The Issues

The Cloning of Animals for Food

Despite strong objections from the public and Congress, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to approve cloned animals and their products for the U.S. food supply. While the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) themselves requested a continued voluntary moratorium on clones into the market place, they approved progeny of cloned animals and their “products.” 

U.S. Policy
In December of 2007, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly approved a bipartisan amendment calling on the FDA to delay its decision regarding cloning until more substantive human safety and economic studies could be completed.  However, despite this vote and the fact that there is scant human health data and disturbing research findings regarding the welfare of cloned animals, the FDA announced its decision to allow cloned animal products into the market just days later. It further decided that there would be no labeling of these products, claiming there is no difference between products of cloned and traditionally-bred animals.
 
The USDA is maintaining the voluntary moratorium on cloned animals, although considerably weakened: The moratorium no longer covers the offspring of clones, is only voluntary, and is being managed by the cloning industry. In reaction, over a dozen states, as well as Congress, have introduced bills during the 2008 session to mandate labeling of cloned animal products.

Animal Welfare Implications ^{1 2 3}

Cloning results in increased, severe health risks to animals, from gestational complications to significantly increased mortality rates:

• More than 95% of cloning attempts fail. Of the 5% of cloned animals who survive, a disproportionate number suffer from—among other health problems; deformities; early death; and heart, kidney, and liver disorders.
• The surrogate mothers suffer from a range of pregnancy complications. The FDA’s own assessment reveals that 28% of cow clone pregnancies result in “hydrops,” an often fatal condition in which the mother and/or fetus swells with fluid. This condition is extremely rare (only 1 in 7,500) in traditionally-bred cattle.
• Over 50% of all calf clones suffer from Large Offspring Syndrome, in which the calf is grossly oversized and often displays other significant abnormalities.
• Older clones who appear healthy have been known to develop “adult clone sudden death syndrome,” which casts doubt on the assumption that cloned animals can ever be considered healthy.

Progeny of Clones
The FDA has argued that continued reproduction and cloning attempts will correct errors in the progeny of clones. However, a 2005 study by Dr. Dean Betts of the University of Guelph, Ontario found that an abnormality resulting from cloning (shortened telomere length) was reproduced in the clones’ offspring.⁴ The National Academy of Sciences has also questioned whether abnormalities will be passed on, stating, “Little evidence is available in the scientific literature to assess whether the progeny of cloned animals are at increased risk for inherited or developmental defects.”⁵

Expert Opinions
Significant evidence indicates that cloned animals are different from traditionally-bred animals, despite the Biotech industry’s insistence to the contrary. Chavatte-Palmer, a research leader at the French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), supervises one of only two or three non-corporate research facilities worldwide studying large numbers of cloned animals to determine both the long-term health of the animals and whether there are differences in cloned food products -- her studies are cited 54 times in the FDA’s risk assessment. INRA has found significant differences in cloned animals and in food products derived from clones. Among the differences, Chavatte-Palmer found that cow clones were significantly heavier at the time of puberty and reached puberty 62 days later, on average, than traditionally bred animals. She also found that clones have shortened lifespans and that on average fewer than five out of a hundred fetuses are born alive.⁶

Public Opinion
Two out of three Americans are uncomfortable with animal cloning, according to the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology.⁷ In addition, public opinion polls show that 89% of consumers want food from clones labeled, and that most Americans are unlikely to buy milk, meat and eggs from offspring of cloned animals even with FDA assurances that they are safe for human consumption.⁸

Some major industry and religious groups have taken a position on cloned animal products.^{9 10}

• Kroger, Safeway, Whole Foods, and PCC Natural Markets have stated that they will not sell cloned foods in their stores. Organic Valley stated that they are “alarmed at the FDA’s assessment.”
• The Organic Trade Association says that cloned products will not be sold as organic in the U.S.
• Smithfield Foods recently reaffirmed that it is not planning to produce meat products from cloned animals.
• The United Methodist Church called for the labeling of cloned animal products at its General Conference in 2008.¹¹

Human Health Implications
The FDA did not consider deformed and diseased animals in their risk assessment, because they assume that these animals will be properly inspected and removed from the food supply. However, the recent downed animal investigation of Westland/Hallmark Meat Packing Company, which precipitated the largest-ever U.S. meat recall of 143 million tons, demonstrates that we cannot be assured that diseased animals will be kept out of the food supply.

International Policy
In response to the opinion from the European Group on Ethics, which found not a single reason to support cloned food, members of the European Parliament called on the European Commission to ban all food from cloned animals and to ban the cloning of food animals in Europe. In May 2008, the European Parliament voted overwhelmingly (482 -9) for a resolution which states that it “Strongly believes that the cloning of animals for economic purposes should be banned".¹² The resolution has been sent to the European Council and Commission. According to Janusz Wojciechowski, the Polish Member of Parliament who proposed the cloning ban, “it’s degrading to animals and causes suffering. Animals are sentient beings and should be treated with respect.¹³ 

The European Food Safety Authority is expected to issue a final opinion on the safety of food products from cloned animals in July 2008. “We think it’s very important with such a new technology that we make clear the uncertainties in the scientific evidence,” EFSA’s Executive Director Catherine Geslain-Laneelle said in an interview.¹⁴ 

Latest News on Cloned Animals

What You Can Do

Is that a clone in the food supply?
With a green-light from the FDA, meat from cloned animals may be on its way to market. But without labels, shoppers won’t be able to recognize and take a stand against these products. In reaction to these developments, numerous states have introduced bills during the 2009 session to mandate labeling of cloned animal products. These initiatives are critical for protecting animals and the right of consumers to say NO to these products of cruelty. Take action.

Ask McDonald’s to take a Stand Against Cloning Cruelty
Fast food giant McDonald’s has stated that it wants to take the lead in advancing animal welfare practices—but has not as of yet taken a stand against cloning. In addition to the potential risks to human health posed by products from animal clones, there are serious animal welfare concerns. A shockingly high percentage of cloned animals suffer from heart, kidney, and liver disorders, as well as other deformities and even early death. Please ask McDonald’s to sign a public pledge to not sell products from cloned animals.