Eight Anti-Science Senators Seek to Halt GE Salmon
Written by Brian Garst, Posted in Energy and the Environment, Government Meddling
For eight years we listened to self-righteous lefties wrap their personal policy preferences under the cloak of objective science, then beat anyone who disagreed with those preferences over the head with charges of being “anti-science.” So when will we see the same treatment for the 7 Democratic Senators + 1 liberal Republican Lisa Murkowski for their letter threatening the FDA if they do not override the science in favor of their political opposition to genetically engineered salmon?
A group of senators has asked the Food and Drug Administration to abandon its approval process of genetically engineered salmon as food, threatening to push legislation to strip the FDA’s funding to study the fish if the agency does not comply.
Eight senators sent a letter dated July 15 to the FDA asking it to “immediately cease” consideration of such salmon, a product brought before the agency by AquaBounty Technologies 15 years ago.
…Although the fish would be kept in a land-based facility, environmental groups worry that the salmon could escape and potentially harm fish in the sea. They’re also concerned that the fish, which do not get any larger than unmodified salmon but grow twice as fast, could out-compete native populations for food.
…The senators, who represent coastal states with thriving fisheries such as Alaska, Oregon and Washington, pledged not to provide funding for the program should the FDA go forward with the approval process. They argue that genetically modified salmon could kill jobs by interfering with the fish farming industry, cause environmental damage and potentially harm consumers.
“I just don’t see a reason from a fundamental standpoint why we have to start manufacturing ‘Frankenfish’ when we have incredible fisheries that employ thousands of people,” said Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska).
And here we see their true motives. They are seeking to abuse the purpose of the FDA in order to protect existing industries in their states from competition. They threw out some token scientific concerns, but they are clearly flimsy.
“Even if someone were to steal and release them into the ocean of Panama, they would have to swim thousands of miles to find mates,” said Bill Muir, a professor of animal sciences at Purdue University who specializes in genetics and environmental risk assessment, particularly of fish. Muir said he’s looked at AquaBounty’s product and deemed it safe for the environment.
Their real concerns are based on protectionists economics and narrow self interest, as they seek to protect potential donors and supporters in their respective states. In other words, they are putting their political interests ahead of what’s right. This should come as no surprise, as the political system is designed to encourage just such behavior. This is one of the many faults with creating organizations such as the FDA in the first place. They are inherently part of the political process, and subjective to all the negatives of the incentive structure associated with it. Even if this attempted bullying does not succeed on this particular issue, it will and has already on many others.