View Full Version : cloned meat/milk? or GM crops, show your opinion
annthracks
02-Aug-10, 13:34
Just seen on BBC news - could be sensationalism - milk from cloned cows has been introduced into the human food chain.
I for one would much rather drink milk from cloned cows or eat cloned meat than eat genetically modified crops, the effects of which, on the human body, we have no idea.
I for one would much rather drink milk from cloned cows or eat cloned meat than eat genetically modified crops, the effects of which, on the human body, we have no idea.
Id be worried about this inducing cancer. :roll:
annthracks
02-Aug-10, 18:06
Id be worried about this inducing cancer. :roll:
Fair enough, but in what way do you think milk from a cloned animal might induce cancer? If an animal is an exact copy of it's donor then you wouldn't drink any milk, would you? or eat any meat... I'm guessing you're a vegan LOL
onecalledk
02-Aug-10, 18:07
Just seen on BBC news - could be sensationalism - milk from cloned cows has been introduced into the human food chain.
I for one would much rather drink milk from cloned cows or eat cloned meat than eat genetically modified crops, the effects of which, on the human body, we have no idea.
can you explain the difference to me please , cos to me a cloned animal is NOT NATURAL and is therefore genetically modified .....
I would prefer to eat NEITHER as both can interfere with the human body... but a GM crop well at least you have some idea of what they have altered .....
Unless you can trace what you are eating back to source you have no idea what you are eating or drinking ...... labels lie ...
K
annthracks
02-Aug-10, 18:26
can you explain the difference to me please , cos to me a cloned animal is NOT NATURAL and is therefore genetically modified .....
no, a cloned animal has not been genetically modified, that's where peoples ignorance shows. Ignorance being a lack of knowledge of something. I am ignorant about a lot of things, but if I want to find out about something I can ask or search for info, rather than assume someone is calling me stupid when they say ignorant - that's just being stupid:)
To quote on a search for "cloning basics" which I've just done!
What exactly is cloning?
Cloning is the creation of an organism that is an exact genetic copy of another. This means that every single bit of DNA is the same between the two!
You might not believe it, but there are human clones among us right now. They weren't made in a lab, though: they're identical twins, created naturally. Below, we'll see how natural identical twins relate to modern cloning technologies.
I would prefer to eat NEITHER as both can interfere with the human body... but a GM crop well at least you have some idea of what they have altered .....
cloning cannot interfere with the body any more than the original animal!
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/tech/cloning/whatiscloning/
HTH
I'm not a believer that GM food or cloned food has any inherent toxic effects unless obvious they've been purposefully been engineered that way of course. However, I am opposed to them fundamentally on the basis that we should be producing our food naturally and using less pesticides and herbicides. I'm a great believer that if we provide more food to eat and waste then we will increase the population and put more strains on the natural world which GM is all about. We need to eat less and more healthily by which I mean less meat and making the most with what nature provided us in the first place. That way we won't need GM or anything like it.
onecalledk
02-Aug-10, 18:37
come back and post on the org in abot 10 yrs time after eating cloned meat for that long and give me your view on modified food then ....
I am not being ignorant of the facts, I am well aware of the facts. Animals ARE NOT MEANT TO BE CLONED. Twins ok, thats nature, unless of course they were created in a test tube ...
You asked for a point of view then dismissed said point of view.
If you want to believe all the nonsense that is put out about how modifying, cloning etc does no harm then so be it but dont then tell people who happen to disagree with you that they are ill informed......
K
annthracks
02-Aug-10, 18:55
can you explain the difference to me please
K
Don't ask someone to explain the difference to you when you obviously have no idea of the difference between cloning and genetically modifying, and then spit your dummy out when I explain the difference!
annthracks
02-Aug-10, 18:57
You asked for a point of view then dismissed said point of view.
