GMO Foods - Science
What is your position on genetically-modified foods? Construct your argument based on your personal ethical architecture? What is important to you in agreeing to support GMOs and would you use those products to feed yourself and your family?
Case Studies in Ethics
a t D u k e U n i v e r s i t y
dukeethics.org
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution - Noncommercial - No
Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecom-
mons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/. You may reproduce this work for non-commercial use if you use
the entire document and attribute the source: The Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University.
On September 19, 2010, 13 members in a special Veterinary Medicine Advisory
Committee (VMAC) of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) convened for
public hearings to discuss the approval for biotechnology company AquaBounty
Technologies’ AquAdvantage salmon. This particular salmon is genetically
modifi ed (GM) to grow twice as fast as conventional Atlantic salmon. If
authorized, the product would mark the fi rst FDA-approved GM animal for human
consumption. To AquaBounty, the AquAdvantage salmon would be a profi table
solution to meet increasing fi sh demand in the coming years. Critics of the GM
salmon, however, pointed to the fl awed FDA approval process—the public was
only given 14 days to review all documents before the public hearing, and several
organizations questioned the makeup of VMAC and whether the studies provided
by AquaBounty adequately addressed ecological and human health concerns.
This case considers the FDA approval process for genetically modifi ed animals
in light of AquaBounty Technologies’ push to bring AquAdvantage salmon to
the market. Issues of effective governance, transparency, and antiquated policies
highlight challenges for the FDA in regulating biotechnology enhancements.
The case and teaching notes for this case were completed under the direction of
Dr. Rebecca Dunning, the Kenan Institute for Ethics.
Institutions in Crisis
FISHY BUSINESS?
AquaBounty Technologies, the FDA, and
Genetically Modifi ed Foods
Jessie Tang
Case Studies in Ethics dukeethics.org2
Introduction
In 2006, approximately 110.4 million metric tons of fi sh were consumed, with almost half of that from aquaculture,
the commercial farming of fi sh. Seventy percent of salmon consumed are from farmed sources. The Food and
Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United Nations has estimated that by 2030, annual commercial production
will need to increase by an additional 28.8 million metric tons in order to maintain per capita fi sh consumption
at current levels.1 Biotechnology company AquaBounty Technologies’ hopes to meet this demand through the
production of a genetically engineered fi sh that grows twice as fast as conventional Atlantic salmon, an advantage
that would signifi cantly cut production costs for fi sh farmers while providing a potentially large source of revenue
for the company.2
AquaBounty Technologies fi rst fi led for U.S. approval of its AquAdvantage salmon in 1995. In 2010, the FDA
announced that there was enough information available to review the GM salmon. However, criticisms of the
FDA approval process have brought up issues of transparency and accountability. The FDA released 255 pages
of technical information regarding the GM salmon on Sept 5, 2010, giving the public only 14 days to review the
document before the public hearings would begin September 19. The Consumer Union, the nonprofi t watchdog
group and publisher of Consumer Reports, formally submitted comments noting the shortened time frame for
public comments, the questionable composition of the review board, and lack of data rigor present in AquaBounty’s
research.3
This case considers the FDA approval process for genetically modifi ed animals in light of AquaBounty
Technologies’ push to bring AquAdvantage salmon to the market. Issues of effective governance, transparency,
and antiquated policies highlight challenges for the FDA in regulating biotechnology advancements. This case also
highlights how accountability frameworks within public institutions are reacting to rapid scientifi c innovations that
may pose threats to human and environmental safety.
“The Magician’s Wand”: AHistory of Agricultural Science and Genetics
The process of modifying crops through agricultural science has been occurring for several centuries. In the
late 1840s, Justus von Liebig published Organic Chemistry and Its Applications in Agriculture and Physiology.
Thousands of copies of the book were sold in America, and his letters were published in newspapers around the
world, making Liebig a better known international fi gure than Abraham Lincoln by the start of the Civil War in
1861.4 The publication discussed soil fertilizer and its implications for agriculture, and the fi rst application of
agricultural science was coincidentally in fertilizer by James Murray in 1842. His treatment of fertilizer was
further investigated by other scientists, which led to the advent of the modern nitrogen fertilizer industry, which has
produced both greater yields and environmental problems.5
Concerted scientifi c research on genetics can be traceed back to the work of evolutionary biologist Charles Darwin,
who in 1859 brought to light the laws of heredity and natural selection in The Origins of Species. Darwin’s research
was infl uenced by William Youatt, an agriculturalist who understood the principle of selection as a tool that one
could use to “not only modify the character of the fl ock, but to change it altogether.”6 In this sense, the laws of
heredity were a “magician’s wand” that enabled agriculturalists to alter their stock.
1 From www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2008/1000930/index.html, accessed 11/10/2010.
2 From http://www.aquabounty.com/products/aquadvantage-295.aspx, accessed 10/25/2010.
3 From http://www.consumersunion.org/pub/core_food_safety/016884.html, accessed 10/25/2010
4 Fedoroff, Nina and Nancy Marie Brown. Mendel in the Kitchen. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press, 2004. Page 49.
5 Ibid. Page 50. See Modern Applications of Genetics in Food section of this case for more information
6 Fedoroff, Nina and Nancy Marie Brown. 2004. Mendel in the Kitchen. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press. Page 51.
Case Studies in Ethics dukeethics.org3
It was not until Gregor Mendel, the Moravian monk, that the signifi cance of the hereditary factors, or genes,
was established as he examined the breeding of two types of peas in his monastery garden. He mathematically
documented the outcomes of crossbreeding round, yellow peas with wrinkled, green peas. His observations led
to the development of Mendel’s laws of genetic inheritance, which was published in 1866. His work was mostly
forgotten until 1886, when Dutch botanist Hugo De Vries recovered Mendel’s publication while Vries himself
was developing his theories of plant heredity and mutation. Mendel’s work has been cited as the groundwork for
contemporary molecular techniques for plant improvement.7
Traditional methods of crossbreeding and hybridizations as employed by Mendel involve artifi cial selection, which
is the genetic improvement of cultivated plants and domesticated animals by way of direct human interference.8
Genetic modifi cation, which began in the 1990s, is an extension of artifi cial selection, whereby new genetic material
is created and directly inserted in plants and animals, a method not seen in traditional methods of hybridization and
cloning.9 There are various names for foods that contain genetic modifi cation, the most popular being “genetically
modifi ed,” “genetically engineered,” “genetically altered,” “transgenic,” or “advance-hybrid.”
The FDA defi nes genetically engineered (GE) animals as “those animals modifi ed by recombinant DNA (rDNA)
techniques, including the entire lineage of animals that contain the modifi cation.”10
Modern Applications of Genetics in Food
The application of Mendel’s laws of plant breeding spurred the creation of high-yielding hybrid seed varieties that
resulted in the dramatic increase in crop yields from 1950 to 1984. This period is known as the “Green Revolution,”
and was particularly promising in the developing world. For example, wheat and rice production increased by about
75 percent between 1965 and 1980.11 In America, the hybrid seed varieties led to a 242\% increase in production
of the 17 most important domestic crops, while area only increased by 3 percent between 1940 and 1980.12 Today,
applications of biotechnology in foods are abundant. According to the International Service for the Acquisition of
Agri-biotech Applications, a non-profi t international organization that supports biotechnology as a means of helping
farmers in developing nations, 14 million farmers in 25 countries planted 134 million hectors (i.e. 330 million acres)
of biotech crops in 2009, a 80-fold increase from 1996.13
In addition to biotech crops, the genetic modifi cation of animals and fi sh is becoming a growing area of research.
Transgenic cattle, sheep, pigs, chickens and other animals have been used in biomedical research, and show potential
for farming. These animals have faster growth rates, lower fat levels and increased disease resistance.14 The genes
transferred to the animals are generally ones that regulate the production of growth hormones, or chemicals that
regulate growth, thus making the process of growing animals more economical.
7 Ibid. Page 56.
8 Nottingham, Stephen. 2003. Eat Your Genes: How Genetically Modifi ed Food is Entering Our Diet, Second Edition. New York: Zed Books.
9 Biologist Stephen Nottingham differentiates the distinction between cross breeding and genetic modifi cation as such: “[Traditional plant breed-
ing] is constrained by limitations in sexual compatibility, which prevents cross-fertilization between species. This limits the potential gene pool,
that is the total number of genes and their different alleles, available for crop improvements. Genetic engineering extends this potential by creat-
ing new genetic material for breeders to work on. Once a foreign gene has been engineered into a variety, it can be passed into hybrids like any
other gene using traditional breeding methods.” Further reading can be found in : Nottingham, Stephen. 2003. Eat Your Genes: How genetically
modifi ed food is entering our diet, Second Edition. New York: Zed Books.
10 From http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/UCM113903.pdf, accessed
10/20/2010.
11 Nottingham, Stephen. 2003. Eat Your Genes: How Genetically Modifi ed Food is Entering Our Diet, Second Edition. New York: Zed Books.
12 Ibid. Page 4.
13 From http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/41/executivesummary/default.asp, accessed 11/15/2010.
14 Nottingham. Stephen. 2003. Eat Your Genes: How Genetically Modifi ed Food is Entering Our Diet, Second Edition.
New York: Zed Books. Page 9.
Case Studies in Ethics dukeethics.org4
The benefi ts of biotech foods have been established on several fronts. Proponents recognize biotechnological
advancements as a way to increase crop yield, create herbicide- and insect-resistant crops, and design crops that
are tolerant to various conditions, including droughts and frost.15 Supporters of biotechnology see biotech crops
as an innovative approach to world hunger. One example is the “Golden Rice” initiative, begun in 1984 by Dr.
Peter Jennings. The goal of the venture was to alleviate Vitamin A defi ciency by inserting beta-carotene into rice.16
Others, such as philanthropist Bill Gates and the Director-General of the FAO, endorse biotech advancements as
an important method to tackle the problem of resource constraints. At the 2009 World Summit on Food Security,
world leaders discussed key challenges facing the world, including the increase to a world population of 9 billion
inhabitants by 2050. The goal of eradicating world hunger is paired with an emphasis on international development.
A declaration stemming from the World Summit on Food Security, states,
We recognize that increasing agricultural productivity is the main means to meet the increasing demand
for food given the constraints on expanding land and water used for food production. […] We will seek
to mobilize the resources needed to increase productivity, including the review, approval, and adoption of
biotechnology and other new technologies and innovations that are safe, effective, and environmentally
sustainable.17
However, not all outcomes of biotech food production have been positive. Following the “Green Revolution,” the
yield outputs after 1984 leveled off and declined due to the high levels of expensive agrochemicals, high water
volumes for irrigation, and the increase in farm machinery. These new crops favored large farms, and poorer
farmers could not benefi t from new seed varieties. It was also found that agrochemicals degraded the environment
and polluted water, and an overuse of pesticides created resistance in pests.18 Critics point to issues of resource
effi ciency, resource allocation, and ecological risks as downfalls of biotech advancements.
There are also several notable ecological concerns with regards to GM crops. For example, genetically modifi ed
crops may become weeds to agricultural or natural habitats, diverting nutrients from the crops in the soil. The
new genes may also be transferred from the GM plants to the wild population, whose hybrid offspring could have
an effect on the existing environmental landscape. For transgenic fi sh, there is also the potential for reproduction
between GM and wild species.19
Additionally, opponents have cited GM foods as having negative impacts on human health. Biologist Dr. Stephen
Nottingham notes the possibility of food allergies to GM foods and bacterial buildup in the human gut that could
lead to antibiotic resistance.20 Critics also bring up the lack of labeling for genetically modifi ed foods as another
cause for concern. Consumer advocates believe the public should have the right to information about their food.
Currently, genetically modifi ed crops do not require labeling, and the issue of labeling has been brought up again
with regards to the potential of GM animals for human consumption. Further, Carol Tucker Foreman, director of the
Food Policy Institute at the Consumer Federation of America, a consumer advocacy group in Washington, D.C.,
feels that when it comes to animals, labeling may not appease consumers—many individuals object to the genetic
engineering of animals on humane or ethical grounds more so than on concerns for human safety. 21
15 Ibid..
16 Pringle, Peter. 2003. Food, Inc. New York: Simon & Schuster. Page 19.
17 From http://www.fao.org/fi leadmin/templates/wsfs/Summit/Docs/Final_Declaration/WSFS09_Declaration.pdf, accessed 12/4/2010.
18 Nottingham, Stephen. 2003. Eat Your Genes: How Genetically Modifi ed Food is Entering Our Diet. Second Edition. New York: Zed Books.
