FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,519 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer
Thu Sep 18, 4:07 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Super Chicken strutted a step closer to the dinner table Thursday. The government said it will start considering proposals to sell genetically engineered animals as food, a move that could lead to faster-growing fish, cattle that can resist mad cow disease or perhaps heart-healthier eggs laid by a new breed of chickens.

The rules will also apply to drugs and other medical materials from genetically engineered animals, a field with explosive potential.

U.S. supermarkets currently sell no meat from genetically engineered animals. But a Boston-area company called Aqua Bounty Technologies hopes to win approval next year for its faster-growing salmon and make the fish available by 2011. "It tastes just like any other farm-raised salmon," said vice chairman Elliot Entis, who has sampled it.

Reaction from consumer groups was mixed. They welcomed the government's decision to regulate genetically altered animals, but they cautioned that crucial details remain to be spelled out. For example, the Food and Drug Administration does not plan to require that all genetically engineered meat, poultry and fish be labeled as such. It would be labeled only if there was a change in the final product, such as low-cholesterol filet mignon.

"They are talking about pigs that are going to have mouse genes in them, and this is not going to be labeled?" said Jean Halloran, director of food policy for Consumers Union. "We are close to speechless on this." Consumers Union publishes Consumer Reports magazine.

Nonetheless, Gregory Jaffe, who heads the biotechnology project at the Center for Science in the Public Interest called the FDA's move a "good first step."

"This is the first time the federal government is announcing a comprehensive regulatory system that addresses the concerns from these animals," said Jaffe. "But it may not have addressed all the environmental concerns."

What would happen if a genetically engineered animal escaped and started reproducing with wild animals of the same species? asked Jaffe. The FDA said it would address that issue.

On Thursday, the FDA released a proposed legal framework for how it would resolve such questions as whether the altered animals are safe for human consumption and whether they pose any serious environmental risk. FDA officials said they were focusing on animals that will be used as food, or to produce medications that would then be consumed by people or by other animals. The agency is not interested in reviewing genetically engineered mice already widely used in lab experiments.

"Genetic engineering of animals is here and has been here for some time, " said Larisa Rudenko, a science policy adviser with the FDA's veterinary medicine center. "We intend to provide a rigorous, risk-based regulatory path for developers to follow to help ensure public health and the health of animals."

Genetic engineering is already widely used in agriculture to produce higher-yielding or disease-resistant crops. But it's unclear how consumers will react to altered animals, even if they come with a government seal of approval.

Genetically engineered — or GE — animals are not clones, which the FDA has already said are safe to eat. While clones are exact copies of an animal, genetically engineered animals are manipulated by scientists to bring about a change in their characteristics. In years past, this was done by crossbreeding animals with desirable traits.

GE animals are created when scientists insert a gene from one species of animal into the DNA of another animal to reprogram some of its characteristics. For example, fish could be made to grow faster, or pigs might be re-engineered to produce less waste.

To engineer Aqua Bounty's faster-growing salmon, scientists took a snippet of DNA from an eel-like fish and stitched it into the genes of salmon. Normally, Atlantic salmon produce growth hormone only in the summer months. But with the change, salmon produce growth hormone all year long, allowing them to grow to full size in about 18 months instead of three years, Entis said.

"This is like tuning up your car," he said. GE salmon would be kept in enclosed pens, to prevent their escape into the wild, and sterilized to keep them from reproducing.

While the introduction of GE animals by food companies will probably get the most attention from the public, it's the pharmaceutical industry that seems poised to reap the greatest benefits.

Barbara Glenn, an animal science expert with the Biotechnology Industry Organization, said research is under way that could lead to the development of vaccines, transplant organs, replacement tissues, and other medically useful materials from genetically engineered animals.

For example, one company is experimenting with GE cows to produce human antibodies against such diseases as smallpox and pandemic flu. Another is trying to produce a pig liver that would be suitable for transplanting into a human patient.

Glenn said there is currently only one drug on the market derived from a genetically engineered animal, and it is not approved in the U.S. Available in Europe, the medication is an anti-blood clotting factor produced from the milk of GE goats.

"We are issuing this draft guidance now because the technology has evolved to a point where the commercialization of these animals is no longer beyond the horizon," said Randall Lutter, FDA deputy commissioner for policy. The agency's proposal will be open for public comment for 60 days.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,479 Posts
Super Chicken? That reminds me of the movie Mysterious Island.

Not sure I want to eat engineered food... but we probably already have been and don't know it.



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,780 Posts
Texas Armadillo said:
Super Chicken? That reminds me of the movie Mysterious Island.

Not sure I want to eat engineered food... but we probably already have been and don't know it.



I love that movie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,907 Posts
Remember the old cartoon?

1 What do you get when you cross a Chicken with a Ostrich?


2 what do you get when you cross a Chicken with a Centipede?

Answers below
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1 A Chicken with bigger drum sticks.

2 A Chicken with more drum sticks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,554 Posts
I'll be getting my bachelor's degree in biochemistry in the spring, and I feel that it really depends on what they do. If they make it so the chicken grows bigger by knocking out a gene, fine. If they do it by making the chicken produce more hormones, that could be problematic, as we would have a higher chance of ingesting these hormones (or potentially anti-biotics...). I have no problem with cloned food. It's the same as natural if it is truely cloned, but it does have a higher potential for genetic diseases due to mutations in its genes.

Also, wouldn't it be cool to have a glowing chicken? Have the chicken express GFP and you'll have a really cool chicken that you could use as a night light (although you have to shine UV light on it). Too bad it won't glow once cooked :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,519 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
djv38, I hear what your saying and agree. My fear is that with any business they will be driven by greed. If they allow this type of gene splicing to occer then they will be adding growth hormones to the mix. Not to mention Broad-spectrum antibiotics.

I personnaly have no problem with straight forward cloning. However, when selling this product, it should be labled as such. People have a right to know what they are eating.

Remember Soylent Green?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,554 Posts
That was before my time and I have never seen it.

Cloned food would be very expensive, so I really don't see that happening. It's cheaper just to breed two animals and eat their offspring. I could see someone (very rich) saying: "this steak is really good, I want more. Clone it!"

People should know what has been done to their food, and there has been genetically modified food that has gotten into our food source. A class I took a couple of years ago about the ethics of this used an example where corn that was modified to produce a pesticide to kill a worm got into some companies crackers or something like that (I believe it was actually taco shells). At the time, the FDA had said the corn was only good for animal feed, but due to a lack of communication or care, somewhere between the farmer and the processor, it was put into the corn deemed edible by humans. It was caught after a couple of months or so, but the people had no idea it was in their food. This is where the greed comes in to play. There is a higher yield, but it could be potentially dangerous to us, but someone wants the extra cash, so they don't disclose it.

Also, sometimes the modified crops are intermingled with unmodified crops to prevent super bugs (insects that are resistant to all sorts of pesticides). There have been a couple of instances where these have also gone to the wrong places (i.e. animal feed when it shouldn't have). The current crops that are genetically modified with pesticide resistance should be watched very closely by the FDA to make sure they go to the proper places. Also, more testing needs to be done on the effects of these things on people. It could turn out they are safe to eat, but I don't want to take the risk right now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,519 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I think if many americans knew more about the food that comes from asia and down south were there are no regulations to speak of, they would outragged.

Can you say "night soil"?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,591 Posts
djv38 said:
Cloned food would be very expensive, so I really don't see that happening. It's cheaper just to breed two animals and eat their offspring. I could see someone (very rich) saying: "this steak is really good, I want more. Clone it!"
Expensive until you mate two "perfect" cloned animals. Then you have just the best of the best cloned meat to offer without having to clone another animal.
But doesn't offspring of cloned animals die early since cloned animals don't live as long as non-cloned aninmals?...?
I don't know, to me its like easting a disease animal if it can't live a normal life cycle...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,605 Posts
One more reason to eat your burrito at Chipotle. No genetically altered crap is (or ever will be) sold there. Only all naturally fed with no antibiotics added. Man I love those burritos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,554 Posts
tqtran said:
But doesn't offspring of cloned animals die early since cloned animals don't live as long as non-cloned aninmals?...?
I don't know, to me its like easting a disease animal if it can't live a normal life cycle...
I know when animals first begun to be cloned they aged faster (i.e. Dolly the sheep). I have not heard much about it since then, so they might be able to do something about that, but also the genes already have mutated quite a bit, so there's a higher probability of things like cancer and various other genetically related diseases. Usually, these errors are limited due to both parents contributing DNA to their offspring. But, if they age faster, you can eat them sooner :lol:
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top