It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FDA Issues Final Regulations for Genetically Engineered Animals

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 03:54 AM
link   

FDA Issues Final Regulations for Genetically Engineered Animals


www.sparkpeople.com

Consumer labeling not required for foods from these animals, agency says
THURSDAY, Jan. 15 (HealthDay News) -- The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Thursday issued its final regulations governing the approval of genetically engineered animals.

The rules do not require consumer labeling for foods from these animals.

Genetic engineering involves using recombinant DNA (rDNA) to introduce new characteristics or traits into an animal. The new FDA guidance tells producers of these animals what they need to do to get the newly engineered animal approved by the agency.

"It serves to reassure stakeholders that FDA has clear standards for regulatory decisions on these animals allowing us, when appropriate, to bring safe, effective products to market in a timely manner," Randall Lutter, deputy commissioner for policy in the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine, said during a morning teleconference.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 03:54 AM
link   
The rest of the article:
Genetically engineered animals will require FDA approval before they can enter the marketplace, Lutter said. In addition, producers of these animals will also have to comply with the law and regulations of the National Environmental Policy Act, he said.

Although many kinds of genetically engineered animals are in development, none has yet been approved by the agency for marketing.

In September, a draft of the new regulations was made available for public comment and the final version takes into account some of these comments, Lutter said.

"This technology holds great promise for the health of both animals and humans," Dr. Bernadette Dunham, director of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine, said during the teleconference.

Proponents of genetic engineering say the practice will lead to animals that can grow faster, produce healthier foods, such as heart-healthy eggs, or be resistant to certain diseases, such as mad cow disease.

In addition, genetic engineering can improve the environment by making animal waste less toxic, Dunham said. "Pigs have been genetically engineered to produce less phosphorus in their waste to address agricultural runoff," she said.

Fish have already been genetically engineered to grow to market size faster, "so that the wild ocean populations will not be subject to such intensive harvest pressure," Dunham said.

Opponents say the practice could unleash unintended consequences by altering the traditional genetic structures of animals.

During the comment period, many consumer groups asked the FDA to require labels identifying food as coming from genetically engineered animals.

However, FDA officials said Thursday that while a genetically engineered animal has to be labeled as such, any food products from that animal do not.

"All genetically engineered animals have to be accompanied by labeling so that they can be distinguished from non-genetically engineered counterparts," Larisa Rudenko, senior advisor for biotechnology in the Center for Veterinary Medicine, said during the teleconference.

"[The] FDA is required to ask for labeling if there is a material difference in the food that comes from these animals, but we are not required by law to ask producers to indicate that food comes from genetically engineered animals," she said.

Genetically engineered food production has been around for a long time. Genetically engineered yeast is used in baking and brewing, and other products from genetically engineered microbes are used in cheese-making. Genetically engineered microbes are also widely used in medicine to produce drugs.

Certain animals are being genetically altered to be used in human transplantations -- for instance, providing cells, tissues or organs that are less likely to be rejected by the human immune system. These include islet cells to help diabetics, skin grafts for burn victims, and liver, kidney or heart replacements for the critically ill.

The safety of genetically engineered animals intended for use as food will be decided on a case-by-case basis, Dunham said. Producers of these animals will have to demonstrate that the new genetic traits perform as claimed, the agency added.

More information:
This is the link to the FDA site about this and it starts with an introduction etc.
www.fda.gov...

I am not sure about you guys but I am grossed out and angry that they are going to be able to mass produce this stuff someday and not tell us what is natural and what has been altered. The article says none have been approved, yet later in the article it states; they are already doing this with pigs and fish.(?) Which one is it?
I have yet to see or hear anything about this in the MSM which angers me even more. We have a right to know what they are doing to our food supply. Relying on them to tell us what is safe and isn't has not worked in the recent past. Why should we trust them now?



www.sparkpeople.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by xoxo stacie
The rules do not require consumer labeling for foods from these animals.


This is proof that they want to trick people into eating it.

Why not give us the freedom to decide for ourselves if we want to eat your genetically modified crap!

This is all about deception people. If the FDA were honest, and had nothing to hide, they would label it for what it is.

The evil elite are planning something very sinister, and they don't want us to know what it is.

What is wrong with normal animals, for God's sake?! What is their pathetic excuse for introducing this anyway?!


Originally posted by xoxo stacie
"This technology holds great promise for the health of both animals and humans," Dr. Bernadette Dunham, director of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine, said during the teleconference.


Yeah, since they and their associates want to reduce the global population, I'm sure it holds great promise for our health. Notice they didn't say it whether it would be good for our health...



[edit on 16/1/09 by NuclearPaul]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 06:41 AM
link   
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS.


Indeed, there's your problem.

Google it. There are videos on youtube too.

I'm not going to go into extreme detail here, you can do that yourself as there is much to learn, however I will say under their guidelines vitamins will be considered toxic, and food will be mandated to be irradiated and filled with growth hormones.

Why doesn't anyone mind? Maybe because no one has ever heard of what is going on.

It's strange to me hearing this sooner than February, as this is when the Codex guidlines are supposed to be implemented. Guess this is just paving the way.

You can blame the WTO. Globalization, anyone?



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 07:02 AM
link   
Okay, so here is the link to the first video. I couldn't get it in that last post for the life of me...



Codex Alimentarius



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join