Would you? Cloning ok'd?

[Misun]

Would you consume products from cloned animals? Do you think there should be labeling for them? Just curious on other's thoughts.

[Skeeter]

why would it make a difference?

[Gan]

The question is would you be able to tell the difference if you had consumed cloned food?

Are you already eating cloned vegitation?

[Trouble]

I have no problem with cloning from a consumer perspective. If someone is already willing to eat meat, I can't see them having a problem with the fact that they're eating the identical twin of the cow they had last week.

My main concern would be from the producer advocacy perspective. If some disease/virus comes along that your cow is susceptible to, there is no genetic variation present to allow half of your herd to survive, so you face potential financial ruin. I know they'll be building in genetic resistances for the clone stock to any disease where the technology already exists, but I'm sure it won't cover all possible pathogens.

[CrystalTears]

As Gan said, unless it's known to be different in some way, we may not know the difference anyway. I personally don't care either way.

[Sean of the Thread]

same

[Numbers]

All bananas are identical clones of eachother. Cows aren't any different. But like Trouble said, it makes them all susceptible to the same disease/viruses, so whole herds could be wiped out. Same thing has happened to different varieties of bananas in the past.

[Tsa`ah]

Would I eat it? Only after the proper studies have been done ... and they haven't.

Should packaging indicate a cloned product? Yes ... we'll call it consumer's rights.


As Gan said, unless it's known to be different in some way, we may not know the difference anyway. I personally don't care either way.

That's just it, we don't know because the studies haven't been done.

[Eoghain]

This topid is bananas. B-A-N-A-N-A-S.

(i had to.)

[Trouble]

Would I eat it? Only after the proper studies have been done ... and they haven't.

Should packaging indicate a cloned product? Yes ... we'll call it consumer's rights.


What kind of testing would you like done? A cow is a cow. It's not like we're talking hormones from feed being passed to the consumer.

As far as labeling goes, I don't have a problem either way, but you know the people who aren't using cloned animals will advertise the hell out of it on their packaging, like they do with organic and/or free-range already.

[CrystalTears]

That's just it, we don't know because the studies haven't been done.
And you know this exactly how?

[BigWorm]

This topid is bananas. B-A-N-A-N-A-S.

(i had to.)

Yeah, geneticly modified and cloned bananas

[Tsa`ah]

And you know this exactly how?

Oh I don't know ... maybe common fucking sense?

Considering the first successful animal cloning was done in 1996 and here we are in 2008. Dolly also had a number of ailments that her genetic donor did not display.

So let me ask you, how long do you think it took from Dolly in 1996 to clone animals and animal products in such a way that they could be distributed in our grocery stores as readily as conventional means?

When you answer that question for yourself, you should then consider the length of time it takes to bring a drug to market with FDA approval.

The problem is that since this is "food" the FDA has pretty much said only needed to do a "risk assessment". We've had this debate before, the FDA isn't requiring any sort of case study ... which takes years.

Now if it has been under 12 years since Dolly, and Dolly had problems aplenty ... Let's "assume" that in those 12 years they were able to clone a cow that didn't display problems not found in the donor, and let's also assume it took more than a year to do this, and then let's assume processes were developed to clone on a massive scale, and let's assume that process probably took more than a year ... there hasn't been enough time to conduct a proper study.

Now, if you don't want to take my word for it ... don't be lazy ... look for yourself.

[CrystalTears]

So you're saying that FDA conducted no studies in the 6 years of their research for them to decide that the food would be safe for consumption?

No one has eaten any cloned meat, and for the most part, no one will ever. We may get the cow that was delivered by the cloned cows, but that's about it. It's too expensive to go that route anyway.

[Tsa`ah]

So you're saying that FDA conducted no studies in the 6 years of their research for them to decide that the food would be safe for consumption?

Where do you get 6 years? And if you call a "Draft risk assessment" a "case study" ... well I personally don't see how you draw a line connecting the two ... but I guess you are free to do that.

http://www.fda.gov/cvm/CloneRiskAssessment.htm

That is your "study".

I'm sorry ... but it lacks any sort of testing.

When you bring a new drug to market, it requires several phases of testing ... one of those is human testing. As I said in the previous thread, this isn't a drug, this is our food supply. A drug has a small impact on the population, the food supply has an enormous impact on the population. We had better be damn sure there aren't any adverse effects on the human body, development, or in utero.


No one has eaten any cloned meat, and for the most part, no one will ever. We may get the cow that was delivered by the cloned cows, but that's about it. It's too expensive to go that route anyway.

Umm ... no.

There's no real benefit of cloning a cow in order for it to produce more cows other than specimen ideal for husbandry ... but there are plenty of those.

Cloning milk or a side of beef ... I want to know what's going into my body even if you don't give a rats ass. I'll want to know because the FDA doesn't really care one way or another if cloned food will have adverse effects.

[CrystalTears]

That is your "study".

I'm sorry ... but it lacks any sort of testing.
What kind of testing are you looking for then? Answer Trouble's question.


Umm ... no.
Um no which part? That we haven't eaten any cloned meat or that we probably won't eat directly cloned animals?

[Tsa`ah]

What kind of testing are you looking for then? Answer Trouble's question.

I didn't see it ... but not that it matters ... if you would read it seems obvious I want cloned food to be held at the same requirements (http://www.fda.gov/cder/handbook/develop.htm) as drugs are.


Um no which part? That we haven't eaten any cloned meat or that we probably won't eat directly cloned animals?

Currently there's a voluntary ban on cloned foods, but the FDA is moving to push it through before congress puts a study requirement into the farm bill. So no consumer or test subject has ingested cloned foods.

If the FDA gets their way before congress does, rest assured you will probably be eating cloned meat have no clue about it ... and let's hope you never do.

[CrystalTears]

Look who can't read. I'm saying that isn't going to be as likely or as often as people make it out to be. Making cloned animals is an expensive endeavor and we'll probably eat what the cloned animals produce themselves.

You don't like it, that's fine. Either way, no, I personally really don't care.

[Sean of the Thread]

NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM

I personally can't wait. They're only cloning the prized stock and only for them to reproduce and "energize" the overbred herds with nice prize genes. Ever wonder why every cow you see is cross eyed?


YUMMMMMMMMMMMM. Besides I'm getting tired of eating retarded meat.

[Numbers]

If they were EXACT clones, I don't see what the problem would be. If they were genetically modified to age faster, be fatter, and be dumber, that would make me a bit squeamish.

And yes, I'm aware of the McDonald's chickens, but that was accomplished through selective breeding.

[Tsa`ah]

The problem is that we don't know if they're EXACT. Dolly was an exact genetic copy ... yet she suffered pretty much every day of her existence, though she died of a common "sheep" disease.

Even if the sequence matches, are there any molecular differences in a cow grown in a tube at any point in comparison to a cow grown using "conventional" methods? Are the proteins exact matches? The lipids?

Many things happen on the molecular level that we tend to over look ... and these are the things that mess with liver and kidney function ... among other things.

[Sean of the Thread]

I'm really not certain EXACTLY where I stand on cloning food but I tend to think a simple label is the answer for consumers... morality aside.

Not going to bother me to much either way as I'm in the process of buying a few acres in Hillsborough county to put a smoke shack ... a cow and a pig pen on.

Nom nom nom nom nom nom nom.

[CrystalTears]

They should just put labels on cloned packages just to ease the mind of the paranoid.

As for the case studies, you won't see FDA do any clinical testing, not unless you would like to spend $20 a pound on meat. We'll just slowly find out after thousands of people consume mass amount of hambergers.

[Savageheart]

References Tsa'ah on the whole suffering every day of her life?

I don't know everything about Dolly, in fact I know only a little bit here and there, I was fascinated by it enough to read a bit back in the day.

Off hand here's what I remember

Dolly developed Arthritis in her when she was 5, a likely result of her being ridiculously over fed and severely obese, she would also stand on her hind legs and pose, which is extremely weird for sheep (this was by the way completely treatable, and not a suffering debilitating, tear jerking case).

She was diagnosed with pulmonary adenomatosis (I so looked that part up who remembers pulmonary adenomatosis) at 6 (retrovirus that causes lung tumors btw) and it was highly advanced. This disease is considered common among sheep though generally only older sheep succumb to it, it is enhanced by any which are kept indoors, which Dolly was nearly every day of her life.

She had a full postmortem which uncovered the astounding fact that this sheep was completely unremarkable save the fact that she was incredibly obese. Now you could make a case with her telomeres, being short which implied a genetic replication defect, however no advanced aging was conclusively proven by autopsy. Too be fair, I really wanted this to be the case too but there was nothing backing it up, the idea of the clone being born with a genetic age of the parent donor was something so straight out of sci-fi, naturally I ate it up.

In between this and that she made 6 little sheeps, fucked a ram or twenty, and was papered enough to become the Jabba the Hut of sheep. Apparently this ewe was so fat even Scotsmen wouldn't bang her.

This does not seem like the life of a suffering animal to me. But again, I admit I don't know everything and if you have references on this I would really like to read them, as all I have doesn't really indicate what you're suggesting.

That being said I have no opinions on cloned meat one way or another, I'll eat whats in front of me so long as it passes health inspection.

Some observations though, it would seem to me to be a bad idea in the long run as others have pointed out you genetically limit your livestock and the stock as a whole becomes more fragile than it already was.

I really don't think its any more dangerous than the meat we have today though. Which, is to say that although I am of a curious nature I thank my lucky stars I have the ability to simply 'not care' the things you can find out if you look are disturbing as hell.

The main concern most PETAphiles probably (Im guessing, but hey its my opinion deal with it) have with it is probably that it dehumanizes animals which they work very hard to personify, after all clones like fat people have no souls. The main concern your average phobic might raise in relation to the current practices of the meat packing industry are laughable. Meat stock is killed in fairly short order, not only are these genetic concerns non-transmutable through consumption but they are generally late onset disorders (I am generalizing here and someone is going to catch me on this with some random albeit true fact which will be used to vilify my entire opinion, live dangerously I say).

Read The Jungle, wash your hands, cry, cook some smoked sausage and call it Wednesday (that was a joke, don't cook that crap). Seriously, the things we do to meat are dirty, irresponsible, unhealthy, sickening and soul wrenchingly terrifying already, the cloning process is a drop in the bucket. That being said, pass the A1.

If you randomize the donor process enough and have some amount of genetic variance you might do better. These days every cow, pig are inbred to the vanishing point... If average Joe Dirt starts farming off the genetic material as say the Kobe stock, hey win win.

[Katt]

Ugh, just reading the reference to The Jungle made me shudder. Good book though.

[Stanley Burrell]

<<Savageheart>>

It might also be because Dolly was as old as the plasticity of the somatic cells used to originate her.

If that doesn't make sense to you, it shouldn't.

[Tsa`ah]

References Tsa'ah on the whole suffering every day of her life?

I don't know everything about Dolly, in fact I know only a little bit here and there, I was fascinated by it enough to read a bit back in the day.

Off hand here's what I remember

Dolly developed Arthritis in her when she was 5, a likely result of her being ridiculously over fed and severely obese, she would also stand on her hind legs and pose, which is extremely weird for sheep (this was by the way completely treatable, and not a suffering debilitating, tear jerking case).

The suffering of this particular clone is not at issue with me. However, the span of time Dolly was obese does not explain her arthritis and the post mortem never indicated her weight being the cause. In fact, her arthritis (which was not expressed in her genetic donor) was a head scratcher.

Also, her obesity wasn't due to being over fed. Dolly received a healthy diet and no more. Obesity, strange enough, is a common trait in a large portion of cloned animals since Dolly.


She was diagnosed with pulmonary adenomatosis (I so looked that part up who remembers pulmonary adenomatosis) at 6 (retrovirus that causes lung tumors btw) and it was highly advanced. This disease is considered common among sheep though generally only older sheep succumb to it, it is enhanced by any which are kept indoors, which Dolly was nearly every day of her life.

Two fold here. Premature aging and abnormal immuno response have also been found to be very common in cloned subjects since Dolly.


She had a full postmortem which uncovered the astounding fact that this sheep was completely unremarkable save the fact that she was incredibly obese. Now you could make a case with her telomeres, being short which implied a genetic replication defect, however no advanced aging was conclusively proven by autopsy. Too be fair, I really wanted this to be the case too but there was nothing backing it up, the idea of the clone being born with a genetic age of the parent donor was something so straight out of sci-fi, naturally I ate it up.

I think you need to go back and read. While the sheep appeared to age normally ... the disease she succame to normally brought down older sheep. Her immune system and response was abnormal for her age ... genetically she died at age 12. Telomeres examined with regularity were a. Half as long samples from sheep her age b. upon her death were pretty comparable to sheep twice her age.

Which is interesting since sheep live 12-15 years and Dolly genetic donor was 6 years old.


In between this and that she made 6 little sheeps, fucked a ram or twenty, and was papered enough to become the Jabba the Hut of sheep. Apparently this ewe was so fat even Scotsmen wouldn't bang her.

Obesity in sheep has no correlation to how many offspring they produce.


This does not seem like the life of a suffering animal to me. But again, I admit I don't know everything and if you have references on this I would really like to read them, as all I have doesn't really indicate what you're suggesting.

Umm ... Dolly, clone ... search engine perhaps?

She developed arthritis early on, began packing on weight early on, and displayed signs of an irregular immune system early on. I fail to see how this is normal, let alone signs of not suffering.


I really don't think its any more dangerous than the meat we have today though. Which, is to say that although I am of a curious nature I thank my lucky stars I have the ability to simply 'not care' the things you can find out if you look are disturbing as hell.

Perhaps you confused me with a tree hugger or perhaps a vegan ... or something of that nature.

Dolly's suffering, or the suffering of livestock doesn't phase me. I'll (and have) put a steer down, clean it for the butcher (after emptying my stomach multiple times and gagging through the whole process) and the anxiously await the ribeye that'll hit my plate 42 days later.

My concern is the remote (or not so remote) possibility of altered proteins, lipids, or even something on the molecular level, that will could have an adverse impact on the population. Certain engineered foods have shown potential for liver, kidney, pancreatic ... pretty much screwing with or damaging the digestive system.


The main concern most PETAphiles probably (Im guessing, but hey its my opinion deal with it) have with it is probably that it dehumanizes animals which they work very hard to personify, after all clones like fat people have no souls. The main concern your average phobic might raise in relation to the current practices of the meat packing industry are laughable. Meat stock is killed in fairly short order, not only are these genetic concerns non-transmutable through consumption but they are generally late onset disorders (I am generalizing here and someone is going to catch me on this with some random albeit true fact which will be used to vilify my entire opinion, live dangerously I say).

I'm not sure where this tangent came from. Who really cares what a group of domestic terrorist think or what the meat packing industry has to do with it ... I'm assuming you believe me ignorant of the process?


Read The Jungle, wash your hands, cry, cook some smoked sausage and call it Wednesday (that was a joke, don't cook that crap). Seriously, the things we do to meat are dirty, irresponsible, unhealthy, sickening and soul wrenchingly terrifying already, the cloning process is a drop in the bucket. That being said, pass the A1.

Reading The Jungle will give you a glimpse into the history of the meat industry ... but is in no way indicative of today's industry in the states. Perhaps you have missed the point?


If you randomize the donor process enough and have some amount of genetic variance you might do better. These days every cow, pig are inbred to the vanishing point... If average Joe Dirt starts farming off the genetic material as say the Kobe stock, hey win win .

I'm also guessing you think livestock farmers, or farmers in general, are "Joe Dirt" caliber intellectually? I'm willing to bet a livestock farmer could probably argue you into the ground about genetics and animal husbandry in general ... and explain to you in depth the measures they take to insure genetic diversity while maintaining standards in breedable traits.


<<Savageheart>>

It might also be because Dolly was as old as the plasticity of the somatic cells used to originate her.

If that doesn't make sense to you, it shouldn't.

Sheep "boob" cells ... hence her name Dolly ... and genetically she was born 6 years old.

[Clove]

Personally I'm against cloned meat. Too much sanguine humor to be healthy.

