• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

A Race To The Bottom

Econ101

Well-known member
US Accused of Being Lax on Beef Safety



By Kim Yon-se

The Korea Times

December 4, 2006 Monday

via MeatPoultry.com



U.S. consumer advocacy groups accuse the U.S. government of blocking voluntary tests for mad cow disease by meat processing companies and trying to scale the existing ones down.



One case in point is Creekstone Farms, which produced the first batch of U.S. beef exported to Korea after the three-year import ban was lifted recently.



Creekstone Farms is based in Campbellsburg, Kentucky, with its processing and sales operations in Arkansas City, Kansas.



Following the discovery of a bone fragment last month, a slaughterhouse - or meat processor - belonging to Creekstone Farms was banned from exporting to Korea. It was the violation of import conditions between the two countries.



According to U.S. consumer advocates, the U.S. Department of Agriculture snubbed a request to allow the Kansas-based slaughterhouse to toughen its testing procedures. The consumer groups include the Minnesota-based Organic Consumers Association, whose claims were extensively reported by USA Today.



According to the advocacy group, Creekstone Farms wanted to assure customers that its cattle is safe to eat by testing every cow for mad cow disease.



But the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) blocked private companies from selling disease testing kits to Creekstone, arguing that there was no significant mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), problem in the country.



USA Today recently reported that the USDA is afraid Creekstone will set a precedent for other meat processors to follow and make a dent in beef exports of the U.S. agriculture industry.



Currently, the U.S. government tests only 1 percent of the roughly 100,000 cattle slaughtered daily.



The USDA is planning to reduce daily testing for mad cow disease by 90 percent. It has not been confirmed whether the plan has been implemented, but the revised plan calls for testing only 0.11 percent, or about 110, of the 100,000 cattle tested daily.



"Korea raised the (Creekstone-USDA) case in former talks to resume U.S. beef imports in September," said Kim Chang-seob, an official at the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. "U.S. officials said they follow global standards in regulations on cattle examination."



"A more urgent issue is avian flu in poultry in the domestic market," Kim said. "Why are a few bits of bone so important?"



Byun Hye-jin, a ranking official at the Korean Federation of Medical Groups for Health Rights (KFHR), said the U.S. government's alleged laxness in oversight of mad cow disease is not news.



"The U.S. agriculture industry is the No. 2 political funding source to the Bush administration," she said.



"I believe the USDA's blockade for some meat processors' proposal to extend mad cow disease testing is to block fatal damages to the agriculture industry (from a possibility of more BSE detection)."



In contrast to the U.S., many European countries and Japan are testing all slaughtered cattle, she said. "As we continue to say, the U.S. cannot produce boneless beef because they use big electric saws in processing cattle parts."



Last Friday, the government said it found three bone fragments in the 3.2 tons of beef from Premium Protein Products, a slaughterhouse in the state of Nebraska, that arrived in Korea on Nov. 23.



The third batch of U.S. beef, totaling 10 tons, has arrived at Incheon International Airport. It is to be quarantined. The 651 boxes of beef were also processed in Nebraska. The state has the greatest number of beef processing rule violations.





meatpoultry.com
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
And to think there are idiots who try to tell us that our customers don't want tested beef - and an organization who claims to represent US producers supporting a ban they themselves claim costs each producer $175/head! I just can't believe it......
 

ocm

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
And to think there are idiots who try to tell us that our customers don't want tested beef - and an organization who claims to represent US producers supporting a ban they themselves claim costs each producer $175/head! I just can't believe it......

They're the same idiots who say they "won" the negotiations with Japan and Korea. Ha! Yeah, just like the Persians beat General Pyhrrus.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "And to think there are idiots who try to tell us that our customers don't want tested beef - and an organization who claims to represent US producers supporting a ban they themselves claim costs each producer $175/head! I just can't believe it......"

And to think there is morons that still believe a country wants deceptive bse tested beef AS THEY ARE IMPORTING NON TESTED BEEF.

Someone's interpretation of their words supposedly trumps their actions. HAHAHA! Duuuuuuh!

The ban on deceptive bse testing didn't cost producers $175 per head, having bse in our native herd which R-CULT claims meant our beef was "contaminated" and "high risk" did.

Funny how you use NCBA's $175 figure when it fits your USDA blaming bias.

If Japan wanted bse tested beef, they would be demanding it today. Instead you insist that Japan wants bse tested beef as they import non tested beef. How can anyone be so incredibly stupid? I'll bet that makes sense in R-CULT circles doesn't it?


