Secrete Topic Debate

“Genetically modified salmon, like all GM products have the problem of gene flow. in other words it means that humans eating transgenic salmon can (in the long term), become affected by the transgenic products they are eating, but also other species, which eat or are eaten by salmons.” “Actually it is true they are unknown, but it is still not proved that there are no concrete risks on human health. And we cannot allow and, and take the risks to endanger lives.” Both sentences contradict. If it’s unknown it’s unknown, then we can’t say it will endanger lives. Does greediness allow us to transform and deeply modify the natural life. Can we transform life to be more profitable? And what is the limit to all of this? If we start to allow this, where will it ends? Modified humans? Uh, I’m sorry but I don’t think that approving something has any ethical value. We are not basing the decision of approving salmon on a theocracy, this isn’t exactly a religious discussion, it’s a debate on if we should approve GE fish… There is no greediness involved; we are helping with heart disease. “Saying that poor people would it more fish, even with lower prices, is only a vague suposition. Having an healthy living standart doesn't depend only on prices, but mostly on education. Furthermore we don't have proof that GM salmon would be healthy at all. Even with higher N-3 fatty acids intake, we still don't know the consequenced of GM food on human body” Okay, so if we have more of something doesn’t it logically conclude it would be cheaper? FDA Study: modified salmon are not dangerous to humans http://www.komonews.com... Federal health regulators say a genetically engineered salmon that grows twice as fast as normal is unlikely to harm the environment, clearing the way for the first approval of a genetically engineered animal for human consumption. The Food and Drug Administration on Friday released its environmental assessment of the AquaAdvantage salmon, a faster-growing fish which has been subject to a contentious, years long debate at the agency. The document concludes that the fish "will not have any significant impacts on the quality of the human environment of the United States." FDA Study: Food from AquAdvantage salmon is the same as any Atlantic salmon. No risk to humans Dr. Ronald L. Stotish 2011. (President & CEO, AquaBounty Technologies, Inc.; developers of the salmon) testimony before U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries & Coast Guard, 15 Dec 2011 “Environmental Risks of Genetically Engineered Fish” http://www.commerce.senate.gov... The FDA’s center for veterinary medicine has concluded that the AquAdvantage salmon, in addition to being indistinguishable from Atlantic salmon, is an Atlantic salmon, and that the food from AquAdvantage salmon is the same as food from any other Atlanticsalmon.CVM has determined that the genetic change does not harm the fish, and is safe for the consuming public. It’s also determined that the data and the information we have provided, as well as the conditions and controls we propose to implement, that would be required upon approval of any application, provide meaningful assurance that the AquAdvantage salmon are not expected to have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment in the United States or in foreign countries. Biotech jobs : “Right, but allowing GM salmon would destroy a lot of jobs in the research sector, because usually before approving something, we use to wait for scientist's approval, and for proofs that it is not dangerous. So if we allow it yet, there will be a lower priority on research” Um, I’m pretty sure that’s not true. As I’ve shown in previous evidence brought up in this round that the FDA has run tests on this salmon, we are now waiting for approval. AquaAdvantage has had 18 years of waiting for this to be approved! I’m sure it has had its fair share of testing. Also, when anything has been approved research sectors, think tanks, and other groups don’t just shut down, they have plenty of other products they are testing and they have possibilities for new ones. Voting points: 1) Reduced heart disease: 2) Biotech jobs. 3) Environmental benefits. 4) New technologies. 5) Breaking rules in forfeit.