Right or wrong? Per the article some 64% polled said they were “uncomfortable” with cloned food. Should the FDA require companies to alert consumers to cloned meat for relgious, or just for simple moral reasons?
Personally I dont see the big deal. It looks like the process is very simple and if it results in more food for cheap, all the better. I can’t imagine those people truly starving in the world care if their hamburger came from a naturally born cow, or a cloned one, as long as it cooked right!
I am not a biologist or nutritionist, but at this point I don’t forsee a problem with cloned meat as a source of food. (Has there been much in the way of “long term effects” testing?)
However, I realise that not everyone shares the same opinions or values I do. For those that do object to those kinds of food sources, a label would be nice. Freedom of choice.
I tentatively support the idea of such labels. (Just like there are labels for “organically grown, free range, stress free chicken”, etc.)
For people who really care about this stuff, there will be labels. Expect the Whole Foods stores and the like to put labels on their food that assures their consumers it isn’t from clones.
For the rest of us, who don’t really care, we can pay lower prices and take the risk that the food we are eating may have come from a clone.
…and? Since when does eating an animal that was deformed mean that it is somehow bad meat? Do you think that because this cow had an extra eyeball, that by eating meat from it, you’ll grow another eyeball too? As long as the meat itself is identical to the meat from regular animals (which the studies say it is,) then it’s safe.
perhaps, but should that come from the FDA? If the meat, or safety of the meat, is no different than a normal cow, why should the FDA become involved?
I wouldn’t have a problem if companies volunteered to lable the meat, I just dont want the government getting in the middle of it all once the safety issue has been resolved.
Again, if you are really concerned about it, retailers like Whole Foods will label meat that isn’t from cloned animals, much like they do organic food today. For those who are really worked up about this isssue, they can shop there. For others who don’t really care all that much if their meat comes from a clone or not, they can continue to buy unlabeled meat. Why subject everyone to an additional expense to satisfy the whims of a few?
Add “Unique” to the organic, free range, whole grain parade. Just leave it voluntary.
How is cloning different from all the other “inhumane” practices out there? I would be more interested in the levels of antibiotics in the meat than in knowing that my burger has the same DNA than your prime rib.
I expect that there will be retailers that do wish to cater to that segment of the customer base. And that’s entirely within their right to market thier goods that way.
The FDA, however, is there to act as a safety net against unsafe products, or at least, for providing information that the population base as a whole expects to know about a product.
We already have mandated listed ingredients, even though the majority of those ingredients are safe for consumption. Is it necessary for me to know that they used yellow dye #5 in my Twinkie? “Nice to have”, but not necessary. But the public asked for it, and the government provided.
(We also have lists that indicate how much calories and fats are in there, for those who track that, but that is more of a health/safety issue…)
If there appears to be enough of a demand for this type of info, the FDA may require it, as that seems to be what the population wants.
You seem to be taking the position that the cloning process produces an identical copy that can in no way harm someone that eats the resulting product.
I personally don’t take that view for the following reasons:
It is possible to eat something that is harmful and some of those harmful things can be produced by animal’s
Scientists clearly do not understand all of the biological processes involved (otherwise the failure rate would be lower)
DNA is being played with during the cloning process (turning on and off genes in X chromosome, unless this has changed)
Chemicals are important during development, I don’t trust that there are no side effects during the lab process
Based on previous issues, I don’t trust that the FDA has my safety as it’s primary goal (whether it says it does or not, there is clearly an influence from business)
Past experience says scientists will find something unsafe about this process and make adjustments
Basically, I just have a healthy respect for the complexity of nature and doubt that we can say whether or not this stuff is safe.
I would prefer to be able to choose by seeing a label.
What makes you think that the safety issue has been resolved? Because the FDA said so?
I understand there were studies that said the meat was the same, but I have no idea what they mean by “the same.” I’m going to search for the studies to see what they checked.
I don’t see any reason why the meat wouldn’t be safe (other than normal meat safety issues, of which there are plenty,) but I too will read about it. Here are some links:
Raft, your concerns may be valid, but I don’t share them. Because you do, however, you should be free to seek out non-cloned meat. Just as free-range chicken and organic produce is labeled (and sold at a premium price), I’m sure that non-cloned meat will be available with a label at upscale retailers like Whole Foods. Since you are concerned about this subject, you can buy such meat there.
Dammit, how can we have come so far yet changed so little? Cloning whole animals is so 20th century! When do I get my meat grown in vats? I’d gladly pay a premium for meat from a vat. I want my vatmeat, dammit!
Yes, I’m serious. Vat-grown meat would be much safer, less environmentally damaging, and far more humane. I’m all for it.
But you seem to be taking the position that the FDA should do what you want. Is this because you feel the studies have sufficiently proved the safety? If so, then it will be my job to find an example of something claimed to have been safe that was later found to be unsafe.
I did check out the studies, and they certainly seem reasonable, but given the complexity of the topic, the number of new insights being learned pretty regularly regarding genetics, and the continued number of failures in cloning leads me to want to be cautious.
No, I’m taking the position that this food is safe and that there is no reason the FDA should mandate labeling. If people have concerns, fine. Let them bear the cost of the process that will ensure that the meat they buy isn’t from clones.
Don’t bother with finding the example you mentioned. It will prove nothing. Yes, some things that were once thought to be safe are now known to be unsafe. So what? The vast majority of things once thought to be safe are known now to be, gasp, safe!
Your standard is like me distrusting the safety of, say, cucumbers. Sure, we think they are safe, but have they been proven safe by thousands of scientific studies? Maybe I should just swear off cucumbers until scientists study them more.
Fine, be cautious. It’s no big deal to me. Don’t force the rest of us to follow your same unscientific instincts, though.
It seems as if some of you are missing an important issue, the meat you eat(and thus the labeled meat) is most likley not to come from a cloned animal.