business news in context, analysis with attitude

Good piece in the Los Angeles Times over the weekend detailing a private dinner hosted by the paper at which numerous food experts were invited to see if they could tell the difference between beef dishes made with the offspring of cloned animals and those made with more traditionally raised cuts of beef.

The short answer is no – which is either reassuring or upsetting, depending on your point of view. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has ruled that meat and milk from cloned animals is safe to consume, and that they need not be labeled…a decision that has raised the hackles of those who object to this use of the technology.

Eric Schlosser, author of "Fast Food Nation,” refused to attend the dinner, saying, "I'd rather eat my running shoes than eat meat from a cloned animal."

Spago chef Lee Hefter also refused to attend or even host the dinner. "I don't want people to think that I would ever use it," he said. "I don't want to condone cloned beef. I don't want to eat it. I don't want it in my kitchen."
KC's View:
We wish we’d been invited…we’d have loved to have a chance to eat cloned beef and to have seen whether we could tell the difference.

That said, we remain convinced that it is critical to label meat from cloned animals as being such – and that the FDA once again is abdicating its responsibilities by being less concerned about consumer interests than it should be.

We also think that guys like Schlosser sometimes are more ideological than they should be…and that, as Pete Hamill once wrote, “Ideology is a substitute for thought.”