3 ms·
"The officials said the fish would not have to be labeled as being genetically engineered, a policy consistent with its stance on foods made from genetically en
by seccess 11y ago
"The officials said the fish would not have to be labeled as being genetically engineered, a policy consistent with its stance on foods made from genetically engineered crops."
As an aside, what is your reason for not consuming GMO foods if you also trust that many biologists feel that they can be safe? Genuinely curious not trying to be snarky.
- BuckRogers 11y agoI think the distinction is unclear on level of modification. Generally, you can have 3 kinds of modifications. From least likely to be dangerous to most- 1) gene sequence removal; 2) gene splicing from two different species; 3) whole new organism. If I were to purposefully consume GMO, I would like to know what exactly the severity is of what has been done. Since we can't even get basic labels, let alone information on how extreme the modification is- I just choose to outright avoid.
- jnellis 11y agoIf they can genetically engineer a fish then they can make them easily identifiable so that they can't be passed off as other fish which is already a huge problem. Black light markers on the skin or flesh perhaps. Having some really bad genetic trait that makes them easy prey or die quickly if they escape into the wild is another idea instead of 'top men' just saying 'trust us.'