The Concepts of Health, Well-Being and Welfare As Applied to Animals

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Concepts of Health, Well-Being and Welfare As Applied to Animals The Concepts of Health, Well-being and Welfare as Applied to Animals The Concepts of Health, Well-being and Welfare as Applied to Animals A Philosophical Analysis of the Concepts with Regard to the Differences Between Animals. Henrik Lerner Linköping Studies in Arts and Science No. 438 Dissertations on Health and Society No. 13 Linköpings Universitet, Department of Medical and Health Sciences Linköping 2008 Linköping Studies in Arts and Science • No 438 At the Faculty of Arts and Science at Linköpings universitet, research and doctoral studies are carried out within broad problem areas. Research is organized in interdisciplinary research environments and doctoral studies mainly in graduate schools. Jointly, they publish the series Linköping Studies in Arts and Science. This thesis comes from the Division of Health and Society at the Department of Medical and Health Sciences. Distributed by: Department of Medical and Health Sciences Division of Health and Society Linköping University SE-581 83 Linköping Henrik Lerner The Concepts of Health, Well-being and Welfare as Applied to Animals. A Philosophical Analysis of the Concepts with Regard to the Differences Between Animals. Edition 1:1 © Henrik Lerner Department of Medical and Health Sciences, 2008 Cover photo: Henrik Lerner Printed in Sweden by LiU-tryck, Linköping, Sweden, 2008 ISBN: 978-91-7393-873-0 ISSN: 0282-9800 ISSN: 1651-1646 Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... 9 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 13 BACKGROUND OF THE THESIS ..................................................................................................... 14 TERMS FOR THE RESEARCH FIELD ............................................................................................... 15 AIM OF THE THESIS ..................................................................................................................... 15 2. DIFFERENT KINDS OF ANIMALS ..................................................................................... 19 DISTINGUISHING HUMANS FROM ANIMALS?................................................................................ 20 DISTINGUISHING ANIMALS FROM THE REST ................................................................................ 21 DISTINGUISHING ANIMALS FROM ANIMALS................................................................................. 23 3. MATERIAL AND METHODS ............................................................................................... 29 CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................. 30 LITERATURE SURVEY.................................................................................................................. 34 INTERVIEWS................................................................................................................................36 STUDY OF LEGISLATION .............................................................................................................. 39 4. THE THREE CONCEPTS IN THE LITERATURE OF THE SCIENCE OF ANIMAL HEALTH AND WELFARE ............................................................................... 43 HISTORICAL AND THEORETICAL COMMENTS............................................................................... 43 HEALTH ...................................................................................................................................... 45 WELL-BEING............................................................................................................................... 51 WELFARE.................................................................................................................................... 53 CLOSELY RELATED CONCEPTS .................................................................................................... 69 ROLE OR SPECIES APPROACH?..................................................................................................... 71 RELATIONS BETWEEN THE CONCEPTS ......................................................................................... 71 THE CONCEPTS AT OTHER LEVELS THAN THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL................................................ 76 5. CATEGORISATIONS OF DEFINITIONS OF THE CONCEPTS IN THE LITERATURE ..............................................................................................................79 CATEGORIES OF HEALTH DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................ 79 CATEGORIES OF WELL-BEING DEFINITIONS ................................................................................. 81 CATEGORIES OF WELFARE DEFINITIONS ...................................................................................... 81 6. THE THREE CONCEPTS IN THE INTERVIEWS............................................................. 87 HEALTH ...................................................................................................................................... 87 WELL-BEING............................................................................................................................... 91 WELFARE.................................................................................................................................... 91 CLOSELY RELATED CONCEPTS .................................................................................................... 93 RELATIONS BETWEEN THE CONCEPTS ......................................................................................... 95 NATURE, NORMAL AND SUFFERING............................................................................................. 97 DIFFERENCES WITH REGARD TO SPECIES AND ROLE .................................................................. 103 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................................... 108 7. THE THREE CONCEPTS IN ANIMAL LEGISLATION................................................. 111 HISTORICAL AND THEORETICAL COMMENTS............................................................................. 111 COUNCIL OF EUROPE ................................................................................................................ 114 THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ................................................................................................... 117 ENGLAND.................................................................................................................................. 118 GERMANY................................................................................................................................. 121 SWEDEN.................................................................................................................................... 124 DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................................. 132 8. A FURTHER ANALYSIS OF THE CONCEPTS OF NATURAL AND NATURE......... 141 THE NATURE OF ANIMALS ......................................................................................................... 142 A COMPARISON OF ROLLIN AND ARISTOTLE............................................................................. 150 CRITIQUE OF ROLLIN ................................................................................................................ 151 ORGANIC FARMING VIEWS ON WELFARE – APPLIED ROLLIN ..................................................... 152 NATURAL BEHAVIOUR .............................................................................................................. 154 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................ 163 9. GENERAL COMPARISON AND DISCUSSION ............................................................... 165 A GENERAL COMMENT ON SPECIES-RESTRICTIONS.................................................................... 166 CLASSIFICATION OF HEALTH DEFINITIONS ................................................................................ 166 CLASSIFICATION OF WELFARE DEFINITIONS .............................................................................. 170 QUALITY OF LIFE AS A MEMBER OF A CLUSTER? ....................................................................... 176 RELATIONS BETWEEN HEALTH AND WELFARE/WELL-BEING ..................................................... 177 WELL-BEING AS A USEFUL CONCEPT......................................................................................... 178 HOW SHOULD WELL-BEING BE DEFINED?.................................................................................. 180 THE PROBLEM OF CONGLOMERATE CONCEPTS .......................................................................... 181 CLUSTERS ................................................................................................................................. 181 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................................... 187 APPENDIX A.............................................................................................................................. 191 INTERVIEW GUIDE....................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • The Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Social Welfare Strategies
    Throughout the world, societies are reexamining, reforming, and restructuring their social welfare systems. New ways are being sought to manage and finance these systems, and new approaches are being developed that alter the relative roles of government, private business, and individ- uals. Not surprisingly, this activity has triggered spirited debate about the relative merits of the various ways of structuring social welfare systems in general and social security programs in particular. The current changes respond to a vari- ety of forces. First, many societies are ad- justing their institutions to reflect changes in social philosophies about the relative responsibilities of government and the individual. These philosophical changes are especially dramatic in China, the former socialist countries of Eastern Europe, and the former Soviet Union; but The Advantages and Disadvantages they are also occurring in what has tradi- of Different Social Welfare Strategies tionally been thought of as the capitalist West. Second, some societies are strug- by Lawrence H. Thompson* gling to adjust to the rising costs associated with aging populations, a problem particu- The following was delivered by the author to the High Level American larly acute in the OECD countries of Asia, Meeting of Experts on The Challenges of Social Reform and New Adminis- Europe, and North America. Third, some trative and Financial Management Techniques. The meeting, which took countries are adjusting their social institu- tions to reflect new development strate- place September 5-7, 1994, in Mar de1 Plata, Argentina, was sponsored gies, a change particularly important in by the International Social Security Association at the invitation of the those countries in the Americas that seek Argentine Secretariat for Social Security in collaboration with the ISSA economic growth through greater eco- Member Organizations of that country.
