NEARLY 2 MILLION PEOPLE TELL FDA NOT TO APPROVE GE SALMON
Public
Comment Period Closes with Strong Pushback from Congress; Hundreds of
Organizations, Businesses, and Fishermen Voice Opposition to
Controversial GE Salmon
Comment Period Closes with Strong Pushback from Congress; Hundreds of
Organizations, Businesses, and Fishermen Voice Opposition to
Controversial GE Salmon
Washington, D.C. –
On Friday April 26, 2013 over 1.8 million people sent comments
vehemently opposing the approval of a genetically engineered salmon by
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The effort was driven by a
broad coalition organized over three years ago by the Center for Food
Safety and consisting of public interest, consumer, environmental and
animal protection groups, along with commercial and recreational
fisheries associations and food businesses and retailers.
On Friday April 26, 2013 over 1.8 million people sent comments
vehemently opposing the approval of a genetically engineered salmon by
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The effort was driven by a
broad coalition organized over three years ago by the Center for Food
Safety and consisting of public interest, consumer, environmental and
animal protection groups, along with commercial and recreational
fisheries associations and food businesses and retailers.
“It
is extremely disappointing that the Obama Administration continues to
push approval of this dangerous and unnecessary product through a broken
regulatory system,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director for Center
for Food Safety. “The GE salmon has no socially redeeming value; it’s
bad for the consumer, bad for the environment, and bad for our native
salmon. ”
is extremely disappointing that the Obama Administration continues to
push approval of this dangerous and unnecessary product through a broken
regulatory system,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director for Center
for Food Safety. “The GE salmon has no socially redeeming value; it’s
bad for the consumer, bad for the environment, and bad for our native
salmon. ”
The
FDA first announced that it was considering the approval of a GE salmon
in August 2010. If approved, it would be the first-ever GE animal
permitted for human consumption in the U.S. Friday marked the close of a
120-day comment period on a revised draft environmental assessment for
the GE salmon, which has remained a concern for consumers and Congress
alike.
FDA first announced that it was considering the approval of a GE salmon
in August 2010. If approved, it would be the first-ever GE animal
permitted for human consumption in the U.S. Friday marked the close of a
120-day comment period on a revised draft environmental assessment for
the GE salmon, which has remained a concern for consumers and Congress
alike.
“The
fact that the consideration of AquaBounty’s genetically engineered
salmon has gotten this far is a sign of how broken the U.S. current
regulatory structure actually is,” said Dave Murphy, founder and
executive director of Food Democracy Now! “If GMO salmon is approved, it
sets a dangerous precedent and will be a new low for the Obama
administration in their failure to properly protect the American public
and our food supply.”
fact that the consideration of AquaBounty’s genetically engineered
salmon has gotten this far is a sign of how broken the U.S. current
regulatory structure actually is,” said Dave Murphy, founder and
executive director of Food Democracy Now! “If GMO salmon is approved, it
sets a dangerous precedent and will be a new low for the Obama
administration in their failure to properly protect the American public
and our food supply.”
In addition, documents disclosed on Friday
through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request raise serious
questions about the adequacy of the FDA’s review of the AquAdvantage
Salmon application. Among other things, while the FDA has refused to
look at the environmental impacts of these GE fish beyond the Canadian
and Panamanian facilities proposed in the application, it appears that
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has already received requests to import
AquAdvantage Salmon eggs into the U.S. for commercial production.
through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request raise serious
questions about the adequacy of the FDA’s review of the AquAdvantage
Salmon application. Among other things, while the FDA has refused to
look at the environmental impacts of these GE fish beyond the Canadian
and Panamanian facilities proposed in the application, it appears that
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has already received requests to import
AquAdvantage Salmon eggs into the U.S. for commercial production.
“Like
FDA’s food safety analysis, the environmental analysis leaves many
questions unanswered, and includes numerous highly questionable and
unsubstantiated assumptions,” said Michael Hansen, PhD, senior scientist
at Consumers Union. “The decision on this fish is precedent setting;
given the inadequacies of this document, a full EIS, including a
failure-mode analysis that looks at the possibility of fish escapes,
must be performed.”
FDA’s food safety analysis, the environmental analysis leaves many
questions unanswered, and includes numerous highly questionable and
unsubstantiated assumptions,” said Michael Hansen, PhD, senior scientist
at Consumers Union. “The decision on this fish is precedent setting;
given the inadequacies of this document, a full EIS, including a
failure-mode analysis that looks at the possibility of fish escapes,
must be performed.”
The
groups responsible for organizing the over 1.8 million comments were
Avaaz, Center for Food Safety, Friends of the Earth, Food and Water
Watch, MoveOn, Organic Consumers Association, Food Democracy Now, Credo,
Consumers Union, Just Label It, Farm Sanctuary, Cascadia Wildlands,
Earthjustice, American Anti-Vivisection Society, Institute for
Responsible Technology, and the Alliance for Natural Health –USA.
groups responsible for organizing the over 1.8 million comments were
Avaaz, Center for Food Safety, Friends of the Earth, Food and Water
Watch, MoveOn, Organic Consumers Association, Food Democracy Now, Credo,
Consumers Union, Just Label It, Farm Sanctuary, Cascadia Wildlands,
Earthjustice, American Anti-Vivisection Society, Institute for
Responsible Technology, and the Alliance for Natural Health –USA.
