Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.
They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.
Well today the Salmon Farming industry was dealt a heavy body blow by
the Scientific Journal Science http://www.sciencemag.org

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Campaigns...re01080401.asp


International farmed salmon study supports groundbreaking Suzuki
Foundation research
January 08, 2004


VANCOUVER - Results of a large-scale scientific study on the toxicity
of farmed fish released today in the journal Science support a
pioneering study undertaken by the David Suzuki Foundation three years
ago.

In 2001, the Foundation reported that potentially dangerous levels of
toxic chemicals are contained in the feed given to farmed salmon in
Canada and Europe. The study released today confirms these findings on
a much larger scale.

Scientists tested approximately two tons of farmed and wild salmon,
and salmon feed collected from fish farm wholesalers and retailers in
major cities in North and South America and Europe, including
Vancouver and Toronto. Their findings indicate that contaminants are
significantly higher for farmed salmon than wild salmon.

The Science report argues that “consumption of farmed salmon may
result in exposure to a variety of persistent bioaccumulative
contaminants with the potential for an elevation in attendant health
risks.”

Dr. David Bates, former Dean of Medicine at the University of British
Columbia, is an international expert on pollution. He concurs that
there is a serious risk to health from ingesting contaminants such as
PCBs in our everyday diet.

“Studies have shown that PCBs have a remarkable ability to potentiate
cancer,” Bates says. “The European Union and the World Health
Organization have set acceptable levels and this was done after
analysis of an array of scientific studies. Unfortunately, Canadian
levels are much less stringent and the Canadian government has been
lax in dealing with this issue.”

The study also found that concentrations of contaminants in farmed
salmon from Europe were significantly greater than farmed salmon from
both North and South America.

“While European farmed fish are worse, Canadian farmed salmon are
still a potential health risk,” says Otto Langer, Director of Marine
Conservation.

“The study found that even the least contaminated farmed salmon have
significantly higher contamination levels of PCBs, dioxins, and other
chemicals than wild salmon. This once again underscores the need for
Canada to modernize our regulations regarding the amount of PCBs and
chemicals acceptable for human consumption.”

The Science report cites Environmental Protection Agency consumption
advice, which, based on the new findings, would recommend against
eating more than two meals per month of B.C. farmed fish. Those in
high-risk categories such as children and expectant mothers should eat
much less.

The report authors also recommend fish producers and retailers label
salmon as farmed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also see
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/01/08/salmon_04010
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3380735.stm

Of course the shills and media relations pimps have already tried to
muddy the waters-let's see them twist and turn here now!!!

Sam Salmon > wrote:
>Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
>the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
>Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.

You wouldn't be the slightest bit biased, now would you.

>They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
>abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.

I know about the anti-farming hooligans and their fallacies.

>Scientists tested approximately two tons of farmed and wild salmon,
>and salmon feed collected from fish farm wholesalers and retailers in
>major cities in North and South America and Europe, including
>Vancouver and Toronto. Their findings indicate that contaminants are
>significantly higher for farmed salmon than wild salmon.

Define significantly. And how does this intrinsically
damage farming, once the feed regulations are fixed?

>The Science report argues that “consumption of farmed salmon may
>result in exposure to a variety of persistent bioaccumulative
>contaminants with the potential for an elevation in attendant health
>risks.”

"May," "potential." No significance there. Walking
in the sunshine may have the potential for giving you
skin cancer. You'd better wrap your whole body in tinfoil
and not just your skullcap.

>Dr. David Bates, former Dean of Medicine at the University of British
>Columbia, is an international expert on pollution. He concurs that
>there is a serious risk to health from ingesting contaminants such as
>PCBs in our everyday diet.

Another brilliant revelation from the files of No-Shit Sherlock.

>“Studies have shown that PCBs have a remarkable ability to potentiate
>cancer,” Bates says. “The European Union and the World Health

"Potentiate." I haven't seen that used outside homeopathy
screeds before. No, wait, that's "potentize." "Potentiate"
doesn't mean what he thinks it means:

http://www.onelook.com/?loc=bm2&w=potentiate

He's saying it makes cancer worse. I don't see how he
can say that, considering he's trying to make the argument
that it causes cancer...is he really saying that if you already
have cancer you shouldn't eat PCBs?

>“The study found that even the least contaminated farmed salmon have
>significantly higher contamination levels of PCBs, dioxins, and other
>chemicals than wild salmon. This once again underscores the need for
>Canada to modernize our regulations regarding the amount of PCBs and
>chemicals acceptable for human consumption.”

Doesn't look like a "heavy blow" to the industry.
Looks like a polite request for regulation by the
government, which the industry will no doubt be
following.

>The Science report cites Environmental Protection Agency consumption
>advice, which, based on the new findings, would recommend against
>eating more than two meals per month of B.C. farmed fish. Those in
>high-risk categories such as children and expectant mothers should eat
>much less.

So you're going to tell us now how to distinguish BC farmed
fish from non-BC farmed fish.

>The report authors also recommend fish producers and retailers label
>salmon as farmed.

They already do, and it's tasty and safe.

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Also see
>http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/01/08/salmon_04010
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3380735.stm
>
>Of course the shills and media relations pimps have already tried to
>muddy the waters-let's see them twist and turn here now!!!

You keep saying "shills and media relations pimps" like you're
not a garden-variety blathering reactionary yourself.

--Blair
"You might want to try acting
like a human being next time
you want to slander an entire
industry. It comes across as
harder to refute."

"Sam Salmon" > wrote in message
...
> Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
> the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
> Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.
> They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
> abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.
> Well today the Salmon Farming industry was dealt a heavy body blow by
> the Scientific Journal Science http://www.sciencemag.org
>
>
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Campaigns...re01080401.asp
>
>

I also see that the FDA has effectively dismissed the findings of that
study.

