noworldsystem.com


More “Frankenfoods” heading toward American dinner tables

More “Frankenfoods” heading toward American dinner tables

Telegraph
September 18, 2008

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a proposed legal framework which is expected to open the market to meat and milk produced from modified animals, which detractors have already termed “Frankenfood”.

Such creatures, which could include new hen breeds capable of laying healthier eggs and cows that are immune to mad cow disease, have been developed already.

But producers have been discouraged from marketing their creations by the absence of clear rules governing such a controversial issue.

The government wants the guidelines to resolve questions such as as whether altered animals are safe for human consumption or whether they pose a risk to the environment.

“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 centre.

“We intend to provide a rigorous, risk-based regulatory path for developers to follow to help ensure public health and the health of animals.”

Consumer groups welcomed plans to regulate the area but were alarmed by apparent gaps in the proposals.

They pointed out that the FDA does not, for example, plan to insist that all such meat, fish and poultry be labeled as genetically-engineered.

“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.”

The FDA has already ruled that cloned animals – which are not the same – are safe to eat.

The agency will continue to exempt genetically-altered animals that pose little risk, such as aquarium fish that were recently changed so they would glow in the dark.

Genetically-engineered animals, which are created by the insertion of a gene from one species of animal into the DNA of another, could fulfil a similar role in food production to GM plants.

Genetic engineering is already widely used in agriculture to produce higher-yielding or disease-resistant crops. However, all sides are aware that consumers may be rather more alarmed by the idea of eating GM meat.

Coming Soon to a Grocery Near You: Genetically Engineered Meat
http://blogs.discovermagazine.c..you-genetically-engineered-meat/

Monsanto’s Dangerous Herbicide Will Generate $1.8 Billion in Profits
http://v.mercola.com/b..rate–1-8-Billion-in-Profits-70015.aspx

 



Cloned Beef Has Already Entered U.S. Food Supply

Cloned Beef Has Already Entered U.S. Food Supply, Even Before FDA Nod

Natural News
July 29, 2008

The major cattle cloning companies in the United States have admitted that they have not bothered to try and keep meat from the offspring of clones out of the U.S. food supply, in spite of a request by the FDA several years ago.

“This is a fairy tale that this technology is not being used and is not already in the food chain,” said Donald Coover, who owns a specialty cattle semen business. “Anyone who tells you otherwise either doesn’t know what they’re talking about, or they’re not being honest.”

Coover admitted that for several years, he has been openly selling semen from cloned bulls. He is sure, he added, that others are doing the same.

The revelation came as the FDA approved cloned beef as safe for human consumption but the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) asked farmers to keep it out of the food supply anyway.

The USDA’s primary concern is that if cloned beef enters the U.S. food supply, other countries might refuse to purchase beef from the United States. Similar problems have emerged in the past with genetically modified U.S. crops being rejected, particularly in Europe but also in parts of Africa, Asia and the Americas. Insiders from agencies such as the USDA and Office of the U.S. Trade Representative noted that a product that no other country wants to buy might do the United States more harm than good.

The USDA’s request for a moratorium on cloned beef is meant to give time for “an acceptance process” that will be needed “given the emotional nature of this issue.”

A survey by the International Food Information Council Foundation found that 22 percent of U.S. residents surveyed had a favorable impression of cloned meat in 2007, as opposed to 16 percent in 2006. Approximately 50 percent had a negative impression of such food.

The FDA has rejected calls to require the labeling of food produced from cloned animals.