FDA set to OK food from cloned animals

hippiemom wrote:

No big surprise there. Virtually ALL non-organic soy or corn products that you eat are genetically engineered, and they don't tell you that either. The FDA is staffed largely by former agribusiness executives, and that's who they work for.

75% of their payroll is paid by those companies...from what i have read.

Independent gov't organization....Hardly!

citizen_drew wrote:

I wonder how they feel about cloning soldiers...

It worked for Emporer Palpatine. The clones were able to kill all of the Jedi and overthrow the Republic. The Kaminoans were able to accelarate the growth of the young clones and everything. Incredible technology.

fanch75 wrote:

Elaborate on this. I may not be reading this right but I am not sure what this means.

Hippiemom spelled it out. But for the most part. A grain or oat or anthing that can multiply and regenerate by itself has been modified to kill itself off after one harvest. And/or designed to more or less adjust to pesticide use and not be harmed. Can you taste it already? Thus making the farmer who would just trade seeds among fellow farmers, or replant to keep crops healthy, must now buy new seeds every year from the man. I can't see that the powers that be have had enough time to see how human consumption of said crops has affected the population as they have deemed them good to use in the last 20 years? A guess at how long they have been around. But shouldn't a study involve a few generations to see if it indeed is good and not harmful????

Here is a little story about a farmer VS Monsanto from Canada. He told them to sod off and stuff their modified seeds and then Monsanto snuck on his property and said he was growing their seed without paying for it. He said it blew in from another farm and he didn't want them on his field. Anyhow, you can guess who won the lawsuit.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/1999/08/12/monsanto.html
You can dig around for more on that story from this link. http://search.cbc.ca/search?ie=&site=CBC&output=xml_no_dtd&client=CBC&lr=&getfields=description&proxystylesheet=CBC&oe=&searchWeb=cbc&q=saskatoon+farmer+and+monsanto

Just a couple of years ago an African nation told the World Bank to take a hike with their seeds, that they would virtually, rather starve then use those seeds. Can't find a story for this one.

In October, the Center for Food Safety, the Humane Society of the United States, and several other groups petitioned the FDA requesting, among other things, a moratorium on the introduction of cloned animals into the food supply until adequate safety testing is completed. Some excerpts from that petition:

"While the agency fails to regulate cloned animals, research and production of cloned animals continues in a regulatory vacuum, and animal cloners are reportedly considering ignoring FDA’s voluntary prohibition and touting the benefits of cloned animals for human consumption. For example, in 2005, the Associated Press reported that the cloning company ViaGen had cloned pigs and beef cattle “ready to efficiently produce juicier steaks and tastier chops.” In another example, on March 27, 2006, it was reported that pigs had been cloned and then genetically engineered to contain omega-3 fatty acid. Announcements, like these, claim the success and benefits of cloning. Yet, there is no method to verify the veracity of these claims because cloning is not regulated by FDA and the scientific data from these experiments are not published or publicly analyzed. In fact, these announcements included actual suggestions of problems. For example, three of the six piglets that were born with the omega-3 gene had heart defects that required them to be killed."

"In late 2004, the New England Journal of Medicine reported that “given the available evidence, it may be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to generate healthy cloned animals or humans.” Many cloned animals die within the first 24 hours of birth due to “respiratory distress, increased birth weight and major cardiovascular abnormalities . . . .” Surviving clones often have compromised immune systems and if used in intense animal confinement settings may consistently require the use of antibiotics. This potential for increased use of antibiotics represents yet another food safety issue which FDA must address in considering whether to approve the employment of this technology."

"There is very little scientific data and no long term studies showing that eating food products derived from clones are safe. In late October 2003, FDA released a draft assessment of the safety of food from clones or their progeny and found that there did not appear to be a food safety risk. The agency did issue a cautionary statement, however, by stating that “[a]dditional data on the health status of progeny, and composition of milk and meat from clones and their progeny would serve to further increase the confidence in these conclusions.” Before allowing cloned animals on the market, FDA needs to review long term studies. The draft assessment is not scientifically persuasive because the agency relied on a single study of milk from cloned animals and no data at all on cloned meat."

