Would you eat cloned meat?

Would you eat cloned meat?

  • No

    Votes: 16 61.5%

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 3.8%

  • I don't care

    Votes: 1 3.8%

  • I don't know

    Votes: 8 30.8%
  • Total voters
    26
Liebling:-)))

Liebling:-)))

Sussi *7.7.86 - 18.6.09*
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Messages
31,020
Reaction score
10
US approves animal clones as food

The US government has given the green light to the production and marketing of foods derived from cloned animals.

After six years of study, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ruled that meat and milk from cloned pigs, cattle and goats and their offspring is safe.

Lack of data meant the agency could not reach a decision on sheep products.

The FDA does not expect to see a lot of products from cloned animals being sold now, because of cost. It expects clones would first be used for breeding.

The agency released almost identical draft conclusions in December 2006. Since then, new scientific information has strengthened its central view.

Just because something was created in a lab, doesn't mean we should have to eat it

Senator Barbara Mikulski
"After reviewing additional data and the public comments in the intervening year since the release of our draft documents on cloning, we conclude that meat and milk from cattle, swine, and goat clones are as safe as the food we eat every day," said Stephen Sundlof, director of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

The FDA will not require food derived from cloned animals to be labelled as such.

Low confidence

The agency was criticised by activist groups and by US politicians who were not convinced that enough scientific data was available to justify a decision.

"The FDA has acted recklessly, and I am profoundly disappointed in their rush to approve cloned foods," said Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski, co-sponsor of a bill amendment passed by the US Senate which asked the FDA not to rule until further research was available.

"Just because something was created in a lab, doesn't mean we should have to eat it."

Her criticisms were echoed by Andrew Kimbrell of the Center for Food Safety, a prominent US pressure group.

"The FDA's bull-headed action disregards the will of the public and the Senate and opens a literal Pandora's Box," he said.

Observers do not anticipate a rush to market cloned milk and meat
"The FDA based their decision on an incomplete and flawed review that relies on studies supplied by cloning companies that want to force cloning technology on American consumers."

A survey in 2005 by the Pew Charitable Trusts found that two-thirds of US consumers were "uncomfortable" with animal cloning; nearly half believed food from clones would be unsafe to eat.

Some US food companies have indicated they do not plan to stock products derived from cloned animals.

But Smithfields, which claims to be the biggest producer of pigs and pork products in the country, left the door open to a change of tack, saying it would "continue to monitor further scientific research on this technology" and was committed to improving its products "through careful selective breeding and genetic research".

Breeders themselves expressed their approval.

"The biotechnology industry applauds the FDA for its comprehensive scientific review of this new assisted reproductive technology," said Jim Greenwood, president and CEO of the Biotechnology Industry Organization (Bio), which represents companies and institutions in the biotech field.

"Cloning... can effectively help livestock producers deliver what consumers want: high-quality, safe, abundant and nutritious foods in a consistent manner."

Delayed action

US authorities do not expect to see a wave of products derived from cloned animals on the shelves immediately.

Creating a clone is far more expensive than breeding animals conventionally. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) believes it is more likely that companies will produce clones with "desirable" traits, breed them, and bring products from the offspring into the food chain.

The USDA is asking companies not to market products immediately, but to continue observing the moratorium they agreed to in 2001 when the FDA began its deliberations.

"USDA encourages the cloning industry continue its voluntary moratorium for a sufficient period of time to prepare so that a smooth and seamless transition into the marketplace can occur," it said in a statement.

The US developments will be watched closely in Europe, where evaulation of cloned animals is at an earlier stage.

Last week the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) initiated a public consultation on its draft guidance.

The draft concluded, among other things, that:

foods from cloned pigs and cattle are essentially identical to those from conventionally bred animals

animal cloning is unlikely to have environmental impacts
there are health and welfare issues, but these are likely to diminish as technology progresses

The EU has indicated that if products from cloned animals were approved, they would have to be labelled.

This contrasts directly with the US position, opening up the possibility of trade disputes similar to the lengthy and costly row between the EU and US over genetically modified foods.
Click to expand...

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | US approves animal clones as food
 
I voted No... I rather to eat original meat.

As what US health authorities claim that the clone meat is safe to eat but why can't they label it to let consumers know?


Come and discuss :fingersx:
 
Yes, as long it's clean and health. Maybe it come with better protein.
 
I haven't tried it yet then don't know about taste like that.

I should have labelled if cloned or not, damn to FDA.
 
No way..

May have lead different kind of disease the cloned animals can be affect isn't perfect DNA matches.. I'm afraid to eat the clone meat..

I'd rather the gov't regards all the cloned meat label on it... Let everyone know.. If suppose people doesn't know about the meat product already have cloned and eating.. May probably cause people get sick from that.. Who knows.. I pretty insight don't know.. anyhow..
 
Hmm... if I eat cloned meat, does that mean that my shit will start cloning itself? :Ohno:
 
VamPyroX said:
Hmm... if I eat cloned meat, does that mean that my shit will start cloning itself? :Ohno:
Click to expand...

ROFL!! Exactly my worries!...hahaha!
Im not so sure about eating anything cloned..eeeks!
They better label everything original and cloned so they
can choose whether to buy cloned or not...
Im kind of leery of them cloned meat....
 
VamPyroX said:
Hmm... if I eat cloned meat, does that mean that my shit will start cloning itself? :Ohno:
Click to expand...

:bowlol: :bowlol:, That was funny Vampyie.



The sound of eating cloned meat making me :barf: !!..so therefore I vote "no".
 
What's the different from us eating so many food with chemicals inside it? I believe because of that, it has already began to affect our body.

Research show that when we dies, our body if buried in the ground will decay very slowly much like what happens to mummified bodies in comparison to bodies buried 40 years ago all because of chemicals we ate in the food. That's a scary thought.

At least they can modify the genes making it more safer and healthier to eat.
Think about mad cow disease and ecoli. They can make genes more resist to those and we won't get sick or killed because of it.

But then again I don't know.

It's no difference from when man discover they can use fire to cook the food after for thousands of years of eating raw food.
 
Cloned meat is good for people who are on the food stamp, because the meat is a bit cheaper. If they don't like it, then find a job. :afro:
 
Actually cloned meat is going to be more expensive than regular meat due to the chemicals in making up the cloned meat.
 
I voted NO. Due to the fact that it has too many chemicals involved. The meat that we already eat has ENOUGH!!
 
I did hear about this sometime ago can't remember exact. People were upset over the idea of cloned meat due to infections and diseases it may not be a safe idea due to hormones and chemicals produced. If they did sell such cloned meat it would need to be labeled to identify as clone meat. I just can't see myself eating cloned meat the thought makes me want to :barf: ewwwww
 
Silentwolfdog said:
Research show that when we dies, our body if buried in the ground will decay very slowly much like what happens to mummified bodies in comparison to bodies buried 40 years ago all because of chemicals we ate in the food. That's a scary thought.
Click to expand...

It could mean that the anti-aging creams/potions really do work. :) As far as I know, the chemicals used for preparing the dead for burials may be different/better today than it was 40 years ago. But, this is not to say that the chemicals we consume does not affect our body.

Silentwolfdog said:
At least they can modify the genes making it more safer and healthier to eat.
Click to expand...

That all sounds good in theory, but genetic research is still experimental. For years they have been saying that they can remove bad genes, yet now they say that bad genes are still play an important role and should not be removed.

I voted no, because as posters have already mentioned, we don't know enough about the long-term effect. I am also sure that chemicals we eat does affect us.

I am sure most people have read/heard about research where they say eating XXXXX can cause cancer, then a few years later they say that eating XXXXX can reduce cancer. In other words, they don't know whether XXXXX is good or bad... Now they complicate things buy adding cloned meat... If cloned meat appears on the market, it should be labeled.
 
my vote says NO! but i can eat original meats than cloned meats its healthy foods!
 
I voted no. I wouldn't wanna to eat cloned meat, prefer to eat original meat. If original meat runs out in the future I would prolly switch to vegan and dream of original meat while eating vegan food. heh
 
Back
Top