Learning from Taiwan

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker,

If Canada removes the same SRM's as Taiwan has requested from the U.S, would you consider Canada's beef safe?

Of course you wouldn't because you want to keep the Canadian border closed to live cattle and you will use any excuse available to you.

Why don't you R-CULTers come clean and just admit that you don't want Canadian live cattle imports instead of painting yourselves into your hypocritical corners with your BSE double standards?



~SH~

If USDA agrees to remove the SRM's that their own TSE Study Group recommended and to label all Canadian beef being sold in the US as a Product of Canada so the final decision can be left to the individual consumer--I'd say open her up...........

 

[Sandhusker]

SH squirming, "Are Taiwan's demands justified by the science the OIE bases their decisions on? Unless that question is answered first, there is no way to define "higher standard". The definition of "higher standard" is subjective. "

YES, Taiwan's demands are justified by the science the OIE bases their decisions. Do you think the USDA would not follow the OIE recommendations? :wink:

SH, "If the only way to ship beef to Taiwan requires measures we can live with, we will accomodate those measures even if the science that the OIE has based their standards on will not support Taiwan's demands."

My you're a wiggler today! Your statement is NOT what the USDA is saying. They are saying EVERYTHING has to be sound science via OIE's recommendations. You, my friend, are full crap! How many times have you your self stumped the company line "OIE" "Sound science" ? YOU ARE TREED. :lol: :lol:

SH, "Shipping beef to Taiwan with SRM removal that is currently applicable to cattle over 30 months of age is like shipping hormone free beef to the EU."

Whatever..... the USDA agreed to it! :roll:

SH, "We may accomodate another country's requests if they are cost effective even though we don't agree with them but we will not allow any other country to impose restrictions on us that are not justified or based on the best available science."

But you just said,"If the only way to ship beef to Taiwan requires measures we can live with, we will accomodate those measures EVEN IF THE SCIENCE THAT THE OIE HAS BASES THEIR STANDARDS ON WILL NOT SUPPORT TAIWAN'S DEMANDS." Do you actually know what you think? You're trying to prove R-CALF wrong and you're twisted so tight you're contradicting yourself in the same post! Maybe you're telling us the OIE sound science is not the same as "the best available science"? :lol:

SH, "You are still searching for fools gold but what else can be expected from a fool."

I'll let the other readers decide who is the fool here. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker,

If Canada removes the same SRM's as Taiwan has requested from the U.S, would you consider Canada's beef safe?

Of course you wouldn't because you want to keep the Canadian border closed to live cattle and you will use any excuse available to you.

Why don't you R-CULTers come clean and just admit that you don't want Canadian live cattle imports instead of painting yourselves into your hypocritical corners with your BSE double standards?



~SH~

Why do you ask me questions if you are going to answer for me?

Who has the double standard? :roll: R-CALF is pointing out that the Final Rule will have us with lower import standards that Taiwan, EGYPT, et al. You ignore that by wanting a definition on standards? :lol: :lol: :lol:
R-CALF is right and you just hate it! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Kato]

If you require the highest import standards, you will be required to meet them also. It's a two way street.

Speaking of double standards... In Canada, we process OTM and UTM cattle in separate plants. Do you? Should we require that you do before we import American beef? We don't require it now, but maybe that should change. We could also require traceback, which you don't require of yourselves. We could also require cattle not be fed chicken litter before we will import your beef.

Why do we not do these things? Maybe because we realize that trade is not a bad thing.

 

[Sandhusker]

If you require the highest import standards, you will be required to meet them also. It's a two way street.

Speaking of double standards... In Canada, we process OTM and UTM cattle in separate plants. Do you? Should we require that you do before we import American beef? We don't require it now, but maybe that should change. We could also require traceback, which you don't require of yourselves. We could also require cattle not be fed chicken litter before we will import your beef.

Why do we not do these things? Maybe because we realize that trade is not a bad thing.

Kato, did you miss my original post? We ARE ALREADY meeting higher standards that what the USDA is proposing.

For Taiwan, unless the plant is in the BEV program, we ARE processing cattle in seperate plants.

My post had nothing to do with Canada's requirements and there is no reason for a Canadian to take offense. Those backing the USDA are free to take offense! I was showing the difference between the US's proposed requirements and what we have agreed to do with Taiwan and inquiring if that policy was consistant with the desire to be seen as the world's beef quality leader.

We also realize that trade is not a bad thing. However, lowering standards below your customer's standards doesn't make any sense and is actually detrimental to your business.

 

[whiteface]

Sandhusker, I still don't see how Canada has lesser standards than that of the USA. We've found more BSE but we are doing everything the US is and then some to prevent it's spread. Maybe you can see how some of us are convinced in Canada that R-calf, right or wrong, is simply putting up a trade barrier. Have a good day all and thanks for reading from Canada!

 

[Anonymous]

Sandblaster: "YES, Taiwan's demands are justified by the science the OIE bases their decisions."

Show me the OIE standard that requires SRM removal of cattle less than 30 months of age to be the same as SRM removal in cattle older than 30 months of age.

BRING IT SANDHUSKER!


Sandblaster: "Do you think the USDA would not follow the OIE recommendations?"

Of course they would, Taiwan's requirements are above and beyond OIE standards. They are not recommended standards.


Sandblaster: "Your statement is NOT what the USDA is saying. They are saying EVERYTHING has to be sound science via OIE's recommendations."

Oh, I see, now you are an interpreter for the USDA. What an imagination!

Once again, Show me the OIE standard that requires SRM removal of cattle less than 30 months of age to be the same as SRM removal in cattle older than 30 months of age.


Sandblaster: "You, my friend, are full crap! How many times have you your self stumped the company line "OIE" "Sound science" ? YOU ARE TREED."

Yeh you just keep telling yourself that because it's a heck of a lot easier than proving it.

Treed? Hahaha! The closest you ever came to treeing me was followed by your alarm clock ringing. You have such a vivid imagination!

Bring the OIE recommendation that says that the SRMs removed from cattle under 30 months of age should be the same as the SRMs removed in animals over 30 months of age.

Watch the sandblaster dance around that one!


Sandblaster: "But you just said,"If the only way to ship beef to Taiwan requires measures we can live with, we will accomodate those measures EVEN IF THE SCIENCE THAT THE OIE HAS BASES THEIR STANDARDS ON WILL NOT SUPPORT TAIWAN'S DEMANDS."

Yeh, what is so difficult to understand about that?

Taiwan sets a standard above and beyond OIE recommendations. That is Taiwan's standard, not USDA's and not OIEs. We either accept that or we don't ship beef to Taiwan.

WHAT THE HECK IS THE POINT YOU THINK YOU HAVE THIS TIME??????


Sandblaster: "You're trying to prove R-CALF wrong and you're twisted so tight you're contradicting yourself in the same post!"

I never contradicted myself once.

Taiwan's standard is above and beyond OIE recommendations. You have a chance to prove me wrong by bringing the OIE recommendations that requires SRM removal in animals under 30 months of age to be the same SRM removal of animals older than 30 months of age. You won't be able to do it because no such standard exists.

As far as proving R-CULT wrong, try something a little more challenging. R-CALF spends half of their time anymore defending the stupidity of the statements they made previously.


Sandhusker: "Maybe you're telling us the OIE sound science is not the same as "the best available science"?"

I have no idea where you pulled that from......wait a minute, yes I do!


Sandhusker: "I'll let the other readers decide who is the fool here."

All that is required for you to do that is the OIE recommendation backing your claim.


I'll be waiting!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!


~SH~

 

[Tam]

Sandhusker why are we being told that the US has the highest standards in the world but when you compare standards the US is behind in more than a few standards with more than a few countries. I'm with Kato what about the National ID traceback with birthdate age verification on ALL US cattle, separate slaughter plants for OTM and UTM cattle and the feed bans and records of compliance. Those are some you are behind with Canada on and well lets not go into the testing. Can you name one standard that you are higher in Sandhusker?

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker why are we being told that the US has the highest standards in the world but when you compare standards the US is behind in more than a few standards with more than a few countries. I'm with Kato what about the National ID traceback with birthdate age verification on ALL US cattle, separate slaughter plants for OTM and UTM cattle and the feed bans and records of compliance. Those are some you are behind with Canada on and well lets not go into the testing. Can you name one standard that you are higher in Sandhusker?

