The Government is considering an application for an east coast corporation to introduce a genetically engineered Salmon. That's right- it's a fish that's been genetically engineered and developed to grow faster and bigger, and the company wants to introduce it into the food supply.
So, what do you think? Should we approve a GM fish?
I would say YES - if the Government honestly operated with the best of intentions and everything was done with the most consistent and deepest efforts to produce ONLY what contributes to the BEST HEALTH and to promote the highest level of care.
It would be 'wonderful' if some International Group - totally unrelated to political ties and free from 'intelligence or military' intervention - were in place to make sure everything is being done for the people at large.
I personlly believe as advancements in our grounding and understanding of the intricate details of a variety of genes and their interactions are thoroughly detailed and totally acknowledged to the highest extent - then we would be WRONG not to make 'modifications' that foster greater health and a more enriched quality of life.
a symptom of collapsed wild Atlantic salmon fisheries due to:
habitat loss
interbreeding with hatchery fish
overharvest
disease
It makes me ill.
The more we reduce natural productivity and diversity of food supply...
It is increasingly evident that Habitat Loss and Overharvest are very largely elimating almost every 'species' throughout the world.
It makes me ill too - because we are just barely beginning to understand the very critical role almost every species of life has and why they have been - and were always meant to be - a needed and 'respected' part of a more sacred system.
But Corporate interests and the irresistable 'human drive' to dominate and have more wealth and power appears to be a longstanding characteristic that will remain the most dominating aspect by which the world at large interacts with LIFE on Earth.
The loss of Habitat - will likely never be a 'real problem' that people can appreciate until it's too late - or conditions are so grave they are forced to react.
**************************************************
With the 'disease' and 'interbreeding problems' - and here I would all the more say 'reducing natural productivity and diversity of food supply'
I would think GM would offer the most guaranteed advancements against disease - and perhaps 'interbreeding problems'.
On the whole - I would think GM would be driven to let 'natural productivity' continue but with genes and chomosones that are far less suspectible to 'disease' and equally geared towards healthier aspects becoming even more healthy. Diversity of the food supply would likely be far more enhanced - as GM continues.
*********************************************
I don't know anything - and I'm just throwing out ideas -
Not trying to challege you - and no doubt you are 'the expert'
Contrary to common myth..
Thanks man -- well now we know !
Genetically engineered living "anything" is not harmful to the eater of said flesh...Whatever it is,
can not pass on to the eater anything that has to with passing on genes or chromosomes, etc....Mad-Cow and stuff like that is a microbe/parasite/bacteria that can be passed on..
Bon Appetit
If we stretch our imaginations - and think in terms of hypotheticals - and more abstract possibliities .....
IS it possible that 'Biological Agents' could be introduced in a wide variety of ways - to screw up the genes or chromosomes to cause an endless array of diseases like 'Gulf War Syndrome' - 'Aids' and a bunch of other stuff.
Of course making this a deliberate part of the food supply - would be as far fetched as introducing it to the water supply. At this point however it appears to be easier to have it 'unseen' in the air and all someone has to do is breathe or have contact with their skin and whatever.
Agreed Buster,
The problem is not the genetic engineering. The problem is: what is the result?
Yeah, I see what you're saying - but that sounds too much like the problem is not 'conception' - but what might happen.
If the fish that is genetically engineered starts producing hormones or bad protein chains that are then consumed by people, that is the issue.
That would something to consider - but I think the issue is more than that. The GM Corporations would likely be able to prove that defective hormones and 'bad protein chains' are far more likely to occur 'naturally' and show (in fact Prove) that is the basis for all they are doing.
So I would think perhaps the greatest issue is - is this 'The foot in the Door' - and what happens next.
Once this is fully proven to be 100% Beneficial (and they likely already know this - to now make it public). It then would be almost impossible to NOT accept the GM stuff to spread throughout the world.
I guess I can now make this known - but we (as a society) have long had in place 'machinery' to totally take the place of a woman's uterus. Overtime this will more than likely take the place of our long existing hap hazzard way. Yep - the days of 'morning sickness' and the never ending complications that have forever existed will be a thing of the past. Genetic Engineering will all the more be a huge part of this process - especially considering the 'baby' is being monitored far beyond anything that could be done outside of that. They will get the absolute MAX - in every possible way.
Well that's something I read about years prior - but is still not common knowledge yet.
I'm glad I saw this Thread - as I've been reflecting of various things as soon as I saw it on the news.
Was a GOOD BREAK -- now to finish up and head home in maybe another hour or two.
Have a great weekend everyone ---- and yes that includes YOU (whoever you may be) 
