Is your coffee fair-trade? Your spinach organic? As healthy-eating options expand, so do the challenges of making choices at the store. But there\u2019s one decision looming that you may or may not get to make: Do you buy meat and milk from cloned animals?<\/p>\n
In the latest volley in the food wars, the FDA determined in January that meat from cloned cows, pigs, and goats (and their o\u03a9spring) is safe to eat\u2014 and therefore there\u2019s no need to label it. That argument hasn\u2019t convinced some consumer advocates and members of Congress. It hasn\u2019t swayed many Americans, either: Two-thirds don\u2019t like the whole idea of animal cloning, while more than 40 percent believe that serving the results at the dinner table is a bad idea, according to a 2006 survey released by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. \u201cThere are concerns about safety, but it\u2019s also a question of moral discomfort,\u201d says Michael Fernandez, who was in charge of the Pew Initiative at the time of the survey. The skeptics are pushing lawmakers to force meat producers to label cloned meat and dairy products as such. \u201cConsumers should have the right to refuse, whether it\u2019s justified by the science or not,\u201d insists Marion Nestle, Ph.D., a nutrition professor at New York University.<\/p>\n
If the term \u201ccloned meat\u201d makes you wince, take a deep breath. Cloning is expensive\u2014costing upward of $30,000 per animal\u2014 so it\u2019s limited mainly to prize cattle and horses. No one thinks meat from clones will arrive in any quantity for years. \u201cFor now, it\u2019s extremely cost-prohibitive, with technology still in the research phase,\u201d explains Karen Batra, director of public a\u03a9airs for the National Cattlemen\u2019s Beef Association. The breather will give consumers a chance to get up to speed on what\u2019s at stake. As it turns out, the fight over cloning goes beyond human- health issues, to the ethics of how we produce our food.<\/p>\n
Facts and Fears<\/strong><\/p>\n First, let\u2019s be clear about what cloning is and is not. The concept has long been a staple of science fiction, evoking images of identical humans created by arrogant researchers and controlled by evil forces. (Just dust o\u03a9 your copy of Brave New World.) But the truth is, you\u2019ve probably been eating cloned food all your life. Most of the bananas, potatoes, apples, and grapes at supermarkets are clones, having been produced through various \u201cvegetative propagation\u201d techniques designed to ensure consistent quality and get produce to market quickly.<\/p>\n Most of us feel di\u03a9erently about animals than we do about plants, however. When scientists cloned Dolly the sheep in 1996, they reaped widespread criticism, much of it driven by the fear that humans might be next in line. But in the past decade, animal cloning has only expanded, with scientists cloning mammals ranging from deer to rabbits. To create an animal clone, scientists remove the DNA from an egg cell, replace it with DNA from the cell of a donor animal (the one they want to clone), then implant the egg in a surrogate mother. A genetic copy of the donor animal\u2014 a clone\u2014is born. Although some people equate cloning with genetic modification, it\u2019s entirely unrelated; the animal\u2019s DNA is not altered at all, unlike that of the genetically modified corn that\u2019s become part and parcel of the food supply.<\/p>\n Given the exorbitant cost of cloning, you might wonder what the appeal is for breeders. As Batra explains it, it\u2019s simply another tool in their kit, which includes artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, and other methods designed to ensure that the best genes of an animal carry on. But rather than turning every $30,000 investment into hamburger, breeders will likely keep clones for breeding and sell their progeny instead. So what appears in our food supply will mainly be the o\u03a9spring of clones, produced by conventional reproduction. (After their breeding years end, however, clones may be slaughtered for meat.)<\/p>\n Regardless of where clones are in the family tree, consumer advocates have pressed the government to study the safety issues. The National Academy of Sciences said in 2002 that certain cloned products were no danger to the public. A year later, the FDA announced that milk and meat from cloned pigs, goats, and cattle was likely safe to eat. Some groups argued for more data, so the FDA spent several years taking a closer look. Their final conclusion? \u201cMeat and milk from cow, pig, and goat clones are as safe to eat as the food we eat every day,\u201d Stephen Sundlof, director of the FDA\u2019s Center for Food Safety & Applied Nutrition, said in a statement.<\/p>\n Though some consumer groups still argue for more research, many former critics were assuaged by the FDA\u2019s most recent report, at least on the safety front. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, for instance, found that the FDA has \u201csatisfactorily answered the safety question.\u201d But the cloning controversy isn\u2019t over. As Nestle points out, \u201cjust because it is safe doesn\u2019t mean it\u2019s acceptable.\u201d<\/p>\n Animal Welfare<\/strong><\/p>\n Cloning mammals has risks. Some 95 percent of clones don\u2019t survive gestation. Of those that do survive, many die during their first year of life, which outrages animal-rights advocates. \u201cClones die from respiratory, digestive, circulatory, nervous, muscular, skeletal, and placental abnormalities,\u201d explains Lee Hall, legal director for Friends of Animals, an advocacy organization based in Connecticut. The FDA\u2019s January report counters that \u201cnone of these abnormalities is unique to clones,\u201d and adds that these traits aren\u2019t passed on to their offspring.<\/p>\n Experts such as Andrew Weil, M.D., point to another concern: Safe or not, cloned meat and dairy products will come from factory farms that threaten the environment and make use of hormones and other additives. \u201cThere may not be a specific danger in cloned meat,\u201d Weil notes. \u201cBut it\u2019s all part of an unhealthy trend in food production.\u201d Cloning, he and other critics say, increases the control of factory farms, decreases genetic diversity, and does little to encourage small-scale and organic farming.<\/p>\n On the flip side, you can rest assured that organic meat and milk are clone-free. Although clones could theoretically be raised using organic methods, the USDA has ruled that meat and dairy products from cloned animals and their offspring cannot carry the organic label.<\/p>\n Both cloning skeptics and opponents back the labeling of cloned meat so that consumers can make a real choice. Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland), for instance, is pushing an amendment to the Consumer Product Safety Commission bill that would make such labeling mandatory. Joe Mendelson, legal director of the Center for Food Safety in Washington, D.C., says, \u201cThe public wants more information before clones are released into the food supply.\u201d On that point, it seems, everyone can agree.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Worried about the health effects and ethics of cloned meat […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1165","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-body-soul"],"yoast_head":"\n