And the Race is On!

If you were willing to try your luck in the office World Cup pool, here’s a little contest that might be equally exciting.  See if you can pick which genetically engineered food will enter the marketplace first: Frankenswine or Arnold Schwartzensalmon.  We have some other great names for a similar and unfortunate creation.  Currently, the competitors are neck and neck.  Both “food products” are in the queue at the Food and Drug Administration – after a ten year haul – waiting to be approved for our tables.

The Canadian Environmental Protection Agency approved the manufacturing of Enviropig™, but only in confined environments for now. The University of Guelph developed the Frankenswine as a solution to a factory farm problem.

Enviropig™, which is being developed by the University of Guelph, got the nod from the Canadian Environmental Protection Agency in February, giving them permission to manufacture the morphed pigs, but only in confined environments. Enviropigs™ are the proposed solution to a factory farm problem associated with having thousands of pigs — and their waste — in one location, which is not an issue outside of the factory farm model. Our fact sheet, Enviropig™ or Frankenswine gives a thorough explanation of why this swine is not fine.

Pigs require phosphorus in their diets, but getting it by way of feed grains makes it hard for them to digest. The phosphorus that doesn’t get absorbed ends up in manure. When hogs are raised on enough land to spread their waste, this isn’t a problem. Enviropigs™ are genetically engineered to secrete an enzyme called phytase, which allows them to absorb the phosphorus from feed more efficiently, resulting in less phosphorous in the manure and less money on feed additives. Somehow, mutating an animal in order to address a problem that could be solved by other means – like keeping fewer pigs in one place – seems backwards.

The New York Times’ Andrew Pollack reported on one of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) big decisions: whether or not to allow AquaBounty’s genetically engineered (GE) salmon onto plates in the U.S., and introduce the first type of GE food into the marketplace and into our stomachs. He speculated that, “some consumer and environmental groups are likely to raise objections to approval.” Let me confirm for you, Mr. Pollack: we raise a lot of objections. And, we’re not alone — right, Keith Wagstaff?

Here’s a great one: Food production profit should not take precedence over public health. The aquaculture industry, in general, is trying to increase efficiency and profitability of their products – in this case combining salmon and pout genes to make a fish that grows at twice the normal rate.  But, the FDA’s testing requirements are based on non-GE foods and are completely inappropriate for testing on scientifically tweaked fish. They also haven’t considered the environmental impact – the new trait that makes the salmon grow faster often makes them more aggressive.  Even if producers say they are sterile, they can still escape and out-compete wild salmon for food and habitat.

The FDA is currently reviewing whether or not to allow genetically engineered salmon onto plates in the U.S., and introduce the first type of GE food into the marketplace and into our stomachs. Consumer and environmental groups are not pleased, and for good reason.

The sad part of this “race” to bring GE animals to market is that is continues the unfortunate tradition of introducing untested techniques into our food before we’ve had the chance to determine safety. And, to make matters worse, the FDA has made it clear that they have no intention of requiring these products to be labeled when they reach the market.  So, place your bets on which will be the first GE animal to make it to our plates: the pig or the fish – but unless FDA remembers what their job is and puts health ahead of industry profits, consumers will lose in the end.

-Rich Bindell