If getting information doesn’t inform — well, it’s not really information, now, is it?
If I see one more time someone saying, “I want cloned foods to be labelled as such because I want to make an informed choice,” I’ll scream. What information does that give you, any more than, say, a label that says, “This beef came from a cow with brown spots, vs. white spots,” or, “This milk came from a cow who was facing south.”
The FDA’s ruling was that there was no notable difference between food from clones and food from animals bred in other fashions If you want to debate the science, that’s fine. If there’s a basis for saying that there is a difference, then, yes, it makes sense to add the label — but as long as the FDA (for reasons good, bad, or indifferent) declares there’s no difference, identifying the difference makes no sense. It’s not an informed decision, it’s a prejudiced decision.
If you want to criticize cloning based on moral reasons — I’m not sure that should warrant a federal requirement for food labeling. If you want to criticize cloning for adding to food product monocultures and vulnerability to herd diseases, that’s a public policy decision that has nothing, again, to do with labeling.
Moo.