<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: GE Salmon: BIO’s Sacrificial Lamb?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blogs/ge-salmon-bios-sacrificial-lamb/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blogs/ge-salmon-bios-sacrificial-lamb/</link>
	<description>The latest blogs from Food and Water Watch</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 01:56:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Germain</title>
		<link>http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blogs/ge-salmon-bios-sacrificial-lamb/#comment-60919</link>
		<dc:creator>William Germain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Mar 2013 20:20:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/?post_type=blogs&#038;p=21914#comment-60919</guid>
		<description>Tim, thank you for your detailed account of what appears to be a highly-flawed approval process for GMO salmon at the FDA. I came to the F&amp;WW website looking for recent coverage of this issue after reading a rather disturbing opinion piece by Emily Anthes in today&#039;s NYT entitled &quot;Don’t Be Afraid of Genetic Modification&quot;. I was struck by how Emily Anthes&#039; account of AquaBounty, it&#039;s development of the AquAdvantage product, and FDA approval conflicts with statements and reporting conducted by F&amp;WW. In contrast to Anthes&#039; apparent cheerleading for the biotech industry, your work demonstrates a thoroughness commensurate to the importance of the GMO debate and its potential to impact human and environmental health. I would urge F&amp;WW to submit a response to Anthes in the NYT to challenge her statements regarding the sufficiency of the FDA approval process as pertains to AquAdvantage salmon, expose the questionable claims and careless practices of AquaBounty, and urge a more careful consideration of transgenic food products prior to their being approved for human consumption.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim, thank you for your detailed account of what appears to be a highly-flawed approval process for GMO salmon at the FDA. I came to the F&amp;WW website looking for recent coverage of this issue after reading a rather disturbing opinion piece by Emily Anthes in today&#8217;s NYT entitled &#8220;Don’t Be Afraid of Genetic Modification&#8221;. I was struck by how Emily Anthes&#8217; account of AquaBounty, it&#8217;s development of the AquAdvantage product, and FDA approval conflicts with statements and reporting conducted by F&amp;WW. In contrast to Anthes&#8217; apparent cheerleading for the biotech industry, your work demonstrates a thoroughness commensurate to the importance of the GMO debate and its potential to impact human and environmental health. I would urge F&amp;WW to submit a response to Anthes in the NYT to challenge her statements regarding the sufficiency of the FDA approval process as pertains to AquAdvantage salmon, expose the questionable claims and careless practices of AquaBounty, and urge a more careful consideration of transgenic food products prior to their being approved for human consumption.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
