Genetically modified salmon has recently been given the metaphorical green light by the Food and Drug Administration. There is no requirement mandating proper labeling of this genetically modified salmon; however, the FDA has floated the idea that the salmon may be labeled optionally. If this optional labeling were to take place, it would appear as though each seafood corporation could make its own decision regarding the level of detail that they will provide their consumers regarding the manner in which their salmon was raised (Pollack).
Purdue University Professor William Muir, a proponent of GM salmon, says that “the current practice of using wild caught salmon as a food source is not sustainable; our oceans are overfished.” Additionally, Professor Muir states that “this development provides a safe and sustainable alternative.” Conversely, opponents of genetically modified salmon are concerned about the health of wild salmon if the GM salmon were to escape from their confinement (Pollack).
At this time, I am opposed to the genetic engineering of salmon. Yes, I am disappointed with the haphazard proposals, if we can even call them that, for labeling GM salmon. Yes, I am doubtful that the GM salmon will never escape their confinement- and I am skeptical about what their escape means for the reproductive success of wild salmon. Nevertheless, the aspect of this controversy that I find most perplexing is that genetic engineering has become an increasingly acceptable, even expected, aspect of our food system. Does the future of our food system look like genetically modified… everything?
I look forward to hearing your opinion on this matter!
Until Next Week… Plan Well, Pack Well, Live Well,
Pollack, Andrew. “Genetically Engineered Salmon Approved for Consumption.” New York Times. 19 Nov. 2015: The New York Times Company. Web. 28 Nov. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/20/business/genetically-engineered-salmon-approved-for-consumption.html?_r=0>