Pages 4-5.
19 Ibid. Page 88.
20 Ibid. Page 91.
21 Pollack, Andrew. “Without U.S. Rules, Biotech Food Lacks Investors. “ The New York Times (July 30, 2007).
Case Studies in Ethics dukeethics.org5
The Genetic Era and U.S. Regulations
The Genetic Era dawned when the U.S. Department of Agriculture approved Petition No. 92-196-01P on October
19, 1992, which approved the commercialization of the Flavr Savr Tomato by Calgene Incorporated.22 In 1994, the
Flavr Savr tomato was the fi rst genetically modifi ed product to reach U.S. supermarkets. The tomato was supposed
to soften at a slower speed compared to conventional tomatoes. The Flavr Savr tomato was not a success with the
public, however, given its (ironic) lack of fl avor.
The fi rst profi table genetically modifi ed plant was Monsanto Company’s Roundup Ready soybean, which was
approved by the Department of Agriculture on May 19, 1994. This spurred subsequent government approval for
GM corn, potatoes, cotton, squash, papaya, radicchio, and tomatoes. In 1996, the fi rst GMO crops were grown
commercially. These crops generally included two new gene traits. One was herbicide tolerance, mostly using the
Monsanto-created Roundup formulation; the other was insect resistance, in which a bacterium, Bacillus thuringienis,
would cause plants to produce a protein fatal to pests.23
The United States leads all other countries in the production of genetically modifi ed crops, planting 64.0 million
hectares of GM crops. In 2009, over 75\% of the 90 million hectares of soybeans and almost 50\% of the 33 million
hectares of cotton were biotech.24 An additional 32 countries granted regular approvals for biotech crops between
1996 and 2009.25 With regards to consumption, it is estimated that 70\% of processed foods sold in the USA and
Canada contain approved GM ingredients.
The Regulatory Framework of Genetically Engineered Foods in America
Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology
Federal policy fi rst addressed biotechnology in 1986. The “Coordinated Framework for Regulation of
Biotechnology” stated that no new laws were needed to regulate the products of biotechnology. This piece of policy
was based upon the assumption that “upon examination of the existing laws available for the regulation of products
developed by traditional genetic manipulation techniques, the working group concluded that, for the most part, these
laws as currently implemented would address regulatory needs adequately.”26 Under the “Coordinated Framework,”
three lead federal agencies— the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(USDA/APHIS), the Department of Health and Human Services’ Food and Drug Administration (HHS/FDA), and
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—have the responsibility for implementing the nation’s biotechnology
regulatory framework.27
Furthermore, the policy stated that a commercial product should be regulated based on the product’s composition
and intended use, regardless of its manner of production—essentially implying that biotech food would be regulated
22 Lambrecht, Bill. 2001. Dinner at the New Gene Café: How Genetic Engineering is Changing How We Eat, How We Live, and the Global
Politics of Food. New York: Thomas Dunne Books. Page 6.
23 Ibid. Page 7.
24 Nottingham, Stephen. 2003. Eat Your Genes: How Genetically Modifi ed Foods ars Entering Our Diet, Second Edition. New York: Zed
Books. Page 3.
25 Ibid. Page 15.
26 From http://usbiotechreg.nbii.gov/CoordinatedFrameworkForRegulationOfBiotechnology1986.pdf, accessed 11/10/2010.
27 From http://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/tech/biotechreg.pdf, accessed 11/10/2010
Case Studies in Ethics dukeethics.org6
in the same manner as other foods produced through conventional processes.28 The result is that no single statute and
or single federal agency specifi cally governs the regulation of biotechnology products.29
The FDA, CVM, and Transgenic Animal Regulation
The FDA is the oldest comprehensive consumer protection agency in the U.S. federal government, and its modern
regulatory framework was established under the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act.30 Below is the stated mission
statement of the agency as provided on the FDA website:
The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, effi cacy and security of
human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and
products that emit radiation.
