some observations from north of the border
faber at HASKINS.YALE.EDU
Fri Sep 14 23:33:37 UTC 2012
On 9/14/12 7:10 PM, Laurence Horn wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Victor Steinbok wrote:
>> A couple of minor points.
>> (1) may well refer to the common claim that farmed salmon is
>> chemically protected (antibiotics, etc.). US and Canada have some
>> of the more stringent regulations on aquaculture, but we've had an
>> influx of Chilean, Costa Rican and Ecuadorian farmed fish (not just
>> salmon, but striped bass and other fish) and that's a bit of a
>> problem. The fish farms in the region are run by a couple of
>> Norwegian companies who are very adept at squeezing every last dime
>> out of farmed fish--and doing so in Central and South America in
>> order to skirt European, US and Canadian anti-PhRma regulations.
>> Even in the US, the usual rumor spread by environmentalists is that
>> salmon farming is a very dirty business, conducive to fish
>> infections, which are then treated with massive doses of
>> antibiotics. This is certainly the case South of the Border and
>> perhaps in Asia (a different can of worms entirely). But PhRma is
>> definitely an issue.
> I knew about the issue (we go for the wild Pacific salmon locally
> available and hope it's not endangered), but hadn't come across
> "Pharm Salmon" as opposed to "farmed salmon" to refer to it. I see
> other instances of the former via Google, though.
On the various medical support forums I participate in, there's a strong
minority of posters who refer to the drug companies as "Big Pharma" and
are convinced of the nefariousness of these companies' pushing
pharmaceutical solutions to ailments that could, in theory, be better
treated by diet and lifestyle changes. Given that one aspect of farmed
fisheries (and livestock feedlots) is use of antibiotics in feed,
perhaps what you're seeing is a pun or even a snide snowclone.
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l