Cost of BSE in the US

[Tam]

USDA Inspected doesn't mean the meat is any safer either but that lable still gets put on.

Are you just trying to keep the U.S. out of the Japanese market, Tam?

Any way you can, eh?

What the USDA inspected label means is that all the beef met the same USDA standards no matter where it happen to come from. Is that not the important part Econ. THAT ALL BEEF MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE USDA STANDARDS.

And the US is doing a good enough job of keeping themselves out of the Japanese market they don't need any help from me. :wink:

Tell us even if all packers tested for the Japanese market and Japanese believe the OIE when they say that SRM removal is the most critical and valuable central measure for public health protection. Do you think the Japanese would be taking tested beef now after one US packer sent SRM's to them? And if you think they don't believe the OIE SRM rule then why did they stop US imports again in meat that they themselve knows the test doesn't show positives in?

I am going to play your game for a little bit Tam, just to show you how annoying it is to have kindergarteners in a grownup class.

So if the beef is not labled with a sticker from the USDA saying it has been tested for BSE does it mean that the meat is possibly infected with BSE?

Yes Econ you are annoying at times. But you are the only one on here that plays games. To the rest of us it is a serious industry that we make a living at and we don't have time for games like you. So grow up and stick to topics that are relevant to this century.

To answer your question, No it doesn't mean it is infected but why would anyone label it BSE tested if they didn't want people to assume it is somehow safer than generic beef. Which as Creekstone themselves admitted BSE tested does not mean BSE Free, therefore it is not any safer than generic beef that has been handled under the proper rules. In the case of Creekstones BSE TESTED beef is just a market ploy to open the Japanese market. It has nothing to do with food safety as the test will not work on the animals Creekstone would be testing as they are TO YOUNG and even the Japanese with their years of 100% testing knows that. Isn't that why the Japanese were willing to back off the testing of under 20 month old animals?

 

[Econ101]

What the USDA inspected label means is that all the beef met the same USDA standards no matter where it happen to come from. Is that not the important part Econ. THAT ALL BEEF MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE USDA STANDARDS.

And the US is doing a good enough job of keeping themselves out of the Japanese market they don't need any help from me. :wink:

Tell us even if all packers tested for the Japanese market and Japanese believe the OIE when they say that SRM removal is the most critical and valuable central measure for public health protection. Do you think the Japanese would be taking tested beef now after one US packer sent SRM's to them? And if you think they don't believe the OIE SRM rule then why did they stop US imports again in meat that they themselve knows the test doesn't show positives in?

I am going to play your game for a little bit Tam, just to show you how annoying it is to have kindergarteners in a grownup class.

So if the beef is not labled with a sticker from the USDA saying it has been tested for BSE does it mean that the meat is possibly infected with BSE?

Yes Econ you are annoying at times. But you are the only one on here that plays games. To the rest of us it is a serious industry that we make a living at and we don't have time for games like you. So grow up and stick to topics that are relevant to this century.

To answer your question, No it doesn't mean it is infected but why would anyone label it BSE tested if they didn't want people to assume it is somehow safer than generic beef. Which as Creekstone themselves admitted BSE tested does not mean BSE Free, therefore it is not any safer than generic beef that has been handled under the proper rules. In the case of Creekstones BSE TESTED beef is just a market ploy to open the Japanese market. It has nothing to do with food safety as the test will not work on the animals Creekstone would be testing as they are TO YOUNG and even the Japanese with their years of 100% testing knows that. Isn't that why the Japanese were willing to back off the testing of under 20 month old animals?

Since all the testing for BSE in Canada and the U.S. doesn't mean BSE free, does that mean we should just keep the borders closed until we find out? Would you intentionally import BSE beef? bse tester says his test can find and identify bse in cattle that are asymptomatic. Do you know what that means?

The fact is, Tam, that the beef industry in the hands of the NCBA and the Canadian equivalent have not been that good. Beef has lost market share to poultry. You need to change what you are doing or you will get the same ole results. I think you would argue away all potential producer profits for your positions. If Creekstone testing meant that Creekstone or anyone else could sell to foreign markets why would beef leaders stand in the way of good sales? That is not what we need in the beef leadership. You and your enunciated policies have been a miserable failure for producers.

 

[mrj]

Tam-- It was the Japs that were screaming for the tested beef...Test them and sell them what they want of the tested beef- sell the rest as generic here in the US....Nothing says you have to put BSE tested on those tested...USDA didn't label the meat off the 200,000+ they tested at slaughter with a BSE tested label- Did they :???: .....

Reader and flounder should have the opportunity to buy tested if a company is willing to provide it- same as they should have the opportunity to know what country their meat comes from.....

OT, what is the "200,000+ they tested at slaughter" you refer to above?

MRJ

 

[Anonymous]

Tam-- It was the Japs that were screaming for the tested beef...Test them and sell them what they want of the tested beef- sell the rest as generic here in the US....Nothing says you have to put BSE tested on those tested...USDA didn't label the meat off the 200,000+ they tested at slaughter with a BSE tested label- Did they :???: .....

Reader and flounder should have the opportunity to buy tested if a company is willing to provide it- same as they should have the opportunity to know what country their meat comes from.....

OT, what is the "200,000+ they tested at slaughter" you refer to above?

MRJ

USDA claims they've tested over 200,000 cattle in the US (can't remember exact figures), many of which were at slaughter time...None of the beef from these tested cattle was required to be labeled as BSE tested as Tam suggested......

 

[mrj]

I am going to play your game for a little bit Tam, just to show you how annoying it is to have kindergarteners in a grownup class.

So if the beef is not labled with a sticker from the USDA saying it has been tested for BSE does it mean that the meat is possibly infected with BSE?

Yes Econ you are annoying at times. But you are the only one on here that plays games. To the rest of us it is a serious industry that we make a living at and we don't have time for games like you. So grow up and stick to topics that are relevant to this century.

To answer your question, No it doesn't mean it is infected but why would anyone label it BSE tested if they didn't want people to assume it is somehow safer than generic beef. Which as Creekstone themselves admitted BSE tested does not mean BSE Free, therefore it is not any safer than generic beef that has been handled under the proper rules. In the case of Creekstones BSE TESTED beef is just a market ploy to open the Japanese market. It has nothing to do with food safety as the test will not work on the animals Creekstone would be testing as they are TO YOUNG and even the Japanese with their years of 100% testing knows that. Isn't that why the Japanese were willing to back off the testing of under 20 month old animals?

Since all the testing for BSE in Canada and the U.S. doesn't mean BSE free, does that mean we should just keep the borders closed until we find out? Would you intentionally import BSE beef? bse tester says his test can find and identify bse in cattle that are asymptomatic. Do you know what that means?

The fact is, Tam, that the beef industry in the hands of the NCBA and the Canadian equivalent have not been that good. Beef has lost market share to poultry. You need to change what you are doing or you will get the same ole results. I think you would argue away all potential producer profits for your positions. If Creekstone testing meant that Creekstone or anyone else could sell to foreign markets why would beef leaders stand in the way of good sales? That is not what we need in the beef leadership. You and your enunciated policies have been a miserable failure for producers.

Are you truly a Luddite, Econ? Whatever gave you the idea that the beef industry "is in the hands of the NCBA and the Canadian equivalent"?

Those organizations are simply the professional organizations representing cattle producers in each country. NCBA works to make the cattle/beef business better for cattle producers. They have been successful in raising beef demand quite rapidly since 2005 with a combination of contracted Beef Checkoff projets, and efforts of the Membership division and PAC in Washington, DC has also improved our business climate. Of course there are many more projects and activities ongoing to the same ends.

I think it safe to assume the Canadian organization does similar things for their members.

MRJ

 

[bse-tester]

The term that Creekstone allegedly uses says: "BSE Tested doesn't mean BSE Free." Can someone post the statement that shows that Creekstone actually stated that???

Also, perhaps someone can tell me what kind of test they would be using if they could not absolutely garantee that the tested animal and its meat and meat products were absolutely free of PrPsc????

Surely, if they are going to test their animals at or prior to slaughter, they would have to have a test that could actually determine whether or not the animals tested were free of PrPsc at the time of going to the kill floor. If all they are doing is running the smoke and mirror game and lying to the consumers, then why bother even testing, simply go out and buy a sticker that says something like "BSE free - MAYBE!!!"

This whole idea of BSE Tested should tell the consumer that the product is 100% totally free of PRPsc and nothing else is acceptable.

 

[Tam]

I am going to play your game for a little bit Tam, just to show you how annoying it is to have kindergarteners in a grownup class.

So if the beef is not labled with a sticker from the USDA saying it has been tested for BSE does it mean that the meat is possibly infected with BSE?

Yes Econ you are annoying at times. But you are the only one on here that plays games. To the rest of us it is a serious industry that we make a living at and we don't have time for games like you. So grow up and stick to topics that are relevant to this century.

To answer your question, No it doesn't mean it is infected but why would anyone label it BSE tested if they didn't want people to assume it is somehow safer than generic beef. Which as Creekstone themselves admitted BSE tested does not mean BSE Free, therefore it is not any safer than generic beef that has been handled under the proper rules. In the case of Creekstones BSE TESTED beef is just a market ploy to open the Japanese market. It has nothing to do with food safety as the test will not work on the animals Creekstone would be testing as they are TO YOUNG and even the Japanese with their years of 100% testing knows that. Isn't that why the Japanese were willing to back off the testing of under 20 month old animals?

Since all the testing for BSE in Canada and the U.S. doesn't mean BSE free, does that mean we should just keep the borders closed until we find out? Would you intentionally import BSE beef? bse tester says his test can find and identify bse in cattle that are asymptomatic. Do you know what that means?

The fact is, Tam, that the beef industry in the hands of the NCBA and the Canadian equivalent have not been that good. Beef has lost market share to poultry. You need to change what you are doing or you will get the same ole results. I think you would argue away all potential producer profits for your positions. If Creekstone testing meant that Creekstone or anyone else could sell to foreign markets why would beef leaders stand in the way of good sales? That is not what we need in the beef leadership. You and your enunciated policies have been a miserable failure for producers.

Since all the testing for BSE in Canada and the U.S. doesn't mean BSE free, does that mean we should just keep the borders closed until we find out? Would you intentionally import BSE beef?

I don't know what you know about the BSE testing but if the test is done in Canada the animal is a 4D which means that it is D as in DISEASED which means it was condemned and not allowed into the food chain or it was D as in DYING which mean it wasn't allowed into the food chain or it was D as in found On A farm DEAD which again means it wasn't allowed in the food chain and last but certainly not least it was D as in a DOWNER which in Canada is not allowed into the food Chain. The testing is not for Food Safety it is for survellance to see if our safeguards are working to prevent an epidemic like the UK had. We test the 4D cattle as they are the ones that are the most likely to show positive if any are going to show. I would say by the few cases we have found our safeguards did work. We have other safe guards to protect the consumers that have been recommended by the people that make the guidelines that all countries use to make they import/export rules, INCLUDING THE US. and those are age limits and SRM removal if you had read the OIE reports to the USDA you would have known that now wouldn't you have?

bse tester says his test can find and identify bse in cattle that are asymptomatic. Do you know what that means?

Econ what does it mean if there isn't a country that has validated his test? Nothing. I hope Testing for BSE, does improve but I'm not the one that has to be convinced his test works The Authorities of all those countries that test for BSE have to be convinced.

Beef has lost market share to poultry. You need to change what you are doing or you will get the same ole results.

That is why we need to PROMOTE BEEF IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE INCLUDING FAIR AND CONVENTION BOOTHS. Do you think the smell of your bar-b-que is reaching New York City Residence? Check off money is meant to promote BEEF but you bitch because you see it as free advertizing for packers. Have you ever seen the name of a PACKER on Check off advertizing. if not how could it be advertizing for the packers.

If Creekstone testing meant that Creekstone or anyone else could sell to foreign markets why would beef leaders stand in the way of good sales?

So you think a good sale is one that is based on misinformation. Can you deny that Creekstone was going to do the testing, that they knew proved nothing , because of the perception that it would somehow be safer than untested beef? Fraud is Fraud unless you support it then is a good sale.

That is not what we need in the beef leadership.

Whos we Econ we all doubt you actually belong so don't you mean you need in beef leadership. And I would rather have the leadership we have as at least they care about the truth and understand that blaming the packers for everything is not a way to have a working relationship.

You and your enunciated policies have been a miserable failure for producers.

OH do you mean the policy of backing what we say with truth and honesty so we have CREDIBILITY WITH OUR TRADING PARTNERS Or maybe the policy of being leaders in the industry by supporting an ID system that saved the Canadian beef industry weeks in their search for all cattle involved with BSE found within our borders, which held our consumer confidence like no other country affected by BSE. Or the policy of being leaders in the industry that were some of the first producers to age verifiy their cattle so the Japanese have a document to prove age not a look at the tenderness of a cut of meat. or the policy of turning over the recommended cattle for testing so we can really judge if our safeguards are working. Or the policy of looking at the industry to see what can be done to further protect our consumers like added firewalls and stronger feed bans Or is it the policy of complying to the rules so we don't risk our consumers trust. Do you mean those policies. Those kinds of policies that have put the US industry years behind and having to play catch up.

Can you tell us just what R-CALFs policies have done for the US system. OH yea you don't know what their policies are do you, well let me fill you in. Their policy is to lie and discredit and BLAME anyone that they see as their competition. They will even turn to the enemy for support if they think it will farther their cause. When they say something one day they have no problem with changing the story the next to fit their agenda. They support programs that prove nothing, they take people to court and waste producer dollars on lost lawsuits. So is that the kind of leadership you want. One that lies and makes false accusations and waste time and money to prove nothing. Oh I forgot I was talking to a person that mays a career at that knid of crap so I guess you would. There could be a problem with that kind of leadership Econ and that is CREDIBILITY IN THE EYES OF YOUR TRADING PARTNERS. So I will take our policies and the kind of people that support those policies over yours. Credibility beats deception anyday of the week. :wink:

 

[Tam]

Tam-- It was the Japs that were screaming for the tested beef...Test them and sell them what they want of the tested beef- sell the rest as generic here in the US....Nothing says you have to put BSE tested on those tested...USDA didn't label the meat off the 200,000+ they tested at slaughter with a BSE tested label- Did they :???: .....

Reader and flounder should have the opportunity to buy tested if a company is willing to provide it- same as they should have the opportunity to know what country their meat comes from.....

OT, what is the "200,000+ they tested at slaughter" you refer to above?

MRJ

USDA claims they've tested over 200,000 cattle in the US (can't remember exact figures), many of which were at slaughter time...None of the beef from these tested cattle was required to be labeled as BSE tested as Tam suggested......

According to the rules the USDA was to be testing 4D cattle just like the Canada. none of the ones we tested were at slaughter they were condemned cattle that would have never been in the food chain so I would love to know why yours would have been labeled anything other any condemned. :shock:

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, what leads you to believe the Japanese don't know what BSE testing will and won't find out? Your whole rant is based on the assumption that they don't know what they will be getting.

 

[Sandhusker]

Another question for you, Tam; Do you think organic beef is safer or better than "regular" beef?

 

[Tam]

Tam-- It was the Japs that were screaming for the tested beef...Test them and sell them what they want of the tested beef- sell the rest as generic here in the US....Nothing says you have to put BSE tested on those tested...USDA didn't label the meat off the 200,000+ they tested at slaughter with a BSE tested label- Did they :???: .....

Reader and flounder should have the opportunity to buy tested if a company is willing to provide it- same as they should have the opportunity to know what country their meat comes from.....

I buy meat marked "kosher" or "organic" and pay more to boot. I bet there are plenty of people who would buy BSE tested as well. Of course I personally would want to know more about the testing program and the sensitivity of the tests.

Yes because you would know to ask but the average consumer that will be paying extra for that label will not know. They will be assuming the beef is safer because it is tested. That is the fraud I'm talking about.

 

[Tam]

The term that Creekstone allegedly uses says: "BSE Tested doesn't mean BSE Free." Can someone post the statement that shows that Creekstone actually stated that???

Also, perhaps someone can tell me what kind of test they would be using if they could not absolutely garantee that the tested animal and its meat and meat products were absolutely free of PrPsc????

Surely, if they are going to test their animals at or prior to slaughter, they would have to have a test that could actually determine whether or not the animals tested were free of PrPsc at the time of going to the kill floor. If all they are doing is running the smoke and mirror game and lying to the consumers, then why bother even testing, simply go out and buy a sticker that says something like "BSE free - MAYBE!!!"

This whole idea of BSE Tested should tell the consumer that the product is 100% totally free of PRPsc and nothing else is acceptable.

I totally agree with you on this BSE Tester If Creekstone was going to use a USDA approved test in their lab then it would not work on the young animals that they wanted to test and history has proved that. So all it was just a smoke and mirror act to get themselves back into a market that they saw as their foot hold to success. What I don't understand is some claim the packers have lied and cheated to get where they are but they support Creekstone in their bid to deceive the consumer to gain market power.