    [Show full text]
  • Workfare, Neoliberalism and the Welfare State
    Workfare, neoliberalism and the welfare state Towards a historical materialist analysis of Australian workfare Daisy Farnham Honours Thesis Submitted as partial requirement for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (Honours), Political Economy, University of Sydney, 24 October 2013. 1 Supervised by Damien Cahill 2 University of Sydney This work contains no material which has been accepted for the award of another degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text of the thesis. 3 Acknowledgements First of all thanks go to my excellent supervisor Damien, who dedicated hours to providing me with detailed, thoughtful and challenging feedback, which was invaluable in developing my ideas. Thank you to my parents, Trish and Robert, for always encouraging me to write and for teaching me to stand up for the underdog. My wonderful friends, thank you all for your support, encouragement, advice and feedback on my work, particularly Jean, Portia, Claire, Feiyi, Jessie, Emma, Amir, Nay, Amy, Gareth, Dave, Nellie and Erin. A special thank you goes to Freya and Erima, whose company and constant support made days on end in Fisher Library as enjoyable as possible! This thesis is inspired by the political perspective and practice of the members of Solidarity. It is dedicated to all those familiar with the indignity and frustration of life on Centrelink. 4 CONTENTS List of figures....................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Atrocities Go Vegan, Lose Weight MFA Undercover Investigation Exposes Heartbreaking Abuse Tips from an Expert the Artivists Creativity Meets Compassion
    - FREE - Go ahead, take it. Living Compassionate CTHE MAG OF MFA. FALL-WINTERL 12 ISSUE 11 Wicked Walmart The Hidden Cost of the Mega Retailer's Cheap Pork Butterball Gets Busted Historic Cruelty Conviction + Auction Against Turkey Tyrant Atrocities Go Vegan, Lose Weight MFA Undercover Investigation Exposes Heartbreaking Abuse Tips from an Expert The Artivists Creativity Meets Compassion MercyForAnimals.org dear friends newswatch Living Meaty Environmental Issues The Scientific Veterinary Committee of the European Commission studied the matter extensively. What they Compassionate According to NPR, meat consumption in the reports that the 10 million automobiles in the region found wasn’t all too surprising: “When sows are put United States is on a downward spiral, and not only produce far less smog than the area's 300,000 into a very small pen, they indicate by their behavioral out of animal cruelty concerns. The media magnate dairy cows. responses that they find the confinement aversive. If given CL states that 29 percent of its Truven Health Analytics Water depletion is another major concern. Researchers the opportunity, they leave the confined space and they Health Poll’s 3,000 participants cited concern for the at the Stockholm International Water Institute find that usually resist attempts to make them return to that place.” Contributors environment as their motivation for forgoing animal "there will not be enough water available on current products. It’s no wonder why, considering the Amy Bradley croplands to produce food for the expected 9 billion frightening facts. In other words, pigs want freedom. Just like you and Becca Frye population in 2050 if we follow current trends and me.
    [Show full text]
  • MAC1 Abstracts – Oral Presentations
    Oral Presentation Abstracts OP001 Rights, Interests and Moral Standing: a critical examination of dialogue between Regan and Frey. Rebekah Humphreys Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom This paper aims to assess R. G. Frey’s analysis of Leonard Nelson’s argument (that links interests to rights). Frey argues that claims that animals have rights or interests have not been established. Frey’s contentions that animals have not been shown to have rights nor interests will be discussed in turn, but the main focus will be on Frey’s claim that animals have not been shown to have interests. One way Frey analyses this latter claim is by considering H. J. McCloskey’s denial of the claim and Tom Regan’s criticism of this denial. While Frey’s position on animal interests does not depend on McCloskey’s views, he believes that a consideration of McCloskey’s views will reveal that Nelson’s argument (linking interests to rights) has not been established as sound. My discussion (of Frey’s scrutiny of Nelson’s argument) will centre only on the dialogue between Regan and Frey in respect of McCloskey’s argument. OP002 Can Special Relations Ground the Privileged Moral Status of Humans Over Animals? Robert Jones California State University, Chico, United States Much contemporary philosophical work regarding the moral considerability of nonhuman animals involves the search for some set of characteristics or properties that nonhuman animals possess sufficient for their robust membership in the sphere of things morally considerable. The most common strategy has been to identify some set of properties intrinsic to the animals themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Child Welfare? a Guide for Educators Educators Make Crucial Contributions to the Development and Well-Being of Children and Youth
