13 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2016
    1. Most studies

      I think there should be a link to a peer reviewed study or review article

    2. studies by researchers who have compared genetically modified salmon to their wild counterparts have shown that the fish behave differently

      Good place for a reference

    3. it could outcompete the wild salmon, which is smaller, for food and breeding grounds

      This may not be true. Since the AquAdvantage fish grows year round, and does not have a "dormant" stage like other salmon, this fish may actually have a disadvantage, as it has to forage year round. More studies need to be done to make any sort of "competition" claims

    4. man-made breed

      here, is "man-made" referring to the genetically engineered aspect of the fish? Would a conventionally bred chicken be considered "Man-made"?

    5. soon be served in restaurants and appearing at your local fish counter

      Links to govt agencies are typically good sources

  2. Dec 2015
    1. What if the GMO salmon gets into the wild somehow?

      This section focuses on potential negative environmental effects of the Salmon but does not attempt to discuss any of the benefits

    2. though there are a few that hint at potential harm to organs like the kidneys, liver and heart, as well as increased risk of cancers and early death in these animals.

      Is this based on the Seralini study? Where are the references to these studies?

    3. asking

      I am not sure if "asking" is an appropriate term. From the link: " FDA supports voluntary labeling and is providing this guidance to assist manufacturers that wish to voluntarily label their foods as being made with Atlantic salmon or ingredients derived from Atlantic salmon that has or has not been genetically engineered."

      Please comment if you disagree and think they are "asking" for one.

  3. Oct 2015
    1. A technology can’t itself be good or evil – the real issue is in how it is applied.
    2. The vested interests at play mean the evidence we see from the research community isn’t always objective. So instead of allowing “experts” to determine the best course of action, why not ask the public? We could demand independent, objective evidence

      Underplays the vast independent scientific research literature that is already out there.

    3. we need to embrace GM to feed the world

      While the link is an opinion, and not based on science, the author is claiming here that it is an argument that exists, which is true

    4. Scottish ban on GM crops.
    5. creates division.

      These examples below present "false dichotomies". A lot of people are somewhere in the middle, and not one way or the other.