People can live in denial all they want, but it's clear that farmed salmon
is an infirior product to wild on all accounts.

"Musashi" > wrote in message
om...
>
> "Sam Salmon" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
> > the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
> > Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.
> > They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
> > abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.
> > Well today the Salmon Farming industry was dealt a heavy body blow by
> > the Scientific Journal Science http://www.sciencemag.org
> >
> >
>
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Campaigns...re01080401.asp
> >
> >
>
> I also see that the FDA has effectively dismissed the findings of that
> study.
>
>

Do you have a link for that?

F t B wrote:

> People can live in denial all they want, but it's clear that farmed salmon
> is an infirior product to wild on all accounts.

That's fine for people who can get wild, but we on the East Coast
cannot get it as easily or cheaply. And for the record, I'm perfectly
satisfied with farmed salmon for sushi.

--
Dan

"Musashi" > wrote in message
om...
>
> "Sam Salmon" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
> > the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
> > Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.
> > They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
> > abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.
> > Well today the Salmon Farming industry was dealt a heavy body blow by
> > the Scientific Journal Science http://www.sciencemag.org
> >
> >
>
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Campaigns...re01080401.asp
> >
> >
>
> I also see that the FDA has effectively dismissed the findings of that
> study.
>
That dismissal is almost a conditioned reflex but do you remember when the
British Agricultural Minister "demonstrated" the safety of the beef supply
by feeding his little daughter a hamburger on television? It was quite a
bust since she refused to eat it! is clear that serious investigation of
feeding practices for farmed fish is called for since, unfortunately, that's
how we will be able to get affordable fish in the future.


--
James V. Silverton
Potomac, Maryland, USA

"F t B" > wrote in message
news:N8ALb.49828$Dm.16683@edtnps89...
>
> "Musashi" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> > "Sam Salmon" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
> > > the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
> > > Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.
> > > They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
> > > abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.
> > > Well today the Salmon Farming industry was dealt a heavy body blow by
> > > the Scientific Journal Science http://www.sciencemag.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Campaigns...re01080401.asp
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I also see that the FDA has effectively dismissed the findings of that
> > study.
> >
> >
>
> Do you have a link for that?
>

I read it in the paper on my way into work. But you'll find the FDA position
in alot
of articles on this study.
Like this exanmple:

"U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials rejected that recommendation.
"We don't believe these findings are cause for concern," said Terry Troxell,
director of the FDA's office of plant and dairy foods and beverages, which
started a similar study."

http://www.sunspot.net/news/health/b...alth-headlines

"James Silverton" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Musashi" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> > "Sam Salmon" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
> > > the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
> > > Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.
> > > They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
> > > abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.
> > > Well today the Salmon Farming industry was dealt a heavy body blow by
> > > the Scientific Journal Science http://www.sciencemag.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Campaigns...re01080401.asp
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I also see that the FDA has effectively dismissed the findings of that
> > study.
> >
> That dismissal is almost a conditioned reflex but do you remember when the
> British Agricultural Minister "demonstrated" the safety of the beef supply
> by feeding his little daughter a hamburger on television? It was quite a
> bust since she refused to eat it! is clear that serious investigation of
> feeding practices for farmed fish is called for since, unfortunately,
that's
> how we will be able to get affordable fish in the future.
>

This type of problem exists with nearly any food source that we can farm,
from shrimp
to fish to pigs. I guess it's the nature of operating a closed system.
And to be sure, certainly safeguards should be put into place for everyones
benefit.
The problem is to me is that the economic-emotional war going on between the
wild-salmon advocates and the farmed-salmon advocates don't do anything to
help the consumer.

Farmed salmon is not always sold as "farmed salmon". Sometimes it is sold as
"Atlantic Salmon".
How are we consumers suppose to know which is which?
Sometimes I see tags that say "Silver salmon" or "King salmon". These I know
are suppose to
be coho and chinook. But are they "wild" just because they are pacific
salmon species?
I know for a fact that some pacific species are beng farmed.
Finally we consumers need to see a price break on "wild salmon" is the
advocates want
the public to switch over. In fact, in most cases here on the east coast,
not only is it a
price issue, it is also an availability issue. You often simply can not find
and "wild" salmon
for sale, whereas the "farmed/atlantic" is everywhere.
So perhaps some laws standardizing the labelling of salmon, a break in
prices of wild salmon
and better distribution would go much farther than ranting about it on a
usenet forum to
people who often siimply don't have a choice.

Sounds to me like you're the type willing to pack your freezer with
inexpensive cuts of mad cows.


