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

71–80 of 339 posts

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#71

Post by epgui »

karmakurtisaani wrote: post #42
epgui wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a biochemist, and I’d feed GMOs to my kids all day if I had any. Or to my mom. They’re totally fine.

For me the idea that a company can claim intellectual property rights to a genome sounds pretty awful. To be fair, I don't know if that's a real threat or not, but I could totally see it happening.

Yeah I agree, but I also feel the same way about software patents.

I think it’s important to distinguish that objection from health scares, technophobia and such: imagine if the public’s objections were targeted at the real problems instead, how much more productive it would be!

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#72

Post by DeWilde »

bigDinosaur wrote: post #33
0des wrote: post #25

This might be an unpopular opinion here but if this puts more beef on the table or at a lesser price, bring it on. I love beef. I want more people to have access to good quality beef at a competitive price. The pandemic for me saw meat in general double in price on average. I can't in good faith consume corn, tomatoes, tobacco, or even broccoli while saying I don't support GMO. It is not the same but it also is not a…

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…

> not needs, you can thrive on a vegetarian diet

Not true for everyone. I have a specific health issue and to ingest the necessary daily intake of proteins solely through non-meat source would mean ingesting a lot more carbs that I can handle for a day.

Also explain how would CRISPR increase the suffering of animals?

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#74

Post by Tenoke »

mping wrote: post #50
klondike_ wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't provide any argument for why you dislike GMO food here. What bothers you so much about GMO food? The fact is that humans have been breeding plants and animals to increase efficiency and palatability for thousands of years, and GMO is the next technological step.

Unknown unknowns

There's always unknown unknowns and by now those have been reduced significantly for GMOs. Any reason to think the risk in this case might be higher than the benefits? Are you sure you are not overestimating the unknown unknown risk just because GMO sounds scary?

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#75

Post by naoqj »

koonsolo wrote: post #58
0des wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I respect your choice, and hope some day the work we see here can open doors to a lab grown alternative that eliminates the suffering so that you also can experience the joy of a ribeye, bone-in with a compound butter and runny egg.

I also eat meat, so not going to play the saint here. But it seems you have absolutely no remorse of what happens to those animals that end up on your plate. Or you do and try to cover it up by playing the tough guy. I try to cut back on meat as much as I can. I also enjoy some ribs, but I don't eat meat every day. And when I do, I try to stick with fish or poultry. I suggest you watch some slaughterhouse videos, so…

That video is slowed down in the most shocking moments to make it look like the suffering of the animals lasts for longer.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#76

Post by netizen-936824 »

epgui wrote: post #21
ksec wrote: post #8

From the 12+ Years on HN I know this is an unpopular opinion. I dont like GMO / Genome-edited cattle / food or crops. Even if it could theoretically occur through a natural breeding process. You can cross breed all you want. GMO is not cross breed as many on HN somehow believes last time we had this discussions. You can do Data Science and other controlled environment in providing better yield as in EUR ( Or specific…

I’m a biochemist, and I’d feed GMOs to my kids all day if I had any. Or to my mom. They’re totally fine.

Same here. Also a biochemist, I'm totally fine with GMO stuff. There's nothing wrong with it at all

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#77

Post by kleene_op »

mping wrote: post #50
klondike_ wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't provide any argument for why you dislike GMO food here. What bothers you so much about GMO food? The fact is that humans have been breeding plants and animals to increase efficiency and palatability for thousands of years, and GMO is the next technological step.

Unknown unknowns

There will always be unknown unknowns, whatever the subject at hand. This is not specific to GMOs and certainly not a good argument against them.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#78

Post by Eduard »

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

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.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#79

Post by genousti »

bigDinosaur wrote: post #64
Knufen wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't know. My moral intitutions and reasoning fall apart if you remove suffering from the equation. By that logic it would also be okay to farm and eat humans if we eliminated their ability to suffer using CRISPR. What would you think of that? I don't even know where to start.

No post body was provided.

Re: FDA Approves First CRISPR Cows for Beef

#80

Post by Timwi »

DeWilde wrote: post #72
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…

> not needs, you can thrive on a vegetarian diet Not true for everyone. I have a specific health issue and to ingest the necessary daily intake of proteins solely through non-meat source would mean ingesting a lot more carbs that I can handle for a day. Also explain how would CRISPR increase the suffering of animals?

I don't think they were claiming that it increases suffering. But it doesn't decrease it either. We should at least decrease suffering, or ideally, eliminate it. CRISPR does not constitute any progress in that regard. If anything, it gives more people more excuses to continue supporting the suffering.
Post reply on HN