[Clove]

Certain engineered foods have shown potential for liver, kidney, pancreatic ... pretty much screwing with or damaging the digestive system.

Which?

[Savageheart]

Tsa'ah

Nothing there was referenced and was all highly assumptive, until you are accepted as the worlds Dolly expert I'm going to need more. As I stated originally I would love to see and read where you're obtaining this information because its contrary too most of the credible information I have seen in the past. Credible meaning published in a journal of medicine or science, or published by a researcher mind you.

There was no proof I have read which states conclusively she or any other clone is born with the genetic age of it's donor and the other conjunctions you draw with clones with premature aging I have read contrary opinions on as well premature aging and imuno response ect. If anything the imune issues are indicative of animals which are housed indoors.

You're responses to the rest of my opinion are really immaterial as you seemed to take the entire post as some sort of attack against you when it was not. The rest, was also no, and you attempt to draw some sort of straw man reference to the phrase Joe Dirt to attack my character as well... Which is humorous in its own way, but demeaning to your credibility as a whole. As to missing the point, no I really just wasn't making it all about you :)

[Gelston]

I'd eat the shit out of a cloned steak smothered in A1.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I'd eat the shit out of a cloned steak smothered in A1.

Good steak needs nothing but salt and pepper.

[Gelston]

I'd eat A1 by itself if it wasn't a sauce, I like the taste of it.

[Savageheart]

Good steak needs nothing but salt and pepper.

I don't disagree here but I generally like to use a rub or a light marinade prior to cooking. A1 goes a long way there with me.

[Clove]

I don't disagree here but I generally like to use a rub or a light marinade prior to cooking. A1 goes a long way there with me.

I'd eat a cloned turkey stuffed with in-vitro chicken.

[CrystalTears]

If we had the copy, we could eat the copy...

[Daniel]

I'd eat A1 by itself if it wasn't a sauce, I like the taste of it.


QFT

[Clove]

If we had the copy, we could eat the copy...

Austin. Austin, Massachussetts.

[Skeeter]

http://www.peppers.com/images/products/ACFMpntKb.jpg

Greatest rub ever. I put it on everything. BBQ sauce no longer necessary. (or steak sauce for that matter)

[Savageheart]

You know sometimes I like a dry rub, sometimes I like a wet rub. Its true and its true, awe yeah!

[Parkbandit]

LOL at the alarmists once again. We're not going to actually EAT the oMgClOnE! but we would be eating the offspring of the clone. It is FAR cheaper to just breed cattle the old fashion way than it is to just make a herd of clones.

Make a clone of a prized cow.. raise it.. it becomes breeding stock the old fashioned way.. we eat the offspring.

Beef.. it's what's for Dinner.

[Clove]

Particularly since 98% of clone attempts fail.

[CrystalTears]

LOL at the alarmists once again. We're not going to actually EAT the oMgClOnE! but we would be eating the offspring of the clone. It is FAR cheaper to just breed cattle the old fashion way than it is to just make a herd of clones.

Make a clone of a prized cow.. raise it.. it becomes breeding stock the old fashioned way.. we eat the offspring.

Beef.. it's what's for Dinner.
Careful, you'll be accused of not being able to read (since I basically said the same fucking thing!).

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I would do a clone of Mandy Moore.

[Methais]

All bananas are identical clones of eachother.

This is complete bullshit. One banana always has a sticker on it.

[Tsa`ah]

Tsa'ah

Nothing there was referenced and was all highly assumptive, until you are accepted as the worlds Dolly expert I'm going to need more. As I stated originally I would love to see and read where you're obtaining this information because its contrary too most of the credible information I have seen in the past. Credible meaning published in a journal of medicine or science, or published by a researcher mind you.

I see what you did there. You made a post (based on your recollection) that was highly assumptive and lacking any reference ... and when I countered your post .... you pulled a "source please".

NICE!


There was no proof I have read which states conclusively she or any other clone is born with the genetic age of it's donor and the other conjunctions you draw with clones with premature aging I have read contrary opinions on as well premature aging and imuno response ect. If anything the imune issues are indicative of animals which are housed indoors.

Yet you call into question my rebuttal? Laughable ... very laughable.

There is enough evidence to draw the conclusion ... even though you don't want to believe it or lack the ability to see it.

http://www.isscr.org/public/reproductive.htm


High failure rates:

While this procedure may sound relatively easy, reproductive cloning is fraught with profound technical and biological problems. The birth of normal animal clones is very rare. Despite cloning and implantation of hundreds of embryos, very few live cloned animals have been obtained thus far, around 1 percent of all the eggs that received donor DNA.

In addition, the clones that do survive are in very poor health with many problems, including obesity, arthritis, infection, breathing problems and death at young ages. At this stage, it is not known why the technique of reproductive cloning is so inefficient or why there are so many health problems in the few surviving clones. Scientists are actively working in this area and possible reasons are beginning to emerge.

Hmm .. sounds familiar.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0YUG/is_6_12/ai_n18613464

Fat mice.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/02/28/tech/main502453.shtml

More fat mice.

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/cloned%20meat%20and%20dairy%20factsheet10.19.2005. pdf

The gruesome.

I could go on, but it seems it's perfectly acceptable in your eyes to not provide any reference or an ounce of proof (and you've read so there isn't any) ... but still call my post into question.