Blair P. Houghton > wrote in message >.. .
> Sam Salmon > wrote:
> >Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
> >the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
> >Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.
>
> You wouldn't be the slightest bit biased, now would you.
>
> >They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
> >abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.
>
> I know about the anti-farming hooligans and their fallacies.
>
> >Scientists tested approximately two tons of farmed and wild salmon,
> >and salmon feed collected from fish farm wholesalers and retailers in
> >major cities in North and South America and Europe, including
> >Vancouver and Toronto. Their findings indicate that contaminants are
> >significantly higher for farmed salmon than wild salmon.
>
> Define significantly. And how does this intrinsically
> damage farming, once the feed regulations are fixed?
>
> >The Science report argues that ?consumption of farmed salmon may
> >result in exposure to a variety of persistent bioaccumulative
> >contaminants with the potential for an elevation in attendant health
> >risks.?
>
> "May," "potential." No significance there. Walking
> in the sunshine may have the potential for giving you
> skin cancer. You'd better wrap your whole body in tinfoil
> and not just your skullcap.
>
> >Dr. David Bates, former Dean of Medicine at the University of British
> >Columbia, is an international expert on pollution. He concurs that
> >there is a serious risk to health from ingesting contaminants such as
> >PCBs in our everyday diet.
>
> Another brilliant revelation from the files of No-Shit Sherlock.
>
> >?Studies have shown that PCBs have a remarkable ability to potentiate
> >cancer,? Bates says. ?The European Union and the World Health
>
> "Potentiate." I haven't seen that used outside homeopathy
> screeds before. No, wait, that's "potentize." "Potentiate"
> doesn't mean what he thinks it means:
>
> http://www.onelook.com/?loc=bm2&w=potentiate
>
> He's saying it makes cancer worse. I don't see how he
> can say that, considering he's trying to make the argument
> that it causes cancer...is he really saying that if you already
> have cancer you shouldn't eat PCBs?
>
> >?The study found that even the least contaminated farmed salmon have
> >significantly higher contamination levels of PCBs, dioxins, and other
> >chemicals than wild salmon. This once again underscores the need for
> >Canada to modernize our regulations regarding the amount of PCBs and
> >chemicals acceptable for human consumption.?
>
> Doesn't look like a "heavy blow" to the industry.
> Looks like a polite request for regulation by the
> government, which the industry will no doubt be
> following.
>
> >The Science report cites Environmental Protection Agency consumption
> >advice, which, based on the new findings, would recommend against
> >eating more than two meals per month of B.C. farmed fish. Those in
> >high-risk categories such as children and expectant mothers should eat
> >much less.
>
> So you're going to tell us now how to distinguish BC farmed
> fish from non-BC farmed fish.
>
> >The report authors also recommend fish producers and retailers label
> >salmon as farmed.
>
> They already do, and it's tasty and safe.
>
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >Also see
> >http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/01/08/salmon_04010
> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3380735.stm
> >
> >Of course the shills and media relations pimps have already tried to
> >muddy the waters-let's see them twist and turn here now!!!
>
> You keep saying "shills and media relations pimps" like you're
> not a garden-variety blathering reactionary yourself.
>
> --Blair
> "You might want to try acting
> like a human being next time
> you want to slander an entire
> industry. It comes across as
> harder to refute."

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 10:56:27 -0500, Dan Logcher
> wrote:
>
>That's fine for people who can get wild, but we on the East Coast
>cannot get it as easily or cheaply. And for the record, I'm perfectly
>satisfied with farmed salmon for sushi.

Well good for you Dan!
Certainly the price on your favourite chemical cocktail should drop
significantly soon.
Try to eat even more to help out the struggling industry and prove
what a great deal greasy tasteless farmed slugs really are.
Of course you'll be even better off once you start to glow in the
dark-think of the lower electricity bills!
I hope that you have a little something put away to pay the HazMat
cleanup crew when the grim reaper finally comes!

Sam Salmon wrote:

> On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 10:56:27 -0500, Dan Logcher
> > wrote:
>
>>That's fine for people who can get wild, but we on the East Coast
>>cannot get it as easily or cheaply. And for the record, I'm perfectly
>>satisfied with farmed salmon for sushi.
>>
>
> Try to eat even more to help out the struggling industry and prove
> what a great deal greasy tasteless farmed slugs really are.
> Of course you'll be even better off once you start to glow in the
> dark-think of the lower electricity bills!
> I hope that you have a little something put away to pay the HazMat
> cleanup crew when the grim reaper finally comes!


If you say so, but how am I suppose to get wild salmon when it's not
available? Are you going to send it to me for free? I thought not.
Since you're unable to give me an alternative, I will continue what
I'm using now. It suits me fine. You can keep your wild salmon.

You're quite the gloom and doom guy, glad you're just nutty.

--
Dan

James > wrote:
>Sounds to me like you're the type willing to pack your freezer with
>inexpensive cuts of mad cows.

I don't see any mad cows. I see nutcase pseudo-environmentalists
who are shilling for fishermen who are being out-competed by
farmers.

--Blair
"Tomorrow is salmon day."

Musashi > wrote:
>
>I also see that the FDA has effectively dismissed the findings of that
>study.

Well, you have to consider whose FDA it is.

--Blair
"They think crude oil is a vegetable."

Musashi > wrote:
>Farmed salmon is not always sold as "farmed salmon". Sometimes it is sold as
>"Atlantic Salmon".

They are the same kind of salmon, but, if it's farmed,
I think it must be labelled as farmed, and if it's not
labelled as farmed, it's not farmed.

I tried to look it up, but nobody at .gov wants to make
it easy to find information these days. At least, not in
this direction. They're always making it easier for them
to poke into our business.

>Sometimes I see tags that say "Silver salmon" or "King salmon". These I know
>are suppose to
>be coho and chinook. But are they "wild" just because they are pacific
>salmon species?
>I know for a fact that some pacific species are beng farmed.

That would be good. Because pacific salmon have a higher
incidence of parasites that they get from their food,
and the pelletized feed is parasite-free.

>Finally we consumers need to see a price break on "wild salmon" is the
>advocates want
>the public to switch over.

But that's the point of the propaganda campaign. They want
to drive down demand for farmed salmon and increase demand
for wild salmon so they not only don't have to reduce the
price, but can increase it.

>In fact, in most cases here on the east coast,
>not only is it a
>price issue, it is also an availability issue. You often simply can not find
>and "wild" salmon
>for sale, whereas the "farmed/atlantic" is everywhere.
>So perhaps some laws standardizing the labelling of salmon, a break in
>prices of wild salmon
>and better distribution would go much farther than ranting about it on a
>usenet forum to
>people who often siimply don't have a choice.

They don't want you to have a choice. They want the farms
shut down.

--Blair
"Fallacy of the excluded middle."

F t B > wrote:
>People can live in denial all they want, but it's clear that farmed salmon
>is an infirior product to wild on all accounts.

We've been through this. No, it is not.

Wild salmon has pathogens too, but the salmon-fascists
won't tell you that.

I've compared the two side-by-side, and whether it's due to
the original product or the distribution and processing,
the wild salmon was not as good as the farmed salmon for
texture and flavor. It had *more* flavor, but it was a
less pleasant flavor.

This is in Arizona. I don't doubt if you could get the
fish at the docks in the Northwest you'd be better off
doing that, because it'll be fresher and less damaged,
and because even the best will be cheaper for not having
any transportation costs to cover.

But the rest of the world doesn't live in the Northwest.

--Blair
"It was 78F and golfy here today."

Sam Salmon > wrote:
>[...]

Sam Salmon?

Nice to see the salmon nazis aren't above dickhead marketing tactics.

--Blair
"Go spawn and die."

Why don't you doom and gloomers (read Democrat) move? Leave? Find
your Nirvana, perhaps in IRAN where you have unlimited rights to free
speech? Ten years ago you were all telling us how greenhouse gas was
going to cause a new Ice Age, now you're telling us it's going to
cause Global Warming. You told us the Ozone Hole was going to cause
everyone to have skin cancer, now we find out the hole is a natural
phenomenon that has probably occurred since the beginning of time and
probably contributed to the fact that some monkeys actually got smart
enough to bitch about farmed salmon. Give it a flippin rest, wild
salmon are not readily available to the masses, farmed might be a
inferior product, note I said "might" but it is available. I find it
quite tasty. Find another group to try and lay your guilt trip on.
Join Peta or something and stalk the dog shows.

Joe
X regular at Sushi Zone, Arlington, TX

"X" only because I moved to Florida

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 03:31:32 GMT, Sam Salmon
> wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 10:56:27 -0500, Dan Logcher
> wrote:
>>
>>That's fine for people who can get wild, but we on the East Coast
>>cannot get it as easily or cheaply. And for the record, I'm perfectly
>>satisfied with farmed salmon for sushi.
>
>Well good for you Dan!
>Certainly the price on your favourite chemical cocktail should drop
>significantly soon.
>Try to eat even more to help out the struggling industry and prove
>what a great deal greasy tasteless farmed slugs really are.
>Of course you'll be even better off once you start to glow in the
>dark-think of the lower electricity bills!
>I hope that you have a little something put away to pay the HazMat
>cleanup crew when the grim reaper finally comes!

Musashi wrote:

>
> This type of problem exists with nearly any food source that we can farm,
> from shrimp
> to fish to pigs. I guess it's the nature of operating a closed system.
> And to be sure, certainly safeguards should be put into place for everyones
> benefit.


It's probably more likely that they try to farm to many in to small
a location. They're trying to make more money and cut costs.

> The problem is to me is that the economic-emotional war going on between the
> wild-salmon advocates and the farmed-salmon advocates don't do anything to
> help the consumer.


I'm not for either side. I'm on my side as a consumer. I want readily
available salmon for sushi at a reasonable price, be it wild or farmed.


> Farmed salmon is not always sold as "farmed salmon". Sometimes it is sold as
> "Atlantic Salmon".

> How are we consumers suppose to know which is which?

All Atlantic Salmon is farmed in the US, so it's pretty easy to
figure that out.


> Sometimes I see tags that say "Silver salmon" or "King salmon". These I know
> are suppose to
> be coho and chinook. But are they "wild" just because they are pacific
> salmon species?
> I know for a fact that some pacific species are beng farmed.


Could go either way, that's where better product labeling is needed.


> Finally we consumers need to see a price break on "wild salmon" is the
> advocates want
> the public to switch over. In fact, in most cases here on the east coast,
> not only is it a
> price issue, it is also an availability issue. You often simply can not find
> and "wild" salmon
> for sale, whereas the "farmed/atlantic" is everywhere.


Or just availability. These "wild salmon" people can rant and rave all
they want in a sushi newsgroup, but it isn't going to make wild salmon
more available on the East Coast. And if it did, they'd need to make
sure it's safe for sushi and offer a price break to win over the sushi
bars.


> So perhaps some laws standardizing the labelling of salmon, a break in
> prices of wild salmon
> and better distribution would go much farther than ranting about it on a
> usenet forum to
> people who often siimply don't have a choice.

More specifically a sushi newsgroup.. where most of us are sushi
customers. It amazes me how much they rant but offer so little
solutions.

--
Dan

"Joe" > wrote in message
...
> Why don't you doom and gloomers (read Democrat) move? Leave? Find
> your Nirvana, perhaps in IRAN where you have unlimited rights to free
> speech?

I'm a Democrat- and I eat Atlantic salmon. You, on the otherhand, are merely
ignorant, regardles of your politcal affiliation.

>Why don't you doom and gloomers (read Democrat) move?

so there is no doom and gloom from the republicraps? Only the democraps?

The republicraps just think the end of the world is soon going to be upon us
as there are people who actually have differing beliefs from them.
peace
jeff

"Commissars and pinstripe bosses roll the dice
Anyway they fall, guess who gets to pay the price?
Money green, or proletarian gray
Selling guns instead of food today
So the kids they dance and shake their bones
And the politicians throwing stones
Singing ashes, ashes, all fall down"

barlow/weir

Dan Logcher > wrote:
> > How are we consumers suppose to know which is which?
>
>All Atlantic Salmon is farmed in the US, so it's pretty easy to
>figure that out.

Only 5% of the farmed atlantic salmon eaten in the US are
also farmed in the US.

Don't make me look it up or qualify it. This topic is
wearing out my Googling finger.

>> I know for a fact that some pacific species are beng farmed.
>
>Could go either way, that's where better product labeling is needed.

