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

Canadian Answer - Test All Exports

Help Support Ranchers.net:


Well-known member
Feb 10, 2005
Reaction score
Montgomery, Al
I have read many abstracts by this guy and he IS pretty sharp:
(This would also get R-Calf off their back)

The recent finding of two Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) infected cows closed Canadian beef export markets to 30 countries including the United States with resulting direct losses estimated at over 2 billion dollars. Canadian regulators should concentrate on helping to develop new export markets while maintaining the current U.S. market. The various options for BSE testing include: maintain current testing levels, test domestic beef only, test exported beef only and test all beef; these options are explored with analysis of the risks and benefits likely to accrue from each choice. The option that ensures the greatest level of safety for Canadians (testing all beef) is resisted due to the harmonization of regulations between Canadian and American beef industries. The best policy option for Canadians is one that provides some middle ground restoring the confidence of Canadian beef without alienating our biggest trading partner. A workable solution is to institute testing of all exported beef products only. Testing exported beef only has many benefits including avoiding future market closures by verifying safe, exported beef as well as the potential to open foreign markets that will not currently buy untested beef products. However, Canadian public acceptance of untested domestic beef while testing exported beef to overcome trade barriers will require that the public be aware of the risks and reasons for choosing this BSE testing policy.

Michael Tyshenko, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow,
McLaughlin Centre for Population Health Risk Assessment,
University of Ottawa
William Leiss, Research Chair in Risk Communication & Public Policy
Haskayne School of Business,
University of Calgary
(FIRST DRAFT: 9 June 2004)
If we are going to test, then test everything..

But we need to give up the idea of the north americian beef industry, and set our own rules to do this. If IBP and Tyson dont like, then they can go home, the plants can't be moved, someone will buy them and operate them.

If this was to happen, then AIM's nightmares would come true. We would be the biggest competitor to the US beef producer in the world, not their unwilling partner anymore.

Careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
:D You bet Mike. But how do we convince our Government. And how in the hell do we convince the Multinational packer Giants in Canada who have no need for it. Boxed beef sales are great and profits are greater. No need for them to change. Only hope is for new plants to be allowed to test.
This would give them a bit of competitive advantage as well. Any ideas on how to push this agenda harder would be more than welcome.
I didn't read this as closely as I should, but is there a guarentee any country would take tested beef from Canada? My gut says yes and it is something I don't oppose. Reading the judges briefs from the border closure, he points out that the last few cases put Canada's rate of BSE close to that of Great Britain. Not sure where he got this, but it is different than I thought.

Here's my points on Canadian testing. With several cows found, it gives a chance to determine this. I think it's kinda like pulling a scab. Get it over quickly. How enjoyable is it to keep having cases pop up???

I also think it creates an opportunity for premiums. They are there or they aren't. Nobody has ever tested the market to see.

As for the arguement of sound science, it seems it depends upon who you ask. Read the judges excerpts, it seems he concludes different. I guess if I beleive in the judge for the Pickett trial, I should have the same faith that this judge looked at this as fair as he could until there is evidence otherwise. At one time sound science said the world was flat and the sun revolved around it. I also agree the chances for catching vCJD is vey miniscule. Who pays??? the guys getting the premium for labeling it certified.

The final thing is that if Canada can keep Japan, then they will still be favoring finished beef. It also takes away some pressure from beef imported from them, and heaven knows that if they can certify beef from Cows as BSE free it will slow the herd buildup.

Been on the fence listening to a lot on this. These are the conclusions I have come up with. Anyone that knows me knows I tend to take awhile to decide and definetely I am not an R-Calf member. i have been supportiv of Canadians and their plight in this, I think this is an avenue to get back on track,

I just think this is the solution for Canada AND the US to get the export markets back. But you're right, how to get them to do it is another story.

Maybe we should have a big cattle drive. Drive 'em all to Washington and Ottawa. THAT would get some attention!
THAT is only good common sense to TEST as Japan's blanket testing of cattle for mad cow disease and Canada's testing will be money ahead for exports and BSE testing COSTS less than REMOVEING SRM"S.BSE test cost around 18 to 23 $Canadian and SRM removeal cost the cattleman 182 $ Canadian and the packers 34$ in extra labor costs.

Latest posts