Dear Reader,
I have to apologize for getting of the subject with this newsletter. I know I promised you some information about vitamins. Please be patient with me, because there are more pressing issues at hand. What possible could be more important than informing you about proper use of Vitamins and minerals? I tell You. The government has done it again. One has to wonder what a bunch of nincompoops make policy and who the people are dispersing the advise in order to come up with public policy?
The FDA on December 28, 2006 issued Draft Documents on the Safety of Animal Clones for use in human food! Yes, you read that right. Her it is again: On December 28, 2006 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued three documents on the safety of animal cloning — a draft risk assessment; a proposed risk management plan; and a draft guidance for industry.
According to an article from Michelle Chen in The New Standard the FDA "Cherry Picked Evidence" and Food-safety watchdogs argue that the FDA’s official safety claims are based on skewed interpretations of sparse or inconsistent scientific data. The FDA looked at things like the physiology of cloned animals rather than food consumption of them. The assumption is that if it looks good, it must be good for you. The New Standard further reports that the Center for Food Safety criticized the FDA because it drew its conclusion from focus on data provided by the biotech firms Viagen and Cyagra, which have a financial stake in cloning for agriculture.
If this is not getting you going just yet, here is one more reason you should start fuming. The FDA has rejected calls for consumer-labeling on products derived from cloning, arguing that they are essentially identical to their non-clone counterparts. Yes, and hence eliminating your choice as a consumer whether you would like to eat products from cloned animals or not. Might that be because of industry pressure?
More than six in 10 consumers (64 percent) are “uncomfortable” with the idea of animal cloning, including 46 percent who are “very uncomfortable,” according to a September 2006 survey of 1,000 people by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology.
The International Food Information Council found comparable results in a survey of nearly 500 people in mid-2006: only 16 percent held a favorable impression of animals produced through cloning, 56 percent held an unfavorable view, including 33 percent who find it “not at all favorable.” In this survey, consumer attitudes improved if the FDA determined that meat, milk and eggs from cloned animals were safe.” More than four in 10 consumers (42 percent) said they would buy these foods if the FDA deemed them safe.
David Schubert, a professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, has this to say: "The conclusion that cloned animal products are safe to eat is based almost completely on data and arguments provided by the companies that will profit from their sale. Similar scenarios allowed the introduction of genetically modified, or GM, foods 10 years ago, and the massive and largely unregulated introduction of pesticides after World War II." I urge you to read the full article.
The FDA is seeking comments from the public, and you may participate in the democratic process and submit electronic comments on the three documents, by visiting FDA 2003N-0573. Written comments may be sent to: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD, 20852. Comments must be received by Apr. 2, 2007 and should include the docket number 2003N-0573. Or you may go to the Organic Consumers Association's website and submit a letter already written for you. Either way, I urge you to make your opinion heard.
Bottom line is, you, the consumer, needs to be enabled to make decisions pertaining to purchases be they a car, a house, or food. You only can make an educated decision about your purchase if you have full disclosure about the product you are getting. This should pertain especially to food. I don't know of a more intimate relationship a person could have than with food. It is the only thing you actually put in you (hopefully at least three times a day) and then during digestion, the food you had for pleasure, nourishment, celebration or whatever other reason, actually provides the building blocks for your cells. The cells in turn then do their thing and duplicate to become healthy cardiac cells, lung cells, muscle cells, etc. It has been found that stuff residing in food eventually becomes part of you and may cause disease. Pesticides, heavy metals such as mercury, even hormones which were injected into livestock. It only makes sense to be on the cautious side of things when somebody tries to shove an animal down your throat which was created by technology too young to be proven 100% safe for human consumption. Maybe a re-reading of Silent Spring by Rachel Carson is in order again.
I will leave you with a very fitting quote of hers:
"It is the public that is being asked to assume the risks…
the public must decide whether it wishes to continue
on the present road and it can only do so
when in full possession of the facts…"
Rachel Carson
May 27, 1907 – April 14, 1964
Beste Gesundheit,
Werner