USDA
Recommends That Food From Clones Stay Off the Market
By
Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 16, 2008; Page
A03
The
U.S. Department of Agriculture yesterday asked U.S. farmers to keep their cloned
animals off the market indefinitely even as Food and Drug Administration officials
announced that food from cloned livestock is safe to eat.
Bruce
I. Knight, the USDA's undersecretary for marketing and regulatory programs, requested
an ongoing "voluntary moratorium" to buy time for "an acceptance
process" that Knight said consumers in the United States and abroad will
need, "given the emotional nature of this issue."
Yet
even as the two agencies sought a unified message -- that food from clones is
safe for people but perhaps dangerous to U.S. markets and trade relations -- evidence
surfaced suggesting that Americans and others are probably already eating meat
from the offspring of clones.
Executives
from the nation's major cattle cloning companies conceded yesterday 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
pending completion of the agency's safety report.
At
least one Kansas cattle producer also disclosed yesterday 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.
"This
is a fairy tale that this technology is not being used and is not already in the
food chain," said Donald Coover, a Galesburg cattleman and veterinarian who
has a specialty cattle semen business. "Anyone who tells you otherwise either
doesn't know what they're talking about, or they're not being honest."
Yesterday's
awkwardly meshed announcements by FDA and USDA officials, made at a joint news
conference in Washington, reflected continuing divisions among U.S. regulatory
agencies on how to deal with the issue of food from clones.
Stephen
F. Sundlof, director of FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, spoke
from his perspective as the person who oversaw that agency's six-year review of
the safety of milk and meat from clones and their offspring. He released the results
of that 968-page "final risk analysis," saying "meat and milk from
cattle, swine and goat clones are as safe as food we eat every day."
That
conclusion amounted to handing the cloned-food hot potato to the USDA's Knight,
whose agency has the responsibility of getting those products accepted on the
market.
Recent
surveys indicate that the agency has a challenge. Last year, 22 percent of Americans
who responded to a major survey said they had a favorable impression of food from
clones.
That
was up from 16 percent a year earlier. Nonetheless, about 50 percent have an unfavorable
impression, said Danielle "Dani" Schor of the International Food Information
Council Foundation, an industry-funded interest group that has conducted the survey
of 1,000 Americans annually since 2004.
At
issue are clones of beef cattle, dairy cows, pigs and goats, as well as their
offspring, which farmers in the United States and a few other countries are starting
to raise in an effort to produce more consistently high-quality milk and meat.
In
recent weeks, as it became clear that the FDA was ready to release its positive
safety report, officials there began encountering resistance from other agencies
that would have to deal with the consequences of food from clones entering the
U.S. food supply.
Some
of them, including the USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service and the Office of the
U.S. Trade Representative, have been struggling for years to persuade countries
in Europe and other parts of the world to accept gene-altered crops from the United
States. The last thing those agencies needed, insiders said, was a new U.S. product
that nobody wants.
The
USDA's request that farmers keep their clones out of the food chain, probably
for a few more years, "is simply allowing the time for an orderly transition
to occur," Knight said, adding that the department is already having conversations
with U.S. trading partners and trying to smooth the way to acceptance.
Some
U.S. consumer groups have expressed concern for the cloned animals, which often
have health problems, and have suggested that the American public may be as tough
a sell as the wary consumers in the European Union and Japan.
"Despite
the fact that cloned animals suffer high mortality rates and those who survive
are often plagued with birth defects and diseases, the FDA did not give adequate
consideration to the welfare of these animals or their surrogate mothers in its
deliberations," said Wayne Pacelle, chief executive of the Humane Society
of the United States.
Some
U.S. groups have demanded that food from clones be labeled to give consumers the
"right to choose."
But
James Greenwood, president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, whose members
include the nation's biggest farm-animal cloning companies, rejected that idea,
as has the FDA. He said cloning is simply a way to make offspring. Other methods
of farm animal procreation, such as in vitro fertilization and artificial insemination,
are not listed on food labels.
He
and other industry representatives specifically rejected proposals to label food
from conventionally conceived offspring of clones.
While
the now-expired FDA moratorium sought to keep both clones and their offspring
off the market, the new USDA moratorium requests only that clones themselves be
withheld, so the offspring might make it to store shelves within a few years.
But
imagine the labels that would appear if certain rules were in place, Greenwood
said:
"
'This steak's father was a clone.' 'This steak's grandfather was a clone.' 'This
steak's great-grandmother was a clone.'
"At
what point does it become absurd?"
Staff
researcher Madonna Lebling contributed to this report.