Academic calls for more studies on seaweed touted as emissions fix

An academic has called for more research on Asparagopsis seaweed over one concern that could have “nasty implications for the animals”. But Australia’s leading science agency has flatly refuted the claims.

CSIRO has refuted claims a product it has helped developed posed potential risks. Picture: Supplied

A leading climate policy academic has raised concerns about potential carcinogenic properties of an active ingredient present in Asparagopsis seaweed feed additives — a product developed to reduce the methane output from livestock.

But the basis for the concerns have been flatly refuted by CSIRO, developers of the FutureFeed Asparagopsis seaweed product; and its lead researcher says the product at the recommended dose “presented zero risk”.

Speaking at a MerinoLink conference last week, the Australian National University Climate, Energy and Disaster Solutions institute director Professor Mark Howden cast doubt on the research on Asparagopsis seaweed.

Prof Howden said bromoform — the key active ingredient in the seaweed — was a “known carcinogen”.

He said there needed to be more work done to “demonstrate there were no nasty implications for the animals and the supply chain”.

“If there is an acceptability of putting bromochloromethane into the guts of animals you don’t need to go through Asparagopsis, a seaweed to do it, you can just buy a really cheap chemical just off the shelf and shove it in,” Prof Howden said.

He later told The Weekly Times the seaweed product contained “a chemical here that has real red flags” and there were “significant uncertainties” in the research.

He said independent research and regulatory approval was needed.

“We need more independent research to establish what the potential excretion is of the breakdown products from the seaweed and how they (could) enter the food chain,” Prof Howden said. “I’m not actually saying seaweed is a problem; what I am saying is we need to do the work to make 100 per cent sure it is not a problem.”

However, CSIRO sustainability research director and Future Feed director Dr Michael Battaglia said Prof Howden’s comments were “wrong”.

FutureFeed was developed to use Asparagopsis as a natural ingredient for livestock to significantly reduce carbon emissions and is marketed by CSIRO and partners.

“We are well aware that the bioactive ingredient in it (FutureFeed) is bromoform,” Dr Battaglia said.

“Lots of things are dangerous — if you eat 200 almonds in a row the good cyanides will get you.

“The key thing is understanding dose and response.

“We have totally gone in a very risk-adverse way assessing the risks.

“We’ve done a number of really rigorous trials — ourselves, the University of California Davis — one of the most respected Universities in agriculture in the world and Penn State University.”

Dr Battaglia said the trials analysed animal health, products and tissues and “in none of those cases has bromoform been detected because it is broken down in the rumen to bromide salts and excreted”.

FutureFeed product contained a very small amount of the compound, but at low doses presented “zero risk”, Dr Battaglia.

Dt Battaglia said there was a trial at the Wageningen University, which he described as “interesting” and he cast doubt over the methodology of that trial and its findings.

“FutureFeed and CSIRO would never see a product to market when we were aware of any risks, it is not in our interests as representatives of the Australian government, we wouldn’t do it,” Dr Battaglia said.

“There are many significant interests around the world generating feed additives and clearly this is seen by many of those as a competitive product, which might be worth thinking through.”

Wageningen University has been contacted for comment.

MORE

BRITISH FARMERS PUSH FOR DEAL CLARITY

BUYING PATTERNS CHANGING AT SALES

METHANE RESEARCH FAILING, EXPERT SAYS