×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientists Clone Sheep With 'Good' Fat

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the pulling-the-wool-over-your-stomach's-eyes dept.

Biotech 233

redletterdave writes "Chinese scientists have cloned a genetically modified sheep containing a 'good' type of fat found naturally in nuts, seeds, fish and leafy greens that helps reduce the risk of heart attacks and cardiovascular disease. The gene, which is linked to the production of polyunsaturated fatty acids, was inserted into a donor cell taken from the ear of a Chinese Merino sheep. The cell was then inserted into an unfertilized egg and implanted into the womb of a surrogate sheep. With any luck, this process could be replicated in the future to clone more animals for safe and healthy consumption."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

233 comments

Genetically Modified Hogs next? (4, Funny)

tomhath (637240) | about 2 years ago | (#39789605)

Healthy bacon. Mmmm.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789629)

Health food will still taste like shit.

Seriously, though, really? I love bacon, but back off on the meat consumption and you'll be better. Veg? not so much, but eat like a person, not like people of walmart.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (5, Interesting)

erroneus (253617) | about 2 years ago | (#39789691)

I kinda disagree with that. Yes, current meats are kinda... bad in large amounts but that is largely because of the way the body works... if you live on mostly meats without much in the way of carbs, you'll be just fine and your body will consume those "bad fats." Problem is, it is really hard to eat that way... really hard. It's good to mix things up. So if we can have meats without the negative health impact when mixed with other things, we will get the benefits of the protiens and all the good things meat offers and still be able to eat it with things more carby... like spaghetti in meat sauce... :)

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (4, Informative)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | about 2 years ago | (#39789883)

This is already a reality with naturally-fed animals. For example, beef can provide us with all the healthy fats and oils we need when the cow is grass-fed and range raised. When chickens are raised on a diet or worms that grow in fresh cow dung, the consistency, flavor, and overall health of their eggs is substantially higher than what is generally available in the supermarket.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (4, Insightful)

value_added (719364) | about 2 years ago | (#39790805)

Worth pointing out that the same applies to vegetables and fruits. Winter tomatoes grown in the sandy soils of Florida can't really be compared nutritionally [npr.org] to what someone can get out of their own garden.

Ultimately, it's all about the "ingredients". That's long been considered a truism for chefs in the kitchen as it is for someone involved in raising animals. That this is routinely overlooked, glossed over or otherwise dismissed in the pursuit of economic interests and efficiencies is both funny and tragic. Funny in the sense of "What the hell did you expect?", and tragic in the sense of engaging in (and wasting time and effort with) tortured discussions of good/bad ideas and practices which, ultimately, are workaround to workarounds.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790049)

But they're not bad fats, and living "mostly on meat" is very easy.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (-1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#39790293)

>>>if you live on mostly meats without much in the way of carbs, you'll be just fine and your body will consume those "bad fats."

What BS. The bad fats will simply accumulate in the walls of your arteries, giving them a "foam" appearance until a clot is formed. Then you die like the doctor who came-up with this "eat lots of fat" diet.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (1)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about 2 years ago | (#39790607)

He was eating grain-fed animals, though. And not following his diet (if you're referring to Atkins).

Native Americans ate primarily animal meat and vegetables. They didn't have any significant heart disease until we started introducing them to cultivated grains (and alcohol).

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (2)

kamapuaa (555446) | about 2 years ago | (#39790789)

Jim Fixx popularized jogging with "The Complete Book of Running," then died of a heart attack at age 52. An autopsy revealed a cornorary artery that was 95% blocked. Sample size of 1 and all that.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (4, Interesting)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about 2 years ago | (#39790519)

How is it difficult to eat "that way"?

IMO it's very easy to have a diet which is primarily meat. You don't have to eat a large pork rind for breakfast or a side of bacon every other week, but if you've got good quality meat available, short of filling up your cart with lots of different meats and a handful of odd veggies at the grocery, it's really not that hard.

You need less food (in volume) if you're eating meat than if you were eating a 'mixed' carb-heavy diet, too, which certainly helps. Judging from what I've seen vegans or even vegeterians deal with, it's certainly easier (in terms of food prep and quantity) and less costly.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789641)

nigger

First clone of first post! (3, Funny)

larry bagina (561269) | about 2 years ago | (#39789643)

HeaIthy bacon, Mrnrnrn,

Re:First clone of first post! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789731)

Your clone appears to have developed a deleterious mutation.

Re:First clone of first post! (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#39790233)

They already have that. It's chicken or turkey strips flavored like bacon. Very good with almost no bad fat.

They already have that. It's chicken or turkey strips flavored like bacon. Very good with almost no bad fat.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789915)

I'd love to get my hands on some meat that simultaneously tastes like pork and fish.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (2)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#39790061)

I'd love to get my hands on some meat that simultaneously tastes like pork and fish.

Her name is Shiela, and she's not all that interesting... really.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789921)

Omigawd!

Thinking about that, I think I just had a droolgasm!

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (1)

crmarvin42 (652893) | about 2 years ago | (#39789957)

There already are GMO pigs. A Canadian group created them about a decade ago, and last I heard they were trying to get regulatory approval in Canada to sell them for meat. They were modified to more efficiently digest phosphorus from grain, thus reducing their environmental impact. I believe the trade name they intend to use is Ecopig, or something like that.

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (5, Funny)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#39790099)

ECOPIG!!! Swine of environmental justice!!!! Wherever evil agro-corps commit atrocities against the natural landscape ECOPIG and his sidekick PIGGY-SUE will snort in the face of danger and send those business hogs back to Wallstreet squealing!!!

Re:Genetically Modified Hogs next? (1)

user flynn (236683) | about 2 years ago | (#39790389)

Yeah. Why the hell did they do this with sheep first!!@#$! So what if it's more difficult to clone other mammals.

my wife... (4, Funny)

crutchy (1949900) | about 2 years ago | (#39789623)

...gets a bit of "good fat" occasionally

Re:my wife... (2)

jhoegl (638955) | about 2 years ago | (#39789723)

So... your neighbor?

Re:my wife... (1)

Hartree (191324) | about 2 years ago | (#39789795)

"So... your neighbor?"

Nah. It's why all his kids look like either the mailman or the plumber.

Re:my wife... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789867)

No, most look like Tyrone the thug.

Lamb (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789639)

Now suitable for vegetarians?

Somatic cell = old mitochondria (1)

Svartormr (692822) | about 2 years ago | (#39789647)

It's the same problem that killed Dolly the sheep early. Mammal female germ cells avoid activity prior to fertilization to minimize oxidation damage to their mitochondria. This may or may not be dealt with by then breeding normally thereafter.

Re:Somatic cell = old mitochondria NOT (1)

Svartormr (692822) | about 2 years ago | (#39789667)

Erk. Just read the process again. Gene into somatic cell nucleus, then somatic cell nucleus into regular egg. Doesn't have that problem.

Re:Somatic cell = old mitochondria (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789727)

If you're breeding for food purposes, I don't think longevity matters that much. Dolly lived for much longer than the usual term for lamb that are bred for meat.

Re:Somatic cell = old mitochondria (2)

NoKaOi (1415755) | about 2 years ago | (#39789785)

If you're breeding for food purposes, I don't think longevity matters that much. Dolly lived for much longer than the usual term for lamb that are bred for meat.

Except that breeding the old fashioned way is probably a lot cheaper than cloning and genetic modification. I would think that ideally, you'd want to clone/modify a few and then breed them.

Re:Somatic cell = old mitochondria (1)

tragedy (27079) | about 2 years ago | (#39789965)

I'm pretty sure it's not the mitochondria, but the shortened telomeres in the older nuclear DNA.

Ethics of GMO animals? (2)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 2 years ago | (#39789697)

GMO plants is one thing, but animals? I can't quite put my finger on why, but someting about this seems... troubling.

Re:Ethics of GMO animals? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789745)

Oh, no doubt. Even GM plants is unsettling.

As for the animals, they are healthy just not in the amounts that most are eating. It's bad enough all the hormones and antibiotics in meat as it is. 'Good' fat isn't going to change that.

captcha: disgusts

Re:Ethics of GMO animals? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789889)

Nah. Better than GM plants. We've already seen how hard it is to keep GM corn penned up. Oh, wait, "penned up...."

Re:Ethics of GMO animals? (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 2 years ago | (#39789875)

Because you think modern livestock haven't undergone genetic modification?

Re:Ethics of GMO animals? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790415)

It's not the genetic modification as such that worries me. Practically everything we eat, excluding bananas is genetically unique. We're adapted to it.

The difference is the degree and kind of modification. Remember, potatoes and nightshade are genetically very similar. More so, perhaps than some of the GM stuff.

Re:Ethics of GMO animals? (2)

metrometro (1092237) | about 2 years ago | (#39790087)

Because you can't treat a plant inhumanely. Sheep can suffer. And we know how compatible capitalism and bioethics is.

Re:Ethics of GMO animals? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790451)

Just till we start cross breeding animals with humans. I think the Chinese will give a go first.

Re:Ethics of GMO animals? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790503)

I can't quite put my finger on why, but someting about this seems... troubling.

Ingrained prejudices.

There's really no difference except that we "feel" it's different.

Re:Ethics of GMO animals? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790831)

We've been doing GMO for centuries, many of them. The difference is now we're able to make specific, targeted changes much more rapidly, whereas before we had to breed features in and out of our food species over very (very very in some cases) long periods with only a partial ability to control the outcomes well. This whole argument is kinda like hearing someone say "You genetically modified a housecat to not have claws? That's so unnatural!" .. as if housecats are at all natural. We created what they are today over a long period (well, and some more modern breeds/features over a shorter period when we understood breeding properly). If you want a "natural" pet, trying having a cougar sit in your lap and purr every day (insert cougar dating joke here).

All of the modern major food supply species: Cows, Pigs, Chickens, etc... are all incredibly unnatural species already, even before the advent of proper GMO. They'd go extinct in a heartbeat without us growing/farming/protecting them until we eat them. We engineered them as food sources, they're not natural!

Creepy mental image (5, Funny)

Grayhand (2610049) | about 2 years ago | (#39789721)

The fact they got the fat gene from a round worm gave me this mental image of a 100lb round worm covered in sheep's wool. I doubt counting those wouldn't help me get to sleep and would likely give you nightmares.

Re:Creepy mental image (2)

xstonedogx (814876) | about 2 years ago | (#39789793)

Wait until they cross them with cinnamon trees.

Re:Creepy mental image (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790175)

But they'd be a bit easier to shear.

"fat found in nuts, seeds, fish and greens" (1)

John Hasler (414242) | about 2 years ago | (#39789751)

So we'll soon have mutton that tastes like spinach?

Re:"fat found in nuts, seeds, fish and greens" (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#39789803)

Or cashews.

Could be a growth market - flavored cows. Spinach cows, cashew cows, trout cows, kale cows.....

Dunno.

Re:"fat found in nuts, seeds, fish and greens" (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about 2 years ago | (#39790597)

I don't know where that nonsense came from. The fat gene comes from a worm.

No thanks (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789779)

It's not like this is a rare nutritional commodity. I think I'll just stick to eating the nuts, seeds, fish and leafy greens instead of the cloned sheep.

Healthy (5, Interesting)

kamapuaa (555446) | about 2 years ago | (#39789797)

Worth mentioning that humans evolved to eat animals with standard fat percentages, not margarine or mealworm-sheep. There is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD [ajcn.org], and there are healthy populations that traditionally go 6-9 months with no fats except animals fats.

Re:Healthy (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | about 2 years ago | (#39789985)

and there are healthy populations that traditionally go 6-9 months with no fats except animals fats.

Bear in mind these populations probably also get a good amount of exercise... Here in 'merica we want to have our fat and eat it too.

Re:Healthy (4, Insightful)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about 2 years ago | (#39790473)

Here in America, we also have processed grains in everything.

We also have a very high percentage of our diets consist of processed GMO grains (corn, wheat). If you're having 2 hamburgers with a handful of corn chips and two white wheat buns, the meat isn't going to be the primary component of the meal.

It seems that every couple months there's a news article about some old guy or gal who died after a fairly insignificant (not particularly active or sedentary, nothing really marked to note) life who spent their entire life having pork (ham/bacon) and eggs for breakfast every day. It wasn't until the inclusion of excess grains that Americans started to have issues in the late 1800s.

Re:Healthy (3, Informative)

slew (2918) | about 2 years ago | (#39790201)

Worth mentioning that humans evolved to eat animals with standard fat percentages, not margarine or mealworm-sheep. There is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD [ajcn.org], and there are healthy populations that traditionally go 6-9 months with no fats except animals fats.

FWIW, the main advance with this announcement is not the omega-3/FAT-1 transgenic aspect, it is the new cloning technique BGI calls handmade cloning which apparently allows lower-tech facilities and higher transgenic clone yield. BGI has already done this transgenic modification with pigs and now they have done it with sheep. With this new cloning technique, however, it might be possible to do this at an industrial scale.

