Cloning meat: Good or bad idea? Discuss

[easyguy]

There is much debate already over the FDA's plans to produce cloned meat that would make its way to storeshelves and distributors, all while not including a label indicating it as being cloned.

 

What are your personal thoughts on this? Would you be less inclined to eat meat knowing that it was cloned? Or would it not matter to you?

 

I personally see it both ways. The up side of having cloned meat is that if they can find the perfect animal/cow/etc., that "perfection" could be amplified again and again and again. There would be a higher demand for the meat because of that. The downside, however, is that if the source is ever contaminated with a bacterial virus, like Salmonella, that too would be inside all of the meat that gets sent out to the public (it was also found that only 3% of animals sent through the slaughterhouse on an annual basis get thoroughly inspected).

 

I'm not against it but I'm not for it either. There are aspects of it that can reap benefits, but if the industry's workers dodge the bureaucracy and avoid being held accountable, mass amounts of unsafe meat could be sent right to your local store or restaurant, and you wouldn't even know it.

 

Just my thoughts on this.

[AwdreeHpburn]

hmmmmm...yes, very intersting.

 

I can't imagine they actually clone MEAT per se, but the animal the meat comes from. thereforeeee not cloning salmonela....

 

BUT - the idea of cloning an animal does not in the least bother me. Cloning for food....maybe its where we are. We've been raising them for food forever, this may just be the next logical - technological - step.

 

I care not.

[sixpounder]

i was reading an article about this. i was surprised that it would actually come to this. cloning animals for meat? if they have the technology to clone, why not just find cures for animals that are already sick

[cc2006]

i was reading an article about this. i was surprised that it would actually come to this. cloning animals for meat? if they have the technology to clone, why not just find cures for animals that are already sick

 

Its cheaper to destroy the animal then cure it most times. Plus, if you root around in the genetics for an animal you can (and I'm sure it'll get even better in the future) supposedly fix the problem before it even starts. Have a family of cows that always get some weird limp? Hey if its a genetic issue maybe we can clone the cows and strip that problem right out. No more limpy cow.

 

 

We already eat bioengineered and cloned veggies, why not meat?

 

 

Personally, if they could do it right and not a royal screwup like sometimes governments/corporations are capable I see no problem with it. If they could get a little test tube with the formula for delicious and problem-free meat and crank out an army of identical animals then I say serve them up

 

'specially if it ends up meaning MORE food for MORE people, cheaper.

[jengh]

hmmmmm...yes, very intersting.

 

I can't imagine they actually clone MEAT per se, but the animal the meat comes from. thereforeeee not cloning salmonela....

 

BUT - the idea of cloning an animal does not in the least bother me. Cloning for food....maybe its where we are. We've been raising them for food forever, this may just be the next logical - technological - step.

 

I care not.

 

Exactly... you said JUST what I wanted to...thanks for not making me think about how to word it

[Celadon]

How long did they study the effects of meat from cloned animals? I've got to wonder about long-term effects of eating something that may have defects in it.

 

There was an interesting article about the dog-breeding craze in Japan in the NY Times. They keep breeding and breeding these specialty dogs, and soon enough they're getting litters with one "good" dog and the rest deformed, missing limbs and such. If those unexpected results happen from selective breeding, I sort of wonder what havoc might be wreaked through cloning. I'd like to see more research into the safety of consuming cloned products. And labels should definitely be part of any approval.

[timlondon]

If they are talking about mass cloning of the animals, one negative effect would be to reduce the genetic variation within herds - effectively making the (e.g. cow) population more susceptible to disease. However, it seems more likely that prize bulls etc would be cloned so that they could produce more offspring, and also effectively reproduce indefinitely.

 

Also, while I'm not intrinsically averse to genetic modification of crops and livestock, I can't help but think that the result would not be higher quality meat and veg, but higher output and increased profits for the producers.

 

There really is no comparison between rubbish supermarket meat and the fantastic stuff you get from a proper butcher, where they know what breed the cow is and which farm it's from. The issue is that customers currently value price over quality - personally I'd much rather eat less but tastier meat.

 

I'm not sure where I stand on the labelling. If it's just as I've suggested above where a bull or something has been cloned, I don't think it's necessary, but if it's a recombinant animal I think it should be stated.