Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[chris gadsden]

You guys need all the support you can get......  

Do you get a chance to see the CTV news article that was just broadcast a few minutes ago on how the feedlots are selling their virus infected product to unsuspecting consumers?

http://bc.ctvnews.ca/parasite-ridden-salmon-sold-in-b-c-stores-1.864202

[chris gadsden]

Nope, was busy watching Global talk with Peterman about the declining productivity of sockeye salmon coastwide (i.e. not limited to the "hot zone" of the BC coast).

If I did see that piece on CTV, I would probably be frustrated right now as they tend to interchange the terms "Virus" and "disease", even though those two things are very different. Viruses are everywhere, but it's the expression of those viruses (i.e. disease) that concerns us primarily with respect to declining salmon populations.

Alex should get out and buy some nice T-bones, and see if she can find any viruses on them.

You will be happy I found it for you.

[alwaysfishn]

Alex should get out and buy some nice T-bones, and see if she can find any viruses on them.

It seems that with all the diseases and viruses she is finding in the salmon feedlots, she has no time to go testing T-bones.

[aquapaloosa]

It seems that with all the diseases and viruses she is finding in the salmon feedlots, she has no time to go testing T-bones.

Your post suggest that mrs. morton is the individual that discovers viruses in farmed and wild salmon.  This is not the case.  She is re introducing  them in her fear mongering style which is often miss leading and not a clear representation of the facts that surround each individual case.

Parasites are in lots of food that we eat.  You eat pork?  Wild salmon has lots of para sites.  Halibut is off the charts for parasites. 

[shuswapsteve]

People should be more concerned with what Peterman had to say than this presence of Kudoa in farmed salmon fillets.

Many of these parasites already reside in wild Pacific salmon, so Volpe shouldn't be talking about ticking time bombs.  Henneguya salmincola (the parasite that Morton couldn't identify from Wikipedia), is common in wild Sockeye and doesn't look very appetizing, but it isn't going to harm you either.  Instead he should be taking more notice about about decline productively of Sockeye Salmon - coastwide.

dnibbles is right....people interchange viruses and disease even when both are different.   An animal can have virus and not necessarily have a disease from it.  Morton's discovery of reovirus are a perfect example of this.  Just because she found these reoviruses she started calling it a deadly heart virus which causes HSMI.  Well, for one thing she never found HSMI in those fish and the presence of reoviruses doesn't necessarily implies that something is wrong.  The "O" stands for orphan....meaning they are not necessarily associated with disease.  These reoviruses are already found healthy broiler chickens with no sign of disease.

It is an "almost" slick demarketing campaign to scare the consumer.  The reason why I say "almost" is because it is pretty plain to pick out the errors in Morton's conclusions.  She is gambling on the fact that the general public won't question her judgement.

[chris gadsden]

People should be more concerned with what Peterman had to say than this presence of Kudoa in farmed salmon fillets.

Many of these parasites already reside in wild Pacific salmon, so Volpe shouldn't be talking about ticking time bombs.  Henneguya salmincola (the parasite that Morton couldn't identify from Wikipedia), is common in wild Sockeye and doesn't look very appetizing, but it isn't going to harm you either.  Instead he should be taking more notice about about decline productively of Sockeye Salmon - coastwide.

dnibbles is right....people interchange viruses and disease even when both are different.   An animal can have virus and not necessarily have a disease from it.  Morton's discovery of reovirus are a perfect example of this.  Just because she found these reoviruses she started calling it a deadly heart virus which causes HSMI.  Well, for one thing she never found HSMI in those fish and the presence of reoviruses doesn't necessarily implies that something is wrong.  The "O" stands for orphan....meaning they are not necessarily associated with disease.  These reoviruses are already found healthy broiler chickens with no sign of disease.

It is an "almost" slick demarketing campaign to scare the consumer.  The reason why I say "almost" is because it is pretty plain to pick out the errors in Morton's conclusions.  She is gambling on the fact that the general public won't question her judgement.

To bad we can not question the FF and the Liberals tried to gag us as well. Lack of transparency will defeat both of them, in time.

[troutbreath]

So true Chris. Questioning someones opinion starts from what you want to hear. Hopefully at the end of the day we hear is what is really happening.

[shuswapsteve]

To bad we can not question the FF and the Liberals tried to gag us as well. Lack of transparency will defeat both of them, in time.

The BC industry is now under the regulatory control of the Federal government following the court ruling which Morton rallied behind.  If you are referring to the now abandoned Bill-37 it would have had no impact on the way fish farms report.  As for being forthcoming, you might want to ask Ms Morton why she has yet reveiled her recent lab results....or is transparency just a one-way street?

http://www.salmonfarmers.org/sites/default/files/hot-topics/bill_37.pdf

[Dave]

As for being forthcoming, you might want to ask Ms Morton why she has yet reveiled her recent lab results....or is transparency just a one-way street?

http://www.salmonfarmers.org/sites/default/files/hot-topics/bill_37.pdf

I again asked Ms. Morton that question on SFBC, today ... why not share this new data?  She has not responded but I was basically told to butt out by another forum member.
Thanks Rodney for this forum where people can express opinions freely if done respectfully and with common sense.

[shuswapsteve]

I again asked Ms. Morton that question on SFBC, today ... why not share this new data?  She has not responded but I was basically told to butt out by another forum member.
Thanks Rodney for this forum where people can express opinions freely if done respectfully and with common sense.

I read the comment on SFBC.  Too bad that a legitmate question is answered with insults and more presumptions that you are an industry hack.  He sounded a tad paranoid in his reply.  It's funny that government is held to the fire to have data like this readily available to the public, but somehow Ms Morton can criticize her opponents with the conclusions of the data while holding back the reporting of this data at the same time.  If she wants transparancy then she is going to have show a little herself.  Her last report from those Superstore farmed fish was only forthcoming when pressed on her blog by her critics.  This only makes her look evasive now.

[JPW]

I've hesitated on commenting on many of these threads because I don't feel I have all the information about what makes the most sense for our own health and that of the environment.  My feeling is that fish farming may be a necessity to satiate the global demand for seafood; we can't continue to rape the oceans with commercial fleets.  That being said, until it can be definitively proven that there is no harm to resident populations I believe they should be limited to closed containment.  Why take the risk?  I already know the answer, it's money and to me that is unacceptable.  There are many farming practices that also follow the same ethic circumventing focus on profitability and I disagree with those as well and believe they should change.  Unfortunately, that misuse of livestock and land is ingrained in our culture and will take longer to correct, but salmon farming is still new enough (relatively speaking) that we shouldn't make the same mistakes.  Despite assurances from the fish farm spokespeople about the safety of their industry the reality is that we know so little about the marine ecosystem that I ask again, why take the risk?  That brings me to this discussion about Morton's "error".

For better or worse, I believe in corporate accountability.  I also recognize that I am not the authority on all of the products I interact with on a daily basis.  That being said, from time to time despite my uneducated position I feel that if I'm concerned about a product I have the right to ask questions.  In my opinion a good company will provide a satisfactory answer, when it comes to food safety this is a must.  Many people on this forum seem to feel that Morton's science is questionable and they are entitled to their opinions, but in the case of Kudoa appearing in farmed fillets she was right.  She  had concern, she asked a relevant question, and I can relate to that.

To me it's disappointing that the pro fish farm users here and the spokespeople for the industry focus on attacking semantics (virus vs. disease, actual photo vs. example) rather than looking at the big picture.  I'm not going to drink the Morton Kool-Aid without asking questions, but the same goes for the fish farms.  In terms of credibility, Morton could skip the science altogether (I know many think she already does) and just post that she found "gross looking, mushy, fillets" that she doesn't think she be eaten and if she's right, she's right (that's exactly what happened with the linked CTV news story).  In fact even if she misidentified the cause completely, having the fish farm spokespeople count that as a win for their camp does NOTHING for their credibility in my opinion.  Take it for what you will, but I hold the corporation trying to sell me something to a higher standard than the biologist with the gifted degree.  I feel the onus is on them to provide me evidence contrary to the big picture issue Morton or any other consumer has identified.

More concisely I feel like these threads that try to discredit by focussing on the small details are basically like Morton blogging that she has found a horse that has been beaten to death and the fish farmers chalking up a win because they've found that the photo of said horse wasn't the actual horse and further investigation on their part has revealed that in fact it was bludgeoned to death!  The horse is still dead and that's really all that matters to me.

Can you imagine if Morton was just a concerned consumer, asking questions without even a hypothesis?  What would the pro fish farmers have to pick apart?

[Dave]

Good post and welcome to the debate.

[alwaysfishn]

Good post and welcome to the debate.

I realize it's rare, but I agree with Dave 100%!  

[absolon]

I've hesitated on commenting on many of these threads because I don't feel I have all the information about what makes the most sense for our own health and that of the environment.  My feeling is that fish farming may be a necessity to satiate the global demand for seafood; we can't continue to rape the oceans with commercial fleets.  That being said, until it can be definitively proven that there is no harm to resident populations I believe they should be limited to closed containment.  Why take the risk?  I already know the answer, it's money and to me that is unacceptable.  There are many farming practices that also follow the same ethic circumventing focus on profitability and I disagree with those as well and believe they should change.  Unfortunately, that misuse of livestock and land is ingrained in our culture and will take longer to correct, but salmon farming is still new enough (relatively speaking) that we shouldn't make the same mistakes.  Despite assurances from the fish farm spokespeople about the safety of their industry the reality is that we know so little about the marine ecosystem that I ask again, why take the risk?  That brings me to this discussion about Morton's "error".

For better or worse, I believe in corporate accountability.  I also recognize that I am not the authority on all of the products I interact with on a daily basis.  That being said, from time to time despite my uneducated position I feel that if I'm concerned about a product I have the right to ask questions.  In my opinion a good company will provide a satisfactory answer, when it comes to food safety this is a must.  Many people on this forum seem to feel that Morton's science is questionable and they are entitled to their opinions, but in the case of Kudoa appearing in farmed fillets she was right.  She  had concern, she asked a relevant question, and I can relate to that.

To me it's disappointing that the pro fish farm users here and the spokespeople for the industry focus on attacking semantics (virus vs. disease, actual photo vs. example) rather than looking at the big picture.  I'm not going to drink the Morton Kool-Aid without asking questions, but the same goes for the fish farms.  In terms of credibility, Morton could skip the science altogether (I know many think she already does) and just post that she found "gross looking, mushy, fillets" that she doesn't think she be eaten and if she's right, she's right (that's exactly what happened with the linked CTV news story).  In fact even if she misidentified the cause completely, having the fish farm spokespeople count that as a win for their camp does NOTHING for their credibility in my opinion.  Take it for what you will, but I hold the corporation trying to sell me something to a higher standard than the biologist with the gifted degree.  I feel the onus is on them to provide me evidence contrary to the big picture issue Morton or any other consumer has identified.

More concisely I feel like these threads that try to discredit by focussing on the small details are basically like Morton blogging that she has found a horse that has been beaten to death and the fish farmers chalking up a win because they've found that the photo of said horse wasn't the actual horse and further investigation on their part has revealed that in fact it was bludgeoned to death!  The horse is still dead and that's really all that matters to me.

Can you imagine if Morton was just a concerned consumer, asking questions without even a hypothesis?  What would the pro fish farmers have to pick apart?

Nice to see a rational presentation for a change. However, I take issue with a couple of your points. Nobody with the exception of one participant here speaks of this in terms of competition, teams and winning or losing. This isn't a contest. The representations here, at least from the people who don't agree with Morton and who actually know something about farms and salmon biology, are about correcting misinformation she provides and providing access to a better basis for making up your own mind. They aren't attempts to score "points".  You have every right to make your own decisions about farms but you can't make good decisions based on bad information.

What you call small details like the "difference between a virus and a disease" are not small details at all. In practical terms, they are critically important and differentiating them brings a required precision to the discussion. Morton's error has relevance because it is a blatant demonstration of her approach to making claims. Her concern isn't accuracy. It's impact, and the truth falls by the wayside in the pursuit of that impact. I can understand how the general public can be taken in, but how can she expect to be taken seriously by the scientists and regulators looking at the impacts of farms and for whom precision and accuracy are critical parts of their stock in trade when she displays such a disregard for those qualities. Precision and accuracy are critical in order to arrive at good understanding and good decisions.

I agree that food safety is critical but Kudoa is not a food safety issue in spite of all the attempts to frame it as such. None of the concerns Morton has recently raised in an attempt to put this subject on the table is a food safety issue in even the slightest degree. It is simply Morton's latest tactic in her battle to eliminate farms and needs to be exposed for that; the final decision about farms is still yours to make even after someone has pointed that relevant detail out.

You suggest that companies should answer the questions you have. How do you know they won't? Have you tried? It isn't reasonable to paint them as uncooperative or irresponsible simply because they aren't interested in responding to Morton. They know, as does Morton, that just because somebody makes a claim doesn't mean that it has a shred of reasonability or that it deserves an answer and they also know, as does Morton, that every time they respond, it keeps her claims and her name in the news and in front of the uninformed public who hasn't got sufficient tools to analyze the claim for truth. If you have a question for the farm companies, just simply send them a polite email and they will respond. If you have a question about disease, send the provincial vet's office or the fish health branch a polite email. There is no need to let Morton filter the information you need to work with.

Unfortunately, when the horse dies, or in this case, the wild salmon, you do need to know what killed them and to do that, you do need to know the details. This isn't a simplistic subject that lends itself to broad generalities though the people who have no patience for details or understanding of their importance will happily tell you otherwise. The details are where the truth lies and in order to get to it, you need to deal with the details. It may be repetetive but that is because the same old arguments against the farms are trotted out time after time after time with no regard for the fact that they have been clearly rebutted by presentations of fact. The fact that we need to go through this over and over speaks to the inability of the reactionaries to come up with plausible criticisms and their dogged determination to ignore anything that doesn't support their feelings about the subject.

[alwaysfishn]

Nice to see a rational presentation for a change.

You should have probably removed this comment when you edited your post..... as it has no relevance to how you tried to show how irrational you think JPW is. 

Seeing as how you and Dave seem to agree on everything, I'm now questioning the sincerity of Dave's comment.