Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

modernfarmer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 339 posts

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#181

Post by imtringued »

Knufen wrote: post #60
bigDinosaur wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you have literally no concern about the suffering of animals, then it's a good thing. If you think that the suffering of animals outweighs people's preferences (not needs, you can thrive on a vegetarian diet) then this is absolutely not good. I'm happy to see high prices for beef, and would be happy if everyone was priced out of eating it. As second best, I'd be happy if people at least considered the suffering th…

This is probably gonna sound a bit dystopian, but would you eat beef if we eliminated suffering with CRISPR? I don't get to talk to a lot of vegetarians/vegans so honest question.

Sorry, nobody is going to eat your meat eggs :P

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#182

Post by cesaref »

gruez wrote: post #135
Eduard wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't provide any argument for why you like GMO food here. What bothers you so much about food?

1. Just because he’s anti-anti-GMO, doesn’t mean he views conventional foods with disgust and buys GMO whenever he can 2. The benefits are clear: GMO foods are more cost effective, hence why farmers choose them over conventional

On your second point, you are basically saying 'more profit' is the reason that farmers are choosing them. I personally am not interested in farmer profit when choosing what to eat.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#183

Post by matthewdgreen »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #52
dillondoyle wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also 'endure climate change' is so grossly ironic. Instead of factoring in the costs of our actions, engineer ways to lower price and feed more demand -> and thus creating more methane, forest destruction, emissions from feed, huge waste of water, and all the gas shipping it a continent away. If people won't reduce their beef consumption, maybe we can crispr out some methane (seems not possible just based on chemistr…

The methane isn't from the cows, it is from the bacteria in their gut. It can be greatly reduced with supplemental feeding that changes the microbiome

I've read a lot about this, but is it being done at any scale? And how much extra does it cost?

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#184

Post by kickout »

My opinion continues to be tools like CRISPR and genome editing techniques are just that--tools. Can be used for good or bad purposes depending on your context and bias.

Most people associate these genome modification tools as inherently bad because the first generation of them were tied to herbicide and pesticide resistance. Whether you agree with those applications or not, its clear those tools worked and were extremely powerful. I would personally argue they work too well and the 2nd and 3rd order effects are doing the most damage. But these tools exist in regulatory frameworks that are archaic and rigid and when billions of dollars are on the line companies figure out ways to play in between the lines.

An optimistic person might want these tools to be used to increase taste profiles, shelf-life, nutritional content, range of adaptation, etc. A pessimist probably sees this as a faster way to add more herbicide or pesticide traits to enable those chemicals to be applied.

I'm very bullish on genome editing tech. Lots of these comments are applying 1990s thinking to a 2030 and beyond tech. Akin to 1950s 'futuristic' predictions showing flying cars.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#185

Post by imtringued »

ben_w wrote: post #92
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone forgets the missing methane output from the nearly extirpated bison population. Cattle in north america are only slightly more numerous than the peak bison population.

I wasn’t expecting to ask this when I woke up this morning but: how much methane did bison burp relative to the same biomass of modern cattle?

Probably less because we are feeding the cheapest source of feed to cows, not what they can digest the best. The food that your body fails to digest will be digested in the big intestine which can lead to bloating.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#186

Post by imtringued »

danielovichdk wrote: post #9

Address the real problem. We are too many people on the earth for the resources that we are naturally given. That's a fact.

Too many people to live a modern western standard of living.

I'm sure there is a compromise between vegetarianism and being a full on carnivore. e.g. a global middle class that doesn't suck.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#187

Post by matthewdgreen »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #165
Eduard wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The methane isn't from the bacteria, it is from their food. If the inefficient cow/bacteria processing step is skipped, the whole production pipeline is greatly more climate-friendly.

More specifically, it is a waste product from bacteria digesting the food. The food doesn't turn to methane without the bacteria. https://jasbsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40104-01...

But genes to appear to modulate gut microbiota composition on other animals, so it's not impossible that there is some genetic modification (to cattle) that would have the desired effect.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#188

Post by sjmm1989 »

kickout wrote: post #184

My opinion continues to be tools like CRISPR and genome editing techniques are just that--tools. Can be used for good or bad purposes depending on your context and bias. Most people associate these genome modification tools as inherently bad because the first generation of them were tied to herbicide and pesticide resistance. Whether you agree with those applications or not, its clear those tools worked and were extr…

Anyone who has ever eaten bread or a banana, has already been technically in some fashion or another, eating GMO's.

Norman Borlaug helped rid us of Wheat rust, which took a more 'natural' approach to gene editing.

The banana has been a mutant for decades now.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#190

Post by xbmcuser »

koonsolo wrote: post #174
xbmcuser wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most livestock, fruits, grains and vegetable that exist today and we buy in our store shelves are all the result of selective breeding by humans over the last 100-200 years. More recently as the science and ability to do selective breeding has improved. Genetic manipulation is going to accelerate something that is already happening. For me genetic manipulation of livestock and grains is not as problematic as the west…

I don't fully agree with that timeline, at least not when you consider it more broadly. My granddad was a farmer (he was born around 1920). Back then, animals were still treated fairly well, and the animals themselves were also still natural. The real industrialization of livestock came after that, when he was already retired. Having raised and killed animals all of his life, he actually wasn't too fond of how animal…

What has how animals are treated got to do with selective breeding? Even your granddad probably used selective breeding.
Post reply on HN