backtop


Print 72 comment(s) - last by number999.. on Jan 26 at 8:49 PM

The recent decision by the FDA will only ignite a debate for years to come

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently made a tentative conclusion that meat and milk from some cloned animals is safe for human consumption.  The decision has paved the way for the United States to become the first nation that allows products from cloned animals to be sold in grocery stores. 

After years of numerous delays, the FDA report found that there is not much of a difference in composition of food from cloned animals compared to normal animals.  Even if the FDA's assessment is officially approved in 2007, consumers may not be able to products from cloned animals since the technology remains too costly to be widely used.

The decision on Thursday immediately drew comments from critics from across the nation.  Opponents to cloned food are aiming to throw Congressional pressure to delay the policy before it is finalized.

Consumer groups are gravely concerned over potential health issues that may arise in some of the cloned animals.  Some cloned animals may have weakened immune systems and will need more drugs to stay healthy, according to activists and critics.

Don't be surprised if you begin seeing some sort of "clone-free" labels on meat and dairy products from cloned animals.  Ben & Jerry's ice cream, for example, already mentions that its farmers do not use any sort of bovine growth hormone on its cows.  Many opponents are not necessarily against cloned food, but want to make sure consumers know exactly what they are purchasing.  The FDA found, however, that there is "no science-based reason" for having to label cloned foods.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: wrong development
By Ringold on 12/31/2006 2:39:47 PM , Rating: 2
One huge post without any serious scientific or economic point as to why anyone should prefer high-cost low-efficiency 'organic' food over food grown through modern means.

The population bit really gets me, though. Maybe you've forgot the whole exponential growth thing, but by 2025 the population should be 8 or 9 billion or so. That's about 25% more than today. By then, it's a safe assumption that with the rise of the middle class in India and China (how many hundreds of millions within a decade?) they will no longer be happy with just rice and noodles. Meanwhile, land that was once arable but not needed now has homes, malls, and condo's sitting atop it, with the best arable but unused land being the rainforest.

So again, your line of reasoning has choices. Stop resisting science, or kiss the little bit of natural environment (and economic strength) left goodbye. With growth rates in the population like that, I don't see how it could go any other way. This miracle of the last century in producing more food needs to happen again, and things like this will be the method of delivering that.

Population control doesn't work either (see: China), except in Europe, which seems to be content withering away.


"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki