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

Koreans Demonstrate Against U.S. Beef

Mike

Well-known member
(LEAD) U.S. reasserts its beef is safe

WASHINGTON, May 4 (Yonhap) -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reasserted Sunday that American beef is "among the safest in the world" and does not pose human health risks, a message targeted at South Korea whose consumers have risen up in nationwide demonstrations against importing U.S. meat.

Richard Raymond, undersecretary for food safety, declined to answer whether the beef deal, struck last month, could be reopened for negotiations as demanded by the protesters and some lawmakers in South Korea.

But the "invitation is always there" for South Korean officials to come and inspect the cattle slaughter houses, he said in a press conference hastily arranged mostly for South Korean reporters.

Reiterating the safety of U.S. beef, Raymond revealed a preliminary conclusion that a young female in Virginia had not died from variant Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease (vCJD), which is traced to mad cow disease, as previously suspected.

On April 18, just hours before South Korean and U.S. presidents met for summit talks at Camp David, negotiators from the two countries reached an agreement in Seoul virtually ending years of restrictions on the import of American beef.

The ban was imposed in late 2003 after the U.S. confirmed its first mad cow disease case. In early 2006, the ban was partially lifted to allow in boneless products from cattle under 30 months old. Last month's agreement reopened South Korea's market to virtually all cuts of beef, except for specified risk materials (SRMs) which could be infective in a cow with mad cow disease, scientifically known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).

Seoul has been under heavy pressure to resume imports after the U.S. tied the issue to its efforts to ratify a bilateral free trade agreement. Although beef is not a part of the trade deal agenda, senior U.S. congressmen have vowed to oppose the trade pact until South Korea fully reopens its beef market.

In May last year, the World Organization for Animal Health categorized U.S. beef as "controlled risk," meaning it is safe to export.

But local media in South Korea have aired programs highlighting potential health hazards from eating BSE-infected beef, leading to massive street demonstrations by those demanding a stop to imports.

The opposition political camp joined in, pressuring the government to re-negotiate the agreement with the U.S. Critics charge that the deal as it stands now does not permit South Korea to stop imports even if a BSE case reoccurs in the U.S.

Undersecretary Raymond was asked repeatedly if the beef deal can be reopened, and he repeatedly refused to answer.

"I am not here to discuss negotiations. I am not a negotiator," he said. "I don't know what was negotiated in Korea."
Even if BSE is found, it would be "inappropriate" to take action against the slaughter facility where it was discovered, Raymond said. "Remember, the slaughter establishment is not the cause of the BSE," he said.

"The Korean government is welcome to come to the U.S. and do an audit as they see fit, when they see fit," he said, although that "might be a step too far."
Raymond sidestepped questions about suggestions that Koreans may be genetically more vulnerable to BSE-related disease.

"That's a study I believe that deserves international examination. It goes beyond my level of training."
But again, he said removing the SRM is the answer.

"If SRM is removed, there is no worry what the genetics are," he said. "We've never had a person in the U.S. be diagnosed with vCJD for eating American beef. So if it's zero, and chances are double, double zero is still zero."
He started the press conference with a prepared statement that was read for nearly 14 minutes emphasizing the safety of U.S. beef products and the rigor of inspections to guarantee that SRMs are detected and removed at the slaughter houses.

"USDA inspectors are stationed at key points along the production line where they are able to directly observe certain SRM removal activities. Other off-line inspection personnel verify additional plant SRM removal, segregation and disposal. Moreover, FDA (Federal Drug Administration) regulates human foods and cosmetics," the undersecretary said.

He also emphasized the strengthened rule in banning ruminant feed to minimize BSE risks.

Based on targeted BSE surveillance testing conducted since 1990, "we can definitively say that the incidence of BSE in the United States is extremely low," he said.

On a recent suspected case of vCJD, Raymond cited preliminary results just handed over to him by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showing that the autopsy indicates the patient did not die of that disease.

[email protected]
(END)
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
MRJ, "Furthermore, NCBA has worked long and hard to show other nations that the best science available today shows that US beef is safe to eat and that there is no real reason they should not accept US beef.......with some successes. "

I guess this isn't one of those successes...
 

Mike

Well-known member
It is my contention that the USDA is solely responsible for the lack of confidence in USA beef by not allowing Creekstone (and others) the right to test with USDA oversight.

That, along with the footdragging on using the latest testing methods.........

I want my $175 per head back!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
It is my contention that the USDA is solely responsible for the lack of confidence in USA beef by not allowing Creekstone (and others) the right to test with USDA oversight.

That, along with the footdragging on using the latest testing methods.........

I want my $175 per head back!

Yep-- been over 5 years now- and to think we could have been shipping to Japan and Korea for all those years except for some bullheads in NCBA/USDA taking the Big Corporates stance against Creekstone and the other smaller Packers that wanted to test....

And if the USDA's figures on positive cattle in the country (or lack of) is right- it would have been proven and we would be open to the world.....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
gcreekrch said:
Kinda makes you think of R-Calf and M-COOL......Korean style, don't it? :p :p :oops: :oops:

You mean that it proves R-CALF right? Yep, consumers DO care where their food comes from.

If the camp R-CALF was in (the group that supports private enterprise and he basic business concept of giving the customer what they want) had their way instead of the heavy hand of the government (fully supported by NCBA) breaking established protocol, inventing new selective requirments, and rediculously skewing the Toxins and Serums Act solely for the big packers who are using the USDA to protect their interests at the expense of others, there would be no demonstrations against US beef and it would of been available to Korean (and Japanese) customers 4 years ago - and US producer's checkbooks would of reflected the additional sales of their product.
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
US beef is safe as far as BSE/BASE is concerned ? :roll: :yeah: And downer cows are not being put into the human foodchain in the US. :wink: :oops: And the USDA promisses that US packers will remove SRM'S just like they supplied boneless beef in acchordance export regulations. :lol2: :oops: Even though there is no regulations pertaining to the SRM removal which is not being done in the US anyways. And now the the same guys that are putting downer cows into the human foodchain want to be put in charge of BSE testing and the rest of the world is supposed to just trust these guys will put will put customer safety infront profits which they have never done before. Yeah :roll: that is going to happen. If Creekstone wants to push the testing issue they should submit a proposal that a (foreign) third party will be doing the testing in order to provided a unbias test results and see if the USDA will be allowed to test then. But will packers want someone they cannot control doing the testing?
 

Bill

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
gcreekrch said:
Kinda makes you think of R-Calf and M-COOL......Korean style, don't it? :p :p :oops: :oops:

You mean that it proves R-CALF right? Yep, consumers DO care where their food comes from.

If the camp R-CALF was in (the group that supports private enterprise and he basic business concept of giving the customer what they want) had their way instead of the heavy hand of the government (fully supported by NCBA) breaking established protocol, inventing new selective requirments, and rediculously skewing the Toxins and Serums Act solely for the big packers who are using the USDA to protect their interests at the expense of others, there would be no demonstrations against US beef and it would of been available to Korean (and Japanese) customers 4 years ago - and US producer's checkbooks would of reflected the additional sales of their product.

Let's give them full credit and not forget R-Klan standing on the National stage in 2003 singing Koombya with the consumer groups crowing about BSE and trying to keep out Canadian beef. Do you think all those millions invested in law suits that drew attention to BSE were ignored by your customers?

:roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
QUESTION said:
US beef is safe as far as BSE/BASE is concerned ? :roll: :yeah: And downer cows are not being put into the human foodchain in the US. :wink: :oops: And the USDA promisses that US packers will remove SRM'S just like they supplied boneless beef in acchordance export regulations. :lol2: :oops: Even though there is no regulations pertaining to the SRM removal which is not being done in the US anyways. And now the the same guys that are putting downer cows into the human foodchain want to be put in charge of BSE testing and the rest of the world is supposed to just trust these guys will put will put customer safety infront profits which they have never done before. Yeah :roll: that is going to happen. If Creekstone wants to push the testing issue they should submit a proposal that a (foreign) third party will be doing the testing in order to provided a unbias test results and see if the USDA will be allowed to test then. But will packers want someone they cannot control doing the testing?

