1. GE salmon could harm our fish stocks: scientists
2. Genetically engineered salmon could spawn problems, scientists fear
---
---
1. GE salmon could harm our fish stocks: scientists
SARAH SCHMIDT, Postmedia News
Montreal Gazette, February 23 2011
http://bit.ly/hY9WGr
There's a risk Canadian fish stocks could be harmed if the world's first genetically engineered salmon is approved for commercialization, federal scientists suggest.
Internal records obtained by Postmedia News also indicate experts from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) are concerned about "limited" and possibly "constrained" regulatory powers around the approvals for GE fish.
The analysis, from senior scientists specializing in biotechnology and aquaculture, comes as a company called AquaBounty Technologies works to bring GE salmon to the dinner plate.
Hoping to get approval in the United States to sell the first genetically engineered fish that people can eat, the company cleared an important hurdle in August, when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's preliminary analysis concluded that the salmon, engineered in Atlantic Canada to grow twice as fast as normal fish, are safe to eat and not expected to have a significant impact on the environment.
The AquAdvantage salmon contains a growth hormone gene from the Chinook salmon and a genetic on-switch from the ocean pout (an eellike fish), resulting in the continuous production of the hormone. The salmon grows to market size in 16 to 18 months instead of three years, but does not grow any bigger than conventional salmon.
The company plans to produce the eggs in Prince Edward Island, home to AquaBounty's research facility, where the Massachusetts-based company now grows sterile female GE salmon for research purposes. It uses technology developed by scientists at Memorial University in Newfoundland.
The eggs would then be shipped to Panama, where the genetically engineered Atlantic salmon would be raised at an inland fish farm and processed before getting shipped as table-ready fish to the U.S. for sale. The FDA's preliminary environmental analysis concluded it is "extremely unlikely that AquAdvantage Salmon would ever be able to survive and migrate to the Pacific Ocean."
The Canadian connection means AquaBounty must undergo a separate regulatory approval process in Canada. During early consultations a year ago involving AquaBounty officials and scientists from the Department of Fisheries, Environment Canada and Health Canada, fisheries officials voiced concerns.
"DFO clarified that while the risk assessment will focus on potential effects in Canada, there is potential risk of fish migrating back to affect Canadian fish stocks," according to the minutes, redacted in many places and released under access-toinformation legislation.
"DFO requested that containment and limitations to which companies in other countries will have to comply be clearly outlined in the notification."
In separate correspondence about draft minutes of this meeting, two government experts raised issues about the regulatory approvals process in Canada to approve GE fish.
Key passages of email correspondence between Caroline Mimeault, a scientific adviser at DFO's Biotechnology and Aquatic Animal Health Science, and Robert Devlin, a world renowned DFO scientist who studies risk assessment of GE fish at the department's Centre for Aquaculture and Environmental Research in West Vancouver, are redacted.
But the correspondence refers to limits and possible constraints of the current Canadian regulations for GE fish.
Mimeault wrote that she "totally agreed" with Devlin, "but we are limited by the current ... regulations."
The concerns contradict newly released internal DFO media lines, prepared in May 2009 in case of journalists' questions about AquaBounty.
The Canadians regulations "currently provide an effective regulatory framework for protecting the environment from potential risks of GE fish," state the media lines.
---
---
2. Genetically engineered salmon could spawn problems, scientists fear
By Sarah Schmidt, Postmedia News
Edmonton Journal
February 23, 2011
http://bit.ly/eTfNxL
There's a risk Canadian fish stocks could be harmed if the world's first genetically engineered salmon is approved for commercialization, federal scientists suggest.
Internal records obtained by Postmedia News also indicate experts from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans are concerned about "limited" and possibly "constrained" regulatory powers around the approvals for GE fish.
The analysis, from senior scientists specializing in biotechnology and aquaculture, comes as a company called AquaBounty Technologies works to bring GE salmon to the dinner plate. Hoping to get approval in the United States to sell the first genetically engineered fish that people can eat, the company cleared an important hurdle in August, when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's preliminary analysis concluded that the salmon, engineered in Atlantic Canada to grow twice as fast as normal fish, are safe to eat and not expected to have a significant impact on the environment.
The AquAdvantage salmon contains a growth hormone gene from the Chinook salmon and a genetic on-switch from the ocean pout, resulting in the continuous production of the hormone. The salmon grows to market size in 16 to 18 months instead of three years, but does not grow any bigger than conventional salmon.
The company plans to produce the eggs in Prince Edward Island, home to AquaBounty's research facility, where the Massachusetts-based company currently grows sterile female GE salmon for research purposes. It uses technology developed by scientists at Memorial University in Newfoundland.
The eggs would then be shipped to Panama, where the genetically engineered Atlantic salmon would be raised at an inland fish farm and processed before getting shipped as table-ready fish to the U.S. for sale. The FDA's preliminary environmental analysis concluded it is "extremely unlikely that AquAdvantage Salmon would ever be able to survive and migrate to the Pacific Ocean."
The Canadian connection means AquaBounty must undergo a separate regulatory approval process in Canada. During early consultations a year ago involving AquaBounty officials and scientists from the Department of Fisheries, Environment Canada and Health Canada, fisheries officials voiced concerns.
"DFO clarified that while the risk assessment will focus on potential effects in Canada, there is potential risk of fish migrating back to affect Canadian fish stocks," according to the minutes, redacted in many places and released under accessto-information legislation.
"DFO requested that containment and limitations to which companies in other countries will have to comply be clearly outlined in the notification."
In separate correspondence about draft minutes of this meeting, two government experts raised issues about the regulatory approvals process in Canada to approve GE fish.
Key passages of e-mail correspondence between Caroline Mimeault, a scientific adviser at DFO's Biotechnology and Aquatic Animal Health Science, and Robert Devlin, a world renowned DFO scientist who studies risk assessment of GE fish at the department's Centre for Aquaculture and Environmental Research in West Vancouver, are redacted. But the correspondence refers to limits and possible constraints of the current Canadian regulations for GE fish.
Mimeault wrote that she "totally agreed" with Devlin, "but we are limited by the current... regulations."
Mimeault, citing another colleague's input about the kind of information that can be requested of a company seeking to commercialize GE fish, said the government "may be constrained" by the regulations.
This e-mail exchange includes an attachment of a journal article Devlin co-wrote that found dispersal behaviour has been affected by introducing an outside gene into a fish, so GE fish may venture into habitat previously not used by wild fish.
The apparent concerns about assessments and regulations contradict newly released internal DFO media lines, prepared in May 2009 in case of journalists' questions about AquaBounty.
The Canadians regulations "currently provide an effective regulatory framework for protecting the envi-ronment from potential risks of GE fish," state the media lines.
Another draft of media lines, prepared in August 2010 by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, also shows that DFO scientists say there is a risk of contamination of wild species in the case of accidental escape of GE fish.
Lucy Sharratt, co-ordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network and critic of AquaBounty's efforts to commercialize its GE fish, said she's worried inadequate regulations could hamper the ability of DFO scientists to carry out a comprehensive risk assessment of a GE fish application.
"The documents confirm the fish cannot be contained, infertility cannot be 100 per cent achieved, and when fish escape, there's a risk it will come back to affect our fish stocks," said Sharratt. "This could be a case of good scientists inside departments constrained by regulations."
Michael Hansen, a scientist at the New York-based Consumers Union, said the concerns of federal fisheries experts are noteworthy.
"The real issue here is DFO are raising credible scientific issues because, frankly, the assessment that the FDA did was scientifically completely inadequate."
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal