Scum sucking FDA

[Sugarcoated]

I just heard they may approve non-labeling cloned animal meat. I love how THEY decide FOR US that we don't need to know this. Like altered fruits and vegetables and the shit they pump into cows for more milk. The FDA is not about protecting the public, thanks to smirko and extreme Repub majority they've become robber baron enablers.

[mainegreen]

1. My family has switched over to buying meat from our local butcher from animals raised locally.

If I don't know the farm where the cow/pig/chicken came from, I'm not sure I want to eat it.
We switched back when we lost trust that the generic meat supply was not infected with good old prions.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Yep, I believe I won't be buying commercial meat w/o a chain of title. n/t

[Sugarcoated]

5. I try to do the same

We go to a local butcher or organic most of the time.

I remember some food industry pig on one of the cable news shows talking about hydrogenized oil or something. The gist of the interview was that people had the right to know what was in their food and this pig said something like, 'Tough. Everytime people catch on we'll just change the name and label it differently'. His tone was aggressive and confrontational. He reminded me of that prick lawyer Imus has on, the one who represented O'Reilly in the sexual harassment case. I hate these kind of people. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:

[Tesha]

3. Just so I'm clear on this, what special hazard do you expect from cloning?

Just so I'm clear on this, what special hazard do
you expect from cloning?

After all, with the possible exception of the abbreviated
telomeres (have they decided on that yet?), there's *NO*
genetic difference in the cloneburger versus the sperm+egg
hamburger.

Tesha

[mainegreen]

6. Well, there's a probable higher risk of bacterial infection from cloned vs grown.

Until they prove that cloned meat doesn't suffer from the same problems hamburger suffers from, that's a very real risk.
And as there is no data on other possible contamination risks from growing meat in vats, the harvesting methodology, and government inspection rules, I calling the whole thing a wee bit to suspect for me to consider putting it on my families table.

[Sugarcoated]

8. I don't know all the details of the risks

I just know it's an unknown and I don't trust them. I don't trust that the powers that be, the committees that are supposed to represent and protect us, the little guys, are going to honestly do that job. I DON'T TRUST THEM. ESPECIALLY after smirk-in-theif and VP snarl and a 6 year imbalance of power.

[Tesha]

12. I don't think we're (yet) talking about meat from a vat.

I don't think we're (yet) talking about meat from a vat.

What I *THINK* the FDA is approving is the idea that we
could consume meat from animals that have been cloned,
for example, Dollyburgers, without being put on notice
of that fact.

You're right that there are a whole slew of issues if
we ever get to the point of considering producing and
eating, say, muscle meat grown in vats.

Tesha

[mainegreen]

13. It's hard to imagine a cloned cow could be cheaper than just letting two cows do it.

Strange.

[YOY]

15. Actually that would be a cow and a bull!

'Two cows doing it' might lead to a same sex union. That would upset the religious right for sure...Flossy and Claribelle tieing the knot!

Jebus help us!

[NashVegas]

34. $60,000 for a Clone

Why would someone pay that?

Because they've been talked into believing it's more efficient than normal breeding.

Here's the claim in an LA Times article:

Though cloning is expensive — Coleman paid $60,000 to clone First Down — producers have embraced it for the efficiencies it can bring to a farm or ranch. If a particular bull consistently sires strong offspring or a dairy cow is an unusually prolific milk producer, clones can multiply those advantages.

Knowing that the arguments that claim GM/GE agriculture products produce higher yields and reduce costs for farmers is pure bullshit, my guess is, the above argument is bullshit, too.

[Lance_Boyle]

14. Wha?

This is not vat-grown meat. This is meat that is removed "the old fashioned way" from once-living livestock. The *only* difference is that this livestock was "conceived" by a different method. Risk of bacterial infection is identical to that in regular sperm-and-egg conceived livestock. In fact, *everything* is identical to the source animal, except, as mentioned before, possibly the telomere length. Which shouldn't matter much, since these animals are not expected to live to old age.

[mainegreen]

17. I guess I was think vat grown, as it just seems inconcievable that there is any business reason

to clone an animal vs use traditional husbandry. What do you gain? So I just assumed this was about vat grown meat (where I could see the $ incentives). Silly me.

This world is insane. That's my excuse.

[Tesha]

22. Repeatability

> What do you gain?

Repeatability. Bessie #4096 is just like Bessie #1.
So when you have one head of cattle that is ideal
for your process, you can have an unlimited number
of them, all equally ideal.

Tesha

[mainegreen]

23. Interesting. And does Bessie 4096 suffer any... genetic flaws?

I was under the impression that, well, barring reproduction, DNA degrades.
Or is that the telomeres issue of which you speak?
:shrug:

Either way, I like my meat to be... natural.

[Zodiak]

40. Mutation and recombination

They will not be the same...each will be 1/1,000,000 different genetically. How that tranlates into the cells themselves is a matter of random chance.

[Tesha]

41. I'm assuming that all 4095 copies are "first generation"

I'm assuming that all 4095 copies are "first generation" copies,
derived directly from Bessie #1. In this case, there probably
isn't much "data loss".

For more on telomeres, see:

o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomere

Tesha

[mainegreen]

42. That was very interesting!

I did not know that. Thanks!

[Tesha]

49. You're welcome! (NT)

[elehhhhna]

30. So if Cloney has Mad cow, everybody gets it! HOORAY!

[Kali]

19. I think you need to look up the term cloned.

Not meat grown in a vat. Animals of the same exact genetic make. Maybe good or bad, but get the facts straight.

[mainegreen]

21. I know full well what cloned means.

Based on the primary post I thought literally 'cloned animal meat'. Thanks to the shitty nature of the English language it can mean either a) meat from cloned animals or b) cloned animal meat cells, and the complete lack of a link in the primary post clarifying, I though of option b. Option a didn't occur to me.
Of course, you better believe that if laws allowing option a) to go through unlabeled option b) is coming very soon, especially as it will make meat that is cheap as hell.

[yellowcanine]

37. One woiuld not use "cloned" in that instance. "Tissue culture" would be a more appropriate term.

[jmowreader]

33. Cloned versus grown?

Shouldn't that be more like "cloned versus conceived"?

Endpoint of a cloning is a calf, same as the endpoint of conception. You still have to grow the animal to market weight.

[yellowcanine]

36. Meat from cloned aminals is made "on the hoof" like any other meat.

And where did you get the info on bacterial infection?

[Freddie Stubbs]

51. How much higher is the risk of bacterial infection?

:shrug:

[NashVegas]

32. Reduced Gene Pool & Variants, and Patents

Reliance on corporate (or for that matter, any) patented and royalty-driven agriculture is a hazard to us all and future generations.

[Morereason]

48. Your right! Next comes patenting animals!!!!!!!!!

You made the best point in this discussion and it is probably being missed. What will come of these "cloned breeds"?

Patenting Life!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[tbyg52]

50. Possible hazard isn't even the main point to me

The main point is that *they* are going to decide what we do and don't need to know, regardless of our wishes. They are not working for we the people.

[havocmom]

4. One of the early moves in the bush administration/rubber stamp congress

was to eliminate the requirement on food labels for country of origin. Don't want Americans to see how much of their food is not from here. (Something like 40% at the time they dropped the label requirement). Don't want Americans to get any clue at how vulnerable we are to corporate manipulation of food production, all the stuff coming from countries that have even less protection, the fact that cartels now rule your belly like they have ruled your gas tank.

Learn to grow something. Join groups that save seeds before everything is patented and you can't even garden without paying through the nose to giant corporations that don't care if you get safe food or not.

[geardaddy]

26. Yes, go to this link:

http://www.urbanearthcoop.com . Shameless community promotion ;)

[havocmom]

38. Great site, great group!

Yes, make it happen! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

People, gardening is a political act! Act up and start making food happen!

[geardaddy]

52. Thanks!

It's just starting, but the community sees big plans for this place!

[havocmom]

53. Bookmarked site to my 'Rabble Rousing Tools' folder

Will send people your way at every chance. May be in touch with some questions, geardaddy.

[Lusted4]

7. We need someone on the inside to leak which foods are safe.

Because you know their not eating that crap.

[Avalux]

9. Please read the entire draft here, then tell them your opinion (they're asking for it):

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2006/NEW01541.html

FDA is seeking comments from the public on the three documents for the next 90 days. To submit electronic comments on the three documents, visit www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/oc/dockets/comments/commentdocket.cfm. Written comments may be sent to: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD, 20852. Comments must be received by Apr. 2, 2007 and should include the docket number 2003N-0573.

For more information, visit http://www.fda.gov/cvm/CloneRiskAssessment.htm.

[Mrs. Overall]

10. Here are links to the clone/gmo articles I just read this morning:

FDA set to OK food from cloned animals
http://www.komotv.com/news/health/5024871.html

Industry group gives scientists go-ahead for genetically engineered peanuts
http://www.komotv.com/news/health/5009066.html


It seems that both cloned meat and peanuts have received the approval they need and are coming to a store near us soon. (Yuck!)

[Avalux]

11. Not yet. Please read the FDA's draft document.

I am in no way supporting what's in the draft, but it's not a done deal yet, and I'd read it from the horse's mouth rather than rely on news stories. They want public opinion - please let them know what you think -

FDA is seeking comments from the public on the three documents for the next 90 days. To submit electronic comments on the three documents, visit www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/oc/dockets/comments/commentdocket.cfm. Written comments may be sent to: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD, 20852. Comments must be received by Apr. 2, 2007 and should include the docket number 2003N-0573.

For more information, visit http://www.fda.gov/cvm/CloneRiskAssessment.htm.

[Mrs. Overall]

16. Thanks for this info! I'll do that.

[nosmokes]

39. the FDA has a long history of ignoring public comment, never more so

than today under shrubco.

[fed-up]

18. an article from Chico State (CA) on early cloned calves

http://www.csuchico.edu/pub/inside/archive/01_03_29/01.newbiotech.html
March 29, 2001
Volume 31 Number 13
Bio Tech Milestone at University Farm

Cloning project produces groundbreaking biotechnological knowledge despite death of two calves

Three cloned Charolais calves, Martie, Natalie, and Emily, were born on March 9 as part of a research project through the College of Agriculture. They were met with the excitement and trepidation of a birth long anticipated and monitored at every step. In spite of appearing healthy for the first 11 days of their lives, on day 12, Natalie died, and three days later Emily died.

In the relatively new area of animal cloning research, these results are not unexpected. In an article in the Science and Ideas Section of U.S. News and World Report, March 19, 2001, writer Nell Boyce says: "Several years of animal cloning work had taught them that most cloned animals never even make it to birth, and the rare ones that do all too frequently have problems ranging from physical deformities to life-threatening medical conditions."




DON'T MESS WITH MY FOOD!!!

[question everything]

20. And how do you know that that piece of steak

came from a deformed animal?

Frankly, all the discussion here makes me want to be a vegetarian.

[Beaverhausen]

27. I went veggie 20 years ago

so I don't have to worry about this "meat" - now, the news that they are messing with peanuts really has me pissed off!

[Kali]

24. In an attempt to be rational here (I know that isn't a real option on this topic, but hey...)

The simple act of breeding (selecting) for certain traits in both plant and animal based foods can lead to these same types of problems. If you want to attempt a rational argument against these *scary* sounding new technologies, you MIGHT want to actually understand what the potential problems are and ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.

Then you may be able to make a logical and reasoned agument for or against some proposed action. Should we halt embryo transfer? Crossbreeding? What about the various manipulations of seed or all the massive cloning of plants for food? Ever eat a banana?

I'm not arguing for or against animal cloning at this point, but at least I have some understanding of what we are talking about in terms of food production that has been going on for centuries.

[Warren DeMontague]

45. I'm certainly not anti new technology. I'm just in favor of full disclosure.

It wouldn't kill anyone to put a label on stuff telling consumers exactly what's in it.

[nosmokes]

47. i believe i do have some understanding of the implications of introducing

milk and meat from cloned animals into the food chain w/o fully testing and vetting the safety. i certainly understand the implications of doing so with genetically modified organisms, which is a totally animal from what humanity has been doing with selective breeding since agriculture began. i'm not chicken little crying that the sky is falling w/o a reason. there is plenty of reason to be wary, way more than wary, out right antagonistic to wards the petro/chemical/agro industrial/bio-genetic/complex.

after all, if this shit is so great why not open all the test files to public scrutiny and proudly label the food containers in 3inch yellow letters **CONTAINS GMOS!!** or **yes! this milk comes from a clone!**

[12string]

25. cloned meat

whats the difference between eating one seared corpse over
another?

[Conan_The_Barbarian]

28. Look for the non-clone logo I guess

The Organic industry is doing quite well, if cloned meat is a big issue for people I'm sure none clone meat suppliers will likely make it well known that they don't use cloned animals in the production of their meat products.

They probauly approved it because there is currently not enough substansive evidence indicating why cloned animals as a source of meat is a health hazard to humans. Provided some conrete evidence of the immediate dangers I would hope FDA would consider their decision. I'm curious to see where this this technology could lead, in our society it seems once the private sector gets ahold of something and makes it profitable the technology takes of like a damn rocket.

I personally don't believe myself educated enough on the topic to vehemently stand on either side of the argument but I find the debate itself eerly fascinating.

[YankeyMCC]

29. I posted about this the other day

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2973957&mesg_id=2973957

All this does is promote the continued industrialization of our food chain, continues the mechanization of animals, and by that increases the risk to the ecology and human health, not to mention moral treatment of animals.

For those reasons, regardless of the level of safety in eating meat from a cloned animal, it is a Bad Idea.

[NotGivingUp]

31. FDA has sucked for a LONG time, and they just keep getting worse.

[blues90]

35. This is some sick stuff

I don;t eat meat but may have come across some vegetable matter that is grown by some unearthly process .

They have been telling us what we will eat for years now , nothing new there but this is an abomination no doubt .

[Warren DeMontague]

43. Maybe people should start using cloned animal meat for birth control.

Then the FDA will regulate the crap out of it, if not ban it entirely.

[sweetheart]

44. nothin' but a pencil neck geek

keep the workers alive as long as they're useful,
then hive them away in poor houses to die.

[Morgana LaFey]

46. This non-helpful FDA (and USDA and so forth) started well before

Bush. It started at least with Reagan, who appointed all sorts of people who were anti-thetical to the mission of the agencies they were appointed to head and staff. Remember James Watt? Perfect example. As was Clarence Thomas who was appointed head of the EEOC.