The Great Deception -> Gmo Salmon - Usa Canada & Fda Team Up To

Gmo Salmon - Usa Canada & Fda Team Up To, Deceive Consumers

Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 4 2010, 10:21 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Engineered-in-Canada salmon declared fit for the dinner plate http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national...?service=mobile Ready for GMO Salmon? This is more NWO insanity. This will destroy the real Salmon population.

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 5 2010, 10:11 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Genetically engineered salmon under FDA consideration http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-supe...7688,full.story

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 5 2010, 10:52 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...opic=5840&st=25 http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?to...7061.0#lastPost

jofortruth

Posted: Sep 5 2010, 01:31 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,485
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Water Wars: The 'Endangered' Western States:
http://www.infowars.com/water-wars-the-end...western-states/

QUOTE

Currently, the California Delta has been in the news, as there are 2 lawsuits: water contractors (who provide water delivery) are suing both the Department of Interior over the questionable science of the biological opinion (Bi-Op) of the threatened Delta Smelt, and the contractors are also suing the federal Department of Commerce over the suspect Bi-Op of the threatened salmon. The Department of Commerce, under the �commerce clause� has usurped authority by claiming that because the salmon could cross state lines, it has jurisdiction over the state�s resource (salmon).

Looks like the Gov is using the "Commerce Clause" to justify perpetual encroachment on the States!
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=6872

KICK INCUMBENTS OUT IN NOVEMBER 2010. THEY HAVE ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN ON THEIR WATCH. NO MORE CHANCES FOR THE FOOLS OR THE SELLOUTS WHO CALL THEMSELVES LEADERS BUT WHO HAVEN'T THE FOGGIEST IDEA WHAT THAT MEANS!

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 8 2010, 03:04 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Frankenfish: Genetically Engineered Salmon http://www.prisonplanet.com:80/frankenfish...red-salmon.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCNGRdAq5X8...player_embedded

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 18 2010, 10:23 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	GM salmon Frankenfish about to be unleashed into US food supply http://www.prisonplanet.com/gm-salmon-fran...ood-supply.html

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 19 2010, 11:16 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	PEI was said to be the first GE Free province in Canada. What happened? They now allow Research on GE Salmon in their Province? http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...topic=8540&st=0

jofortruth

Posted: Sep 19 2010, 11:46 AM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,485
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Genetically modified salmon safe, FDA says
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/...bounty-584.html

QUOTE

Documents released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration say genetically modified salmon being reared on P.E.I. is safe, provoking some alarm on both sides of the border.

If the salmon, raised by Aqua Bounty Technologies, is approved for consumers, it would be the first genetically modified food animal on the market.

Aqua Bounty Technologies started its quest to have its fast-growing salmon approved by the FDA 15 years ago. The fish has been genetically modified to grow twice as fast as other Atlantic salmon.

FDA documents just released say the fish is as safe to eat as other Atlantic salmon, with similar vitamins, minerals and fatty acids.

That news drew a reaction from an international coalition of groups opposed to genetically modified food.

"The United States could be approving a genetically engineered fish with really inadequate data, and � this opens the door to other genetically engineered animals," said Lucy Sharratt, head of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, a coalition partner.

Bypassing U.S. regulations
Jaydee Hanson, policy analyst for the U.S.-based Center for Food Safety, took issue with plans by Aqua Bounty, which has its corporate headquarters in Waltham, Mass., to produce fish outside the U.S. for American consumers.

Todd Dupuis of the Atlantic Salmon Federation is concerned about the escape of genetically-modified salmon. (CBC)
"By approving the fish to be raised in Canada and Panama instead of the U.S., the FDA is side-stepping a full assessment of the environmental risks," Hanson said.

"The FDA is relying on an environmental assessment done by private consultants hired by the company. Under U.S. law, an environmental assessment requires a much less rigorous review than a full environment impact statement."

The biggest environmental concern is that the genetically modified fish will escape and breed with wild salmon. FDA documents say escaped fish are highly unlikely to pose a significant threat to the environment, because up to 99 per cent of genetically raised salmon are sterile.

While the Atlantic Salmon Federation is not formally opposing Aqua Bounty's plan, the regional director of the group, Todd Dupuis, is concerned.

