The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
1 Points

Genetically modified salmon should be cleared for human consumption by the FDA.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/28/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,158 times Debate No: 21567
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




I think the FDA should allow GM salmon to be legal for human consumption. The debate will be structured like this. First round, acceptance. Second round, constructive arguments. Third and fourth rounds, cross examination or questions to the other side. I was thinking it would work like this, round 3A Pro questions, round 3B Con answers and questions, 4A Pro answers 4B No debate (Con writes something to the effect of "as agreed on, this round serves no purpose.) Round 5 is affirmative and negative rebuttals respectively. I would like someone who will take this debate seriously but still have fun with it.


This looks interesting. I will accept.
Debate Round No. 1


Today I would like to prove why genetically modified salmon should be cleared for human consumption. GMOs are a wonderful idea. Genetically modified crops are already being produced and used in the food industry. They are easier to grow, more resistant to stresses, and increase yield for farmers. [1] I would like to discuss today the economic effects, testing, and social implications of GMOs.

Looking at the economy today, the casual observer can see that it is not in the best of shape. The unemployment rate in America is at 8.3 percent. Genetically modified salmon would need maintenance, supervisors, and harvesters. This could potentially create hundreds of jobs, jobs that Americans need. Secondly, Salmon costs on average $8.60 a pound. [2] Salmon being so expensive cannot achieve the market of the lower middle and lower classes. If genetically modified salmon were legalized, they could reach these markets. According to the law of supply and demand, if there is more demand for salmon, there will have to be a larger production of the fish. This would lead to stimulation of the industry, and lower prices for consumers. Thirdly, we could sell the technology to other countries. This would stimulate our economy, increasing foreign trade, and allowing both our and foreign economies to flourish. The United States economy needs some help, legalizing GMO's for human consumption may just be the answer.

I want to discuss the testing which has been done on these organisms next. One of the FDA's main concerns is whether or not the fish is safe or will have long term effects on humans. This is a good thing. One of the FDA's primary obligations is to make sure food is safe for human consumption. However, AquAvantage submitted its first data set to the FDA in 1996, 16 years ago. What they don't seem to understand is that this salmon is the same as any other animal. It has genetics just like any other organism. The genetics of cattle are not subject to the meticulous scrutiny these fish are. What if there are long term effects of beef consumption due to their genes? It is ridiculous to single out this organism for the sole fact that its genes were not formed by natural selection. A second concern is that the fish could mate with other salmon replacing the traditional population. The company has this to say on the subject,

"AquaBounty has further stipulated that it will market only sterile, all female AquAdvantage® Salmon. Since these fish are unable to reproduce, there can be no gene flow to wild salmon. As a further precaution, AquAdvantage® Salmon will be reared in physically contained facilities, similar to those used in the commercial trout industry. AquAdvantage® Salmon will thus be raised with redundant biological and physical containment, mitigating any potential risk of a negative impact on genetic diversity of wild stocks." [3]

As we can see from this quote, all salmon will be sterile in containment facilities. There is no possible way for these salmon to mate and therefore there is no risk to the traditional population.

Finally, I think another major problem the FDA has with legalizing the fish is social pressure. People have bought into the sensationalism of being anti-"Frankenfood." The view that GMOs are dangerous is propagated by organizations such as Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund. Many people say they are against genetically modified organisms or that it should be labeled already eat GMOs on a normal basis. [4] Genetically modified crops are used all over the US, and there has been relatively little problem with them. About as many problems as you would run into with traditional foods.

Today I have outlined a case for the legalization of genetically modified salmon for human consumption. I have made this assertion based on the economy, testing, and social issues.



1dustpelt forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Seeing as my opponent didn't post a constructive I have no questions for cross examination.


I am most terribly sorry that I forfeited the last round. I had an unexpected pile of work to do. Also realize that I was currently debating 6 other people. Please give conduct to Pro.

Also, I do realize that my opponent is arguing for GMO's. When I accepted this debate, I thought she was arguing against GMO's, because of the title "Genetically modified salmon should be cleared for human consumption by the FDA."
By "cleared" the definition:

"Adverb. So as not to be in contact with or near; away (often followed by of ): Stand clear of the closing doors."

By this, I thought she meant that the FDA should not let people get in contact with GMO's.

My argument is that Pro took the wrong side, thus arguments should go to me.

Debate Round No. 3


Clear: to pass an authority for review, approval, etc.: The bill must clear through the assembly before it becomes legal.
There are over 70 definitions for the word. Sorry for the confusion, but I posted, "I think the FDA should allow GM salmon to be legal for human consumption" in the beginning of the debate, to avoid this kind of confusion.


I am sorry for this confusion. But on, there are three definitions and none of them say the bill is approved.
Debate Round No. 4


Cleared: to pass an authority for review, approval, etc.: The bill must clear through the assembly before it becomes legal. Definition 68 on


There is no way anyone can argue on this debate. Voters, please don't vote on this debate.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro took the wrong side hence the conduct vote. agree with pro as the FDA should allow all foods: you wanna eat rancid mean have fun. I will come back and evaluate this debate with a more thorough mind later. Then con said do not vote... tie until I come back.