And in this week’s scare, genetically modified fish (as if animal breeding isn’t genetically modifying things … have you ever seen a “normal” chicken with a 9 pound breast!)
“Critics call the modified salmon a “frankenfish” that could cause allergies in humans and the eventual decimation of the wild salmon population. Representatives from consumer, environmental and food safety groups asked the agency to decline the company’s application to market the fish, saying it is untested.”
Read the whole thing. Notice that the FDA is involved and not the EPA. What if I want to eat a Frankenfish? Under what definition of free-markets does some agency (full of unelected bureaucrats) tell me what I can and cannot eat.
Oh, and this is great: “Critics speaking at the meeting said they were concerned about the unintended consequences of approval, arguing the FDA is relying on too little data.”
You cannot make this stuff up. We may give 40 econ lectures on the unintended consequences of planning, green energy subsidies, climate change policies, and told all the while that we are reactionary, hysterical and exaggerating despite the hundreds of years of evidence and sound theory upon which such arguments are put forth. I love that these same critics are now relying on “complex processes” as a caution in intervening. Tell you what, I’ll agree to no modified fish on the grounds that intervening in a complex system may unleash awful, albeit unintended by well meaning planners, results – if we apply this thinking uniformly.
Extra credit for you: Provide the evidence on how many cases of allergies and diseases have there been from genetically modified crops since they first came to market in the early 1980s?