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "And to think there are idiots who try to tell us that our customers don't want tested beef - and an organization who claims to represent US producers supporting a ban they themselves claim costs each producer $175/head! I just can't believe it......"

And to think there is morons that still believe a country wants deceptive bse tested beef AS THEY ARE IMPORTING NON TESTED BEEF.

Someone's interpretation of their words supposedly trumps their actions. HAHAHA! Duuuuuuh!

The ban on deceptive bse testing didn't cost producers $175 per head, having bse in our native herd which R-CULT claims meant our beef was "contaminated" and "high risk" did.

Funny how you use NCBA's $175 figure when it fits your USDA blaming bias.

If Japan wanted bse tested beef, they would be demanding it today. Instead you insist that Japan wants bse tested beef as they import non tested beef. How can anyone be so incredibly stupid? I'll bet that makes sense in R-CULT circles doesn't it?


~SH~

SH, here is a question for you:

Does Australia use MBM for their cattle feed? This is an issue that arises out of packer wanting to sell waste product from slaughter as a feed to cattle, making them cannibals. All this because of greed.

Does Australia have this problem?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lying King: "Does Australia use MBM for their cattle feed? This is an issue that arises out of packer wanting to sell waste product from slaughter as a feed to cattle, making them cannibals. All this because of greed. Does Australia have this problem?"

You tell me Lying King. If you have a point, make it. You are the one making the allegation, now show me what you got.


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Lying King: "Does Australia use MBM for their cattle feed? This is an issue that arises out of packer wanting to sell waste product from slaughter as a feed to cattle, making them cannibals. All this because of greed. Does Australia have this problem?"

You tell me Lying King. If you have a point, make it. You are the one making the allegation, now show me what you got.


~SH~

Isn't this pretty central to the fact that Australia is the primary supplier of beef to Japan?

If you don't know this facet of the beef industry, SH, just admit it.

You are supposed to know all facets. Seems you are a little short here, don't you think?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lying King: "Isn't this pretty central to the fact that Australia is the primary supplier of beef to Japan?"

Why do you keep asking me when you are the one who made the allegation?

Does Australia use MBM for their cattle feed or not?

Secondly, what is your point (under the stupid assumption that you actually have a point)?


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Lying King: "Isn't this pretty central to the fact that Australia is the primary supplier of beef to Japan?"

Why do you keep asking me when you are the one who made the allegation?

Does Australia use MBM for their cattle feed or not?

Secondly, what is your point (under the stupid assumption that you actually have a point)?


~SH~



......all facets.......
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
DIVERSION!

3rd time: Does Australia use MBM for their cattle feed or not?

watch the diversion again........


Lying King knows that he can divert questions and keep making statements and avoid exposing his eternal ignorance that way.


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
DIVERSION!

3rd time: Does Australia use MBM for their cattle feed or not?

watch the diversion again........


Lying King knows that he can divert questions and keep making statements and avoid exposing his eternal ignorance that way.


~SH~

So you admit you do not know all facets of the beef industry? Please retract the statement then.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
What's wrong Lying King? Once again you can make an allegation about Australia feeding MBM but you can't back it? Why should I be surprised, you have never backed a position you have held yet with supporting facts. You are the biggest phony on this site bar none.


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
What's wrong Lying King? Once again you can make an allegation about Australia feeding MBM but you can't back it? Why should I be surprised, you have never backed a position you have held yet with supporting facts. You are the biggest phony on this site bar none.


~SH~

SH, here is a question for you:

Does Australia use MBM for their cattle feed? This is an issue that arises out of packer wanting to sell waste product from slaughter as a feed to cattle, making them cannibals. All this because of greed.

Does Australia have this problem?

Is this an allegation?

You first dodged the question and asked me what relevance this could have.

Then you continually dodge the question.

I thought you knew all of the facets of the beef industry and just wanted to ask you a simple question.

It is obvious that you were lying if you can not answer the question.

Your words mean nothing anymore.

You are a clown.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I don't know whether Australia has that problem or not.

Now you can answer your own question.

Does Australia feed MBM to their cattle?

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't know


Lying King: "I thought you knew all of the facets of the beef industry...."

I never said I that I knew EVERY FACET of the beef industry IN EVERY COUNTRY. I'm not a liar like you. Add another lie to your list.


~SH~
 
Top