K
I did not "dismiss" your point of view, you asked me to explain the difference
If your worried about meat, don't eat it, you don't need to :eek:
can you explain the difference to me please , cos to me a cloned animal is NOT NATURAL and is therefore genetically modified .....
K
First bit is right: the animal does not have a natural origin. The second bit is technically wrong: the genetic code is not altered in any way. Theoretically the animal is genetically an identical copy of it's single genetic parent.
PS: sorry, I should have read the thread through before answering...... still haven't learnt to do that! Drat!
redeyedtreefrog
02-Aug-10, 21:39
We've been doing genetic modification in plants and animals for hundreds of years in selective breeding. Domestic dogs have been genetically altered to have softer fur or to be smaller, and cows to produce more meat or milk.
Is it really right to put your hippy "natural" nonsense above giving people in drought-stricken countries genetically modified seeds that can grow in drier climates?
I do think if it helps to end world hunger than it cannot be a bad thing. If you are starving and watching your children starve you will be glad of any food and thankful to god for the life it gives you.
Fair enough, but in what way do you think milk from a cloned animal might induce cancer? If an animal is an exact copy of it's donor then you wouldn't drink any milk, would you? or eat any meat... I'm guessing you're a vegan LOL
no not az vegan. just dont think poeplpe should play at being god when our level of understanfdinmg is so limited
dolly the sheep had alot of probs dont forget
no not az vegan. just dont think poeplpe should play at being god when our level of understanfdinmg is so limited
dolly the sheep had alot of probs dont forget
Dolly developed arthiritis prematurely. This is thought to be because she was made from the cell of a sheep that was already of a cetain age, therefore her genetic material was already aged. She did have a cancer that was not imputable to the cloning, but to a virus that was present in the flock at the university where she was cloned. For meat, only animals deamed healthy at ante-mortem and post mortem inspection is passed fit for consumption. The controls are stringent and pretty efficient. There would be no interest in developing milk animals that would age prematurely.
While agreeing that playing at God is a bad idea, we have been doing it since we first planted a seed or tamed a wolf pup.
GM modified food scare me because they genetically modified not only to produce more, but to carry certain genes which will perpetute the dependancy of the farmer on the seed company, such as F1 sterility. dolly was a genetic photocopy of a sheep that went on to live a normal fertile life, shortened by the fact that her genetic makeup was already old- a sheep "born" old.
I would prefer to eat NEITHER as both can interfere with the human body... but a GM crop well at least you have some idea of what they have altered .....
Very wise.
I dont any meatat all.
Yet more misery and toture in store for the animals at the hands of greedy un:~( caring humans.
The link below is worth a read.
http://www.manataka.org/page1714.html
onecalledk
03-Aug-10, 11:30
We've been doing genetic modification in plants and animals for hundreds of years in selective breeding. Domestic dogs have been genetically altered to have softer fur or to be smaller, and cows to produce more meat or milk.
Is it really right to put your hippy "natural" nonsense above giving people in drought-stricken countries genetically modified seeds that can grow in drier climates?
just because man has been interfering with nature for years doesnt make it right. If we stopped consuming and THROWING away as much food as we do as a population then there would be no food shortage, everyone in the world would have enough. Its not that there is not enough food in the world that food is being modified, its to do with PROFIT from food.
The average person in the street wants to be CHEAP food and that is where it all falls down. To get CHEAP food then the manufacturers of said food need to make the ingredients as cheap as possible for maximum profit.
Most people dont care where their food comes from, nor the affects of it on their bodies, they eat what they are programmed by adverts and the media to eat. Hence we generations of children hooked on high sugar , low nutrition cereals in brightly coloured boxes. Hmmm we also have an epidemic of ADHD so the medical profession would have you believe, could it be that if we stopped pouring sugar and additives etc into our kids they might behaviour less wildly ??? Your health is affected by your diet, poor diet, poor health. This country as a whole eats empty food, just like the USA does.
So if we all stopped listening to the media machine saying that we NEEDED all this GM food and cloned animals and decided to make our own decisions about what goes into our bodies we would be healthier.
