# No Labels for Cloned Food



## devotay (May 14, 2001)

What does the "virtually" part mean?

Read the whole story here


----------



## mredikop (Dec 6, 2006)

What I am afraid of is that they will start splicing DNA to make super live-stock and then clone that special strain over and over. Would the US Govt. ever be awful enough to ban livestock breeding in favor of clone reproduction for "food safety" or "consistency" or what have you? They might.

This cloning deal has huge ramifications which I won't get into because the thread is discussing the fact that the FDA has decided that cloned live-stock and the resulting dairies and proteins don't have to be labeled. 

I am concerned about the "virtually indistinguishable" bit but I would guess they will mark them some special way at the farm or ranch. I mean if the technology is sound I guess it would be essentially the same cow, pig or what-have-you which was safe and good enough to eat/drink from so I guess it is safe but I'd still like to know if I was consuming a clone or the product of real bovine love it makes a difference to me.


----------



## brittany (Dec 23, 2006)

Wow. I don't know what to say. My biggest concern is if they breed a super cow whose brain is ten times the size of humans and decides that he wants to take over the world. The age of the cow is upon us people. We won't kill each other, they'll get us. I'd start being nice to them now.
Seriously, I just don't know what to say. I don't want to be one of those people that says progress is bad without all the facts but meat that is grown in a test tude, I just can't stomach that. I don't think we are allowed to do that. There are certain laws to nature and we don't write them. I think this might come back to haunt us. I don't know why, just everything about this says no. I sound like my mother. I'm going now.


----------



## mlansing (Dec 21, 2006)

It has been said that there is no risk for consumers. What I am not sure is that if there is any test that shows how cloned products will interact with our body chemistry? There may be no problem at all or may be negative effects ten years from now. As a respect for consumers please put at least a label so I can know.

Mike


----------



## mredikop (Dec 6, 2006)

"The age of the cow is upon us..." LMAO!

Honestly though there are consequences to tampering with nature. We keep finding cures for stuff and over populating and nature comes up with new strains of viruses and such to cull the herd. Some things should be sacred and cloning Bessie the Prize Bovine is one of 'em. This is just steps away from cloning people.

Anyway bottom line is I want to know if I am eating a real cow or a clone cow, real or ersatz. Why do I suddenly want to watch "Bladerunner" or read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" by Philip K. Dick?


----------



## the_seraphim (Dec 25, 2006)

all the virtually indistinguishable means is that sure... you _can_ tell.... if youve got a £150m dna testing lab at your fingertips....

cloned food, i dont mind, GM food... well, im kinda on the fence leaning toward ... i mean, its all down to how they modify the dna... if they use a retro virus, i would be concerned... how can you tell if the virus is going to change you too... if they use hardware/chemicals to cut and glue the dna... i suppose thats ok...

all down to technique... kinda like what we do!

it all just boils down to technique and timing

something else to think about is restaurant menus dont normally tell you much about the meat your about to eat... "slow roasted beef striploin" that comes from? ok... "slow roasted aberdeen angus striploin" perhaps even "slow roasted british aberdeen angus striploin" still dont know much about it do we?

my personal opinion is that if god exists... then we cant go wrong... if not, were potentially screwed... the universe has a cruel sense of humour and enjoys entertaining itself... god has morals and wants us to progress i think... so if god exists he gave us the power to do it and sanctioned it... the universe just wants to watch us kill ourselves by breeding wasps with the tool knowledge of humans, the strategic ability of ants, and to be to the size of elephants....

to be fair... id watch that on tv !


----------



## entropy (Nov 11, 2006)

I definitely believe that tampering with nature will one day come back to bite us in the rear end. Just call it a feeling.

In general I think food production methods have gone way out of control, in its attempt to keep up with growing populations, etc... Hormone injections, feeding cows cows, cloning, all that stuff is a little scary. Not that I want farmers to get the shaft, but if the general health of humans are at long-term risk, something has to be done and the government should get involved, before the healthcare system becomes even more messed up.

A stupid question: Just b.c. the FDA says something is "harmless," what's the harm in putting it on the label anyway?? What am I missing here? I would like to know what I'm eating, or what I'm feeding to my kids.


----------



## starlord (Jul 14, 2006)

I don't know why, but after a considerable amount of typin a reply for this thread, my message was wiped out when the program declared me as a guest, and not a logged in member.

The basic idea I had posited was that people will show great fear about this situation, and feel they should be advised if they are buying cloned food. That sounds good, but the fear factor will make the sale of cloned, labelled foods so weak that they will soon be dropped, just because Chicken Little is afraid that eating it will somehow harm them.

I was raised on a farm as a kid, and I can guarantee you that most of the food you eat right now is the result of science and genetic engineering, and we have the best food in the world. I have personally seen how unrational fear has prevented the irradiation of food and other products, and I have seen it in Tennessee where I saw a beefsteak that had been on a shelf for 6 months with no refrigeration, but was 100% edible and safe to eat.

Once, to demonstrate how stupid Chicken Littles can be, I circulated a petition at a rally of people protesting "Frankenfood," demanding congress do something about a chemical found in all our rivers and lakes, and being used in factories and nuclear power plants. The petition demanded that congress take immediate action about protecting the public from the horrible chemical, Dihydrogen Monoxide. People were pushing each other out of the way to get to sign this petition, while moaning about what Dihydrogen Monoxide was doing to their children, and asking the circulators where they could get some device to detect Dihdrogen Monoxide.


----------



## devotay (May 14, 2001)

I'm not going to eat a steak that's been sitting unrefridgerated for 6 months, I don't care if it was touched by the hand of God. And the point is that I would like there to be a label telling me clearly that it's been sitting there for six months (as there is - meat has to be dated), so that Starlord over there can get his ancient meat, and I can avoid it.

Your petition idea is funny, but it demonstrates only that horses asses outnumber horses, that there are more stupid people in the world than smart ones.

By the way, most of the food I eat is not the result of genetic engineering because I go out of my way to buy every ingredient I can locally from farmers I know personally - both for my family and for my restaurant.

It's just too bad that I have to go out of my way to get good healthy food, while junkfood and GMOs are at the corner gas station.


----------



## mredikop (Dec 6, 2006)

You obviously don't understand the dangers of "water". :lol:

You make a good point that paranoia can be a funny thing. However what is the harm in putting a label on it. It could later, if it is safe and all, become a selling point. "This meat from cows cloned from special Boba Fett Cows. Boba Fett cows are immune to 'Mad Cow' disease. Get your's today."


----------



## jayme (Sep 5, 2006)

This is obviously a hot topic... as there is another thread going on the same subject in the Food forum- "and I'll have the cloned ribeye". 
I wonder if the government has as much concern with this subject as we in the industry do??


----------



## entropy (Nov 11, 2006)

On behalf of all the Chicken Littles, I just want to say this: Its not as if I live in a frozen state of fear or panic, Starlord. I don't even have an agenda here, its not as if I'm about to go marching into the street protesting cloned meat. I just want a label. I just want to be educated. Information on foods that are healthy, information on not-so-healthy foods, and yes, cloned meat. That way we can all make good decisions for our personal needs. That's what makes this country so great: the freedom of choice. 

This fear you rant about will dissolve if people are informed, no? 

I respect your decision to eat whatever you want, and I hope you respect chicken little's decision as well. Peace out!


----------



## chefswanny (Jan 16, 2008)

Adressing Devotay's original question, the definition of virtual is :

*1. * Existing or resulting in essence or effect though not in actual fact, form, or name: the virtual extinction of the buffalo.
*2. * Existing in the mind, especially as a product of the imagination. Used in literary criticism of a text.
*3. * _Computer Science_ Created, simulated, or carried on by means of a computer or computer network:

"Though not in actual fact" is the most cause for my concern.
According to a poll conducted by KRC Research, 45 percent of consumers said they knew "nothing at all" about animal biotechnology, while 26 percent said they knew "a little" and 21 percent knew "some."  I don't think enough testing has been done on cloned animals especially in the long term. Unfortunately there are hidden agendas that the beef industry doesn't want the public to know. Big Beef will count on those 45 percent staying ignorant!!
I feel a responsibility as a chef to learn as much as possible about the product I am serving for public consumption, therefore, I wholeheartedly endorse labeling of cloned meat!


----------



## lentil (Sep 8, 2003)

If it's so darned safe and "virtually" indistinguishable, then in the interest of public disclosure, let's label it. I think we need to be able to choose. It's not as if the government has ever lied to us before, has it?


----------



## pete (Oct 7, 2001)

Whether I agree with cloning or not, I do feel that food should be labelled as such so that the consumer can decide if they want to purchase it or not. If food from cloned animals then sits on the shelves because no one buys it, well then, so be it. Those are the joys of capitalism. We, as consumers, ultimately decide what makes it and what doesn't. That's not to say that the masses haven't been led astray before.

As for this whole hoopla about "genetic engineering", with science we have come very far very fast and are doing some things that I question, but really folks we have been genetically engineering food since the beginning. Don't think that those big, beautiful beets you pulled out of the ground were like that thousands of years ago, of the wonderfully sweet corn you enjoy in the summer. Through science (even if they didn't know it was science) mankind has manipulated, crossbred, grafted, and hybridized just about everything we eat. So, while I don't embrace cloning or genetically modified foods, neither can I run and hide in fear of these breakthroughs.


----------



## cat man (May 7, 2007)

Personally, I don't have much of a problem with cloned food.
I believe the natives had been mixing corn seeds for a long time before we came to North America, in order to be able to harvest sooner and plant later.
Over thousands of years, I'm pretty sure various animal species have mated with other species and created new sub groups.

It's not like beef cattle are getting a whole lot of the 'father bull and young bull on the cliff looking down at all the cows' kind of action...

So what if science is speeding things up for us Hey, if you can clone the best **** beef I've ever had and reproduce it consistently, I'll see you in that line.

This whole issue reminds me of the global warming bs. The earth gets hot for periods of time, and the earth gets cold for periods of time....whether humans are around or not.
Same with genetics....whether we helps things along or not.

My thinking is the FDA did it's job here, which is to keep the food supply safe using science, not emotion. If there is zero scientific evidence that cloning food animals is unsafe, which is what the FDA is saying....it's good in my book.

Cat Man


----------



## deltadoc (Aug 15, 2004)

I don't think we have to fear Dihyrogen Monoxide as much as the more dreadful Hydrogen Hydroxide!! And it is every single bit as pervasive in our environment! Fact!

doc


----------



## brooklynchef (Nov 26, 2007)

My concern is more with the FDA. I read somewhere that the only reason Aspartame was ever approved was because Donald Rumsfeld was the CEO of the company that makes nutrasweet at the time. There is no way it would be approved today. Special interests seem to have a great deal of pull with the FDA, and that scares me more than the idea of cloned meat or genetically modified food.


----------



## goose (Feb 12, 2007)

What you are saying, then, is that you have blind faith in the Government. The Government said it is safe, therefore, it is.

I do not opperate with such blind faith. How many times have you seen the FDA approve a heart drug, obeseity medication, or, more recently, a cholesterol medication that, at best, was not performing according to the drug manufacturers' claims or, at worst, killing those that they were marketed to help? 

The FDA is a governmental agency, and as long as the government is run by polititians who take money form lobbyists jockeying for their interests, the FDA cannot be trusted with blind faith. Money is what is driving this. This is why purchasing drugs from Canada was proclaimed "dangerous" by the FDA, this is also why all the tainted products that arrive in our stores from China are allowed even though some of them ARE dangerous. Corporate Greed. 

By labeling cloned food as "cloned", many will not purchase it, causing the beef (or pork, or whatever) industry to lose money....and the government will have no part of that.


----------



## lentil (Sep 8, 2003)

Well said Goose and Brooklynchef!


----------



## rouxtheday (Jan 5, 2008)

Labeling aside, one has to be curious as to why cloning for meat production would be so actively pursued in the first place. Ostensibly it's to gain consistency in the quality of the herd, thus ensuring that every slaughter results in top-notch beef. But from a purely business-minded position, my reading suggests that the cost-benefit ratio does not even come close to working out. I can't help wondering whether it will even really hit the food supply. 

Am I missing something?


----------



## the_seraphim (Dec 25, 2006)

cloning is simply a way of allowing asexual reproduction in mammals that lack this natural skill

some creatures can do it... cockroaches i think, reproduce asexually (without a mate)

nothing wrong with it in my books... its bloody expensive to do, and you would only clone the best animals... do a full DNA profile and say "ahh... an animal with all good genetic traits... lets simply clone this one rather than take the chances on others"

of course, a long way down the line, you end up that you can only clone, because the genetic variation among the species is so small that reproduction becomes impossible.

GM i also think is ok... i mean, i understand the tech fine, and it doesnt worry me in the slightest...

just wait till they start modifying an already born/grown body/plant rather than modifying the seeds...

thats when the retro viruses can mutate and break loose


----------



## cat man (May 7, 2007)

I expected disagreement with my comments, and that's fine.

No I do not follow the government blindly, and scientific evidence sometimes turns out to be only that, evidence, not proof. However, it is more reliable than emotion.

The FDA is far from perfect, but in general, I think they contribute more to our society than other government agencies.

As I said, if FDA scientists say something is safe for human consumption, that's good enough for me.

Cat Man


----------



## lentil (Sep 8, 2003)

Cat Man, I respect your opinion, but doesn't Goose's comment below concern you? People have died or been harmed by drugs that the FDA has approved. Lawyers are making millions on lawsuits stemming from FDA approved drugs. HOw can you, with certainty, trust any gov't agency who's made such blunders in the very recent past? I question whether scientists are really makiing the decisions on scientific merit or if $$ has much to do with thier decisions.

_quoted from Goose's post[/I*]. How many times have you seen the FDA approve a heart drug, obeseity medication, or, more recently, a cholesterol medication that, at best, was not performing according to the drug manufacturers' claims or, at worst, killing those that they were marketed to help?*_


----------



## brooklynchef (Nov 26, 2007)

The FDA recently approved Thalidomide! Yeah, they really are concerned with our well being.


----------



## lentil (Sep 8, 2003)

The same Thalidomide that caused birth defects in the 50's? Good decision...


----------



## lentil (Sep 8, 2003)

I just googled Thalidomide and discovered that it's now being used to treat some cancers and skin conditions. I suppose as with any drug, there are dangers and unwanted side effects related to their use. When it was prescribed in the 50's to treat morning sickness, it caused birth defects when taken by women early in their pregnancies. Obviously, it won't be used on pregnant woman in its new reincarnation. Even drugs for prostate disorders shouldn't be handled by women.

Although I can understand the rationale for reintroducing drugs like Thalidomide to treat disorders than the one for which it was initially intended, I still don't trust the decision to give the green light to something like cloned meat when the choice is taken away from the consumer. Sure, if they believe it's safe today, put a label on it so those of us who aren't so confident can pass on by.

It's interesting how we allow the government to take away more of our choices without any protest at all.


----------



## brooklynchef (Nov 26, 2007)

right on lentil


----------

