NoClones.ca

Cloned-animal foods are allowed without labels in Canada. Here’s what to know and how to act.

We are updating the site daily with new information and working on building a petition. Join us. Join the petition

Deep Dive: Cited Studies

Last updated: 2025-11-11

This page lists the key studies and assessments cited in Health Canada’s scientific opinion regarding SCNT animal cloning and related policy. Each section summarizes the study and highlights notable factoids for further scrutiny. Readers are encouraged to consult the full studies for full context.

Scientific opinion on SCNT cloning of cattle and swine (Canada.ca, 2024)

Government synthesis of current knowledge, gaps, and impacts for food/feed safety, animal health, environment, and indirect human health.

Data gaps

“No data” collected to date on impact of SCNT on animal microflora; “no data” on impact of SCNT on levels of chemical residues in meat/milk.

Animal health

Higher incidences of birth defects/malformations and pregnancy‑related complications in clones compared to conventionally bred counterparts.

Longevity unknowns

Considerably less is known about long‑term effects on health and fertility; few livestock clones have reached advanced age.

Limited composition data

Little to no data on composition of meat/milk from sheep/goat clones; little/no data on older livestock animals.

Progeny evidence

Evidence for progeny often inferred from comparator studies; direct long-term consumption data remain limited in scope.

Microbiological safety

“There is no data that has been collected to date on the impact of SCNT on the microflora of these animals.”

Chemical residues

“There is no data that has been collected to date on the impact of SCNT on the levels of chemical residues in the meat and milk of animal clones or of their progeny.”

Source: Canada.ca — Scientific opinion (2024)

US FDA. Animal Cloning: A Risk Assessment (2008)

Comprehensive US assessment of SCNT food safety and animal health, with comparator studies.

Sample sizes

Includes a large study of 5 boar clones vs 15 related control barrows; 264 clone progeny compared with related controls.

Approach

Focus on health comparability (physiological + compositional) as proxy for safety; limited long‑term consumption data.

EFSA Scientific Opinion (2008)

EU opinion on food safety, animal health/welfare, and environmental impacts for SCNT clones.

Perinatal losses

High perinatal mortality and developmental problems in clones; welfare concerns emphasized.

Source: EFSA Scientific Opinion (2008)

EFSA Update (2012)

Update to the 2008 EFSA opinion with additional literature.

Welfare

Continues to report developmental problems and animal health concerns; limited new long‑term consumption evidence.

Source: EFSA Update (2012)

Sinclair et al. (2016) — Long‑term assessment of cloned sheep

First study to assess long‑term effects of SCNT in large mammals; 13 cloned sheep aged 7–9 years, including 4 from the Dolly lineage.

Long‑term cohort

13 cloned sheep; reported no detrimental long‑term effects in this group.

Limitations

Small sample; sheep only; not generalizable to cattle/swine; survivorship bias possible.

Watanabe & Nagai (2009) — Progeny survey

Survey of 202 progeny of cloned cattle in Japan; lifespans and development compared with conventional controls.

Progeny outcomes

Reported similar lifespans and development across early lifecycle stages vs controls.

Scope limits

Lifecycle coverage focused on first year; limited external validation.

Wells et al. (2004) — Progeny of cloned cattle

Health status, growth, reproduction, and milk/meat quality of progeny of SCNT cattle vs conventional comparators.

Findings

Reported no known significant differences in progeny health or edible product composition vs controls.

Caveat

Progeny may not reflect clone‑specific adverse outcomes; selection bias possible.

Mir et al. (2005) — Pig clones

Study of SCNT pig clones; details to be extracted in full‑text review.

Note

Pending full study analysis: extract perinatal losses, survival to maturity, health anomalies.

Walker et al. (2007) — Pig clones

Study of SCNT pig clones; details to be extracted in full‑text review.

Note

Pending full study analysis: natal outcomes, post‑natal health, sample sizes.

Gauthier et al. (2001) — Goat clones

Study of SCNT goat clones; details to be extracted in full‑text review.

Note

Pending full study analysis: failures, deaths, abnormalities, to maturity rates.

Reggio et al. (2001) — Goat clones

Study of SCNT goat clones; details to be extracted in full‑text review.

Note

Pending full study analysis: failures, deaths, abnormalities, to maturity rates.

Polejaeva et al. (2013) — Reproductive performance in cloned cows

Reports similar reproductive performance of cloned cows (transferable‑quality embryos) vs conventional cows.

Outcome

Comparable embryo production; broader health outcomes not detailed here.

Wells et al. (1998) — Sheep clones

Early study on SCNT sheep clones; details to be extracted in full‑text review.

Note

Pending full study analysis: perinatal/juvenile mortality and abnormalities.