Animal Cloning and Food: More Than a Feeling

cloning

i don't

of KY @ Sep 09, 2008 11:56:13 AM

Media fuels hysteria

I happen to work for one of the ag cloning companies in question so I can for CERTAIN tell you from first hand inside knowledge, we did not create or handle the data that the FDA used. They requested samples from cloned animals and their offspring which we provided and THEY did the data analysis. They also studied peer-reviewed articles from various other scientists all over the world looking at the health of various species of cloned animals, NOT just data they generated from animal samples they obtained from us. If you want to get samples from cloned animals where the heck are you going to get them if not from the people who bred them?

Comments like Walter's bug the ever last loving crap out of me. A healthy animal is a healthy animal no matter how it was bred.

I happen to really like the place that I work for and the people that I work with, how many people can say that about their jobs? The individuals all the way to the top truly CARE about what we are doing and HOW we do it. I get completely sick and tired of the company that I work for being portrayed as if it's some faceless, soulless, entity that doesn't give a rat's rear end about people or animals, it's totally false.

I see a LOT of the media stoking the fires of sensationalism to amp up people's freak out factor to scientific innovation in food production. There are certainly plenty of activist groups who are eager to jump on the bandwagon of "agribusiness is evil!" and egg the media on. Not to mention an organic food sector who drives the growth of their business by demonizing any food production system that doesn't fall in line with their own. Isn't it odd how organic has such a "knight in white armor" reputation when this basic fact is over looked? I am greatly bothered that their marketing is totally based on demonizing anything that's not organic.

Jennifer of TX @ Sep 05, 2008 10:53:35 AM

offspring of clones is a non-issue

Cloning produces a genetically identical animal. i.e. it does not affect the DNA. Because the DNA is not changed, offspring of clones are in no way different than any other animals.

Cloned animals themselves are being held out of the food supply, so no 'ick' to worry about. Offspring of clones are just like every other animal that is harvested. No ick there, either.

Sara DownToEarth of TX @ Sep 04, 2008 12:00:05 PM

It takes years for any unsuspecting problems to show up that will occur from this. In 10 Years we will be finding that our childern will be the ones who will be suffering from diease, immune system problems, Cancers, Tumors etc. Already our cattle is being given chemicals to produce more milk or bulk up. The out come will be ...We didn't know this would happen and the farmers and goverment will be immune to the repercusions Once again. But you could probable take them to court....How much is your child worth. I dont have any childern but I would imagine it would be more than anyone could pay.

Patricia of CA @ Sep 03, 2008 12:26:49 PM

Animal Cloning

The Food and Drug Administration had originally said it was going to use the same standards that it uses for animal drugs to approve animal cloning. Instead, it invented a new weak standard. The LARGEST sample size in the studies that the FDA looked at was milk from only 15 cloned cows. Most of the data the FDA examined came from cloning companies with a vested financial interest in the outcome of the review. This is the kind of data that the FDA would accept as supplemental data in a drug review, but not as primary data.

The FDA's review committee was composed of only three scientists, two of whom had worked for cloning companies with patents on the processes related to cloning. When the FDA does reviews as shoddy as this one was, the public should be queasy. When the FDA says that any problems of animal health from cloned animals will be caught at the slaughter house, we need to be even more worried.

Jaydee Hanson of DC @ Sep 03, 2008 09:55:14 AM

Great title...

I certainly don't think there is any evidence out there that would support a prohibition on the sale of cloned foods, but isn't there a definite case to be made that the consumer should at least be able to make an informed choice.

In other words, shouldn't we know what it is that we're buying? The way these quotes read makes me wonder if the industry is even keeping enough records to make this information known.

The "ick" factor shouldn't be canonized, but it is the individual's right to base their financial decisions on all available information, and intuition may be an important piece of that information... I remember when Olestra came out, I didn't eat it because it didn't seem right, of course it had been cleared by the FDA, and no scientific evidence was available to support my feelings. Lo and behold, it wasn't right, and is now off the market. Unfortunately, I may have missed my best chance to experience labor pains, but I think I'm probably better for it.

Greyson of OR @ Sep 02, 2008 23:56:35 PM

adssswee

d d d d d wt rege

sfdfsf.fwefdd of NY @ Sep 02, 2008 22:18:36 PM

If the "ick" factor isn't a viable reason for not buying a food product, I don't know what is. The bottom line is we just don't know. Sure, no current research has turned up a problem, but I am not going to bet my kids' health on what we THINK we know now. But the truly worrying thing is that agribusiness lobbyists are preventing cloned meat from being labeled. Consumers are not given the opportunity to choose (because we know what would happen, don't we?) That is plain wrong and we need to stand up and demand that all engineered/altered food (genetically modified, irradiated, cloned, whatever) be appropriately labeled so that WE can decide whether or not to feed it to our families.

of KY @ Sep 02, 2008 19:03:54 PM