In your opinion. And if that's your opinion, that's fine. But it's not my opinion, nor is it many other people's opinion.. which brings us to the crux of the matter. LABELING. The FDA is not requiring labeling.. so they have taken away our choice as to whether we want to risk exposing our bodies to eating cloned animals or not. I do not. I want disclosure.

I think it's too early to tell whether the FDA will ever require labeling. This issue clearly is a new one and initial article says the decision on labeling is "pending". So I'd wait and hear the decision before getting my panties all in a bunch over something that hasn't even happened yet. Even if the FDA decides against labeling, the industry can also be self regulating in that sense by choosing to label items as "clone-free". It wouldn't be the same thing, but if your reaction is any barometer of what the general U.S. population will have, I imagine most companies will be clamoring to be "clone-free". Just my opinion though.

Again, you are mistaken on both counts. The safety has been questioned by numerous agencies, scientists and doctors.

Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. Chairman of the international Cancer Prevention Coalition maintains that the link between rBGH and cancer is "indisputable." He has written a whole book on it, as well as presenting evidence of "the corporate wrecklessness of Monsanto" (who, by the way, is behind this current cloning push) and "the complicity of the FDA."

In this news release, he talks of the difference between natural milk and Genetically engineered (GE) through rBGH:

"GE milk is entirely different from natural milk: nutritionally; biochemically; pharmacologically; and immunologicaly. It is also contaminated with: pus and antibiotics used to treat mastitis; high levels of the GE hormone; and high levels of the naturally occurring growth factor IGF-1. Elevated levels of IGF-1 in GE milk have been strongly associated with high risks of colon, breast and prostate cancers, besides promoting their invasiveness."

http://www.preventcancer.com/publica...ilkRelease.htm

Regarding safety to cows... Monsanto has been forced to label Posilac (Posilac is the Monsanto brand name for the rBGH) as follows:

Mastitis.
Cows injected with POSILAC are at an increased risk for clinical mastitis
(visibly abnormal milk). The number of cows affected with clinical
mastitis and the number of cases per cow may increase.

In addition, the risk of subclinical mastitis (milk not visibly abnormal)
is increased. In some herds, use of POSILAC has been associated with
increases in somatic cell counts. Mastitis management practices should be
thoroughly evaluated prior to initiating use of POSILAC.

General Health.
Use of POSILAC is associated with increased frequency of use of medication
in cows for mastitis and other health problems.

Cows injected with POSILAC may experience periods of increased body
temperature unrelated to illness. To minimize this effect, take
appropriate measures during periods of high environmental temperature to
reduce heat stress. Care should be taken to differentiate increased body
temperature due to use of POSILAC from an increased body temperature that may occur due to illness.

Use of POSILAC may result in an increase in digestive disorders such as
indigestion, bloat, and diarrhea.

There may be an increase in the number of cows experiencing periods of
"off-feed" (reduced feed intake) during use of POSILAC.

Studies indicated that cows injected with POSILAC had increased numbers of enlarged hocks and lesions (e.g. lacerations, enlargements, calluses) of
the knee (carpal region), and second lactation or older cows had more
disorders of the foot region. However, results of these studies did not
indicate that use of POSILAC increased lameness.

Injection Site Reactions.
A mild transient swelling of 3-5 cm (1-2 inches) in diameter may occur at
the injection site beginning about 3 days after injection and may persist
up to 6 weeks following injection.

Some cows may experience swellings up to 10 cm (4 inches) in diameter that remain permanent but are not associated with animal health problems.

However, if permanent blemishes are objectionlble to the user,
administration of the product to the particular animal should be
discontinued. Use of POSILAC in cows in which injection site swellings
repeatedly open and drain should be discontinued.

Additional Veterinary Information:
Care should be taken to differentiate increased body temperature due to
use of POSILAC from an increased body temperature that may occur due to
illness.

Use of POSILAC has been associated with reductions in hemoglobin and
hematocrit values during treatment.

Additional Information:
Milk production response during each 14-day injection period is cyclic and
will be greatest during the middle of each period.

No milk discard or preslaughter withdrawal period is required.
-------
Going back to Dr. Epstein-- he says:

"By 1989, analysis of available industry information showed clear evidence of adverse veterinary effects, especially reproductive and a high incidence of mastitis. Additionally, Monsanto files, leaked to me from the FDA in October 1989, showed clear evidence of other serious pathology in cows injected with the GE hormone. Review of these documents by Cong. John Conyers, Chairman of the House Committee on Government Operations, led to the serious accusation that "Monsanto and FDA have chosen to suppress and manipulate animal health test data," besides data on contamination of GE milk with high levels of the GE hormone."

http://www.preventcancer.com/press/r...s/nov18_99.htm

So don't eat cows. Win/win!

This thread is making me crave steak and a big glass of milk. Am I getting the wrong message?

I have cloned cells, mice and rats.

What's the difference between one cell and another? One mouse vs. another? One rat vs. another? I cannot tell.

What they are going to do is make the clone with "enhancements"--maybe add genes or not, then breed them to normal "God animals" building up the core.

We are even lucky we can talk about this kind of food source. A lot of people in the world and the homeless in our cities starve, daily because of a lack of food...

I don't know why they want to introduce this kind of thing into the foodsource, but the scientists, vets, physicians, big pharmas, corporate sectors have been studying the efficacy for over 10 years.

The paperwork is out there in veterinary journals and possibly in Science and Nature. So, hey, if we call ourselves intelligent, then we can do our own research and choose if we want to eat it or not...

And I wouldn't put too much past ANY large grocery chain and the safety of one's food. If true, we would not have had a huge Spinach E. coli problem...

The other thing is, to maintain the health of a cow is extremely costly. If that process can be sped up, then would you try it? And the main drug that gets injected into cows are antibiotic regimens with analgesics...

So there are several reasons why "cloning" is more cost effective of some kinds of production for foods:

Let's take your example of a cow. Calves take too long to wean. Unless you want veal, you MUST leave the calf with the mother.

As I understand it, it takes ~200+ days to have a calf or 10-11 months depend on size. Some strains of bovine do not breed as sucessfully as mixed breed.

Most mixed breed do not produce enough milk or quality of meat--i.e. too tough, etc.

Breeding takes too long. Sometime the stud doesn't impregnate the females. Sometimes he doesn't know where to put it. So, do you want to wait for production? Knowing the U.S. population's desire for a good steak or tenderloin?

Well, with molecular genetics the scientists, vets, physicians, big pharma, corporations, just move evolution a little faster than normal time...

Um, so you know, clones are born just like normal calves and must grow up, get weaned, etc. They don't spring fully grown from a petri dish.

Considering that AKA_Monet has a PhD in the sciences (biochemistry?) I SERIOUSLY doubt that she needs you to explain to her that clones "don't spring fully grown from a petri dish".

I'm fully convinced that 90% of the active posters on GC do it solely to see their words on the screen. I really really hope you people don't actually believe in the crap that you post. If you do, then I'm genuinely concerned.....

Interesting to finally find out that Asprin is not a pain killer but a blood thinner only! WOW!

They why do people take asprin for pain and have for years before the new biggies came out.

What is amazing about the FDA is thier willingness to allow drugs and other products on the market. The FDA is one of the most inept Agencies in Our Govt.

What I love are Ads that tout certain medecations for certain things and then list what the hell they can do to the human body if you take them.:confused:

During the American Revolution troops were given rum to settle their nerves instead of drugs.

Interesting isn't it?

Which would you rather have?

Actually, Drole is correct. The cloned animals don't spring fully grown from a petri dish.

The way it is done is to transplant a nuceus from a cell from one animal into the enucleated egg of another. The nucleus-egg combination is then fused together with electricity. The electricity also stimulates cell division. The divided cell is placed into the uterus of the female. The animal grows in the uterus and is born as a baby animal.

Unfortunately, the obviously fictional movie, "The Island" has made people think mammal clones are produced fully developed. They are not.

Best post in this entire thread.

OMG, you totally missed the point that I was making...Let me make it plain for you...

NO ONE SAID THAT DROLEFILE WAS WRONG. BUT SINCE AKA_MONET HAS A PHD, THERE WAS NO NEED FOR DROLEFILE TO BRING UP THE COMMENT ABOUT ANIMALS SPRINGING FROM A PETRI DISH FULLY GROWN. I THINK SHE WOULD HAVE MASTERED THAT CONCEPT IN GRADUATE SCHOOL.

AND THERE IS NO NEED TO EXPLAIN TO ME HOW CLONING WORKS. I HAVE TWO DEGREES IN CHEMISTRY, I THINK I KNOW A THING OR TWO ABOUT SCIENCE.

The above post only proves my point that folks only like to see their words on the screen....do you people even read before you just start posting? :confused:

Jub-- I think Drole was responding to this comment by AKAMonet:

"The other thing is, to maintain the health of a cow is extremely costly. If that process can be sped up, then would you try it?"

While I have no personal knowledge of AKAMonet's educational background, I was simply responding to what I read in her post. She may indeed have just posted that for no other reason than to see the words on the screen, but those words are all I can reply to.