Tracking the next pandemic: Avian Flu Talk |
FDA Is Set To Approve Milk, Meat From Clones |
Post Reply |
Author | |
Ravendawn
Valued Member Joined: March 16 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 462 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: October 17 2006 at 3:53pm |
Well GM crops were a great step back now this,are Governments grabbing at straws here as the food chain is in such a terrible state,and how many years do we have to wait before all your children are born looking the same or encounter strange side effects?
By Rick Weiss
Three years after the Food and Drug Administration first hinted that it might permit the sale of milk and meat from cloned animals, prompting public reactions that ranged from curiosity to disgust, the agency is poised to endorse marketing of the mass-produced animals for public consumption. The decision, expected by the end of this year, is based largely on new data indicating that milk and meat from cloned livestock and their offspring pose no unique risks to consumers. "Our evaluation is that the food from cloned animals is as safe as the food we eat every day," said Stephen F. Sundlof, the FDA's chief of veterinary medicine, who has overseen the long-stalled risk assessment. Farmers and companies that have been growing cloned barnyard animals from single cells in anticipation of a lucrative market say cloning will bring consumers a level of consistency and quality impossible to attain with conventional breeding, making perfectly marbled beef and reliably lean and tasty pork the norm on grocery shelves. But groups opposed to the new technology, including a coalition of powerful food companies concerned that the public will reject Dolly-the-Lamb chops and clonal cream in their coffee, have not given up. On Thursday, advocacy groups filed a petition asking the FDA to regulate cloned farm animals one type at a time, much as it regulates new drugs, a change that would drastically slow marketing approval. Some are also questioning the ethics of a technology that, while more efficient than it used to be, still poses risks for pregnant animals and their newborns. "The government talks about being science-based, and that's great, but I think there is another pillar here: the question of whether we really want to do this," said Carol Tucker Foreman, director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America. That there is a debate at all about integrating clones into the food supply is evidence of the remarkable progress made since the 1996 birth of Dolly, the world's first mammalian clone, created from an udder cell of an anonymous ewe. Scientists have now applied the technique successfully to cattle, horses, pigs, goats and other mammals. Each clone is a genetic replica of the animal that donated the cell from which it was grown. Cloning could solve a number of long-standing farm problems. Many prize males are not recognized as such until long after they have been tamed by castration. With cloning, that lack of semen would not matter. Cloning also allows farmers to make many copies of exceptional milk producers; with natural breeding, cows have only one offspring per year, and half are males. In the eyes of many in agriculture, cloning is simply the latest in a string of advances such as artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization that have given farmers better control over animal reproduction. "Clones are just clones. They are not genetically engineered animals," said Barbara Glenn, chief of animal biotechnology at the Biotechnology Industry Organization. The FDA agrees with that distinction, Sundlof said. The agency has already said it will regulate transgenic animals -- those that have been engineered by adding specific, valuable genes -- in much the way it regulates pharmaceuticals, under a new category called "New Animal Drugs." No such animals are currently on the market. By contrast, proponents say, clones are simply twins, albeit born a generation apart. It was October 2003 when the FDA released its first draft document concluding that clones and their offspring are safe to eat, prompting several cloning companies to scale up their operations. But an agency advisory panel and the National Academies, while generally supportive, raised flags, citing a paucity of safety data. That, and opposition led largely by the International Dairy Foods Association, which represents such large, brand-sensitive companies as Kraft Foods, Dannon, General Mills and Nestlé USA, put FDA approval on hold. For years the agency has asked producers to keep clones off the market voluntarily while the issues got sorted out, a delay that bankrupted one major company and has left others increasingly frustrated. But now a large collection of new data submitted to the FDA has revitalized the effort, according to government officials and others. The biggest new study is a detailed comparison of meat from the offspring of cloned and conventional boars created by Austin-based ViaGen Inc., a major producer of cloned farm animals. Company scientists agreed to share key results with a reporter but withheld details as required by the journal Theriogenology, which will publish the full report in its January issue. Semen from four clones and three conventional boars was used to inseminate 89 females. A total of 404 progeny (242 from clones) were raised identically by government scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Meat Animal Research Center in Clay, Neb., and slaughtered when they reached market size. (Because clones are so valuable, companies for now anticipate sending only their offspring to market.) Of the 14,036 measures of protein composition, fatty acid profiles and other meat components done on the offspring of clones by an independent lab, all but three were within the same range as those of the conventional animals, and only one was outside what the Agriculture Department considers normal. The other large research report came from Cyagra, a cloning company in Elizabethtown, Pa. In that study, 80 blood and urine measures, including various hormone levels, were taken in 10 newborn, 46 weanling and 18 adult clones. Results were indistinguishable from those obtained from conventional animals. Then 79 biochemical measurements from three cuts of meat taken from five male and six female adult clones were compared with those from matched cuts from conventional animals. Again, no differences were found, said Cyagra's director of marketing, Steve A. Mower. The results have been submitted to the FDA and are being reviewed by a scientific journal. "The data are very clear," said ViaGen President Mark Walton. "You really can't tell them apart." In light of the new findings, and the FDA's near completion of a complicated, interagency review demanded by the White House Office of Management and Budget, Sundlof anticipates releasing a formal draft risk assessment by the end of the year, along with a proposed "risk management" plan. Those documents would allow the marketing of clones and their offspring for food and milk after a final period of public comment. Unless, that is, the opponents manage to stop the process, which they are trying to do on two fronts. One is the petition filed Thursday by the Washington-based Center for Food Safety. It asks the FDA to regulate clones, not just transgenics, as New Animal Drugs. It also calls for environmental impact statements to evaluate the environmental and health effects of each new proposed line of clones. "The available science shows that cloning presents serious food safety risks, animal welfare concerns and unresolved ethical issues that require strict oversight," the petition states. Industry scientists derided the petition's safety concerns, built largely on a theoretical possibility that subtle genetic changes seen in some clones may alter the nutritional nature of meat. If those genetic changes were significant, Mower said, they would cause biochemical changes in milk or meat, none of which have been found. But issues of ethics and public acceptance are not easily dismissed, several experts said. Surveys show that more than 60 percent of the U.S. population is uncomfortable with the idea of animal cloning for food and milk. The single biggest reason people give is "religious and ethical," with concerns about food safety coming in second, said Michael Fernandez, executive director of the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, a nonpartisan research and education project. Those sentiments are a big concern to dairy companies, which fear that any association with cloning could harm milk's carefully honed image of wholesomeness. Confidential documents from the International Dairy Foods Association, obtained by The Washington Post, indicate the group has played a key role in slowing FDA action and propose a strategy for blocking any future FDA approval. Association spokeswoman Susan Ruland said the group opted not to adopt the lobbying strategy described in those documents, which included using friends in Congress and "continued outreach to the White House." In any case, Sundlof said, the FDA has no authority to make decisions based on ethics concerns. Nor is it inclined to call for labeling of products from clones, as some have demanded. For one thing, clonal meat or milk would be impossible to authenticate, since there is no way to distinguish them from conventional products. The FDA may already be too late. Several owners of clones have been selling semen to farm clubs and others vying to grow prize-winning cattle. Most of those animals end up being slaughtered, sold and eaten, experts said. "That you can go online today to any number of different Web sites and purchase semen from cloned bulls tells you there are cloned sires out there fathering calves in the food supply," Walton said. Like it or not, Walton and others said, the clones are out of the barn. © 2006 The Washington Post Company
|
|
HoosierMom
Valued Member Joined: June 15 2006 Status: Offline Points: 334 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well yet another reason I was considering going to a Vegan diet, well then you have ,the spinach-ecoli outbreak, maybe this is a for sure sign we should go back to raising our own food, either livestock and/ or gardens !
|
|
Guests
Guest Group |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
red flesh free here... Now for the dairy... I won't post what they say about dairy. |
|
Penham
Chief Moderator Moderator Joined: February 09 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 14913 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I was watching Good Morning America this morning and they were also saying that cloned meat was already in the food chain because there are currently no laws regulating against it. |
|
Guests
Guest Group |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hoosierman,
After reading your post in which you're against the consumption of cloned animals, I reread that cloning article again and nowhere did I find a legitimate reason for not cloning and eating farm animals. The study showed the milk or meat used from those animals is identical to regular animals and is perfectly safe to eat.
One small paragraph said opponents objected on religious and ethical grounds. Now I can see where that arguement could and should be made on human beings, but farms animals? I doubt the issue of cloning animals is found anywhere in anyones bible and whats the ethics problem of cloning hogs or cows, if the by products we use from those animals are perfectly safe for human consumption?
Show me a legitimate study that says that stuff is harmfull to humans and I might well consider. But util then, I say bon-apetit!!
|
|
roxy
Valued Member Joined: February 27 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 534 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I really haven't followed this topic. But I think I will Pass . my concern is that the early animals aged too fast, did they fix that? and I hope the packages are marked,for those our us with concerns, roxy
|
|
Ravendawn
Valued Member Joined: March 16 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 462 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Due to the lies told during the BSE crisis and the fact we feed farm animals any old junk for profit i personally feel ashamed at the way animals are treated.
Do you not think we are changing the evolutionary process messing with DNA,what happens when we have a virus able to adapt to clones and cause a wide spread famine,and how long before people are cloned for drones creating a massive divide between society,your insurance company's will love having a DNA data base to explore and having a cloned child may give you lower insurance premiums.if you take a look at the technical advances being archived this in my opinion would be something Hitler would have been very proud of.We as human beings share this planet and we show it nothing but utter contempt, we are here for a short time and yes we are at the top of the food chain so why is it ok to experiment with our food supply?data regarding clones and food safety Hmmm well after the great experiment we will all be introduced to who will stand up and say sorry we got it wrong. I think many humans have lost touch with nature and given into the thoughts and wishes of the consumer society,we have land in the UK enough to supply the country with our own produce so food production by cloning seems to me as being rather bizarre,due to the manipulation of our foods we may just be the bearers of our own extinction.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ravendawn,
I think you might have it a touch wrong.........the article said cloned animals and not DNA engineered animals - a very big difference I think involving two totally different technologies.
I don't know if we're changing mans overall evolution by experimenting with DNA, but even if we are, I'm not so sure it's all bad. If they found that ridding a certain DNA strand in man prevented certain cancers, Parkinsons Disease, diabetes, Alzheimers Disease or many other serious diseases that renders it's victims with ruined and horrible lives, then I would be all for it. However if someone decided to engineer someones DNA to ensure a super baby or a kid with a superior IQ that's off the charts, then I say no.
I don't think we should blanketly dismiss any type of medical advance. There's good and bad with everything...............it's up to us to discover and implement the good these sciences can do and to put in place safeguards to prevent the bad.
|
|
Ravendawn
Valued Member Joined: March 16 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 462 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi retiredcopper,point taken but do you not think the human history of interbreeding to get the best of different types of animals,flowers etc,will be limited to straight forward cloning,i cannot believe that for a instant,the meaning of creation has eluded man for thousands of years and now we are treading on very dangerous ground "curiosity killed the cat "as the saying goes,as for terminal illness and cures just because we are told this may lead to cures it does not mean it will,in the rush to become advanced in bioengineering we may create more problems in the future,if we rid ourselves of disease then the human population will become totally out of control what then ? nature has a on going battle with us and the chemical soup we have generated in the air and sea is that a ideal way to create perfect clones without further chemical/DNA tampering.
I found this passage in relation to the bibles teachings
God intends for human beings to grow in their appreciation and understanding of His creation, which includes knowledge regarding the human body (Matt. 6:26-29; Ps. 8:3-9; Ps. 139:1-6; 13-16). For this reason, efforts to understand the biological structures of life, through ethical research, should be encouraged
I have not read the bible so i can only post this passage blind i know a lot of Christan's visit this forum and i would be grateful if they could give a more descriptive meaning to the passage above as i have pulled the passage above from a site and i do not know if it is correct
|
|
Guests
Guest Group |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ravendawn,
You wrote: <<God intends for human beings to grow in their appreciation and understanding of His creation, which includes knowledge regarding the human body (Matt. 6:26-29; Ps. 8:3-9; Ps. 139:1-6; 13-16). For this reason, efforts to understand the biological structures of life, through ethical research, should be encouraged>>
I don't want to sound negative, blasphemous or anything else, but did this bible passage you quoted, which was probably written over 1500 + years ago, actually use the words "biological structure of life, through ethical research"? Back then they didn't even know what an ingrown toenail was, much less know what "biological structures of life" meant. It sounds to me that the people on that website in which you found this quote, is doing a bit of modern revisionism for their own reasons.
|
|
Ravendawn
Valued Member Joined: March 16 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 462 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Retiredcopper,i read it that way also,its a sad fact some people bend religions to fit different agendas.I can see the benefits of playing God to solve world food shortages and disease,it just seems to me to be a horrible way to accomplish it,i have really opened a Pandora's box for myself on this issue we have other food issues in the pipeline at the moment also along these lines if you are interested heres a link to growing your own meat,its old news but still evolving. |
|
sweetpea
V.I.P. Member Joined: March 27 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 299 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
okay, this gives me the eebie-jeebies .... (shiver) ... cloned milk from cloned cows ... eeewwwh! Cloned animals for meat? eeeewwwh! Seems that in the search for ?? what are we searching for?? Anyhow, how can this be justified as "normal," what if later on down the road we start sprouting "clones" ("Gremlins") or multiplying like "Tribbles" (Star Trek) ... maybe I've watched one too many sci-fi movies, but isn't there sort of a half-ounce of truth to them?!?!
I don't know what Science will come up with next... all this fooling with Nature ... it's going to come back to them one way or another ... and unfortunately for the rest of the world as well. Maybe this is how the whole bird flu business got started??
Sorry bout the ranting here, but is science really trying to be "God!" I still sticking to the "good old ways" as best I can ...
|
|
"When an emergency arises, the time for preparation is past."
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum |