Food Safety Now

8/8/2019 Food Safety Now

1/7

INADEQUATELY TESTED AND UNLABELED genetically engineered crops have been wiused in our food for nearly a decade, but now another risky genetic food technology threat-ens our food supply. Meat and dairy products from cloned animals may soon be sold, unla-beled, in grocery stores across the country. Yet scientists say that cloned animals may inher-ently be unhealthy, with potentially harmful consequences for animal foods derived fromclones. Moreover, cloning is a cruel technology that often results in needless animal suffering.

Cloning first succeeded in producing a live birth with the famed sheep clone Dolly in 1997,and has since been used in many other animal species, including dairy cows and beef cattle,poultry, hogs, and other livestock. But after the hype, few commentators followed the storyof Dollys demise. Just six years old when she was euthanized (sheep of Dollys breed gener-ally live to 11 or 12), Dolly suffered from premature arthritis and lung disease usually seen inmuch older animals.

Dolly was hardly unique among cloned animals. Incidents of unusual health problems, chron-ic illnesses, and sudden unexpected deaths plague the cloning industry. The head of onecloning company said that the data on the numerous health problems in surviving cloned cowssuggested to the vets that some of them should be dead. Ian Wilmut, the lead scientistresponsible for creating Dolly has warned that even small imbalances in a clones hormone,protein or fat levels could compromise the safety of its milk or meat, stating If companies

start marketing this food and there areproblems it will bring the whole tech-nology into disrepute.

Despite this track record of failure andconcern about safety, some livestockbreeders are using cloning in the hopethat the technology will enable themto generate identical copies of prizedanimals with favorable characteristics.

1

Food Safety Now!SUMMER 2006

A PUBLICATION OF THE CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY www.centerforfoodsafety.or

SOMETHINGS SCARYIN THE DAIRY

Summer is FinallyHere! Get yourhands dirty onpage 6

Dont want yourmilk from clonedcows? Takeaction on page 7

New report byCFS comes to asickening conclu-sion, see page 3

InspectorGenerals reportslams USDA onpage 4

continued on page 2


2/7

For example, cows that producehigh quantities of milk have beencloned in hopes of producingongoing lines of high-yieldingmilk cows. Since as early as2001, cloned cows have been

producing milk on American dairyfarms. The only barrier to thiscloned milk entering the foodsupply is a voluntary agreementbetween industry and the Foodand Drug Administration (FDA),which has requested that foodproducts from clones be kept off the market until the agencysguidelines are developed.

But recent reports suggest thatFDA may soon allow cloned meat

and dairy on the market, despitemany serious unresolved safety,health, and animal welfareissues. A front-page WashingtonPost story last fall stated that the agency was near to finalizingits guidance document, allowing industry to begin selling unla-beled food products from cloned animals.

But the FDA has shown little rigor in its safety review of foodfrom animal clones. For its 2003 draft assessment, the agencyrelied on just a single unpublished study of milk from clones, andno data at all on meat. In 2005, the biotechnology industrywidely trumpeted the first study demonstrating that the science

is clear on the safety of food from animal clones. But the indus-try failed to mention that the study looked at dairy from just fourcows, and beef from just two cattle.

Perhaps even more troubling, FDA has virtually ignored the ani-mal cruelty issues inherent in cloning. Surrogate cows must beused to produce clones, and these surrogates suffer from highrates of late-term abortion, early prenatal deaths, and grosslyoversized calves, and often have severe pregnancy complicationsand caesarian births. Cloned offspring suffer from commondefects such as enlarged tongues, squashed faces, intestinal blockages, immune deficiencies and diabetes. These are notunusual side-affects, but a certain inhumane cost of thisunseemly cloning business: cloning failure rates have beenreported as high as 98%, and one study found that with cloning64% of cattle, 40% of sheep, and 93% of mice exhibit someform of abnormality. The Humane Society of the United Stateshas condemned cloning, citing the increased animal sufferingand noting that cloning reinforces the perception of animals asdisposable, manufactured commodities.

Leading cloning scientists say that even seemingly healthyclones are likely to carry genetic abnormalities. These abnormal-ities could have food safety consequences, but almost no stud-

ies have looked at this problem.The National Academy of Sciences found that There is cur-rently no data to indicatewhether abnormalities in pat-terns of gene expression persist

in adult clones and are associat-ed with food safety risks. IanWilmut has pointed out thatwhile such studies have not beendone on adult cloned livestock,studies of cloned mice haveshown that such abnormalitiesdo persist.

To manage the high pregnancyfailure rate in cloning, scientistssometimes inject surrogate cowswith massive doses of hormones.

To live with immune deficiencies,cloned offspring may be givenhigh doses of antibiotics andother veterinary drugs. Commer-

cialization of cloning would almost certainly increase levels of veterinary hormones and antibiotics in the human food supply,but the food safety issues of this increase in medicating foodanimals have not been assessed.

Finally, cloning is an essential technology for the genetic engi-neering industry. Biotech companies use cloning to replicatecopies of their gene altered (transgenic) animals, since normal reproduction might not recreate the desired genetic alteration.

Numerous companies are already producing cows, goats, chick-ens, pigs, poultry and other genetically engineered animals toproduce experimental foods or drugs. With such genetic engi-neering will come all of the health, food safety and animal wel-fare issues of cloning, with the additional environmental con-cerns posed by the creation of engineered animals that mayunexpectedly breed with natural populations.

CFS has urged FDA to impose a mandatory immediate moratori-um on the sale of food products from cloned animals, given theserious food safety, consumer right-to-know, and animal welfareconcerns inherent with this untested technology.

In addition, we have asked major dairies and food companiesacross the country for their position on marketing food productsderived from cloned animals. While we have heard from somecompanies who will reject milk from cloned animals (StraussFamily Creamery (CA), Shelburne Farms (VT), Pastureland Coop(MN), Stonyfield Farms, and Organic Valley among others) mostof the major U.S. dairies have not answered our request for aposition statement. The Center for Food Safety urges consumersto join us in rejecting food from cloned animals. Check out TrueFood: Take Action! on page 7.

2

[ S O M E T H I N G S S C A R Y I N T H E D A I R Y ]

Leading cloning scientists say that even seemingly healthy clones are likely to carry genetic abnormalities.These abnormalities could have food safety consequences,but almost no studies have looked at this problem.


3/7

BASED ON RESEARCH compiled directly fromthe scientific literature, this report describesthe strange, sickening impacts on the smell,taste, color, and texture of food exposed todoses of radiation.

Whether meat, poultry, shellfish, or veg-etable, this quality damage occurs acrossmany food types. This ground-breakingreport also presents evidence on the highercosts of irradiated food and on the irradia-tion industrys dire economic straits. Thethree are intertwined: poor-quality fooditems that are more expensive than theirnormal, non-irradiated counterparts lead toruined irradiation companies. This reportconcludes that commercial scale irradiation is a failureand agross one at that. Yet, it is a failure that has pulled in millionsof dollars over the past five decades in Federal taxpayer supportfor research aimed at trying to fix the very damage the treatmentinflicts on food quality.

Despite a half-century of research, experimentation, promotion,and test marketingmuch of which was unwittingly supportedby U.S. taxpayersfood irradiation has proven to be an unreal-istic solution to our national food safety challenges. Consumersshould not be exposed to the toxicological and nutritional risksthat irradiation poses. Scientists have known about the poten-tial hazards from the early days of the technology in the 1950sand 1960s, and more problems have revealed themselves over thedecades of research. CFS has submitted several comments and apetition to FDA highlighting the most pertinent toxicity research.

Now to the topic of this reportwhy A Gross Failure? Here wedocument how irradiation can actually ruin the flavor, odor,appearance, and texture of common foods. Publishedresearch on irradiated foods repeatedly finds thatthey smell ROTTEN, METALLIC, BLOODY, BURNT,

GRASSY, and generally off. The taste is described aslike SULFUR, SINGED HAIR, BURNT FEATHERS, BURNTOIL, and RANCID FAT. Meats can turn GREEN, BROWN,RED, or YELLOW. Irradiated oysters give off a YELLOWSALIVA-LIKE excretion. Sounds yummy, doesnt it?And it doesnt even address the serious questions asto whether this food is wholesome enough to eat.

Despite 50 years of research based on massive tax-payer and private funding, food scientists st ill do notfully understand how this quality damage occurs.

Much of the ongoing research, in fact, isfocused on devising new ways to hide ormask the most objectionable aspects of these changes, trying to reduce them to lev-els at which most consumers cannot detectthem.

These quality problems, in addition to majortechnological and financial hurdles, havecaused the recent industry failures, includingthe spectacularly flopped efforts to mass-market irradiated ground beef in grocerystores, restaurants, and throughout U.S.public schools.

The numerous problems afflicting the irradi-ation industry documented in Food Irradiation: A Gross Failureare encouraging to advocates for more sensible solutions to foodsafety concerns. However, the irradiation industry has beencyclical since the 1960s. Despite the recent technical and mar-keting failures, history indicates that the industrypropped upby allies in the Federal governmentwill try again to reviveitself.

With each new marketing attempt, irradiation backers spread thesame mythsthat irradiated foods are proven to be 100% safethat the treatment does not form toxic chemicals or otherwisechange the foods compositionthey taste, smell, and look nodifferentand they cost just a few pennies more than non-irra-diated foods. A waning of public attention could allow resusci-tation of this unwanted technology, even in the near future.

Some recent developments point to this. Plants have opened orare on the drawing boards in Australia, Mexico, New Zealand, thePhilippines, and other countries aiming to ship irradiated fruits,

vegetables, and meats to the United States and else-where. A flood of irradiated imports could exacer-bate the trend towards globalized supply that has

already bankrupted tens of thousands of mostlysmall U.S. farmers and ranchers and forced many of our food processors out of business. Further, theUnited Nations-affiliated Codex AlimentariusCommission has approved the irradiation of any foodat high, virtually unlimited, doses, despite the risks.

Additionally, Congress has attempted to weaken thealready bare-bones labeling laws for irradiated food,to allow irradiators to call their products pasteur-ized or other terms more palatable than irradiat-

FOOD IRRADIATION: A GROSS FAILURENew report by the Center for Food Safety and Food and Water Watch comes to a sickening conclusion.

Look for the radura symbol and thewords treated by irradiation to avoid irradiated products.

3


4/7

4

[ F O O D I R R A D I A T I O N :

A G R O S S F A I L U R E ]

MANY COME OUT IN FAVOR OF TIGHTERRESTRICTIONS TO STOP MAD COW FDAs proposed animal feed restrictions dont go far enough in protecting the public

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was flooded with lettersduring their public comment period on proposed animal feed reg-ulations to address the threat of Bovine SpongiformEncephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as mad cow disease, inthe United States. FDAs proposed firewall feed ban leavesmuch to be desiredtill allowing dangerous loopholes by whichcattle can be fed cattle blood, cattle fat, plate waste and poul-try litter contaminated with cattle meat and bone meal, despitethe knowledge that mad cow is spread through cattle feed con-taminated with such materials.

FDA proposed reducing the risk of spreading mad cow by up to

90% with its new rules. The Center for Food Safety called on theFDA to protect public health by eliminating the loopholes in theregulations that allow the disease to spread nothing less than100% risk reduction is acceptable. Even McDonalds commentedthat 90% is not enough to protect beef consumers from a threatas grave as mad cow. According to a January Associated Pressstory, McDonald's said the risk of exposure to the disease shouldbe reduced to zero, or as close as possible. ''It is our opinion thatthe government can take further action to reduce this risk,"wrote Dick Crawford, company vice president. It remains to beseen whether FDA will put such a rule in place. Stay tuned to theCFS web site for more information.

INSPECTOR GENERALS REPORT SLAMS USUSDAs current regulations on GE field trials dont go far enough

A report released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture'sInspector General said the department "lacks basic information"on where field tests are or what is done with the crops after theyare harvested. According to the report, and as long claimed byCFS, the USDA has failed to properly oversee field trials of genet-ically engineered crops, including plants designed to producechemicals for medical and industrial uses.

During the Inspector Generals investigation, auditors found that

two large harvests of pharmaceutical crops remained in storageat test sites without the USDA's knowledge or approval. Theinvestigators also said that in 2003 the department failed toinspect fields of pharmaceutical crops with the frequency thatofficials said they would.

"Current (USDA) regulations, policies and procedures do not gofar enough to ensure the safe introduction of agricultural biotechnology," the report said.

To read the report, go to http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/ 50601-08-TE.pdf

news bitesed. The research cited in this report verifies that the changescaused in this food are material and that, under current label-ing laws, consumers must be clearly informed of the processapplied. To FDAs credit it has resisted Congresss attempts toweaken our labeling laws so far, but that could change any time.Additionally, such labeling does not apply to restaurant food,school lunches, or mixed-ingredient foods containing irradiatedsubstances.