One of the major pieces of legislation related to the regulation of the United States Food Safety system is the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) of 1938. It was passed after a legally marketed toxic elixir killed 107
people. This incident led the FFDCA to overhaul the public health system. The law authorized the FDA to demand
evidence of safety for new drugs, issue standards for food, and conduct factory inspections.31
Specifi c to genetically modifi ed animals, in January 2009 the FDA issued a fi nal version of “Guidance for Industry:
Regulation of Genetically Engineered Animals Containing Heritable Recombinant DNA Constructs.”32 Within the
FDA, the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) oversees the application process and works with developers of
genetically engineered (GE) animals. The agency issued the industry guidance for the following reasons:
As GE animals approach commercialization, we think it is important to issue guidance to clarify our
regulatory process, and to gather input from the public and the regulated industry. In addition, we think
publishing the guidance is timely in light of the recent adoption of the Codex Alimentarius guideline on
assessing the safety of food from GE animals.33
The 26-page document outlines new regulatory steps scientists and companies need to take in order to seek approval
for GE animals, which is regulated under the “new animal drug provision” of the FFDCA (see Appendix A for
reasons for approval).
A drug, in section 201(g) of the FFDCA (21 U.S. 321 et seq.), is defi ned as “articles intended for use in the
diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man or other animals;” and “articles (other than
28 Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. “Guide to U.S. Regulation of Genetically Modifi ed Food and Agricultural Biotechnology Prod-
ucts.” The full document is available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Food_and_Biotechnology/hhs_bio-
tech_0901.pdf,
29 It should be noted that the lack of differentiation between process and product has signifi cant implications for the topic of food labeling. The
United States does not currently have a mandate for the agribusiness industry to label GM foods. In 2001, the FDA proposed voluntary label-
ing guidelines for both non-genetically modifi ed and genetically modifi ed foods (for more information, see the FDA’s “Guidance for Industry:
Voluntary Labeling Indicating Whether Foods Have or Have Not Been Developed Using Bioengineering.” In Europe, public pressure pushed the
European Commission to establish mandatory GM food labeling in foods with higher than 0.9\% of genetically modifi ed ingredients.
30 From http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/default.htm, accessed 11/27/2010.
31 From http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Legislation/default.htm, accessed 11/27/2010.
32 For the complete 26-page document, visit http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/Guidancefo-
rIndustry/UCM052463.pdf.
33 From http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/GeneticEngineering/GeneticallyEngineeredAnimals/ucm113660.
htm, accessed 11/27/2010. The Codex Alimentarius Commission was formed in 1963 as a joint venture between the World Health Organization
and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The goals of the Commission are to promote fair trade practices in the food
industry and promote coordination of all food standards undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations. For more
information, visit http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp.
Case Studies in Ethics dukeethics.org7
food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals.” A new animal drug is
defi ned as “any drug intended for use for animals other than man, including any drug intended for use in animal feed
but not including such animal feed.”34 The rDNA construct used to create a transgenic animal affects the structure
or function of the body of the GE animal, and thus qualifi es as an animal drug that requires FDA approval under the
new animal drug defi nition. 35
In the FDA Veterinarian Newsletter 2008, the oversight goals of the CVM were as follows: “As with any review
of a new animal drug, CVM will be considering the safety of the gene construct to the animal, the safety of any
food derived from the animal (if it is intended to enter the food supply), the effectiveness of the construct, and any
possible threat to the environment.”36
It has been noted that FDA offi cials have said that treating a gene inserted into an animal’s DNA as a drug was “the
best approach, because it was unlikely Congress would pass entirely new laws governing genetically engineered
livestock.”37
AquaBounty Technologies
Originally incorporated in 1991, AquaBounty Technologies is a biotechnology company focused on the commercial
aquaculture industry. Executive Director, CEO, and President of AquaBounty stated the following as the company’s
mission:
Our mission is to play a signifi cant part in “The Blue Revolution” – bringing together biological
sciences and molecular technology to enable an aquaculture industry capable of large-scale, effi cient,
and environmentally sustainable production of high quality seafood. Increased growth rates, enhanced
resistance to disease, better food-conversion rates, manageable breeding cycles, and more effi cient use of
aquatic production systems are all important components of the sustainable aquaculture industry of the
future.38
The company fi rst originated as A/F Protein, through which they sought to pursue the commercial development
of antifreeze protein-based technology under license from the University of California at Berkeley.39 In 1996,
they acquired a license for AquAdvantage technology from the University of Toronto and Memorial University of
Newfoundland. The company then reorganized itself into two separate entities in 2000, one remaining A/F Proteins,
the other named AquaBounty Farms, and in 2004 owners offi cially changed the name to AquaBounty Technology.
