Thread: Mmmmmmmm, "frankenbacon"......
-
11-25-2012 10:32 AM #11
Taking one pig that has a copy of one favorable gene and using that pig to breed the next generation is what we call breeding. Mankind has been doing artificial selection since we domesticated anything. having a genetic map only allows for more efficient selection of matings.
You latch on to one small sentence that says "Some researchers may even use the information to do genetic modification of pigs."
SOME... MAY... sounds like a real specific and concerted effort to create GMO pigs...DiederichFarm
"You are only as good as your next success, not your last" Sir Jock Stirrup
-
11-25-2012 05:34 PM #12
Not disputing what this will do for breeding. And you can't dispute what this will do for production of GMO livestock.
I latch onto the sentence that has the most significance to me. GMO hogs sounds significant.
Moving on....
-
11-26-2012 08:30 AM #13Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Posts
- 17,486
RCR has legitimate concerns. He understandably doesn't trust that scientists won't abuse this technology. And he's not alone.
To keep science on the up and up, there's a whole host of ambulance chasing trial lawyers, who will use every and any excuse to file lawsuits. Which puts great pressures on science to get it right. A whole lot of pressure. That means tests, tests, tests and more re-tests by research and development. The accumulated data must meet requirements by numerous US govt. regulatory agencies, plus the many other nation's regulatory agencies who may import the product and/or technology.
A common claim by those who suspect that these numerous agencies in numerous nations are just "bought off" by the patent holder is......well.....common. Well, I don't much trust govt. in many areas, either.
But given that these companies have targets painted on them by our lawsuit happy laws, it would be very difficult for a company to expose themselves to even more lawsuits if they brought a flawed product to market.
There are Currently a whole lot of checks and balances. This won't satisfy everyone. That's impossible.
But if we develop livestock that are more rate of gain efficient, we'll have less manure in the process. Environment and financially friendly. And we will have more bacon...........
-
11-26-2012 09:56 AM #14Senior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Posts
- 4,014
Scientists already have created biotech salmon that grow faster and larger than native salmon. All of the new salmon will be sterile. What is the big deal if it results in more efficient salmon production and reduced costs for consumers?
-
11-26-2012 11:01 AM #15DiederichFarm
"You are only as good as your next success, not your last" Sir Jock Stirrup
-
11-26-2012 03:06 PM #16Senior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Posts
- 4,014
-
11-26-2012 05:35 PM #17
No one is condemning GMO anything. I'm all for the consumer getting the lowest cost/highest quality product.
However, keep the purity of the conventionally bred livestock. Also, as a consumer, I'd prefer to buy the conventional over the GMO, so label it as such. I do not think this is unreasonable.
-
11-26-2012 06:34 PM #18DiederichFarm
"You are only as good as your next success, not your last" Sir Jock Stirrup


Reply With Quote
