Franken-fish

I just saw a headline that captured my eye and make my heart skip a beat: FDA to approve GM Salmon.  After reading the article, I moved to the comments page. Why? Because what the article has to say is pretty cut and dry (and without much in the way of genuine content). We have figured out a method by which we can make salmon grow larger and do so faster.  The FDA may approve this salmon for general consumption.  What I want to know is what we are saying about this.


One comment in particular caught my eye as it contained all of the platitudes and some of the errors that I find occurring repeatedly within this debate: (1) We cannot feed the whole planet fish on traditional methods of fishing; (2) The planet needs and wants more fish; (3) Telling the planet (I am assuming here we mean people on earth) they can't eat as much salmon is not a "politically feasible position"; (4) People are going to start farming these fish whether they are approved by the FDA or not; And (5) GMOs are not different than all of the other methods by which human beings have altered the ecosystem since we "left Africa".  


I was drawn to this comment because it was articulate, followed a pattern of argumentation one could recognize as logical (at least on its face)and expressed the most deceptive and dangerous thought patterns: 'We cannot control what others will do, including but not limited to need and greed.  Moreover, others (all others) will act out of wanton self-interest (in the short term) not matter what other information may cross their paths.  This self-interest will compel these 'others' to engage in what is, admittedly, perhaps a bad idea.  Get on board or go home.  Plus we can comfort ourselves with the idea that this activity is no different than walking, talking, breathing, and seeking out methods of basic survival.'  


Let me take the last point first:  Human beings are a part of the micro and macro ecosystems on this planet, just like any other organism.  Unlike some organisms, we can examine how our actions affect the systems in which we live.  And because we can, we should (a la Kant).  Period.


Returning then to the first point, why is it necessary, or even desirable, to feed the whole planet fish?  We do not come from homogenous environments, and as such our dietary needs are not uniform.  Further, it does not automatically follow that just because a diet contains fish, that all fish are created equal or are desired by the body for the same reasons.  While I may grant that, as populations grow and develop, we need to find new ways to feed these populations, I am not convinced, prima facie, that farming one, or several kindsm of fish, in one part of the world, is the answer.  


Moving on to (3), telling people to do anything, whether the command is to walk between two lines, or to eat or not eat certain foods, is rarely a "politically feasible position."  What does generally work is to present cognizant individuals with all available information and to ask them to make an informed and educated decision.  While this approach may feels scary (as 'we' cannot control the outcome) facts without fear-mongering often lead to individuals making intelligent choices.  (And here is where the NYTimes (who originally ran this article) could step up their game.  There is NO information of content in the entire article, though the editors of NYTimes do consider this front page news!)  


Yes, I said it: People are capable of coming to intelligent conclusions when presented with facts.  I have seen it with my own eyes and heard it with my own ears.  It is simply not the case that individuals will farm or support the farming of GM salmon when presented with all of the facts.  And if individuals will not by it, larger corporations will not produce it.  But again, the key is to have access to unbiased information whereby individuals can make informed decisions and have the data to support their claims (especially as they are bombarded by less expensive product and massive advertising campaigns).


I realize that I have not yet begun to address the facts of the case at hand, but I must run (literally).  Please write in with what you know and let's get the education game going!