[codingdave]

> Stinks of agenda.

Everyone has an agenda. I don't see an agenda of conservation of our ecology as one we need to resist. Especially when their conclusion at the end is not just "Save the Sharks", but a hope that we will research other possible ingredients instead of just running with the first working prototype.

[DeusExMachina]

Many agendas masquerade as "conservation of our ecology" when they are none of the sort and produce no results or even the opposite of what they claim.

The fact that you like it is no reason to not look at what's behind it.

[melling]

Sure, move past the innuendo and offer the theory so we can discuss. Throwing out the innuendo without any reason doesn’t help anyone.

Climate change deniers, for example, say the agenda “the redistribution of wealth“

Now we can have a discussion.

[jagger27]

> look at what’s behind it

Oh yeah, this one has Big Shark written all over it.

The ones that produce no results are more likely to be victims of other agendas than ineffective because of their own.

[dajohnson89]

agreed but the article says that nonanimal sources are more expensive than sharks. so research isn't what's needed, but rather (arguably) things like state provided incentives.