However, If you are interested instead about this specific "fat-1" transgenic idea, it was done with mice [nih.gov] way back in 2004.

Although that is possibly true that saturated fats aren't corrolated with increased risk of CHD or CVD, omega-3 fatty acids are required for controlling blood clotting and building cell membranes in the brain and are assumed to be a necessary nutrient. The "healthy populations" you seem to be alluding to likley maintain their consumption of omega-3 fatty acids from seafood and nuts and oils for 6-9 months of the year.

Peta's gonna be pissed ..... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789895)

Eating animals just got even healthier.

If an animal has plant DNA, does that mean it is no longer an animal and even more delicious?

AWESOME! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39789929)

I want a Chai Latte straight from the cow!

Re:AWESOME! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790027)

You don't need GMO then - just pour some hot water over some cow dung and you're done.

Re:AWESOME! (1)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#39790159)

You can get that today, just be warned the cow will kick you ass for burning her udder!!!

What could go wrong? (2)

jtotheh (229796) | about 2 years ago | (#39789945)

I don't want to seem old or old fashioned but this seems like a really bad idea in numerous ways. Maybe they should feed the clone brains from another sheep to add another dubious aspect to this process.

Re:What could go wrong? (2)

siddesu (698447) | about 2 years ago | (#39790043)

You're not scared enough. Just wait until the Chinese scientists get permission to do the breeding on that asteroid that Google is about to bring in Earth orbit. Anyway, I am off to stock up on some shotgun shells, plasma cells and rockets.

Yum - Peng Peng Lamb (1)

axonis (640949) | about 2 years ago | (#39789975)

I wonder if it tastes anything like Mongolian Lamb ?, I'm sure the next step is Genetic marination - ready to cook !

knockoff handbags (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790001)

That’s a brilliant work. that kind of work I never seen it before, this post going to be best resource to get any knowledge.

Re:knockoff handbags (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790113)

You forgot the link, man. How are people supposed to buy your knockoff handbags?

what about women? (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 2 years ago | (#39790065)

Can we genetically modify human women to not have any fat? I have one in particular that I'm pretty sure I have power over attorney over that I'd be willing to volunteer.

Re:what about women? (1)

siddesu (698447) | about 2 years ago | (#39790147)

I'm afraid not everybody shares your anorexic fantasies. Most of us prefer natural women, with enough fat in the proper places.

Re:what about women? (1)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#39790181)

So you want a woman with no breasts and no ass... hmmm why not just find a guy?

Re:what about women? (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about 2 years ago | (#39790213)

I saw a woman today at the grocery store who looked like she had zero body fat. Not a pretty sight I can tell you. I wanted to drop six pounds of bacon in her basket as an act of charity, bit I thought she might take it amiss. Besides, it wouldn't have been enough.

Disgusting (2)

doston (2372830) | about 2 years ago | (#39790069)

Not eating cloned anything or anything that's been screwed around with. I know it's unpopular here, but I eat everything organic...everything. As far as meat, if it didn't eat what it was supposed to eat; pasture raised and organic at that, I avoid it. Chickens eat bugs and grass, not feed. They like to scratch around in dirt, not hang out idly in cages all day. Same with Beef, less the bugs. We're likely evolved to eat a paleolithic era type diet. Going to stick as close to that as possible. You aren't just what you eat, you're also what your food ate. Why would I support something like 800 million pounds of pesticide being dumped on the land every year? Now it's some pesticide killing the bees. I remember when my Father's doctor had him eating trans-fat for his heart trouble. What will researchers discover ten years after this cloned junk's been foisted on the public?

Re:Disgusting (1)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#39790195)

That the new race of superhumans that came from eating this mana from the gods is about embark on a long voyage to a distant new world they can see with their naked super eyes, and leave you sad organic nibbles to what's left of the earth.

Re:Disgusting (1)

doston (2372830) | about 2 years ago | (#39790285)

That the new race of superhumans that came from eating this mana from the gods is about embark on a long voyage to a distant new world they can see with their naked super eyes, and leave you sad organic nibbles to what's left of the earth.

I've met quite a few of these "Gods" while drinking beer. Don't get your hopes up.

polyunsaturated animal fats? (1)

Dahamma (304068) | about 2 years ago | (#39790079)

Aren't they usually a liquid at body temperature? Going to make for some really squishy lambs...

Re:polyunsaturated animal fats? (1)

CFD339 (795926) | about 2 years ago | (#39790237)

no, you're thinking plant fats with one hydrogen atom vs. animal fats with two. the "hydrogenate" plant fats to make them taste and have the texture of animal fats but as a result, they're just as bad for you.

