The available science shows that cloning presents serious food safety risks, animal welfare concerns and unresolved ethical issues that require strict oversight,
Um - science doesn't raise any ethical issues and government certainly doesn't have any place legislating ethical issues - next!
I had also thought that science was supposed to rely on empirical evidence. What evidence shows that clones provide a 'serious food safety risk?'
Industry scientists derided the petition's safety concerns, built largely on a theoretical possibility that subtle genetic changes seen in some clones may alter the nutritional nature of meat.
I guess the group that is presenting this concern doesn't believe in evolution then does it? After all, the theory of evolution is based on the 'theoretical possibility that subtle genetic changes seen in some clones may alter' a species - up to and including the change in the nutritional nature of meat.