    FACTSHEET June 2018 What Is Child Welfare? A Guide for Educators Educators make crucial contributions to the development and well-being of children and youth. Due to their close relationships with children and families, educators can play a key role in the prevention of child abuse and neglect and, when necessary, support children, youth, and families involved with child welfare. This guide for educators provides an overview of child welfare, describes how educators and child welfare workers can help each other, and lists resources for more information. What Is Child Welfare? Child welfare is a continuum of services designed to ensure that children are safe and that families have the necessary support to care for their children successfully. Child welfare agencies typically: Support or coordinate services to prevent child abuse and neglect Provide services to families that need help protecting and caring for their children Receive and investigate reports of possible child abuse and neglect; assess child and family needs, strengths, and resources Arrange for children to live with kin (i.e., relatives) or with foster families when safety cannot be ensured at home Support the well-being of children living with relatives or foster families, including ensuring that their educational needs are addressed Work with the children, youth, and families to achieve family reunification, adoption, or other permanent family connections for children and youth leaving foster care Each State or locality has a public child welfare agency responsible for receiving and investigating reports of child abuse and neglect and assessing child and family needs; however, the child welfare system is not a single entity.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Human Development and Human Deprivations Suman
    Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI) Oxford Department of International Development Queen Elizabeth House (QEH), University of Oxford OPHI WORKING PAPER NO. 110 Measuring Human Development and Human Deprivations Suman Seth* and Antonio Villar** March 2017 Abstract This paper is devoted to the discussion of the measurement of human development and poverty, especially in United Nations Development Program’s global Human Development Reports. We first outline the methodological evolution of different indices over the last two decades, focusing on the well-known Human Development Index (HDI) and the poverty indices. We then critically evaluate these measures and discuss possible improvements that could be made. Keywords: Human Development Report, Measurement of Human Development, Inequality- adjusted Human Development Index, Measurement of Multidimensional Poverty JEL classification: O15, D63, I3 * Economics Division, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, UK, and Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI), University of Oxford, UK. Email: [email protected]. ** Department of Economics, University Pablo de Olavide and Ivie, Seville, Spain. Email: [email protected]. This study has been prepared within the OPHI theme on multidimensional measurement. ISSN 2040-8188 ISBN 978-19-0719-491-13 Seth and Villar Measuring Human Development and Human Deprivations Acknowledgements We are grateful to Sabina Alkire for valuable comments. This work was done while the second author was visiting the Department of Mathematics for Decisions at the University of Florence. Thanks are due to the hospitality and facilities provided there. Funders: The research is covered by the projects ECO2010-21706 and SEJ-6882/ECON with financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology, the Junta de Andalucía and the FEDER funds.
    [Show full text]
  • The Welfare Costs of Well-Being Inequality
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES THE WELFARE COSTS OF WELL-BEING INEQUALITY Leonard Goff John F. Helliwell Guy Mayraz Working Paper 21900 http://www.nber.org/papers/w21900 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 January 2016 All three authors are grateful for research support from the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, through its program on Social Interactions, Identity and Well-Being. We are also grateful to Gallup for access to data from the Gallup World Poll and the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index® survey. The authors wish to thank Carol Graham, Richard Layard, Eric Snowberg and Joe Stiglitz for helpful comments on an earlier version. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2016 by Leonard Goff, John F. Helliwell, and Guy Mayraz. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. The Welfare Costs of Well-being Inequality Leonard Goff, John F. Helliwell, and Guy Mayraz NBER Working Paper No. 21900 January 2016, Revised April 2016 JEL No. D6,D63,I31 ABSTRACT If satisfaction with life (SWL) is used to measure individual well-being, its variance offers a natural measure of social inequality that includes all the various factors that affect well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • Giving Our All: Reflections of a Spend out Charity “The Great Use of Life Is to Spend It for Something That Outlasts It.”
