A recent study shows that the Eurasian perch population in a lake in Sweden where an anti-anxiety was leaked became bolder, less social, and more active than unexposed fish. These effects ultimately reduce their mortality rates compared to these unexposed fish as well. The study not only took these previously exposed fish, but they also exposed fish eggs to the same drug called Oxazepam; they also had a control group of unexposed perch. The results showed that mortality rates were high among the two year old perch and the hatched fry, but were significantly reduced in the groups exposed to Oxazepam. Also, the study showed that in the exposed hatched eggs, the mortality rates were lower in the eggs that had high concentration treatments as opposed to lower or no concentration.
Previously, standard ecotoxicological tests only searched for contaminants such as heavy metals and dioxins which threaten ecosystems like this. Conceptual views of pollutants being purely harmful has limited testing for possible positive pollutants such as Oxazepam and possible other pharmaceuticals. I personally believe that yes it is indeed possible for there to be positive polluants, but that doesn’t give companies, specifically pharmaceutical companies to dump their waste and byproducts wherever they please. This could cause catastrophic changes in our ecosystem that are either directly harmful to the creatures in that ecosystem or cause a change in the food chain/web.
http://www.enn.com/wildlife/article/47683
I think that while it may appear as though the drug may be benefiting the fish, it's still not right to dump it wherever they please. If fish were supposed to act that way and live that long, they would have adapted due to their natural enviroment. If this is allowed to continue, I'm sure some problem will arise, such as overpopulation due to the longer lives they live, and then lack of food due to overpopulation.
ReplyDelete