Why do we need cloned meat?

[RedGlitter]

I don't get it. What's the point?



FDA Set to Give Final OK to Food Derived From Cloned Animals

Tuesday, January 15, 2008





Food derived from cloned cattle, pigs and goats is safe to enter the American food supply, according to a long-awaited final report from the Food and Drug Administration obtained by the Washington Post.

The 968-page "final risk assessment" concludes there is no evidence to support opponents' concerns that food from cloned animals poses hidden risks, the newspaper reported.

• Click here to read the Washington Post report.

Despite the FDA report, it still will be years before foods from cloned animals show up on store shelves, in part because the clones themselves are too valuable to slaughter or milk, the Post reports.

Instead, the replicas of prize-winning farm animals reportedly will primarily be used as breeding stock to create what is hoped will become a new generation of superior farm animals.

FDA officials have said they do not expect to require food from clones to be labeled as such, but they may allow foods from ordinary animals to be labeled as not from clones.

[yaaarrrgg]

Well, it certainly puts an interesting twist to the whole vegetarian diet. If we can clone a steak in a dish, that removes the moral issue of killing an animal to get it. Might be cheaper to produce as well.

Course, I wouldn't eat it ... I just don't like the taste of meat. But I'm not a vegetarian for moral reasons.

[RedGlitter]

I don't know, Yarg. How does it remove the moral issue? I used to be a veggie and I had quit meat because of the pain and suffering the animals go through. I am assuming even a cloned animal can feel pain??

[el guapo]

still has to be slaugtered

[yaaarrrgg]

Yes, that's a good point. I was thinking though that the next step, they are going to be cloning tissue. Just a chunk of muscle ... for example. In that case, I wouldn't think it would feel pain.

[mikeinie]

That way you can be guaranteed the same

great taste

Over and over and over again! :wah:

[RedGlitter]

yaaarrrgg;758388 wrote: Yes, that's a good point. I was thinking though that the next step, they are going to be cloning tissue. Just a chunk of muscle ... for example. In that case, I wouldn't think it would feel pain.


I see. That may be true. But boy, that sounds gross. :wah:

[el guapo]

in the uk at the mo the big food Q is about chicken how it is reared

battery chicken

at the moment a basic chicken is £3,50-£5

there trying to get the supermarkets to stop selling then

the prob is an organic chicken is £10ish

if the battery hen are got rid off chicken will be an expensive meal

[theia]

el guapo;758398 wrote: in the uk at the mo the big food Q is about chicken how it is reared

battery chicken

at the moment a basic chicken is £3,50-£5

there trying to get the supermarkets to stop selling then

the prob is an organic chicken is £10ish

if the battery hen are got rid off chicken will be an expensive meal


When I was growing up in the 50s, chicken was a luxury because it was so expensive. After seeing those programmes on Channel 4 last week and the way chickens are farmed intensively, I would prefer to see it going back to being a luxury. It seems that a few of the supermarkets are making moves to stock only free range eggs and meat, over the next couple of years.

[el guapo]

theia;758409 wrote: When I was growing up in the 50s, chicken was a luxury because it was so expensive. After seeing those programmes on Channel 4 last week and the way chickens are farmed intensively, I would prefer to see it going back to being a luxury. It seems that a few of the supermarkets are making moves to stock only free range eggs and meat, over the next couple of years.


could be a good thing

[theia]

el guapo;758412 wrote: could be a good thing


Yes, I think so, Jess...but whether it will actually happen is another matter.

[el guapo]

theia;758414 wrote: Yes, I think so, Jess...but whether it will actually happen is another matter.


ok as long as prices dont go through the roof

[YZGI]

Cloned children will need something to eat..

[Bryn Mawr]

RedGlitter;758366 wrote: I don't get it. What's the point?



FDA Set to Give Final OK to Food Derived From Cloned Animals




If you take it through the process then, assuming it's cheep enough to take off at all and does not bounce off of public prejudice, then the meat farmers will gravitate to the clone giving the highest meat yield and the dairy farmer will go for the clone giving the highest milk yield and we'll end up with a genetically impoverished stock.

Then along comes a new / mutated disease or a drought / excess rain or a blight on the particular feed plant of preference and the entire herd goes under for want of adaptability.

Maybe a short term gain in profitability but a disaster in the long term - regardless of the health implications in eating the meat (which, in any case, cannot be half as bad as the effects of pumping the cattle full of hormones to induce weight gain).

[YZGI]

In super markets will they call the steaks, recreated meat?

[Bryn Mawr]

jimbo;758425 wrote: well said bryn i'm glad you managed to get the thread back on track after wize guy de railed it :-6



i read somewhere the other day that lots of kids were hitting pubity really early coz of all the growth hormoes ,has any one else heard about this


Yes, that's one of the effects - another is male sterility because some of the hormones mimic oestrogen.

[gmc]

jimbo;758425 wrote: well said bryn i'm glad you managed to get the thread back on track after wize guy de railed it :-6



i read somewhere the other day that lots of kids were hitting pubity really early coz of all the growth hormoes ,has any one else heard about this


Yep, it's one of the major causes of dispute between the EU and US. They use hormones in their cattle banned by the EU. There are articles all over the place about it.

These are old but it is still rumbling on.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/622509.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/the ... 343475.stm

http://www.global-reality.com/biotech/a ... ews045.htm

Remember Oprah Winfrey got sued for pointing out american cattle had BSE? She won the case I think.

[Kathy Ellen]

jimbo;758425 wrote:



i read somewhere the other day that lots of kids were hitting pubity really early coz of all the growth hormoes ,has any one else heard about this


Yes, I agree Jim and gmc,

As a teacher, I can see the rapid growth in children's growth patterns due to harmones in our foods. Girls did not usually reach their puberty (between 11-13 yrs. old) and now some 8 yr old girls are reaching puberty. :-2

It is indeed very scary:-2

[Kathy Ellen]

jimbo;758537 wrote: http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a873e4d721c.htm







i hope this the right link


Thanks Jim....some thoughts to ponder in that article. It's sad to see my little girls so developed at such a young age. They just don't what's happening to them:o

[Sheryl]

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

I just love how it's always American beef is always pumped full of hormones. When it's not.



There's no need for cloned meat, there is not a shortage of cows for beef or milk. Nor is there a shortage of chickens or pigs. Cloning a cow is not going to produce the same quality of meat as the orginal. Good beef comes from the feed and environment just as much as the dna of the cattle. :rolleyes:

[Bryn Mawr]

Sheryl;758574 wrote: :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

I just love how it's always American beef is always pumped full of hormones. When it's not.



There's no need for cloned meat, there is not a shortage of cows for beef or milk. Nor is there a shortage of chickens or pigs. Cloning a cow is not going to produce the same quality of meat as the orginal. Good beef comes from the feed and environment just as much as the dna of the cattle. :rolleyes:


An American site trying to justify the use of hormones in beef production :-

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Intervet_C ... tID=181941

“Pound-for-pound, beef produced with grains and growth hormones produces 40% less greenhouse gas emissions and saves two-thirds more land for nature compared to organic grass-fed beef.”



Another article discussing the issue :-

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... id=1083852

For 15 years, the USA and the EU have been butting heads over whether the use of growth hormones in beef production poses any risk for consumers. The dispute has even spilled over on to the streets when protesters at the World Trade Organization summit in November, 1999 in Seattle attacked the WTO for, among other things, lining up with the USA and trying to force their hormone-treated beef on to the European market. Each side has continued to assert that it possesses scientific evidence supporting the use, or the ban, of growth hormones in beef production.



And :-

http://lists.envirolink.org/pipermail/a ... 10167.html

Ninety-five percent of US beef is produced using growth-promoting hormones.

I'd love to know why you think the US do not use hormones in beef production.

[RedGlitter]

Yucck Scrat! That doesn't say much for those lowdown hyenas. Poor buffalo.

A little warning next time pleeze? :-3

[firebird]

I think the reason that Sheryl does not believe that all beef production does not use hormones is because of where she is from. We live in the heart of beef production in Texas. I was a farmer/rancher, I have family in the feedlot industry and I have a degree in Agribusiness. I am not saying hormones are not used, but not to the extreme that most think. I have read many of the articles on the use and abuse of hormones and if you will look at the source they are pro organic propaganda. That is another argument all together. I do not think that we need cloned beef because the quality is in genetics, but if you just use cloned animals, breeding for better animals will slow. But also at the same time feed rations and the quality of the feed will determine wether or not the beef will be very good.

[gpthomlinson]

Hi All

The other problem, surely, with cloned meat is the susceptibilty to diseases. A wide variation in a herd means that, if a really bad disease strikes, then at least some will survive - just as a some people survive the large flu or plague epidemics. But if they are all identical, the thing that kills one, kills all.

Gail

[Bryn Mawr]

firebird;758597 wrote: I think the reason that Sheryl does not believe that all beef production does not use hormones is because of where she is from. We live in the heart of beef production in Texas. I was a farmer/rancher, I have family in the feedlot industry and I have a degree in Agribusiness. I am not saying hormones are not used, but not to the extreme that most think. I have read many of the articles on the use and abuse of hormones and if you will look at the source they are pro organic propaganda. That is another argument all together. I do not think that we need cloned beef because the quality is in genetics, but if you just use cloned animals, breeding for better animals will slow. But also at the same time feed rations and the quality of the feed will determine wether or not the beef will be very good.


Thanks for the lowdown - it's often difficult to know just how biased the articles are.

As I've said above, my fear is he inevitable shrinkage of the gene pool as everyone moves to the highest yield lines.

[gmc]

firebird;758597 wrote: I think the reason that Sheryl does not believe that all beef production does not use hormones is because of where she is from. We live in the heart of beef production in Texas. I was a farmer/rancher, I have family in the feedlot industry and I have a degree in Agribusiness. I am not saying hormones are not used, but not to the extreme that most think. I have read many of the articles on the use and abuse of hormones and if you will look at the source they are pro organic propaganda. That is another argument all together. I do not think that we need cloned beef because the quality is in genetics, but if you just use cloned animals, breeding for better animals will slow. But also at the same time feed rations and the quality of the feed will determine wether or not the beef will be very good.


Pro organic propaganda as opposed to the biotech companies? The source doesn't make the content any more or less valid.

The thing is it's the consumers choice. In the UK and eu there is tremendous opposition to GM crops and the use of hormones and such. This despite the fact that the first cloning of animals was done on the UK. Bio tech companies like monsanto just trying to dismiss the opposition as being from a bunch of tree huggers results in people getting even more suspicious. If it's labelled people can decide if they want to buy it or not. When companies object to labelling people ask why do they object. Consumer choice doesn't just mean you can choose what you buy it also means you can choose not to have any of it. Companies do not have the right to do what they like- Americans can eat what they like it's their choice if they are daft enough to make it. It seems in the US you have a culture where companies don't seem to think their activities should be subject to any kind of control or people are not allowed to question what farmers are up to. Those that do are dismissed as fruit loops.

After BSE no one trusts the governments or the food companies-after all they are the ones that thought it a good idea to feed animal protein to cattle in the first place because there was no evidence it did any harm.

The UK is a very small crowded island . This stuff was getting in to our water courses and fish were becoming feminised. there was also problems with the chemicals farms used on their crops and the way we treated sewage but things have improved considerably over the last twenty years or so. It's a visible difference that anyone going in to the countryside can see. People are more conscious of what is in their food than ever before.

[RedGlitter]

"When you buy a box of Cheerios in New York and one in Champaign, Illinois, you know they are going to be the same. By shortening the genetic pool using clones, you can do a similar thing."

JON FISHER, president and owner of Prairie State Semen in Illinois, after the F.D.A. declared cloned animals safe for the food supply.



Prairie State Semen?! Geez.

[Sheryl]

gmc;758715 wrote: Pro organic propaganda as opposed to the biotech companies? The source doesn't make the content any more or less valid.

The thing is it's the consumers choice. In the UK and eu there is tremendous opposition to GM crops and the use of hormones and such. This despite the fact that the first cloning of animals was done on the UK. Bio tech companies like monsanto just trying to dismiss the opposition as being from a bunch of tree huggers results in people getting even more suspicious. If it's labelled people can decide if they want to buy it or not. When companies object to labelling people ask why do they object. Consumer choice doesn't just mean you can choose what you buy it also means you can choose not to have any of it. Companies do not have the right to do what they like- Americans can eat what they like it's their choice if they are daft enough to make it. It seems in the US you have a culture where companies don't seem to think their activities should be subject to any kind of control or people are not allowed to question what farmers are up to. Those that do are dismissed as fruit loops.

After BSE no one trusts the governments or the food companies-after all they are the ones that thought it a good idea to feed animal protein to cattle in the first place because there was no evidence it did any harm.

The UK is a very small crowded island . This stuff was getting in to our water courses and fish were becoming feminised. there was also problems with the chemicals farms used on their crops and the way we treated sewage but things have improved considerably over the last twenty years or so. It's a visible difference that anyone going in to the countryside can see. People are more conscious of what is in their food than ever before.


You have no clue. My husband grew up on a farm, and went to school for farming, I think he knows what he's talking about. Companies liked Monsanto have helped with the farming industry more than harm it. Monsanto, Dupont, and other companies like this are more restrained in the U.S. by the E.P.A. All chemicals are labeled, only after 4 or more years of trials. When the chemicals are applied, the temperature, amount sprayed, wind speed and direction, what crop, and target pestl are all reported to the E.P.A and state agricultural agencies. With proper application and regulations we greatly reduced our problems with runoffs and pollution of the environment.

[gmc]

Sheryl;758885 wrote: You have no clue. My husband grew up on a farm, and went to school for farming, I think he knows what he's talking about. Companies liked Monsanto have helped with the farming industry more than harm it. Monsanto, Dupont, and other companies like this are more restrained in the U.S. by the E.P.A. All chemicals are labeled, only after 4 or more years of trials. When the chemicals are applied, the temperature, amount sprayed, wind speed and direction, what crop, and target pestl are all reported to the E.P.A and state agricultural agencies. With proper application and regulations we greatly reduced our problems with runoffs and pollution of the environment.


Neither do you. If that is the only comment you have to make then I'm really not impressed. As I said you seem to have a culture where people are not supposed to question what farmers and biotech companies are up to, as you've just demonstrated.

I couldn't actually care less what you do in America. But as a consumer I reserve the right to know what is in my food and not to buy it if I think it unsafe. If producers can't handle that then tough-they will go out of business.

I am deeply suspicious when producers are keen to hide how stuff is grown and what is used in the production of meat. I don't know if you export or not but you need to understand that the insistence on labelling in Europe is as a result of public demand not some anti American tactic in a trade war as it's sometimes portrayed. You banned British beef because of BSE yet you have it in your own cattle and moan when the Japanese slap on an import ban. Does it not make you wonder what else goes on?

With proper application and regulations we greatly reduced our problems with runoffs and pollution of the environment


So all these super safe products didn't cause you any problems then? If you had known the consequences would you have used them, and if you knew what your were doing why did you do it?

If you're daft enough not to care it's your look out. If you believe no one should question what farmers or agri-business are doing then I have no sympathy for you. Companies like monsanto are restrained for the simple reason they have caused considerable damage in the past-even a cursory trawl through the internet will turn up dozens of examples-and If you're daft enough to trust them well good luck to you.

[Sheryl]

:wah::wah::wah: be back when i'm done laughing :wah::wah::wah:

[firebird]

gmc;758896 wrote: Neither do you. If that is the only comment you have to make then I'm really not impressed. As I said you seem to have a culture where people are not supposed to question what farmers and biotech companies are up to, as you've just demonstrated.

Hey question me all you want and I will give you answers. No one said that we were beyond question.

I couldn't actually care less what you do in America. But as a consumer I reserve the right to know what is in my food and not to buy it if I think it unsafe. If producers can't handle that then tough-they will go out of business.

Buy what you want, it makes no difference to me. As a farmer I am not directly selling to anyone in the market. You are buying through a middle man who controls what might be in your food and whats on the label.

I am deeply suspicious when producers are keen to hide how stuff is grown and what is used in the production of meat. I don't know if you export or not but you need to understand that the insistence on labelling in Europe is as a result of public demand not some anti American tactic in a trade war as it's sometimes portrayed.

I really didn't know I was hiding anything when I grew my crops, considering I had to report my acres planted, chemical applications and yeilds to the government. When I had cattle there was nothing to hide there either.



You banned British beef because of BSE yet you have it in your own cattle and moan when the Japanese slap on an import ban. Does it not make you wonder what else goes on?

The reason for the moan when the Japanese banned is because of market damage. BSE in not a major problem here.

As of May 2007, fourteen cases of BSE have been identified in North America. Of these fourteen cases, three were identified in the U.S. and eleven in Canada. Of the three cases identified in the U.S., one was born in Canada; of the 11 cases identified in Canada, one was imported from the United Kingdom.

So all these super safe products didn't cause you any problems then? If you had known the consequences would you have used them, and if you knew what your were doing why did you do it?

No one has ever said all chemicals are super safe, besides you. But knowledge has grown and with proper application there is less risk. And yes I probably would have used most of the chemicals I have anyway, because at the times I applied them that was the best option for the probems I faced.

If you're daft enough not to care it's your look out. If you believe no one should question what farmers or agri-business are doing then I have no sympathy for you. Companies like monsanto are restrained for the simple reason they have caused considerable damage in the past-even a cursory trawl through the internet will turn up dozens of examples-and If you're daft enough to trust them well good luck to you.


I do care, but I am also educated and live with the real facts. Not the ones in the editorial opinionated columns that you apparently read. I ask for no sympathy, just that you actually use some common sense and not be a retard. The big companies are not always out to get you, sometimes they actually help you, even in your blindness.

[RedGlitter]

Why do so many of these threads deteriorate into "what's wrong with America?" Can't we have a good discussion without that? And without calling someone daft?? We have a farm family here. At least hear them out whether you choose to believe or not.

[gmc]

RedGlitter;758950 wrote: Why do so many of these threads deteriorate into "what's wrong with America?" Can't we have a good discussion without that? And without calling someone daft?? We have a farm family here. At least hear them out whether you choose to believe or not.


I'm trying to keep it general but it's difficult. As to calling someone daft I object to being told

You have no clue. My husband grew up on a farm, and went to school for farming, I think he knows what he's talking about. Companies liked Monsanto have helped with the farming industry more than harm it.


I do have a clue and am as capable of understanding the science behind it as any farmer. So are a lot of people, farmers are not somehow gifted with knowledge that makes them the best people to listen to. With BSE maybe if they had bothered checking what was in the cattle feed they might not have used it. We had farmers representative on national TV pleading ignorance. The stuf was exported throughout europe french and german cattle hve it as well they're just sneakier about hiding it. Whether BSE will be a problem in the future only time will tell. But that's just one of a number of issues.

Monsanto in the UK made the mistake of trying to us the law to stop people protesting against GM crops and prevent articles being printed. All it did was stir up resentment and a widespread consumer boycott that resulted in GM foods being withdrawn wholesale from supermarket shelves. They did the same in europe. People don't like being patronised and told not to worry.

I couldn't actually care less what you do in America. But as a consumer I reserve the right to know what is in my food and not to buy it if I think it unsafe. If producers can't handle that then tough-they will go out of business.

Buy what you want, it makes no difference to me. As a farmer I am not directly selling to anyone in the market. You are buying through a middle man who controls what might be in your food and what's on the label.




You should care what consumers want, it affects your export trade and not just with the EU. Incidentally in the EU food producers are told how to label their products. They are a middle man and they do control what's in the food and can put in what they like but they have to tell everyone what they've done. what chemicals are used how much meat etc. etc..

I do care, but I am also educated and live with the real facts. Not the ones in the editorial opinionated columns that you apparently read. I ask for no sympathy, just that you actually use some common sense and not be a retard. The big companies are not always out to get you, sometimes they actually help you, even in your blindness.




Maybe if you used some common sense and read a bit more than the sales brochures you might be a bit more cynical. Big companies are not out to get me or anyone but with a lot of then it's because they know they have to be careful not to annoy the public. Given half a chance they would stop anyone questioning their activities and the more people like you they can convince they shouldn't be called to account the better they like it.

I am actually also educated and capable of looking at the facts and it must be an american viewpoint but over here someone who disagrees with you or has a different point of view isn't a retard. Or maybe using all these chemicals over the years has affected your objective capabilities. I know some of them cause cancer and infertility but am not aware of any that cause retardation. My initial response was to call you a clod hopping pillock but decided that wasn't terribly constructive.

Clone your animals all you want. Just don't expect to sell them to anyone outside of america. If you want them good luck to you.

Posted by firebird

I really didn't know I was hiding anything when I grew my crops, considering I had to report my acres planted, chemical applications and yeilds to the government. When I had cattle there was nothing to hide there either.


Incidentally you clearly haven't twigged I'm not am american despite the various clues. I don't care who you report to or what you do as it has no effect on me. I was talking in very general terms. I had to search to find what EPA was. over here it is an epoxy adhesive used in construction.