I haven't heard of any atlantic species being farmed.
Atlantic salmon grow fast and big and tasty and firm,
and are hardy in farming conditions, so it's unlikely
anyone setting up a risky farming operation will increase
the risk. It'd be nice to have cheap farmed King salmon,
but I'm not holding my sake kama waiting for it.

>Or just availability. These "wild salmon" people can rant and rave all
>they want in a sushi newsgroup, but it isn't going to make wild salmon
>more available on the East Coast. And if it did, they'd need to make
>sure it's safe for sushi and offer a price break to win over the sushi
>bars.

It's not safe for sushi anyway. As I pointed out earlier,
the incidence of parasites in wild salmon make it far
more dangerous for sushi eaters. Farmed salmon eat a
processed feed that has been treated to remove parasite
vectors.

The drawback, as this thread's inciting incident
points out, is that the feed still may contain chemical
contaminants that the feed source has picked up from its
environment. But those would be in less concentration
than the original fish would have acquired. And we can
do something about that by treating the feed some more, or
regulating the source fish used for feed.

This issue is entirely transient, and it's a sad thing to
watch wild-salmon fisheries destroying their credibility
by trying to fight salmon farming.

--Blair
"I get more chemical damage from my
shampoo than from eating two pounds of
salmon a month."

There is only one species of Salmon in the Atlantic-Salmo Salar.

Because Salmo Salar has been domesticated for 40+ generations it's
ideal for the cramped and filty conditions extant on Salmon Farms.

I know I've seen countless Fish Farming operations unlike the
'indoorsy' experts'here.

Also-in 30+ years of living in BC I have never met a Salmon Farm
worker who would eat the product they were paid to produce-even the
dumbest minimum wage greaser won't touch the stuff even if it's free.

Please Note-Blair P Houghton is a liar/shill/tout/pimp and homosexual
pervert of the most nauseating variety-that is why the Salmon Farming
industry hires him to promote their poison.


LMAO!!!!

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 03:05:04 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

>Dan Logcher > wrote:
>> > How are we consumers suppose to know which is which?
>>
>>All Atlantic Salmon is farmed in the US, so it's pretty easy to
>>figure that out.
>
>Only 5% of the farmed atlantic salmon eaten in the US are
>also farmed in the US.
>
>Don't make me look it up or qualify it. This topic is
>wearing out my Googling finger.
>
>>> I know for a fact that some pacific species are beng farmed.
>>
>>Could go either way, that's where better product labeling is needed.
>
>I haven't heard of any atlantic species being farmed.
>Atlantic salmon grow fast and big and tasty and firm,
>and are hardy in farming conditions, so it's unlikely
>anyone setting up a risky farming operation will increase
>the risk. It'd be nice to have cheap farmed King salmon,
>but I'm not holding my sake kama waiting for it.
>
>>Or just availability. These "wild salmon" people can rant and rave all
>>they want in a sushi newsgroup, but it isn't going to make wild salmon
>>more available on the East Coast. And if it did, they'd need to make
>>sure it's safe for sushi and offer a price break to win over the sushi
>>bars.
>
>It's not safe for sushi anyway. As I pointed out earlier,
>the incidence of parasites in wild salmon make it far
>more dangerous for sushi eaters. Farmed salmon eat a
>processed feed that has been treated to remove parasite
>vectors.
>
>The drawback, as this thread's inciting incident
>points out, is that the feed still may contain chemical
>contaminants that the feed source has picked up from its
>environment. But those would be in less concentration
>than the original fish would have acquired. And we can
>do something about that by treating the feed some more, or
>regulating the source fish used for feed.
>
>This issue is entirely transient, and it's a sad thing to
>watch wild-salmon fisheries destroying their credibility
>by trying to fight salmon farming.
>
> --Blair
> "I get more chemical damage from my
> shampoo than from eating two pounds of
> salmon a month."

Blair P. Houghton wrote:

> Dan Logcher > wrote:
>
>>>How are we consumers suppose to know which is which?
>>>
>>All Atlantic Salmon is farmed in the US, so it's pretty easy to
>>figure that out.
>>
>
> Only 5% of the farmed atlantic salmon eaten in the US are
> also farmed in the US.
>
> Don't make me look it up or qualify it. This topic is
> wearing out my Googling finger.


What I should have said is the Atlantic Salmon we get in the US
is farmed, not necessarily from US. We don't commercially fish
for Atlantic salmon.

>>Or just availability. These "wild salmon" people can rant and rave all
>>they want in a sushi newsgroup, but it isn't going to make wild salmon
>>more available on the East Coast. And if it did, they'd need to make
>>sure it's safe for sushi and offer a price break to win over the sushi
>>bars.
>>
>
> It's not safe for sushi anyway. As I pointed out earlier,
> the incidence of parasites in wild salmon make it far
> more dangerous for sushi eaters. Farmed salmon eat a
> processed feed that has been treated to remove parasite
> vectors.


Then why does he keep posting his crap in a sushi newsgroup?


> This issue is entirely transient, and it's a sad thing to
> watch wild-salmon fisheries destroying their credibility
> by trying to fight salmon farming.

What do you expect from extremists.

--
Dan

"James Silverton" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Musashi" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> > "Sam Salmon" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Regular readers here will be familiar with my strident opposition to
> > > the ecologically destructive and economically unsustainable Salmon
> > > Aquaculture aka Salmon Farming Industry.
> > > They will also be familiar with the shills and pimps for same said
> > > abomination-by their lies and falsehoods you shall know them.
> > > Well today the Salmon Farming industry was dealt a heavy body blow by
> > > the Scientific Journal Science http://www.sciencemag.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Campaigns...re01080401.asp
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I also see that the FDA has effectively dismissed the findings of that
> > study.
> >
> That dismissal is almost a conditioned reflex but do you remember when the
> British Agricultural Minister "demonstrated" the safety of the beef supply
> by feeding his little daughter a hamburger on television? It was quite a
> bust since she refused to eat it! is clear that serious investigation of
> feeding practices for farmed fish is called for since, unfortunately,
that's
> how we will be able to get affordable fish in the future.
>

People may be interested in this URL:

http://www.sundayherald.com/39220

The site is that of perhaps the leading Scottish newspaper and essentially
confirms the US reports.