The companies that produce food produce it for PROFIT , nothing else. The fact they sell you stuff that is bad for the human body means nothing to them.
You may term it "hippy" nonsense if you wish. I just wouldnt trust a company out to make profit to tell me the truth of the product they are selling ........
K
The Angel Of Death
03-Aug-10, 11:56
Who cares its just going to be another thing we cant eat for it causing cancer or some other incurable disease
Its like beef that causes cancer so does bacon and microwave'd food in fact I am willing to be that just about everything will cause cancer at some point once the boffins have a look further into it
Any bets on how long it will take for air or water to cause cancer ?
nightspirit
03-Aug-10, 16:19
Interesting split on the poll... the ppl are divided on this one.
redeyedtreefrog
03-Aug-10, 19:23
...I just wouldnt trust a company out to make profit to tell me the truth of the product they are selling ........
K
That's why we have things like the Food Standards Agency to make sure that food is safe and doesn't pose a health risk. GM crops have been on the go for a decade and there are NO recorded incidences of anyone dying or becoming ill because of them. There was a good article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/02/fear-gm-milk-science-fiction) on the Guardian today about GM.
Who cares its just going to be another thing we cant eat for it causing cancer or some other incurable disease
Its like beef that causes cancer so does bacon and microwave'd food in fact I am willing to be that just about everything will cause cancer at some point once the boffins have a look further into it
Any bets on how long it will take for air or water to cause cancer ?
Not much causes cancer according to science, but approximately half of everything that exists does according to the Daily Mail. The other half cures it.
onecalledk
03-Aug-10, 21:27
[quote=redeyedtreefrog;743873]That's why we have things like the Food Standards Agency to make sure that food is safe and doesn't pose a health risk. GM crops have been on the go for a decade and there are NO recorded incidences of anyone dying or becoming ill because of them. There was a good article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/02/fear-gm-milk-science-fiction) on the Guardian today about GM.
and you believe all the information that the food standards agency tell you? You would assume that they are there to make food safe but by who's standards......
Again I wouldnt totally believe what they tell you about food, most people dont actually read any of the material that they produce about what is acceptable in each food category, etc etc cos its written in technical jargon. If you did read it then perhaps you would realise that "safe" doesnt mean not harmful. Safe until someone suffers something then its reviewed.
Does anybody ever check what goes into the food they eat or does everyone believe the agencies that are the mouthpieces of the companies selling food?
Nutrasweet springs to mind in all this, added to millions of products and deemed safe. But high intake of this is linked to cancer. So in the small doses that you have in the products it looks fine, but what if someone eats LOTS of low fat yoghurt containing nutrasweet, and then washes it down with lots of diet coke which also contains nutrasweet.
Phenylaniline (sp?) , contained in lots of soft drinks, extremely harmful to pregnant women in large doses. Who decides what is the large dose ? the food standards agency will set a limit to how much a bottle of juice contains, pregnant woman has craving for soft drink ........etc etc ......
Anyone get where I am going with this ?
K
[quote=redeyedtreefrog;743873]That's why we have things like the Food Standards Agency to make sure that food is safe and doesn't pose a health risk. GM crops have been on the go for a decade and there are NO recorded incidences of anyone dying or becoming ill because of them. There was a good article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/02/fear-gm-milk-science-fiction) on the Guardian today about GM.
and you believe all the information that the food standards agency tell you? You would assume that they are there to make food safe but by who's standards......
Again I wouldnt totally believe what they tell you about food, most people dont actually read any of the material that they produce about what is acceptable in each food category, etc etc cos its written in technical jargon. If you did read it then perhaps you would realise that "safe" doesnt mean not harmful. Safe until someone suffers something then its reviewed.
Does anybody ever check what goes into the food they eat or does everyone believe the agencies that are the mouthpieces of the companies selling food?