Regardless of the label, why would rational consumers want foodlaced with toxicity concerns; nutritional deficits; disgustingodor, taste, color and texture problems; and a major cost premi-um on top? In this, as in other areas, consumers are demonstrat-ing more sense than government officials by staying away fromthis technology en masse.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Your help is needed to prevent the spread of this technology:

Urge the FDA, USDA, and your Congressional representativesto ban irradiated food until or unless its manifold prob-lemsincluding its lack of wholesomeness documentedhereare resolved in a public, transparent way. The mostdirect way to approach FDA is to support the pending peti-tion to revoke the past approval for irradiated groundbeefplease go to http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org totake action online.

Buy wholesome organic food, which cannot be irradiatedlegally.

Oppose any attempts by Congress or FDA to further weakenthe already weak labeling laws. Check our websites forfuture updates on this: Center for Food Safety, www.center-forfoodsafety.org, and Food and Water Watch,www.fwwatch.org.

Oppose the serving of irradiated foods in your local school district, including working through your parent and teacherorganizations, due to the unacceptable risks to our vulnera-ble children, its inadequate labeling, and its gross quality.

Encourage your local grocers and restaurateurs not to carryirradiated foods, keeping in mind that irradiated food soldin groceries must be clearly labeled, but this is not true forrestaurants.

Become a member of the Center for Food Safety to supportour efforts against this technology; see http://www.center-forfoodsafety.org or call (202) 547-9359.

Get the full report, Food Irradiation: a Gross Failure atwww.centerforfoodsafety.org


5/7

5

IOWA COUNTY ADOPTS COUNTRYS FIRST ORGANIC AND LOCAL FOOD POLICY

Local Food Purchase Policy Supports Local Farmers

Iowas Woodbury County Board of Supervisors in January took a boldstep by adopting the 'Local FoodPurchase Policy'; a resolution tomandate the purchase of locallygrown organic food, through itsfood service contractor, whendepartments of Woodbury Countyserve food in their usual course of business. This new policy makesthem the first county in the nationto mandate local purchase of organic food products. The resolu-

tion has the potential of shifting$281,000 in annual food purchasesto a local farmer-operated coopera-tive, thus increasing local demandthat will spur increased productionand processing. "The Local FoodPurchase Policy will create local

jobs in the food sector and exposeour producers, who produce organicand non-organic farm products, tomarkets outside of the immediatearea," said Rob Marqusee, Directorof Rural Economic Development forWoodbury County.

The policy supports the Organics Conversion Policy that wasadopted by the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors on June28, 2005; the Local Food Purchase Policy provides a market forthose farmers that convert to organic production of certain itemsneeded for the Woodbury County facilities. Transitional crops areincluded in the mandatory sections of this policy. Because theavailability of locally grown organic food will not meet currentneeds, the policy gives a strong preference for local non-organ-ic food production to meet this unmet demand.

The text of the policy may be found at: www.woodburyiowa.com/ departments/economicdevelopment.

ORGANIC VALLEY LAUNCHES NEW PROGRAMTO HELP FARMERS GO ORGANICOrganic Cooperative Introduces 'Generation Organic' Campaign

Organic Valley Family of Farms, America's largest cooperative of organic farmers, has introduced a campaign designed to bringnew farmers into organic agriculture. "Generation Organic is the'Endangered Species Protection Act' for the American family

farmer. U.S. farmers have disappeared from the land at the rateof 195 per day for 70 years. We have worked to protect the baldeagle and the grizzly bear. Now it's time to save the familyfarmer. The health of our food, our environment and our future

generations is at stake," said TravisForgues, 32, the Organic Valley dairyfarmer from Alburg, Vermont whoseconcern for the future of familyfarming gave rise to the GenerationOrganic program.

For further information aboutGeneration Organic, prospectivefarmers are invited to call theOrganic Valley Farmer Hotline at 1-888-809-9297, or visit the OrganicValley Farmers website atwww.farmers.coop. Check out theprogram at: http://www.organicval-ley.coop/newsroom

PRO-BIOTECHCOLUMNIST AND AUTHPAID BY MONSANTOColumnist and author Michael

Fumento failed to disclose paymentshe received from MonsantoScripp

Howard to sever its ties to him

According to BusinessWeek Online,Scripps Howard News Service announced in January that it's sev-ering its business relationship with columnist Michael Fumento,who is also a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute,and the author of BioEvolution, a pro-biotech book published in2003. The move came after BusinessWeek Online proddedFumento about payments he received from Monsanto, a frequentsubject of praise in Fumento's opinion columns and his book, butneglected to disclose to the News Service or its readers.