“The
public has spoken, loud and clear: There is simply no need for GE
salmon,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water
Watch. “It’s time for FDA to put an end to this regulatory mess and
admit that the environmental and public health risks are too big to
approve this controversial product.”
public has spoken, loud and clear: There is simply no need for GE
salmon,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water
Watch. “It’s time for FDA to put an end to this regulatory mess and
admit that the environmental and public health risks are too big to
approve this controversial product.”
On Wednesday, 12 Senators led by Senator Mark Begich (D-Alaska) and 21 Representatives
led by Congressmen Don Young (R-AK-01), Mike Thompson (D-CA-05) and
Jared Huffman (D-CA-02) sent letters to the FDA urging it to halt its
approval until their economic, regulatory and environmental concerns are
addressed. The Congressional letters come just months after an
amendment offered by Senator Begich to the Senate Budget Resolution passed by voice vote in favor of the labeling of GE fish.
led by Congressmen Don Young (R-AK-01), Mike Thompson (D-CA-05) and
Jared Huffman (D-CA-02) sent letters to the FDA urging it to halt its
approval until their economic, regulatory and environmental concerns are
addressed. The Congressional letters come just months after an
amendment offered by Senator Begich to the Senate Budget Resolution passed by voice vote in favor of the labeling of GE fish.
In
addition to Congressional attention, the FDA received joint letters
from major groups and businesses reflecting broad public opposition to
GE salmon. A joint letter
was submitted by CEOs of major environmental organizations including
American Rivers, the Center for Food Safety, Earthjustice, Friends of
the Earth, Food & Water Watch, Greenpeace, Natural Resources Defense
Council, Ocean Conservancy and Sierra Club. Led by the American
Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS), 22 animal protection organizations joined a letter to FDA opposing GE salmon, as did a number of religious groups.
addition to Congressional attention, the FDA received joint letters
from major groups and businesses reflecting broad public opposition to
GE salmon. A joint letter
was submitted by CEOs of major environmental organizations including
American Rivers, the Center for Food Safety, Earthjustice, Friends of
the Earth, Food & Water Watch, Greenpeace, Natural Resources Defense
Council, Ocean Conservancy and Sierra Club. Led by the American
Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS), 22 animal protection organizations joined a letter to FDA opposing GE salmon, as did a number of religious groups.
“The
AquAdvantage salmon studies, by their very design, underreport or fail
to detect health problems and abnormalities in the fish. Yet we know
that genetic engineering is fraught with failures and unintended
consequences, and preliminary findings indicate that GE salmon are prone
to deformities and may be more susceptible to disease,” said Nina Mak,
research analyst with AAVS. “It is deeply concerning that FDA would
‘release’ this still-experimental technology into the environment.”
AquAdvantage salmon studies, by their very design, underreport or fail
to detect health problems and abnormalities in the fish. Yet we know
that genetic engineering is fraught with failures and unintended
consequences, and preliminary findings indicate that GE salmon are prone
to deformities and may be more susceptible to disease,” said Nina Mak,
research analyst with AAVS. “It is deeply concerning that FDA would
‘release’ this still-experimental technology into the environment.”
A
variety of other groups also have voiced their opposition to GE salmon,
including several indigenous groups. Citing numerous fisheries and
economic concerns, over 250 businesses, individuals, public interest
groups and fisheries organizations, representing fishermen and -women
across the U.S., joined a letter to FDA, including the Alaska Trollers
Association, the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance, Bristol Bay
Regional Seafood Development Association and the Alaska Marine
Conservation Council.
variety of other groups also have voiced their opposition to GE salmon,
including several indigenous groups. Citing numerous fisheries and
economic concerns, over 250 businesses, individuals, public interest
groups and fisheries organizations, representing fishermen and -women
across the U.S., joined a letter to FDA, including the Alaska Trollers
Association, the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance, Bristol Bay
Regional Seafood Development Association and the Alaska Marine
Conservation Council.
“U.S.
fishermen take seriously the job of delivering a wholesome,
sustainable, high quality product to market,” said Dale Kelly, executive
director of the Alaska Trollers Association. “Applying such invasive
technology to a food fish has not been adequately studied for its
impacts on human health, the environment, or American jobs.”
fishermen take seriously the job of delivering a wholesome,
sustainable, high quality product to market,” said Dale Kelly, executive
director of the Alaska Trollers Association. “Applying such invasive
technology to a food fish has not been adequately studied for its
impacts on human health, the environment, or American jobs.”
The
market has already started to reject GE salmon. Supermarket chains with
more than 2,500 grocery stores across the county have committed not to
sell GE seafood should it come to market and 260 chefs across the
country have signed on to a letter by Chefs Collaborative objecting to the transgenic fish.
market has already started to reject GE salmon. Supermarket chains with
more than 2,500 grocery stores across the county have committed not to
sell GE seafood should it come to market and 260 chefs across the
country have signed on to a letter by Chefs Collaborative objecting to the transgenic fish.
“We
don’t believe this engineered salmon is either healthful or
sustainable,” says Trudy Bialic of PCC Natural Markets in Seattle. “We
won’t sell it.”
don’t believe this engineered salmon is either healthful or
sustainable,” says Trudy Bialic of PCC Natural Markets in Seattle. “We
won’t sell it.”
“The
FDA process is obviously flawed, and already the market is rejecting
genetically engineered salmon,” said Eric Hoffman with Friends of the
Earth. “The vast majority of consumers say they won’t eat genetically engineered fish and grocery stores are rejecting it.
The submission of over 1.8 million comments in opposition to
genetically engineered fish is just another sign that there is no future
for this fish in the U.S.”