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.

 

What is the problem with cloned meat?

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmashPapayaKC

Originally posted by webpirate
I honestly think the issue isn't with the meat so much as "moral" issues from religious groups. We are playing god by creating life. We are all evil, the animals we create are evil and so the meat must also be evil.
If god meant for us to eat cloned meat he would have just made more animals himself.


Way off topic I am sorry but I am tired of hearing this, seen similar post like this before in several topics.
Speak for yourself,You may be evil, I am certainly not evil. Do not include the whole human race to a handful of scientists.You are calling yourself evil, so why do you care about what "God" thinks or does? That eliminates your "moral" issue, Cause evil people do not have morals. I am really sorry webpirate to use this post as an example, just again really tired of looking at we all are evil crap again.


Pretty sure the post was supposed to be the way religious groups see this as a moral issue, not the poster's actual feelings about it



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Let's start with reducing the amount of food thrown away. Then we can increase the amount of vegetables in our diet. And then there might be some food-companies that are evil that needs to be split up. There is a reason why I want to use this tech in that order. Because we will see some negative effects, it would be naive not to expect that. And, our food-manufacturers will try to hide those effects with their best people. That will be bad for people's health.

Because once you open the door for cloning, some nasty things might pop up along the way. There might be new viruses or bacterias in the organisms we create. Those can become a problem. It might be that a new bacteria is created in the belly of an Ox we create. A new bacteria with some really dangerous abilities. Maybe something that has an incubation-period in 20 years before you can detect it. If there is such a thing, we will have the same problem with cloning as artificial supplements to food: Some things will cause cancer, but because the food-supply is contaminated we don't know which of the artificial supplements that are cancerous.

Today we have a situation where male fertility is in decline in the industrialized world. There is no explanation for that anomaly yet. Life-expectancy has also risen, and that is the standard explanation why cancer is more common. But, what if we have a situation where we have some agents chopping at the genome of the entire population? There is born less men now then before. That could be a indicator that our genome has been compromised by something, because of the structure of the Y-chromosome relative to the X. We have a steady influx of immigration worldwide. That will protect us for some time against the destruction of mankind's genome. But, that protection won't last for long. It might be that we are in a very, very, very bad situation at this point. If this is true, do you think your government would tell you about it? I suggest you start gather data as well. Try to see the big picture on what's going on.

If you take a compromised genome and an inability for society to already pay for health care for todays population, you will start to see the contours of some possibilities in the future that we do not want. Social-Darwinism will be something we should be wary of if that happens. If I sound like a pessimist, it might be that I realize that world food-security is very low. We tried to protect ourselves with guns. How stupid is that? It's economy, micro-organisms and chemical byproducts that pose the real threat. We can't win any war if our supply-lines fall down. That is my worst fear. Not being able to keep the world civil. Loosing the war on violence.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by satron
 


See, but that is exactly the point. Chemically, the animal will be 100% organic and natural. It is "fake" I suppose you could say... but only .0000000001%? I mean, it's not natural as we may know it, however out of all the scientific processes, this would be the absolute closest to natural as I can think of.


If all a human needed to live on was chemicals, how come they don't have a regime of pills you can swallow so you aren't required to eat anything?

If you want cloned meat, I'm sure you're going to be paying a lot more per pound than traditionally organic livestock. Cloning isn't cheap. Think about what it takes to clone and what it takes to naturally raise an animal.




"There’s no way for the consumer to know whether they’re getting cloned meat or their offspring," said Will Rostov, a senior attorney at the Center for Food Safety, a agricultural advocacy group.


They'll definately be able to tell when they look at the price.
edit on 27-11-2011 by satron because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by PhysicsAdept
 


The problem comes when they switch genes in their DNA to "improve" the livestock



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   




"There’s no way for the consumer to know whether they’re getting cloned meat or their offspring," said Will Rostov, a senior attorney at the Center for Food Safety, a agricultural advocacy group.


They'll definately be able to tell when they look at the price.
edit on 27-11-2011 by satron because: (no reason given)


That wasn't what that quote was intended to represent. If you read the posts, it was more about the taste, composition of the meat than the price.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
I don't like eating chicken two days in a row. Why would i like eating the identical animal over and over again? LOL

I heard KFC has so many chicken wings and legs because they genetically modifiy their chickens to have 6 legs and 4 wings each. Also, TacoBell's beef is only 30% meat, so I guess eating cloned meat wouldn't be much different.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012




"There’s no way for the consumer to know whether they’re getting cloned meat or their offspring," said Will Rostov, a senior attorney at the Center for Food Safety, a agricultural advocacy group.


They'll definately be able to tell when they look at the price.
edit on 27-11-2011 by satron because: (no reason given)


That wasn't what that quote was intended to represent. If you read the posts, it was more about the taste, composition of the meat than the price.