[Sheryl]

gmc;759084 wrote: I'm trying to keep it general but it's difficult. As to calling someone daft I object to being told



I do have a clue and am as capable of understanding the science behind it as any farmer. So are a lot of people, farmers are not somehow gifted with knowledge that makes them the best people to listen to. With BSE maybe if they had bothered checking what was in the cattle feed they might not have used it. We had farmers representative on national TV pleading ignorance. The stuf was exported throughout europe french and german cattle hve it as well they're just sneakier about hiding it. Whether BSE will be a problem in the future only time will tell. But that's just one of a number of issues.

Monsanto in the UK made the mistake of trying to us the law to stop people protesting against GM crops and prevent articles being printed. All it did was stir up resentment and a widespread consumer boycott that resulted in GM foods being withdrawn wholesale from supermarket shelves. They did the same in europe. People don't like being patronised and told not to worry.

Ok, once more BSE was not, is not a problem in the U.S. We had regulations in place to prevent it.



You should care what consumers want, it affects your export trade and not just with the EU. Incidentally in the EU food producers are told how to label their products. They are a middle man and they do control what's in the food and can put in what they like but they have to tell everyone what they've done. what chemicals are used how much meat etc. etc..

Once we sell our grain, we have no control over where it goes and why.



Maybe if you used some common sense and read a bit more than the sales brochures you might be a bit more cynical. Big companies are not out to get me or anyone but with a lot of then it's because they know they have to be careful not to annoy the public. Given half a chance they would stop anyone questioning their activities and the more people like you they can convince they shouldn't be called to account the better they like it.

I have a feeling American farms and Britian farms are no where near the same. Because if you had a clue to how American farms were ran, you wouldn't be running off the mouth here.

I am actually also educated and capable of looking at the facts and it must be an american viewpoint but over here someone who disagrees with you or has a different point of view isn't a retard. Or maybe using all these chemicals over the years has affected your objective capabilities. I know some of them cause cancer and infertility but am not aware of any that cause retardation. My initial response was to call you a clod hopping pillock but decided that wasn't terribly constructive.

Yea, and I guess you must have a touch of BSE, since you believe us to be so daft! :rolleyes:

Clone your animals all you want. Just don't expect to sell them to anyone outside of america. If you want them good luck to you.



Errr..do you really think it's ever gonna be that we need to clone animals for food. I live within 15 miles of 5 feed lots. Sorry I have a hard time ever seeing a need to for cloning cattle.

Posted by firebird



Incidentally you clearly haven't twigged I'm not am american despite the various clues. I don't care who you report to or what you do as it has no effect on me. I was talking in very general terms. I had to search to find what EPA was. over here it is an epoxy adhesive used in construction.


Yes, I've picked up on your not American, I've been on the forum for awhile. You stated that we had the tendency to hide things, my responding of telling you that we had to report things to our state and federal government was in response to that.

Seriously I'm not going to continue this conversation. You obviously have this fantasy that farmers are chemical loving fools, when in the majorities case this isn't true. But hey, if your ever in the Texas Panhandle, look me up! I'll take you on tours of several American family farms and few feedlots, so you can see for yourself that it's not at all as bad as you've imagined or read it to be.

[Sheryl]

:wah::wah: Where in the world do you get the idea farmers are greedy? You haven't visited a family farm either have you. Let me tell you something, farmers are struggling right along with the rest of you. That's why we went out of farming, because it's to expensive, and with market prices, a farmer is lucky to break even. So before you go on your evil greedy farmer tirade, take a look at the facts. The only farms making money are the corporate ones, not the family farmer. :rolleyes:

[gmc]

Sheryl;759135 wrote: Yes, I've picked up on your not American, I've been on the forum for awhile. You stated that we had the tendency to hide things, my responding of telling you that we had to report things to our state and federal government was in response to that.

Seriously I'm not going to continue this conversation. You obviously have this fantasy that farmers are chemical loving fools, when in the majorities case this isn't true. But hey, if your ever in the Texas Panhandle, look me up! I'll take you on tours of several American family farms and few feedlots, so you can see for yourself that it's not at all as bad as you've imagined or read it to be.


You stated that we had the tendency to hide things, my responding of telling you that we had to report things to our state and federal government was in response to that.