This is more about the fatty acids and oils that are why fish are healthier to eat than beef (in that we eat too much beef and not enough fish, generally).

The real question is ...how will it taste.

Re:polyunsaturated animal fats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790711)

Aren't they usually a liquid at body temperature? Going to make for some really squishy lambs...

As squishy as you. Unless you're rock hard ripped, in which case, they're as squishy as the average flabby guy.

Roundworm fat (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about 2 years ago | (#39790173)

The article says they successfully cloned the roundworm gene into a sheep but doesn't say how much it changes the fat in the sheep. Who knows if it's even significant? And who knows if it's OK for sheep's health to make a weird kind of fat and who know if people will like to eat wormutton?

A lot of the taste of meat is in the fat. Will it taste wormy?

Re:Roundworm fat (1)

CFD339 (795926) | about 2 years ago | (#39790253)

More than that, it will likely interact with the brain differently. You could conceivably be creating sheep with very different brain function.

Fat? (-1)

cashman73 (855518) | about 2 years ago | (#39790197)

"a 'good' type of fat found naturally in nuts, seeds, fish and leafy greens"

Sounds like somebody either failed basic biochemistry, or Chinese translation. "Fat" is exclusively an animal product. It is not found in plants, which would include nuts, seeds, and leafy greens.

Re:Fat? (3, Informative)

WarSpiteX (98591) | about 2 years ago | (#39790313)

I think you may be wrong. Nuts and avocados are the most common plants to contain fats, but others do as well. Like olives.

Unless you think you're frying your chicken on olive carbs, rather than olive oil?

Re:Fat? (2, Funny)

jonnythan (79727) | about 2 years ago | (#39790547)

Well obviously the fats came from animals. Olive trees are notorious for eating squirrels and other rodents.

Re:Fat? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790681)

Even for Slashdot, I'm somewhat amazed at this combination of immense ignorance and pretentiousness.

Good fat, bad fat, I'm the guy with the gun (1)

WarSpiteX (98591) | about 2 years ago | (#39790269)

Am I the only one who thinks animals evolved with "bad fat" for a reason, other than clogging your cardiovascular system?

Perhaps this "bad fat" isn't so bad? Remember when eggs were really bad for you, because they contained cholesterol, and now they're really good for you, because they contain good cholesterol?

Re:Good fat, bad fat, I'm the guy with the gun (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790867)

Yep. Saturated fat is the precursor to many essential body hormones, for example testosterone.

Dietary science is abysmal. About all we can say is that dietary cholesterol and saturated fat and most other bugaboos are not at all bad for you. Also, that body seems to thrive under a great number of diets, and that no particular diet has been shown to be "best" for health or lifespan purposes.

Why stop at something like that? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790377)

I say you genetically modify the damn things to be walking grocery stands. Then in the other herd, you could genetically modify them to produce 'adult novelty items.'. Oh, I forgot, they already are.

Absolutely no information (2)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about 2 years ago | (#39790437)

There is absolutely no information in the article. "Healthy fat found in seeds"?

What it sounds like they're doing is they've figured out how to genetically modify animals to produce omega 3 and similar types of fats instead of the fats commonly found in grain fed or industrially raised meats. That's actually fairly big (good) news, I think.

On the other hand, 'healthy' fat can be found in animals which are 'free range'. It's less environmentally intensive. The unhealthy fat found in animal meat is only unhealthy because of the way they're raised.

Re:Absolutely no information (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790883)

Even assuming your assertion about healthy fat in "free range" animals were correct, do you have any idea the implications of your well-intentioned suggestion? We have nearly 7 billion humans on this planet. We can't feed them all properly without animals raised in stock pens in massive commercial operations and GMO grains harvested at the highest possible efficiency. Even given all we can do in this area, we're still facing possible food supply shortages globally in the coming decades.

If you want everyone to eat free range / "organic" -grown foods, you first need to drop the population back under a billion, maybe considerably less. What's your plan for telling 6 billion people that they have to commit suicide and/or neuter themselves? It's not happening any other way.

Healthy consumption? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790881)

Really?

Irrespective of the chemical makeup of the animal, you are still exploiting another life form. Slavery of any sort should not be disguised as healthy eating.

modified animals for dinner (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39790989)

GROOOOOOOOOSSS to the max! Your children will be born green with horns.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...