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

Damn shame,with all the hungry people in the world

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
reader (the Second) said:
My belief is that there is far more incentivization and cooperation in Canada in terms of acknowledging downers and having them tested. At great price to the industry there and to individuals too.

I don't believe that the USDA or ANY of the industry -- that includes NCBA and R-CALF - have pushed for the broad testing of downers that should be being done.

So, yes, you have a good point.

reader-- Remember tho in Socialized Canada the Canadian producer gets paid to have the Vet come test--Vet gets paid- producer gets paid...I think some provinces pay as much as $250 per head to test what down here is worth just coyote food...

It isn't just out of the goodness of their hearts or doing whats right by a long shot---Government had to pay them to get them to comply :???: ........

It always comes down to the money doesn't it Oldtimer we aren't going to test because the USDA isn't paying us to test like the CFIA is the Canadian Producers. We aren't going to ID because we don't want to be burdened with the cost like the Canadian Producers are. But when the Packers say that your M"COOL will cost big bucks with little to no added beneifit to the indusrty as you have no way of assuring the label they are to do at anyway just because you say to as it MIGHT put a buck in your pocket right OLDTIMER.
Yes Canadian Producers get a payment to cover the lose of the cow if she is tested but then the rest of our herds are not at record high prices are they? If the US producers really cared about whether you have BSE or not you would give over your animals to prove you don't. After all the price you get for the rest of your cattle should more than cover the lose of one or two diers. And if the US producer cared about their herd health they would bite the bullet and put a NATIONAL M"ID" system in place so you can trace back to birth place like the Canadian INDUSTRY DID By the way Oldtimer the producers in Sask only get $75 not $250. so does that make us less likely to turn over our cattle? We made our testing quota and more. How about you Oldtimer did you turn any of your high price diers over for testing? As far as the incentive to test, the best incentive to test is to PROVE R-CALF WRONG and that we don't have the chronic huge life risking BSE problem that they think we do. :wink:

Tam, you sound like a National M ID salesperson. I'm still not sold.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
reader (the Second) said:
My belief is that there is far more incentivization and cooperation in Canada in terms of acknowledging downers and having them tested. At great price to the industry there and to individuals too.

I don't believe that the USDA or ANY of the industry -- that includes NCBA and R-CALF - have pushed for the broad testing of downers that should be being done.

So, yes, you have a good point.

reader-- Remember tho in Socialized Canada the Canadian producer gets paid to have the Vet come test--Vet gets paid- producer gets paid...I think some provinces pay as much as $250 per head to test what down here is worth just coyote food...

It isn't just out of the goodness of their hearts or doing whats right by a long shot---Government had to pay them to get them to comply :???: ........

It always comes down to the money doesn't it Oldtimer we aren't going to test because the USDA isn't paying us to test like the CFIA is the Canadian Producers. We aren't going to ID because we don't want to be burdened with the cost like the Canadian Producers are. But when the Packers say that your M"COOL will cost big bucks with little to no added beneifit to the indusrty as you have no way of assuring the label they are to do at anyway just because you say to as it MIGHT put a buck in your pocket right OLDTIMER.
Yes Canadian Producers get a payment to cover the lose of the cow if she is tested but then the rest of our herds are not at record high prices are they? If the US producers really cared about whether you have BSE or not you would give over your animals to prove you don't. After all the price you get for the rest of your cattle should more than cover the lose of one or two diers. And if the US producer cared about their herd health they would bite the bullet and put a NATIONAL M"ID" system in place so you can trace back to birth place like the Canadian INDUSTRY DID By the way Oldtimer the producers in Sask only get $75 not $250. so does that make us less likely to turn over our cattle? We made our testing quota and more. How about you Oldtimer did you turn any of your high price diers over for testing? As far as the incentive to test, the best incentive to test is to PROVE R-CALF WRONG and that we don't have the chronic huge life risking BSE problem that they think we do. :wink:

Excuse me for asking a dumb question Miss Tam,but is there another reason you want "OTMs"in the USA,besides money ?...............good luck
 

TimH

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,421
Reaction score
0
Location
Southwest Manitoba
Sandhusker said:
TimH said:
Sandhusker said:
Tim, "I'm ignoring reality??? The US border slammed shut to CDN beef after 1(one) native case. R-calf was instrumental in keeping it shut. That is the reality. The USA has had 1(one) native case. Also reality. One native case is obviously enough for a country to lose it's BSE free status. Reality."

