Israel And Japan Sitting In A Tree | (EASY-TO-READ VERSION)


Click to enlarge;  Credit me and tell me if you repost; I will probably not ask you to take it down.

(At least, easier to read?  Hope so.)

Leave a comment: make a blogger happy.

Be seeing you.

M.W.K.P.A. | This One Goes Out To All That Trumps

Listen /watch:


Be seeing you.

Puttin' On The Ritz: FrankenSalmon Will Be On Dinner Tables By 2017

"Puttin' on the Ritz!" (Young Frankenstein, 1974.)

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration just gave the go ahead for genetically modified salmon to go into production. This is a first: before now, no Frankenfoods were animals. Been in the works since 1989; all the paperwork (called the "New Animal drug Application," I kid you not) completed in 2010.  Here we go.

Genetically modified food crops have been consumed for several years. Have you ever wondered if there was any genetically engineered food animal? There was none until yesterday. But now, the FDA has approved AquAdvantage Salmon, a genetically modified fish for the first time, and according to reports, it is expected to hit grocery store shelves in two years.
Major retailers like Target, Meijer, Aldi, Giant Eagle, Whole Foods and U.S. conventional grocery chains Kroger and Safeway have reportedly agreed not to sell genetically engineered salmon.
But this is what Ronald Stotish, CEO of AquaBounty had to say, "AquAdvantage Salmon is a game-changer that brings healthy and nutritious food to consumers in an environmentally responsible manner without damaging the ocean and other marine habitats. Using land-based aquaculture systems, this rich source of protein and other nutrients can be farmed close to major consumer markets in a more sustainable manner."

Read more

No one asked me.  Did anyone ask you?

There remains some uncertainty over whether the effect on your health will be equally as undetected as the change on your dinner table is expected to be.

Especially in the longer term.

"Some uncertainty," by which, as I understand it, is indicated, the average of the two positions: If one hand is in ice-cold water, and the other, in boiling, on average your hands are a comfortable room temperature...

AquAdvantage Salmon (I hate that missing letter 'A,' don't you?) reach around 6.6 pounds (3 kg.) in 1 1/2 years instead of the usual 3 years for farmed salmon. If they grow for 3 years they can weigh as much as 13 pounds, two times the normal weight for that age. To trigger this growth, two genetic modifications were made: one to trigger the necessary hormone and one to prevent colder winter waters from inhibiting growth. 

More meat, sooner; less time, less overhead.  Easy money.

Not specifically too good.  (Photo: Renovation headquarters)
If you ever 'fixed' electronics by splicing cords, compare for a moment (bear with me) a whole, uncut cord to one that has been cut, scraped, and twisted with another. No matter how you do it, the uncut cord is vastly superior: in reliability (structurally the wires are guaranteed to not get crossed); in performance (the conductivity is way more reliable and the output greater), and in longevity (electrical tape glue degrades over time, those neat little nuts fall off, and duct tape was so stupid in the first place that the comparison is irrelevant).

The analogy holds for 'inserted' genes. The sequence tends to break at that point. The gene fragments lie about, get picked up by bored or curious gut bacteria. Not good.

The official story: there are 'no material differences' between GM and conventional salmon. The flesh contains the expected amounts of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids. "Food from AquAdvantage Salmon is as safe to eat as food from other Atlantic salmon. There is a reasonable certainty of no harm from consumption."

And since all the fish are female and sterile, there is absolutely, positively no danger of them escaping and breeding with the wild population: none at all. Of course. If they did, it would be either too cold... or too hot.  Period.  

What could possibly go wrong?

