The following is a letter to the editor submitted by John Filose of Filose & Associates, a seafood business consulting firm based in Encinitas, Calif. The letter also ran in the Point of View column in the December 2010 issue of SeaFood Business magazine. It’s in response to Wednesday’s story “Industry: Don’t undermine FDA process.”
As a marketing professional and a heavy consumer of both wild and farmed salmon, I am following with great interest the ongoing controversy surrounding genetically modified (GM) salmon. The Food and Drug Administration's preliminary finding is that GM salmon is a safe product for human consumption (See Top Story). However, the pushback from NGOs, consumer advocates and the wild salmon industry has been quite vocal. Numerous news reports, including one in the typically conservative Wall Street Journal (WSJ), have referred to GM salmon as “Frankenfish.” That is not a very positive product reference!
The FDA has also concluded that there is no biologically relevant difference between GM salmon and regular Atlantic salmon. This ruling, if it stands, would mean that there would be no special labeling requirements for GM salmon. However, from both consumer and business perspectives, I believe that GM salmon should be labeled as such, even if there is no legal requirement to do so.
First of all, proponents cite the fact the GM corn and soybeans are already in the marketplace without special identification, which is a poor analogy. Salmon is a highly visible center-of-the-plate item. It is the No. 2 seafood in terms of per-capita consumption, behind shrimp. (I am not counting tuna; most of it is consumed canned, as a sandwich item). Salmon is not hidden as an ingredient or as a side dish. It is served as the entrée, whether ordered in a restaurant or cooked at home.
Secondly, not identifying GM salmon will only add to fears about product safety. I have been part of numerous focus groups with consumers, chefs and restaurant operators since the early 1970s. Get 12 consumers, 12 chefs/restaurant operators or 12 retailers in a focus group room and you will have a variety of opinions. Ask the group about taste, flavorings, product quality or plate appeal, and you can often have 12 different opinions. But start to talk about any product that carries even the slightest implication about product safety, and you will receive unanimous and vocal feedback. No one will accept any food item that brings the baggage of even a hint of controversy about food safety, and the term “Frankenfish” certainly does not generate warm feelings.
In addition, there seems to be little information available about GM salmon other than what proponents have told the media. According to the WSJ article: “To create the faster-growing salmon, scientists took a gene from the chinook salmon, which matures rapidly, along with a gene from an ocean pout, which produces growth hormones all year.” I have been around the seafood industry for 30 plus years and am not familiar with the ocean pout. I’ll bet that most seafood industry operators and consumers also are not familiar with this fish.
Click here to read the rest of the letter to the editor.
