Debate: Genetically modified salmon

Background and context

What are the potential health or nutritional effects of genetically modified salmon?

Pro

There are no biologically relevant differences. AquAdvantage salmon contained the expected amounts of nutritionally important omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids at the appropriate ratio for a fish source. People who are allergic to Atlantic salmon will likely be allergic to AquAdvantage Salmon because it is a finfish-- one of the eight most allergenic foods in the US-- not because it has been genetically engineered.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/VeterinaryMedicineAdvisoryCommittee/UCM224762.pdf

Moreover, increased salmon consumption leads to lowered risk of heart disease. Coronary heart disease is the number one cause of death in U.S. (National Center for Health Statistics, 2000). A study by Lutter and Tucker (2003) revealed that the marketing of GM salmon will lower salmon prices and increase consumption of salmon, an exceptionally good source of omega-3 fatty acids linked to lower risk of heart disease. The resulting increase in omega-3 intake will prevent 600 to 2600 deaths per year in the U.S.

http://regulation2point0.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2010/04/phpwx.pdf

Lutter and Tucker (2003): A 1% change in salmon consumption should increase total n-3 intake by 8.2%, assuming n-3 intake from other sources is unchanged. Empirical research suggests that a 1% decline in the price of farm-bred salmon leads to a 1% increase in consumption. In French fish markets, a 1% drop in international salmon prices lowers retail prices by 0.165%. A 1% decrease in the cost of farmed salmon will lead to a .165% drop in the retail price of salmon.

GM salmon would reduce the risks of fatal CHD by about 0.2%. Since about 720,000 Americans aged 35 and older died from heart disease in 1999 (National Center for Health Statistics, 2000), a reduction of 0.2% amounts to about 1400 deaths per year.

VSL ANALYSIS:

Willingness to pay: $8.22 to reduce risk of heart disease by 1 in 1 million (Cameron, DeShazo, Johnson, 2009)

VSL calculation: 8.22/.000001=$8,220,000

GM salmon reduces fatalities by 1440

1440*8,220,000 = $11.84 billion (value of lives saved)

Con

Problems Overlooked by FDA Regarding Approval of GM Salmon

Increase Cancer Risks Currently, 1 in 6 men in the United States will be diagnosed with prostate cancer during his lifetime and 1 in 8 women in the United States will be diagnosed with breast cancer during her lifetime. According to a recent study, men who were given IGF-1 as an aging supplement had almost twice the risk of cancer death . This finding is consistent with breast cancer in women.

Assumption: There are 23 million salmon consumers, of which 50% men, 50% women

Assuming a 1% cancer risk increase: Men High risk of cancer (salmon consumption 8xs/month): 150 cases of prostate cancer Moderate risk of cancer (consume salmon 1/month): 2,300 cases of prostate cancer

Women High risk of cancer (salmon consumption 8xs/month): 113 cases of breast cancer Moderate risk of cancer (consume salmon 1/month): 1,910 cases of breast cancer

Total Cost of Salmon-related Cancer cases Men: $166 mill (Assuming cost to treat prostate cancer is $42,750/person) Women: $162 mill (Assuming cost to treat breast cancer is $60,000/person)

Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria (ARB) ARB transfers from livestock to humans. Due to this transfer of bacteria, there is a $4 Billion annual increase in healthcare costs. Assuming each American eats 182.5 lbs of meat per year, there would an additional $22 million spent on healthcare costs per lb. Assuming ARB transfers from salmon at same rate and GM salmon becomes 50% of national supply in 5yrs, annual health care costs will increase by $22 million.

Click "edit" and write arguments here

Notes/References: Randall Lutter and Katherine Tucker, "Unacknowledged Health Benefits of Genetically Modified Food: Salmon and Heart Disease Deaths", AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies; Tufts University http://www.agbioforum.org/v5n2/v5n2a04-lutter.htm

Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1), IGF binding protein 3 (IGFBP3), and breast cancer risk: pooled individual data analysis of 17 prospective studies. The Lancet Oncology, Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages 530 - 542, June 2010

Antibiotics used in meat pose a threat to public health, admits FDA. October 22, 2010 David Gutierrez http://www.naturalnews.com/030132_antibiotics_meat.html

Cancer Prevention Coalition http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/general/milk.htm Hormone Thought to Slow Aging Associated With Increased Risk of Cancer Death: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100301091417.htm. March 10, 2010.

How might genetically modified salmon affect the environment?

Pro

Current System for Farming Salmon relies heavily on Ocean Penning

Land based egg production, spawning, and growth of salmon would reduce disease introduction, lower interactions with natural population, and create regional markets where carbon footprint could be lowered. GM salmon production may lower pressure on natural fish populations as well.

Egg Production Facilities (Prince Edward Island) and Growing Facilities (Panama) have 3 or 4 layers of physical containment

Transport of Eggs is in Secure Transport

In the event of escape or release into the wild,

Chance of Survival at Both Locations Limited by Temp., Salinity, Age

Shipments of Eggs for Growing Must be at least 95% Infertile

All Female Population

No natural Salmon Populations Near Either Facility

Minimal Risk of Reproduction

Con

Click "edit" and write arguments here

When AquaBounty’s monopoly ends new companies will enter the market, and it will be increasingly difficult to regulate the containment of GM salmon. Competing firms will be incentivized to lower their marginal costs, creating an environment that is innovative and less risk averse.

Precautionary Principle: “Action should be taken to correct a problem as soon as there is evidence that harm may occur, not after the harm has already occurred.” --Cass Sunstein

Another concern are problems with Inland Aquaculture:

Cannot build facility near body of water, “cyclone belt” or in agriculture-suitable land (soil must be impervious). There are also issues of waste management and negative externalities to surrounding community from aquaculture byproduct.

What is the potential economic effect of genetically modified salmon entering the marketplace?

Pro

Con

Click "edit" and write arguments here

Several contingent valuation (CV) surveys indicate willingness to pay (WTP) for saving an endangered species range from $6 to $95 depending on species. Assuming 223 million adults in the United States.

Value of Wild Salmon LOW CV at $6 $1.3 Billion HIGH CV at $95 $21.2 Billion

Another economic issue with legalizing GM salmon is that since AquaBounty (AB) currently holds the patent rights to produce GM salmon, AB will be a price setter because they have the patent rights. AB has no incentive to lower price until competing GM salmon enters the market. The overall price for salmon will not lower right away.

References:

Related pages on Debatepedia:

http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Genetically_modified_foods

External links and resources: