The FDA declared on January 15 that cloned animals were safe to eat. After studying the chemical makeup of beef, pork and milk from clones, FDA scientists determined that they didn’t differ from food already for sale in the US. Cloned meat and milk are “as safe as food we eat every day,” says the FDA. The agency also ruled that the identification of cloned food would not be necessary, which prompted Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut) to introduce legislation requiring labeling on cloned products.
Chefs around the country wondered why cloning was necessary, although to read the FDA report, it appears to be a cost- and labor-saving device. Cloned cow offspring, for example, can be designed to produce vast quantities of milk without the time and attention spent in traditional agriculture.
“In the kitchen, that’s what we call cutting corners,” said Daniel Bojorquez, chef de cuisine of Sel de la Terre in Natick, Massachusetts. “There are long-term consequences,” said Bojorquez, reflecting on how pure-bred animals often exhibit erratic behavior and vulnerabilities to disease. “I don’t know why they don’t just do it the natural way.” Vitaly Paley of Paley’s Place in Portland, Oregon also expressed serious doubt. He felt that labeling was imperative, so that customers could make a clear decision about what they were eating.
Aidan Davin of Stillman’s Farm in Hardwick, Massachusetts, echoed Bojorquez’s concerns. He had just delivered pigs to Sel de la Terre the day before we spoke. “I don’t know about the whole idea. Pigs reproduce pretty easily. I just let them do what they do. They’re more than happy to!”
Davin remembered the big hog breeders he knew, mostly in the South, who kept the hogs enclosed because they were not disease-resistant. “There’s no hybrid vigor,” he explained. “It’s a weaker strain in the end. If you introduce different blood lines, you get a better animal.” Paley wondered what would happen when cloned animals “intermingled” with regular animals. To some farmers, it seems that cloning might take that pure-bred vulnerability one step further, even while disease resistance appears be a reason for cloning in the first place.
Annie Cuggino of Veritable Quandary in Portland, Oregon wanted the government to help small farmers, whose competitive edge might be hurt by the FDA decision. Cuggino also acknowledged the current strong consumer awareness about food. Customers practically interrogate her about the specific origins of what Veritable Quandary serves, as do those at Paley’s Place. “People are really sophisticated about food’s origins now,” she said, admitting that the FDA report seemed out of step with the active farm-to-table movement.
Industrial farming is powerful, she acknowledges, “but something positive must be happening, because if Costco and Burgerville are including local and seasonal items, that tells you something.”
In light of the FDA’s decision, and a voluntary ban on clones in the food supply that the USDA requested farmers to continue, the relationship of trust between farmers, restaurants and consumers is of vital importance.
The chefs and farmers I spoke to agreed that the risks of cloning were potentially devastating, and the benefit unclear. Said Cuggino: “I wish that we would keep our eye on the ball, promote the farmers’ markets, help the small farmers to be competitive, and help the farmers do it right. Given the choice, I hope that people will choose a [sustainable] alternative,” even if it costs more. “That’s where our voice is, how we spend our money. Where we put our money speaks volumes, and that’s empowering.”
Posted by: Rebecca Ruquist
February 17th, 2008 at 9:23 am
I have serious doubts about the FDA’s assurances of the safety of food from cloned animals. After all, the USDA strictly bans the use of cloned animals and their offspring from the production of organic food, which seems to indicate doubts at that agency.
The Center for Food Safety, a non-profit public interest organization, has stated, “Given the lack of data regarding human health impacts, CFS believes the FDA was premature in pronouncing food from cloned animals to be safe to eat.”
According to the Cornucopia Institute, a nonprofit farm policy research group, the realities of cloning include some disturbing phenomena:
• 64% of cattle, 40% of sheep, and 93% of cloned mice exhibit some form of abnormality, with a large percentage of the animals dying during gestation or shortly after birth
• High rates of late abortion and early prenatal death, with failure rates of 95% to 97% in most mammal cloning attempts
• Defects such as grossly oversized calves, enlarged tongues, squashed faces, intestinal blockages, immune deficiencies, and diabetes
• When cloning does not produce a normal animal, many of the difficult pregnancies cause physical suffering or death to the surrogate mothers
Mark Kastel of the Cornucopia Institute says:
Regardless of what the proponents claim this is all about bottom-line profit and producing more and more of our food from giant industrial-scale farming operations. We are getting so, so far away from farmer Jones and the intimate connection between the land, animals, and the people who care for them in a sustainable and regenerative system. I wish I could say this was science fiction.
An article in the Washington Post by Rick Weiss offers the following troublesome news:
“Executives from the nation’s major cattle cloning companies conceded…that they have not been able to keep track of how many offspring of clones have entered the food supply, despite a years-old request by the FDA to keep them off the market.”
One Kansas cattle producer has disclosed that he has openly sold semen from prize-winning clones to many U.S. meat producers in the past few years, and that he is certain he is not alone.