Nutrasweet springs to mind in all this, added to millions of products and deemed safe. But high intake of this is linked to cancer. So in the small doses that you have in the products it looks fine, but what if someone eats LOTS of low fat yoghurt containing nutrasweet, and then washes it down with lots of diet coke which also contains nutrasweet.
Phenylaniline (sp?) , contained in lots of soft drinks, extremely harmful to pregnant women in large doses. Who decides what is the large dose ? the food standards agency will set a limit to how much a bottle of juice contains, pregnant woman has craving for soft drink ........etc etc ......
Anyone get where I am going with this ?
K
i think so.
aspartame (nutrasweet?) and mono sodium gluatamate are very bad for us. the doctor told me not to take those trhings years ago
if the food standards dpet are anything like the FDA in america then they are not to be trusted i think
redeyedtreefrog
04-Aug-10, 00:21
and you believe all the information that the food standards agency tell you? You would assume that they are there to make food safe but by who's standards......
Again I wouldnt totally believe what they tell you about food, most people dont actually read any of the material that they produce about what is acceptable in each food category, etc etc cos its written in technical jargon. If you did read it then perhaps you would realise that "safe" doesnt mean not harmful. Safe until someone suffers something then its reviewed.
Does anybody ever check what goes into the food they eat or does everyone believe the agencies that are the mouthpieces of the companies selling food?
Nutrasweet springs to mind in all this, added to millions of products and deemed safe. But high intake of this is linked to cancer. So in the small doses that you have in the products it looks fine, but what if someone eats LOTS of low fat yoghurt containing nutrasweet, and then washes it down with lots of diet coke which also contains nutrasweet.
Phenylaniline (sp?) , contained in lots of soft drinks, extremely harmful to pregnant women in large doses. Who decides what is the large dose ? the food standards agency will set a limit to how much a bottle of juice contains, pregnant woman has craving for soft drink ........etc etc ......
Anyone get where I am going with this ?
K
Phenylalanine is needed in the diet and is only dangerous to individuals with phenylketonuria (PKU). Consuming sixty cans of diet soda at once would not raise blood phenylalanine levels above harmful. Aspartame (Branded as NutraSweet) has been approved for consumption in 90 countries and is one of the most thoroughly tested additives out there. The WHO set a recommended limit of 40mg/kg of body weight for aspartame (works out as 2,808mg for a British female, 3,220 for male). 500ml of Diet Coke contains 240mg, meaning you'd need to drink about six litres of Diet Coke to be on the threshold.
But all thats a bit off-topic.
Duncansby
05-Aug-10, 16:29
Personally I'm far more concerned about the impact of GM crops on wildlife and biodiversity than the effects of eating GM or cloned food stuffs. For instance, GM corn crops have had disasterous implications on the monarch butterfly population in the states as the pesticide producing genes from the crop kill off the caterpillar larvae. And of course GM crops are a lot harder to control as the pollen from GM produced crops could fertilise non GM crops.
onecalledk
05-Aug-10, 17:01
Seems a cloned cow has now been eaten! shows also how the food standards agency are not all they are cracked up to be. You are meant to be able to trace steak on the plate back to the cow that the steak came from but it appears the FSA doesnt know "exactly" how many cloned embryos are in the UK let alone where said embryos are .....
how convenient, its just the cloned ones they cant find, the rest they can????
For those that want an end to cloning of animals please sign at the link
http://action.ciwf.org.uk/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.client.id=119&ea.campaign.id=7401
K
The Angel Of Death
05-Aug-10, 17:33
You know I wouldn't mind tasting a cloned burger just if nothing else to see what all the fuss is about
I had a couple of Beef burgers the other day, they both tasted exactly the same, could they have been cloned???:eek:
onecalledk
05-Aug-10, 18:29
For those who think that those in charge are playing fair with our food then this might help ......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSpkLk0vYmk
There is an argument/theory which says that if the Western World did not eat meat, then the grain (which more often than not is imported from the Third World) and could eradicate starvation throughout the world.