I agree. But didn't you just claim that number of cases was a lame arguement? One is a number.

Tim, "If you don't want to answer my question Sandhusker, why not just say so? No need to start babbling about horse races and insurance companies."

I have no problems answering your questions, Tim. I'm just giving real examples to show that number of cases does matter. Number of cases are used to compute odds, which policy is based on.

One more time then, Sandhusker,exactly what is the difference in BSE risk between a package of beef labeled "Product of USA" and one labeled "Product of Canada"??
Weasel out of answering again ,if you must. I won't waste any more effort asking a third time. :)

Right now, the difference is the odds of that package of beef being BSE positive. They are much greater the package labeled "product of Canada" will have BSE. It's not my opinion, it's math, and you can't fart on math.

Figure it out yourself. If you were playing a game of chance where you were rewarded with a $100 bill for blindly pulling a black marble from a jar, would you pick from the jar that had 5 black marbles mixed with 50 white, or would you pick from the jar that had 2 blacks mixed with 200 white?

So using your math then Sandhusker, would the BSE risk, in a package of USA beef, currently have the same risk that a package of CDN beef had when Canada had only 1 native case??
Remember you agreed, above, that a single native case of BSE is enough for a country to lose it's BSE free status.
BTW, How can you argue , with a straight face, about the number of DETECTED cases in each country being a risk indicator , and at the same time, point your finger at the USDA for bungling their investigations and what ever else they may or may not have done wrong?? How many more cases might the US have if USDA had done things your way?? :shock:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Tim, "So using your math then Sandhusker, would the BSE risk, in a package of USA beef, currently have the same risk that a package of CDN beef had when Canada had only 1 native case??
Remember you agreed, above, that a single native case of BSE is enough for a country to lose it's BSE free status.
BTW, How can you argue , with a straight face, about the number of DETECTED cases in each country being a risk indicator , and at the same time, point your finger at the USDA for bungling their investigations and what ever else they may or may not have done wrong?? How many more cases might the US have if USDA had done things your way??
"

Using MY math? There is only one math, Tim. No matter which country, continent, etc.... one is the same as one. What's with all these questions? I feel like I'm hanging out with a first grader here.

I don't know how many more cases would of been found, if any, had the USDA not decided to emulate a Three Stooges movie. Any guess by anybody is only speculation.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
R2, "The cost of 2 years of increased testing would not touch the cost of all the lost business."

AMEN! Yet, the meter is still running. Unbelievable. :mad:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
Tam- R-CALF is a cattle industry organization--AMI, NCBA, NMPA are the beef industry organizations....R-CALF represents cattlemen- these others represent Packers.....
Oldtimer if R-CALF, "the Cattle Organization" keeps spouting damaging lies about the beef industry because of their hate for packers, Beef demand will fall then who will you sell your "cattle" to? You are a complete idiot if you think the "cattle Industry" can survive without the beef industry. When R-CALF goes after the beef industry with lies they are destroying the market to which YOU SELL YOUR CATTLE. :roll:

Well Tam- If telling people the truth about fraudulent sales of imported beef, purposely mislabeling for financial gain, inept bureaucracy, outright coverups in both the industry and govt., and safety decisions made based not on science but based on economic gain for the Multinationals offends you, then I guess you and I will never agree...I believe in being open and honest...

You worried there won't be a US beef industry to shirttail on again Tam :???: :lol: :lol: I know it isn't because you worry about your ex-country or countrymen that you seemingly curse daily :wink: ....