"That leaves one per cent of fish that are still viable," said Dupuis, noting that Aqua Bounty is rearing hundreds of thousands of salmon.

"So for every 100,000 fish there's going to be 1,000 fish in there that are viable. So if they do get out, there's concerns of course with them passing their genes on to wild fish."

The FDA documents say Aqua Bounty has reduced the risk of escape by raising the fish in well-contained tanks on land at its two facilities � in Fortune, P.E.I., and in Panama � with several barriers of netting and screens.

Dupuis said there have been escapes from land-based fish farms on P.E.I. before.

The FDA documents say that if any fish escape, it's unlikely they would survive.

The coalition opposed to selling the salmon in the U.S. hopes to stall the FDA approval process at public meetings set to start in 10 days.

IF WE HAD HONEST PEOPLE WORKING AT THE FDA, WE MIGHT BELIEVE THEM. HOWEVER, THEY ARE MORE OF THE ELITE GOONS DISPERSED INTO EVERY AGENCY OF THE US GOVERNMENT.

ANY ORGANIZATION THAT DOES NOT ALLOW A FOOD PACKAGING LABEL TO TELL THE PUBLIC THAT SOMETHING IS GMO OR GENETICALLY ENGINEERED IS NOT BEING HONEST. THE FDA HAS STATED THIS RECENTLY SAYING THAT IT WOULD JUST CONFUSE CONSUMERS. HEY, I WANT TO BE CONFUSED. THE LABELS SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO SAY THIS IS GMO FOOD PERIOD!

See article above: "FDA rules won't require labeling of genetically modified salmon"

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 19 2010, 12:16 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Public Hearing on the Labeling of Food Made from the AquAdvantage Salmon: (August 2010) http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/Labeling...n/UCM223913.pdf

jofortruth

Posted: Sep 19 2010, 12:28 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,485
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

VMAC Briefing Packet AquAdvantage Salmon: (Sept 20, 2010)
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommi...e/UCM224762.pdf

QUOTE

This Briefing Packet has been produced to serve several purposes.

First, it provides an overall summary of FDA�s risk-based, scientific process for determining the safety and effectiveness of the AquAdvantage Salmon1 produced by Aqua Bounty Technologies Inc. Safety includes safety to the recipient animal, and the safety of the food from that lineage of animals; effectiveness refers to whether the article consistently and uniformly does what the sponsor claims it is supposed to do.

Second, it provides data and information that the agency evaluated as part of the application process, as well as the agency�s evaluations. In addition, it includes an environmental assessment and the agency�s analysis.

Third, it continues to meet the agency�s commitment to transparency by providing both the Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee (VMAC) and the public with the same data and information that the agency evaluated in the review of an application for the approval related to the AquAdvantage Salmon. The VMAC will be charged with providing scientific advice to the agency; this document is intended to provide the scientific and regulatory information that will help in discharging those duties.

Finally, in the event that the agency approves Aqua Bounty�s application, this document will serve as the basis for the Freedom of Information (FOI) summary that normally accompanies new animal drug approvals. The FOI Summary will also contain additional information such as the approved drug label, additional information on post-market responsibilities, and other administrative information.

jofortruth

Posted: Sep 20 2010, 08:34 AM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,485
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

VMAC Briefing Packet AquAdvantage Salmon: (Sept 20, 2010)
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommi...e/UCM224762.pdf

Read the following pages of the VMAC document above. The hearings started today with the public hearing being tomorrow:

QUOTE

Pg 1 -� "This is the first time FDA is considering an application for a genetically engineered animal intended for food use."

Pg 2 -� " Genetic engineering refers to the use of recombinant DNA (rDNA) techniques to introduce new characteristics or traits into an organism."

Pg 3, 4 - "five key principles of food labeling" - You will find #5 most interesting.