You're responses to the rest of my opinion are really immaterial as you seemed to take the entire post as some sort of attack against you when it was not. The rest, was also no, and you attempt to draw some sort of straw man reference to the phrase Joe Dirt to attack my character as well... Which is humorous in its own way, but demeaning to your credibility as a whole. As to missing the point, no I really just wasn't making it all about you :)

You went on a tangent and I called into question the relevance of such a tangent ... you also disparaged the agricultural community as a whole with your "Joe Dirt" comment and uneducated remark about the gene pool of livestock being diminished through inbreeding. Which indicated to me that you not only have no clue about that topic ... but you previously proved you have no real foundation for your argument in the previous topic.

Carry on in ignorance if you wish ... but next time do some actually reading. If you want to debunk my post ... do the research and debunk it. If you can't follow my post and counter it with your own reading ... you do nothing more than display your inability to participate with any competence in a debate of any form. We have enough CTs and PBs on this board as it is ... we don't need who's only distinguishing feature is a vocabulary.

[CrystalTears]

Yeah Savageheart, you have to be a google whore in order to be on par with our resident farmer/economist/chemist/bullshit artist.

[Parkbandit]

Careful, you'll be accused of not being able to read (since I basically said the same fucking thing!).

You actually take what Tsa'ah says seriously? You might be the only one on the entire board that doesn't just laugh at him.

[Tsa`ah]

Yeah Savageheart, you have to be a google whore in order to be on par with our resident farmer/economist/chemist/bullshit artist.

Typical moronic bullshit .... it has become your MO as of late, no surprise.

Remind me in the future that the next time I talk to a woman on-line, to continue talking to her and repeatedly send sexual innuendos her way and unrealistically flatter her at ever opportunity ... or she'll turn into some cheerleading douche that offers nothing in a debate other than to cheerlead idiots that troll and derail.

http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/69/71/23497169.jpg

[Clove]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/02/28/tech/main502453.shtml

More fat mice.



Luckily we aren't planning on eating mice (or we'd be fat). This quote taken from your source above.

"Worldwide, there are now hundreds of animal clones, including cows, pigs, mice and goats, many of them appearing healthy.

But many attempts to clone animals have ended in failure, with deformed fetuses that died in the womb, had oversized organs or were born dead. Still others died days after being born, some twice as large as they should have been.

The successes and failures of cloning have generated heated debate in many countries, particularly as some scientists have suggested cloning humans. "

Explanations?

[CrystalTears]

Typical moronic bullshit .... it has become your MO as of late, no surprise.
Only with you, sweetheart. You're the main google whore around here. Who doesn't even read his own sources, it appears.


Remind me in the future that the next time I talk to a woman on-line, to continue talking to her and repeatedly send sexual innuendos her way and unrealistically flatter her at ever opportunity ... or she'll turn into some cheerleading douche that offers nothing in a debate other than to cheerlead idiots that troll and derail.
You may have to. It'll be the only way they'll talk to you once you start linking them to googled sites to explain your overinflated ego.

[Tsa`ah]

Luckily we aren't planning on eating mice (or we'd be fat). This quote taken from your source above.

"Worldwide, there are now hundreds of animal clones, including cows, pigs, mice and goats, many of them appearing healthy.

But many attempts to clone animals have ended in failure, with deformed fetuses that died in the womb, had oversized organs or were born dead. Still others died days after being born, some twice as large as they should have been.

The successes and failures of cloning have generated heated debate in many countries, particularly as some scientists have suggested cloning humans. "

Explanations?

Read further in the last link. Obesity is common in almost all varieties of cloned animals, not just mice. This includes cattle. However, your choice in quotes interesting simply because of the word "appearing". After Dolly, no one is claiming these clones are healthy simply because of the existing problems (likely linked to genetic age). Obesity, diabetes, arthritis, respiratory disease, pulmonary disease ... you get the picture.

Seemingly healthy clones are not produced exhibiting these conditions, they develop them at young biological ages.

What good is a cow for eating if it develops several diseases before it comes to slaughtering age? What good is a cow for breeding when it's hobbled with arthritis?

More interesting would be a study into the offspring.

[Clove]

Read further in the last link. Obesity is common in almost all varieties of cloned animals, not just mice. This includes cattle. However, your choice in quotes interesting simply because of the word "appearing". After Dolly, no one is claiming these clones are healthy simply because of the existing problems (likely linked to genetic age). Obesity, diabetes, arthritis, respiratory disease, pulmonary disease ... you get the picture.

Seemingly healthy clones are not produced exhibiting these conditions, they develop them at young biological ages.

What good is a cow for eating if it develops several diseases before it comes to slaughtering age? What good is a cow for breeding when it's hobbled with arthritis?

More interesting would be a study into the offspring.

Weak. I included the following paragraph for a reason. The context is pretty clear- many clones are fine; however many are not and it is a argued subject amongst experts (of which you are not). The Center for Food Safety is a consumer group- not a research org or a news agency.

What good IS a crippled animal for breeding indeed. Sounds like we have nothing to worry about in terms of cloned food, if your assumptions are correct.

98% of clones attempts fail (I can source that with charts and everything if you like). At this stage it's unlikely that herds will be cloned for food; though possibly breeding stock might be.

In any case you don't assume the genetic defects of the food you eat (and you won't be able to fly if you eat a pigeon either). If you're worried about engineered food, you should probably be more concerned with in-vitro meat; far more viable and likely.

[Tsa`ah]

You overlooked the key word in that paragraph ... specifically the line you bolded ... as pointed out in my previous post.

You also neglected to address the first part of that line concerning livestock riddled with disease before slaughtering age.

The Center for Food safety is just as viable as a news agency, more so since their sole focus is on ... food safety. And cloning raises some serious concern on just that topic. Or are you suggesting that such a group is incapable of researching the topic?

My concern goes beyond seemingly genetic diseases and more into the realm of genetic and molecular anomalies that have the potential to harm consumers in ways conventional methods have not.

If clones exhibit these problems at young ages and more readily than standard breeding methods ... the question of food safety is very relevant.

[Clove]

You overlooked the key word in that paragraph ... specifically the line you bolded ... as pointed out in my previous post.


I didn't overlook it at all. Who the fuck are you Bill Clinton? If I say "The subject appears normal" it means the subjects... appear... fucking... normal. It's a nice tap-dance but you Googled up articles and didn't bother to read them. Thanks for playing.

No, I don't consider a consumer group credible; they often have agendas and can be alarmist.



My concern goes beyond seemingly genetic diseases and more into the realm of genetic and molecular anomalies that have the potential to harm consumers in ways conventional methods have not.


Such as? You've been reading too much sci-fi. Perhaps some folks will be allergic to modified proteins. Next?

[Tsa`ah]

Well it appears you're back on the bandwagon. And things were so civil.

Look me up again when you're less moronic and even less "source please" before producing any yourself.

[Clove]

Well it appears you're back on the bandwagon. And things were so civil.

Look me up again when you're less moronic and even less "source please" before producing any yourself.

No answers then?

[Tsa`ah]

No answers then?

I'd be more willing to accommodate you if you didn't follow the typical lock-step bullshit.

You, much like savageheart, have the same one sided argument. Demanding of others what you fail to produce on your own. The google insult is old. It's akin to one student berating another for using the library, or perish the thought, reading up on the subject.

It would have merit if I were to copy and paste, or paraphrase. This isn't the case however. Search engines are tools to be used for research, much like libraries, much like text books and other required reading material for any given subject.

Outside of that, I'm fully aware of how abrasive my posting style is. More often than not it lacks insult until an insult is fired off at me.

Now, if you can't participate without firing off bullshit and insults ... let alone pulling out the "google" bullshit, which I'm sure you use as much as everyone else ... you're not worth my time or energy beyond this post.

[Methais]

We interrupt this heated internet debate for a breaking news update.










































http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/6742/locksonnoticeag5ha5.jpg








Back to you, PB.

[Parkbandit]

I'd be more willing to accommodate you if you didn't follow the typical lock-step bullshit.

You, much like savageheart, have the same one sided argument. Demanding of others what you fail to produce on your own. The google insult is old. It's akin to one student berating another for using the library, or perish the thought, reading up on the subject.

It would have merit if I were to copy and paste, or paraphrase. This isn't the case however. Search engines are tools to be used for research, much like libraries, much like text books and other required reading material for any given subject.

Outside of that, I'm fully aware of how abrasive my posting style is. More often than not it lacks insult until an insult is fired off at me.

Now, if you can't participate without firing off bullshit and insults ... let alone pulling out the "google" bullshit, which I'm sure you use as much as everyone else ... you're not worth my time or energy beyond this post.

Holy Sweet Jesus Christ.. can you BE a bigger hypocrite? Please.. for the love of all that is holy.. don't make me look up posts and make you look like a complete and utter fucking hypocrite like I did before. You remember that thread..

Oh wait.. are you also going to employ the Backlashian Maneuver of "Well, once back in 1997 you insulted me, so I am free to use insults in every one of my responses to you"?

[Clove]

I'd be more willing to accommodate you if you didn't follow the typical lock-step bullshit.


Your own sources don't support your argument fully. You Google stuff up and don't read it thoroughly. Your response is a very weak argument over semantics (unsupported by the context of the quote).

I've already said several times that 98% of clone attempts fail. You keep trying to assert that most (if not all) successful clones result in genetically flawed organisms. And you don't have any solid sourcing for it except news articles and consumer group reports. Nice.

On top of that your concerns about cloned meat involve a nebulous fear of modified proteins. But you don't have any specific explanations (or sources for that either) on just how modified proteins can harm humans via ingestion. Poisonous perhaps? Or is this a build-up for your pitch to sell me gene-therapy skin cream?

You came. You spouted bullshit. You were called.

[Gan]

Everytime Tsa'ah calls someone else a board troll it makes me chuckle.

http://dogtoe.com/weblog/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/arguing_on_the_internet.jpg

[Savageheart]

Well hmm... ok gloves off then.

The articles on cloned mice are actually interesting and I will give you credit for digging them up. This, is actually good stuff, it has nothing to do with most of the alarmist rhetoric you are frothing but good none the less!

The findings on obesity in relation to cloning was not something I was disputing however, I did not make a direct correlation with the two but I did state in fact Dolly was morbidly obese. Kudos

Mortality rates are also not in question here, in fact had you posed the statement that there is a high (holocaustic was the phrase used in one of the articles) embryonic failure rate in clones I would agree with you.

The process, is not perfect by any means nor did I insist it was. You're arguing with yourself there, which is cool I'm sure you get a lot of practice with masturbation.

However, you still have not nor can not validate the following claims you have made


Clones are exact genetic copies of donor cells aged to date of donation
Dolly suffered Every Day of her existence. (This one is important since its really the only thing I was initially questioning the rest of your bullshit I was writing off)
Cloned meat will some how pass FDA inspection yet be specifically harmful upon consumption by humans
You are in fact a rational human being and not a manic depressive adolecent computer program written in perl.
People like you.


