Would you eat cloned meat??

Kansas City Star | 12/29/2006 | Clones nearer to our tables

 

No! The thought of it reminds me of the scene in "The Fly" where Jeff Goldblum cooks Geena Davis a steak which he had teleported. That scene always grossed me out for some reason.

 

I have an ugly feeling we probably already have....

 

I agree... I could never eat cloned meat. I mean... I dunno... I know it's still real meat... but at the same time, it kinda feels like it's not!!

 

You think that meat you're eating is "well bred?" Pfft...the only reason you aint got Mad Cow Disease is because you have a FBI and a good cover.

Cloning an animal is..guess what...cloning an animal. NOT genetically modifying it, which is surprising as the US is the #1 in genetically modified produce, now THAT is something that is closer to weirdness.

Note to folks: This is the 21st century. Free choice to say no.

 

Only once.

 

I have enough time with the idea of eating meat as it is.

 

Cloned animals so far have been weak and sickly. Sick animals require a lot of hormones and antibiotics. The chances are very good that cloning will only result in sub par animals so that means the meat won't taste good. I don't see cloned meat in the supermarket anytime soon. However, the FDA in its infinite wisdom has decided that it doesn't need to be labeled as such. Given the phenomenal costs involved, major hurdles will have to be overcome before it becomes affordable.

 

It would depend on how hot the guy was that it was attached to!!

 

Don't see why not. Cloned vegetables have been in the food supply for years.

 

ill eat anything that is lean, and not high in sugar or calories..
so bring it on!

 

Naughty, that is a very Ugly feeling.

I think they would have told us. I have a bit of faith. To be fair, we are eating genetically modified Veggies, so I can't imagine it will be long before meat comes along.

 

CannibaL:tongue:

 

Does this mean every steak I eat is going to taste the same?

That could be a very bad thing.

 

Having read the Kansas City Star piece, I am left wondering..........why?

What's in it for the ranchers that they are hailing it as a "step into the future"?

Are they that bad at breeding cattle the old fashioned way?

They admit that the technology is still expensive so it can't be for cost reasons.

Why, why, why?

 

I suppose there is an advantage in the fact that they can breed healthier cattle, with larger parts of meat on them. More meat=more food.

 

But that would be genetically modifying the cattle, they're talking about just cloning it.

 

They go hand in hand, Amygirl. Like bopperbasting and chocolate.:biggrin1:

 

Oooohhhhh!!

 

I'm usually all for new ideas, but this is not one of those times. I dont think this cloning is a good idea. A good breeding program should be good enough. Although this is'nt necessarily related, my uncle died of Mad cow disease (Creutzfeldt-Jakob) about 10 years ago, he did travel outside the U.S but we cant say for sure where he ate the infected meat. Allot of people are unaware of the fact there HAVE BEEN deaths in the U.S from this.