Page 1 of 1

US FDA says yes to cloned food

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:06 am UTC
by LE4dGOLEM
Just heard on the Radio that the US Food &Drug Association say that, after 5 years of study, Cow and Pig meat & milk of cloned animals is safe to eat.

Discuss.

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:22 am UTC
by Air Gear
Duh. (There, discussed.)

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:24 am UTC
by Peshmerga
lol

people are stupid

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:17 am UTC
by Rat
yay now we can make one of those machines that spits out clones onto a conveyor and slaughters them at the end!

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:28 am UTC
by Detritus
I suspect that would actually require a very long conveyor belt! (Or a very slow one)

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:30 am UTC
by Peshmerga
An infinite conveyor belt, actually. But the real question is, can a plane take off from it?

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:32 am UTC
by Aoeniac
They're not talking about simply cloning animals to multiple our meat market, they're talking about selectively cloning animals that produce high quality meat.

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:38 am UTC
by wmoonw
Peshmerga wrote:An infinite conveyor belt, actually. But the real question is, can a plane take off from it?


With or without sucking all the new clones into the engines? Because that would kind of limit the utility of the clones somewhat :wink:

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:50 am UTC
by Teaspoon
wmoonw wrote:
Peshmerga wrote:An infinite conveyor belt, actually. But the real question is, can a plane take off from it?


With or without sucking all the new clones into the engines? Because that would kind of limit the utility of the clones somewhat :wink:


Oooh, sounds like an exciting slaughter method!

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:50 pm UTC
by LE4dGOLEM
Aoeniac wrote:They're not talking about simply cloning animals to multiple our meat market, they're talking about selectively cloning animals that produce high quality meat.


And that human-safe. Apparently, Cloned Sheep meat & milk is not safe.

Also, clones can reproduce normally. These offspring are, supposedly, also safe to eat meat and milk from.

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:50 pm UTC
by thomasjmaccoll
don't know if i'm being stupid here, but why wouldn't cloned meat be safe to eat? if the original animal was safe, and it was cloned, then wouldn't the clone be safe too, seeing as it's a clone? and the offspring of a cloned pig, seeing as they are actually just pigs, not any sort of mutant chemical beast?

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:13 pm UTC
by umbrae
Sure, it all digests the same. Thats fine with me.

But gotta be careful. Because using clones essentially nullifies natural selection. If we let cloned animals breed, then we're really taking away the random mutations that can be a help or a hindrance to the animal.

I guess the only mutations we'd really allow these days are things that would allow for more tender, delicious or nutritious meat or byproducts. But still!

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:26 pm UTC
by fjafjan
I don't have a huge problem with it, but we certainly have to be wary of the risks, I believe that already cows etc are propped FULL of antibiotics etc to prevent them from cathcing deceases, if you have almost no genetical variety, then the odds of an epidemic wiping out the whole species (sp?) is alot more likely.

And I thought atleast animals cloned today were slightly "weaker" than their "natural" counterparts, since they are made from cells that have already duplicated themselves etc. I think dolly died pretty young or so, cause she was made from a skin cell

AND it is not really a viable method yet, the news said that a cow costs some obcene amount, I think it was like 50k$ or someting to produce one of these cows with current methods, so not really economical yet.

But we don't wanna end up like bananas, where they all die.

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:50 pm UTC
by Verysillyman
Oryx and Crake! Chickinubs! (spelling is poor) Someone else explain me, i'm going to bed.

Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 12:45 am UTC
by Framling
I'm still waiting for vat-growing to become a viable means of meat production. I want some damn steak. Or god, fried chicken. Mmmm...

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 6:45 pm UTC
by LE4dGOLEM
thomasjmaccoll wrote:don't know if i'm being stupid here, but why wouldn't cloned meat be safe to eat? if the original animal was safe, and it was cloned, then wouldn't the clone be safe too, seeing as it's a clone? and the offspring of a cloned pig, seeing as they are actually just pigs, not any sort of mutant chemical beast?


Because "ZOMPF THE'I'Y'R'E CLONEZ!"

fjafjan wrote:And I thought atleast animals cloned today were slightly "weaker" than their "natural" counterparts, since they are made from cells that have already duplicated themselves etc. I think dolly died pretty young or so, cause she was made from a skin cell


Dolly died young because she was cloned from a nonyoung sheep. She was "born" with a body that was already x years old, kinda.

If a normal sheep lives 10 years (I honestly don't know how long they actually live) and Dolly's "mother" was already 6 years old, Dolly would have lived to four years.

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:36 pm UTC
by starvingartist
In a world where animals are cloned so that we end up with only high-quality meats, Charlotte's Web would lose all meaning...

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:39 pm UTC
by Peshmerga
starvingartist wrote:In a world where animals are cloned so that we end up with only high-quality meats, Charlotte's Web would lose all meaning...


What was that book about again?

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:51 pm UTC
by LE4dGOLEM
Peshmerga wrote:
starvingartist wrote:In a world where animals are cloned so that we end up with only high-quality meats, Charlotte's Web would lose all meaning...


What was that book about again?


DON'T TELL HIM! MAKE HIM WATCH THE FILM!

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:12 pm UTC
by Peshmerga
LE4dGOLEM wrote:
Peshmerga wrote:
starvingartist wrote:In a world where animals are cloned so that we end up with only high-quality meats, Charlotte's Web would lose all meaning...


What was that book about again?


DON'T TELL HIM! MAKE HIM WATCH THE FILM!


It's probably about animal cruelty or something.

God dammit. Stupid pigs. I read the book a while ago and the old movie. But I guess the message was so stupid I just ignored it.

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:22 am UTC
by hrryank
AND it is not really a viable method yet, the news said that a cow costs some obcene amount, I think it was like 50k$ or someting to produce one of these cows with current methods, so not really economical yet.



I think the exponential growth of technology will nullify any concerns about financial feasibility.

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:52 am UTC
by Narsil
umbrae wrote:Sure, it all digests the same. Thats fine with me.

But gotta be careful. Because using clones essentially nullifies natural selection. If we let cloned animals breed, then we're really taking away the random mutations that can be a help or a hindrance to the animal.

I guess the only mutations we'd really allow these days are things that would allow for more tender, delicious or nutritious meat or byproducts. But still!
Or one that allowed a body to achieve sub-freezing temps, turning cows everywhere into soft-serve ice cream machines.

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:56 am UTC
by LE4dGOLEM
Narsil wrote:
umbrae wrote:Sure, it all digests the same. Thats fine with me.

But gotta be careful. Because using clones essentially nullifies natural selection. If we let cloned animals breed, then we're really taking away the random mutations that can be a help or a hindrance to the animal.

I guess the only mutations we'd really allow these days are things that would allow for more tender, delicious or nutritious meat or byproducts. But still!
Or one that allowed a body to achieve sub-freezing temps, turning cows everywhere into soft-serve ice cream machines.


I think Narsil just won the thread.

That's another point on your way to winning the Internet Narsil!

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 4:32 am UTC
by fjafjan
hrryank wrote:
AND it is not really a viable method yet, the news said that a cow costs some obcene amount, I think it was like 50k$ or someting to produce one of these cows with current methods, so not really economical yet.


I think the exponential growth of technology will nullify any concerns about financial feasibility.


Not necessarily, if there is not enough commercial interest to maintain that research then it probably will never happen, and I don't see how cloned meat will be something people will pay alot MORE for.

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 4:39 am UTC
by aisling
fjafjan wrote:Not necessarily, if there is not enough commercial interest to maintain that research then it probably will never happen, and I don't see how cloned meat will be something people will pay alot MORE for.


If you play it up enough and advertise it enough to the right masses, some day in the future it might be possible. I could see it being something of a novelty, or even a delicacy. Like, can't you see some rich businessman sitting down to dinner with his spoiled fat children and depressed wife and saying "This cloned beef is most certainly more succulent than that regular real beef we normally have, isn't it? I'm sure the Johnson's down the road don't have cloned beef this nice. We should eat it more often." Or something to that effect.

Honestly, being an adolescent in the time we're in, I'm more or less a slave to advertisements. If I have enough money, and it won't harm me, I'm all for it.

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 4:48 am UTC
by fjafjan
No i'm not saying it's IMPOSSIBLE, but it is not necessarily the case.

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:10 am UTC
by aldimond
aisling wrote:
fjafjan wrote:Not necessarily, if there is not enough commercial interest to maintain that research then it probably will never happen, and I don't see how cloned meat will be something people will pay alot MORE for.


If you play it up enough and advertise it enough to the right masses, some day in the future it might be possible. I could see it being something of a novelty, or even a delicacy (sp!). Like, can't you see some rich businessman sitting down to dinner with his spoiled fat children and depressed wife and saying "This cloned beef is most certainly more succulent than that regular real beef we normally have, isn't it? I'm sure the Johnson's down the road don't have cloned beef this nice. We should eat it more often." Or something to that effect.


That does seem to be a possibility, once the costs are down to a somewhat reasonable level. Though it would be interesting to see how the non-cloned beef industry would react. It reminds me of the (relatively) new process for manufacturing diamonds of exquisite quality and how the traditional controllers of the diamond market are reacting against it. What makes it different is that the only way that the traditional controllers of the diamond market make money is by enforcing scarcity and controlling the market (both with an iron fist...), so any force that comes from the outside and threatens scarcity is their natural enemy (and thus a friend of mine; everything I read about the history of the diamond trade makes me hate it more). Whereas animal cloning research, as I understand it, is funded by the big industrial agriculture companies. They can introduce a newly branded product at a higher price.

Honestly, being an adolescent in the time we're in, I'm more or less a slave to advertisements. If I have enough money, and it won't harm me, I'm all for it.


Do something else during advertisements. I like to hack around on my electric keyboard, lift weights, or clean my kitchen. Most advertising messages are worthless.

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:13 am UTC
by Velociraptor
What about cloning Raptors...?

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:20 pm UTC
by LE4dGOLEM
Velociraptor wrote:What about cloning Raptors...?


/o_o\
..|_|

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 6:47 pm UTC
by RealGrouchy
Velociraptor wrote:What about cloning Raptors...?

Dude, change your avatar. Scaring people like that is just not nice.

fjafjan wrote:I believe that already cows etc are propped FULL of antibiotics etc

Yes, this is done in the US to a tremendous degree, and facilitates the development of superbugs. It wouldn't be necessary if they didn't cramp livestock so close together. As an example, chickens are kept their whole lives in cages that are so small even one chicken can't spread its wings if it were alone in there. There are usually 5-7 chicken in each cage, and 10,000 chickens in a warehouse.

Note that it is illegal in Canada to use antibiotics this way in cattle. Therefore, when you hear US politicians spreading fud about Canadian beef being "less safe", it's, well, fud.

A good book to read about meat and food is "The Food Revolution" by John Robbins (the would-be heir to the Baskin & Robbins company). It isn't preachy about vegetarianism, but informs you about all of the things that go into meat, and why meat is bad:
- for your health
- for the environment
- for the economy
- for the rainforests
- for the poor starving children in Costa Rica (really!)
- and more.

I still eat meat, but now I'm more informed.

Also, when you eat a hamburger at a fast food restaurant, you are consuming meat from over 100 animals (animals, not species), all mixed together and stuff.

- RG>

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:07 pm UTC
by LE4dGOLEM
One word: Ribwich.