Frankenfood?

I lived as a young girl in a generation that saw the national epidemic of polio. When we (my family) went to visit relatives in the south we avoided many, many town that had widespread outbreaks of polio and we just kept on going. I have friends who died or became permanenetly disabled because of this problem. I think this is a disease that many of you don't even have to think about. nothing in life is without risk. I think food that is sold as genetically modified should be labeled as such and the consumer can decide for himself.

I lived as a young girl in a generation that saw the national epidemic of polio. When we (my family) went to visit relatives in the south we avoided many, many town that had widespread outbreaks of polio and we just kept on going. I have friends who died or became permanenetly disabled because of this problem. I think this is a disease that many of you don't even have to think about. nothing in life is without risk. I think food that is sold as genetically modified should be labeled as such and the consumer can decide for himself. Auntie

Pigs evolved to have high-phosphorus poop for a reason. It's people trying to introduce pig populations (and expand them) into areas which don't have the appropriate ecosystem that causes problems. That, and we're defending them from natural predators, etc etc etc...

I'm not sure about the implementation or use of these livestock breeds, but I strongly support mandatory labeling of foods which have 'enhanced' components.

This is a tricky one... I for one would eat "enhanced" foods if they were tested and proven safe... Most of us that have ever grown our vegitable garden have eaten "hybrid" foods... Most seeds that you get now a days are of the hybrid type... They are enginered to be more resistant to disease etc... And like I, believe Auntie said, those in poorer countries would not argue if they were given "enhanced" foods...

OK maybe I am dense but we seem to have a non-argument being used to bolster the FRP's (Fart Reduced Pigs). This has nothing to do with the genetic manipulation but the theory that this will solve world hunger. Nothing in the article says the FRP's breed faster, grow faster, or produce more meat. Even the other genetic animals still take the same time to grow, consume the same amount of feed they just have some "advantages" given to them.

From what I can tell genetic alteration's goal is not much different than selective breeding. No one would argue that pigs who were bred to be FRP's were ok. However, selective breeding still uses natural methods and takes out human error. The changes are produced through a number of generations where aberrations can be seen and monitored. Genetics, because it works so much faster, is potentially more productive and more dangerous. I am very glad the FDA is studying these things. I also feel that if they start using genetically altered meat they should clearly label it as such.

However, I must actually side with those who do not approve. We, as a society, are more in a rush for new foods, new medicines etc. This has led, in the past, to some health repurcussions we never could forsee. Breeding is slow but the errors have time to crop up. The very speed of genetics is its strength but for me it is also its downfall.

The final nail in the coffin, in this instance, is that it will do nothing for world hunger. It is supposedly going to do something for pollution in Minnesota but that does not affect starving people in Zimbabwe. Most countries would be much happier with high yield corn, rice, or potatos, and wheat. All of these have been created through breeding. They have also made strains that grow with low water needs, survive in high temperatures, low temperatures, short growing seasons etc. None of these have conquered world hunger but they have certainly done more than RFP's will.

ill be happy when they can just grow lean meat without it haveing to come from an animal. no farts no barnyard diseases and no slaughter.

i don't think meat thats the product of genetic manipulation can cause harm to those who eat it. its not like injecting animals with harmones or steroids. the genes of what you eat don't get passed on to you!

True... y'know, promoting livestock (especially cattle) as a cure for world hunger is sort of like promoting gasoline-powered-razor-style-scooters for the answer to mobility in impoverished areas... there are alternatives which are more efficient, cheaper, and much more environmentally friendly, even if they lose in the luxury department.

I agree with Terr completely, but I think since "us westerners"
can't stop eating animals, might as well make 'em pollute less.

And hey, you don't have to eat pig anyway, you'll probably
live longer and happier.