    Giving our all: reflections of a spend out charity “The great use of life is to spend it for something that outlasts it.” William James (1842 –1910) Miles and Briony Blackwell, founders of The Tubney Charitable Trust The Prince of Wales © Chris Jackson 6 The Tubney Charitable Trust Contents Section 1 The Tubney Charitable Trust: grant-making 1997 – 2012 Summary of grant-making 12 Being proactive 28 The birth and early years Marine conservation 32 (1997 – 2001) 14 New tactics 33 Our first steps (2001 – 2003) 15 Our final years (2008 – 2012) 36 An early trauma 17 Spending out 36 Adolescence (2003 – 2004) 18 Preparing for the end 37 Strategic review 18 Our legacy 38 Defining direction 19 Allowing space to ‘think big’ 38 Coming of age (2004 – 2008) 22 The legacy mindset 39 Championing our causes 22 Working on trust 40 Farmed animals 22 Biodiversity 24 Giving our all: reflections of a spend out charity 7 Section 2 What we learned The big picture 48 Relationship between Trustees and staff 81 Recognising connections 48 Watch your language 82 Bringing people together 49 Spend out 83 Building networks 50 Why do it? 83 Beyond national boundaries 54 Encouraging philanthropy 84 Working with applicants and grantees 56 Ten reasons to consider spending out 86 Dialogue and feedback 56 The practicalities 88 Evidence-based work 61 Management 88 Taking risks 64 Investments, finances and Managing risk 66 scheduling 89 Bringing in experts 67 Communication – inside and out 91 Supporting business and Transfer of assets 93 financial planning 70 Summary 95 Size matters 75 Acknowledgements 98 Sharing lessons learned 76 Tubney-funded The Trustee Board 77 publications 100 Keeping the same Trustees 77 History of the Trust 102 Becoming experts in our core areas 80 8 The Tubney Charitable Trust Hay Meadow © Yorkshire Dales Millennium Trust Giving our all: reflections of a spend out charity 9 Welcome During its 15-year existence, the composition of the small group of Trustees and staff running The Tubney Charitable Trust changed very little.
    [Show full text]
  • Science in the Service of Animal Welfare
    Science in the Service of Animal Welfare Universities Federation for Animal Welfare Annual Report 2008-2009 Annual Report The Universities Federation for Animal Welfare The Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, founded in 1926, is an internationally recognised, independent, scientific and educational animal welfare charity concerned with promoting high standards of welfare for farm, companion, laboratory and captive wild animals, and for those animals with which we interact in the wild. It works to improve animals’ lives by: • Promoting and supporting developments in the science and technology that underpin advances in animal welfare • Promoting education in animal care and welfare • Providing information, organising meetings, and publishing books, videos, articles, technical reports and the journal Animal Welfare • Providing expert advice to government departments and other bodies and helping to draft and amend laws and guidelines • Enlisting the energies of animal keepers, scientists, veterinarians, lawyers and others who care about animals Photograph Credits Dr Cathryn Mellersh p3 courtesy of the Animal Health Trust. Broiler p7 courtesy of Louise Buckley. Sheep p9 courtesy of Bluemoondog Pictures. Elephant p9 courtesy of Dr Chris Sherwin. Zoo Outreach p10 courtesy of The Zoo Outreach Organisation. © UFAW 2009. Published by UFAW, The Old School, Brewhouse Hill, Wheathampstead, Hertfordshire AL4 8AN, UK. Tel: +44 1582 831818 Fax: +44 1582 831414 Website: www.ufaw.org.uk Email: [email protected] Printed on NAPM approved recycled paper Science in the Service of Animal Welfare 1 Letter from the Chief Executive’s Chairman Report It gives me great pleasure to Fifty years ago William report another very Russell and Rex Burch’s ‘The successful year for the Principles of Humane charity with many notable Experimental Technique’ achievements, confirmation was published.
    [Show full text]
  • Centre for Animal Welfare News 2017
    2017 News and Events from the University of Winchester’s Centre for Animal Welfare CAW Acting Director speaks out on Brexit, sentience and animal welfare 12 December 2017 Dr Steven McCulloch, Acting Director of CAW, has published two articles on Brexit, sentience and animal welfare. Sentience and animal welfare has received substantial media attention after Parliament voted against an amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill tabled by Caroline Lucas MP. Dr McCulloch's first article, Brexit, Animal Sentience and Democracy, describes the moral atrocities committed against animals when their sentience has been denied. In the article he argues that the historical denial of sentience and its consequences in itself means that government should formally recognise it in law. The second article The Greatness Of A Nation Can Be Judged By How It Treats Its Animals is critical of the Conservative government policy to reject incorporating Article 13 in the EU Withdrawal Bill. How clever are the animals we keep? World's first Professor of Animal Welfare, gives lecture at CAW event 28 November 2017 Donald Broom, Emeritus Professor at the University of Cambridge (pictured above centre with Dr Steve McCulloch and Professor Joy Carter), gave a CAW evening lecture on How clever are the animals we keep? on 27 Nov 2017. Donald Broom was the first person to be appointed Professor of Animal Welfare in the world. Professor Joy Carter, Vice Chancellor at Winchester, introduced the CAW event, which was a great success. Over one hundred staff, students and members of the public attended. Watch the video of the Centre for Animal Welfare lecture How clever are the animals we keep? by Professor Donald Broom.