TIME FOR BED OLDTIMER you are reverting to the loyality to your excountrymen excape again.
But until you do go to bed let us look at the truth Oldtimer You claim the USDA INSPECTED label is fraudulent but the stamp doesn't say US Beef it says USDA INSPECTED. Meaning it was inspected and passed the same standards that the domestic beef has to pass. The only thing that makes it fraudulent to you is you are assuming the consumers see that as US BEEF not USDA INSPECTED. Now let us look at the BSE TESTED label that would have been appearing if Creekstone, with the full support of R-CALF, would have been allowed to test the under thirty month old cattle they slaughter. Does it mean anything other than the beef was tested NO even Creekstone admits to that. As the test done on UTM cattle RARELY results in a positive. The test that the US uses has been show not to find positives in OTM cattle either. :wink: But if consumers is not smart enough to realize the USDA inspected label doesn't mean US BEEF, will they be smart enough to realize the BSE tested label does not mean BSE FREE. :???: And don't tell me that label would not be appearing on any beef that wasn't shipped to Japan as if Creekstone tests, they are going to use it as a market ploy in every market they have if they think the consumers will buy their beef with the assumed meaning of the label. Gee who's financial gain with fraudulent labeling was R-CALF backing there Oldtimer. And the M"COOL" label will be labeling US beef by DEFAULT as R-CALF's plan was design to, not labeling it because the packer knows it came from the US producers because he has a system that proves where it came from. Is that not also perpetrating a fraud on the US consumers if they ASSUME the packers can trace that beef back to the US PRODUCER where the animal was actually BORN like we are expected to do if we want to export our beef into the US Market.? Fraud is defined by the eyes looking at the issue. I call the BSE tested label and the M"COOL" US BEEF labels both frauds supported by R-CALF and you see a label that says USDA INSPECTED a fraud :roll:
...I believe in being open and honest...
By supporting a law that labels beef by DEFAULT not because of proof. :roll:
And if you believe in the TRUTH then what are you doing paying you dues to a bunch of liars. Just to refresh your memory of R-CALF's honesty.
“We test annually over 150,000 more cattle than Canada tests.”
do we need to go over the numbers again Oldtimer?
"we know Canada is still processing downer animals, the United States does not process downers”.
Do we need to review where the Washington cow was and where the Texas cow was taken and found dead on the truck? and where all the Canadian BSE postive cows were found in CANADA
Canada has a chronic problem with their Meat and Bone Meal (MBM) feed ban and that it is ineffective.
Gee do we need review the records of compliance?
Canada’s feed ban is not adequately enforced.
would you like to look at the Canadian records like the NCBA and the USDA did Oldtimer. I have looked at the GAO report on your enforcement Gee. GOOD JOB there.
News reports originating in Canada indicated that as much as 70% of cattle feed samples tested contained unauthorized animal parts, suggesting that Canada has not adequately enforced its feed bans”.
Gee no mention of the imported samples Oldtimer and where they came from or what those "unauthorized animal parts" were. That just might have changed the tone of the message that Leo was trying to imply from "OH MY GOD we can't trust the Canadian to do anything right" to "SO WHAT We better find out what we exported to them and do something about it so we aren't putting our herd at risk while we are putting theirs at risk from US FEED".
importing UTM (under thirty month) cattle and meat from OTM (over thirty month) cattle would put the U.S. feed system in danger.
what happen to the World Highest Standards and the great compliance to the Best MBM feed ban? and What known risk is there from UNDER THIRTY MONTH OLD ANIMALS AND MEAT?
if the U.S. imports the UTM cattle from Canada to be processed in the U.S. plants, the U.S. consumers would be put in danger.
Just how much risk is there in UTM cattle oldtimer and are the US producers still selling meat from UTM AND OTM cattle now that you HAVE BSE?
Our high health and safety standards are needed to protect consumers, the beef industry, and U.S. jobs
What jobs Oldtimer it sure wasn't the jobs lost in the meat packing industry or the feed lots that couldn't access enough cattle to keep all their workers busy and had to down size.
Under no circumstances should the United States accept any cattle, beef or beef products, from countries that do not maintain identical or more stringent safeguard measures that is presently required or presently proposed in the United States which measures have been enforced for at least as long as the United States.
Gee if we didn't have more stringent safeguards why are R-CALFers including YOU insisting you have the right to have the same safeguards as Canada if you are going to import our cattle?
"If there is a positive case again in the U.S., we as a beef producing nation shouldn't market beef in cattle older that 20 months".
Gee where is Dennis now and why hasn't he demanded the US cattlemen stop selling cattle over the age of 20 months as they may wind up in a slaughter plant being sold as US BEEF
“we know if we are going to keep consumer confidence we are going to maintain some of the highest standards in the world to make sure that BSE is not introduced into this country. And we are going to make sure we have the best meat and bone meal ban in this country in place. So if for some reason we did find a case we can stand and look our consumers right in the eye and say, don’t worry we have had these firewalls in place for years, the only country prior to having a case of BSE to have these firewalls in place for so many years. And we did it to make sure if a case was ever found it was a non-issue.
You all know what I think of this gem from Leo and not one of you can explain to us how firewalls that can protect the US consumers from US BSE can't protect from imported CAN YOU?
"R-CALF USA [has] never argued that there was a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada."
WORD GAMES great risk verses Tainted and unsafe for human consumption, which lead Cebull to believe and included in his, word for word from R-CALFs statements, ruling "PRESENTS A GENUINE RISK OF DEATH" . but they never said there was a Great Risk. :roll:
If that is the kind of honesty you pay for, honesty doesn't mean much to you. . Unlike you I believe admitting the industry has a problem and doing everything we can to assure our consumers we are taking it serious so we can protect them is being honest. Be it doing the recommended testing, IDing our cattle, upgradeing feed ban and firewalls. We have to do what ever it takes to make sure our consumer know we CARE. Blaming others for the faults we could and should be handling as an industry is not honest. I ask you and your honesty Oldtimer if the R_CALF fight is with the USDA why all the LIES about the Canadian beef industry?OPEN AND HONEST NOW OLDTIMER.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
HAY MAKER said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
reader-- Remember tho in Socialized Canada the Canadian producer gets paid to have the Vet come test--Vet gets paid- producer gets paid...I think some provinces pay as much as $250 per head to test what down here is worth just coyote food...

