FDA should listen to concerns about cloned food animals

THE ISSUE The Food and Drug Administration is poised to approve consumption of meat and milk products from cloned animals.

CONSUMERS squeamish about being served tonkatsu from a cloned pig need not worry, at least for the time being. The Food and Drug Administration's final approval of meat and milk from cloned animals is months away and even if cleared for human consumption, the current expense of cloning probably will keep such products off the shelves for awhile.

The FDA has tentatively concluded that food from cloned animals -- cows, pigs and goats, but not sheep, chicken or other poultry -- is safe to eat and has opened a 90-day comment period for the public to weigh in.

The agency should expect an earful.

Polls show that many people aren't comfortable with eating cloned animals, which the FDA says is no different from chowing down on beef from artificially inseminated animals.

The FDA's defense is misleading. Artificial insemination basically assists organic reproduction. Cloning removes, then replaces DNA in an embryo before it's implanted, and studies have shown that genes in cloned eggs react differently from those in natural reproduction.

In any case, the issue might be less about the validity of the FDA's studies, some of which were conducted by cloning companies who stand to profit from the approval, and more about public trust in an agency that is underfunded, understaffed and often mistaken about the safety of the products it oversees.

There also are questions about the depth of the studies on which the FDA based its decision, particularly because of the number of cloned animals available -- an estimated 500 to 600 cows and about 200 pigs -- is so small. Moreover, the FDA was primed to clear cloned animals for consumption three years ago, but retreated from approval when its advisory committee found data insufficient to support the decision.

The FDA says cloned products need not be labeled to identify their origins, but consumers should be given a choice.

The identification also could help the producers, the FDA, scientists and health experts track products and assess their effects on consumers. The National Academy of Sciences' recommendation that the FDA set up a public database of compounds in foods from cloned animals is a wise course.

The biggest hurdle for the cloning industry will be to find public acceptance. The FDA contends that consumers' aversion stems from ignorance and that as time passes, people will come to accept cloned food. If so, the FDA should recognize that sensitivity and set aside industry concerns that labels will hurt investment and development. After all, the agency's role is to safeguard the public, a mission it has had trouble carrying out.