AquAdvantage Salmon
AquaBounty is working toward developing “advanced-hybrid” salmon, trout, and tilapia. The AquAdvantage salmon
is the fi sh that the company is seeking FDA approval for currently. According to the company’s web site,
34 From http://www.FDA.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Legislation/FederalFoodDrugandCosmeticActFDCAct/FDCActChaptersIandIIShortTitle-
andDefi nitions/ucm086297.htm, accessed 11/27/2010.
35 From http://www.FDA.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Legislation/FederalFoodDrugandCosmeticActFDCAct/FDCActChaptersIandIIShortTitle-
andDefi nitions/ucm086297.htm, accessed 11/27/2010
36 http://www.FDA.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/FDAVeterinarianNewsletter/ucm109295.htm
37 Pollack, Andrew. “Rules Near for Animals’ Engineering.” The New York Times (September 17, 2008).
38 From http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/aquabountys-response-to-the-press-release-titled-coalition-demands-fda-deny-approval-of-
fi rst-genetically-engineered-food-animal-101927263.html, accessed 11/27/2010.
39 From http://www.aquabounty.com/company/company-history-292.aspx, accessed 10/20/2010.
Case Studies in Ethics dukeethics.org8
AquAdvantage® Salmon (AAS) reach market size twice as fast as traditional salmon. This advancement
provides a compelling economic benefi t to farmers (reduced growing cycle) as well as enhancing the
economic viability of inland operations, thereby diminishing the need for ocean pens. AAS are also
reproductively sterile, which eliminates the threat of interbreeding amongst themselves or with native
populations, a major recent concern in dealing with fi sh escaping from salmon farms.40
The AAS is an Atlantic salmon that contains a growth hormone gene from a Chinook salmon, in addition to a
genetic on-switch from the ocean pout, a distant relative of the salmon.41 The genetic on-switch allows the salmon
to grow year-round, rather than just during the warmer months. AAS can reach market weight in about 18 months,
versus the 30 months of conventional Atlantic salmon, though the company states that the GM salmon will not end
up any bigger than a conventional fi sh. In addition to the shortened growth time frame, the fi sh produced are also
reproductively sterile, according to the company, which addresses certain environmental concerns about the threat of
inbreeding among the genetically modifi ed and wild salmon population.
The FDA and AquaBounty’s AAS
AquaBounty fi rst fi led for FDA approval of its AquAdvantage salmon in 1995. According to Elliot Entis, the
company’s chief executive, by 2007 the company had already given the agency studies showing that the fi sh were
healthy and that implanted genes remained stable over several life cycles. Additionally, the company affi rmed that it
had conducted tests revealing that the GM salmon were essentially identical to other farmed salmon, containing the
same levels of fats, proteins and other nutrients, and would not set off allergic reactions.42 However, at that point, the
FDA was still seeking more data from the biotech company on safety and environmental risks on the wild salmon
population.43
According to news reports from June 2010, AquAdvantage Salmon seemed on a path to becoming approved by the
FDA. This announcement was important, because the approval of AAS would set a precedent for other GM animals.
For example, cattle resistant to mad cow disease or pigs that could supply healthier bacon may be next in line for
possible approval.44
On September 3, 2010, the VMAC informed the public that it was hosting a …
CATEGORIES
Economics
Nursing
Applied Sciences
Psychology
Science
Management
Computer Science
Human Resource Management
Accounting
Information Systems
English
Anatomy
Operations Management
Sociology
Literature
Education
Business & Finance
Marketing
Engineering
Statistics
Biology
Political Science
Reading
History
Financial markets
Philosophy
Mathematics
Law
Criminal
Architecture and Design
Government
Social Science
World history
Chemistry
Humanities
Business Finance
Writing
Programming
Telecommunications Engineering
Geography
Physics
Spanish
ach
e. Embedded Entrepreneurship
f. Three Social Entrepreneurship Models
g. Social-Founder Identity
h. Micros-enterprise Development
Outcomes
Subset 2. Indigenous Entrepreneurship Approaches (Outside of Canada)
a. Indigenous Australian Entrepreneurs Exami
Calculus
(people influence of
others) processes that you perceived occurs in this specific Institution Select one of the forms of stratification highlighted (focus on inter the intersectionalities
of these three) to reflect and analyze the potential ways these (
American history
Pharmacology
Ancient history
. Also
Numerical analysis
Environmental science
Electrical Engineering
Precalculus
Physiology
Civil Engineering
Electronic Engineering
ness Horizons
Algebra
Geology
Physical chemistry
nt
When considering both O
lassrooms
Civil
Probability
ions
Identify a specific consumer product that you or your family have used for quite some time. This might be a branded smartphone (if you have used several versions over the years)
or the court to consider in its deliberations. Locard’s exchange principle argues that during the commission of a crime
Chemical Engineering
Ecology
aragraphs (meaning 25 sentences or more). Your assignment may be more than 5 paragraphs but not less.
