Cloned meat and
milk
The
federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently declared “that meat and
milk from cloned animals and their offspring are as safe as the natural
versions, clearing the way for the products to enter the food supply without
special labeling … In releasing their final risk assessment on the safety of
cloning technology … the FDA asked producers to continue keeping cloned cattle,
pigs and goats out of the food supply during a transition period of unspecified
length to give the market time to adjust.” (Charleston Daily Mail, Jan. 16,
2008)
So,
how is the public to know when these products will be on the shelves of our
grocery stores and whether we will be able to avoid them if we don’t want to
risk including them in our diet?
Apparently we won’t.
Reviewing
the information about this development, I couldn’t help but think back to
another time, when the German government failed to adequately protect the
public and, as a result, the world learned a new word, one that still evokes
terrible images of physical deformities in babies. Does anyone else remember “Thalidomide
babies?”
Inadequate
tests were performed to assess the drug’s safety, with catastrophic results for
the children of women who had taken Thalidomide during their pregnancies. “From
1956 to 1962, approximately 10,000 children were born with severe deformities.”
(Wikipedia)
Opponents
of releasing cloned animal products into our food supply raise the following
objections:
•
Unknown food safety risks;
•
Animal cruelty;
•
There is no requirement to mandate labeling of cloned food so consumers can
avoid using them if they wish;
•
Problems in clones could lead to increased incidence of illnesses caused by
these food products, such as E. coli infections;
•
Excessively high doses of hormones, antibiotics and other medications in the
animals that are a necessary part of the process;
•
Even healthy appearing cloned animals could have hidden defects that could
affect food safety;
•
Cloning animals for food is completely new technology, dating back just 10
years;
•
A 2006 Pew poll found that 64 percent of “American consumers” are not
comfortable with animal cloning, and the Humane Society of The United States
has declared that cloning has no “legitimate social value and decreases animal
welfare;” and
•
“Widespread adoption of cloning could lead to the dramatic loss of genetic
diversity in livestock,” which “may leave farmers and our nation’s food supply
vulnerable to devastating epidemics due to an extremely narrow gene pool.” (The
Cornucopia Institute)
Proponents
argue that it is perfectly safe, that it has been adequately studied, and that
it is a necessary and economic addition to the food supply.
If
that’s true, why is it that they don’t want the public to exercise their own
discretion in deciding what they want to eat?
We
don’t yet know for sure whether cloned meat and milk are safe, notwithstanding
the FDA’s claims. Until we do, these
products should not be released for public consumption or, if they are, they
should be clearly labeled so the public can decide for themselves if they want
to include them in their diet.
As
the old saw about drinking goes, “Name your poison.” For me, my poison will not include cloned
meat and milk products if I can avoid them.
Not yet.
© 2008 Harris R. Sherline,
All Rights Reserved
NOTE:
Read more of Harris Sherline’s commentaries on his
blog at “opinionfest.com.”