Mike
Well-known member
Mad Cow Update 3: USDA plans to STOP CHECKING FOR THE DISEASE
Instead of comforting consumers about the chances of another mad cow pandemic, the USDA seems to be doing everything in its power to scare buyers away from the cattle market. Even though a fresh case of mad cow disease was reported by agricultural officials Monday, the USDA has decided to rely on only private sector companies' tracking systems to track cattle suspected of carrying the disease. In plain terms, the organization has decided to stop checking for the disease, leaving it up to the producer's discretion to check the animals. Legislators had hoped the USDA would make it mandatory for producers to have their animals tested by the government organization and were suprised to hear the USDA had taken a step in the opposite direction. Reuters quotes house commitee member who have criticized the announcment calling it "wrong-headed."
The USDA justifies, or at least tries to justify, the announcemt by stating that the public's health is protected by other rules that "protect cattle feed from contamination and require meatpackers to remove the brains and spinal cords from older cattle." '"By any stretch of the imagination, we have proven we have a very low incidence," said acting Undersecretary Chuck Lambert.' Yes, mad cow disease had almost been forgotton as of late, but I would think the new incidence proves that disease can occur even when precautions are taken and exemplifies why all cows need to be checked and tracked; so we can stop the problem before it onsets bigger, deadlier problems. Although no cases of of humans contracting the disease from cattle have originated in the US, and it does cost millions to fund the program, personally I would rather be safe than sorry.
Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Democratic, seems to agree with me."It just seems to me that (scaling back) doesn't make much sense," she said. "I had hoped the third case would have an effect on that," she said. Democrat Allen Boyd of Florida also criticized the initiative claiming that while the USDA is taking a burden off of themselvers, "[the new regulations are] probably not going to work very well for cattlemen or consumers". He is referring to the USDA's claim that advocating the use of private sectors will have no effect on the quality of meat while at the same time saving the government money. They predict the program will have the opposite effect of consumers' fears and that "...market forces are going to drive this to a mandatory program," said Ron DeHaven, head of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. I think I speak for every meat-eater/beef-lover when I say that I hope DeHaven's predictions are correct.
Instead of comforting consumers about the chances of another mad cow pandemic, the USDA seems to be doing everything in its power to scare buyers away from the cattle market. Even though a fresh case of mad cow disease was reported by agricultural officials Monday, the USDA has decided to rely on only private sector companies' tracking systems to track cattle suspected of carrying the disease. In plain terms, the organization has decided to stop checking for the disease, leaving it up to the producer's discretion to check the animals. Legislators had hoped the USDA would make it mandatory for producers to have their animals tested by the government organization and were suprised to hear the USDA had taken a step in the opposite direction. Reuters quotes house commitee member who have criticized the announcment calling it "wrong-headed."
The USDA justifies, or at least tries to justify, the announcemt by stating that the public's health is protected by other rules that "protect cattle feed from contamination and require meatpackers to remove the brains and spinal cords from older cattle." '"By any stretch of the imagination, we have proven we have a very low incidence," said acting Undersecretary Chuck Lambert.' Yes, mad cow disease had almost been forgotton as of late, but I would think the new incidence proves that disease can occur even when precautions are taken and exemplifies why all cows need to be checked and tracked; so we can stop the problem before it onsets bigger, deadlier problems. Although no cases of of humans contracting the disease from cattle have originated in the US, and it does cost millions to fund the program, personally I would rather be safe than sorry.
Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Democratic, seems to agree with me."It just seems to me that (scaling back) doesn't make much sense," she said. "I had hoped the third case would have an effect on that," she said. Democrat Allen Boyd of Florida also criticized the initiative claiming that while the USDA is taking a burden off of themselvers, "[the new regulations are] probably not going to work very well for cattlemen or consumers". He is referring to the USDA's claim that advocating the use of private sectors will have no effect on the quality of meat while at the same time saving the government money. They predict the program will have the opposite effect of consumers' fears and that "...market forces are going to drive this to a mandatory program," said Ron DeHaven, head of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. I think I speak for every meat-eater/beef-lover when I say that I hope DeHaven's predictions are correct.
