|2003N-0573||Draft Animal Cloning Risk Assessment|
|FDA Comment Number :||EC797|
|Submitter :||Mr. Rory Brown||Date & Time:||01/04/2007 10:01:12|
|Organization :||Mr. Rory Brown|
|Category :||Individual Consumer|
| What would bring this thought to someone as a good idea? I have gone to school at the Culinary Institute of America and there we learned that to produce good food you have to start with good quality ingredients. How can something produced from a cloned animal be a starting point to produce good food? I know that you are going to say that you have scientific evidence that states that there is no noticeable difference between or negative effects from products produced by cloned animals. I read that load of bullocks when you started spouting it with Genetically Modified Organisms also, and I did not believe it then and I will not allow you to attempt to pull one over on me again.
I am already skeptical of the food system and the ever-increasing distance between farmers and return on labor. I feel sad for the people that do not have the opportunity to make the choice of quality over quality. If you can live with poisoning the people that you have been tasked to protect then there is a larger problem at hand. Has the money really clouded your judgment?
The point of contention is the unknown factor. There is no way of knowing what this new technology will do to the ecosystem of the future. Sure the scientists have said that they believe that this is safe but how many studies did they do, for how long, how many positive peer-reviews, what were the conditions? There is no way of knowing what repercussions this will cause for the animals, the consumers, or the economy. I can postulate that the pharmaceutical industry will be increasing to take care of all the symptoms of whatever new conditions will evolve from this consuming cloned products, so at least you will be making someone money though at who's expense? I will not stand to be a test subject against my will. I have seen to many setbacks from negligent or incomplete 'scientific' testing. Look at the fiascoes created by Starlink, L-trypotphan, Fen Phen, new scientific testing of rBGH and the conclusive links to increased cancer. These are only a few cases that illustrate how dangerous haphazard- rushed research is to the people who rely on the FDA to properly evaluate new products for their safety and wholesomeness.
I am not against technological growth but I will not stand for products or technology that has been 'tested' in a slapdash manner to be labeled safe. On labeling I think that GMO and, if for some reason this is allowed into the market, cloned food should be labeled. The whole point behind the push for labeling of ingredients on products was for the consumer to make an informed decision. If you feel that there really is no difference between traditional and conventional foodstuffs then label them and allow the people to choose. You are not elected officials and have not been given the right or the privilege to speak for the public. If you feel so strongly behind this then allow the market to determine if this is the proper time for release. I would say that it is not and that is why there are so many last minute and nighttime pushes for voting on bills. Step away from corporate contributions and forget that you once worked for these conglomerates and align your loyalty with the people. If new technology is a good idea then allow lassie-fare to work the magic and validate your conclusions.
This is a bad idea. Pretend as though you care and do the right thing - make this go away.