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

Deliberate Sabotage?

Jason

Well-known member
Try to keep up Econ, testing under 20 month animals for BSE is currently a waste of time. It may turn out to be always a waste of time, but technology does change.

Japan is buying beef without a test, testing it would have been a bad idea and a bogus illusion of safety.

If you can't understand that rationale it is no wonder SH confuses you.
 

Mike

Well-known member
The packers are whining about not being able to find enough cattle under 21 months now, not to mention how to meet the market if it takes off in a big way.

I think it would have been wise for the USDA to allow Creekstone to ship up to 30 month animals, with testing.

I concur that testing under 21 month old cattle is not necessary from what little I know. But 30 months was where the age limit was when Creekstone and Japan first discussed testing of all animals.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
reader (the Second) said:
Gosh, 1 dead and 130 ill and the FDA is shutting down the spinach growing industry. Interesting isn't it? You all yell that hundreds dead from BSE and medically related CJD is no big deal...

Its immediate in both time and location...vCJD takes years to manifest and is impossible to connect to one BSE animal in particular- but I still think you will see consumers demand a huge reaction/overreaction when/if the first case of native originated vCJD appears... It will make the precautions that could be being taken now seem trifling in comparison.....
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Jason said:
Try to keep up Econ, testing under 20 month animals for BSE is currently a waste of time. It may turn out to be always a waste of time, but technology does change.

Japan is buying beef without a test, testing it would have been a bad idea and a bogus illusion of safety.

If you can't understand that rationale it is no wonder SH confuses you.

Try to keep up with a newbie like you, Jason? C'mon, you can do better than that.

Just because there have been no large number of cattle under 20 months or younger positive for bse doesn't mean they don't exist. What if the AL cow had a calf and instead of keeping it, it was sold in the auction to someone to someone who wanted it for veal.

Aids was once thought to be transmitted via sex only until aids babies started popping up.

My grandfather used to have a saying about fishing and other related things:

"You can't catch a fish if you don't have your pole in the water."

If we are not credibly testing for bse or testing with a "bogus test", we will never find it in under 20 month olds.

That might bode well for a few selfish cattle ranchers who don't care if they sell a bse positive cow, calf or bull, but it doesn't bode well for a safe supply of beef.
 

Jason

Well-known member
There has never been a positive animal tested under 20 months.

Does a negative test on an under 20 month animal garantee it won't test positive at 50 months?

There is absolutely no justification for testing young animals at this time.

The science will likely change, it has already. We know BSE is not contagious like was previously thought.

You bring up AIDS, that used to be a death sentence, yet how many people can now live for many years with it? Some used to and maybe still think hugging an infected person will give you AIDS, maybe your one of them.

Maybe some day a test will be available that will tell us which animals are incubating BSE. Then again maybe someday a test will allow us to terminate all preschoolers that might get Alzhiemers. Mights and maybes aren't what responsible people base descisions on.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
reader (the Second) said:
Jason said:
There has never been a positive animal tested under 20 months.

Does a negative test on an under 20 month animal garantee it won't test positive at 50 months?

There is absolutely no justification for testing young animals at this time.

The science will likely change, it has already. We know BSE is not contagious like was previously thought.

You bring up AIDS, that used to be a death sentence, yet how many people can now live for many years with it? Some used to and maybe still think hugging an infected person will give you AIDS, maybe your one of them.

Maybe some day a test will be available that will tell us which animals are incubating BSE. Then again maybe someday a test will allow us to terminate all preschoolers that might get Alzhiemers. Mights and maybes aren't what responsible people base descisions on.

Why is it relevant that AIDS is no longer automatically a death sentence. TSEs are automatically a death sentence and given the state of Alzheimer's and the mysteries around TSEs, it's doubtful there will be a treatment / prevention / cure discovered quickly.

If a connection is made between Alzheimers and BSE their may not be any cattle ranching left- anywhere...They will be reopening the horse slaughter plants and we will all learn to eat it like the French- or we will all be chicken and hog chasers...All it takes is watching one relative suffer the horrendous effects of the dementia of the disease to want to do everything to prevent it...
 

blackjack

Well-known member
...ot ...does billings or great falls have any 20 somethings walking around like they might be suffering from dementia...maybe it is caused by too many big macs... :shock:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
blackjack said:
...ot ...does billings or great falls have any 20 somethings walking around like they might be suffering from dementia...maybe it is caused by too many big macs... :shock:

They definitely do- and most average citizens just pooh pooh it away- as a self inflicted (meth) problem - until it touchs them or someone in their families....Then depending upon whether they be crime victim or parents of addict they are either screaming for life jail sentences or new drug rehab programs....And right now- just like with BSE- government is riding the middle road with not enough effort going toward either camp- enforcement or rehabilatation....
 

blackjack

Well-known member
...ot...your right government never does anything cause there is no cure for the cure all...our system here in canada is up to 50% of our tax dollars that just go into health care ...plus the millions of dollars donated to find the cure...just as they find one cure another two pop up ... alot of people think it is what they eat that makes them sick but the air we breathe everyday may be the problem...as fedup2 says... there is always more questions than answers...
 

Jason

Well-known member
The idea of starving people to death because of the myth that beef is linked to vCJD or now Alzhiemers is as bad or worse than selling a known tainted product.

Autos kill more people every day than vCJD has claimed, yet autos are allowed to continue.

Guns are dangerous and criminals use them to commit murders everyday, when was the last time you were held up at "steakpoint"?

Hand over your wallet or I will make you eat this ribeye ...and it's from an over 30 month animal!!!!! :shock:

Fear mongering is what the beef business has dealt with for years from wackos and rabbid vegan groups. Fortunately hunger and common sence keep people buying beef.
 

Jason

Well-known member
Considering this article hasn't even been written...check the date...

It has a slight anti gov't and anti conventional farming slant.

Some of it terms are designed to instill fear..

Following a scorched-earth approach, workers wearing "spacesuits" inject nerve agents into the soil before planting, leaving nothing alive. Hogs grow enclosed in facilities several stories high. Tomatoes are picked green, gassed and then canned.

I don't even own a "spacesuit" yet I farm. I have never injected nerve agents into the soil.

Perhaps the authors are refering to a herbicide application, but nerve agent?

We had some awesome tomatoes this year, yet all were picked green. Gassing them with inert gasses to kill any bugs would certianly be in the consumers best interest, unless you like some insects in your pasta sause.

Hog barns are single story structures, they experimented with some 2 and maybe a 3 story one, but those turned out to be not quite as expected. The 2 story buildings were hogs on top with compost facilities under them, the heat generated from the compost and the compost itself was helpful to the environment as it took less natural gas or propane to heat the barns and the compost deals with bacteria and pathogens from the manure. The ideas are sound, application of them might not always work as planned but to make a profit the hogs need to be cared for.

Considering the company that grew the spinach is also growing organic produce, this article shows how some just like to complain instead of taking responsibility for their own decisions. Don't buy the spinach until it is safe... pretty simple.
 

Mike

Well-known member
To his credit, Bill Clinton signed legislation in the 90's to completely disallow imported meat that not passed inspection at any one import station.

The meat importers would shop this meat from station to station until they found a checkpoint that would allow it in the USA.

If there had not been a problem this particular matter, this bill would have never been presented to the lawmakers.

We have been fed the propaganda for years that the US has the safest food system in the world.

The chickens are coming home to roost.

When it goes back to a "Localized" system, I think it might be safer.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer:
From my law background viewpoint it just seems asinine that someone can't see the fraud and deception in allowing persons to profit off selling falsely identified products- the selling of imported beef as a US product is a scam on the consumers.
Oldtimer from my common sence viewpoint it seems ASININE to blame the packers and Canadian producers, when you know first hand that it is YOUR LOCAL BUTCHER that is taking those labels off, hence the "Product of Canada" boxes in your local butchers dumpster! :roll: and it is also ASININE to bitch about it, then turn around and EXCUSE YOUR LOCAL BUTCHER for the reason you gave, which was
The local fella is doing it to compete- he can only get what the warehouse sources to him- and that varies from week to week-- and he knows that if he marks it Product of Canada he would lose business
:roll:
You sir are just as guilty as the next of assisting in perpetrating this fraud by excusing his actions on the grounds he has to COMPETE OR LOSE BUSINESS. :nod: You claim you, as a ex-law man, deal with truths but yet you allow your local butcher to SCAM HIS CONSUMERS YOUR NEIGHBORS. You Oldtimer deal in what ever fits your agenda which is excuses and half truths at BEST :(

And I have to laugh at you supporting the idea that the "USDA INSPECTED" label is a fraud. Think about it if a consumer sees that "INSPECTED" label what is he going to think
1: that the meat is US beef and safe for human consumption because the USDA inspected it or
2: the meat, imported or domestic. was inspected to the USDA standards and was found to be safe for human consumption
Either way the USDA inspection of the meat found the beef to be "safe for human consumption" . Now if the label said US BEEF then it would be a fraud to sell imported under that label. But since it is an USDA INSPECTED LABEL and the USDA inspected all the meat to the same standards NO FRAUD WAS PERPETRATED. :x Just a bunch of bitching ranchers like you OLDTIMER thinking the consumers don't have the right to know that the USDA has inspected ALL meat to the same standards to ensure all beef imported or domestic is safe for human comsumption.

Now let us look at the label that most of you same people think is not a fraud, the "BSE TESTED label. What do you think the consumer is going to think?
1. The animal was tested and the test result was negitive meaning it is free of BSE therefore it is being sold safe of risk from BSE. or why else would it be in the meat counter OR
2. The animal was tested the test result was negitive but since the animal was too young the test could be wrong, so eat at own risk.

TWO completely different means one implies no risk and the other implies may still present a small risk if the SRM's hadn't been removed. Which leads to fraud on the part of the labeler, which in this case is Creekstone supported BY R-CALFERS.
Now if the label was to state "SRM's removed " Then the consumer could think, according to the OIE, SRM removal is the number one way of removing the risk of contracting vCJD (if I can contract it from eating beef) so the risk of this meat is less than eating tested beef when that test was done knowing it WOULDN"T WORK ON YOUNGER ANIMALS.

The only thing that makes this "not a fraud" is the fact you R-CALFERS support it as a means of selling your beef to Japanese consumers, with implied safety.
The thing that makes the inspected label "a fraud" to you is even though it tells the consumers the truth, the meat is safe, you can't use it to line your pockets by trying to sell your beef to US consumer by implying US beef is safer than imported even though both countries meat is inspected to the SAME STANDARDS.

MIKE: The meat importers would shop this meat from station to station until they found a checkpoint that would allow it in the USA.
If there had not been a problem this particular matter, this bill would have never been presented to the lawmakers
We have been fed the propaganda for years that the US has the safest food system in the world.
And Mike if the guys that import beef can do an end run around some USDA inspectors by going to a different inspector what is saying the same can't be happening in the US with domestic beef but a much large scale given the volume of US beef slaughtered on any given day??? kind of puts a big question mark on the claims of the US Beef being the Safest in the World I'd say.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Oldtimer:
From my law background viewpoint it just seems asinine that someone can't see the fraud and deception in allowing persons to profit off selling falsely identified products- the selling of imported beef as a US product is a scam on the consumers.
Oldtimer from my common sence viewpoint it seems ASININE to blame the packers and Canadian producers, when you know first hand that it is YOUR LOCAL BUTCHER that is taking those labels off, hence the "Product of Canada" boxes in your local butchers dumpster! :roll: and it is also ASININE to bitch about it, then turn around and EXCUSE YOUR LOCAL BUTCHER for the reason you gave, which was
The local fella is doing it to compete- he can only get what the warehouse sources to him- and that varies from week to week-- and he knows that if he marks it Product of Canada he would lose business
:roll:
You sir are just as guilty as the next of assisting in perpetrating this fraud by excusing his actions on the grounds he has to COMPETE OR LOSE BUSINESS. :nod: You claim you, as a ex-law man, deal with truths but yet you allow your local butcher to SCAM HIS CONSUMERS YOUR NEIGHBORS. You Oldtimer deal in what ever fits your agenda which is excuses and half truths at BEST :(

Tam- I'm not excusing him- just telling you why he did it (because the Canadian beef will not sell as well if the consumer knows its Canadian)- but could not do anything about it until we got the M-COOL law operating--and as of next month he won't be able to do that fraud anymore with the beginning of the Montana M-COOL (but neither will the chain store)...Montanans at least will get to know the truth of their meat products origin....I Just spent last week visiting with one of the members of the advisory committee for the Governor on the COOL law- and Montanas COOL law is about ready to go- even with the continued opposition of the Big Packers, and a few of their buddy NCBA mouthpieces from MSGA....
And I was advised that the Governor will make sure it is enforced....

But Canadians are now almost forced to backing this fraud which daily takes away more of their identity- making them more dependent on the multinationals interests... Truly I feel sorry for Canadian ranchers and pity them- that they have got themselves into such a shape that their product is so unknown or unwanted that it has to be mislabled in order to market it......And this financial motive that Canadians have in wanting/needing this fraud to continue makes whatever you or any Canadian producer says against COOL very dubious as for credibility......About as credible as a Columbian druglord telling people that coke/crack isn't bad for them-- Both have a financial interest in keeping their operations, no matter how dishonest, operating at the highest income to each... :wink:


And I have to laugh at you supporting the idea that the "USDA INSPECTED" label is a fraud. Think about it if a consumer sees that "INSPECTED" label what is he going to think
1: that the meat is US beef and safe for human consumption because the USDA inspected it or
2: the meat, imported or domestic. was inspected to the USDA standards and was found to be safe for human consumption
Either way the USDA inspection of the meat found the beef to be "safe for human consumption" . Now if the label said US BEEF then it would be a fraud to sell imported under that label. But since it is an USDA INSPECTED LABEL and the USDA inspected all the meat to the same standards NO FRAUD WAS PERPETRATED. :x Just a bunch of bitching ranchers like you OLDTIMER thinking the consumers don't have the right to know that the USDA has inspected ALL meat to the same standards to ensure all beef imported or domestic is safe for human comsumption.

If it wasn't directly inspected by a USDA inspector it shouldn't be able to have a USDA inspected label...Canadian beef is inspected by CFIA employees and should be labeled CFIA inspected, thru retail- Mexican beef is inspected by Mexican employees and should be so labeled thru retail.....Just because a country signs some treaty shouldn't give them wide open use of the USDA label- which historically has been known to US consumers as inspection/grading by US personnell of US products...
And since we have no control of the live animals while out of country, or the health, feed, drug, and enviromental laws of those countries- animals that have spent time in other countries and are slaughtered in the US should be so labeled...Have the USDA inspector check them and give the product the USDA inspected stamp- but also advise they are the product of whatever country(Canada. Mexico).....

What could be wrong with telling people the truth about the food they eat :???:

And currently only .005% of all food being imported is inspected by a US employee inspector (USDA, FDA) at import....
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer:What could be wrong with telling people the truth about the food they eat
Well Oldtimer funny you should ask this question. :lol:

Don't you support a group that bought a newspaper ad that stated the US cattle producers raise the safety beef in the world, after claiming all beef coming from a country affect with BSE is a risk to human health. Where is the truth there Oldtimer? Does the US not have BSE in their native herd which according to R-CALF would make the US beef a risk to human health? Gee I think Phyllis proved you DO.
Don't you support a ex-R-CALF leader that was going to tell the consumers, if BSE was ever found in the US, that the US had firewalls IN PLACE FOR YEARS to protect them so BSE is a NON ISSUE in the US. I have to wonder if Bill was going to explain to those consumers that the firewall that the US had for so many years were not as stringent as those in Canada AND those firewalls were the ones that protected from the strain of BSE Canada had BUT not the strain the US had???
And didn't R-CALF put a stop to a system (M"ID") that would have told the consumer where their beef comes from within the US by saying Don't burden the US producer with M'ID just label US beef by default. as in if it wasn't imported it must be US. To bad you didn't have M'ID' OLDTIMER you could have sold MONTANA BEEF by advertizing it wasn't from Texas or Alabama therefore it is the Safest Beef in the World. Think of what that could have done for the price of yours Leo's and Bill's cattle in Montana if people stopped eating TEXAS BEEF. :wink:

So are you up to telling the people the real truth or just the half truths that further the R-CALF agenda? :roll:

because the Canadian beef will not sell as well if the consumer knows its Canadian)-
Could this be because of all the lies you R-CALFers and a certain Montana Federal Court Judge have been spouting to scare Consumers into think Canadian beef is a risk to human health? I guess your local butcher will only have you to thank if he looses enough business that he looses his livelyhood. But what is one more out of work US citizen on a long list of out of work US citizens as long as R-CALF gets import trade stops right Oldtimer.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Tam, quickly before I hit the hay;
1) Beef from BSE countries carries risk. That is why there is SRM removal.
2) Nice misinterpretation of Bill's statement AGAIN.
3) The ID system wouldn't of went to the consumers anyway, it would of stopped at the packers.

There's no half truths - just half-wits.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Tam, quickly before I hit the hay;
1) Beef from BSE countries carries risk. That is why there is SRM removal.
2) Nice misinterpretation of Bill's statement AGAIN.
3) The ID system wouldn't of went to the consumers anyway, it would of stopped at the packers.

There's no half truths - just half-wits.

If Beef from BSE counties carries a risk then HOW CAN R-CALF CLAIM THE US HAS THE "WORLD SAFEST BEEF"?
Are there not countires in this world the DON"T HAVE BSE WHICH WOULD MAKE THEIR BEEF SAFER THAN THE US BEEF COMING FROM A BSE COUNTRY?

And If Leo is asking for higher standards as in the ones Canada already has, how can R-CALF claim that US producers raise their beef to the Highest Standards in the World?

I didn't misinterpret Bill's statement Leo made the statement and he said you had these firewalls IN PLACE the only country prior to having BSE to have these firewall IN PLACE for so many years. If they were IN PLACE then why is he asking for them NOW a year after you found BSE IN THE US?

Sandhusker do you know the birthplace of each and everyone of the Canadian cattle that were found to have BSE? All any consumer of beef in Canada has to do is look on the CFIA web site to know where those animals originated, just like the packers as they had nothing to do with our BSE positive cattle. In knowing where they came from the consumer can follow the investigation to a successful conclusion knowing the CFIA did find the suspect herd and tested it for any further problems. But can the US consumers look on the USDA web site and find out where your BSE positive cattle were born and raised and wheither there were anymore in the same herds infected ? No because you don't have a system, thank to R-CALF, that could provide the USDA with that information. Consumer don't really have to know where every animal was born and raised but it sure is reassuring to them that if an animal is found positive the government agency that is in charge of the safety of their food has access to the information with one phone call.

Sandhusker I'm glad you said this as I would have to half agree with you on this "There's no half truths - just half-wits" there are Half-wits in R-CALF'S ORGANIZATION namely YOU SANDHUSKER :lol: :lol:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Back to you Oldtimer
Oldtimer said:
[
Tam- I'm not excusing him- just telling you why he did it (because the Canadian beef will not sell as well if the consumer knows its Canadian)- but could not do anything about it until we got the M-COOL law operating--
If it bugged you enough to blame every packer and Canadian producer for perpetrating this fraud, why didn't you talk to him and ask him to stop relabeling it. And if that didn't work then pull the boxes out of the dumpster and put them at his front door where all his consumers could see them. I doubt all of his consumers go dumpster diving like you do. :wink:

Montanans at least will get to know the truth of their meat products origin---
Oh really will they know if it is Texas beef or Alabama beef or will they know just what R-CALF wants them to know?
And I was advised that the Governor will make sure it is enforced...
. How

But Canadians are now almost forced to backing this fraud which daily takes away more of their identity- making them more dependent on the multinationals interests... Truly I feel sorry for Canadian ranchers and pity them- that they have got themselves into such a shape that their product is so unknown or unwanted that it has to be mislabled in order to market it......
Unknown it's not unknown but thanks to R-CALF lies what some consumers think they know has made it unwanted. SO thank you R-CALF for all the lieing that has made US consumers THINK OUR BEEF IS UNFIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION to the point that your local butcher has to not mislabel but relabel it , as not to loose business from the false fear YOU CAUSED.
And this financial motive that Canadians have in wanting/needing this fraud to continue makes whatever you or any Canadian producer says against COOL very dubious as for credibility......About as credible as a Columbian druglord telling people that coke/crack isn't bad for them-- Both have a financial interest in keeping their operations, no matter how dishonest, operating at the highest income to each... :wink: [/b]
about as credible as R-CALF at one of their fund raiser. Can't tell the truth as the truth will not fill the coffers will it Oldtimer.


If it wasn't directly inspected by a USDA inspector it shouldn't be able to have a USDA inspected label...
So does a USDA inspector inspect every piece of meat processed in the US? .
 

Latest posts

Top