Meat For Vegetarians: FDA Says Cloned Animals Safe As Food

mykevermin

CAGiversary!
Feedback
34 (97%)
FDA Says Cloned Animals Safe As Food

By LAURAN NEERGAARD – 3 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Meat and milk from cloned animals are as safe as that from their counterparts bred the old-fashioned way, the Food and Drug Administration said Tuesday — but sales still won't begin right away.

The decision removes the last big U.S. regulatory hurdle to marketing products from cloned livestock, and puts the FDA in concert with recent safety assessments from European food regulators and several other nations.

"Meat and milk from cattle, swine and goat clones are as safe as food we eat every day," said Dr. Stephen Sundloff, FDA's food safety chief.

But the government has asked animal cloning companies to continue a voluntary moratorium on sales for a little longer — not for safety reasons, but marketing ones.

USDA Undersecretary Bruce Knight called it a transition period for "allowing the marketplace to adjust." He wouldn't say how long the moratorium should continue.

"This is about market acceptance," Knight added, who said he would be calling a meeting of industry leaders to determine next steps.

Regardless, it still will be years before many foods from cloned animals reach store shelves, for economic reasons: At $10,000 to $20,000 per animal, they're a lot more expensive than ordinary cows, meaning producers likely will use clones' offspring for meat, not the clone itself.

And several large companies — including dairy giant Dean Foods Co. and Hormel Foods Corp. — have said they have no plans to sell milk or meat from cloned animals because of consumer anxiety about the technology.

But FDA won't require food makers to label if their products came from cloned animals, although companies could do so voluntarily if they knew the source. Last month, meat and dairy producers announced an industry system to track cloned livestock, with an electronic identification tag on each animal sold. Customers would sign a pledge to market the animal as a clone.

But that system is voluntary, and there is no way to tell if milk, for example, came from the daughter of a cloned cow.

"Both the animals and any food produced from those animals is indistinguishable from any other food source," Sundloff said. "There's no technological way of distinguishing a food that's come from an animal that had a clone in its ancestry. It's not possible."

The decision was long-expected, but controversial. Debate has been fierce within the Bush administration as to whether the FDA should move forward, largely because of trade concerns. Consumer advocates petitioned against the move, and Congress had passed legislation urging the FDA to study the issue more before moving ahead.

"The FDA has acted recklessly," said Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., who sponsored that legislation. "Just because something was created in a lab, doesn't mean we should have to eat it. If we discover a problem with cloned food after it is in our food supply and it's not labeled, the FDA won't be able to recall it like they did Vioxx — the food will already be tainted.

"If you ask what's for dinner, it means just about anything you can cook up in a laboratory," said Carol Tucker-Foreman of the Consumer Federation of America, who pledged to push for more food producers to shun clones.

The two main U.S. cloning companies, Viagen Inc. and Trans Ova Genetics, already have produced more than 600 cloned animals for U.S. breeders, the vast majority cattle, including copies of prize-winning cows and rodeo bulls.

"We certainly are pleased," said Trans Ova President David Faber, who noted that previous reports by the National Academy of Sciences and others have reached the same conclusion.

"Our farmer and rancher clients are pleased because it provided them with another reproductive tool," he added.

It was a day forecast since Scottish scientists announced in 1997 that they had successfully cloned Dolly the sheep. Ironically, sheep aren't on the list of FDA's approved cloned animals; the agency said there wasn't as much data about their safety as about cows, pigs and goats.

By its very definition, a successfully cloned animal should be no different from the original animal whose DNA was used to create it.

But the technology hasn't been perfected — and many attempts at livestock cloning still end in fatal birth defects or with deformed fetuses dying in the womb. Moreover, Dolly was euthanized in 2003, well short of her normal lifespan, because of a lung disease that raised questions about how cloned animals will age.

The FDA's report acknowledges that, "Currently, it is not possible to draw any conclusions regarding the longevity of livestock clones or possible long-term health consequences" for the animal.

But the agency concluded that cloned animals that are born healthy are no different than their non-cloned counterparts, and go on to reproduce normally as well.

"The FDA says, 'We assume all the unhealthy animals will be taken out of the food supply,'" said Joseph Mendelson of the Center for Food Safety, a consumer advocacy group that opposes FDA's ruling. "They're only looking at the small slice of cloned animals that appear to be healthy. ... It needs a lot further study."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j8xJl-JxF9wAo8gMgdPBXS-fyiIwD8U6ILT00

Yikes.
 
I'm up for hearing the marketing I guess.

I love meat, but if I cant afford to go to the brands that specifically label that they dont use it, I might have to do something extreme like go vegetarian.

Maybe in 10-15 years when its been around long enough to do a PROPER study, I might change my mind.
 
I don't see how it would be any different anyway, but what's the point? Would it really be cheaper than just having the animals bang?
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']I'm up for hearing the marketing I guess.

I love meat, but if I cant afford to go to the brands that specifically label that they dont use it, I might have to do something extreme like go vegetarian.

Maybe in 10-15 years when its been around long enough to do a PROPER study, I might change my mind.[/QUOTE]

My feelings as well. I despise that they will not regulate the labeling of cloned animal products (which is just more big-business fellating from our government, like is being done with legal definitions of "chocolate" in recent years).
 
So if the public doesn't mind that Chickens are being Nuked....then I guess they won't mind us eating cloned animals. :whistle2:|

Funny, the 6th day was on cable over the weekend...
 
at least put a freaking sticker on the package, they are for cloning things that we eat but talk about cloning organs and people freak out.
 
This whole issue is completely silly. The whole point of cloned animals is that they are exactly the same as the original animal; there literally is no difference.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']My feelings as well. I despise that they will not regulate the labeling of cloned animal products (which is just more big-business fellating from our government, like is being done with legal definitions of "chocolate" in recent years).[/quote]

There is labeling on products, it's called buying organic. At least there, supposedly, there isn't all the other junk in the food that you get at the local super market. I've been switching over to organic recently for a lot of my foods. It costs more, but I'd rather eat healthy, or at least feel healthy about what I'm eating, and I know that a lot of the stuff in regular foods (i.e. Nitrites, MSG, etc). isn't in the organics.
 
[quote name='dopa345']This whole issue is completely silly. The whole point of cloned animals is that they are exactly the same as the original animal; there literally is no difference.[/quote]

You don't know that for sure. There could be breakdown in the tissue, etc. Look, it didn't make sense for farmers to feed cows cow, but they did, and that turned into Mad Cow. A clone is basically a copy, and as you make copies, they breakdown and the quality of the original is lost. You just can't say, with 100% certainty, that nothing can happen.
 
[quote name='hiccupleftovers']You don't know that for sure. There could be breakdown in the tissue, etc. Look, it didn't make sense for farmers to feed cows cow, but they did, and that turned into Mad Cow. A clone is basically a copy, and as you make copies, they breakdown and the quality of the original is lost. You just can't say, with 100% certainty, that nothing can happen.[/QUOTE]

But you can make the same argument for natural "cloning" otherwise known as "reproduction". There are plenty of naturally birthed animals that have defects. And where did you get the line about the breakdown of copies from? I don't believe that one bit. It probably has the same or even less chance of being messed up.
 
[quote name='xmrblondex']And where did you get the line about the breakdown of copies from? I don't believe that one bit. It probably has the same or even less chance of being messed up.[/quote]

"But the technology hasn't been perfected — and many attempts at livestock cloning still end in fatal birth defects or with deformed fetuses dying in the womb. Moreover, Dolly was euthanized in 2003, well short of her normal lifespan, because of a lung disease that raised questions about how cloned animals will age."
 
Its well known that the first animal clones died of horrible diseases and had aging issues. I hadnt really kept track of developments since then, maybe they fixed all that.
 
[quote name='hiccupleftovers']You don't know that for sure. There could be breakdown in the tissue, etc. Look, it didn't make sense for farmers to feed cows cow, but they did, and that turned into Mad Cow. A clone is basically a copy, and as you make copies, they breakdown and the quality of the original is lost. You just can't say, with 100% certainty, that nothing can happen.[/QUOTE]

With cassettes, sure. But not with CDs.
 
[quote name='dopa345']This whole issue is completely silly. The whole point of cloned animals is that they are exactly the same as the original animal; there literally is no difference.[/quote]

Some U.S. consumer groups have expressed concern for the cloned animals, which often have health problems, and have suggested that the American public may be as tough a sell as the wary consumers in the European Union and Japan.

"Despite the fact that cloned animals suffer high mortality rates and those who survive are often plagued with birth defects and diseases, the FDA did not give adequate consideration to the welfare of these animals or their surrogate mothers in its deliberations," said Wayne Pacelle, chief executive of the Humane Society of the United States.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011501555.html
 
[quote name='SpazX']I don't see how it would be any different anyway, but what's the point? Would it really be cheaper than just having the animals bang?[/QUOTE]

Because they're going to mess with the genes in the clones to create animals that are more efficent meat producers.

Trust me all corporations see is something like 15% more profit due to messing with animals genetics that will result in more efficent meat producing. Once they mess with the genetics and create a 'designer animal' they clone them. Money in the bank.
If there were mild health consequences from it, they'd bury it.
All they care about is profit.
 
