The media is in quite the frenzy over the upcoming FDA announcement that declares meat from cloned animals to be safe for human consumption. Everybody seems to be against the decision. (Which, by the way, isn't really a "decision" so much as a finding of fact, which makes people's anger over this all the more funny).
But why would cloned animals be dangerous to eat? All they are is the equivalent of man-made identical twins, albeit twins born many years apart, which doesn't happen all that often. :)
I wonder if the people objecting to this are really aware of what cloning is all about. Do they think that natural twins are also unfit for consumption? If not, why do they make a distinction for the man-made variety?
My hunch is that the people who are against this fall into one of three categories.
- People who are against us "playing God"
- People who don't really understand cloning or confuse it with genetic modification
- People who stand to lose money due to the first two types of people not buying their stuff anymore
I suspect that the market for cloned meat will be primarily limited to the very high end suppliers which provide meat for savvy consumers and upscale restaurants. Breeders will be able to clone their finest cattle (or whatever animal) and sell it at an increased price. The same people who buy Kobe beef will buy meat from cloned animal known for its tastiness and quality. (Assuming they're not members of groups 1 and 2 mentioned previously.)
Furthermore, unlike mad cow, cloning isn't contagious. Just because a rancher has one or more cloned cattle doesn't mean that they can't sell non-cloned animals as well. So I'm not exactly sure why other countries would ban US animal products since we could simply not sell them the cloned animals.
Whatever. I welcome cloned animals into my diet. I want my baby back... baby back... baby back cloned ribs, damnit.
