From Petri Dish to Your Table

First of all, let's be clear:  there is no need to clone animals for food.

The Bryant Park Project reports:

After six years of intensive research on whether meat, muscle tissue and milk from cloned animals are fit for human consumption, the FDA says they "are as safe as food we eat every day."

If that's not obscene enough, the next line of copy reads:

The stamp of approval from the FDA removes the last regulatory hurdle to mass-marketing cloned meat and milk products.

I don't know why we humans cannot leave well enough alone.  It was never about safety anyway.  We now know that there have been two issues playing the part of the finger in the dyke.  One is the wary consumer who (thank God) is  reluctant to buy into the horrific notion of creating lives in laboratories with the ultimate goal of shooting a piston through their heads, and carving up their genetically engineered flesh for our deli sandwiches and $10 Sunday roasts. 

The other reason is the impact such an industry would have on the economic fabric of modern times.  It would stand to reason that this would be the one of primary importance to the U.S. government. 

It's true, isn't it?  In life, it really does all boil down to sex (or lack thereof, in this case) and money, doesn't it?

Comments

[Robguy]

I'm not so concerned with eating cloned animals... they still are real animals. I'm more concerned with limiting the genetic diversity of the stock. I can imagine some virus coming along that wipes out a huge percentage of the domestic stock because they all had the same genetic trait.

sandy says: For me, it's not a science-based objection. The geek in me is very excited by the fact that cloning is possible.

It's the arrogance of our species that I have a problem with. I respect the food chain and how it fits in the greater scope of existence, but I don't think this is a very respectful way to treat our fellow creatures on the planet, regardless of their position on said chain.