Clone-Generated Milk, Meat May Be Approved

mrmom2

Senate Member
Mar 8, 2005
5,380
6
38
Kamloops BC
The Food and Drug Administration is expected to rule soon that milk from cloned animals and meat from their offspring are safe to eat, raising the question of whether Americans are ready to welcome one of modern biology's most controversial achievements to the dinner table.
Hundreds of cloned pigs, cows and other animals are already living on farms around the country, as companies and livestock producers experiment and await a decision from the FDA.

The agricultural industry has observed a voluntary FDA moratorium on using the products of clones, but it has recently become clear that a few offspring of cloned pigs and cows are already trickling into the food supply. Many in agriculture believe such genetic copies are the next logical step in improving the nation's livestock.

Consumer groups counter that many Americans are likely to be revolted by the idea of serving clone milk to their children or tossing meat from the progeny of clones onto the backyard grill. This "yuck factor," as it's often called, has come to light repeatedly in public opinion surveys. Asked earlier this year in a poll by the International Food Information Council whether they would willingly buy meat, milk and eggs that come from clones if the FDA declared them to be safe, 63 percent of consumers said no.

Yet mounting scientific evidence suggests there is little cause for alarm, at least on food-safety grounds. Studies have shown that meat and milk from clones can't be distinguished from that of normal animals, although work is not complete and researchers say that clones do suffer subtle genetic abnormalities.

While milk from clones might reach grocery shelves, clones themselves are not likely to be eaten, since they cost thousands of dollars apiece to produce. They'd be used as breeding stock, so the real question is whether their sexually produced offspring would be safe.

The FDA has been promising a policy for three years, but hasn't produced a final version, and some biotechnology companies involved in cloning have run out of cash while waiting. Weary livestock producers have dubbed the FDA the "Foot Dragging Administration."

The FDA declined requests for an interview. In response to written questions, Stephen F. Sundlof, chief of veterinary medicine at the agency, said the FDA "really can't provide a reliable estimate on the time frame" for releasing a policy.

But there are signs the agency is preparing to move. Lester Crawford, before he abruptly resigned Sept. 23 as FDA commissioner -- for apparently unrelated reasons -- said the agency was drafting a formal scientific paper outlining its conclusions. Speaking at a conference earlier this year, John Matheson, an FDA scientist working on the issue, said the policy was under review at higher levels of the Bush administration.

"We're spending a lot of time briefing these folks, trying to make them comfortable with the technology," Matheson said. "I think that's a microcosm of what you're going to see in the public when the decision goes out."

When the birth of Dolly the sheep, the first mammal cloned from an adult cell, was announced in 1997, American farmers and ranchers were as shocked as anyone. But by now, thousands of farm families have seen clones at agricultural fairs and grown comfortable with the idea.

The producers of prime pigs and cattle shown in contests at those fairs have been among the first to embrace cloning. Show animals represent only a small portion of the food supply, but the finest are sometimes used as breeding stock to upgrade food herds. Companies have been selling clones to some show-animal producers for years, practicing their cloning techniques for the day when they can put them to use in the far larger market for food animals.

Prairie State Semen Inc. of Champaign, Ill., is active in breeding "show pigs." In an interview at his farm, the president, Jon Fisher, explained his decision to embrace agricultural cloning.

He's a merchant of boar semen, keeping about 80 valuable animals. Rural students, usually members of 4-H clubs or the Future Farmers of America, order semen from these champion animals at $50 to $150 a vial and use it to inseminate local sows in hopes of creating a winning pig.

Fisher's business took off in 1997 after he paid $43,000 for a top Hampshire boar. The boar died suddenly in 2001, but instead of mourning, Fisher sliced off an ear and sent samples to a Wisconsin cloning company.

He got back six clones, plus another clone from a different animal. He has a batch of clones on order now from ViaGen Inc. of Austin. Clones nowadays can cost as little as $6,000 apiece, far less than it would cost to buy the finest boars. Fisher and other producers have been sending semen from clones to students who breed pigs and cattle for the show circuit. Normal practice, once the shows are over, is to sell those animals for slaughter. Fisher said he has seen pigs he knew to be the offspring of clones sold to slaughterhouses that would have processed them as food. Reporting earlier this year by the Los Angeles Times showed the same thing is happening with show cattle born of clones.

