A cranky opinion for
CRANKY OPINION SATURDAY
This Saturday’s cranky opinion
differs from most in that I not only have very little knowledge on the subject
(nothing different there) but my opinion is also subject to change. This week, opposing opinions are not only
welcome, but might even change my thinking.
As always, in all comments, no name calling please, and that means you,
you big stupid head.
The FDA is
about to allow production of GMO salmon (genetically modified organism.) This would be the first non-plant GMO food
allowed for general consumption.
Environmentalists are steadfast against GMO salmon. The new salmon is modified to grow quickly in
fish farms.
I have read
several complaints against this so-called Frankenfish. One is that it could be released into the
wild and decimate the wild salmon population by being more
competitive for natural resources. The
second complaint is a legal issue. Would
corporations hold the patent to these fish?
The third is how do we know these fish are truly safe for consumption?
The
developers claim that since these fish are all maintained inland there is no
chance of them disturbing the wild population.
I would think that there is very little chance, but certainly not “no
chance,” but I am not sure how they could decimate the wild salmon anyway.
The legal
issue doesn't really bother me. Let the
developers patent their fish. I’m not
sure why that is a problem. They spend
the money to create a superior food, they should profit from it just as the
developers of a better mouse trap would profit from their invention.
I would hope
the FDA would test these fish to determine if they are safe for
consumption. It is not as if they are
radioactive or fed chemicals. It seems
to me that all organisms via evolution are products of very slow genetic
modification. I understand that 90% of
corn and soy beans are genetically modified to resist disease and grow
faster. If corn is corn and soy is soy,
then salmon would be salmon.
I don’t
understand the big worry about GMO food.
Is it hysteria over anything not “natural?” I understand people wanting to eat organic
food. I understand the concern about
food treated with chemicals and pesticides.
I am not sure what those concerns have to do with genetic modification.
Luther
Burbank was a genius who gave us hundreds of different varieties of potatoes
and other fruits and vegetables. He did
this through cross breeding, grafting, and hybridization.
I’m not sure what all those processes are about, but they sound a bit
scary, and they don’t sound natural, but we have been eating his varieties and
thousands of other varieties of foods produced with these processes for over one
hundred years.
Genetically
modifying organisms just sounds to me like altering organisms with the ability
to use more beneficial characteristics then are currently available through
traditional crossbreeding.
What is the
danger of GMO food? Why the hysteria in
some circles? Is it political? Is it economic? Is it scientific?
Is corn just
corn? Is salmon just salmon? How difficult is it to test for differences
which could be dangerous? What is the
problem?
I believe
these GMO foods are and will be safe.
They are easier to produce and will have beneficial
characteristics. They will grow faster
and require less fertilizer. They will
be disease resistant and require fewer pesticides. They will grow faster and have a smaller
carbon footprint.
It seems to
me that GMO foods are full of pluses with no drawbacks. That is my opinion. It is subject to change. Go ahead, enlighten me.
The preceding wishy-washy opinion is
that of a cranky old man, and not necessarily that of management…Mrs. Cranky.