INSTRUCTIONS:
To access the FNU Online Library for journals and articles you can go the FNU library link here:
https://www.fnu.edu/library/
In order to
n that draws upon the theoretical reading to explain and contextualize the design choices. Be sure to directly quote or paraphrase the reading
ce to the vaccine. Your campaign must educate and inform the audience on the benefits but also create for safe and open dialogue. A key metric of your campaign will be the direct increase in numbers.
Key outcomes: The approach that you take must be clear
Mechanical Engineering
Organic chemistry
Geometry
nment
Topic
You will need to pick one topic for your project (5 pts)
Literature search
You will need to perform a literature search for your topic
Geophysics
you been involved with a company doing a redesign of business processes
Communication on Customer Relations. Discuss how two-way communication on social media channels impacts businesses both positively and negatively. Provide any personal examples from your experience
od pressure and hypertension via a community-wide intervention that targets the problem across the lifespan (i.e. includes all ages).
Develop a community-wide intervention to reduce elevated blood pressure and hypertension in the State of Alabama that in
in body of the report
Conclusions
References (8 References Minimum)
*** Words count = 2000 words.
*** In-Text Citations and References using Harvard style.
*** In Task section I’ve chose (Economic issues in overseas contracting)"
Electromagnetism
w or quality improvement; it was just all part of good nursing care. The goal for quality improvement is to monitor patient outcomes using statistics for comparison to standards of care for different diseases
e a 1 to 2 slide Microsoft PowerPoint presentation on the different models of case management. Include speaker notes... .....Describe three different models of case management.
visual representations of information. They can include numbers
SSAY
ame workbook for all 3 milestones. You do not need to download a new copy for Milestones 2 or 3. When you submit Milestone 3
pages):
Provide a description of an existing intervention in Canada
making the appropriate buying decisions in an ethical and professional manner.
Topic: Purchasing and Technology
You read about blockchain ledger technology. Now do some additional research out on the Internet and share your URL with the rest of the class
be aware of which features their competitors are opting to include so the product development teams can design similar or enhanced features to attract more of the market. The more unique
low (The Top Health Industry Trends to Watch in 2015) to assist you with this discussion.
https://youtu.be/fRym_jyuBc0
Next year the $2.8 trillion U.S. healthcare industry will finally begin to look and feel more like the rest of the business wo
evidence-based primary care curriculum. Throughout your nurse practitioner program
Vignette
Understanding Gender Fluidity
Providing Inclusive Quality Care
Affirming Clinical Encounters
Conclusion
References
Nurse Practitioner Knowledge
Mechanics
and word limit is unit as a guide only.
