David Suzuki's Fish Story

[Jonny]

Man, to think I fell for this too...

 

http://www.financialpost.com/news/features/Suzuki+fish+story/4439810/story.html

 

Looks like the wild salmon industry and Suzuki have been running a pretty big scam.

[Cudz]

Interesting read. It is never difficult to deistort facts and figures to make them appear to be what you want them to be. It is a very inconvenient truth.

[cram]

I don't know. Its a small point, but they use the pacific vs. atlantic, apples vs oranges comparison to show the study was flawed (should be wild pacific vs farmed, and wild atlantic vs farmed). As far as I know there isn't a wild atlantic fishery anywhere....when people eat wild salmon its pacific/sockeye/chum/whatever. Not atlantic. Yet atlantic is easier and faster to farm. Wonder how flawed the rest of their argument is.

 

Besides, all the stories about needing to dye the farmed meat so that its actually orange (instead of grey) gives me the willies. Pretty big load of antibiotics as well....not my cup of tea.

[Gregoire]

Man, to think I fell for this too...

 

http://www.financialpost.com/news/features/Suzuki+fish+story/4439810/story.html

 

Looks like the wild salmon industry and Suzuki have been running a pretty big scam.

 

 

I'm not too sure about the whole scam statement. Suzuki is accepting donations to support a cause that he believes in. This article provides very little empirical evidence to contradict Suzuki's claims, one of the biggest being that farmed salmon contribute to the declining pacific salmon stocks. As far as comparing Atlantic to Pacific salmon I think the point is off. I would want toxin levels from fish in the same water bodies compared so that I can eat the fish with the least amount of toxins in it...but again this is not the major point. The facts is that we should be looking at are whether farmed salmon has a negative impact on wild salmon stock, something that this article does not even address. I would argue that the article is an opinion piece hidden as news story propagating a bias towards the fish farming industry. I would also argue with the statement made at the outset of the article that the US is the worlds largest seafood market as both China and Japan consume more seafood yearly.

 

Having said all this I do think that as a culture we need to look at our consumption of seafood. We are draining the oceans of it's fish stocks rapidly. Farming may be part of the way that we could help restore fish stocks around the world, but fish need to be farmed in a way that considers the health of the ecosystem around them.

[DoubleDigits]

Man, to think I fell for this too...

 

http://www.financial...9810/story.html

 

Looks like the wild salmon industry and Suzuki have been running a pretty big scam.

 

Don't be too quick to fall for anything. This article included. I have no real interest or knowledge on the subject, but the article throws out a number of unsubstantiated claims that sound an awful lot like shilling for the Canadian salmon farming industry. A quick google search finds that the author is a one-issue "independent" blogger, who has worked for and taken money from...wait for it...the Canadian salmon farming industry.

 

When an 'expert' is attacking scientists and environmentalists in the same breath, there is usually an industry footing the bill somewhere.

Edited March 16, 2011 by DoubleDigits

[Gregoire]

Don't be too quick to fall for anything. This article included. I have no real interest or knowledge on the subject, but the article throws out a number of unsubstantiated claims that sound an awful lot like shilling for the Canadian salmon farming industry. A quick google search finds that the author is a one-issue "independent" blogger, who has worked for and taken money from...wait for it...the Canadian salmon farming industry.

 

When an 'expert' is attacking scientists and environmentalists in the same breath, there is usually an industry footing the bill somewhere.

 

I should have though of the google search. That does not surprise me in the least.

[cynmar]

I don't know much about the subject either, just remembering a Chronzy show where they were showing the explosion of sea lice in the surrounding wild population of salmon as a result of the fish farming. Apparently can be fatal to the stock and is a result of the massive "congestion" in the farmed stock.

 

Bill

[Jonny]

Don't be too quick to fall for anything. This article included.

 

Good point.

 

The article may have its own bias, but it does seem to expose some major flaws in the "anti-farming" drive. As always, environmentalists are not above fudging the facts any more than anyone else. Look at the whole anthropogenic global warming debate!

 

If we assume that environmentalists are telling the unvarnished truth because of their "altruistic" motives, we can easily be led down the garden path.

 

Suzuki makes a lot of money preaching the things he does. That makes him a vested interest too.

 

 

 

[DoubleDigits]

 

 

If we assume that environmentalists are telling the unvarnished truth because of their "altruistic" motives, we can easily be led down the garden path.

 

Suzuki makes a lot of money preaching the things he does. That makes him a vested interest too.

 

 

 

 

All true.

[bigugli]

When research is funded by a party with a vested interest in the results, the conclusions drawn from the data are usually skewed. In some instances, contradictory data will be omitted. If the data is exceedingly contrary to expectation, the results get quashed.

 

Example, butter. Back in the 50's, after extensive world wide research, it was determined that butter, and other dairy fats were bad for you, and since then the big dietary doctrine is that we should all eat margerine.

In the research samplings were done in over 150 countries. Results from countries where results were contrary/ anomalous to the expected finding were quietly omitted. No one bothered to look at fat content in margerine. Fact is the conclusion was drawn long before the research was completed.

Merely one of hundreds of examples of profit generated science. Certainly not good scientific prectice.

Closer to our own time were recent studies on hand sanitizer. The results were not well published with good reason. A soap company, and manufacturer of hand sanitizer products commissioned a study on hand sanitizer efficacy. The result was that many such products often prove to be no more, sometimes less, effective than conventional soap and water. Needless to say, this was not on the 6 o'clock news. Media makes far too much advertising revenue on sanitary products to tip the apple cart.

The salmon fisheries issue is no different. You have foreign and domestic vested interests vying for control over market share and money knows only one ethic; "Keep it in the BLACK".

Edited March 16, 2011 by bigugli