"There is a considerable amount of scientific evidence identifying the severe harm and suffering to animals involved in the cloning process. Specifically, the science shows that cloning causes harm to surrogate mothers and often creates deformed and/or unhealthy animal clones. These health risks are far different from traditional breeding. Based upon this evidence, FDA should find that animal cloning creates severe health risks for animals and thus, is not generally recognized as safe. The implantation of a cloned cell in a surrogate can cause harm to the surrogate mothers. Surrogate animals are subjected to repeated surgical operations to implant the cloned embryos and extract the cloned fetuses. Most cloned animals exhibit a condition known as “large-offspring syndrome,” which results in overly stressful deliveries for the surrogate mothers. Because of their large size, a higher than normal percentage of clones are delivered via cesarean section. In one documented cattle cloning project, three out of 12 surrogate mothers died during pregnancy."

"Religious groups have also rejected animal cloning on ethical grounds. In 1995, more than 200 U.S. religious leaders, including those from the Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist faiths, announced a joint opposition to the patenting of animal genes, tissue, organs, and organisms, citing the belief that genetic manipulation and subsequent claims to exclusivity over the final product shifted “authorship” of life from ‘God’ to scientists and transnational companies. In fact, religious groups who renounce SCNT in animals view cloning in general as tantamount to ‘playing God.’ "

miller8966 wrote:

Being a conservative i am for less government intervention...

I agree in principle, but making sure the food we eat isn't poisonous is a perfectly acceptable responsibility for government, regardless of which political wing one feels part of. This isn't outlawing "over easy" eggs - this is mandating that we know what we are eating, when we don't know much about what we are eating (in this case of cloned meat)

MrBrian wrote:

Tuesday, December 26, 2006

WILLIAMSPORT, Md. — For nearly four years, dairy farmer Greg Wiles has poured milk from his cloned cows down the drain in compliance with a voluntary ban on food from cloned livestock.

Now in financial straits, Wiles says he may be forced to sell his cloned cows for hamburger.

The Food and Drug Administration says that's probably safe, but pressure from the food industry has kept the agency from approving it. Milk and meat marketers worry that consumers won't accept food from cloned animals.


Wiles says he doesn't want the animals killed -- he says one of the clones, Cyagra, has had health problems and should be studied. Cyagra has never grown to full size, aborted her first calf and had another that died a month after it was born. Wiles has offered her to the government for research. The government has declined.

An industry group, the International Dairy Foods Association, hopes that Wiles will abide by the voluntary moratorium and keep his clones out of the food supply. The association, which represents brands such as Kraft, Dannon and Borden, says it believes all farmers have complied with the ban.

The FDA urges Wiles to comply as well, spokesman Doug Arbesfeld said. "FDA has asked farmers voluntarily to refrain from putting meat or milk from cloned animals into the food supply until the agency's risk assessment is complete," Arbesfeld said
----
http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061226/BUSINESS/612260323

The article was a few days before the "ok"

The government does'nt want to study the sick cow?

Good Christ, it's already out there?

MrBrian wrote:

Who knows, I mean desperate times desperate meausres eh.
--

Maybe a few have gotten in, I dunno, but i think that since the FDA has given the thumbs up as far as health concers go, maybe some farmers will start slowy "sending out the clones".

Let's hope it's not that easy.

I guess I'm slow on the news. I didn't even know there were private farmers doing this already in America.

This post is not at all meant to be combative, or arguementative, just want to satisfy a general curiousity....


In general, the liberal side tends to strongly favor a Science based approach to life- things like faith, religion, etc are not as accepted.

Science is pointed to for global warming, evolution, stem cells, etc...

Why is the science of cloning, and subsequently the thought of food products from those scientifically produced animals so scary/negative?



I have yet to form a strong opinion on the matter, on the surface it doesnt bother me all that much, i was just curious why this particular brand of science seems to be so disturbing to a lot of you.

searchlightsoul wrote:

Why does an animal with the same genetic material as another become poisonous or dangerous? The DNA is not manipulated or altered, the genome is intact. In any case the genome is altered prior to digestion from its original form to amino acids so it is not incorporated intact into your own genetic information. People are like sheep on issues where they should be thinking critically.

Cloned pregnancies have a very high failure rate. The fetuses that do survive tend to grow much larger than naturally conceived fetuses. They have a hugely higher rate of birth defects. They develop diseases at a higher rate. They die much earlier. This tells me that something is going on that we don't really understand ... or, the people who do understand it are not talking about it. Personally, I would not eat this stuff or feed it to my kids.