    [Show full text]
  • An HSUS Report: the Welfare of Animals in the Meat, Egg, and Dairy Industries
    An HSUS Report: The Welfare of Animals in the Meat, Egg, and Dairy Industries Abstract Each year in the United States, approximately 11 billion animals are raised and killed for meat, eggs, and milk. These farm animals—sentient, complex, and capable of feeling pain and frustration, joy and excitement—are viewed by industrialized agriculture as commodities and suffer myriad assaults to their physical, mental, and emotional well-being, typically denied the ability to engage in their species-specific behavioral needs. Despite the routine abuses they endure, no federal law protects animals from cruelty on the farm, and the majority of states exempt customary agricultural practices—no matter how abusive—from the scope of their animal cruelty statutes. The treatment of farm animals and the conditions in which they are raised, transported, and slaughter within industrialized agriculture are incompatible with providing adequate levels of welfare. Birds Of the approximately 11 billion animals killed annually in the United States,1,2,3,4,5 86% are birds—98% of land animals in agriculture—and the overwhelming majority are “broiler” chickens raised for meat, approximately 1 million killed each hour.6 Additionally, approximately 340 million laying hens7 are raised in the egg industry (280 million birds who produce table eggs and 60 million kept for breeding), and more than 270 million turkeys8 are slaughtered for meat. On factory farms, birds raised for meat are confined by the tens of thousands9,10 in grower houses, which are commonly artificially lit, force-ventilated, and completely barren except for litter material on the floor and long rows of feeders and drinkers.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Comments Concerning the Food and Drug Administration's
    660 PENNSYLVANIA AVE ., SE , SUITE 302, WASHINGTON , DC 20003 (202) 547-9359 É FAX (202) 547-9429 1009 GENERAL KENNEDY AVE ., #2 SAN FRANCISCO , CA 94129 (415) 561-2524 É FAX (415) 561-7651 WWW .CENTERFORFOODSAFETY.ORG Initial Comments Concerning the Food and Drug Administration’s Animal Cloning Risk Assessment by Joseph Mendelson III Legal Director Presented at the FDA Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee November 4, 2003 Rockville, MD The Center for Food Safety (CFS) is a national non-profit membership organization with offices in Washington, DC and San Francisco, CA. CFS works to protect human health and the environment by curbing the proliferation of harmful food production technologies and by promoting organic and other forms of sustainable agriculture. CFS engages in legal, scientific and grassroots initiatives to guide national and international policymaking on critical food safety issues. CFS provides the following initial comments to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) concerning its Animal Cloning Risk Assessment. Critical Lack of Scientific Rigor in FDA’s Risk Assessment CFS believes that the conclusions reached by the FDA in its Animal Cloning Risk Assessment are scientifically unsupported and run contrary to the agency’s mandate to protect the safety of American consumers and the food supply. Rather remarkably, the FDA basis its initial safety conclusions on the milk and meat from cloned animals upon only one study. The FDA’s admits: Information on the composition of clone meat or milk is extremely limited. Very few of the bovine clones are old enough to have been bred, given birth and lactating. One study has been identified on the composition of milk from clone cows; no studies on the composition of meat from clones have been identified.1 Similarly, the Risk Assessment’s conclusions rely upon one study on the milk from progeny of clone and no studies on the edible products from cloned animals.
    [Show full text]