A fascinating view of animal cloning and the threat of human genetic  
engineering. The one may lead to the other.
Tom
 =============================================================================
GM WATCH daily
http://www.gmwatch.org
---
---
EXTRACT: The Food  and Drug Administration (FDA)'s draft risk assessment 
leans heavily on the work  of animal-cloning companies Cyagra and ViaGen. Over a 
quarter of the 700-page  draft is a data dump from those two -- a fact that the 
New York Times failed to  mention, even when quoting the president of ViaGen 
saying "I think that this  draft is going to provide the industry the comfort 
it needs."

GM WATCH  NOTE: You can respond to the FDA's call for public comment here:  
http://www.organicconsumers.org/rd/clones.htm 
---
---
from Pete  Shanks, author of Human Genetic Engineering: A Guide for 
Activists, Skeptics,  and the Very Perplexed

Hi there

The Center for Genetics and  Society (CGS) now has a blog, at 
http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/, where  various members of the CGS staff post and so 
occasionally do guests such as  myself. The central topic is human biotech, but 
broader connections are often  drawn. The intro is at  
http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/2006/10/welcome.html.

I recently put up  an item about the connections between the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA)  livestock-cloning report and the cloning companies and in 
turn their founders,  who have human GE interests.  

It's at  
http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/2007/01/cloned-meat-hidden-agendas-behind.html  and also copied below, but without the links and formatting. 
[We've added some  of the links below - ed]

It's public comment time at the  FDA...

best
pete
---
---
Cloned Meat: the hidden agendas  (behind the other hidden agendas)
posted by Pete Shanks  
http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/2007/01/cloned-meat-hidden-agendas-behind.htm
l

Who  is pushing to legalize cloned meat? Follow the money -- and there are 
strong  connections to human genetic engineering.

The Food and Drug  Administration (FDA)'s draft risk assessment leans heavily 
on the work of  animal-cloning companies Cyagra and ViaGen. Over a quarter of 
the 700-page draft  is a data dump from those two -- a fact that the New York 
Times failed to  mention, even when quoting the president of ViaGen saying "I 
think that this  draft is going to provide the industry the comfort it  
needs."
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/CloneRiskAssessment.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/28/business/28cnd-clone.html

ViaGen  is part of the Exeter Life Science Group, owned by billionaire John 
Sperling,  who also financed the notorious Genetic Savings and Clone (GSC). 
Viagen's chief  scientist, Irina Polejaeva, was once GSC's, and when GSC closed 
ViaGen took over  their gene banking operation. The cloned pets were rightly 
described by Wired as  "a footnote to John Sperling's grand plan" -- and so are 
the cows and pigs. The  plan is people -- living  forever.
http://www.genetics-and-society.org/resources/items/20020429_fortune_warner.ht
ml
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.02/immortal.html

Cyagra  was a subsidiary of Advanced Cell Technology (ACT), of press-release 
infamy. ACT  sold Cyagra in one of its desperate grabs for cash, but chief 
scientist Robert  Lanza and his former colleague Jose Cibelli (a co-author of 
Hwang Woo-suk's and  a former consultant to the California stem cell institute -- 
it's a small  universe) are cited throughout the FDA report.

The surface agenda the FDA  addresses is public safety (though Stuart Newman 
[professor at New York Medical  College] says "it's potentially a health 
hazard"); the agenda hidden in plain  sight is that of commercial interests; and 
behind that lies the specter of human  genetic engineering. It's a mutually 
reinforcing spiral: The animal cloners have  been relying on human medical 
research (and of course feeding the starving) to  make their work seem less 
unacceptable -- and the human cloners rely on the  animal work to make theirs seem more 
 reasonable.
http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070101/NEWS02/70101
0332/1018

The  public does not want cloned meat and certainly wants it to be labeled, 
which the  FDA says it cannot require. All the more reason to object now. The 
Center for  Food Safety has been opposing animal cloning for years. So has the 
Organic  Consumers Association, which has set up a handy site for responding 
to the FDA's  call for public comment.
http://www.organicconsumers.org/rd/clones.htm  


----------------------------------------------------------
You  are subscribed as [log in to unmask]
To unsubscribe simply click the link  below:
http://www.gmwatch.org/unsub.asp?ID=1097&sec=pbmhh

This  message has been sent because you subscribed to the GM Watch  List.
http://www.gmwatch.org

------------------------------------------------------------




- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp