Talk of fish is everywhere these days, from discussions about , and if you recall, this past November, the state of California had on its ballot a proposition that, if passed, would have required the labeling of all GMO foods. Proposition 37 ignited scintillating debate from high stakeholder and biotechnology corporation, Monsanto, to environmentalists and public health advocates. While Prop 37 did not pass, there are movements to require labeling of any foods containing GMOs starting from the supermarket level to the state legislature level that are gaining momentum. What then will be the fate of Massachusetts based AquaBounty Technologies, which has long sought approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of a genetically modified salmon?1
AquaBounty Technologies—the Creator
After 20 years of research and development, AquaBounty Technologies is finally ready to see its baby, AquAdvantage, on the market. On September 19, 2010, the FDA convened a public hearing in which testimonies were heard by both AquaBounty representatives and FDA scientists.2 There, the FDA scientists reported findings consistent with that of AquaBounty, stating that the transgenic salmon, or AquAdvantage, is not harmful to human health or to the environment. The Environmental Assessment produced in 2012 further reinforced these findings.3 The FDA extended the public comment period for this Environmental Assessment until April 26, 2013, and is now in its final stages of review.4 The FDA has the authority to make the ultimate decision, but the CEO of AquaBounty expects to receive approval by the end of this year.5
Two salmon of the same age. Back: genetically modified salmon; front: natural salmon.6
The Genetically Engineered Atlantic Salmon
The Atlantic salmon, cousin to the larger Chinook Salmon, is being effectively engineered to grow two times faster than its natural cousins. The fish will be of market size in 18 months as opposed to three years.7 The DNA of the Atlantic salmon is spliced by a growth hormone from the Chinook Salmon paired with an “antifreeze” promoter from the ocean eel pout.8 The growth hormone is necessarily coupled with the promoter gene because the salmon cannot naturally produce the hormone in cold weather.9 Thus, the promoter gene activates the growth hormone indefinitely.10 Disregarding the ethical implications—playing “God”—inherent in this genetic modification, AquaBounty implores the public to keep an open mind about its avant-garde food product. They claim that AquAdvantage will play a key role in achieving safe and sustainable aquaculture practices while also meeting the seemingly endless global demand for seafood.11 They also argue that farming AquAdvantage will lead to a more economically viable fishing industry.12
Environmental and Health Impacts
Opponents have voiced vehement concerns over the environmental implications that may result from the breeding, rearing, and harvesting of these transgenic organisms. Specifically, they worry that the escape of the “Frankenfish” will impose considerable alterations to wild salmon populations and the surrounding ecosystems at large.13 AquaBounty assures the public that escapes are highly improbable, as the fish will be raised in land-based facilities as opposed to aquatic pens, which are more susceptible to escape.14 Moreover, if by some inadvertent chance a few fish do happen to escape, AquaBounty states that they will only raise female salmon that are sterile, and will be unable to breed with wild salmon populations.15 Despite AquaBounty’s convincing, fact-based rebuttals, there is no way to really know what will happen if these fish escaped. Nor is there a way to confidently know whether health impacts will manifest. According to Time Magazine, the FDA had found that AquAdvantage had exhibited “higher levels of tissue inflammation than natural fish,” which signifies a “more fragile immune system.”16 This will be reflected in increased levels of antibiotics in fish feed, which may increase the already prevalent antibiotic-resistant bacteria population that is a threat to our health even today.
A coalition of supermarkets across the nation, including Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods, and Aldi, have banned together under the Campaign for Genetically Engineered-Free Seafood to make explicit their condemnation of the transgenic salmon.18 At the aggregate, these supermarkets represent 2,000 stores nationwide.19 Whole Foods is even going as far as requiring all GMO foods to be labeled by 2018.20 This action reflects the thoughts and concerns harbored by the public about GMO foods, which can be described as skeptical, if not fearful.
Genetically engineering fish is not an issue to be taken lightly. In the end, we must weigh the benefits of approving AquAdvantage against not. In other words, will the environmental benefits obtained from introducing an alternative aquaculture practice outweigh the cost of continuing business as usual—depleting the global fish stock and prolonging unsustainable aquaculture practices—just for the sake of avoiding unknown health and environmental risks? Perhaps AquAdvantage is bound to fail in the market. Regardless, the issue of global fish decline is real and must be taken into consideration in the decisionmaking process.
