Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FDA set to OK food from cloned animals TODAY (28/12/2006)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
nosmokes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-28-06 03:56 PM
Original message
FDA set to OK food from cloned animals TODAY (28/12/2006)
I don't know about y'all, but next to the war and the stolen elections, this is about the most outrageous thing i believe they have foisted upon us. and i am outraged. for all the good it does. and i'll betcha dollars to donut's there ain't gonna be any milk or meat from cloned animals on the tables of the members of the FDA or anyone else that's part of shrubco.-nosmokes
--###--


original-gm watch

FDA set to OK food from cloned animals TODAY (28/12/2006)


GM WATCH COMMENT: According to this Associated Press piece, the US government is expected to declare today that cloned animals are safe to go into the human food supply.

There has, of course, been no public debate about whether US citizens, let alone the recipients of US exports, wish to consume milk and meat from cloned animals.

And this isn't just an issue of democratic deficit.

A spokesman for the Biotechnology Industry Organization is quoted in the article as saying, "We clone an animal because we want a genetic twin of that animal. It's not a genetically engineered animal; no genes have been changed or moved or deleted."

But we know clones are very far indeed from perfect copies and that all clones are, in one way or another, defective with multiple flaws embedded in their genomes. Rudolf Jaenisch, a geneticist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, estimates that something like 4-5% of the genes in a cloned animal's genome are expressed incorrectly.

And these genetic defects can have tangible results - some subtle and hard to reckon but others all too clear. Some clones have been born with incomplete body walls or with abnormalities in their hearts, kidneys or brain function, or have suffered problems like "adult clone sudden death syndrome" and premature ageing.

~snip~
.
.
.

complete article, including link to an AP report here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-28-06 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. This & GM/GE Foods Could Lead to Catastrophe for the Human Race, IMO
Putting the means of producing food and livestock into the hands of a few corporations (as opposed to tens, hundreds of thousands, millions of growers & producers) is begging for trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-28-06 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. The FDA has put forth a draft; has not made a final decision.
I've read a lot of news stories on this subject today that are inaccurate. I am not defending the FDA, but I am disturbed by the amount of misinformation being circulated about this matter. Please go here to read the entire draft proposal concerning cloned animals:

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

The FDA is also taking public opinions until April 2007. Email them or write to them - they need to hear from you:

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 http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/oc/dockets/comments/commentdocket.cfm?AGENCY=FDA. 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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dweller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-28-06 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. kick for comments from the public part...
:kick:

this deserves a thread of its own.

dp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacebird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-28-06 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
3. Is organic still going to be "clean"? Can free range and organic folks market as NON-cloned?
I know the dairy industry fought tooth and nail to keep small organic farms and ice cream companies from labelling as "No rBGH".....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nosmokes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-28-06 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. good question.
since the NOSB is now stacked w/ 12 of 15 seats having significant ties to industrial agricultural interests one can only guess at this stage. i certainly wouldn't put it past the faux organic dairies, horizon, dean, aurora and their brethren who while the herds *may* (or may not) technically meet the definition of orgaanic, may never see a blade of grass their entire lives, to market cloned milk as organic.

otherwise my advice is the same. if you don't have a local dairy that's organic, organic valley is a co-op of family dairies that is trustworthy. for everything else, support your local farmer!

join a CSA and if they don't also raise some meat and poultry they can steer you in the right direction. and write your congress critters and tell them we want real consumer representation and real organic farmer representation on the NOSB, not Kraft, not ADM,not general mills. we want the organic label to mean organic, not some organic, or mostly organic or 95% organic, but completely organic.

Buylocal
Buy organic
Buy free trade
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-28-06 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
5. The quality of the meat isn't the problem for me.
We eat cloned animals all the time. They are called twins or members of the same litter.

My problem is why bother? We have a perfectly reliable way of creating new livestock that mother nature provided us with. It seems to me that the process would be more expensive and unnecessary in the long run, a totally unproductive way of doing this.

So I agree this is more a ruse by factory farms to maybe patent their product enabling them to corner the market and force every other producer out of the business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-28-06 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
6. (deleted)
Edited on Thu Dec-28-06 05:15 PM by TahitiNut
(nevermind)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC