With the FDA's current track record, I a devout meat eater since birth am severely concerned. I am starting to acclimate myself to eating tofu...
2007-01-16 16:00:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bedazzled101 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
I agree that there should be a labeling system but the large agribusiness companies don't want that because they know it will hurt there sales. I don't know what the negative effects of cloned food could be, if any but I really have a problem with people messing with our food supply. I think more dangerous than cloning is genetically modified foods, some of witch are already on the shelves and also are unlabeled. These foods have had there genetic structure changed to give them characteristics that do not occur naturally. The most important thing to remember is that the FDA does not give a damn about your health or safety and they are a pack of assholes
2016-05-23 23:01:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
While I know many people are opposed to cloning on ethical grounds, I see no real health problems. Clones are still animals like normal, just that they were conceived in an different way and have the same DNA of the animal they were cloned from, this doesn't create any inherent health problems.
All the bananas we eat are clones, as cultivated banana trees are sterile and new trees can only be made from cutting of old trees. This is very different obviously, but I see no reason why a cloned animal would be any worse than this. Assuming there's nothing wrong with the original there shouldn't be anything wrong with the clone.
Are you more distressed by cloning animals for food than by rearing animals for food normally?
2007-01-17 05:49:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by AndyB 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Like many others in this discussion I don't see the difference between what would happen to cloned animals and naturally conceived ones. However, and maybe for some this is a blessing, I don't think that it would be very cost effective - labs and scientists are expensive and factory farmers won't even spring for a cheap anesthesia for the animals that they are killing let alone everything that it would take to produce cloned meat. Factor in the public animosity toward the practice ("the your playing god argument) and I definitely don't see the adoption of this method anytime in the near future (or at least until they are produced cheaper than what it is now).
2007-01-16 17:40:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I have always found the Idea of cloning a bit sinister but to produce factory cloned animals purely for consumption is a bit sick. Some Meat eaters I know think that it is scraping the bottom of the barrel!! Also I for one am glad I no longer eat meat . Will they even label it so that the omnivores can make the choice to buy that or ordinary meat? Will it be cheaper thus forcing low income omnivore families to buy it in order to save some pennies ??? Will they just announce that ' well, actually Morrison's/Safeway/ASDA (walmart) have had it on their shelves among the regular meat in it's unlabeled state'!!
I think that omnivores (if they are going to eat meat and are happy doing so) should have that freedom to make the choice!
Vegan and happy!!!
2007-01-17 00:14:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Andielep 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think it's great news for vegetarians as this bad decision (along with the USDA's lax regulation on BSE) should help increase the number of folks that go veggie! Most people are woefully ignorant about the genetic damage caused by the cloning process and that cloned animals are (by default) randomly genetically modified organisms. As more people understand this potential risk they'll naturally shun these products and (at least some) will turn to veggie friendly products.
If you're a veggie don't forget to remind people that the USDA has made it illegal to voluntarily test animals for mad cow disease! Also point people to today's latest decision by the USDA (link below).
I really love it every time they decrease meaties trust of the animal "food" supply!
2007-01-16 16:58:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
the meat form the clone is just as the same as a regular born. they pump just as many hormones and vitamines into the clone as any other animal. i eat meat, but i think growing animals and then killing them for food is just wrong. they feel pain just as much as we do. what would you say if cows made human babies and grew them up just right just so they can eat them. there are plenty of ways to get your daily needs of nutritions, why do it this way?
2007-01-16 16:28:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Havanator 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
This baffles me as much as meat
eaters who find the idea of
consuming a domesticated animal
abhorrent while chomping on dead
chicken parts.
They already use forced molting
and artificial insemination in order
to get more eggs and dairy than
what nature would allot.
So why is it that the public cares
whether its meat is cloned.
All of it is unnatural.
I don't understand the logic.
2007-01-18 11:52:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by Standing Stone 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Thats like the same thing. It is pretty much still animal cruelty because your still killing it. Even though it is a clone it is still a living thing.
2007-01-18 21:52:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by Huang Yi-Chao 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
that....is seriously f--ked up. that sounds just as gross, if not more so, than as all the hormones and drugs they pump into the animals already! only now, they're making animals from out of test tubes to pump full of more drugs, that more of the non-veg population can *eat*. mmm that sounds yummy....not!
noOo thank you!
hey, maybe when the entire American population is wiped out from fat, artery-clogged, heart-diseased, unnecessarily-hormoned/drugged, and tortured foods, *maybe* we'll get the hint. if there's anyone even alive to understand it at that point... ?
2007-01-16 15:50:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by j-man 3
·
6⤊
0⤋