AquAdvantage GE Salmon Gender Benders

sloppy and dishonest (4.00 / 2)

I cranked up the supercomputer, which resides in the closet next to the hot water tank, and performed a many-factor multivariate analysis of both relevant and extraneous inputs, being especially careful to apply the filters required to exclude conclusion-distorting imponderables such as the rare but improbably possible cross-phenotypic breeding of female MiniCoopers with male Hummers.

N-dimensional output has a polynomial/loglog/semilog/exponential correlation coefficient of 0.99999999...Aqua Bounty Technologies makes safety claims, including claims of environmental and ecological safety,  which have vanishingly small reliability, inexorably approaching zero with hyperbolic ferocity.

Seriously. We have been subjected to commercial-scale experiments for decades now, which prove conclusively that the safety claims from Aqua Bounty Technologies are bogus. FDA can include all the post-market responsibility requirements it can dream up, but these monstrosities cannot be isolated from the environment. For one teensy-tiny but obvious example,

In the event that the milt irradiation was not successful, the offspring would be an Arctic char / Atlantic salmon hybrid. These fish are readily identifiable by their differential markings and phenotypic appearance. As such, these hybrid fish can be easily removed without extensive testing.

Identification and removal might be hypothetically possible, but can anyone, even the most credulous FDA bonehead, reasonably anticipate a commercial operation ensuring that every offspring individual will be inspected?

Scary stuff from the preface:

...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.

Since when is a new animal the same thing as a new animal drug? Guess what, boys and girls, there's a footnote, footnote superscript 1:

FDA regulates GE animals under the new animal drug provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA; 21 USC 321, et seq.) because the recombinant DNA (rDNA) construct used to make genetically engineered animals is an article that meets the definition of a new animal drug. As a shorthand, we sometimes refer to the regulation of the article as regulation of the GE animal.

That is a piss-poor basis for a regulatory regime for an issue of this magnitude. Mention of an approved drug label hints that, perhaps, if the FDA unleashes this travesty upon us, it will at least be labeled, right? I wonder. And I wonder if a new drug label would give us any useful information.

Congress has spoken, a President signed off, FDA wrote its regs, and everything PBO's administration has done so far indicates that FDA will drive hard to foist this on us for the financial health and greater glory of industrial food. By me, sure as God is an old white guy in the sky with lots of white facial hair, this is technology gone mad.

---

by: count @ Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 15:48:52 PM UTC

HAHAHAHA (4.00 / 2)

By me, sure as God is an old white guy in the sky with lots of white facial hair, this is technology gone mad.

I swear, that might be the best comment ever made on this blog.  

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

---

by: Jill Richardson @ Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 21:33:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

subversion (4.00 / 1)

The subversion of young minds is my delight.

---

by: count @ Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 22:10:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]