before it's in the papers"
August 03, 2010
TO THE WORLD SCIENCE HOME PAGE
Clone food safe, FDA says; no sales foreseen yet
Jan. 16, 2008
Meat and milk from clo ned animals are as safe as that from their counterparts bred the old-fashioned way, the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration said Tuesday — but sales still won’t begin right away.
The decision removes the last big U.S. regu latory hurdle to marketing products from cloned livestock, and puts the FDA in concert with recent safety assessments from European food regulators and several other nations.
“Meat and milk from cattle, swi ne and goat clones are as safe as food we eat every day,” said Stephen Sundloff, FDA’s food safety chief.
But the government has asked animal cloning com panies to continue a voluntary moratorium on sales for a little longer — not for safety reasons, but marketing ones.
USDA Undersecretary Bruce Kni ght called it a transition period for “allowing the marketplace to adjust.” He wouldn’t say how long the moratorium should continue.
“This is about market accep tance,” Knight added, who said he would be calling a meeting of industry leaders to determine next steps.
Regardless, it still will be years before many foods from cloned animals reach store shel ves, for economic reasons: At $10,000 to $20,000 per animal, they’re a lot more expensive than ordinary cows, meaning producers likely will use clones’ offspring for meat, not the clone itself.
And several large companies — including dairy giant De an Foods Co. and Hormel Foods Corp. — have said they have no plans to sell milk or meat from cloned animals because of consumer anxiety about the technology.
But FDA won’t require food makers to label if their pro ducts came from cloned animals, although companies could do so voluntarily if they knew the source. Last month, meat and dairy producers announced an industry system to track cloned livestock, with an electronic identification tag on each animal sold. Customers would sign a pledge to market the animal as a clone.
But that system is volun tary, and there is no way to tell if milk, for example, came from the daughter of a cloned cow.
“Both the animals and any food pro duced from those animals is indistinguish&s from any other food source,” Sundloff said. “There’s no technological way of distinguishing a food that’s come from an animal that had a clone in its ancestry. It’s not possible.”
The decision was long-expected, but contro versial. Debate has been fierce within the Bush admin istration as to whether the FDA should move forward, largely because of trade concerns. Consumer advocates petitioned against the move, and Congress had passed legislation urging the FDA to study the issue more before moving ahead.
“The FDA has acted recklessly,” said Sen. Barbara Mi kulski, D-Md., who sponsored that legislation. “Just because something was created in a lab, doesn’t mean we should have to eat it. If we discover a problem with cloned food after it is in our food supply and it’s not labeled, the FDA won’t be able to recall it like they did Vioxx — the food will already be tainted.
“If you ask what’s for dinner, it means just about any thing you can cook up in a laboratory,” said Carol Tucker-Foreman of the Consumer Federation of America, who pledged to push for more food producers to shun clones.
The two main U.S. cloning comp anies, Viagen Inc. and Trans Ova Genetics, already have produced more than 600 cloned animals for U.S. breeders, the vast majority cattle, including copies of prize-winning cows and rodeo bulls.
“We certainly are pleased,” said Trans Ova President David Fa ber, who noted that previous reports by the National Academy of Sciences and others have reached the same conclusion.
“Our farmer and rancher clients are plea sed because it provided them with another reproductive tool,” he added.
It was a day forecast since Scot tish scientists announced in 1997 that they had successfully cloned Dolly the sheep. Ironically, sheep aren’t on the list of FDA’s approved cloned animals; the agency said there wasn’t as much data about their safety as about cows, pigs and goats.
By its very definition, a success fully cloned animal should be no different from the original animal whose DNA was used to create it.
But the technology hasn’t been perfected — and many att empts at livestock cloning still end in fatal birth defects or with deformed fetuses dying in the womb. Moreover, Dolly was euthanized in 2003, well short of her normal lifespan, because of a lung disease that raised questions about how cloned animals will age.
The FDA’s report acknowledges that, “Currently, it is not possible to draw any conc lusions regarding the longevity of livestock clones or possible long-term health consequences” for the animal.
But the agency concluded that cloned ani mals that are born healthy are no different than their non-cloned counterparts, and go on to reproduce normally as well.
“The FDA said, ‘We assume all the un healthy animals will be taken out of the food supply,’“ said Joseph Mendelson of the Center for Food Safety, a consumer advocacy group that opposes FDA’s ruling. “They’re only looking at the small slice of cloned animals that appear to be healthy. ... It needs a lot further study.”
* * *
Send us a comment
on this story, or send
it to a friend
Report: cells “from space” have unusual makeup
Dolphins and the evolution of teaching
Drug may trick body into “thinking” you exercised
Tit-for-tat: birds found to repay wartime help
Musical genes may be coming to light
Rock-hurling zoo chimp stocked ammo in advance: study
Faith found to reduce errors on psychological test
Doodling gets its due: tiny artworks may aid memory
From oral to moral? Dirty deeds may prompt “bad taste” reaction