Well, it should have been included. Price can effect taste. Ever been let down by the taste of an expensive food because the taste didn't match the price? Then some people will say food tastes better the more costly it is. Caviar? Shark fins that the Japanese pay so much for, but in reality have no taste what so ever?
edit on 27-11-2011 by satron because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Reptius
 


I have read that other animals if given the choice will not eat GMO.... I also read that dolly the clones sheep died young. If mother nature did not make it. I dont trust it...



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
what I don't see is the point of cloning animals. I mean we waste so much food at the moment. There is no world food shortage, there is a distribution problem.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by tooo many pills
I don't like eating chicken two days in a row. Why would i like eating the identical animal over and over again? LOL

I heard KFC has so many chicken wings and legs because they genetically modifiy their chickens to have 6 legs and 4 wings each. Also, TacoBell's beef is only 30% meat, so I guess eating cloned meat wouldn't be much different.


Maybe they will cross it with a spider next and have an eight legged chicken....



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
I think the biggest problem with cloned meat is people's mindsets. They have enough food to eat, so therefore they are able to form barriers that protect their "comfort level".

Ask a starving person if they care, and I believe when it comes to hunger, there is no prejudice involved.

A cloned cow takes as long to grow, tastes the same, has the same blood in it as the donor cow, and will produce the same cuts of meat.

Then again, I haven't actually saw any meat in the grocery store labelled as "Cloned Beef Roast", or "Cloned Chicken Wings", so as far as the taste goes, I'll wait until they start labeling it as such, and be the first to buy some, and toss it on the barby.

I tend toward the carnivorous side of my omnivorous upbringing. Give me meat.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
My problem is that I would feel like I was eating the same old thing over and over again.

Seriously though, I think the main issue is that cloning, due to activists slowing it down, is still in its infancy. The successes are still out weighed by the public fears and opinions. One day they will get it right with no adverse effects to Human life and maybe the conditions that surround our current meat harvesting process will get better. One can only hope.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   
When we are talking MEAT cloned from cells and not cloned animals I say GREAT! we will then have clean protien that never had a life to torture and snuff. I a vegetarian am all for this!



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
My theory is as follows:

Super simple: if they are just cloning the animal... Putting the genetic material of a particular animal into an empty of genetic material egg, then it "SHOULD" be fine and just a copy of the original.

The photocopy: if we make a clone of a clone of a clone, there would be some defects that would creep up after an unknown number of copies. Who knows if the defects start showing up in the initial clone or further down the copy sequence.

The "Mad Scientist": well if we can clone, why not make it better, we'll just change this gene here to make the cow 300% larger, that one there to make the milk never spoil, and let's not forget that one that makes the farts smell like roses so we make perfume......oh, how could we know that when changing all those genes we'd end up making the urine into an acid that kills anything and melts though any material known to man?

The scientist in me looks for the benefits of doing things in a controlled environment, the person in me gets scared of the Umbrella Corporation aspect of it all.
edit on 27-11-2011 by FleetAdmiral because: iPad related typos and fixing the leaving words out that otherwise would make sentences not make sense.



posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Like another poster said, i dont really see the point in cloning whole animals just to butcher them for meat. I am not against eating it, because it would be just like a "natural" animal. Cloning is all about making an identical duplicate.

Where i do see the value is in where this will lead. With advancements in cloning science i think we may get to a point in time where instead of cloning a whole animal the scientists could find a way to clone just the edible parts.

Instead of chicken farms, there are warehouses that grow cloned chicken breasts. Just the breast, so there is no actual animals for peta to get all mad about. No chicken poop to cause bad meat. Just a nice big juicy chicken breast cloned from a prize winning 100% perfect chicken, 100% chemically identical to one you would get from a butchered "natural" chicken.

DC



posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by xDeadcowx
Like another poster said, i dont really see the point in cloning whole animals just to butcher them for meat. I am not against eating it, because it would be just like a "natural" animal. Cloning is all about making an identical duplicate.

Where i do see the value is in where this will lead. With advancements in cloning science i think we may get to a point in time where instead of cloning a whole animal the scientists could find a way to clone just the edible parts.

Instead of chicken farms, there are warehouses that grow cloned chicken breasts. Just the breast, so there is no actual animals for peta to get all mad about. No chicken poop to cause bad meat. Just a nice big juicy chicken breast cloned from a prize winning 100% perfect chicken, 100% chemically identical to one you would get from a butchered "natural" chicken.

DC

They actually have already done this but have not progressed to the point of mass production. Meat without the suffering of animals just protein grown as lean and healthy as possible, no drugs, no compromised feed, no poop!

It looked the same to me as any meat on the program I watched, but they say that people will not except it. I can't understand this, while people eat machine separated meat, ground unknowns and call body fluids and blood "juice"!



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 



Maybe they will cross it with a spider next and have an eight legged chicken....


What if they cloned that big breasted, eight-legged chicken millions and millions of times then delivered it fully-cooked to your door step every day? I bet everyone would scarf it down then. 0=



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join