--
James V. Silverton
Potomac, Maryland, USA

Sam Salmon > wrote:
>Please Note-Blair P Houghton is a liar/shill/tout/pimp and homosexual
>pervert of the most nauseating variety-that is why the Salmon Farming
>industry hires him to promote their poison.

That pretty much validates your credibility.

--Blair
"Thanks."

Yes I was loaded when I posted last night.
However-'in vino veritas'....




..On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:20:29 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

>Sam Salmon > wrote:
>>Please Note-Blair P Houghton is a liar/shill/tout/pimp and homosexual
>>pervert of the most nauseating variety-that is why the Salmon Farming
>>industry hires him to promote their poison.
>
>That pretty much validates your credibility.
>
> --Blair
> "Thanks."

Oops! Blair P. Houghton > was seen spray-painting on a wall:
> Sam Salmon > wrote:
>>Please Note-Blair P Houghton is a liar/shill/tout/pimp and homosexual
>>pervert of the most nauseating variety-that is why the Salmon Farming
>>industry hires him to promote their poison.
>
> That pretty much validates your credibility.
>
> --Blair
> "Thanks."

Indeed. It is pretty easy to do a similar evaluation of the
credibility of the opinions of people on can.taxes...
--
wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','acm.org').
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/x.html
Rules of the Evil Overlord #35. "I will not grow a goatee. In the old
days they made you look diabolic. Now they just make you look like a
disaffected member of Generation X." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>

"Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
...

>
>
> Then why does he keep posting his crap in a sushi newsgroup?
>
Come on, everybody posts crap on this NG. A news release regarding dioxins
in fish is not crap no matter how you feel about it.. While you may not
agree with the post, it's just as legitimate a post as any of yours.

PS, wild salmon is safe to eat, they serve it around here in many sushi
joints and I've eaten many fish that I've cought as sashimi. It's too bad
it's not sold on the East coast. But I'm not here to argue about it...

"Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
...
> F t B wrote:
>
> > "Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >
> >>
> >>Then why does he keep posting his crap in a sushi newsgroup?
> >>
> >>
> > Come on, everybody posts crap on this NG. A news release regarding
dioxins
> > in fish is not crap no matter how you feel about it.. While you may not
> > agree with the post, it's just as legitimate a post as any of yours.
>
>
> Perhaps, but if this guy is always spouting about how much better
> wild salmon that can't be used as sushi.. why in a sushi newsgroup.
>
>
> > PS, wild salmon is safe to eat, they serve it around here in many sushi
> > joints and I've eaten many fish that I've cought as sashimi. It's too
bad
>
> > it's not sold on the East coast. But I'm not here to argue about it...
>
> Safe? Are you sure of that?
>
> --
> Dan

What a stupid thing to say. Wild salmon is sold in Sushi restaurants and
stores throughout the Pacific region on and offshore and I'm sure it's
available on the East Coast. Logcher thinks this is his personal forum and
it only should include sushi interest as it relates to his own back yard.
>

Bill wrote:

> "Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>F t B wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Then why does he keep posting his crap in a sushi newsgroup?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Come on, everybody posts crap on this NG. A news release regarding
>>>
> dioxins
>
>>>in fish is not crap no matter how you feel about it.. While you may not
>>>agree with the post, it's just as legitimate a post as any of yours.
>>>
>>
>>Perhaps, but if this guy is always spouting about how much better
>>wild salmon that can't be used as sushi.. why in a sushi newsgroup.
>>
>>
>>
>>>PS, wild salmon is safe to eat, they serve it around here in many sushi
>>>joints and I've eaten many fish that I've cought as sashimi. It's too
>>>
> bad
>
>>>it's not sold on the East coast. But I'm not here to argue about it...
>>>
>>Safe? Are you sure of that?
>>
>>--
>>Dan
>>
>
> What a stupid thing to say. Wild salmon is sold in Sushi restaurants and
> stores throughout the Pacific region on and offshore and I'm sure it's
> available on the East Coast. Logcher thinks this is his personal forum and
> it only should include sushi interest as it relates to his own back yard.

Not at all stupid. The salmon eaten around here as sushi is all farmed Atlantic
salmon. Pacific salmon has a higher risk of parasitic infestation, and should
not be used for sushi.

Just because they server it throughout the Pacific region doesn't mean its
safe. Perhaps they brine it for you, to make it safer.

--
Dan

Michael wrote:

> "Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Sam Salmon wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 10:56:27 -0500, Dan Logcher
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>That's fine for people who can get wild, but we on the East Coast
>>>>cannot get it as easily or cheaply. And for the record, I'm perfectly
>>>>satisfied with farmed salmon for sushi.
>>>>
>
> I just got a few sides of Copper River salmon at the Super Target for $6/#.

Some people told me where I can get wild salmon, so I'll be checking that
out tomorrow. I held off buying farmed salmon when I was at the super
market. I'll post prices when I know them, to see how they compare.

--
Dan

"Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
...
> Michael wrote:
>
> > "Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>Sam Salmon wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 10:56:27 -0500, Dan Logcher
> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>That's fine for people who can get wild, but we on the East Coast
> >>>>cannot get it as easily or cheaply. And for the record, I'm perfectly
> >>>>satisfied with farmed salmon for sushi.
> >>>>
> >
> > I just got a few sides of Copper River salmon at the Super Target for
$6/#.
>
> Some people told me where I can get wild salmon, so I'll be checking that
> out tomorrow. I held off buying farmed salmon when I was at the super
> market. I'll post prices when I know them, to see how they compare.

At $6/# the Copper River salmon was on special. I would expect you'll find
it at about $9-12/#.

"Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
...
> Bill wrote:
>
> > "Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>F t B wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Dan Logcher" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Then why does he keep posting his crap in a sushi newsgroup?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Come on, everybody posts crap on this NG. A news release regarding
> >>>
> > dioxins
> >
> >>>in fish is not crap no matter how you feel about it.. While you may not
> >>>agree with the post, it's just as legitimate a post as any of yours.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Perhaps, but if this guy is always spouting about how much better
> >>wild salmon that can't be used as sushi.. why in a sushi newsgroup.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>PS, wild salmon is safe to eat, they serve it around here in many sushi
> >>>joints and I've eaten many fish that I've cought as sashimi. It's too
> >>>
> > bad
> >
> >>>it's not sold on the East coast. But I'm not here to argue about it...
> >>>
> >>Safe? Are you sure of that?
> >>
> >>--
> >>Dan
> >>
> >
> > What a stupid thing to say. Wild salmon is sold in Sushi restaurants
and
> > stores throughout the Pacific region on and offshore and I'm sure it's
> > available on the East Coast. Logcher thinks this is his personal forum
and
> > it only should include sushi interest as it relates to his own back
yard.
>
> Not at all stupid. The salmon eaten around here as sushi is all farmed
Atlantic
> salmon. Pacific salmon has a higher risk of parasitic infestation, and
should
> not be used for sushi.
>
> Just because they server it throughout the Pacific region doesn't mean its
> safe. Perhaps they brine it for you, to make it safer.
>
> --
> Dan
>
I asked my local itamae that sells wild sockeye. He freezes it before he
uses it, never brines it, now before you jump up and say that you don't have
a commercial freezer, he said a home unit will work fine, you just need to
freeze it longer. He also said the likelihood of finding a parasite is very
rare and agreed it was blown out of proportion. He's the one that gave me
instructions about four years ago how to deal with the salmon I catch. My
children, my wife and friends have eaten lots of salmon prepared this way
over the years with no side effects ever.
Again, I'm not gonna get into an argument about this, but I thought you
might want to know.
Cheers..

Blair P. Houghton > wrote in message >.. .
> F t B > wrote:
> >People can live in denial all they want, but it's clear that farmed salmon
> >is an infirior product to wild on all accounts.
>
> We've been through this. No, it is not.
>
> Wild salmon has pathogens too, but the salmon-fascists
> won't tell you that.
>
> I've compared the two side-by-side, and whether it's due to
> the original product or the distribution and processing,
> the wild salmon was not as good as the farmed salmon for
> texture and flavor. It had *more* flavor, but it was a
> less pleasant flavor.
>
> This is in Arizona. I don't doubt if you could get the
> fish at the docks in the Northwest you'd be better off
> doing that, because it'll be fresher and less damaged,
> and because even the best will be cheaper for not having
> any transportation costs to cover.
>
> But the rest of the world doesn't live in the Northwest.
>
> --Blair
> "It was 78F and golfy here today."


I live in the northeast part of Massachusetts, far outside of Boston.
I make my own sushi 'cause it can get rather expensive eating out all
the time. My point is this. I have a number of good fish markets that
I frequent, and a know more than a few supermarket seafood dept
managers. From what these people tell me, it's all a crap shoot. You
can get just as sick off of frozen imported salmon. Personally I have
little problem eating the farm raised salmon. The stuff I get comes
out of Maine, on ice. I have 3 places I usually buy it, one being a
supermarket. I have little concern for freshness, there is a large
local asian community here. Most days the whole case gets replenished
2 -3 times.
And 9 times out of 10, I can get a damn fine fillet off one in the
icebox, not one that has been sitting in the case for even a few
hours. Sounds like a good case for sashimi.

Lately, the price has been hovering about 5 to 6$ Lb., skin on. Not
bad at all, considering skinless "loin cuts" at the different markets
are 3 dollars a lb. more. And then they cut off most of the belly
meat!!! These days I eat more salmon than tuna because I can get it
that fresh and that cheap. Wild salmon (when I can get it) is usually
7- 10 bucks a Lb. More often than not, it's frozen.

That being said, I am trying not to be ignorant about this whole
topic. It sounds to me like a lobbyist supported ****ing contest. What
are they trying to do scare us? I have a greater chance of dying from
secondhand ciggy smoke. And I don't smoke to begin with. I think it's
a bit strange actually. The whole point behind salmon farming was to
conserve wild stocks. Correct me if I am wrong, but those wild stocks
were/are overfished to the point where the fishery is unsustainable.
If the wild stocks are gone, then what are we left with?

Sam Salmon > wrote:
>>Sam Salmon > wrote:
>>>Please Note-Blair P Houghton is a liar/shill/tout/pimp and homosexual
>>>pervert of the most nauseating variety-that is why the Salmon Farming
>>>industry hires him to promote their poison.
>>
>>That pretty much validates your credibility.
>
>Yes I was loaded when I posted last night.

And tonight you're fired.

>However-'in vino veritas'....

Only if you're drunk enough to believe it.

--Blair
"Go bother rec.pets.cats"

Jim S. > wrote:
>That being said, I am trying not to be ignorant about this whole
>topic. It sounds to me like a lobbyist supported ****ing contest. What
>are they trying to do scare us? I have a greater chance of dying from
>secondhand ciggy smoke. And I don't smoke to begin with. I think it's
>a bit strange actually. The whole point behind salmon farming was to
>conserve wild stocks. Correct me if I am wrong, but those wild stocks
>were/are overfished to the point where the fishery is unsustainable.
>If the wild stocks are gone, then what are we left with?

