he said.
The fish has been judged as having no biological differences from regular Atlantic salmon, and is just as safe to eat.
The US National Marine Fisheries and the Fish and Wildlife Service have come to the same conclusion as the FDA - that the fish do not present an environmental danger, he noted.
Anti-GM groups, however, are dead set against it.
British-based GM Freeze, for instance, said that the FDA decision was based on "wholly inadequate safety data" and that the environmental impact could be considerable.
To prevent GM fish from escaping and spawning in the wild, however, they are bred in inland facilities, and the fish produced are female and sterile.
Many scientists have also endorsed the fish - the AquAdvantage salmon - and say the technology behind it is a way of easing the world's food burden.
One group of researchers, developers and investors feel so strongly about the bureaucratic bottlenecks that they petitioned US President Barack Obama last year.
"Any further unexplained delay in moving forward with the regulatory process of this precedent-setting case diminishes existing and future investment and innovation across the entire range of agriculturally important animals," they said.
"Animal biotechnologies have the potential to help address the challenges of food security at a time when the US and the other countries of the world could greatly benefit from such innovation."
Is this source proven reliable?Did you do any cross referencing with oter sources?
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't GM food cause harm to the environment?
ReplyDeleteThis source is proven reliable as it can be cross-referred to another source found in the straits times article in 2010 on the same topic of gm fish by the same scientist, professor Hew Choy Leong.
ReplyDeleteThe source can be found here:
http://newshub.nus.edu.sg/news/1010/PDF/INVENTOR-st-3oct-p38.pdf
Even now, people are eating genetically modified food, its just a question of whether they are aware or unaware of it. We can see that there has been no serious harmful environmental impacts with gm foods.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the amount and extent of genetic modification is not yet at its highest. What if it reaches its peak and foods are modified beyond recognition? Wouldn't that cause the loss of the true identity of naturally grown food?
ReplyDeleteHey peepos, Rayna made that comment. (way too pro sounding to be me)
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question,I think that there are limitations and regulations to food modification that companies have to adhere to.If it is scientifically proven to be safe to be consumed or it does not pose as a serious health problem,then I see no reason why we are fretting over it.Although it is true that there might be a loss of the true identity of organice food,but the loss is not at a high stake here.It is more about finding a way to combat world hunger,which is a pressing issue to many world leaders.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the diffrences bettween organic food and Gm food?Aren't they the same?Both are equally safe to be consumed.
ReplyDeleteWell, since GM food is altered to be better than organic food, obviously there is a difference. Some may feel that this alteration may cause health problems. Personally, I do not wish to discourage others from eating GM foods, but instead would like to highlight that truly organic food is still preferred by many.
ReplyDeleteIt is not true that many prefer organic food to GM food.Well,I feel that this is your assumption.Organic food are expensively priced and some may not be able to afford it.In conclusion,personal preferences and choices play a part in one's own diet.
ReplyDeleteI have considered others' views from interviews. When I said "many", I may have meant the minority. It is not specific enough. Even though they are not able to afford it, some would rather consume organic food. -Rayna
ReplyDeleteIn that case, do you mean that GM foods should be only be used to combat world hunger and organic food used to feed the people in first-world countries?
ReplyDelete