I was talking about these things in general terms not about america in particular. You're right I don't know anything about american farms and never claimed to do so. Which if you had read my posts would have been clear to you. Over here we are very suspicious of food producers and biotech companies and with very good reason.

I didn't state you hide things, frankly I don't care what you do in the states, if american consumers don't want to know that is their problem. In the EU food has to have detailed labelling showing the ingredients. When you come across it american packaging is very different.

I merely pointed out that US exporters trying to get round EU regulations is causing a trade war. They are perceived as having something to hide and the reality is they want to hide GM crops because they know consumer resistance in the EU means it can't be sold and they are also perceived as trying to get us to eat hormone treated meat. We'll buy theb stuiff so long as it meets our safety standards.

It affects both meat and cereal exports from and to bother trading regions, and not just to the eu either. Not just agricultural products either. It's serious, it affects your economy overall. The last thing you need is a trade war.

I thought the different perspective might be of interest. You may not care after you have sold to a middleman but if he has no market for the stuff neither will you.

posted by sheryl

Monsanto in the UK made the mistake of trying to us the law to stop people protesting against GM crops and prevent articles being printed. All it did was stir up resentment and a widespread consumer boycott that resulted in GM foods being withdrawn wholesale from supermarket shelves. They did the same in europe. People don't like being patronised and told not to worry.

Ok, once more BSE was not, is not a problem in the U.S. We had regulations in place to prevent it.




I wasn't actually talking about BSE in the united states. Just to reiterate the UK and EU are not in america. they are different countries- in fact they are on different continents. You seem to have real difficulty understanding that when I am talking about the UK or EU I am not also referring to the US. If I was referring to the US I was start a sentence with something like "in the US"

But since you mention it I suppose that's why did the texas cattleman's association feel the need to sue Oprah Winfrey for daring to mention the possibility on her programme? Too bad they lost the case isn't it?

[Sheryl]

Texas Cattleman sued Oprah because they blamed her for the bottom falling out the market when she made her statement.

[firebird]

Scrat;759464 wrote: Right, so why do you speak of these corporations in such glowing terms? I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.


This is my last post on this thread because it is too difficult to argue with idiots.:-5

Companies such as Monsanto and Dupont do not own farms - corporate farms are large business that come in and buy land, farm it to the max and try to collect the most government money that they can.

Also if we didn't try to make a profit the consumer would starve. Call it greed if you want, but isn't that the purpose of business - to make money? If not you do not, you will not stay in business long. I no longer farm myself because I didn't make enough money. The family farm gone because we were not greedy enough I guess.

[gmc]

Sheryl;759285 wrote: Texas Cattleman sued Oprah because they blamed her for the bottom falling out the market when she made her statement.


They cattlemen lost the case. Personally I think there's something wrong when you can be sued for criticising the way a company or food producers go about their business. All that kind of approach does here (Just to make it clear here in this context is the United kingdom or Britain-as some would have us call it not the US which is on the other side of the world just down the road from canada.) is confirm there is something to hide. Maybe we are just more cynical. With BSE in the UK it was the denials there was a potential problem that really got things stirred up.

Same with the concern over pesticides and GM crops. The more companies try to trash the research criticising their products the more people started reading about the issues and getting concerned.

posted by firebird

idiThis is my last post on this thread because it is too difficult to argue with idiots.




Actually you haven't been arguing with idiots. (If scrat will excuse me since the idiot comment was directed at him. apparently I'm just the retard. In my defence I would like to blame the additives in my food. goodness knows what's in scotch pies but I don't think it's meat:-3) Telling someone they don't have a clue and calling them retards or idiots is not actually arguing with someone. It is the written equivalent of trying to shout someone down. Maybe all those chemicals and hormones are making you very aggressive or something.

[Chezzie]

Anyone fancy a peace burger?

[minks]

jimbo;758425 wrote: well said bryn i'm glad you managed to get the thread back on track after wize guy de railed it :-6



i read somewhere the other day that lots of kids were hitting pubity really early coz of all the growth hormoes ,has any one else heard about this


Yes I have, we here have believed that for ages. Take young girls for instance, look at how early they are "developing" breasts, and think about how often you think one is older than she really is it's shocking. Being the mother of one very shapely 17 year old that is dam bloody frightening... she has been "propositioned" often. She has grown up on local beef and milk, lots and lots of it. Oddly my older on, not the same shape at all and for many years... never ate beef... has me wondering....