Det amerikanske mattilsynet slapp oppunder jul en rapport som konkluderer med at myndighetene ikke ser noen betenkeligheter ved å godkjenne det første genmodifiserte kjøttproduserende kommersielle dyret, en genmodifisert laks som vokser dobbelt så raskt som normalt.

Hvis den genmodifiserte laksen ser dagens lys vil det kunne ha stor innvirkning på norsk lakseoppdrett.

Den genmodifiserte laksen er klar for konsum etter halvannet år, i stedet for tre.

Rapporten skal nå ut til høring, svar skal sendes inn og deretter behandles. Det kan ta tid, men utfallet synes klart: USA vil tillate produsering av genmodifisert laks.

Laksen skal produseres i store tanker på land. Myndighetene ser ingen risiko for miljøet, dvs livet i havet. Men hva hvis noen med overlegg plasserer den syntetiske laksen i havet, for å ødelegge for konkurrenter? Det vil ikke være første gang mennesker gjør noe slikt av profitthensyn.

The AquAdvantage salmon, as it is called, is an Atlantic salmon that contains a growth hormone gene from the Chinook salmon and a genetic switch from the ocean pout, an eel-like creature. The switch keeps the gene on so that the salmon produces growth hormone year round, rather than only during warm weather. The fish reach market weight in about 18 months instead of three years.

The F.D.A. tentatively concluded in September 2010 that the salmon would be safe to eat and for the environment. A committee of outside advisers, while finding some shortcomings in the analysis, did not contradict those conclusions in general.

The agency then embarked on a more detailed environmental analysis that has now come to the same conclusions.

The main concern addressed was whether the genetically engineered salmon could escape and establish themselves in the wild, with detrimental environmental consequences. The larger salmon, for instance, could conceivably outcompete wild Atlantic salmon for food or mates.

The agency said the chance this would happen was “extremely remote.” It said the salmon would be raised in inland tanks with multiple barriers to escape. Even if some fish did escape, the nearby bodies of water would be too hot or salty for their survival. And reproduction would be unlikely because the fish would be sterilized, though the sterilization technique is not foolproof.

The agency also said that approval of the salmon would have no effect on endangered species, including wild Atlantic salmon. The National Marine Fisheries Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service did not disagree.

AquaBounty produces its eggs at a facility in Prince Edward Island, Canada. The eggs are shipped to the highlands of Panama, where the fish are grown to market weight.

The federal agency said that other facilities for growing the salmon would require separate approvals. It also noted that it did not assess how the salmon would affect the environment in Panama and Canada, only in the United States.

Opponents said that the agency should do a more complete environmental impact statement. They also said that not enough samples were studied to conclude that the fish would be safe to eat.

Scientists and companies working on animal biotechnology had complained that the failure to approve the salmon was discouraging investment in the industry.

An article in Slate earlier this week said the White House had been delaying release of the environmental assessment for political reasons, violating the Obama administration’s pledge to make decisions based on science. The environmental assessment was released soon afterward.

..

AquaBounty has argued that the faster growth of its fish makes it feasible to rear them in inland tanks rather than ocean pens, reducing the environmental impact. “That allows us not to disturb the oceans whatsoever,” said Elliot Entis, the founder of AquaBounty.

Mr. Entis, who no longer works for the company, has formed a new company to rear the salmon in the United States.

AquaBounty, which is based in Maynard, Mass., nearly ran out of money waiting for the salmon to be approved.

se også:

GM salmon: FDA’s assessment of environmental risks (LA Times)
http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-aquabounty-salmon-fda-assesses-risks-20121224,0,2554480.story

Genetically Modified Animals (Women’s Health Magazine)
http://www.womenshealthmag.com/nutrition/genetically-modified-animals

Protect our waters from GE Salmon (Center for Food Safety)
http://ge-fish.org/

Below the Surface: The Dangers of Genetically Engineered Salmon (Food & Water Watch)
http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/factsheet/below-the-surface/

Genetically Engineered Salmon (Ocean Conservancy)
http://www.oceanconservancy.org/our-work/aquaculture/aquaculture-genetically.html