 

[Anonymous]

Tam- You better go over there and tell those Japanese consumers that they shouldn't eat tested meat because it doesn't work- and tell them that those under 30 month positives they found really weren't positive.. :lol:

Better take some NCBA members along-- They always like to "go educate them thar ignorant folk to our way of thinking"....... :lol:

Yep Tam- You and SH go educate the Japs about BSE...I wonder why they have one of only 3 OIE recognized BSE consultant labs... :???: :lol: :lol:

 

[Econ101]

Yes Econ you are annoying at times. But you are the only one on here that plays games. To the rest of us it is a serious industry that we make a living at and we don't have time for games like you. So grow up and stick to topics that are relevant to this century.

To answer your question, No it doesn't mean it is infected but why would anyone label it BSE tested if they didn't want people to assume it is somehow safer than generic beef. Which as Creekstone themselves admitted BSE tested does not mean BSE Free, therefore it is not any safer than generic beef that has been handled under the proper rules. In the case of Creekstones BSE TESTED beef is just a market ploy to open the Japanese market. It has nothing to do with food safety as the test will not work on the animals Creekstone would be testing as they are TO YOUNG and even the Japanese with their years of 100% testing knows that. Isn't that why the Japanese were willing to back off the testing of under 20 month old animals?

Since all the testing for BSE in Canada and the U.S. doesn't mean BSE free, does that mean we should just keep the borders closed until we find out? Would you intentionally import BSE beef? bse tester says his test can find and identify bse in cattle that are asymptomatic. Do you know what that means?

The fact is, Tam, that the beef industry in the hands of the NCBA and the Canadian equivalent have not been that good. Beef has lost market share to poultry. You need to change what you are doing or you will get the same ole results. I think you would argue away all potential producer profits for your positions. If Creekstone testing meant that Creekstone or anyone else could sell to foreign markets why would beef leaders stand in the way of good sales? That is not what we need in the beef leadership. You and your enunciated policies have been a miserable failure for producers.

Since all the testing for BSE in Canada and the U.S. doesn't mean BSE free, does that mean we should just keep the borders closed until we find out? Would you intentionally import BSE beef?

I don't know what you know about the BSE testing but if the test is done in Canada the animal is a 4D which means that it is D as in DISEASED which means it was condemned and not allowed into the food chain or it was D as in DYING which mean it wasn't allowed into the food chain or it was D as in found On A farm DEAD which again means it wasn't allowed in the food chain and last but certainly not least it was D as in a DOWNER which in Canada is not allowed into the food Chain. The testing is not for Food Safety it is for survellance to see if our safeguards are working to prevent an epidemic like the UK had. We test the 4D cattle as they are the ones that are the most likely to show positive if any are going to show. I would say by the few cases we have found our safeguards did work. We have other safe guards to protect the consumers that have been recommended by the people that make the guidelines that all countries use to make they import/export rules, INCLUDING THE US. and those are age limits and SRM removal if you had read the OIE reports to the USDA you would have known that now wouldn't you have?

Econ: So are you saying that Canadian beef is not safe?

bse tester says his test can find and identify bse in cattle that are asymptomatic. Do you know what that means?

Econ what does it mean if there isn't a country that has validated his test? Nothing. I hope Testing for BSE, does improve but I'm not the one that has to be convinced his test works The Authorities of all those countries that test for BSE have to be convinced.

Econ: What have you done to help the technology along? Have you asked your cattle association to help solve the BSE mess by having tests like bse tester's test tested or have you just sat back and griped about everything?

Beef has lost market share to poultry. You need to change what you are doing or you will get the same ole results.

That is why we need to PROMOTE BEEF IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE INCLUDING FAIR AND CONVENTION BOOTHS. Do you think the smell of your bar-b-que is reaching New York City Residence? Check off money is meant to promote BEEF but you bitch because you see it as free advertizing for packers. Have you ever seen the name of a PACKER on Check off advertizing. if not how could it be advertizing for the packers.

Econ: So do you think the people in NY city saw your booth? When I see car commercials they sometimes do not have the name of the car on the commercial. Does that mean that they were advertising flying squirrels?

