Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
March 29, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

The Art of the Con

What Is Sex For?
I Am Brian Wilson

Truthdig Bazaar
Pure Goldwater

Pure Goldwater

By John W. Dean; Barry M. Goldwater, Jr.

more items

Ear to the Ground
Email this item Print this item

Cloned Food to Go Unmarked

Posted on Dec 28, 2006
Cow clones

A dairy cow (far right) and her clones.

The Food and Drug Administration is set to approve food products derived from cloned animals and their offspring. Though eating beef from a cloned cow may seem incredibly creepy, the FDA has decided the manufactured twin is just as safe as the original animal, and requires no special identification once in the food supply.


“Meat and milk from clones and their progeny is as safe to eat as corresponding products derived from animals produced using contemporary agricultural practices,” FDA scientists Larisa Rudenko and John C. Matheson wrote in the Jan. 1 issue of Theriogenology.

Labels should only be used if the health characteristics of a food are significantly altered by how it is produced, said Barb Glenn of the Biotechnology Industry Organization.

“The bottom line is, we don’t want to misinform consumers with some sort of implied message of difference,” Glenn said. “There is no difference. These foods are as safe as foods from animals that are raised conventionally.”

Critics of cloning say the verdict is still out on the safety of food from cloned animals.

Read more


Taboola Below Article
Get a book from one of our contributors in the Truthdig Bazaar.

Related Entries

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every day.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By Jmaes White, May 22, 2007 at 9:38 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cloning animals is completely against my point of view. Scientist should not play God in such away just to do something for there own being. Study should most defiantly contiue to insure the safety of our nation and its consumers.

Report this

By Jasmine, January 8, 2007 at 1:17 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Clones are not the same: they are clones.  If they were the same, scientists wouldn’t call them clones. Clones will never be the same. And furthermore, the process of cloning has not yet been perfected to the point where there will be no deformed animals as a result; There are many. I fear consumers will be buying meat from deformed cloned animals if this injustice is fully approved, because quite frankly, our country has greatly slacked off when it comes to protecting the welfare of its people: not enough supervision perhaps.  Also,  not enough leaders who care.

Cloning is man-made: it is not natural, and it will never be.  I believe our scientists today are hastily promoting the success of cloning for pure selfish reasons: They clearly are not really considering the health of the consumers.

I am not against cloning, I just do not think we are ready to eat cloned food yet. Perhaps in another 10 or more years.  I want further testing to continue. 

I am also not sure how cloning would greatly benefit our society.  I worry that it would be detrimental, and no one can be sure that it will not be.

I sent my comments to the FDA to please give it more time.  I urge you all to do the same.



Report this

By kat compromise, December 31, 2006 at 3:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

If it’s a non-issue then why not mark it as cloned meat and let the individual decide if it bothers them.

Report this

By Quy Tran, December 29, 2006 at 7:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

No big deal when a cloned King became an Emperor so everything can be cloned.

Why should we pay much attention to that ?

Report this

By jkoch, December 29, 2006 at 1:00 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Irradiated vegetables and meats would have no e-coli, spoil more slowly, and have no radioactive residues.  But people are more spooked by the idea of eating zapped spinach than they are of getting food poisoning.  Another oddity: a preference for tooth decay over allowing fluoridation of water supplies.

Report this

By Boggs, December 29, 2006 at 7:46 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Our false teeth will now be more at home eating false beef.
And best of all, it will absolutely mean that I will “cold turkey” my meat addiction.
Tortured meat is bad enough, now we will have man-made meat????
Altered foods are the biggest cause of obesity.

Report this

By JBStifler, December 29, 2006 at 7:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Can cloned animals be fed and labeled organic?

Report this

By daviddixit, December 29, 2006 at 2:39 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I don’t agree with those of you who seem to feel that this new FDA anouncement on cloned meat and by-products is a non-issue.
We have a right to know what we’re eating.Period.Also, there is a whole moral (as well as nutritional) element involved in cloning that has yet to de discussed fully. That the FDA refuses to acknowledge this is indeed “incredibly creepy.”

Report this

By Pete Sea, December 28, 2006 at 11:25 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Seems like the remarks are getting just like our government’s action.  Looks like this administration has figured the American citizen out, they can do as they wish, because there well never be any reprisal for their actions….  Cloned, I am sure that Bush and Cheney will be eating the beef from their ranch, just as they will not be eating the beef we received from Canada,  which had mad cow disease//////

Report this

By jon eden, December 28, 2006 at 6:55 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cloned Beef!  Sounds great!

And that cattle are adding green house gases equivalent to those of transportation. Not to worry—technology again comes to the rescue:  the cotton seed has been re engineered so that it is no longer toxic and is now being hailed as a great new source of protein.

So once we have had enough global warming from the billions of farting cattle, we’ll be able to eat ADM cotton seed burgers. YUMMY   I can’t wait.

Technology, ain’t it wonderful.


Report this

By jon eden, December 28, 2006 at 6:36 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Given that we have cloned politicians, could cows have really been that far behind!


Report this

By Outraged, December 28, 2006 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Gee… as “safe” as foods from animals that are raised “conventionally”. Now that’s reassuring.

Report this

By Francois, December 28, 2006 at 12:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

You know how the FDA works don’t you?
Just before they pass a drug companies product, they go and buy thier stock, so when they make the annoncement, the stock will go higher. As for this cloneing crap, they better be careful, we just could go and raid their offices and take them as hostages.
Beware of the FDA, they are more dangerous then the mafia.

Report this

By WCG, December 28, 2006 at 9:46 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Um,... so what? I guess I fail to see the point of this article. Why wouldn’t clones be exactly the same as their parent? That’s the whole point, after all.

In fact, if - for some unknown reason - you’re worried about their genetic code, you should be relieved at eating clones. After all, you never know what genes are in a “normal” cow. Heh, heh.

As far as “incredibly creepy” goes, you’ve got to be kidding! Why? They’re not grown in a vat, you know. Let’s use a little logic and rational thought here. Otherwise, we’ll sound like a bunch of superstitious Luddites.

Report this

By writerdd, December 28, 2006 at 8:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There’s no reason to mark cloned meat, just as there is no reason to mark meat from animals that were conceived via artificial insemination. It’s just another way to induce pregnancy. Since there is absolutely no difference in the living animal or the meat produced by butchering said animal, what purpose would a label serve besides frightening ignorant fools who are afaid of the word “clone”?

Report this

By jhm, December 28, 2006 at 6:16 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Saying that this product “requires no special identification,” is misleading.  As with GMOs, irradiation and other controversial foods and processes, the idea is not just to permit a lack of labeling, but to make any attempt to inform the consumer that a given product is not from a cloned animal (or GMO, et cetera) illegal.  In other words, since the government has determined that there is no difference in the two products, consumers have no right to make up their own minds on the matter.

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right 3, Site wide - Exposure Dynamics
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook