FDA Clears Way for AquaBounty to Raise Salmon in America’s Heartland

It’s been more than three years since the FDA approved salmon from AquaBounty Technologies, but debates about labels and other requirements have kept the genetically engineered fish from reaching dining plates. On Friday, the FDA removed the last regulatory hurdle standing in the company’s way.

The FDA lifted an “import alert,” a rule that kept AquaBounty from importing its salmon eggs. Maynard, MA-based AquaBounty owns a salmon farm in Canada that will supply the salmon eggs for its U.S. fish farm in Indiana. The FDA had already cleared that farm for operation. But until now, it was not authorized to bring in the genetically engineered salmon eggs, so it’s been stocked with traditional Atlantic salmon eggs. In a prepared statement, CEO Sylvia Wulf said AquaBounty will immediately start the process of importing eggs from Canada to grow in its Indiana facility.


Seneff: “This was posted last September but I just now came across it. Excellent article on glyphosate. Very useful table detailing how much glyphosate is used annually on various food crops. You'd be surprised which foods are exposed. Non-GMO is definitely not good enough!”

What Crops Are Sprayed with Glyphosate? Over 70 of Them To Be Exact

While glyphosate doesn’t kill you on the spot, it’s the accumulative effects that matter. It isn’t until glyphosate starts building up in the body over months and years, when symptoms start to arise.

Over time, glyphosate slowly damages our delicate gut flora, leading to chronic diseases rooted in gut dysfunction. When the delicate lining of our gut gets damaged, it makes it more difficult to absorb vitamins and minerals from our food (5).

Unfortunately, over 70 crops are desiccated with glyphosate prior to harvest. This includes popular foods like almonds, oranges, grapes, apples, watermelons, figs, and more.

The complete list of crops is shown below…


Agribusiness's secretive plans to unravel food safety and worker protections

Predictably, the RCC stakeholder submissions were mostly from transnational corporations and industry associations. Most of the public, as well as many food, consumer and environmental groups, have never heard of the RCC. (IATP’s comments were among very few from civil society.) The corporate commenters have a consistent message, which mirrors that of the Trump administration: Use the RCC to get rid of regulations. Many also see the RCC as a mechanism for implementing new restrictions on public protections that are part of the New NAFTA. Here are some of the most egregious industry asks:

All inspections of imported meat at the border should be eliminated…

If all border inspections aren’t eliminated, then food safety inspectors should reduce tested sample size. If you test less of a product, you will undoubtedly find fewer violations. Of course, this isn’t the reason meat industry lobbyists NAMI and CMC give for their request that the RCC focus on reducing sampling lot size—instead they say their goal is to prevent food waste! When it comes to food safety, what you don’t know can hurt you.

Prevent Canada’s new mandatory Front of Package health and nutrition labels from going into effect…

Allow Canadian-grown meat to be sold with chemical treatments and in packaging that currently isn’t allowed…

Reduce safety testing of containers used to transport pesticides and other hazardous chemicals…

Use obscure words instead of plain language to hide information from consumers…

Roll back controls on climate-harming hydrofluorocarbon gases…

The current RCC agenda, added to New NAFTA’s “Good Regulatory Practices,” points to a concerted effort by corporations and their allies in government to lower standards in North America and beyond…


Trump Asks UK To Drop Food And Environment Standards To Secure Post-Brexit Trade Deal

The United States negotiation objectives outline that the UK should “eliminate practices that unfairly decrease U.S. market access opportunities or distort agricultural markets to the detriment of the United States”. These practices include the ban on the sale of chlorinated chicken, genetically modified plants and hormone-injected beef, which many say will lower the UK’s more rigorous food and environmental practices and standards.


Again attacked, Professor Séralini responds to his critics
December 19 , 2018 / Gilles-Éric Séralini

The whole glyphosate debate is off the shelf, because of that. Not a word from Mr. Huet about all these results, why ? How and by whom does he inquire ? Why then does he cite the methods learned in journalism schools ? He can not ignore the seven defamation suits that we have filed and won against lobbies, infiltrated into public agencies recopying the words of the company Monsanto in recent years. He can not ignore the " Monsanto Papers " especially on my " affair " that made the columns and pages of the World in 2017 to show the blatant evidence of bribery and organizations to defame me, retraction of an article, pressure on scientific and mainstream newspapers, and lists of scientific untruths asserted by this global company, to silence those who discover the toxicity of its products.


Healing From Genetically Altered Foods
Another Reason to Go Organic

Dr. Michelle Perro, a pediatrician, author and executive director of GMO Science, in San Rafael, California, became involved when she came across research by plant biologist Dr. Arpad Pusztai, one of the first scientists to raise concerns about the safety of genetically modified foods. “I was able to correlate his findings with the change in children’s health that I was beginning to notice in my own practice,” says Perro. “As I dug deeper, I put the pieces together of the relationship between GMOs, gut health and subsequent diseases.”

Arty turns 11 this summer.