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

Interesting paradigm shift in the beef business

When you say their choices will be legislated out of business, I assume you're talking about the NCBA/USDA policy that says your product has to be based on sound science and can't be anything that your competitors would have to do to remain competitive in that market? (Unless your product is any of the others that don't meet those requirements but who's existence and acceptance strangely is ignored)
 
I'll have to read some book, because I have never in my 60 years in the cattle business figured out how producers have control over anything. We were the bottom of the totum pole and took the hit every time there was a problem, especially with over supply. Look at packers argument that if we don't let them feed cattle they will have to lower prices to compensate for their risk. They admit that themselves.
 
Sandhusker, would you please provide us with a copy of that NCBA or even a USDA policy which states that "your product has to be based on sound science and can't be anything that your competitors would have to do to remain competitive in that market"?

BTW, how many major packers actually do own own and feed out cattle? And the number they feed, please? I do not believe I've ever seen that, which isn't saying it hasn't been out there, just that I've not noticed it.

mrj
 
For some people, by the time they finally see something, it's too late to do anything about it. I can't understand why an open-minded person can't see the type of market these same packers have established in pork and poultry and not believe they will try to establish this type market in the beef sector. It's all protein to them! :???:
 
mrj said:
Sandhusker, would you please provide us with a copy of that NCBA or even a USDA policy which states that "your product has to be based on sound science and can't be anything that your competitors would have to do to remain competitive in that market"?

BTW, how many major packers actually do own own and feed out cattle? And the number they feed, please? I do not believe I've ever seen that, which isn't saying it hasn't been out there, just that I've not noticed it.

mrj
Click to expand...

NCBA is against testing because "It isn't based on sound science" and because they said it it was allowed, everybody would have to do it. Do you deny that?
 
I'm not denying, or accepting ANYTHING you SAY until you show us the policy, as written by NCBA, which you claim to be quoting.

mrj
 
mrj said:
I'm not denying, or accepting ANYTHING you SAY until you show us the policy, as written by NCBA, which you claim to be quoting.

mrj
Click to expand...

It's what they said, MRJ. Look it up yourself....
 
USDA should continue to deny a request by one Kansas meatpacker that wants to test all its cattle for mad cow disease, says the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA). "Testing is not a simple marketing decision that will only impact those who decide to surrender to this unjustified request in order to gain access to export markets," says association President Jan Lyons.

At issue is a request by Creekstone Farms Premium Beef to conduct BSE testing on all the animals it slaughters. The company exports a substantial amount of its production to Japan, and officials there say that due to last December's discovery of a BSE-infected cow in Washington state, they will not import U.S. beef unless all cattle are tested for the disease. (Japan currently requires such testing for its domestic cattle supplies.) Creekstone is willing to conduct the testing, but under a 1913 federal food safety law, USDA first must approve, and the department has declined to do so in the Creekstone case.

NCBA's Lyons points out that Japan did not ban beef just from one company, but from the entire United States. "If one market requires 100-percent testing, all cattle in the United States would have to follow this standard because products from the majority of cattle harvested in the United States are exported," she says. Lyons also claimed that discussions regarding private testing for BSE as a marketing tool "continues to disrupt government-to-government discussions on restoring trade for U.S. beef, impose economic stress on our cattlemen and undermine consumer confidence in a safe product."

Lyons emphasized the position of federal food and animal safety experts that testing all cattle is not scientifically justified. "The World Organization for Animal Health and the USDA's International Review Team, have agreed that testing all cattle does not provide additional protection for consumers," said Lyons.
---------------------------------------------------

This had to do with giving the customer what they wanted & what they were willing to pay for! I don't care what organization that you belong to, this is just plain wrong!
 
Rind Sucker, the head seed spitter for the National Watermelon Association calls for the USDA to not allow the private thumping of watermelons! He states that if one buyer is allowed to thump a watermelon, all buyers will want to pick, choose, and thump their melons! "If they don't want to take what we give them, they can get it somewhere else" said Mr. Sucker.
He also pointed out that the World Health Organization agreed with his position that thumping all melons does not insure their safety.

In other news today, it was reported that Australia & Brazil have increased their watermelon exports 300% while the USDA reported US sales have dropped to 3 % of the previous year. Its all based on sound science according to the National Watermelon Association.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Too funny, fedup! :lol: :lol:

USDA's International Review Team, have agreed that testing all cattle does not provide additional protection for consumers," said Lyons.
Click to expand...

Either the test works.........or it doesn't!

If it works, there is no way it CANNOT provide additional protection for consumers.

If it does not work. why do they even test?
 
So as not to show bias in my reporting to any particular group!
Page 2

The 3 Amigos, spokesmen for R-Melon, were busy raising money today to stop the flow of melons across the border. They say they have 'hard' evidence that some of these melons have MC disease. (Mad Canadian). They are reported saying that many of these lonely Canadians without partners, especially in the Northern parts have been coring and committing unspeakable acts with these melons. "All melons over the age of 3 months must be x-rayed for violations" , they are quoted as saying.

Meanwhile Canadian spy planes, (bald eagles with helmet cameras) have been flying over remote locations in the US and have reported 3 different sightings in Neb, Mont, and Texas of men heading toward their melon patches with shovels! Undisputable evidence that MC also exists in the US also they said.

Four members of the National Watermelon Association made a trip to Canada last week on a fact finding mission. They reportedly flew over melon patches with the plane reaching altitudes as low as 1000 feet and speeds down to 120 mph and reported seeing no violations!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top