Pg 5 - See last paragraph in particular "material" fact and labeling

Pg 6 - A MUST SEE! Talks about a legal case brought and the judge agreed with the FDA that consumer demand wasn't sufficient to require additional labeling of foods made from GE organisms."� �

Legal Cases:

Stauber v. Shalala:
http://www.animallaw.info/cases/causfd895fsupp1178.htm

Alliance for Bio-Integrity v. Shalala:
http://www.biointegrity.org/report-on-lawsuit.htm
http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/438/...veraTorres.html

More Docs from VMAC mtg:
http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Comm...e/ucm201810.htm

jofortruth

Posted: Sep 20 2010, 08:55 AM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,485
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

FDA rules won't require labeling of genetically modified salmon
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...prss=rss_nation
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/fda-lab...e-modification/

QUOTE

As the Food and Drug Administration considers whether to approve genetically modified salmon, one thing seems certain: Shoppers staring at fillets in the seafood department will find it tough to pick out the conventional fish from the one created with genes from another species.

Would someone fire the current FDA officials, and find some ethical adults for the job, please!

More on the FDA & Michael Taylor:
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...pic=5840&st=25&

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 20 2010, 09:04 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Here's a poll at the Washington Post: http://views.washingtonpost.com/post-user-...ST2010091804108

jofortruth

Posted: Sep 21 2010, 09:25 AM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,485
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Meet Garth Fletcher (man at Memorial University who created this) & the CEO of AquaBounty, Stotish:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adQFY-8S_q0...be_gdata_player

QUOTE

Aqua Bounty plant in Bay Fortune, P.E.I, Canada is where genetically modified salmon eggs are produced.

Memorial University Newfoundland is where this idea was conceived:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article....c-fish-go-large

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 21 2010, 09:31 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	How Safe Would Genetically Modified Salmon Be to Eat? (Various opinions on) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmwQj6rXc8Y

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 21 2010, 01:14 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	FDA advisors urge more study of genetically altered salmon: http://fluentnews.com/s/25901885

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 21 2010, 08:23 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Why is the FDA about to rubber-stamp GE Salmon http://www.grist.org/article/2010-09-20-wh...stamp-ge-salmon

jofortruth	Posted: Sep 26 2010, 09:56 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	GM food battle moves to fish as super-salmon nears US approval: http://www.prisonplanet.com/gm-food-battle...s-approval.html

jofortruth

Posted: Sep 27 2010, 07:36 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,485
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

FDA refuses to require labeling of genetically modified salmon
http://www.infowars.com/fda-refuses-to-req...odified-salmon/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0091803808.html
http://www.NaturalNews.com/029862_salmon_g...y_modified.html

QUOTE

Mike Adams
NaturalNews
September 27, 2010

As the FDA stands poised to approve genetically modified (GM) salmon safe for public consumption, the next logical question concerns how GM salmon would be labeled. Would the fish come with a large red warning that says, �Genetically modified salmon�?
�
The FDA has already gone on the record stating it will not require any special labeling of genetically modified salmon. Photo: Woodley Wonderworks.�
�
As it turns out, no. In fact, the FDA has already gone on the record stating it will not require any special labeling of genetically modified salmon. You, the consumer, just have to take a wild guess because you�re not allowed to know what you�re really eating.

The biotech industry takes this absurdity one step further by claiming that labeling GM foods would just �confuse� consumers. David Edwards, the director of animal biotechnology at the Biotechnology Industry Organization, explained it in this way: �Extra labeling only confuses the consumer,� he says. �It differentiates products that are not different.�

Except that they are different. If they were really no different, then AquAdvantage company wouldn�t be growing them. The whole point of genetically modified salmon is that they are modified with extra growth hormone genes to make them grow more quickly. I don�t know where David Edwards is getting his information, but in the rest of the world, when something is different, that means it�s different.

If it�s no different, then why are so many GM salmon processes patented? If it�s no different, there would be nothing to patent. The entire purpose of a patent is to make a legal claim that �we invented something different� and we own the monopoly rights to it.

The GM salmon industry can�t have it both ways, you see. They can�t claim it�s so unique that their technologies and animals should be proprietary or patented, yet when it comes to food labeling, they claim there are no differences. It�s either different or it isn�t, and in the case of GM salmon, only an outright liar would look you in the eye and claim GM salmon is identical to regular farmed salmon or wild-caught salmon.

FDA insists on keeping people in the dark

The FDA, for its sad part in this saga, claims that it would be against the law to require the honest labeling of GM foods. This agency claims that since GM salmon is identical to regular salmon (it�s �no different� once again, they say), they can�t require it to be labeled any differently.

Except, of course, it is different. The genetic code of GM salmon is provably different, and since that genetic code is imprinted in every cell of the fish flesh, consumers are buying genetically modified fish with a different genetic code whose sole purpose was to alter the biochemistry of that fish so that it would grow larger more quickly. Thus, the physical expression of GM salmon is, by definition, different from the physical expression of regular salmon.

A d v e r t i s e m e n t
When you eat genetically modified salmon, you are eating something that�s different from regular (natural) salmon.

Word game trickery

What the FDA and biotech industries are doing with the GM salmon issue is playing word games, trying to confuse consumers with sleight-of-mouth language intentionally designed to mislead and misinform. They�ve already decided they want to approve GM salmon and they don�t want it to be accurately labeled. In essence, they want to trick consumers into buying GM salmon by making them think it�s natural salmon.

The trouble with this FDA hucksterism is that the people aren�t as stupid as the FDA thinks, and they aren�t going to be fooled by this genetically engineered salmon. That�s because the minute the FDA approves this Frankenfish, NaturalNews.com and a long list of other websites are going to alert the whole world to the simple truths of the matter:

Truth #1) Genetically engineered salmon is different from regular salmon.

Truth #2) The FDA is going out of its way to make sure GM salmon isn�t accurately labeled.

This is a Frankenfood cover-up, pure and simple, and the public is going to be outraged that the FDA would introduce a genetically engineered fish into the food supply without even requiring it to be accurately labeled!

Watch NaturalNews for more breaking coverage of this issue

We�ll be watching this issue very closely, waiting for the FDA�s final decision. If the FDA decides to yet again betray the American public over this issue, we won�t be at all surprised. But we will be vigilant, and we will ask for your help to spread the word and take action to demand that genetically modified salmon be accurately labeled so that consumers know what they�re actually buying.

Gee, you would think the FDA might be interested in food labeling honesty. But of course, the more you learn about the FDA, the more you realize every decision the agency makes is a political decision that betrays the rights and safety of the American people.

I don�t know about you, but I don�t want to eat genetically modified salmon. And I don�t want the FDA shoving this down my throat by making me try to guess which salmon is real versus artificially engineered. This Frankenfood shell game must end!

jofortruth	Posted: Oct 2 2010, 11:13 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Genetic engineering turns salmon into fast food http://www.hcn.org/issues/253/14058

jofortruth	Posted: Oct 3 2010, 11:03 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,485 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Stop Frankenfish: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4UmPcNcrqw...player_embedded

jofortruth

Posted: Aug 3 2011, 08:15 AM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,485
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Trade groups tell Congress: Stay out of FDA salmon probe (OH, REALLY? SO YOU GUYS ARE GODS NOW WHO THINK YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO THE FOOD? THIS THING YOU CALL SCIENCE IS AS BOGUS AS THE GLOBAL WARMING SCIENCE!)
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn...0,7205500.story

QUOTE

By Andrew Seidman

August 2, 2011, 2:23 p.m.
A coalition of nearly 30 organizations in the animal agriculture industry sent a letter to the heads of the House and Senate on Tuesday, asking lawmakers not to intervene as the Food and Drug Administration considers whether to approve genetically engineered salmon as food.

The letter comes more than a month after the House approved an amendment, by voice acclamation, to an appropriations bill that would strip the FDA of funding to study the salmon. On July 15, members of the House and Senate sent letters to the FDA asking it to abandon its consideration of modified salmon as food, and threatened to propose legislation to bar further study of the fish if the agency does not comply.

Calling themselves the �Animal Agriculture Coalition,� the industry groups did not take a side in the debate over genetically modified food, but instead implored Congress to respect the principle of science-based regulation.

In the letter, the organizations wrote to Sens. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), as well as House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), that the House legislation �would disrupt the FDA�s congressional mandate to base its assessments of human and animal drugs, devices, vaccines, and process applications on the best-available science underlying an application. Such a disruption would diminish the credibility of the FDA approval process at home and overseas. The global reputation of FDA�s science-based review procedure is based on the Agency�s objectivity.�

The groups include the National Farmers Union, the Animal Health Institute, the American Meat Institute and the American Farm Bureau Federation, among others.

0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)

0 Members:

« Next Oldest | Health-related / FDA / Food / Water / GE & GMO/ Monsanto | Next Newest »

Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Register for Free