In 1999 the Hudson Institute, which employs Fumento, receiveda $60,000 grant from Monsanto. Fumento told BusinessWeek hesolicited several agribusiness companies to finance BioEvolution,"I told them that if I tell the truth in this book, the biotechindustry is going to look really good, and you should contribute."The Monsanto grant, he said, flowed from the company to theHudson Institute and that "most of it" went into his salary.

BusinessWeek said the book's acknowledgements cite supportfrom The Donner Foundation and "others who wish to remainanonymous," and that Fumento didn't disclose the payment fromMonsanto either in the book or in at least eight columns he haswritten mentioning Monsanto since 1999.

[ N E W S B I T E S ]


6/7

6

SUMMER IS FINALLY HERE!Its the time of year when many of us are admiring the flowers,enjoying the first strawberries of the season and looking forwardto tomatoes! There is no better way to enjoy fresh veggies, herbs

and beautiful flowers than to grow them yourselforganically.Growing organically is a great way to rekindle the connection toyour food and the land that produces it (even if its just pots onyour deck!).

WHERE CAN YOU GET ORGANIC SEEDSFOR YOUR GARDEN?There are many online and mail order companies that offerorganic seeds. In some regions you will even find them on racksin hardware or garden supply stores as well as some supermar-kets. Your choice of seeds really depends on which region youlive in, as many varieties are adapted to do well in certain cli-mates, so for the best results its important to choose the vari-eties best suited for your region. Most seeds youll find are cat-egorized by zone, based on average minimum temperatures fordifferent areas. To find your zone, check the USDAs PlantHardiness Zone Map. The American Horticultural Society publish-es a similar map based on maximum temperatures to help thosein warmer regions plan their gardens to avoid periods of exces-sive heat. Here are a few seed companies you can find onlinethat offer seeds suitable for many different areas in the U.S: Seeds of Change 100% CERTIFIED ORGANIC seeds and

foods (Santa Fe, New Mexico) http://www.seedsofchange.com Seed Savers Heritage Farm Heirloom seed (Decorah, Iowa)

http://www.seedsavers.org/

Happy Cat Organic Seeds & Seedlings Organic seeds andseedlings (Elverson, Pennsylvania) Call or e-mail for a cata-log: 610-217-7723 or [email protected]

The Cook's GardenMarket garden supplying unusual andflavorful organic seed (Londonderry, Vermont) Charter signa-tories to the Safe Seed Pledge and do not support thedevelopment of genetically engineered seeds or sell them.http://www.cooksgarden.com

Fedco CooperativeA collective based in Maine offeringorganic supplies, seeds, trees and bulbs for nationwidedelivery. Fedco Co-Op announced that they would no longercarry Seminis Seeds when Monsanto purchased Seminis inJanuary 2005. Though Seminis seeds accounted for more

than 11% of the Co-Ops seed sales, Fedco refused to dobusiness with Monsanto. http://www.fedcoseeds.com

To find organic seeds in your area, searchable by state oronline ordering, visit Greenpeople : www.greenpeople.org

NEED SOME HELP?There are many good books on organic gardening. S tep by StepOrganic Flower Gardening and Straight Ahead Organic , for vegetablegardening, both by Shep Ogden, are great books to help you getstarted, or to help along your already established organic garden.Taking you from planning a site for your garden all the way toharvesting what youve grown, these books are two of the bestout there.

Have slugs or snails? Insect pests? Animals eating all your veg-gies? There are easy tips and techniques to deal with these gar-den problems naturally and organically! Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides offers a

Healthier Homes and Gardens program: http://www.pesti-cide.org/HHG.html with free monthly garden tips and more.

Beyond Pesticides offers lots of good information on com-mon garden pests and how to control them without toxicchemicals. http://www.beyondpesticides.org

If you cant garden at home, see if theres a local communitygarden (or start one with friends). Community gardens not onlylet you grow your own organic produce, they can also connectyou to others in your community who may share your interest insafe, healthy food systems. The American Community GardenAssociation has a wealth of resources to help you find, join, oreven start your own, community garden. For a list of community gardens by state, see:

http://www.communitygarden.org/links.php#Gardens For tips on how to start a community garden, visit:

http://www.communitygarden.org/links.php#Generalcg For great tips on urban and rooftop gardening, visit City

Farmer: http://www.cityfarmer.org/rooftop59.html

food for thought

STOP AND SMELL THE (ORGANIC) FLOWE

Many people enjoy buying cut flowers for their homes thistime of year, or sending them as gifts to friends and lovedones. While these flowers are beautiful, they are often treat-

ed or produced with toxic pesticides and chemical fertilizers.In fact, the flower industry is one of the heaviest users of agricultural chemicals, leaving pesticide residues of up to 50times the level allowed on the food we eat.

In the last few years, organic flowers have become mucheasier to find at farmers markets and some supermarkets,like Whole Foods and Wild Oats. But getting an organic bou-quet delivered to your mother was nearly impossible. Notanymore! Several companies now deliver organic bouquetsnationwide. Here are a few to check out: http://www.organicbouquet.com offers flowers and gift

baskets

http://diamondorganics.com sells flowers, gift baskets,and organic produce

To find organic flowers grown in your local area, go tohttp://www.localharvest.org


7/7

7

SOME DEAN BRANDS INCLUDE:Milk and milk products (cream, half-&-half, etc)Adohr Farms, AltaDena, Barbe's, Barber's, Berkeley Farms, Borden,Broughton, Brown's Dairy, Celta, Country Delite, Country Fresh,Creamland, Dairy Ease, Dairy Fresh, Dean Foods Ultra, Dean's,Foremost, Gandy's, Garelick, Hershey's Milk, Hygeia, Land O'Lakes,Lehigh Valley Dairies, Louis Trauth, Mayfield Dairy, McArthurDairy, Meadow Brook, Meadow Gold, Model Dairy, Oak Farms, PET,Price's, Purity, Reiter, Robinson Dairy, Schinkel's, Schepps,Shenandoah's Pride, Swiss Farms, T.G. Lee, Tuscan, Verifine

Ice Cream

AltaDena, Brown's Dairy, Country Fresh, Creamland, Dairy Fresh,Dean's, Frostbite, Hygeia, Louis Trauth, Mayfield Farms, MeadowGold, Oak Farms, Pet, Reiter

Yogurt, cottage cheese, sour creamBorden, Broughton, Cheese n Stuff, Country Fresh, Dairy Fresh,Dean's, Hygeia, Land O'Lakes, Louis Trauth, Meadow Gold,Mountain High, Naturally Yours, Oak Farms, PET, Purity, RobinsonDairy, Rod's, Schepps

Dean also owns Horizon Dairy, the nations number 1 organic milk brand, and soy products makersWhite Wave, Silk, and Sun Soy.

WHAT ELSE CAN YOU DO?Tell FDA Not to Allow Foods from Cloned Animalson the Market! Demand an immediate moratorium on thesale of unlabeled milk and meat from cloned cows or their off-

spring. FDAs job is to protect consumers andensure the safety of our food supply, not to forceuntested, unlabeled and unwanted products on the public!

Food and Drug Administration5600 Fishers Lane

Rockville, Maryland 208571-888-INFO-FDA (1-888-463-6332)main FDA Phone Number

true food: take action!

HELP US STOP THE USE OF CLONED ANIMALS IN FOOD PRODCall on Dean Foods, the number 1 U.S. dairy company, to take a stand against milk from cloned cows . As the industryleader, Dean Foods has a responsibility to let the public know that our milk will continue to be safe and clone-free !

Ray McCoy, Dean Foods, Quality Assurance2515 McKinney Ave, Suite 1200Dallas, TX 75201Phone (214) 303-3400 Fax (214) 303-3499 [email protected]

Dear Mr. McCoy,

I am very concerned about the advent of milk and dairy products from cloned cows. As youknow, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is currently considering allowing such products to be sold unlabeled in gro-

cery stores across the country. But scientists say that there is little evidence to show that theseanimals will produce safe milk, and cloning will lead to unnecessary inhumane conditions for dairy animals.The Humane Society of the United States has condemned animal cloning , and the nonprofit Center

for Food Safety has called on FDA to institute a moratorium on the practice. Still, unless food companies like Dean Foods take

a public stance, consumers may have no way of knowing if dairy products are derived from cloned cows.

I urge Dean Foods to make a public commitment to prohibit the use of dairy products fromcloned animals in any Dean brands.

The True Food Network is CFSs grassroots action network where concerned citizens can voice their opinionabout critical food safety issues , and advocate for a socially just, democratic and sustainable food system .

join the network and receive free action alerts visit www.truefoodnow.org and stand up for True Food

Documents

Food Safety Now