Reply
Wed 27 Dec, 2006 09:03 am
A Moral issue?
Code:The public seems skeptical about changing that. In a poll taken earlier this year, 65 percent called cloning animals morally wrong. Another poll found that 45 percent opposed using cloning in food production.
If FDA approval goes through, the question is how and whether cloned meat and milk will be clearly marked so consumers know what they're buying. Experts say that may be unlikely.
"It's very possible that these products will end up on the grocery store shelves without any specific label identifying them as having come from cloned animals," said Michael Fernandez, executive director of the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology.
Ok, I thought it was an interesting topic for discussion. Nevermind.
I would have absolutely no problem with it.
As an aside, I hear there's about 150 cloned cattle right now, so it's not like it's going to be on special at the supermarket next week.
I simply cannot see where this would be any kind of heath issue. Another example of people having to have something to get all excited about.
Kinda reminds of all the hoopla about "radiated" foods a few years ago.
I can't find a link but in the May, 2006, issue of
Harper's Nathanael Johnson's Letter from Iowa, "Swine of the Times: The Making of the Modern Pig" I learned that cloning may not be necessary.
Thanks to in-breeding and the wonders of AI with semen from standardized boars pigs are now standardized.
Quote:For instance, as swine carcasses move down the conveyor belt, at Hormel's Austin, Minnesota, packing plant,they hit a curved knife, which slices the cylindrical loin from the inside of the body cavity. If the animals aren't just te right proportions, the knife will hit the wrong spot, wasting meat or cutting into bone.
I'd have no problem eating food from cloned animals.
peel off the skin, and they are all the same..
I'm pissed that it won't be labelled/identified.
OK, let me elaborate my "why"?
Would you not buy it if it was cloned?
If you would not then buy it, why not?
If you would buy it anyway, why do you care if it's labeled or not?
Or, as a third aspect, would you be looking specifically to buy cloned meat, and want the label so you know it is cloned?
In that event, why would you buy cloned meat over non-cloned?
I won't consider "Right to Know" a sufficient answer.
"Cloned" certainly is not equivalent to "genetically engineered", if that makes any difference. Cloning is merely the production of identical offspring without going through the breeding process. Considering the extent of artificial insemination in the cattle industry over the past half century, I fail to see how much difference cloning could make. I am sure, however, that it makes a difference to some people who may not understand. We see that on a daily basis.
Cowdoc--
Off topic here, but our vet's office is full of dog-owning locals bringing their animals in for "temperment" shots.
So where to they get all these people during these "man on the street" interviews to confess how hesitant they are about all this?
They probably had to ask about 100 people to get the 3 or 4 they televise.
Chai Tea wrote:They probably had to ask about 100 people to get the 3 or 4 they televise.
Or perhaps we at A2K are just not a representative sample. There isn't much reason to expect that the general population feels similarly about this matter than the membership of this community.
I would even eat meat from a cow that cheated on his girlfriend.
I just don't care, I'm a rebel.
I thought the "moral issue" was an interesting sidebar to this issue.
I think the moral issues have a much heavier impact when talking about cloning humans.
dyslexia wrote:I thought the "moral issue" was an interesting sidebar to this issue.
Why? Why would anyone have a moral issue with artificially creating identical twins of animals, but
not have a moral issue with killing it and eating it? Which animal, if given a choice, would rather be slaughtered than cloned? None in its right mind I suppose.