This post is my response to an article forwarded to us by my sister-in-law, Dee Carlock, who shares our interest in matters of human health and our surrounding environment. The article came to her attention by virtue of the good work of Dr. Mercola. Both deserve my thanks and acknowledgment before I engage in passing along some of the acquired information to our readers.

As is my habit, I want to encourage everyone to read my original sources directly so that they can learn more and avoid whatever limitations my own reports may have. Although the opinions I express are my own, I am drawing on Dr. Mercola’s “Why the Bioengineered Salmon Project Got Paused,” dated July 5, 2023. For those who wish to look at Dr. Mercola’s article directly, here is a link to it: https://open.substack.com/pub/takecontrol/p/frankenfish-bioengineered-salmon?r=18f0ou&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Since viewing it on the Mercola site requires some extra time that some readers do not have to spare, I will share my notes on that seven-page article here. All quoted material is quoted from the latter Mercola article.

Since I have encountered several people who assume that GMO engineering is just a modern version of centuries-old cross-breeding efforts, just with more modern technology, I will begin with a clarification. My major concern about Genetically Modified Organisms is based on my skepticism regarding human knowledge in combining genes from species of animals and plants that DO NOT combine in the design of nature. Simply put, I believe that there is good reason why plants and animals belonging to different species do not mate and have offspring having new interspecies combinations of genes. In other words, I have no problem with efforts to cross-pollinate corn with corn or cross breed horses with horses– but crossing monkeys with elephants? No! I am talking about the dangers of transplanting genes that are never transferred from plant to plant or animal to animal through the breeding design found in nature. When you start incorporating spider genes into fish (it has been done!) I say that you have overreached your knowledge as to why there is a block on such combinations in nature. I also do not think it wise to alter genes in ways whose consequence is unknown, even when doing so within the same species. There is much about DNA that our scientists do not know and it is very risky to make alterations in extremely complex designs about which we know so little.

As if to illustrate my above assertion that cross-species genetic modification does occur, the genetically engineered salmon discussed in the Mercola article contain “the DNA from two other fish, a growth-promoting gene from a Chinook salmon and a ‘promoter’ gene from the eel-like ocean pout.” Need I add, Chinook salmon and ocean pouts DO NOT mate and have offspring in the wild; they do NOT pass on this gene combination except at the hands of human genetic engineers. What these engineers are doing IS NOT JUST AN EXTENSION OF TRADITIONAL BREEDING PRACTICES.

From Dr. Mercola’s article, we see that there is a very large-scale effort by a company named AquaBounty to produce and market many tons of genetically engineered (GE) salmon. Mercola points out that AquaBounty has facilities in several locations. He mentions one in Panama, another in Canada, and one near Albany, Indiana, which “can produce 1,200 metric tons of GE salmon annually.” Still another of its salmon farms is under construction in Pioneer, Ohio. Of the latter facility, Mercola reports that “The company expects to stock its first salmon eggs at the facility in late 2024, with the first salmon harvest expected mid-2026.”

I must admit here that, though I have studied and even delivered university lectures on the co-optation of government regulatory agencies by those they are meant to regulate, I am still shocked to see examples of it. Although the USDA includes AquaBounty’s salmon “ in a list of foods that must instead be labeled ‘bioengineered”…”food served in restaurants or ‘similar retail food establishments’ is exempt from the labeling Standard”!!! I do not know if the reason for this exemption is because of the undue influence of the industries which market such products, but I am justified in having a strong suspicion to that effect. But whatever the reason, it is obvious that the exemption runs enormously counter to the claim that our government is providing consumers with the information they need to make informed choices. I view this practice as A BETRAYAL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE..( Regarding the FDA approval of AcquaBounty GE salmon in 2015, Mercola reports: “…the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in 2020 that the FDA ‘violated core environmental laws” when it did so.”)

Perhaps there are those who still believe that we must “experiment” in order to learn more about genetics. Please note that these “experiments,” if such they are, are NOT restricted to labs and science journals. The results are going directly into the larger world and can affect not only human health but the nature of existing species in ways that may be irreversible. Yet such GE products have an enormous appeal to agri- and aqua-culturing businesses. In the case of these salmon, “GI salmon grow twice as fast as wild salmon, which means they reach market size of 8 to 12 pounds in just 18 months, compared to 36 in the wild.” The monetary appeal to producers is easy to see.

But as economically attractive as GE salmon appear to be, the dangers to humans and to the broader environment should not be ignored.. An escape of genetically engineered salmon into the wild could endanger the already-endangered wild Atlantic salmon; and it could do so in ways that cannot be reversed. That, in turn, could put an end to the wild salmon runs upon which large numbers of salmon fishing families depend.

In addition, there are health risks to the humans who consume GE salmon. Amazingly, data released by the FDA itself give reason for great caution:

[begin quote Mercola]
The limited summaries of data that the FDA has released [show that] GE salmon exhibited 40 percent higher levels of a hormone called insulin-like growth factor 1, which has been shown to increase the risk of certain cancers…GE salmon exhibited as much as 52 percent higher levels of ‘allergenic potency,’ which indicates possible allergic reactions from consumers. … the salmon may have less protein and differences in vitamin, mineral and amino acid levels compared to non-GE salmon. [end quote]

My own conclusion: WE CANNOT AND SHOULD NOT TRUST THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT WE HAVE BEEN TOLD ARE TRUSTWORTHY. AT A MINIMUM, WE MUST DEMAND MORE TRANSPARENCY AND MORE PUBLIC OVERSIGHT, AND WE MUST RESIST ALL EFFORTS TO CENSOR THE DISSEMINATION INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO MAKE INFORMED CHOICES.–Jerry