Cloning is the term commonly used to refer to a procedure known as somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), the procedure which was first used to create Dolly the sheep in 1996.^[1] Since then, researchers have “copied” a number of different animals, including cows, pigs, goats, horses, mice, cats, and dogs.^[2] The process is far from perfected, however, with only one to four percent of cloning attempts, if any, generally succeeding.^[3]

In SCNT, the nucleus (which contains the genetic material of an animal) is removed from an adult (somatic) cell from the donor to be cloned, and is placed into an unfertilized egg whose own nucleus has been removed. The egg is then stimulated to develop, ultimately resulting in an animal that is an almost exact genetic copy of the donor (though some differences remain).

To do this, researchers typically first inject a female with hormones to induce her to super-ovulate (produce more eggs than usual) so that they can harvest her eggs, often surgically. The nuclear transfer is performed and the reconstructed cloned embryos are incubated until they reach a certain size, at which point they are surgically implanted into surrogate mothers, often several embryos per surrogate in the hopes that at least one will 'take.'^[4]

Only a very small percentage of cloned embryos—typically zero to four percent—will be successfully delivered,^[5] usually by cesarean section. Of those few cloned animals who survive birth, the majority will be of such poor health, suffering from a variety of physiological abnormalities and deformities, that they die within a few days.^[6][7] Even the cloned animals who survive for longer have been known to suffer unexpected health consequences later in life. In fact, an article published in The New England Journal of Medicine stated that, "given the available evidence, it may be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to generate healthy cloned animals...."^[8]

The serious health problems associated with cloned animals lead to numerous concerns over animal welfare, the safety of food products from cloned animals, and the ethics of cloning—concerns which need to addressed before food from cloned animals or their offspring are allowed on the market.

Hide Answer

Agriculture researchers are interested in cloning livestock such as cows, pigs, sheep, goats, and poultry primarily for the purposes of breeding to create copies of 'valuable' animals. Currently, farmers use the animals that have the best genetics for some desired quality such as fast growth, leaner meat, or high milk production as breeding animals to produce offspring that will have similar qualities. By cloning these top breeders, farmers want to extend their reproductive potential and create whole herds or flocks with these uniform characteristics.

Cloning is also used to produce copies of transgenic animals—animals who have been engineered with genes from another species in order to have better traits for production (such as faster growth, disease resistance, altered milk or meat products with “health benefits” for humans, etc); to produce pharmaceuticals in their milk, blood, urine, or semen (pharming); or to produce tissues and organs for transplantation into humans (xenotransplantation).^[9][10] If animal cloning is approved, generation and proliferation of transgenic animals is likely to become the major application of cloning technology.

Hide Answer

While cheaper, “healthier” food may sound like a good thing, the important question to ask is, how should it be accomplished? The answer is not by cloning animals. Animal cloning raises concerns on numerous levels and there is simply no need to clone animals for food.

First, the remarkable inefficiency of cloning poses serious threats to animal welfare, as does engineering these animals for ever more intensive production, which is already associated with great animal cruelty and suffering.

Second, the poor health of cloned animals, combined with the instability and unpredictability of the genetic manipulations, leads to important concerns about the safety of consuming food products from cloned animals.

Third, the effects of creating uniform herds of animals, and the resulting loss of biodiversity, have significant implications for the environment and the ability of cloned herds to withstand diseases.

Fourth, the majority of Americans have strong ethical objections to cloning animals, and are concerned that animal cloning will lead to human cloning, that cloning is unreligious, or that cloning is just not “right.”

These are all concerns which have not yet received adequate attention or discussion, and which must be addressed before cloning can be allowed to move forward. Just because we can clone animals for food, doesn’t mean we should.

Hide Answer

Cloning is in some ways an extension of assisted reproductive technologies already in use in agriculture, and in other ways it is a radical departure from how animals have traditionally been bred.

Selective breeding, in which only those animals with desired traits are chosen for reproduction, has been used by farmers for centuries. More recently, selective breeding practices have intensified, aiming for ever greater production and lower costs, often sacrificing animal welfare in the process. As animals are bred to grow twice as fast or produce three times more milk, they are increasingly suffering from lameness, udder infections, and other painful production-related problems.

In the past 50 or so years, selective breeding techniques have evolved to include artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, and embryo transfer—all involving increasingly greater human interference and all employed to maximize the reproductive potential of 'valuable' animals.^[11] In this sense, cloning is an extension of these reproductive techniques. And like these techniques, cloning promises to increase the amount of suffering animals must endure.

However, animal cloning carries far greater risks and loss of life than other reproductive techniques. With over 95 percent of cloning attempts resulting in death or serious health problems and deformities, a clone is hardly the same as a natural twin. In addition, cloning is not a form of sexual reproduction, and despite what proponents of cloning say, genetic manipulation is an integral component of the technology. This ratchets up the level of associated animal welfare and ethical concerns. Moreover, while other assisted reproductive techniques are currently in use, this does not justify their existence nor does it justify the introduction of cloning as another tool in the factory farmer's arsenal.

Hide Answer

In the U.S., food products from cloned animals are not yet allowed on the market, though their offspring are. However, there is only a voluntary moratorium on cloned animals, and there have been several reports of farmers putting milk and meat from their clones into the food supply.

In 2003, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had asked producers to voluntarily withhold cloned animals and their offspring from the market while the agency determined if food products from these animals were safe to eat.^[12]

In January 2008, amidst fierce opposition from animal and consumer advocacy groups, the public, the dairy industry, and Congress, the FDA released its final risk assessment on animal cloning. The agency concluded that products from cloned cows, pigs, and goats, as well as products from the offspring of any cloned animal, are as safe to eat as conventional products. The FDA also determined that products from cloned animals and their offspring could be sold without labels.^[13]

Recognizing that the majority of consumers and food producers are concerned about the implications of cloned animals in the food supply, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) immediately asked that producers continue to observe the voluntary moratorium on cloned animals, though not on their offspring. The USDA has stated that it will keep the moratorium in place to allow the market time to transition.^[14]

Ideally, this moratorium should be made mandatory and should be extended to the offspring of cloned animals. Nevertheless, it is important to use this period to demonstrate that there is no market, domestic or international, for cloned animals. Food companies, the USDA, and Congress all need to hear that consumers worldwide do not want cloned animals or their offspring in their food. And before the USDA allows animal cloning to proceed any further, the animal welfare, ethical, and economic impacts of cloning must be considered.

Hide Answer

The FDA determined that, because the agency found no food safety risk, it is not necessary to label products that contain ingredients from cloned animals or their offspring. However, according to a recent survey, 63 percent of consumers said they did not want to buy food from cloned animals even if it were 'safe.'^[15] This means that a majority of consumers who oppose animal cloning on animal welfare, religious, or moral grounds would be forced to unwittingly make purchases that violate their ethical principles.

Consumers have a right to know how their food was produced so they can make informed decisions about what they buy and what they feed their families. Though AAVS believes that no animal should be cloned for food, we are working with numerous consumer, animal, and environmental organizations to ensure that cloned foods, if they are approved for public sale, are required to be labeled.

Labeling legislation has been introduced at both the state and federal level. Currently, the only way a consumer can be assured that a food does not contain ingredients from cloned animals is to look for the Organic label.

Hide Answer

No other country has approved cloning, and Denmark and Norway have already banned cloned animals from the food supply. Several countries have indicated that they will factor not just food safety, but also consumer concern, animal welfare, and ethics into their decision.

The European Food Safety Authority, for example, provided a draft of its expert opinion on animal cloning to the European Commission in early 2008, concluding that the health and welfare of a significant proportion of clones is adversely affected.^[16] The European Group on Ethics, in its expert opinion, also concluded in early 2008 that, considering the current level of suffering and health problems caused to surrogate dams and animal clones, there is no ethical justification for cloning animals for food.^[17]

Hide Answer

AAVS has been the leading animal protection organization working to ensure that animals are not cloned for food. With our End Animal Cloning campaign, we act as advocates for farmed animals, educating the public, the media, federal agencies, and members of Congress about the animal welfare and ethics concerns about cloning animals for food.

We also collaborate with several other animal and consumer advocacy groups, environmental organizations, and members of the food industry to require that our government consider not just food safety, but also implications for animal welfare and ethics before allowing cloning to move forward.

We work on legislation that can address our concerns, including legislation that would require labels on cloned foods and studies on consumer attitudes.

And we are working with the food industry to urge companies to publicly pledge that they will not used cloned animals or their offspring in their products.

You can read more about what AAVS is doing to end animal cloning by visiting our Recent Developments page.

Hide Answer

Let your voice be heard! Animal cloning is bad for animals and bad for consumers. The USDA, Congress, and the companies who produce, make, and sell food all need to hear that you do not want animals to be cloned for food.

Please visit our Action Alerts and Spread the Word pages to learn about specific things you can do. You can also browse our Resources and News pages to learn more about animal cloning.

Hide Answer