The FDA's Sundlof said, in his written answers, that the agency had heard rumors of clone progeny moving into the food supply, but was "not aware of any proof."

While the number of clones on farms is low now, Fisher predicted that as soon as the FDA opened the door, producers would embrace the technique. "Within 18 to 20 months after that, there will be hundreds of thousands of clones growing" on American farms, he said.

One recent morning, two cloned calves pranced around a field outside Austin. Their progenitors were not living animals, but rather cattle that had already been butchered and hung on a hook in a slaughterhouse. The calves were selected for cloning after receiving high grades for meat quality and yield, judgments that couldn't have been made while the originals were still alive.

Priscilla, born in April, and Elvis, born in June, were created by ViaGen. They're destined to be bred together in an effort to create prime stock. If it works, ViaGen will clone a large population of once-dead cattle, aiming to sell them or their offspring for breeding. It's just one aspect of an ambitious plan to create a commercial cloning market.

While the company has gotten much of its practice cloning show animals, it's eager to expand into the far larger markets of production agriculture. And some big food producers are interested. ViaGen has a contract with Virginia's Smithfield Foods Inc., for example, to explore how cloned pigs could be used in that company's vast pork production operations.

Unlike other small companies that have come and gone in the field of cloning, ViaGen may have the deep pockets needed to turn its commercial vision into reality. The company's principal financial backer is John G. Sperling, founder of several for-profit educational establishments and one of the wealthiest men in the Southwest, with a net worth pegged by Forbes magazine this year at $1.9 billion.

Operating from spotless, light-filled offices in an office park in Austin, ViaGen hired Irina Polejaeva, one of the world's top cloning scientists, and has been pushing the technical limits of the field. In interviews recently, company officers said they had improved the efficiency of cloning and cut the price.

Cloning involves sucking the nucleus out of an egg, injecting a new nucleus from an adult cell and implanting the resulting embryo into a surrogate mother animal. Clones appear to be nearly identical genetic copies of the adult progenitor.

Studies in the United States and Japan have shown meat from the offspring of clones to be nutritionally sound, and more research is underway. A clone is "a copy of the animals we already ate," Polejaeva said. "There's nothing different about them."

There are in fact subtle genetic abnormalities even in healthy-looking clones, said Konrad Hochedlinger, a scientist at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., citing multiple studies in mice. Published research shows risks to the health of clones at all stages of their lives. But the genetic problems aren't likely to alter the food value of clones and aren't passed on to their sexually produced offspring, Hochedlinger said.

Asked if he'd be willing to eat clones or their offspring, Hochedlinger said: "I think I would."

So far, only scattered opposition has emerged to farm cloning. Animal-welfare groups have come out against it, saying it poses unnecessary risks to farm animals. The FDA has made clear it won't require labels on clone products, which may leave meat-eaters who want to avoid them little practical way to do so.

Some consumer groups have also balked, contending that Americans just aren't ready. "When the immediate reaction is 'yuck,' boy, you better watch out putting that in the food supply," said Carol Tucker Foreman, director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America, in Washington.

Among those watching warily as the FDA announces a policy will be the huge conglomerates that buy agricultural products and turn them into groceries.

One group, the International Dairy Foods Association, has voiced skepticism, partly from worry that overseas markets will reject American products. But the biggest American food companies haven't weighed in publicly. The companies might have sufficient power in the marketplace to kill agricultural cloning, if they chose, by imposing ground rules on farmers and slaughterhouses.

The companies will take their cues from the public's reaction to cloned food, said Mark Nelson, vice president of scientific and regulatory policy at the Grocery Manufacturers of America, in Washington.

"We support the science," he said. "But our members are in the business of selling food to the public. If the public doesn't want to eat Velveeta made from cloned milk, it ain't gonna happen."
Link

They better put labels on this shit because I'm not feeding it to my family :pukeright:
 

neocon-hunter

Time Out
Sep 27, 2005
201
0
16
Cloverdale, BC
RE: Clone-Generated Milk,

I guess they want it legal here as well. But they claim it would only be the offspring that was sold as meat or milk.

Cloned meat one step closer to dinner plate

Canada is no stranger to the science of cloning. Canadian scientists have had a hand in the phenomenon for years, successfully cloning Starbuck, one of the first cloned cows.

Health Canada has been studying the viability of putting cloned products on the market for two years, but so far has given no hint as to which way it is leaning in terms of future regulations.

It's unlikely that cloned animals themselves will be sold any time soon -- they're simply too expensive to engineer -- but their offspring may end up on the market if Health Canada follows the FDA lead. Starbuck has fathered 15 offspring.

Read the rest at above link.
 

Canucklehead

Moderator
Apr 6, 2005
797
11
18
I can't believe that Canada is even remotely considering this without studying the genetic effects on other creatures that eat/drink cloned food for at LEAST a couple of generations (animal wise, not human).
Asbestos was perfectly fine at the time, it was only years down the road that the ill effects became apparent. Eeesh. Time to pull an American and shut the border to meat imports me thinks.
 

Cosmo

House Member
Jul 10, 2004
3,725
22
38
Victoria, BC
Re: RE: Clone-Generated Milk,

neocon-hunter said:
Canada is no stranger to the science of cloning. Canadian scientists have had a hand in the phenomenon for years, successfully cloning Starbuck, one of the first cloned cows.
:lol: :lol:

Eating cloned meat or milk just grosses me out. Not sure why, but I'd certainly give it a pass.
 

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
 

no1important

Time Out
Jan 9, 2003
4,125
0
36
56
Vancouver
members.shaw.ca
RE: Clone-Generated Milk,

It does sound like a strange thing to eat cloned meat or drink cloned milk.

But really, would you ever be able to tell a calf from cloned parents or non cloned parents apart in a taste test? More than likely, not. I don't really see why the meat or milk would be any diferent. It would look and taste exactly the same.

A clone is just a copy, nothing diferent and hell the can reproduce, and a calf from a cloned animal or clone dad/ normal mother, would look and taste like any other normal cow.

