|
What is really disturbing is that the meat will not be labeled as coming from a cloned animal or from a descendent of a cloned animal. That takes away our choice, much in the same way as the FDA's recent approval of adding viruses to lunch meat without labeling.
The Consumer Federation of America has been against the FDA's plan to allow cloned meat for quite a while. Ms. Foreman makes some very good arguments about allowing cloned meat in our food supply.
Here is a news release I received back in October on the subject:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Carol Tucker Foreman
October 17, 2006
Phone: 202-441-4510
CFA’S CAROL TUCKER FOREMAN ON FDA’S INTENTION TO
FOIST MEAT AND MILK FROM CLONED ANIMALS ON
UNWILLING PUBLIC
The Food and Drug Administration is, once again, flirting with inflicting meat and milk from cloned animals on the consuming public despite the fact that almost two-thirds of Americans oppose the technology and don’t want to eat cloned milk and meat. By not requiring that cloned milk and meat be labeled, the U.S. Government is permitting these ethically questionable products to be foisted on a reluctant public through secrecy and stealth. There will be no freedom to choose in the cloned milk and meat marketplace.
Independent polls taken over several years, including one by the Gallup organization and the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology show over 60 percent of Americans oppose animal cloning and would not purchase cloned meat and milk even if the government says they are safe.
Three times in the last four years the FDA has stated it has evidence that the cloned milk and meat are safe and will soon be on the market. The FDA has, however, never made its full risk assessment or scientific studies available to the public nor provided an opportunity to comment.
Claims that cloning is safe for animals are questionable. Clone pregnancies, even those in the studies FDA cites to support cloning, often end in miscarriage and many of the animals are deformed or do not survive to maturity. FDA has acknowledged that there
are more negative outcomes of pregnancy than in other forms of assisted reproduction but says they are similar in nature to problems that arise in non-cloned animals. In other words, it is okay to increase the number of animals that suffer as long as they don’t suffer in new ways.
A flood of milk from highly productive cloned cows is not good for the taxpayers. Americans have a milk surplus that has cost taxpayers over $5 billion in the last five years. Surplus milk is turned into high fat products that then go to school children adding fat and cholesterol to their diets.
Page 2
There is, in short, no public value from a technology that raises serious concerns regarding cruelty to animals and the nasty underlying threat that this is the first step down
the slippery slope to human cloning.
# # # # #
Consumer Federation of America is a non-profit association of 300 consumer groups, representing more
than 50 million Americans. It was established in 1968 to advance the consumer interest through research,
education and advocacy. The Food Policy Institute at CFA works to promote a safer, healthier and more affordable food supply.
|
Threaded Mode
