‘Cloned’ food may soon be on shelves, public shows little appetite

The FDA decision is based on a substantial data from rigorous studies, all of which have concluded that milk and meat from cloned animals is virtually identical to such products from conventional animals. Scientists have also been unable to detect health problems in laboratory animals raised on clonal food.

By contrast, studies have found that consumers’ discomfort with the idea of eating food from clones is largely based on vague emotions. Indeed, surveys have repeatedly found that the public understands little about what cloning really is.

That raises the issue: Should decisions such as this one be based solely on science, or should officials take into account public sensitivities ?

“There is no science-based reason” to withhold clone-derived meat or milk from the market, FDA scientists concluded in a report in the January 1 issue of the journal Theriogenology.

“There is more to this issue than just food safety,” said Susan Ruland of the International Dairy Foods Association, which represents such major companies as Kraft Foods and Dannon. The organization’s member companies are concerned that sales of US dairy products could drop by 15 per cent or more if the FDA allows the sale of meat and milk from clones.

“There’s a real trust in milk as a wholesome provider of core nutrition in your diet,’’ Ruland said. “You don’t want to fool around with that.’’

Some farm-state legislators share this concern. In a December 11 letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, Senator Patrick J Leahy, D-Vt, and six other senators asked that the FDA submit its plan to a scientific review board and take other steps to get more public input. As of Friday, Leavitt had not responded.

Scientists make clones from single cells taken from animals they want to replicate. The process involves growing a cell into an embryo in a laboratory dish, then transferring the embryo to the womb of a surrogate mother animal. The resulting critter is a genetic twin of the animal that donated the starter cell.

Relatively few cloned farm animals exist; there are an estimated 150 clones out of the nation’s 9 million dairy cows. But biotechnology firms are gearing up to clone farmers’ tastiest cattle and pigs and most productive dairy cows — a move they say will help consumers get reliably high-quality meat and milk products, day after day.

A voluntary moratorium, imposed by the FDA several years ago, has until now kept products from clones and their offspring off the market — although a few farmers have said they have slaughtered and sold some offspring of clones, having grown tired of waiting for a final decision from the FDA.

Backed by recent safety studies, the FDA is poised to release a “draft risk assessment” concluding that such products should be allowed on the market. The public will be able to submit comments before a final policy is implemented.

Timed to match the FDA action, two polls relating to food from clones are slated for release this week. Each involved about 1,000 American adults.

One poll, commissioned by the University of Maryland’s Center for Food, Nutrition, and Agriculture Policy, asked people what they would do if the FDA determined it is safe to eat meat and milk from clones and their offspring. One-third said they would continue buying those foods, one-third said they would “consider” doing so, and one-third said they would not buy those foods again.

The second poll, by the American Anti-Vivisection Society, which opposes cloning on animal-welfare grounds, found that two-thirds of Americans— and three-quarters of women — “disapprove” of cloning animals for food.

About two-thirds of those who said they approved said they would disapprove if they learned that cloning involved “animal suffering.” Many pregnancies involving clones end in miscarriages and sometimes, the deaths of newborns.

But polling data on cloning should be served with several grains of salt, experts said. For one thing, the public is woefully ignorant about the science.

“For many, the word ‘cloning’ brings to mind negative images,” according to an analysis of public opinion efforts regarding animal cloning, compiled by William Hallman and Sarah Condry of the Food Policy Institute at Rutgers University.

That lack of knowledge means attitudes are still malleable, said David Richards, a senior vice president at KRC Research, a Washington-based opinion research firm. “People don’t know this is a reality yet,” Richards said. But once it’s introduced into the food supply, my guess is that if there are no negatives, then you won’t hear much about it.”