One more thing for giggles. The Center for Food Safety is a lobby... I don't post this for your benefit but for my general amusement at your using it as a 'credible' source.
http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/11

So what we have here is death by GIS, it looks flashy but it just don't hold up. Your only hope is to keep changing the shape of the argument until it looks like your winning it.

But why stop there, I will also insist that I am better looking, more successful (fiscally and sexually, pick a gender and persuasion), can throw a football farther, was more popular in high school, my parents love me more than your parents love you, more mentally stable, more loved by dogs and cats, and most importantly smarter.

You have all the swagger of a college sophomore (to be fair I put myself around the capacity of a high school freshman, I blame hormones) and I revel in your intellectual erectile dysfunction, it is both entertaining and delicous. May god(dess) ((I'm keeping my options open)) have mercy upon your soul. Failing that, may the guy at your favorite Taco Bell give you an extra soft taco with your value meal. I'm done now, you've proved you're not quite worthless with the mousy articles which were good reads. Intellectually I put you somewhere between celery and mushrooms.

[Gan]

Well hmm... ok gloves off then.

The articles on cloned mice are actually interesting and I will give you credit for digging them up. This, is actually good stuff, it has nothing to do with most of the alarmist rhetoric you are frothing but good none the less!

The findings on obesity in relation to cloning was not something I was disputing however, I did not make a direct correlation with the two but I did state in fact Dolly was morbidly obese. Kudos

Mortality rates are also not in question here, in fact had you posed the statement that there is a high (holocaustic was the phrase used in one of the articles) embryonic failure rate in clones I would agree with you.

The process, is not perfect by any means nor did I insist it was. You're arguing with yourself there, which is cool I'm sure you get a lot of practice with masturbation.

However, you still have not nor can not validate the following claims you have made

Clones are exact genetic copies of donor cells aged to date of donation
Dolly suffered Every Day of her existence. (This one is important since its really the only thing I was initially questioning the rest of your bullshit I was writing off)
Cloned meat will some how pass FDA inspection yet be specifically harmful upon consumption by humans
You are in fact a rational human being and not a manic depressive adolecent computer program written in perl.
People like you.
So what we have here is death by GIS, it looks flashy but it just don't hold up. Your only hope is to keep changing the shape of the argument until it looks like your winning it.

But why stop there, I will also insist that I am better looking, more successful (fiscally and sexually, pick a gender and persuasion), can throw a football farther, was more popular in high school, my parents love me more than your parents love you, more mentally stable, more loved by dogs and cats, and most importantly smarter.

You have all the swagger of a college sophomore (to be fair I put myself around the capacity of a high school freshman, I blame hormones) and I revel in your intellectual erectile dysfunction, it is both entertaining and delicous. May god(dess) ((I'm keeping my options open)) have mercy upon your soul. Failing that, may the guy at your favorite Taco Bell give you an extra soft taco with your value meal. I'm done now, you've proved you're not quite worthless with the mousy articles which were good reads. Intellectually I put you somewhere between celery and mushrooms.

:lol:

Nice post.

[CrystalTears]

But why stop there, I will also insist that I am better looking, more successful (fiscally and sexually, pick a gender and persuasion), can throw a football farther, was more popular in high school, my parents love me more than your parents love you, more mentally stable, more loved by dogs and cats, and most importantly smarter.
Well damn, I guess I need to start flirting with you too, since I apparently flirt with everyone I agree with around here.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v412/Jemah/lolcats/funny-pictures-hamster-kiss-glass.jpg

[Anebriated]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y249/Kyrthos/DHNowhere.jpg

5 stars

[Methais]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y249/Kyrthos/DHNowhere.jpg

5 stars

Let's keep this going cause the real thread sucks.

http://www.frontiernet.net/~joe14580/this%20thread%20has%20derailed.jpg

[Anebriated]

ok

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y249/Kyrthos/stupidchart.jpg

[CrystalTears]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v412/Jemah/lolcats/thx-jim-and-now-da-sportz.jpg

[Parkbandit]

Well hmm... ok gloves off then.

The articles on cloned mice are actually interesting and I will give you credit for digging them up. This, is actually good stuff, it has nothing to do with most of the alarmist rhetoric you are frothing but good none the less!

The findings on obesity in relation to cloning was not something I was disputing however, I did not make a direct correlation with the two but I did state in fact Dolly was morbidly obese. Kudos

Mortality rates are also not in question here, in fact had you posed the statement that there is a high (holocaustic was the phrase used in one of the articles) embryonic failure rate in clones I would agree with you.

The process, is not perfect by any means nor did I insist it was. You're arguing with yourself there, which is cool I'm sure you get a lot of practice with masturbation.

However, you still have not nor can not validate the following claims you have made


Clones are exact genetic copies of donor cells aged to date of donation
Dolly suffered Every Day of her existence. (This one is important since its really the only thing I was initially questioning the rest of your bullshit I was writing off)
Cloned meat will some how pass FDA inspection yet be specifically harmful upon consumption by humans
You are in fact a rational human being and not a manic depressive adolecent computer program written in perl.
People like you.


One more thing for giggles. The Center for Food Safety is a lobby... I don't post this for your benefit but for my general amusement at your using it as a 'credible' source.
http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/11

So what we have here is death by GIS, it looks flashy but it just don't hold up. Your only hope is to keep changing the shape of the argument until it looks like your winning it.