It isn't just out of the goodness of their hearts or doing whats right by a long shot---Government had to pay them to get them to comply :???: ........

It always comes down to the money doesn't it Oldtimer we aren't going to test because the USDA isn't paying us to test like the CFIA is the Canadian Producers. We aren't going to ID because we don't want to be burdened with the cost like the Canadian Producers are. But when the Packers say that your M"COOL will cost big bucks with little to no added beneifit to the indusrty as you have no way of assuring the label they are to do at anyway just because you say to as it MIGHT put a buck in your pocket right OLDTIMER.
Yes Canadian Producers get a payment to cover the lose of the cow if she is tested but then the rest of our herds are not at record high prices are they? If the US producers really cared about whether you have BSE or not you would give over your animals to prove you don't. After all the price you get for the rest of your cattle should more than cover the lose of one or two diers. And if the US producer cared about their herd health they would bite the bullet and put a NATIONAL M"ID" system in place so you can trace back to birth place like the Canadian INDUSTRY DID By the way Oldtimer the producers in Sask only get $75 not $250. so does that make us less likely to turn over our cattle? We made our testing quota and more. How about you Oldtimer did you turn any of your high price diers over for testing? As far as the incentive to test, the best incentive to test is to PROVE R-CALF WRONG and that we don't have the chronic huge life risking BSE problem that they think we do. :wink:

Excuse me for asking a dumb question Miss Tam,but is there another reason you want "OTMs"in the USA,besides money ?...............good luck
When you can prove that the only reason R-CALF wants them kept out is not because of money we'll talk Haymaker. :wink:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Tam, "When you can prove that the only reason R-CALF wants them kept out is not because of money we'll talk Haymaker."

Of course it's about money, Tam. Producers would like to be able to stay in business and make a living. Any threat to that has to be addressed if you're serious about your future.

Money is the only reason you want Canadian beef/cattle down here. Why not be honest? I find it interesting that a few Canadians on this board hammer R-CALF on economic reasons, when that is exactly why they want to sell down here. The common term would be hypocracy.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Tam said:
HAY MAKER said:
Tam said:
It always comes down to the money doesn't it Oldtimer we aren't going to test because the USDA isn't paying us to test like the CFIA is the Canadian Producers. We aren't going to ID because we don't want to be burdened with the cost like the Canadian Producers are. But when the Packers say that your M"COOL will cost big bucks with little to no added beneifit to the indusrty as you have no way of assuring the label they are to do at anyway just because you say to as it MIGHT put a buck in your pocket right OLDTIMER.
Yes Canadian Producers get a payment to cover the lose of the cow if she is tested but then the rest of our herds are not at record high prices are they? If the US producers really cared about whether you have BSE or not you would give over your animals to prove you don't. After all the price you get for the rest of your cattle should more than cover the lose of one or two diers. And if the US producer cared about their herd health they would bite the bullet and put a NATIONAL M"ID" system in place so you can trace back to birth place like the Canadian INDUSTRY DID By the way Oldtimer the producers in Sask only get $75 not $250. so does that make us less likely to turn over our cattle? We made our testing quota and more. How about you Oldtimer did you turn any of your high price diers over for testing? As far as the incentive to test, the best incentive to test is to PROVE R-CALF WRONG and that we don't have the chronic huge life risking BSE problem that they think we do. :wink:

Excuse me for asking a dumb question Miss Tam,but is there another reason you want "OTMs"in the USA,besides money ?...............good luck
When you can prove that the only reason R-CALF wants them kept out is not because of money we'll talk Haymaker. :wink:

You wont get any argument from me about that,you bet its about money lots of it,when you are jeporadizing the health & well being of the entire USA cattle herd its big money,I believe that is a well known fact.
Now again is there a reason other than money that you want "OTMs" in the good ole USA ?.............good luck
 

crabby

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Oldtimer said:
Tam- R-CALF is a cattle industry organization--AMI, NCBA, NMPA are the beef industry organizations....R-CALF represents cattlemen- these others represent Packers.....

You got that right, oltimer, r-calf sells cattle, ncba promotes BEEF. I don't eat CATTLE i eat BEEF
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
HAY MAKER said:
Tam said:
HAY MAKER said:
Excuse me for asking a dumb question Miss Tam,but is there another reason you want "OTMs"in the USA,besides money ?...............good luck
When you can prove that the only reason R-CALF wants them kept out is not because of money we'll talk Haymaker. :wink:

You wont get any argument from me about that,you bet its about money lots of it,when you are jeporadizing the health & well being of the entire USA cattle herd its big money,I believe that is a well known fact.
Now again is there a reason other than money that you want "OTMs" in the good ole USA ?.............good luck
If this is about damage the health of the entire USA cattle herd why didn't R-CALF go after a quarantine of Texas? They have more cattle in Texas than we do in all of Canada. and by what I see there has been more than a few reports of non compliance to the US Feed bans going on in Texas. Not to memtion it was in Texas than the cow disappeared after she was targeted for testing. I think I would worry more about what they are covering up in Texas than what might come across the Northern Border. And I never said it wasn't money but Oldtimer was the one that said we only test because of the incentive we recieve from the CFIA and maybe if the USDA would pay the US producers would turn over their 4D cattle. I have been to plenty of meeting where the testing has come up and the main reason I hear is we have to do the testing to prove to the rest of the world that we have controlled the spread of BSE within our herd and that we are doing everything we can to protect the Canadian beef consumer. Unlike the US producers we didn't wait for the Canadian government to pay for an M"ID" system either, we designed and pay for it ourselves. The only thing R-CALF pays for is the next lawyers retirement fund, with their lost cause lawsuits. If they took your money and worked with the US beef industry maybe you would have something to be proud of but no you would rather they waste your money on blaming others for problem within YOUR INDUSTRY. Shutting out Canadian live cattle of any age WILL NOT PROTECT THE US CONSUMERS FOR WHAT IS ALREADY IN THE US.
 

TimH

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,421
Reaction score
0
Location
Southwest Manitoba
Sandhusker said:
Tim, "So using your math then Sandhusker, would the BSE risk, in a package of USA beef, currently have the same risk that a package of CDN beef had when Canada had only 1 native case??
Remember you agreed, above, that a single native case of BSE is enough for a country to lose it's BSE free status.
BTW, How can you argue , with a straight face, about the number of DETECTED cases in each country being a risk indicator , and at the same time, point your finger at the USDA for bungling their investigations and what ever else they may or may not have done wrong?? How many more cases might the US have if USDA had done things your way??
"

Using MY math? There is only one math, Tim. No matter which country, continent, etc.... one is the same as one. What's with all these questions? I feel like I'm hanging out with a first grader here.

I don't know how many more cases would of been found, if any, had the USDA not decided to emulate a Three Stooges movie. Any guess by anybody is only speculation.

"......one is the same as one...."

Is the above quote your answer to the following question - ....would the BSE risk, in a package of USA beef, currently have the same risk that a package of CDN beef had when Canada had only 1 native case??
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Sandhusker said:
Tam, "When you can prove that the only reason R-CALF wants them kept out is not because of money we'll talk Haymaker."

Of course it's about money, Tam. Producers would like to be able to stay in business and make a living. Any threat to that has to be addressed if you're serious about your future.

Money is the only reason you want Canadian beef/cattle down here. Why not be honest? I find it interesting that a few Canadians on this board hammer R-CALF on economic reasons, when that is exactly why they want to sell down here. The common term would be hypocracy.

Gee and here we were told it was because of the Genuine Risk of Death our cattle and beef present to the US consumers. Now you are finally coming clean and admitting it is about the money. If R-CALF had stuck to their economic reasons we wouldn't be fighting mad. But when they saw their claims to protect the high cattle prices weren't working to convince the US consumers the border needed to stay shut, they stepped up the sensationalize of the story and add the Genuine Risk of DEATH our beef was putting all of them in. They claim their fight is with the USDA and the packers but why do they insist on lieing about the Canadian beef industry to further their agenda?
 

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
If I remember right didnt they turn some Canadian care packages away from the people of New Orleans because it contained some beef? After the people there had been through hell!!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Tam said:
Sandhusker said:
Tam, "When you can prove that the only reason R-CALF wants them kept out is not because of money we'll talk Haymaker."

Of course it's about money, Tam. Producers would like to be able to stay in business and make a living. Any threat to that has to be addressed if you're serious about your future.

Money is the only reason you want Canadian beef/cattle down here. Why not be honest? I find it interesting that a few Canadians on this board hammer R-CALF on economic reasons, when that is exactly why they want to sell down here. The common term would be hypocracy.

Gee and here we were told it was because of the Genuine Risk of Death our cattle and beef present to the US consumers. Now you are finally coming clean and admitting it is about the money. If R-CALF had stuck to their economic reasons we wouldn't be fighting mad. But when they saw their claims to protect the high cattle prices weren't working to convince the US consumers the border needed to stay shut, they stepped up the sensationalize of the story and add the Genuine Risk of DEATH our beef was putting all of them in. They claim their fight is with the USDA and the packers but why do they insist on lieing about the Canadian beef industry to further their agenda?

If you've been following my posts with Tim, you would know that I do think there is a risk associated with ANY BSE positive country. Therefore, I don't think R-CALF was lying about Canadian beef. Face the facts, Tam, you've got a herd 1/7 the size of ours and, what 5 cases now? Two of them post ban! The first post ban you can say, yeah, holdover feed could be the deal, but the second?

You don't like OT's calling your problem a cluster, but it is. You're so fond of this North American herd nonsense, get a map of North America and put a red pin where BSE has been found - looks like a cluster all of a sudden, doesn't it?

Then consider what we don't know about BSE. You can't tell me there isn't a risk of death. (Yes, Tim, I would have to say there is a risk with US product as well, as we are a BSE positive country). It's funny to me that you hate R-CALF so bad, but if they got what they wanted (COOL, uniform rules, and all the holes in the feed ban plugged) all their reasons for keeping Canadian cattle out would disappear. I"m sure O.T. would agree with me. Instead of bashing R-CALF, you should be supporting their efforts! You're just so blinded by hate that you can't see what would happen. You are your own worst enemy!
 

TimH

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,421
Reaction score
0
Location
Southwest Manitoba
Sandhusker wrote...
Then consider what we don't know about BSE. You can't tell me there isn't a risk of death. (Yes, Tim, I would have to say there is a risk with US product as well, as we are a BSE positive country). It's funny to me that you hate R-CALF so bad, but if they got what they wanted (COOL, uniform rules, and all the holes in the feed ban plugged) all their reasons for keeping Canadian cattle out would disappear. I"m sure O.T. would agree with me. Instead of bashing R-CALF, you should be supporting their efforts! You're just so blinded by hate that you can't see what would happen. You are your own worst enemy!

Well Sandhusker, that is the difference between you and me. I believe that SRM removal insures food safety. This belief is backed by science.
You believe that beef from any BSE positive country,including the US, is unsafe despite SRM removal.
The Japanese have dropped their mandatory 100% testing rule. They apparently are still testing everything voluntarily. They also remove all SRM's, Sandhusker.... even though every animal is tested fro BSE.
I wonder why...........any thoughts on that??? :?
 

Latest posts

Top