The point of farming is it makes money even though there are
fish running up the rivers.

Salmon stocks in the Pacific Northwest and British Columbia
are nearing record levels, but farming is more economical.

So the problem fisheries are facing there is that they are
catching record numbers of fish and selling them at record
low prices, which are made doubly-low because they compete
with farmed salmon for the generic-salmon consumer market
(chain restaurants, ordinary supermarkets, etc).

They aren't penniless, clearly, because they're pouring plenty
of money into this PR campaign to demonize salmon farming.

That's too bad, because if they ran a positive campaign
touting the natural character of wild salmon, and improving
distribution so it would arrive at the grocery in the same
clean, firm, fresh condition as farmed salmon, then they'd
be able to charge 20-200% more per pound (depending on whether
it's chum, king, or something in between).

--Blair
"Take a clue from the fishes.
Adapt or become extinct."

Blair P. Houghton > wrote in message >.. .
>
> The point of farming is it makes money even though there are
> fish running up the rivers.
>
> Salmon stocks in the Pacific Northwest and British Columbia
> are nearing record levels, but farming is more economical.
>
> So the problem fisheries are facing there is that they are
> catching record numbers of fish and selling them at record
> low prices, which are made doubly-low because they compete
> with farmed salmon for the generic-salmon consumer market
> (chain restaurants, ordinary supermarkets, etc).
>
> They aren't penniless, clearly, because they're pouring plenty
> of money into this PR campaign to demonize salmon farming.
>
> That's too bad, because if they ran a positive campaign
> touting the natural character of wild salmon, and improving
> distribution so it would arrive at the grocery in the same
> clean, firm, fresh condition as farmed salmon, then they'd
> be able to charge 20-200% more per pound (depending on whether
> it's chum, king, or something in between).
>
> --Blair
>

Good points Blair. I think you left out a few though. First is that
commercial salmon fishing is a somewhat seasonal thing. Toss in foul
weather, foreign competition and the always wallet snatching
government... that is more than enough to keep fishermen off the
water.

read the Commercial news from Alaska:
http://www.afjournal.com/news/index.asp

Second point is about bycatch. For those who do not know what it is,
bycatch is whatever else is found in fisherman's nets along with the
desired species. In some fisheries there is a huge amount tossed out
compared to what is kept. It's a huge waste; Fishermen have to
seperate it from what they are licensed to take; it's usally thrown
over the side, and most of it dies. FYI, shrimp trawlers are the WORST
offenders for bycatch, resulting in over 30% of the total globally.
Most salmons are caught in trawl or seine nets. Fishermen are licensed
for only a few species and cannot keep undersized fish. (those sizes
are specified by the govts involved.) So whatever isn't targeted goes
back over the side. Ditto for undersized fish. A large amount of this
catch dies, 60% in some species. Point is, fish farms produce very
little bycatch.

Third point is about the taste differences. All things being equal,(
and they never are) the average consumer doen't know whether they are
eating wild or farm raised fish. Some top restaurants serve wild
salmon as a premium dish; However, chefs will tell you that it's far
easier to cook the uniformly flavored farm raised fish.
Buying for sushi/ sashimi is a different matter. It's all a matter of
taste. A lean fish caught at sea tastes totally different than one
caught close to spawning time. In any case wild salmon is stronger
tasting. The same cannot be said of farmed fish. Be it mild or wild
it's all good.


Jim

On 13 Jan 2004 20:11:50 -0800, (Jim S.)
wrote:

>
>That being said, I am trying not to be ignorant about this whole
>topic. It sounds to me like a lobbyist supported ****ing contest. What
>are they trying to do scare us? I have a greater chance of dying from
>secondhand ciggy smoke. And I don't smoke to begin with. I think it's
>a bit strange actually. The whole point behind salmon farming was to
>conserve wild stocks. Correct me if I am wrong, but those wild stocks
>were/are overfished to the point where the fishery is unsustainable.
>If the wild stocks are gone, then what are we left with?

I think it's one of those deals where both sides are right and it
doesn't really matter.

I 'm sure the lab tests are correct and the farmed salmon contain more
pollutants. I'm also sure that for the amount most people eat, there's
more danger of choking to death eating it than of dying from the
toxins.

That said, now that there's all this noise about it, I suspect that
the industry will clean up it's act anyway.

Terry

"Terry Carmen" > wrote in message
...
> On 13 Jan 2004 20:11:50 -0800, (Jim S.)
> wrote:
>
> >
> >That being said, I am trying not to be ignorant about this whole
> >topic. It sounds to me like a lobbyist supported ****ing contest. What
> >are they trying to do scare us? I have a greater chance of dying from
> >secondhand ciggy smoke. And I don't smoke to begin with. I think it's
> >a bit strange actually. The whole point behind salmon farming was to
> >conserve wild stocks. Correct me if I am wrong, but those wild stocks
> >were/are overfished to the point where the fishery is unsustainable.
> >If the wild stocks are gone, then what are we left with?
>
> I think it's one of those deals where both sides are right and it
> doesn't really matter.
>
> I 'm sure the lab tests are correct and the farmed salmon contain more
> pollutants. I'm also sure that for the amount most people eat, there's
> more danger of choking to death eating it than of dying from the
> toxins.
>
> That said, now that there's all this noise about it, I suspect that
> the industry will clean up it's act anyway.

One discussion at the NC Aquaculture Development Conference last year was
that in the past most fish feed was made from "trash" fish and was now made
from at least 50% vegetable sources.

If you wish to attend this year's conference there is still time.

www.ncaquaculture.org