What deception? If you can buy the salmon, it will be labeled as "bioengineered". If you eat the salmon in a restaurant, it doesn't have to be labeled, but neither does any other fish have to be labeled. It's up to the restauranteur. There are some fish which have poisonous parts that only a very well qualified chef can remove, but not labeled. If you eat mushrooms in a restaurant, does the restaurant tell you what species of mushroom they serve? There are plenty of wild mushrooms that can kill you a lot faster than a GMO salmon.
@@charlesmrader People have the right to know what exactly they're being served, and if that's not restaurant policy to divulge such, then they also reserve the right not to patronize those establishments.
@@joschelei262 Yes of course. I don't know if you realize that I completely agree with you about labeling, even though I suspect that we have completely different ideas about GMO food. But "deception" is a little more complicated. Let me give you some history about the Aquabounty company and genetically modified salmon. Not the whole history, just one very revealing episode. Quite a few years ago, The FDA decided that the GMO salmon was safe to eat, to grow, etc. One of the opponents of GMO salmon (although not GMO anything else) was the Senator from Alaska. She succeeded in pressuring the FDA to not allow the IMPORTATION of GMO salmon until FDA had stated how it was to be labeled. She simultaneously pressured FDA to NOT issue a statement about how it was to be labeled. You will surely see this as having an element of unfairness - if not imagine that the same rule was applied to some food you actually want to eat. Aquabounty management stated its willingness to have the fish labeled any way FDA decided it should be labeled. But as long as it was NOT stated how it should be labeled, it couldn't be labeled and hence couldn't be imported.This standoff was maintained for many years in a row. Now why was "imported" such a big deal? Because Aquabounty genetically modifies salmon eggs in Canada and imports the modified eggs into the US to grow into market size fish. So labeling, in this case, is the company telling ITSELF that the eggs it is importing - from one part of the company to another - that the imported eggs it is passing to itself are genetically modified, which of course it already knows. You see, the labeling was not about deception. It was used by GMO salmon opponents, for year after year, as a means of deception, deceiving the public into thinking that the salmon was unsafe and should be labeled before it was allowed into the US. Incredibly, it goes even further. Finally Congress passed a law about labeling bioengineered food. Not everyone is happy about that law, but it is a law and it contains specific language telling how the named company Aquabounty is to label the named fish. At this point Senator Murkowski had to escalate her deception. The law passed by Congress said that the form of labeling of all GMO foods was to be specified by an office in the Department of Agriculture. FDA is a part of the Department of Agriculture, but not the same part of the Department of Agriculture. So Murkowski successfully maintained that the company could not bring the eggs from one of its locations to the other location without labeling the eggs according to the specifications NOT PROVIDED by FDA but provided for all other bioengineered foods by a different agency of the same department. This logjam was finally broken when the FDA commissioner decided to resign, which freed him from the Murkowski pressure, so he issued the labeling guidance already issued for the salmon by the other Dept. of Agriculture agency. So you see, the word deception has a rather different connotation depending on whether it is to protect consumers who would like to decide themselves what they eat, or to prevent consumers from eating what some politician wants them to buy instead from fishermen in her state.
Let me assume that you have, for whatever reason, decided that you do not want to ever eat a GMO salmon. What's the best way to avoid it? Well, there's only one company raising and selling GMO salmon. It's salmon constitutes 0.1% of the Atlantic salmon eaten in North America. So if you do nothing at all, on average one portion of salmon in a thousand will be GMO salmon. If you decide to give up all Atlantic salmon to avoid that one in a thousand, then you can avoid the GMO salmon entirely by buying only pacific salmon, which is 100% wild caught. It is, however, usually more expensive.
@@joschelei262 That may be a stupid comment, since there are no GMO meats, or, on the other hand, you may have bought into the extreme claims that when an animal eats GMO food it becomes genetically modified itself.
Our FDA is criminal in not allowing a label to be required.
Never order salmon at a restaurant.
I'm sure they have it in stores, just lie about it 🙄
Just label the product for what it is, why the deception?
What deception? If you can buy the salmon, it will be labeled as "bioengineered". If you eat the salmon in a restaurant, it doesn't have to be labeled, but neither does any other fish have to be labeled. It's up to the restauranteur. There are some fish which have poisonous parts that only a very well qualified chef can remove, but not labeled. If you eat mushrooms in a restaurant, does the restaurant tell you what species of mushroom they serve? There are plenty of wild mushrooms that can kill you a lot faster than a GMO salmon.
@@charlesmrader People have the right to know what exactly they're being served, and if that's not restaurant policy to divulge such, then they also reserve the right not to patronize those establishments.
@@joschelei262 Yes of course. I don't know if you realize that I completely agree with you about labeling, even though I suspect that we have completely different ideas about GMO food.
But "deception" is a little more complicated. Let me give you some history about the Aquabounty company and genetically modified salmon. Not the whole history, just one very revealing episode. Quite a few years ago, The FDA decided that the GMO salmon was safe to eat, to grow, etc. One of the opponents of GMO salmon (although not GMO anything else) was the Senator from Alaska. She succeeded in pressuring the FDA to not allow the IMPORTATION of GMO salmon until FDA had stated how it was to be labeled. She simultaneously pressured FDA to NOT issue a statement about how it was to be labeled. You will surely see this as having an element of unfairness - if not imagine that the same rule was applied to some food you actually want to eat. Aquabounty management stated its willingness to have the fish labeled any way FDA decided it should be labeled. But as long as it was NOT stated how it should be labeled, it couldn't be labeled and hence couldn't be imported.This standoff was maintained for many years in a row.
Now why was "imported" such a big deal? Because Aquabounty genetically modifies salmon eggs in Canada and imports the modified eggs into the US to grow into market size fish.
So labeling, in this case, is the company telling ITSELF that the eggs it is importing - from one part of the company to another - that the imported eggs it is passing to itself are genetically modified, which of course it already knows. You see, the labeling was not about deception. It was used by GMO salmon opponents, for year after year, as a means of deception, deceiving the public into thinking that the salmon was unsafe and should be labeled before it was allowed into the US.
Incredibly, it goes even further. Finally Congress passed a law about labeling bioengineered food. Not everyone is happy about that law, but it is a law and it contains specific language telling how the named company Aquabounty is to label the named fish. At this point Senator Murkowski had to escalate her deception. The law passed by Congress said that the form of labeling of all GMO foods was to be specified by an office in the Department of Agriculture. FDA is a part of the Department of Agriculture, but not the same part of the Department of Agriculture. So Murkowski successfully maintained that the company could not bring the eggs from one of its locations to the other location without labeling the eggs according to the specifications NOT PROVIDED by FDA but provided for all other bioengineered foods by a different agency of the same department.
This logjam was finally broken when the FDA commissioner decided to resign, which freed him from the Murkowski pressure, so he issued the labeling guidance already issued for the salmon by the other Dept. of Agriculture agency.
So you see, the word deception has a rather different connotation depending on whether it is to protect consumers who would like to decide themselves what they eat, or to prevent consumers from eating what some politician wants them to buy instead from fishermen in her state.
I think they should ask the public if this is what they want on their dinner table
I DO WANT to eat GMO salmon (and other food). Could anyone plz tell me where to find it?
Just no right !
Let me assume that you have, for whatever reason, decided that you do not want to ever eat a GMO salmon. What's the best way to avoid it? Well, there's only one company raising and selling GMO salmon. It's salmon constitutes 0.1% of the Atlantic salmon eaten in North America. So if you do nothing at all, on average one portion of salmon in a thousand will be GMO salmon. If you decide to give up all Atlantic salmon to avoid that one in a thousand, then you can avoid the GMO salmon entirely by buying only pacific salmon, which is 100% wild caught. It is, however, usually more expensive.
You can eat the GMO meats then, more for you.
@@joschelei262 That may be a stupid comment, since there are no GMO meats, or, on the other hand, you may have bought into the extreme claims that when an animal eats GMO food it becomes genetically modified itself.
@@charlesmrader Man, get out of here with that bullshit, there GMO animals specifically breed to be offered as food sources.