But why stop there, I will also insist that I am better looking, more successful (fiscally and sexually, pick a gender and persuasion), can throw a football farther, was more popular in high school, my parents love me more than your parents love you, more mentally stable, more loved by dogs and cats, and most importantly smarter.

You have all the swagger of a college sophomore (to be fair I put myself around the capacity of a high school freshman, I blame hormones) and I revel in your intellectual erectile dysfunction, it is both entertaining and delicous. May god(dess) ((I'm keeping my options open)) have mercy upon your soul. Failing that, may the guy at your favorite Taco Bell give you an extra soft taco with your value meal. I'm done now, you've proved you're not quite worthless with the mousy articles which were good reads. Intellectually I put you somewhere between celery and mushrooms.


Welcome to the Cheerleading club. Your pin and skirt are on their way.

[Tsa`ah]

Well hmm... ok gloves off then.

The articles on cloned mice are actually interesting and I will give you credit for digging them up. This, is actually good stuff, it has nothing to do with most of the alarmist rhetoric you are frothing but good none the less!

You take my concern as alarmist rhetoric, which is curious since I've never stated one way or another a pro or anti stance on cloning. Which leads me to believe you're reading more than what is there.

My entire argument is based solely on the potential for harm. Not of cloned subjects, and not of a genome or any other "humanitarian" argument you'd like to drop into my posts.

There exists a concept or tag in science referred to as "Mother Nature's kitchen". Or events that occur in nature that can't be replicated using any current scientific method.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's akin to taking water, carbon dioxide, and light energy (photons) and producing sugar, water, and oxygen in a test tube. It couldn't be done at any phase of my required or voluntary education, but I haven't read up on it since ... so cracking nature in that aspect may have already happened.

The simple fact is we don't know due to the lack of testing if "mother nature's kitchen" applies to the aspect of cloning for food or livestock for breeding.

Simply put ... I'd have no problem with cloned food of any sort if such foods were held to the same standards as medications. (perhaps you missed that?)


The findings on obesity in relation to cloning was not something I was disputing however, I did not make a direct correlation with the two but I did state in fact Dolly was morbidly obese. Kudos

Your statement was that Dolly's obesity was due to diet, which was unfounded. Cloning subject since would indicate with good logical merit, that Dolly was obese due to some anomaly in the cloning process (a good argument for Mother nature's kitchen). You also claimed that her arthritis was due to her obesity ... another unfounded claim (you failed to reference either)


Mortality rates are also not in question here, in fact had you posed the statement that there is a high (holocaustic was the phrase used in one of the articles) embryonic failure rate in clones I would agree with you.

And why are they not in question? Because you say so? Sorry ... that doesn't fly. Mortality is extremely relevant.


The process, is not perfect by any means nor did I insist it was. You're arguing with yourself there, which is cool I'm sure you get a lot of practice with masturbation.

You're reading what isn't there and not reading what is there ... maybe you should be less concerned about my masturbatory habits and more concerned with comprehending?


However, you still have not nor can not validate the following claims you have made

Clones are exact genetic copies of donor cells aged to date of donation

Actually I have, maybe you're reading is impaired ... or you just haven't done any? I never claimed that they weren't. I did suggest that there's the possibility of anomalous expression ... did you miss that one or just make an assumption without reference?


Dolly suffered Every Day of her existence. (This one is important since its really the only thing I was initially questioning the rest of your bullshit I was writing off)

Ok, not every day since she apparently didn't suffer prior to developing most of her conditions.


Cloned meat will some how pass FDA inspection yet be specifically harmful upon consumption by humans

I never claimed that at all. My concern has been over lack of testing and the FDA's lack of concern over it. Perhaps you missed that one as well?


You are in fact a rational human being and not a manic depressive adolecent computer program written in perl.
People like you.


Do you really believe I require your affirmation?


So what we have here is death by GIS, it looks flashy but it just don't hold up. Your only hope is to keep changing the shape of the argument until it looks like your winning it.

Like you're doing? I'm sorry but I'm not "in it to win it". Winning an argument doesn't mean much to me when those that wish to argue with me can't produce any reference, can't produce a source to the absent reference, and can't comprehend a single word I've posted and insist on interjecting their misunderstanding as the centerpiece to their argument.


But why stop there, I will also insist that I am better looking, more successful (fiscally and sexually, pick a gender and persuasion), can throw a football farther, was more popular in high school, my parents love me more than your parents love you, more mentally stable, more loved by dogs and cats, and most importantly smarter.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night ... though completely irrelevant.


You have all the swagger of a college sophomore (to be fair I put myself around the capacity of a high school freshman, I blame hormones) and I revel in your intellectual erectile dysfunction, it is both entertaining and delicous. May god(dess) ((I'm keeping my options open)) have mercy upon your soul. Failing that, may the guy at your favorite Taco Bell give you an extra soft taco with your value meal. I'm done now, you've proved you're not quite worthless with the mousy articles which were good reads. Intellectually I put you somewhere between celery and mushrooms.

This coming from someone who produced nothing to substantiate his argument yet demanded as much and more. Again, if it helps you sleep at night ... nothing like the self proclamation of victory in a contest only you participated in ... and rather poorly. But even Clinton is proclaiming victory when it wasn't much of a contest to begin with.

[Gan]

ok

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y249/Kyrthos/stupidchart.jpg


HAHA

Winner.

[Clove]

Welcome to the Cheerleading club. Your pin and skirt are on their way.

LOL

[Savageheart]

Did he just Clinton Godwin?

[Stanley Burrell]

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/7209/peoplewithtoomuchfreeticb4.png