I would have no problem bbq'ng a calf from a clone.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
The Food and Drug Administration is expected to rule soon that Potatoes from laboratory bred plants and tubers from their offspring are safe to eat, raising the question of whether Americans are ready to welcome one of modern biology's most controversial achievements to the dinner table. Hundreds of laboratory bred potatoes, carrots and other plants are already living on farms around the country, as companies and producers experiment and await a decision from the FDA. The agricultural industry has observed a voluntary FDA moratorium on using the products of laboratory breds, but it has recently become clear that a few offspring of laboratory bred potatoes and carrots are already trickling into the food supply. Many in agriculture believe such genetic copies are the next logical step in improving the nation's stock. Consumer groups counter that many Americans are likely to be revolted by the idea of serving laboratory bred Potatoes to their children or tossing tubers from the progeny of laboratory breds onto the backyard grill. This "yuck factor," as it's often called, has come to light repeatedly in public opinion surveys. Asked earlier this year in a poll by the International Food Information Council whether they would willingly buy tubers, potatoes and carrots that come from laboratory breds if the FDA declared them to be safe, 63 percent of consumers said no. Yet mounting scientific evidence suggests there is little cause for alarm, at least on food-safety grounds. Studies have shown that tubers and Potatoes from laboratory breds can't be distinguished from that of normal plants, although work is not complete and researchers say that laboratory breds do suffer subtle genetic abnormalities. While Potatoes from laboratory breds might reach grocery shelves, laboratory breds themselves are not likely to be eaten, since they cost thousands of dollars apiece to produce. They'd be used as breeding stock, so the real question is whether their sexually produced offspring would be safe. The FDA has been promising a policy for three years, but hasn't produced a final version, and some biotechnology companies involved in cloning have run out of cash while waiting. Weary producers have dubbed the FDA the "Foot Dragging Administration." The FDA declined requests for an interview. In response to written questions, Stephen F. Sundlof, chief of veterinary medicine at the agency, said the FDA "really can't provide a reliable estimate on the time frame" for releasing a policy. But there are signs the agency is preparing to move. Lester Crawford, before he abruptly resigned Sept. 23 as FDA commissioner -- for apparently unrelated reasons -- said the agency was drafting a formal scientific paper outlining its conclusions. Speaking at a conference earlier this year, John Matheson, an FDA scientist working on the issue, said the policy was under review at higher levels of the Bush administration. "We're spending a lot of time briefing these folks, trying to make them comfortable with the technology," Matheson said. "I think that's a microcosm of what you're going to see in the public when the decision goes out." When the birth of Dolly the sheep, the first mammal laboratory bredd from an adult cell, was announced in 1997, American farmers and ranchers were as shocked as anyone. But by now, thousands of farm families have seen laboratory breds at agricultural fairs and grown comfortable with the idea. The producers of prime potatoes and carrots shown in contests at those fairs have been among the first to embrace cloning. Show plants represent only a small portion of the food supply, but the finest are sometimes used as breeding stock to upgrade food herds. Companies have been selling laboratory breds to some show-plant producers for years, practicing their cloning techniques for the day when they can put them to use in the far larger market for food plants. Prairie State Semen Inc. of Champaign, Ill., is active in breeding "show potatoes." In an interview at his farm, the president, Jon Fisher, explained his decision to embrace agricultural cloning. He's a merchant of boar semen, keeping about 80 valuable plants. Rural students, usually members of 4-H clubs or the Future Farmers of America, order semen from these champion plants at $50 to $150 a vial and use it to inseminate local sows in hopes of creating a winning pig. Fisher's business took off in 1997 after he paid $43,000 for a top Hampshire boar. The boar died suddenly in 2001, but instead of mourning, Fisher sliced off an ear and sent samples to a Wisconsin cloning company. He got back six laboratory breds, plus another laboratory bred from a different plant. He has a batch of laboratory breds on order now from ViaGen Inc. of Austin. Laboratory breds nowadays can cost as little as $6,000 apiece, far less than it would cost to buy the finest tubers. Fisher and other producers have been sending seeds from laboratory breds to students who breed potatoes and carrots for the show circuit. Normal practice, once the shows are over, is to sell those plants for slaughter. Fisher said he has seen potatoes he knew to be the offspring of laboratory breds sold to slaughterhouses that would have processed them as food. Reporting earlier this year by the Los Angeles Times showed the same thing is happening with show cattle born of laboratory breds. The FDA's Sundlof said, in his written answers, that the agency had heard rumors of laboratory bred progeny moving into the food supply, but was "not aware of any proof." While the number of laboratory breds on farms is low now, Fisher predicted that as soon as the FDA opened the door, producers would embrace the technique. "Within 18 to 20 months after that, there will be hundreds of thousands of laboratory breds growing" on American farms, he said. One recent morning, two laboratory bredd carrots pranced around a field outside Austin. Their progenitors were not living plants, but rather cattle that had already been butchered and hung on a hook in a slaughterhouse. The carrots were selected for cloning after receiving high grades for tubers quality and yield, judgments that couldn't have been made while the originals were still alive. Priscilla, born in April, and Elvis, born in June, were created by ViaGen. They're destined to be bred together in an effort to create prime stock. If it works, ViaGen will laboratory bred a large population of once-dead cattle, aiming to sell them or their offspring for breeding. It's just one aspect of an ambitious plan to create a commercial cloning market. While the company has gotten much of its practice cloning show plants, it's eager to expand into the far larger markets of production agriculture. And some big food producers are interested. ViaGen has a contract with Virginia's Smithfield Foods Inc., for example, to explore how laboratory bredd potatoes could be used in that company's vast pork production operations. Unlike other small companies that have come and gone in the field of cloning, ViaGen may have the deep pockets needed to turn its commercial vision into reality. The company's principal financial backer is John G. Sperling, founder of several for-profit educational establishments and one of the wealthiest men in the Southwest, with a net worth pegged by Forbes magazine this year at $1.9 billion. Operating from spotless, light-filled offices in an office park in Austin, ViaGen hired Irina Polejaeva, one of the world's top cloning scientists, and has been pushing the technical limits of the field. In interviews recently, company officers said they had improved the efficiency of cloning and cut the price. Cloning involves sucking the nucleus out of an egg, injecting a new nucleus from an adult cell and implanting the resulting embryo into a surrogate mother plant. Laboratory breds appear to be nearly identical genetic copies of the adult progenitor. Studies in the United States and Japan have shown tubers from the offspring of laboratory breds to be nutritionally sound, and more research is underway. A laboratory bred is "a copy of the plants we already ate," Polejaeva said. "There's nothing different about them." There are in fact subtle genetic abnormalities even in healthy-looking laboratory breds, said Konrad Hochedlinger, a scientist at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., citing multiple studies in mice. Published research shows risks to the health of laboratory breds at all stages of their lives. But the genetic problems aren't likely to alter the food value of laboratory breds and aren't passed on to their sexually produced offspring, Hochedlinger said. Asked if he'd be willing to eat laboratory breds or their offspring, Hochedlinger said: "I think I would." So far, only scattered opposition has emerged to farm cloning. Plant-welfare groups have come out against it, saying it poses unnecessary risks to farm plants. The FDA has made clear it won't require labels on laboratory bred products, which may leave tubers-eaters who want to avoid them little practical way to do so. Some consumer groups have also balked, contending that Americans just aren't ready. "When the immediate reaction is 'yuck,' boy, you better watch out putting that in the food supply," said Carol Tucker Foreman, director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America, in Washington. Among those watching warily as the FDA announces a policy will be the huge conglomerates that buy agricultural products and turn them into groceries. One group, the International Dairy Foods Association, has voiced skepticism, partly from worry that overseas markets will reject American products. But the biggest American food companies haven't weighed in publicly. The companies might have sufficient power in the marketplace to kill agricultural cloning, if they chose, by imposing ground rules on farmers and slaughterhouses. The companies will take their cues from the public's reaction to laboratory bredd food, said Mark Nelson, vice president of scientific and regulatory policy at the Grocery Manufacturers of America, in Washington. "We support the science," he said. "But our members are in the business of selling food to the public. If the public doesn't want to eat Velveeta made from laboratory bredd Potatoes, it ain't gonna happen." Link They better put labels on this shit because I'm not feeding it to my family
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Clone-Generated Milk,

What the hell kind of benefit is this supposed to give? I realise that they've been cloning the best Holstein bull ever for a long time now, but at some point you have to breed to other bulls because if you don't introduce new, unrelated blood lines you get problems.

It can't be to save money. There is no way that cloning is cheaper than the way we currently do things. It must be to make money. Not for the farmers though...they aren't exactly clamouring for the extra costs this would represent to them.

I'm not terribly worried about the health aspects here. It's environmentally stupid, and completely ridiculous from a longterm breeding point of view. Anything that reduces genetic diversity is.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
Rev, are you discussing cloning, or breeding?

Many cows are now the product of artificial insemination / embryo implants. The cow is impregnated by artificial insemination, and the fertilized eggs are then removed from one cow and either frozen for future, or implanted in separate cows. But this is not cloning.

Every dairy farmer wants to maximize his income, which means he wants high volume producers of high protein milk. The frozen cow embryo business is huge, and there wouldn't be a dairy farmer in the country who doesn't know all about it.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
Many cows are now the product of artificial insemination / embryo implants. The cow is impregnated by artificial insemination, and the fertilized eggs are then removed from one cow and either frozen for future, or implanted in separate cows. But this is not cloning.

I never said it was, Ten Penny. Artificial insemination (my grandpa used to be the tech for his area, my uncle is a distributor as well as a tech) and embryo implantation actually allow a farmer to expand the genetic diversity of his herd, and makes the transfer of genetic material to foreign herds practical. AI, with or without embryo implantation, has been the most common way for breeding dairy and purebred beef cattle for decades.

Right now if you look at the bull books for a specific breed, there are hundreds of sires available.

Cloning is quite a different matter. Let's face it, cloning is not going to occur on farms. Bulls with superior bloodlines will be cloned and their semen sold to be used in AI. You end up with the same sire over generations, without a mixing of the genes. Eventually you end up with maybe a dozen bulls for a breed world-wide. That is not enough diversity, so you end up with inbreeding problems on a much larger scale than we see them today.

I'm not sure if you heard about it or not, but the BSE crisis has caused Alaskan dairy farmers to complain that they couldn't import Canadian semen or Canadian cows and it was leading to breeding problems because of a lack of diversity. Imagine that to be a worldwide problem.