Cloned meat

Originally posted by Palynka
The death rates just show that we should not assume the products are the same and should be labeled as such. It's pretty simple, really. As for the usual "where do you draw the line", I just did. Where do you draw the line? What labels should be necessary?

Where did you draw the line? I didn't quite get that? No two products are the same. Every cow is unique (until clones came along) so every can of beef is different.
I have already pointed out that death rates vary between different breeds of cattle, and even between different countries, or types of farming practice. Yet I don't see you advocating putting death rates on every can.

It's also easy to see that you only feel this strongly about it because some Luddites types attack it.
Actually I don't feel strongly about it. I don't live in the EU. I am just bored and taking a time out while learning Chinese, and if I post much more over in spirituality I will get accused of spamming.

Originally posted by twhitehead
if I post much more over in spirituality I will get accused of spamming.

I used to eat spam till I read the label.

Originally posted by FMF
I used to eat spam till I read the label.

I didn't need to read the label to know not to eat it.

Originally posted by Wajoma
The solution would be all those concerned about such things can purchase foods certified by an independant organisation. i.e. user pays, you use a food certifcation system you pay for it, you don't use a food certification service you don't pay for it.

Wouldn't work. Too much scope for people who have your sociopathic philosophy who assert that producers should be free to produce poisonous food as long as they don't claim it's not poison and don't say it is food. And private companies offering "a food certification system" without themselves having to meet standards, would come and go, while chronic health problems in the populace would not be able to correct market failures quickly enough.

Government should set minimum standards and require appropriate labelling. Best way to deter fraud, protect people from people like you, and best way to avoid confusion and malpractice in an area that can sometimes be a matter of life and death.

Originally posted by Wajoma
I didn't need to read the label to know not to eat it.

Then don't read the label. Neither of us eat it anymore. people are free to read the label and then eat it anyway. The label system has done its job.

Originally posted by Wajoma
You're going to be real busy running around putting labels on all those poisonous things that occur naturally.

You seem to be saying food producers should be able to put things with 'naturally occurring' poison in their produce without being asked to label it. I think most people would disagree with that. We are safe from your philosophy for the time being I think.

Originally posted by FMF
Wouldn't work. Too much scope for people who have your sociopathic philosophy who assert that producers should be free to produce poisonous food as long as they don't claim it's not poison and don't say it is food. And private companies offering "a food certification system" without themselves having to meet standards, would come and go, while chronic hea ...[text shortened]... oid confusion and malpractice in an area that can sometimes be a matter of life and death.

Err yes it would work, a reputable brand name is worth something it's not the regulation that keeps these producers on their toes it's the consumer, and so it would be with independant certifiers, a whiff of corruption and they're gone so they keep it straight.

So if you require regulation you can pay for it.

Try to hold every person that deals with food to such regulation as you advocate in places like Indonesia and the result would be measured, not in lives saved but, lives lost.

Originally posted by FMF
You seem to be saying food producers should be able to put things with 'naturally occurring' poison in their produce without being asked to label it. I think most people would disagree with that. We are safe from your philosophy for the time being I think.

You seem to be saying I'm saying something I'm not saying....again.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Err yes it would work, a reputable brand name is worth something it's not the regulation that keeps these producers on their toes it's the consumer, and so it would be with independant certifiers, a whiff of corruption and they're gone so they keep it straight.

A whiff of corruption and and the independent certifiers would be gone. Reputable brands would come and go. It's the nature of competition. Success and failure. Not the right mechanism for food safety standards.

Originally posted by Wajoma
You seem to be saying I'm saying something I'm not saying....again.

Whatever you say. Again.

Originally posted by FMF
A whiff of corruption and and the independent certifiers would be gone. Reputable brands would come and go. It's the nature of competition. Success and failure. Not the right mechanism for food safety standards.

That's an opinion that does not match reality, there are reputable supermarkets selling reputable products, you'd like to pretend that's a result of regulation when we all know it's not.

Originally posted by FMF
Then don't read the label. Neither of us eat it anymore. people are free to read the label and then eat it anyway. The label system has done its job.

If ever there were an example of the worthlessness of labels, cheers.

Originally posted by Wajoma
That's an opinion that does not match reality, there are reputable supermarkets selling reputable products, you'd like to pretend that's a result of regulation when we all know it's not.

Reputable supermarkets in the U.K., for example, adhere to government standards and regulations, and sell products that are reputable in part because they adhere to government standards and regulations. The system works fairly well. I don't think you can win people over with your ideas because they simply won't trust people like you or food producers who subscribe to your 'free to produce poison' and 'let food safety be decided on the stock market' philosophy. Perhaps your approach will prevail one day. Hope not.

Originally posted by Wajoma
If ever there were an example of the worthlessness of labels, cheers.

People being able to make informed decisions is hardly "worthless" in the case of purchasing things like food, drink and medicine.

Originally posted by FMF
Reputable supermarkets in the U.K., for example, adhere to government standards and regulations, and sell products that are reputable in part because they adhere to government standards and regulations. The system works fairly well. I don't think you can win people over with your ideas because they simply won't trust people like you or food producers who subscri ...[text shortened]... ded on the stock market' philosophy. Perhaps your approach will prevail one day. Hope not.

Do you really think they're afraid of the regulation or their name being associated with a problem, try to be honest.