Here are the three sentences the Daily Mail has thought adequate to answer that:

"The FDA is due to make a final decision this month on whether to approve the GM salmon.
But a coalition of 31 U.S. consumer, animal welfare, environmental and fisheries groups is opposing approval.
They claim tests used to show the safety of the GM salmon were based on very small samples and point out that some of the fish had higher levels of growth hormone in their bloodstream, which is claimed to create a cancer risk.
While the GM fish are supposed to be sterile, critics said up to 5 per cent might be able to conceive and breed if they got into the wild.
Pete Riley, director of campaign group GM Freeze, said: 'We are extremely concerned about the potential for these fish to escape.'"
read more (Textised™ for the Gentle Reader's protection from DailyMail cooties)

May I point out that:
  • the fish were bred to withstand cold -- it doesn't slow their growth
  • the way to breed super-strains of any species is to subject individuals to extremes such as near lethal heat or cold
  • if even one gets out it would be bad
  • the hormone in question is the same one in rGBH that causes cancer
  • the science behind the testing by which impacts on human health were assessed was a great deal shoddier than this implies
  • everyone knows sooner or later a fertile fish, maybe even a male, will escape, and survive; since it is such an aggressive eater, and it will out-compete native species wherever it ends up, it will most certainly fuck the environment up even worse than it already will have been fucked whenever this totally unexpected accident finally happens

Or, to quote that most excellent teller of facts and namer of names, Counterpunch,

Ninety-five to 99 percent of AAS are sterile, said AquaBounty at FDA hearings in 2010, so they are unlikely to breed and threaten wild salmon stocks if they escape. (If they did breed, though, it could Jurassic Park-like since AAS eat five times more food than wild salmon and have less fear of predators, according to background materials.)
AquaBounty told an FDA advisory committee it plans to grow the eggs at a facility on Prince Edward Island in Canada, where escapees could not survive.... Because water temperatures in the winter months are very low and the water has a high salinity, “it is highly unlikely that early life stages of any Atlantic salmon at the facility would be able to survive if they were able to escape.”
...AquaBounty...plans to grow out and slaughter in the country of Panama because that environment is also hostile to survival. “...the water temperature is in the range of 26 to 28 degrees C, at or near the upper incipient lethal level for Atlantic salmon,” says the FDA report. “As a result, it is extremely unlikely that AquAdvantage Salmon would ever be able to survive and migrate to the Pacific Ocean.”

from The Return of FrankenSalmon by Martha Rosenberg, Counterpunch, 1/4/13

You really ought to read more

As to that last, well, I went to the website for GM Freeze, and will let you see for yourself:

See GM Freeze original PDF here

I could end there, but maybe you care, or maybe telling you what little I know may somehow help stop this stupidity. I know at least one blogger who probably would disagree that anything is to be gained by this; perhaps you could join this debate. Is there a point? Does knowing what evil humans have and will have wrought afford us any measure of prevention, protection?

Super Duper...?

Please leave a comment, especially if your answer is yes.

Be seeing you.

Evidence Of Uncontrolled Nuclear Chain Reactions At Fukushima

See "Former Japan Ambassador: Uncontrolled nuclear chain reactions could be underway at Fukushima — “Troubling indications of recurring criticality” as Tellurium-132 detected over 100 miles from plant — ‘Recriticality’ discussed by Japan’s top nuclear official" for more, including working hyperlinks (the above is a screenshot).

I would direct you to MVB's blog, but I can't, since he pulled it, although serious scholarly inquiry ought contact me, as I had archived a copy for personal reference before it went offline.  I will, however, excerpt a few passages, just to add to the rising tide of "What the fuck are you people doing," if I update.  I will include however some screenshots I posted at the time on Twitter:

Twitter archived here, context here.

Archived here, context here.

Be seeing you.

Chemfood's Fukushima Flyers

Posted as a community service.  Unedited.

Business Card Sized

originals at  

click to enlarge, right-click (ctrl-click on a mac) to download.

No nukes. 

Be seeing you.


"No Excuses, No Nukes" by T. Arata


The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received three petitions for rulemaking (PRM) requesting that the NRC amend its “Standards for Protection Against Radiation” regulations and change the basis of those regulations from the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model of radiation protection to the radiation hormesis model. The radiation hormesis model provides that exposure of the human body to low levels of ionizing radiation is beneficial and protects the human body against deleterious effects of high levels of radiation. Whereas, the LNT model provides that radiation is always considered harmful, there is no safety threshold, and biological damage caused by ionizing radiation (essentially the cancer risk) is directly proportional to the amount of radiation exposure to the human body (response linearity).... The NRC is requesting public comments on these petitions for rulemaking...

of particular note:

..Public doses should be raised to worker doses. The petitioner notes that “these low doses may be hormetic. The petitioner goes on to ask, “why deprive the public of the benefits of low dose radiation?”...
...End differential doses to pregnant women, embryos and fetuses, and children under 18 years of age...


(Sorry I didn't post sooner).

more links:

Here's the link to "Linear No-Threshold Model and Standards for Protection Against RadiationDocket Folder Summary"' at regulations.gov, which at present has 31 comments listed and has had the supporting documents withdrawn "at the request of the NRC" (i poked around in the html source to find out there were 12 of them):


Be seeing you.

Pacific Die-Off, Alaska: Faceless Eels With Teeth, Found Far From Any Body Of Water, Are Assumed To Have Fallen From Sky. What?

Courtesy KTLA.com

No, it doesn't mean Fairbanks is being struck by God.  It means the eel-like creatures, or lampreys as they are properly called, were either sucked up then spat out by a tornado, or were dropped by birds.  Alaska officials got that far, and, as I was led to believe by the KTLA article, pointed to the "holes" on the sides of the lampreys, as signs of bird talons; there are seven holes, and I actually spent a bit of time trying to find what bird could have made such a mark.  Certainly no gull fit that description, that was not itself a freak of nature.  

And the holes are awfully close together, perfectly aligned, and bloodless.

Turns out those holes are not from bird feet at all.  The lampreys come with them; they are gills.  The fine print under the photo even said so; if there are holes in the fish, we don't have pictures of them, even though we ought not be faulted for having thought we did.

So back to a modified square one.  Still seems most plausible that the lampreys were dropped by birds.  No tornadoes, has to be birds.  What birds eat lampreys?  And, where are the talon marks?  How come this is a relatively new phenomenon?

The lampreys themselves are the new phenomenon.  They feed on algae as youngsters; when full grown. they latch onto a passing fish.  Here is described newly invasive lampreys, and what they did to the salmon of Lake Champlain:

     Native freshwater lampreys should post no threat to native fish, but sea lampreys--which apparently reached Lake Champlain through the Champlain Canal, built in the early 1800s to connect the lake to the Hudson River--are another matter. Once established in the lake, their population exploded. Greenough pulled in nearly 2,000 voracious sea lampreys last year. With more than 40 years of fishing under his belt, he says anglers have found sea lampreys and the telltale gaping wounds on every kind of fish. "Seventy to 80 percent of the lake trout have hits," he says.
     "Research shows that fish with one sea lamprey wound have about a 60 percent mortality rate," says David Tilton, a fisheries biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Some of the fish we find have multiple wounds. We have to conclude the mortality rate is high." One lamprey can kill up to 40 pounds of fish in the 12 to 18 months of its life in the lake, hindering lake trout and salmon restoration. The main method of lamprey control is a pesticide known as TFM.

Interesting that they are sea lampreys.  I wonder, are the Alaskan lampreys sea lampreys? It is, however, clear, at least to me, what happened:  a fish was carried aloft by a bird of prey, and it took the lamprey a moment to realize something had changed; realizing this, or possibly asphyxiating, the lamprey stopped sucking on the fish, and fell to earth, only to cause a media sensation.  

That this was newsworthy indicates its a new occurrence.  So these lampreys are a new occurrence, just like the algae, and the salmon die-off, and possibly a more widespread famine among the sea creatures of the Pacific, and creatures that feed upon them.

Just a theory.

Comments welcome.

Be seeing you.