The assessment may be re-attempted on two further occasions (maximum three attempts in total). All assessments must be resubmitted 3 days within receiving your unsatisfactory grade. You must clearly indicate “Re-su
Trigonometry
Article writing
Other
5. June 29
After the components sending to the manufacturing house
1. In 1972 the Furman v. Georgia case resulted in a decision that would put action into motion. Furman was originally sentenced to death because of a murder he committed in Georgia but the court debated whether or not this was a violation of his 8th amend
One of the first conflicts that would need to be investigated would be whether the human service professional followed the responsibility to client ethical standard. While developing a relationship with client it is important to clarify that if danger or
Ethical behavior is a critical topic in the workplace because the impact of it can make or break a business
No matter which type of health care organization
With a direct sale
During the pandemic
Computers are being used to monitor the spread of outbreaks in different areas of the world and with this record
3. Furman v. Georgia is a U.S Supreme Court case that resolves around the Eighth Amendments ban on cruel and unsual punishment in death penalty cases. The Furman v. Georgia case was based on Furman being convicted of murder in Georgia. Furman was caught i
One major ethical conflict that may arise in my investigation is the Responsibility to Client in both Standard 3 and Standard 4 of the Ethical Standards for Human Service Professionals (2015). Making sure we do not disclose information without consent ev
4. Identify two examples of real world problems that you have observed in your personal
Summary & Evaluation: Reference & 188. Academic Search Ultimate
Ethics
We can mention at least one example of how the violation of ethical standards can be prevented. Many organizations promote ethical self-regulation by creating moral codes to help direct their business activities
*DDB is used for the first three years
For example
The inbound logistics for William Instrument refer to purchase components from various electronic firms. During the purchase process William need to consider the quality and price of the components. In this case
4. A U.S. Supreme Court case known as Furman v. Georgia (1972) is a landmark case that involved Eighth Amendment’s ban of unusual and cruel punishment in death penalty cases (Furman v. Georgia (1972)
With covid coming into place
In my opinion
with
Not necessarily all home buyers are the same! When you choose to work with we buy ugly houses Baltimore & nationwide USA
The ability to view ourselves from an unbiased perspective allows us to critically assess our personal strengths and weaknesses. This is an important step in the process of finding the right resources for our personal learning style. Ego and pride can be
· By Day 1 of this week
While you must form your answers to the questions below from our assigned reading material
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (2013)
5 The family dynamic is awkward at first since the most outgoing and straight forward person in the family in Linda
Urien
The most important benefit of my statistical analysis would be the accuracy with which I interpret the data. The greatest obstacle
From a similar but larger point of view
4 In order to get the entire family to come back for another session I would suggest coming in on a day the restaurant is not open
When seeking to identify a patient’s health condition
After viewing the you tube videos on prayer
Your paper must be at least two pages in length (not counting the title and reference pages)
The word assimilate is negative to me. I believe everyone should learn about a country that they are going to live in. It doesnt mean that they have to believe that everything in America is better than where they came from. It means that they care enough
Data collection
Single Subject Chris is a social worker in a geriatric case management program located in a midsize Northeastern town. She has an MSW and is part of a team of case managers that likes to continuously improve on its practice. The team is currently using an
I would start off with Linda on repeating her options for the child and going over what she is feeling with each option. I would want to find out what she is afraid of. I would avoid asking her any “why” questions because I want her to be in the here an
Summarize the advantages and disadvantages of using an Internet site as means of collecting data for psychological research (Comp 2.1) 25.0\% Summarization of the advantages and disadvantages of using an Internet site as means of collecting data for psych
Identify the type of research used in a chosen study
Compose a 1
Optics
effect relationship becomes more difficult—as the researcher cannot enact total control of another person even in an experimental environment. Social workers serve clients in highly complex real-world environments. Clients often implement recommended inte
I think knowing more about you will allow you to be able to choose the right resources
Be 4 pages in length
soft MB-920 dumps review and documentation and high-quality listing pdf MB-920 braindumps also recommended and approved by Microsoft experts. The practical test
g
One thing you will need to do in college is learn how to find and use references. References support your ideas. College-level work must be supported by research. You are expected to do that for this paper. You will research
Elaborate on any potential confounds or ethical concerns while participating in the psychological study 20.0\% Elaboration on any potential confounds or ethical concerns while participating in the psychological study is missing. Elaboration on any potenti
3 The first thing I would do in the family’s first session is develop a genogram of the family to get an idea of all the individuals who play a major role in Linda’s life. After establishing where each member is in relation to the family
A Health in All Policies approach
Note: The requirements outlined below correspond to the grading criteria in the scoring guide. At a minimum
Chen
Read Connecting Communities and Complexity: A Case Study in Creating the Conditions for Transformational Change
Read Reflections on Cultural Humility
Read A Basic Guide to ABCD Community Organizing
Use the bolded black section and sub-section titles below to organize your paper. For each section
Losinski forwarded the article on a priority basis to Mary Scott
Losinksi wanted details on use of the ED at CGH. He asked the administrative resident