tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post3951267695147089782..comments2023-07-15T04:39:59.759-07:00Comments on Genomics, Medicine, and Pseudoscience: Scientists build a better salmonSteven Salzberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16549957293973146438noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-87408625801570947912010-12-15T00:07:40.192-08:002010-12-15T00:07:40.192-08:00Or we just stop eating fish. Simple.Or we just stop eating fish. Simple.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-12317027101229880602010-12-14T20:57:42.105-08:002010-12-14T20:57:42.105-08:00Salzberg, I'm unsure whether you are paid to k...Salzberg, I'm unsure whether you are paid to keep quiet on things, afraid of being honest and truthful, or just plain ignorant.<br />Watching two hours of a documentary on Monsanto (The World According to Monsanto that is) is generally enough for people to lose faith in such a company and question their ethics, let alone the research coming forth about mutation, immune system complications and even honey bee population decline related to GM foods and Bt toxins.<br />You seem to think it's fine to support companies committing such great crimes not only against humanity, but nature as well.<br />Either way I don't care, I eat organic, largely vegan and haven't touched a pharmaceutical drug in over 3 years. What I can tell you is that I have more energy and a clearer mind than ever before, and I have not gotten sick in any way since changing my diet. <br />It disappoints me that people with knowledge and voices such as your own (which is much more in scientific fields) refuse to delve deeper into the truth surrounding such topics. I'm someone who is a part of a slightly younger generation who cares deeply for their entire human race and our planet, and knowing I would like to bring up family in a natural world it pains me deeply some days to see writing such as yours.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-8991218966683054512010-09-04T16:06:10.344-07:002010-09-04T16:06:10.344-07:00Fish don't produce the DHA & EPA omega-3 w...Fish don't produce the DHA & EPA omega-3 we get from eating them; they get it from the algae they eat. It'd be better for us to just get our omega 3 from the algae directly, avoiding the need to deplete wild fish stocks, farm genetically engineered fish or expose ourselves to mercury.<br />Here is the research backing up claims:<br />http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14499126<br />http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC341433/Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05055767588775335860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-77258526174571684082010-08-20T06:47:23.570-07:002010-08-20T06:47:23.570-07:00Overfishing isn't only about the amount of fis...Overfishing isn't only about the amount of fish that get fished but also about fishing policies. http://www.ted.com/talks/enric_sala.html is a good talk about the topic.<br />According to it we can fish as much as we do presently if we just move to protect a sizable area (25%) of the ocean from fishing and let fish regrow in those areas.ChristianKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-72273719941891812612010-08-11T12:23:50.813-07:002010-08-11T12:23:50.813-07:00I didn't write that farmed fish are "more...I didn't write that farmed fish are "more mercury and toxin free" than wild salmon - go back and read it. What I wrote is that wild fish are known to have mercury contamination - this is particularly a problem for large fish such as tuna and salmon. As for farmed fish, some farmed salmon have been reported to have mercury while other farms do not. (For example, a 2008 Canadian study found mercury in both wild and farmed salmon, but at higher levels in the wild salmon.) The solution to this is better fish farming techniques - not abandoning farming and going back to a reliance on wild fish.<br /><br />The last commenter attributed other beliefs to me that are simply made up, so I won't bother to address those.Steven Salzberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16549957293973146438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-33944331733725335552010-08-10T12:26:32.270-07:002010-08-10T12:26:32.270-07:00For an article which presumes to debunk perception...For an article which presumes to debunk perception errors based on science, your writing is certainly chock full of massive errors and omissions. <br />1. You omit the concern cited in the papers you are referencing about the increased levels of growth hormone in the genetically modified salmon.<br />Perhaps you're aware that the massive increase in growth hormone in our food is leading to large increases in PUBERTY AMONG 7 YEAR OLD GIRLS IN THE USA? Hmmmm? http://www.cbs12.com/news/puberty-4727923-girls-age.html<br />2. You are completely wrong about farm fish being more Mercury and toxin free than wild salmon: (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/303/5655/226)<br />3. As your hero, Donald Rumsfeld, would say, these are only the "known knowns". The biggest reason to not create and sell these gigantic Frankenfish is that evolution has shown that there are long term reasons for fish being the size, shape, and hormonal makeup that they are. Monsanto has demonstrated with its use of genetically engineered plants that in the long run, naturally bred plants and animals are cheaper, healthier, and safer than these kinds of 'stuck on stupid', 'one hammer' approaches being driven by clueless Harvard MBA's that are getting jobs as CEOs running companies about which they have zero hands on experience, zero long term concern, and zero accountability for the consequences of poisoning our food supply and our environment with this kind of crap. <br /><br /> Frankenfish are NOT about "saving the wild salmon". The ARE about increasing the size of the paychecks of a CEO and his executives. Period. If these people gave a crap about saving wild salmon, they would advocate reversing the trends that have truly decimated salmon populations: destruction of wild rivers, poisoning of rivers with phosphates and pesticides, and unregulated overfishing. <br /><br /> This article is, in its entirety, a red herring (pun intended).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-33030131656468946852010-08-09T21:40:29.691-07:002010-08-09T21:40:29.691-07:00While I applaud skepticism and pragmatism, I'm...While I applaud skepticism and pragmatism, I'm not sure that this blog post furthers those goals. (I do appreciate you repeating the very important message that we're fishing our oceans to death, however!)<br /><br />This post implies that mercury may be less in farmed fish. This is, last I heard, false (<a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/303/5655/226" rel="nofollow">http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/303/5655/226</a>)<br /><br />Also, the first commenter is correct that ocean farming of salmon has some pretty intense localized ecological problems.<br /><br />Land-based, "closed" farms are an ecologically friendly alternative to ocean-based salmon farms. However, the vast majority of farmed salmon is the bad kind, not the good kind.<br /><br />Now, as for these GMO salmon, give me one of these <b>land-farmed</b> super fish and I will eat the hell out of it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-69526075171620497852010-08-09T13:21:35.195-07:002010-08-09T13:21:35.195-07:00I cannot tell you how refreshing it is to read int...I cannot tell you how refreshing it is to read intelligent unbiased commentary from someone who not only understands the science, but is not afraid to dispute the lies, misinformation, and/or disinformation disseminated by activists such as Hauter and Kimbrell. The goal of activists like them is to confuse the technically unsophisticated consumer with lies and/or misinformation in hopes that the consumer will be scared away from embracing exciting new technologies that benefit mankind. People like Hauter believe that all of mankind can be fed by shopping at Whole Foods, and indirectly people like Hauter & Kimbrell will be responsible for millions dying of starvation because they were deprived of revolutionary food producing technology by a bunch of food luddites.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8211371452778645597.post-82320313602728247482010-08-09T06:02:40.255-07:002010-08-09T06:02:40.255-07:00Farming animals in general is bad for the local en...Farming animals in general is bad for the local environment. Especially when it is scaled up to produce thousands of animals such as in fish farms.<br /><br />Furthermore the large scale of farming needs disease control using antibiotics.<br />Large scale farming of any kind of animal has the great potential to stimulate pathogens to develop resistance with effects on the human population. For example, most dutch pig farmers are not allowed in hospitals anymore in the NL since they carry the MRSA bacteria. They are treated with extra care, a lot of extra care when they are sick.<br /><br />It's not the toxins that are dangerous for us humans. It's the antibiotics we need to do large scale farming efficiently, that makes future farming such a nice breeding ground for pathogens.<br /><br />Future salmon will be tasty indeed.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11049980057418152771noreply@blogger.com