European Food Safety Authority Publishes List Of Experts That Will Advise On Commercial Sale Of Cloned Meat In European Supermarkets
by angelique van engelen
The European Food Safety Authority has published the details of the outside consultants it has agreed to work with on its study of cloned meat. If the outcome of study is positive, cloned meat could be in the supermarkets here before 2010.
When the issue of cloned meat first made news headlines in May 2006 as ‘warranting regulatory attention’ with the birth of the first calf of a cloned cow Dundee Paradise, officials’ first reactions were that commercial cloning would likely not become a viable option and they simply reiterated the incumbent rules. Yet the EU’s food safety watchdog is putting up a regulatory framework just in case.
Some observers warn that with the passage of time, the regulatory action could turn out to be the anticipation of real commercial cloning practices. If other countries decide to market the meat in the EU, regulatory framework needs to be in place, so the logic goes. Countries like the US and Australia where there is a lot of interest in cloning, show that commercial companies are overly keen to buy a cloning license. US company ViaGen, a commercial cloning outfit which is nearly profitable, says the prospects for achieving cost savings by commercially cloned meat are very good.
If the EU decides to follow the US Food and Drug Administration and allow cloned meat to enter supermarkets unlabelled, it is likely that consumer opposition will be particularly strong in the UK. This country’s strong anti GMO food lobby dates back to the 1990s, when there was no GM labelling legislation. When companies started to use GMO ingredients in their foods, consumers demanded labelling vehemently. “Now no supermarket or food company in the UK manufactures food using GM ingredients simply because consumers refused to buy it”, says Claire Oxborrow, Food Campaigner with Friends of the Earth in the UK. The consumer action also helped formulate EU-wide GM labelling laws, which enable consumers to continue to avoid GM ingredients.
The US FDA’s decision to okay meat of cloned farm animals to be sold in shops unlabeled is said to be driven to a large extent by the motivation that labeling creates consumer objections. The message that is preached by the food authority is that meat of cloned animals is not any different than regular meat and that labeling it is totally unnecessary. This is contested by others however.
In Europe, consumer polls show that there is little to no enthusiasm for bio engineered food in general and this is likely to extend to consumer attitudes toward cloned meat too. The latest Eurobarometer poll’s outcome compared to the same poll a few years before, shows that there is virtually no shift in attitude on the issue. What’s more, the research shows that it is not an issue that lacks trust because of lack of government rules; European regulation doesn’t change the negative attitude toward GM crops. In the UK, research conducted by WorldPanel shows that a majority of shoppers at the supermarkets said that they would actively avoid GM crops.
The pressure group Friends of the Earth is currently extending the GM foods campaign. It says that most of the UK supermarkets are already selling ‘contaminated’ foodstuffs, because supermarkets that are selling products of animals that have been fed on GMO crops.
UK citizens can go to a Friends of the Earth page and protest to their supermarket directly.
There is significant opposition in the US to unlabelled cloned meat however. When the US FDA (EFSA’s counterpart) decided to give its preliminary okay to unlabeled cloned meat, after a similar study period, the (US) Center for Food Safety, one of the critics, said the report was "unnecessarily rushed" and "heavily influenced by industry." In a statement, the organisation added that the FDA had made use of selectively reported data to fit predetermined conclusions.
The Food and Drug Administration, which is sometimes dubbed the Food Dragging Association, makes no secret of this. John Matheson, an FDA scientist, is quoted in a Washington Post article as saying “We’re spending a lot of time briefing [..], trying to make them comfortable with the technology. I think that’s a microcosm of what you’re going to see in the public when the decision goes out.”
A study by the US International Food Information Council (IFIC) shows some shocking results. Under the headline “Consumers remain opposed to the notion of animal cloning, as well as the use of cloned animals for breeding”IFIC lists this:
“Less than one-fifth (16%) of U.S. adults give a favorable rating for their impression of
animal cloning, while over half (56%) give an unfavorable rating. Regarding the use of cloned animals for breeding purposes, more consumers are neutral (36%) compared to those who are neutral toward cloning (28%), and fewer are unfavorable (46%). Fewer consumers state that they are “not at all likely” to purchase foods from cloned animals (30% vs. 35%), compared to 2005, as well as an increase in those who are “very likely” to purchase foods derived from the offspring of cloned animals (9% vs. 4%), with safety assurances from FDA. However, the majority remain unlikely to purchase foods from cloned animals (58%) or their offspring (59%).”
The external advisors to the EU food safety watchdog come from various backgrounds; there’s a mouse and rat cloning scientist from Hungary, a UK food labeling expert from Assured Food Standards, some veterinarians as well as an Italian professor who has been involved in GMO crops.
These are the details of a few members that make up the committee of experts, plus their disclosures of personal interests. The committee is scheduled to hand in its report before November this year;
- András Dinnyés, a Hungarian Wellcome Trust sponsored mouse and rat cloning expert.
-The International Embryo Transfer Society. Represented by Larisa Rudenko. She is a member of the Health and Safety Advisory Committee of IETS and was also on the US FDA Centre for Veterinary Medicine / government/ animal biotechnology.
- BIOprotein Technologies from France, which creates hyper powerful vaccines (rotavirus) from transgenic Rabbit’s milk.
- Assured Food Standards UK, the organisation behind the RedTractor food label, is also on the committee. It is represented by David Morton, who is also a member of the Farm animal Welfare Council.
- The French INRA (National Institute for Agricultural Research) is represented by Pierre Le Neindre. He ticked his interests as ‘agricultural industry, environment and human nutrition’; the focus areas of INRA. Has advised the French government on animal welfare and an experiments.
-The Italian professor Giuliano D’Agnolo, who’s involved in ‘the deliberate release of GMO crops’ in the EU.
This story has been partially published on DailyKos.com, where a lively discussion is being conducted.
| Created: |
August 02, 2007 13:54 GMT |
| Completed: |
September 04, 2007 10:20 GMT |
| Published: |
http://www.g... |
| Twittered: |
30 |
| Fool Proofed: |
0 |
Twitter Lifeline
follow on twitter.com
|
Fool Proof:
Wanna leave a comment on this Reportwitter's endeavors? Something don't stack up? Typo? Grammatical error? Don't agree?
|