You do realize that the US packers that you’re rambling on about are the same people that do 90% of your packing? SRM removal is not being done in the US? Canada is “Catching them all”?

Do you think third parties should be doing all the other testing that packers do as well? Why should Creekstone have a third party do the testing when both they and their customers were comfortable with Creekstone doing it?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Bill said:
Sandhusker said:
gcreekrch said:
Kinda makes you think of R-Calf and M-COOL......Korean style, don't it? :p :p :oops: :oops:

You mean that it proves R-CALF right? Yep, consumers DO care where their food comes from.

If the camp R-CALF was in (the group that supports private enterprise and he basic business concept of giving the customer what they want) had their way instead of the heavy hand of the government (fully supported by NCBA) breaking established protocol, inventing new selective requirments, and rediculously skewing the Toxins and Serums Act solely for the big packers who are using the USDA to protect their interests at the expense of others, there would be no demonstrations against US beef and it would of been available to Korean (and Japanese) customers 4 years ago - and US producer's checkbooks would of reflected the additional sales of their product.

Let's give them full credit and not forget R-Klan standing on the National stage in 2003 singing Koombya with the consumer groups crowing about BSE and trying to keep out Canadian beef. Do you think all those millions invested in law suits that drew attention to BSE were ignored by your customers?

:roll:

Thats nothing compared to the "Canadian Mad Cow of the Month" news articles-- that routinely remind folks of BSE- the high BSE rate in Canada- and the fact that our idiotic USDA is allowing importers to bring it into the States....Those articles seem to show up in every newspaper in the country and around the world....And just like with all the tainted products China has dumped on us- is one of the reasons US consumers overwhelmingly are requesting Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling....
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
Sandh i forgot everything is perfect in the US. :wink: :roll: The US based packers in canada are under the control of a 3rd party when testing for BSE . Am i wrong or does creekstone want to do it's own testing not a government department but the owners of the plant wants to pay the guys doing the actual testing. can we say conflict of interest.
Remind me, when did the USDA put the rule into place on removal and disposal of SRM's from OTM animals as Canada did?
OT could you please list all the BSE positives found in the last twelve months. And as for the news articles where it is claimed that in canada every month a positive is found could you pleases list where you found them. Maybe the reporters could check with the CFIA as 11 have been found since may 2003. The math may be kinda tough but that is not one a month or is your month longer in the the US? :p Sorry OT i missed the public demonstrations on the news where US consumers were chanting we want M-COOL? :oops: :p :lol:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Q, "Am i wrong or does creekstone want to do it's own testing not a government department but the owners of the plant wants to pay the guys doing the actual testing. can we say conflict of interest"

Again I ask; Why should Creekstone have a third party do the testing when both they and their customers were comfortable with Creekstone doing it? If their customers aren't concerned about any conflict of interest, what business is it of anybody else's?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Am i wrong or does creekstone want to do it's own testing not a government department but the owners of the plant wants to pay the guys doing the actual testing. can we say conflict of interest.

You are partly wrong. Creekstone asked the USDA for oversight by the KSU vet lab during testing procedures, and to make KSU a satellite USDA BSE lab. Creekstone was to pay for training in Europe for their staff.

What's funny is that Creekstone asked to send a brain sample of each animal from which meat was shipped to Japan for testing and the USDA denied them by saying they would be shipping potentially "Hazardous Materials". :roll:

Creekstone asked for the oversight for liability reasons and to keep any conflict of interests at bay.

They were on the up and up.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Mike said:
Am i wrong or does creekstone want to do it's own testing not a government department but the owners of the plant wants to pay the guys doing the actual testing. can we say conflict of interest.

You are partly wrong. Creekstone asked the USDA for oversight by the KSU vet lab during testing procedures, and to make KSU a satellite USDA BSE lab. Creekstone was to pay for training in Europe for their staff.

What's funny is that Creekstone asked to send a brain sample of each animal from which meat was shipped to Japan for testing and the USDA denied them by saying they would be shipping potentially "Hazardous Materials". :roll:

Creekstone asked for the oversight for liability reasons and to keep any conflict of interests at bay.

They were on the up and up.

Makes a hell of a lot of sense to deny Creekstone the right to test because testing those cattle was pointless and "not based on sound science" and then claim that those same samples were potentially hazerdous. This is part of a big pile of evidence that proves the USDA decided to block testing first and then tried to come up with the reasoning.

And the NCBA types here support it and will argue with you if you claim the USDA has alterior motives to blocking testing... :roll:
 

Bill

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Bill said:
Sandhusker said:
You mean that it proves R-CALF right? Yep, consumers DO care where their food comes from.

If the camp R-CALF was in (the group that supports private enterprise and he basic business concept of giving the customer what they want) had their way instead of the heavy hand of the government (fully supported by NCBA) breaking established protocol, inventing new selective requirments, and rediculously skewing the Toxins and Serums Act solely for the big packers who are using the USDA to protect their interests at the expense of others, there would be no demonstrations against US beef and it would of been available to Korean (and Japanese) customers 4 years ago - and US producer's checkbooks would of reflected the additional sales of their product.

Let's give them full credit and not forget R-Klan standing on the National stage in 2003 singing Koombya with the consumer groups crowing about BSE and trying to keep out Canadian beef. Do you think all those millions invested in law suits that drew attention to BSE were ignored by your customers?

:roll:

Thats nothing compared to the "Canadian Mad Cow of the Month" news articles-- that routinely remind folks of BSE- the high BSE rate in Canada- and the fact that our idiotic USDA is allowing importers to bring it into the States....Those articles seem to show up in every newspaper in the country and around the world....And just like with all the tainted products China has dumped on us- is one of the reasons US consumers overwhelmingly are requesting Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling....

Thanks for making my point for me OVI. Once again running around the village flapping his gums not knowing or caring what he is saying all in the effort to be noticed like the now nearly defunct R-Klan and with pretty much the same credibility......

facts be damned.
 

flounder

Well-known member
Police Trace Online Rumormongers

Monday, May 5, 2008 STATEMENT OF DR. RICHARD RAYMOND USDA UNDERSECRETARY FOR FOOD SAFETY May 4, 2008

STATEMENT OF DR. RICHARD RAYMOND USDA UNDERSECRETARY FOR FOOD SAFETY Regarding the Safety of the U.S. Food Supply

May 4, 2008

“Good evening. I am Dr. Richard Raymond, Under Secretary for Food Safety at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you the safety of the U.S. beef supply. I want to be sure that you are aware that I will be discussing food safety issues only, and I am not here this evening to discuss negotiations. “The U.S. Government believes the current agreement well addresses the health and food safety concerns of Korean consumers. It provides for Korea's sovereign right to conduct an audit of our facilities and to work with USDA inspection authorities if any food safety concerns are identified. When the OIE gave the United States "controlled risk" status a year ago, it was after the world's BSE experts reviewed the preventative and food safety measures in the United States. “Since the requirements to export to Korea are consistent with science, U.S. requirements as well as those of the OIE require that if any food safety concern is found, it would be fully investigated and immediately corrected by USDA. “I want to assure all consumers – both domestic and abroad – that the U.S. beef supply is among the safest in the world. ...

*please* see full text with some additional information the good Dr. Raymond seems to have forgotten about. it's about your children. ...

http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2008/05/statement-of-dr-richard-raymond-usda.html

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Health group urges overhaul of US food safety system Calling the US food safety system antiquated and disjointed, a public health advocacy group today urged a major overhaul to make the system stronger, more coherent, and better attuned to today's major threats.

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/fs/food-disease/news/apr3008tfah.html

TSS
 

Latest posts

Top