Modern Meat Chickens & Turkeys are Genetically Altered?

[cassie]

As for whether supermarket vegetables are clones, it's like this. If the plant came form a cutting, it is for all intents and purposes a clone. If it came from a seed it is not. Most of our crops are hybrids though. At least a lot of them are.

 

[Buster52]

Quote:
Actually, I think it is fairly straightforward...

"Given the multitude of problems caused by forced rapid growth using 20 th -century selective breeding methods, the poultry industry is considering cloning and other genetic modification procedures..."

Doesn't say, doesn't even imply, that GM is currently being used in chicken production.

 

[Buster52]

Quote:
I think the problem is with the mucking around with genetic material that may later have unintended consequences. And the same people who are concerned about that aren't all that thrilled about GM in our produce, either.

 

[seramas]

The fears of GM foods are unfounded. If the modification alters the genes of the plant or animal and we eat them we can't absorb the modified genes and become mutants ourselves.

In the case of clones, they take a tiny piece of the original and grow a copy-no gene splicing-just simply copies. We have been cloning plants for centuries.

When we ingest food our bodies extract nutrients that we need the rest is discarded.

We should be more vigil about contaminates that are in the environment that have a bigger impact on our food supplies and our bodies.

My intent for this thread is to get people to thinking and to look for real answers about our food supply and what the real dangers are. To beware of those who twist half-truths to sway the thoughts and beliefs of the uninformed.

The best defense is knowledge.

I read this is an old book: "Seek and ye shall find."

 

[Buster52]

Quote:
Some uninformed folks might be worried about that, but not a lot of people I know. The concern is about altering the genetic components to the point where it permanently alters a species of plant or animal and harms the gene pool. What is more, it allows a company to patent the animal or plant so that it owns its genetic makeup. That plant seed or animal could then be purchase only from the company that owns the patent for it.

Of course, you also can't say that the modification you make to an animal won't somehow harm people in some way, creating some as-yet-unknowable toxic condition or trait that adversely affects human beings.

 

[Buster52]

Lest someone get the wrong impression, I'm not judging the small, local producers that raise these birds for themselves or for sale. I completely understand the pressures these folks face in competition with Big Chicken. My comments are about the bird and those who develop them, not those who raise them.

They aren't for me, but I don't judge those who choose to raise them.

 

[patandchickens]

Quote:
Some uninformed folks might be worried about that, but not a lot of people I know. The concern is about altering the genetic components to the point where it permanently alters a species of plant or animal and harms the gene pool. What is more, it allows a company to patent the animal or plant so that it owns its genetic makeup. That plant seed or animal could then be purchase only from the company that owns the patent for it.

I've never actually met someone who believed that the problem with GMO foods is that they will somehow mutate you. No doubt such people exist, but I question whether they're a majority.

In addition to what's written above, another big reason to be concerned is that modern methods usually insert genes to be expressed in a type of organism *totally different* from the original setting of the gene, for instance getting plants to produce Bt toxins and so forth. The problem is that genes never do only one thing in an organism, and some have considerably pervasive and unexpected effects. And nobody is really *looking* for what *else* the Bt gene does when expressed in, like, a wheat plant. Some studies have found physiological changes in rats fed GMO foods, although whether this is real/widspread and what it might mean is certainly not understood at this time.

*Another* another, reason to be concerned: as an earlier poster alluded to, genetic material can jump among species by means of viruses (yes, really) and by means of natural hybridization. In nature this most often among related species, like from one plant to another, not from very unrelated species like from a bacterium to a plant. The problem is, once you have introduced (say) Roundup-resistance into a wheat plant, you have no control over a virus jumping it over to (say) thistles, and now you have Roundup-resistant thistles happily multiplying all over the landscape and whatcha gonna do bout THAT? It may not be highly likely but if it HAPPENED it would be catastrophic.

Finally, in the case of pesticide-related genes (which I've used as my examples here, but are BY NO MEANS the totality of what is being done, as much gene transfer involves things that affedt the growing characteristics or produce quality of the plants), you have what IMHO is the very biggest problem -- that by making the "use" of these pesticides even more universal (by putting Bt in lots of crops, and by making lots of crops resistant to Roundup etc so you can spray them ever more widely), you are greatly increasing the rate at which pests will evolve resistance. Which is probably inevitable but do we really want to be hurrying the process along?? And frankly, once pest insects are unaffected by Bt and once most weeds are unaffected by Roundup etc, THEN what do you do????


Pat, former research biologist, not against technology in general, but reeeeeaaaallly against this one, especially given the degree to which companies are trying to prevent research from being done on its effects in the world at large.

 

[maf2008]

No references. BUT my two cents is...... that I think there is special breeding going on of course. If you notice the hatcheries sell the chicks of these breeds (corninish x) but NOT the eggs. My chickens breeding conspirocy is that I think the fertile eggs are "injected" with a growth hormone either natural or synthetic BEFORE the chick hatches and is sent to the hatcheries or breeders. Just a thought no proof.

Quote:

 

[seramas]

maf2008,

Here is a link for a video on that very subject. It refers to Australia law but the US and most Countries have adopted these same laws about the same time. It is sort of on the lighter side but is a true video on the subject.

 

[Brunty_Farms]

Quote:

You know they have tinkered with it. I doubt however chickens like these are on todays eating market. Either way scientist are genetically modifying chicken.... we just don't hear about it. Who knows if they will ever make their way to the public. I'm willing to believe that the first genetic change would not be how fast they grow as they have that down pretty good.... but now a featherless chicken is where it's at. Could you imagine not having to pluck a chicken? You just basically scald the chicken at a low temp and take the outer skin off. This would be something that I would be scared to eat and to grow.

I bet they are getting close to a featherless chicken though.