(Diet for a Small Planet by Frances Lappe)
Another report states that 800 million people could be fed by the amount of grain currently given to livestock in the US alone. Report here (http://societyandenvirongroup.umwblogs.org/)
onecalledk
07-Aug-10, 00:08
if the guy in the video is correct there wont be grain for much longer as it will be modified so much it wont resemble what it started out as !
redeyedtreefrog
07-Aug-10, 01:12
if the guy in the video is correct there wont be grain for much longer as it will be modified so much it wont resemble what it started out as !
But then we'd have a better version of grain.
For those who think that those in charge are playing fair with our food then this might help ......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSpkLk0vYmk
Alex Jones is such a sweetie isn't he? ;)
I can imagine cuddling up to him and pinching his spare tyre before issuing him with some well needed dietary advice. :lol:
Alex Jones is such a sweetie isn't he? ;)
I can imagine cuddling up to him and pinching his spare tyre before issuing him with some well needed dietary advice. :lol:
Dear Orger friends,
I thought you should know that onecalledk gave me bad rep for the post above.
perhaps you should listen to the words out of his mouth and not what he looks like ....
Today on Missing the Point, I shall be keeping up with the Joneses. :)
For those who think that those in charge are playing fair with our food then this might help ......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSpkLk0vYmk
thanks K. a very good video
aspartame = fecal mater from the ecoli bacteria!!
usa and england are the main culprist
it might be a metabolic by product of certain bacteria ( which by the way I can find no reference to in any serious scientific papers, pegasus, but fecal matter from bacteria? That must be one heck of a bacterium! Surely you are not considering this you tube video anything more than propaganda? If the FSA is biased, then this "organisation" that made this video are exponentially so. They are probably affiliated with the group that claims that papiloma virus give 90% of those who catch it cervical cancer ( read that carefully, it is one example of distortion of statistics to meet your own agenda- something that this whole video is excellent at!).
thanks K. a very good video
aspartame = fecal mater from the ecoli bacteria!!
usa and england are the main culprist
Thanks Peg. You knew exactly what I was getting at but I knew you'd know. Thanks sweetie. ;)
but how does it do any harm?
Thanks Peg. You knew exactly what I was getting at but I knew you'd know. Thanks sweetie. ;)
i knew cos i watched the video that K had posted. easy realy
Peg x
orkneycadian
07-Aug-10, 22:29
.....cos to me a cloned animal is NOT NATURAL and is therefore genetically modified
Neither is cooking natural - We're the only species to do it, and didn't do it before somebody discovered matches. So presumably cooked food is also genetically modified?
onecalledk
07-Aug-10, 23:09
Dear Orger friends,
I thought you should know that onecalledk gave me bad rep for the post above.
Today on Missing the Point, I shall be keeping up with the Joneses. :)
I thought that repping was for giving your thoughts on peoples posts, I didnt realise it was then posted for all to read. I found your post sarcastic as I find most of your postings to people sarcastic and repped accordingly.
I can see how some people NEVER post on this site as there are a chosen few who seem to like batting people down.
I dont really care one bit if everyone who disagrees with me eats cloned beef til they explode, this is a discussion (or perhaps not ) and that was my point of view. I am sure there are lots of people who have a point of view who dont then post that point of view due to the behaviour above.
Perhaps some people who post on the org should grow up a little and realise in the grown up adult world EVERYONE is entitled to their opinion whether it is the same as theirs or not.
There will never be just one opinion when it comes to food, health etc ...... I realise that I was just partaking in a debate, however now its gone down to "this person did this" its all a bit childish ...
K
This is quoted for John Little:
Perhaps some people who post on the org should grow up a little and realise in the grown up adult world EVERYONE is entitled to their opinion whether it is the same as theirs or not.
See what I mean John?
In this case the irony is palpable.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.