[quote name='duncan36']Because they're going to mess with the genes in the clones to create animals that are more efficent meat producers.

Trust me all corporations see is something like 15% more profit due to messing with animals genetics that will result in more efficent meat producing. Once they mess with the genetics and create a 'designer animal' they clone them. Money in the bank.
If there were mild health consequences from it, they'd bury it.
All they care about is profit.[/quote]

It's already been done. Look up Belgian Blue cows on wiki.
 
[quote name='jaykrue']"But the technology hasn't been perfected — and many attempts at livestock cloning still end in fatal birth defects or with deformed fetuses dying in the womb. Moreover, Dolly was euthanized in 2003, well short of her normal lifespan, because of a lung disease that raised questions about how cloned animals will age."[/quote]

Thanks, but it is unwise for a person to argue with one who hasn't read the article.
 
[quote name='jaykrue']"But the technology hasn't been perfected — and many attempts at livestock cloning still end in fatal birth defects or with deformed fetuses dying in the womb. Moreover, Dolly was euthanized in 2003, well short of her normal lifespan, because of a lung disease that raised questions about how cloned animals will age."[/QUOTE]
I guess I take the statement without numbers with too big a grain of salt. many, as in a high percentage, or many, but a low overall percentage. I concede, it's most likely the first, but do we really know?
 
[quote name='jaykrue']It's already been done. Look up Belgian Blue cows on wiki.[/QUOTE]

Theres been cows bred for extraordinary meat production for centuries, but its been done via natural means.

This is vastly different, all artificial.
 
[quote name='xmrblondex']I guess I take the statement without numbers with too big a grain of salt. many, as in a high percentage, or many, but a low overall percentage. I concede, it's most likely the first, but do we really know?[/quote]
Simply put, it's a high failure yield percentage. Straight from here:

Cloning animals through somatic cell nuclear transfer is simply inefficient. The success rate ranges from 0.1 percent to 3 percent, which means that for every 1000 tries, only one to 30 clones are made. Or you can look at it as 970 to 999 failures in 1000 tries. That's a lot of effort with only a speck of a return!
1 to 30 out of 1000 tries. Now bring that number up to mass production levels and what do you have? It takes 100 failed clones to make 3 successful ones. That's a lot of genetic failure and you definitely don't want to eat that kind of meat. And that's the only the first problem.

[quote name='duncan36']Theres been cows bred for extraordinary meat production for centuries, but its been done via natural means.

This is vastly different, all artificial.[/quote]

The point I was making to you wasn't about cloning but that the process big corporations undertake to make a buck are already happening.
 
Well I don't care. Bring on the clones.

And you know this stuff is going to be safe because if it isn't then everyone in the USA is going to sue for million dollars and they meat companies would be SOL.

Besides you know they are going to give all the cloned cheap meat to the poor people first. Why are you all here so worried about it?
 
[quote name='KingDox']Well I don't care. Bring on the clones.

And you know this stuff is going to be safe because if it isn't then everyone in the USA is going to sue for million dollars and they meat companies would be SOL.

Besides you know they are going to give all the cloned cheap meat to the poor people first. Why are you all here so worried about it?[/QUOTE]


first off they could easily make a rule to protect the meat companies from lawsuits of cloned meat. They have done it with other companies and countries that prevent US residents from suing.


They have also done studies that say that red meat is linked to colon and rectal cancer, do you think cloning the crap out of cows will make things better for that, if anything either beef could get cheaper which would lead to increased consumption leading to increased cancer. OR something in the cloning process could have long term effects that would be impossible to study now and we all be boned.
 
My Opinion....Organic meat just tastes better.

What happened to actual farms?

Also if they fuck up Milk for me, Im killing someone...I drink at least Half a gallona day.
 
Think about it... Atomic Super-Cows, with 50 legs, 7 udders, 20 shoulders, and lazer-eyes that will bring destruction to your enemies! Ohehehehehahahahohoho!
 
Maybe they should try cloning cows at 1/8th their size for instant veal
minime.jpg


And hasn't KFC been doing something genetically to chicken for years now? I don't recall the specifics, but someone always seems to mention it when heading to a KFC.
 
I think it's way too soon, the technology still has such a high failure rate.

They have no idea what the long term effects are of eating cloned meat is.
 
Thanks to the FDA, we don't even know half of what's in the food we eat today, so why would we have any better of an understanding of cloned food?
 
I love all these people who eat meat their entire life, then say crap like "that is enough to make me a vegetarian". No it isn't. You would eat your little salads and pasta for about a week, then say "fuck it, who cares if its a clone" and chow down.
 
bread's done
Back
Top