"Dildeaux" <dildeaux@toys.com> wrote in message

Yep, ole positive George has contributed his share all right.

What I find amusing is your running to his defense rather than
you  naming the faggot mammals (animals) that buttfuck each other.

I believe the word you used was many. I asked for just one.

"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

The tv is full of lawyers asking people to join in on their, class-action law-suits,
against FDA approved drugs.
It just doesn't seem profitable to pay those kick-backs to the FDA whom can not be sued.
I heard one argument made that if they didn't put the meds out, people would suffer.
Half of the junk for sale will cause liver damage.
Sometimes I guess you have to weigh the risks.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/17/fda.crawford.ap/index.html

B/

"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

washingtonpost.com

"Our evaluation is that the food from cloned animals is as safe as the food we eat every day,"
said Stephen F. Sundlof, the FDA's chief of veterinary medicine, who has overseen the
long-stalled risk assessment.

Farmers and companies that have been growing cloned barnyard animals from single cells in
anticipation of a lucrative market say cloning will bring consumers a level of consistency and
quality impossible to attain with conventional breeding, making perfectly marbled beef and
reliably lean and tasty pork the norm on grocery shelves.

But groups opposed to the new technology, including a coalition of powerful food companies
concerned that the public will reject Dolly-the-Lamb chops and clonal cream in their coffee,
have not given up.

On Thursday, advocacy groups filed a petition asking the FDA to regulate cloned farm animals
one type at a time, much as it regulates new drugs, a change that would drastically slow
marketing approval. Some are also questioning the ethics of a technology that, while more
efficient than it used to be, still poses risks for pregnant animals and their newborns.

"The government talks about being science-based, and that's great, but I think there is another
pillar here: the question of whether we really want to do this," said Carol Tucker Foreman,
director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America.

That there is a debate at all about integrating clones into the food supply is evidence of the
remarkable progress made since the 1996 birth of Dolly, the world's first mammalian clone,
created from an udder cell of an anonymous ewe.

Scientists have now applied the technique successfully to cattle, horses, pigs, goats and other
mammals. Each clone is a genetic replica of the animal that donated the cell from which it was
grown.

Cloning could solve a number of long-standing farm problems. Many prize males are not
recognized as such until long after they have been tamed by castration. With cloning, that lack
of semen would not matter. Cloning also allows farmers to make many copies of exceptional milk
producers; with natural breeding, cows have only one offspring per year, and half are males.

In the eyes of many in agriculture, cloning is simply the latest in a string of advances such
as artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization that have given farmers better control
over animal reproduction.

"Clones are just clones. They are not genetically engineered animals," said Barbara Glenn,
chief of animal biotechnology at the Biotechnology Industry Organization.

CONTINUED

© 2006 The Washington Post Company