| |
Who says cloned pig is a clone of a full pig?
They've been working on "vat flesh" for some time.
If they were going to clone pig meat, it might be more environmentally conscious to
just use vats. And after R&D expenses are covered, the meat gets cheaper over time,
until it is just the creation costs plus a (hopefully) fair profit. The question
will be, will that end up being cheaper than raising whole animals? It probably
will be, if we start hitting the meat farms with the costs they should be paying now
- FULL disposal of all waste products, not just dumping into the nearest stream, and
any leakage into streams carrying large penalties (and I mean LARGE).
Do some research on the waste output of a pig farm, you'll see what I mean.
richard marchetti wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Thomas Stangl wrote:
> > Cloned pig would PROBABLY pollute the world less than a pig farm.
>
> I think you have mixed up the idea of cloning with something else. A cloned pig
> is not some vat of proscuitto flesh that doesn't create waste, rather it is a
> very close genetic replica of another animal. I think a cloned pig would still
> defecate.
>
> So again I ask: why is cloning better than normal modes of procreation? If the
> desire is merely for another pig, you can get that by intoducing a female pig to
> a male pig. I am guessing that what is desired is a very specific pig of very
> specific properties in its flesh -- a certain taste, a certain ratio of flesh
> versus fat, etc. But what about generational decay? What about inbred genetic
> instability?
>
> The thing that makes human beings so successful and robust as a species is
> endless cross-breeding and variation. Not the reverse.
>
> Besides, even if you wanted to nurture certain characteristics of a particular
> family of pigs, all you have to do is breed them with stock from another similar
> family. Where does cloning become an advantage rather than a possible danger?
>
> Now maybe this isn't the biggest deal in the world, but I still fail to see the
> need for this particular solution to the probably nonexistent "problem." And
> just because you "can" doesn't mean that you "should" -- there's still plenty of
> unanswered questions here. And I don't see the need to jump to any conclusions
> when it comes to the things we eat.
>
> -- Hop-Frog
--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Delicious!
|
| Well, so far it's the full cloned animal in question: Cloned Food OK by FDA Reuters, 05:50 PM Oct. 30, 2003 PT (URL) I know what you are talking about too, but I think we are still some time away from that. If careful studies reveal that there are (...) (21 years ago, 8-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Delicious!
|
| (...) I think you have mixed up the idea of cloning with something else. A cloned pig is not some vat of proscuitto flesh that doesn't create waste, rather it is a very close genetic replica of another animal. I think a cloned pig would still (...) (21 years ago, 7-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