If Creekstone testing meant that Creekstone or anyone else could sell to foreign markets why would beef leaders stand in the way of good sales?

So you think a good sale is one that is based on misinformation. Can you deny that Creekstone was going to do the testing, that they knew proved nothing , because of the perception that it would somehow be safer than untested beef? Fraud is Fraud unless you support it then is a good sale.

Econ: I think you should not be in the beef selling side, Tam. It looks like you are intent on not doing what the customer wants and you will be like the USDA and let the Aussies beat you out. Maybe you could get a packer rubber stamp job. I think you would be good at that.

That is not what we need in the beef leadership.

Whos we Econ we all doubt you actually belong so don't you mean you need in beef leadership. And I would rather have the leadership we have as at least they care about the truth and understand that blaming the packers for everything is not a way to have a working relationship.

Econ: Like the OIG report shows is the case? :lol: :lol:

You and your enunciated policies have been a miserable failure for producers.

OH do you mean the policy of backing what we say with truth and honesty so we have CREDIBILITY WITH OUR TRADING PARTNERS Or maybe the policy of being leaders in the industry by supporting an ID system that saved the Canadian beef industry weeks in their search for all cattle involved with BSE found within our borders, which held our consumer confidence like no other country affected by BSE. Or the policy of being leaders in the industry that were some of the first producers to age verifiy their cattle so the Japanese have a document to prove age not a look at the tenderness of a cut of meat. or the policy of turning over the recommended cattle for testing so we can really judge if our safeguards are working. Or the policy of looking at the industry to see what can be done to further protect our consumers like added firewalls and stronger feed bans Or is it the policy of complying to the rules so we don't risk our consumers trust. Do you mean those policies. Those kinds of policies that have put the US industry years behind and having to play catch up.

Econ: I am not running for the SSGA or whatever group you have, Tam. It seems their standards and yours match much better. You just admitted your beef isn't BSE safe. That instills a lot of confidence!!! :roll: :roll:

Can you tell us just what R-CALFs policies have done for the US system. OH yea you don't know what their policies are do you, well let me fill you in. Their policy is to lie and discredit and BLAME anyone that they see as their competition. They will even turn to the enemy for support if they think it will farther their cause. When they say something one day they have no problem with changing the story the next to fit their agenda. They support programs that prove nothing, they take people to court and waste producer dollars on lost lawsuits.

Econ: Was any of it your dollars? You waste taxpayer money on subsidies for Tyson so they can fight these court cases.

So is that the kind of leadership you want. One that lies and makes false accusations and waste time and money to prove nothing. Oh I forgot I was talking to a person that mays a career at that knid of crap so I guess you would.

Econ: If I wanted that I would have been in the Alberta govt. packer accountability audit.

There could be a problem with that kind of leadership Econ and that is CREDIBILITY IN THE EYES OF YOUR TRADING PARTNERS. So I will take our policies and the kind of people that support those policies over yours. Credibility beats deception anyday of the week. :wink:

Econ: You have already lost it, Tam, but don't feel bad, so has the USDA.

Tam, I know that not all Canadians are like you. I have found most of them to be real nice folks. I would never get them confused with someone like you. You do a disservice to them and to the producers. Your hate for rcalf has given you packer blindness. I am sorry you have to ship your cattle further to get them slaughtered. Maybe if those involved in the cattle industry in Canada would have taken some of the above suggestions the border would not have been closed and all your credibilty on the same plane as the USDA/NCBA.

 

[cattletrader]

All this BSE is just a bunch of bull ****.....i wish we could just all move on........if its in canada its definatley here.

 

[Tam]

Tam, what leads you to believe the Japanese don't know what BSE testing will and won't find out? Your whole rant is based on the assumption that they don't know what they will be getting.

The Japanese government according to what I understand had to start 100% testing to keep consumer confidence in Japanese beef when they first found BSE. They have lived with that testing protocol for years because that is what they had to do to keep consumer confidence, even though the government knew the test proved nothing in young animals. Why did the Japanese consumers fight the changes to their protocol if they knew the testing was a waste of money on younger animals? They did the testing because their consumer felt tested beef was safer. And Creekstone is betting everything on that belief or they wouldn't be pushing to test for a country that just changed their testing protocols.

And No to your second question. IF BSE is the results of the enviroment or metal contamination or just spontaniously happens then what is stopping an organic raised animal from getting it. I never once said I only believe in the feed transmission theory. I have said that the fact the when we stopped feeding MBM there was evidence that proved to me at least that the feed was a way of spreading it but where did the first case come from that was in the first feed. It had to have come from somewhere.

 

[Tam]

Tam- You better go over there and tell those Japanese consumers that they shouldn't eat tested meat because it doesn't work- and tell them that those under 30 month positives they found really weren't positive.. :lol:

Better take some NCBA members along-- They always like to "go educate them thar ignorant folk to our way of thinking"....... :lol:

Yep Tam- You and SH go educate the Japs about BSE...I wonder why they have one of only 3 OIE recognized BSE consultant labs... :???: :lol: :lol:

And I wonder why they changed their BSE testing protocol to exclude young animals. Yes, the Japanese government will have to educate their consumers to the new testing but educating them is better than playing to their fears by testing animals that they know will show nothing. It is like BSE tester said if the test they use aren't showing anything then it is a smoke and mirror game being played on the consumers.

 

[Anonymous]

Tam- You better go over there and tell those Japanese consumers that they shouldn't eat tested meat because it doesn't work- and tell them that those under 30 month positives they found really weren't positive.. :lol:

Better take some NCBA members along-- They always like to "go educate them thar ignorant folk to our way of thinking"....... :lol:

Yep Tam- You and SH go educate the Japs about BSE...I wonder why they have one of only 3 OIE recognized BSE consultant labs... :???: :lol: :lol:

And I wonder why they changed their BSE testing protocol to exclude young animals. Yes, the Japanese government will have to educate their consumers to the new testing but educating them is better than playing to their fears by testing animals that they know will show nothing. It is like BSE tester said if the test they use aren't showing anything then it is a smoke and mirror game being played on the consumers.

Actually Tam Did they change their testing protocol? The government dropped the requirement on under 20 month old- but they are still testing because the consumers want it...Much like how the Japanese consumer wanted the US beef tested.....

Whats better--Test for them and keep them being happy beef consumers- or not test and have them stop eating beef....

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, what leads you to believe the Japanese don't know what BSE testing will and won't find out? Your whole rant is based on the assumption that they don't know what they will be getting.

The Japanese government according to what I understand had to start 100% testing to keep consumer confidence in Japanese beef when they first found BSE. They have lived with that testing protocol for years because that is what they had to do to keep consumer confidence, even though the government knew the test proved nothing in young animals. Why did the Japanese consumers fight the changes to their protocol if they knew the testing was a waste of money on younger animals? They did the testing because their consumer felt tested beef was safer. And Creekstone is betting everything on that belief or they wouldn't be pushing to test for a country that just changed their testing protocols.

And No to your second question. IF BSE is the results of the enviroment or metal contamination or just spontaniously happens then what is stopping an organic raised animal from getting it. I never once said I only believe in the feed transmission theory. I have said that the fact the when we stopped feeding MBM there was evidence that proved to me at least that the feed was a way of spreading it but where did the first case come from that was in the first feed. It had to have come from somewhere.[/quote


Tam, you never answered either question. It's obvious they feel more comfortable with tested beef, but the question was about what they know and don't know. My second question had nothing to do with BSE - read it again.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Tam-- It was the Japs that were screaming for the tested beef...Test them and sell them what they want of the tested beef- sell the rest as generic here in the US....Nothing says you have to put BSE tested on those tested...USDA didn't label the meat off the 200,000+ they tested at slaughter with a BSE tested label- Did they :???: .....

Reader and flounder should have the opportunity to buy tested if a company is willing to provide it- same as they should have the opportunity to know what country their meat comes from.....

I buy meat marked "kosher" or "organic" and pay more to boot. I bet there are plenty of people who would buy BSE tested as well. Of course I personally would want to know more about the testing program and the sensitivity of the tests.

Reader do you know how they kill a Kosher animal? or how they determine which animals are to be kosher?
They don't like animals with horns cause the rabbi doesn't want to get hurt when he is cuttig the steers thoat while alive and it is strung up by the hind legs to bleed out. Then he does some fancy writing on the Tongue and then you got kosher meat. At least with regular beef they stun the cattle first. Fine buy organic . It should cost more because they generally have a high production cost. I won't argue the "Safety" factor because the is Preceived by the consumer and as long as they are happy and are eating beef that is good for the industry.