Your reliance on probability is as absurd as creationists’ – including Intelligent Design advocates – gross misunderstanding and misinterpretation of basic probability theory and statistics. Even if your contention was true, the very risk you cite is quite minimal to say the least.

Gil is absolutely right in criticizing your absurd contention that DNA from those organisms we eat will affect ours. Yours is the type of reasoning I see all too often from global warming, evolution and vaccination denialists.

While it is possible that these fish might escape in the future, your other assertion that DNA from items we eat regularly alters our own DNA is patently absurd and false…

These will get out. All the others have. Statistically, 99.99% means that one in 10,000 will pass this modification on. That’s 100 out of a million fish. With millions and millions and millions of these beasties in line to be produced, the chances are good that this will “escape” like all the other mods have already.

This is not a good thing…

Prions have been found only in domesticated livestock (mammals) and their feed (which has included some ground-up organic matter from the corpses of these animals). I don’t think those involved in aquaculture of this new genetically-modified strain of salmon would introduce such feed or could given the substantially different dietary requirements between the livestock in question and salmon.

The aquabounty fish is a regular salmon that has a gene inserted into its genome from another fish. This gene creates growth hormone year-round rather than seasonally, which allows the fish to grow year-round rather than seasonally. The end-result is that the fish reaches normal adult size much more quickly than it would without the gene added (about half the time). The author of this article was incorrect when he/she said it grows 2-6x the size in half the time . . . the fish is no larger than any other adult fish, it just gets normal size much more quickly.

The affects of the addition of this gene have been analyzed from many different aspects, and from my best estimate the only negative finding is that some of the fish have a minor defect in the jawbone, and some have something they call focal inflammation (neither of which seem to have any adverse affects on the fish). These fish require ~10% less food to grow, can be raised in aquaculture (unlike wild salmon), and (for those fearing escape into the wild), are rendered sterile (99.9% of the treated population). Yes, I can understand the “yuck” factor when considering eating a “modified” fish . . .but please recognize it for what it is . . .an irrational fear; these fish pose very little risk and quite a bit of benefit. If you can’t get over the irrational “yuck factor”, don’t eat it . . . but please stop trying to halt progress in bettering our food technologies. I for one would be the first to line up to eat one of these fish.

By the way Cathy . . . consuming ANY sushi is much more dangerous than consuming one of these fish cooked. The foreign DNA in Aquavantage pose no risk; the bacteria and parasites known to contaminate a high percentage of fish destined for sushi pose a very real danger to those who consume it. Show me one single case of a negative consequence from consuming DNA . . . . you cannot, because it is not dangerous (and, for those of you who may not know it . . . every single piece of food you consume is packed full of DNA . . . all of which contains thousands of random mutations that occur naturally). So, no sushi for me, but please do serve me up some Aquavantage salmon!!!

GMO foods are always advertised as wonderful things that will put an end to world hunger, things that would have ingrown vitamins and so forth, and yet, the industry doesn’t actually produce those.

As far as we can tell the food industry produces foods that are less nutritious, foods that are artificially ripened in transit via ethylene gas and not fertilized in rich soil, but rather with nitrogen, so they’re the exact opposite of what they claim to be.

Instead GMO producers create things that last longer on shelves, contain more sugar (as if we needed to consume any more), have terminator genes, or contain genes from bacteria to produce toxins, so they can’t be replanted, or are resistant to the use of tons of pesticide – so that they can sell both more pesticide and more seeds.

And there are papers that indicate that some GMOs, such as soy, cause sterility.
There are stories of farmers who have switched to GMOs that have committed suicide when their crops failed and they couldn’t pay for the seeds.

The FDA, a government agency, needs to protect the interests of the consumer, not those of the corporations, and it needs to stop hiring those who worked in the corporations as its executives. It also needs to do independent tests of every product, instead of allowing the foxes to guard the chickens.

The history of these things speak for themselves. Thanks, but I’ll not be eating this fish, it sounds like more of the same. And that isn’t progress, it’s greed.

just a hunch, i dont claim to be right or have any supporting material to back it up.

FDA, can I sign up for some all you can eat sushi trials?

Thanks for your comments with regards to steroids, dietary supplements and the potential survival of this genetically modified breed of salmon in the wild. We’ve dined on genetically modified plants and animals for at least two decades now, with no notable deleterious effects, so any fears about feasting on this new “frankenfish” should be regarded as those unsubstantiated by sound scientific and medical research; such fears are quite groundless and are based on ill-informed knowledge of genetically modified domesticated plants and animals. I, myself, wouldn’t hesitate having sushi or a grilled steak from the meat of this “frankenfish”.

We have already seen GMO soy and corn crossbred with natural strains. No one knows for sure whether it’s harmless as Monsanto would have us all believe. We should be working on growing protein in a test tube versus creating new species of animals.

The stated goal to save the dwindling population of fish could backfire as these superfish compete for resources with natural salmon eventually overcrowding the salmon ecosytem and pushing natural salmon to even greater scarcity. Could even crowd out other speciaes of fish. A 6X salmon might compete with larger Tuna and Halibut …..

no steroids/supplements either. Standard aquaculture fish food, which, in regards to megan’s comment, has been moving away from fish meal and toward vegetable and soy meal.

The only “impact” that these “frankenfish” will have with regards to their consumption as food is zero, even if they are eaten raw as part of sushi. Human digestive juices are sufficient to digest all the genetically-modified organs, muscles, proteins, fats, etc. The only potential concerns I can envision would be with respect to which chemicals that might introduce either as vitamin dietary supplements or as something analogous to steroids to promote faster growth in these fish stocks.

There have been so many claims that GM plants wouldn’t have any negative effect on people, and yet, it turns out, they do after all, some even to such an extent, that they get pulled off the market. Wouldn’t it be better to make sure of that BEFORE there’s a need to pull anything, once it might be too late?