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

331–339 of 339 posts

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#331

Post by collegeburner »

colordrops wrote: post #300
wincy wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The happiest times in my life and the healthiest I’ve ever been are always when I eat mostly meat and very little of anything else. I don’t care about the emotions of animals at all, and never will. I purposely show my daughter videos of how to slaughter farm animals to try to make sure she has a full understanding of what’s happening so she doesn’t one day realize what “pork” or “beef” means and becomes vegan. Her f…

Considering that you have no empathy for other living beings, you should look into Elwood organic meats for you and your children: https://www.elwooddogmeat.com/

I don't see the problem with this. I clicked the site actually debating getting some to try depending on price per lb.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#332

Post by collegeburner »

sweetheart wrote: post #330
belorn wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of the important things are difficult on a diet with animal parts. That is the point you are missing. The rules for a healthy diet only require it to be diversified and balanced so that a person get a healthy amount of calories, proteins, fats, minerals and vitamins. Health studies has not demonstrated any difference if a person get obese through too much bread, too much bacon, or too much sugar. Health studies…

Again, I don’t see how any of this is relevant to the discussion. I’m not making the argument that non-vegan diets are unhealthy. My claim is that vegan diets can be perfectly healthy. You seem to think that I’m claiming that veganism is optimal for health. I’m not.

Then why would I eat vegan? If I like the food less, and it's not optimal for health, and I am fine with animals suffering for my food, why?

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#333

Post by colordrops »

collegeburner wrote: post #331
colordrops wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering that you have no empathy for other living beings, you should look into Elwood organic meats for you and your children: https://www.elwooddogmeat.com/

I don't see the problem with this. I clicked the site actually debating getting some to try depending on price per lb.

You should read the whole site.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#334

Post by sweetheart »

collegeburner wrote: post #332
sweetheart wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, I don’t see how any of this is relevant to the discussion. I’m not making the argument that non-vegan diets are unhealthy. My claim is that vegan diets can be perfectly healthy. You seem to think that I’m claiming that veganism is optimal for health. I’m not.

Then why would I eat vegan? If I like the food less, and it's not optimal for health, and I am fine with animals suffering for my food, why?

As long as you don’t care about causing suffering for your pleasure, then you have no reason.

Why not just give a shit about the suffering of others though?…

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#335

Post by prepend »

sweetheart wrote: post #310
prepend wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vegans are pretty vocal so it’s pretty easy to identify them. It’s like the CrossFit of diet regimens in that they self announce quite a bit. I’m sure there are some quiet vegans, and it’s possible that I just don’t know people well enough to know whether they are vegan. I’ve met dozens of vegans over he years and friends with many. As I’m friends with them, I’m aware of their health issues or lack of health issues.

Ignoring the fact that you still would have clue who you meet is a healthy vegan because why the hell would that come up casually when meeting random people throughout the day, your belief is the opposite of every major nutritional and dietetic association around the world. I linked to the collection of those official stances elsewhere in the thread. That means that not only do you claim to have a better understandin…

I was referring to friends of mine who are or were vegan.

> As I’m friends with them, I’m aware of their health issues or lack of health issues.

Of course I come in contact with lots of random people who are vegan but I certainly don’t know them well enough to understand their health.

I am also aware of the health of my non-vegan friends as well.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#336

Post by collegeburner »

colordrops wrote: post #333
collegeburner wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the problem with this. I clicked the site actually debating getting some to try depending on price per lb.

You should read the whole site.

Yes, I did. I understand it's trying to make a point, but I don't care about eating dogs, so it doesn't really convince me of anything.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#337

Post by dekhn »

qqtt wrote: post #291
tsimionescu wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does that have to do with GMOs?

That by selective growing of plants over thousands of years, we have altered the genetic make up of the foods we consume. While "GMO" is a "new technique", reductively this isn't exactly another dimension compared to over many years isolating and growing things like broccoli and lemons. Yes, GMO is a new technique to modify food sources away from "naturally occurring processes" - but again things like lemons and broc…

The physical process of GMO is extremely different from humans applying selection to crops. There is little to no transfer learning to be applied.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#338

Post by GekkePrutser »

dehrmann wrote: post #247
colordrops wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do want to argue that you should be vegan. The meat industry is very cruel to animals, and it is nearly impossible to source truly "cruelty free" meat despite marketing saying otherwise. Dairy is far worse, with cows kept in small cages, constantly impregnated to keep producing milk, their calves pulled away from them and slaughtered for veal. Eggs are also horrible, with egg chickens living miserable lives, even "…

> with cows kept in small cages I don't think this is common practice. My dairy knowledge is somewhat dated, but they they're usually kept in large corrals (possibly crowded) with many other cows.

It depends on the country. In the Netherlands they are definitely kept in small cages / stables during the winter.

I suppose in a climate that permits them to be outside all year it's a different story.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#339

Post by epgui »

strainer wrote: post #308
epgui wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am of the mind that [...] Which is totally fine, but unfortunately that position is neither informed by any specific evidence, nor informed by a principled understanding of the technology in question (which is where deferral to expertise can come in handy). You should note that there's a difference between an appeal to authority fallacy, and deferral to expertise, and while the former is fatal to any logical argu…

Allow me increase your principled understanding of GMO safety - anyone that thinks that any technology is safe, should be kept away from it. All technology confers capabilities and all capabilities can be misapplied accidentally or negligently in the pursuit of private advantage. Fire is not safe, you have to be safe with fire. What determines the safety of any commercial application of technology is regulation. No t…

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to me, this is totally new information to me and I had never considered that technology and tools could be misused. My understanding of biology has now been improved. /s
Post reply on HN