There is no use of GM technology in the development of the pigs described here as far as I could understand. There was selection of desired types and then breeding of them but no use of GM technology to produce certain desired traits. These are genetically modified pigs only in the sense that breeders might produce genetically modified tomatoes by selecting certain plants with certain genetic features and breeding them exclusively.
Cheers, Ken Hanly --- Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (A week or so ago I reviewed the film "Our Daily > Bread," a documentary > about the dislocations of industrial farming. In > line with that, here is a > long excerpt from an article titled "Swine of the > Times: The making of the > modern pig" by Nathanael Johnson that appeared in > the May 2006 "Harpers" > magazine. It is one of the most devastating > indictments of agribusiness > that I have ever read. Unfortunately, the article is > not online as Harper's > insists on defending the dead tree paradigm. If you > go to their website, > you will find an index of all their articles but all > except maybe 1 percent > are not online.) > > > THE CHICKENIFICATION OF THE AMERICAN PIG > > American hog farmers have experimented with > artificial insemination since > the 1930s, but it became standard practice only > after vertically integrated > megafarms began to dominate the business. Although > the pork-packing > industry can claim the honor of showing Henry Ford > the way to > mechanization, it has only recently embraced the > principle of vertical > integration, which when combined with the assembly > line brought Ford and > other automobile manufacturers such splendid > success. It wasn't until 1991 > that anyone in the pig world succeeded in expanding > Ford's principles > beyond the slaughterhouse, back down the food chain, > to hog farms. The > innovator was Joseph Luter III, who took over > Smithfield Foods in 1975. He > saw that poultry companies were already turning big > profits by building > massive chicken farms and controlling every stage of > production. If > vertical integration could work for chickens, Luter > reasoned, it could work > for pigs. > > Luter wanted to give customers something not often > found in nature: > uniformity. He wanted shoppers to know exactly what > a ham with the > Smithfield label would taste like before they bought > it. > > "And the only way to do that," Luter told a > newspaper reporter in 2000, "is > to control the process from the farm to the packing > plant." > > With AI, Luter could distribute a single line of > genetics across a thousand > farms. Smithfield provided every farmer with the > same pigs, the same feed, > and the same detailed instructions. Producers only > had to build up-to-spec > barns and follow orders. This system lifted the > burden, and the benefits, > of innovation from the producer's shoulders. Some > farmers resented being > forced into the role of de facto assembly-line > workers, but they did not > have much choice. They could not compete with the > efficiencies of vertical > integration. Megafarms sprouted up around > Smithfield's packing plant in > North Carolina, and in the mid-Nineties other > vertical integrators, such as > Premium Standard Farms and Seaboard, began moving > into the Midwest, the > traditional American hog belt. Now Smithfield turns > about 20 million hogs > into pork every year, making it the world's largest > pork producer. > > Farmers who wanted to stay in business converted. > Many quit. The most > stubborn went bankrupt. Between 1979 and 2004, as > pork production increased > by 6 billion pounds, the number of hog farms in > America decreased from more > than 650,000 to less than 70,000. > > "Farmers with know-how and pride got eliminated," > one pork producer who had > chosen conversion told me. "This kind of farming > doesn't take any talent. > The company gives you a plan, a consultant, the > feed, and the pigs. All you > have to do is follow the plan. People who had no > talent thought it was great." > > Luter's system demanded that farmers subtly shift > the way they looked at > their animals. The good farmer had to know his > animals. The successful > Smithfield producer has to watch his inputs, death > rates, and pounds gained > per pound of feed to maximize protein production. > Instead of paying > attention to individual pigs, producers focused on > the efficiency of the > herd as a whole. > > Antibiotic growth promoters like Tylan are > advertised in trade magazines as > tools to help producers deal with such abstractions: > > "Tylan helps minimize attrition losses and maximize > economic returns," one > ad reads. "On average, 30-35% of pigs born never > reach full-value market > weight because they die, are culled or are > lightweights at marketing." > > As one Midwestern veterinarian put it, his role has > changed from something > akin to a family doctor to a public health planner. > "The days when I would > get called in to see one sick pig are long gone," he > said. > > Instead, workers dispatch sick hogs with a bolt gun, > or simply swing the > runts by their hind legs against the concrete floor. > Healing is inefficient. > > As the way producers looked at pigs changed, so did > the animal itself. > Luter needed a brave new pig for his new system, and > in 1990, Smithfield > purchased exclusive U.S. rights to the genetic lines > of extraordinarily > lean pigs from the National Pig Development Company. > These hogs excelled at > efficiently converting feed into salable protein, > because they wasted > little energy on fat production. As an added > benefit, the lean meat they > produced appealed to lipophobic Americans. At that > time, health-conscious > Americans shied away from fatty meats but considered > chicken lean and > virtuous. In 1986 the National Pork Board had begun > an advertising campaign > that would recast the pig as a second type of > chicken. Pork, advertisers > asserted, is "the other white meat." Smithfield made > this claim a reality. > > As other pork corporations turned to the Smithfield > model, breeding > companies designed pigs to accommodate the desire > for leaner, more > efficient swine. Today geneticists have developed > tools to reshape pigs > almost as ably as Ford's engineers reshape > radiators. > > WE HAVE GONE TOO FAR > > I decided to attend the National Swine Improvement > Federation Conference in > Ames, Iowa, to find out what the leading lights of > the hog industry thought > of the animal they had created. Surprisingly, > meatpackers, academics, and > private-sector scientists all gave me the same > answer: We have gone too far. > > Geneticists have made great strides in the last > decade. The portion of the > hog that people can actually eat (as opposed to the > skin, bones, and fat) > has increased by 1.04 percent--the equivalent of an > extra pork chop per > pig. Scientists have shaved 12.9 days off the time > it takes the animal to > reach market weight and increased the area of the > loin eye (used as an > indicator for general muscle size) by 1.9 > centimeters. Sows give birth to > an average of 1.56 more piglets per litter. Today's > pigs are impressively > uniform and grow large, lean muscles quickly. But > the pork has become so > lean that packers often have to inject saline > marinades directly into the > meat--and chefs must drown it in heavy sauces--to > make it palatable. What's > === message truncated ===
