Salmon that have been genetically engineered to grow twice as fast as their natural counterparts have inched a little closer toward US dinner tables, but anti-biotech groups and advocates for the wild salmon industry haven't given up yet.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced Dec. 21 that that the fast-growing AquaAdvantage Atlantic salmon produced by AquaBounty Technologies, Waltham, Massachusetts, do not pose a threat to the environment and are "as safe as food from conventional Atlantic salmon."
That removed a key hurdle for the company seeking to market the modified salmon, which critics like the Center for Science in the Public Interest have derisively dubbed "Frankenfish." But the move also reignited a long-running debate over whether a nation that already grows and consumes genetically modified plants such
as corn and soybeans is prepared to make a similar leap when it comes to animals.
The debate in the United States is part of a broader global struggle over the use of genetically modified foods. Countries in the European Union have banned some genetically modified foods outright and instituted tight labeling requirements on foods that contain modified ingredients. Others such as Russia, Japan and Peru also have instituted restrictions on genetically altered foods.
AquAdvantage, the fast-growing fish at the center of the controversy in the United States, is an Atlantic salmon that contains a growth hormone from a Chinook salmon and has been given a gene from the ocean pout, an eel-like fish. The result is a fish that grows larger and faster than traditional salmon.
Under the company's proposal, no modified salmon would actually be produced in America. The eggs would be produced at a facility on Prince Edward Island in Canada and shipped to another facility in Panama, where they would be harvested and processed. In its assessment, the FDA said the likelihood that the altered fish
could escape containment and reproduce in the wild is "extremely remote."
Consumer and environmental conservation groups have claimed that the FDA has failed to fully scrutinize the product and its potential effects. Lawmakers in Washington, particularly those from the Pacific Northwest, have backed legislation that would ban the fish outright or require specific labeling about its origins.
"The notion that consuming Frankenfish is safe for the public and our oceans is a joke," said Alaska Senator Mark Begich. "I will fight tooth and nail with my Alaska colleagues to make sure consumers have a clear choice when it comes to wild and sustainable versus lab-grown science projects... Today's report is by no means the final say on this issue."
"You keep those damn fish out of my waters. It will ruin what I think is one of the finest products in the world," added Alaska Rep. Don Young, who said he fears that the spread of fish farms could eventually contaminate the wild salmon industry in Alaska.
He wants to force delays in any FDA approval. "If I can keep this up long enough, I can break that company," he said, referring to AquaBounty, "and I admit that's what I'm trying to do."
He may be succeeding. Ronald Stotish, president of AquaBounty, while pleased with the FDS ruling, said that his company has cut back to about a dozen employees, down from more than 30, while awaiting the government's approval. AquaBounty first applied for permission to sell its genetically altered fish in 1995, and even by FDA standards, its application has moved at a glacial pace in recent years.