Tam, that is the problem! For the US to be able to honestly say to the world that we have the highest quality beef in the world (and them believe it so we can capitalize on that image) we have to have the highest standards. Yet, the USDA is insistent on lowering them. Why? Who is profiting from that? Take a wild guess....

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker, I still don't see how Canada has lesser standards than that of the USA. We've found more BSE but we are doing everything the US is and then some to prevent it's spread. Maybe you can see how some of us are convinced in Canada that R-calf, right or wrong, is simply putting up a trade barrier. Have a good day all and thanks for reading from Canada!

Whiteface, I still don't see how anybody can read my post and take it as a comment on Canada's standards . My post is a questioning of THE US's standards as proposed by the USDA in their Final Rule in regard to trade with Canada.

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "Of course they would, Taiwan's requirements are above and beyond OIE standards. They are not recommended standards.".....................
More SH, "Taiwan sets a standard above and beyond OIE recommendations. That is Taiwan's standard, not USDA's and not OIEs.

Now a quote from Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns, ""We are very pleased with this development because it is further significant progress in our efforts to reopen global markets for U.S. beef," said Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns. "This action demonstrates Taiwan's commitment to trade in beef and beef products based on internationally accepted scientific standards for human and animal health.

Now, SH, either you are full of crap, or Secretary Johanns doesn't know much about internationally accepted standards. That is, of course unless he is "lying or deceiving" :roll: Maybe you're going to tell me that the OIE is not what Johanns was talking about when he talked about "internationally accepted scientific standards?


SH resorting to juvinile name-calling when he has no other weapons, "Sandblaster: "Your statement is NOT what the USDA is saying. They are saying EVERYTHING has to be sound science via OIE's recommendations."

SH,'s ill-thought retort, "Oh, I see, now you are an interpreter for the USDA. What an imagination!

And now from the USDA website; "This science-based framework of risk management measures for BSE has been developed with the objective to help normalize trade in ruminants and ruminant products within North America and to promote an international BSE strategy consistent with World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) guidelines. The strategy also represents the integrated North American approach that will be presented to the OIE as part of any further discussions to promote international harmonization of BSE risk mitigation measures through the OIE."

SH, take my advice and pretend you didn't see this post. Give it up.

Back to my original post before you tried to untrack me....... Taiwan has higher requirements taking our beef than what the USDA is proposing we apply to Canada. Is this policy consistant with a county who wants their product to be viewed as the world's best?

 

[Tam]

Sandhusker why are we being told that the US has the highest standards in the world but when you compare standards the US is behind in more than a few standards with more than a few countries. I'm with Kato what about the National ID traceback with birthdate age verification on ALL US cattle, separate slaughter plants for OTM and UTM cattle and the feed bans and records of compliance. Those are some you are behind with Canada on and well lets not go into the testing. Can you name one standard that you are higher in Sandhusker?

Tam, that is the problem! For the US to be able to honestly say to the world that we have the highest quality beef in the world (and them believe it so we can capitalize on that image) we have to have the highest standards. Yet, the USDA is insistent on lowering them. Why? Who is profiting from that? Take a wild guess....

But compare you standards Sandhusker you don't have the highest standards in the world by a long shot so are you telling us that the US beef industry including R-CALF is not being honest with the world when they say the US has the highest quality beef in the world. :shock: Maybe if the US beef industry would stop dragging their feet about some of these standards that other countries are DOING then maybe you would have the right to boost but until then it is just lip service and I think it is also called false advertizing. You would have been one step closer if R-CALF wouldn't have got M"ID" taken out of M"COOL" but that is just how far into the future R-CALF looks. If you would have had M"ID" it would have taken one small step to age vertify ALL CATTLE by birthdate like it did in Canada but you are still at ground floor on your National ID system aren't you. Not to mention the other standards that are lacking in the US.
Who is profiting from that? who isn't burden with the cost of M"ID" and expects the packers to guarantee a label that has no way of proving it. Who is recieving record high cattle prices and that is the really reason for keeping the border closed. Take a wild guess Sandhusker. Why is it bad for the packers to profit but it is OK for you to kill an industry just so you profit a little longer. Have you taken a good look at the long term effects R-CALF actions are and will cause in the future to the US beef industry. What do you think of R-CALF closing one of the largest export markets the whole US beef industry enjoys profits from. If Mexico closes their border you will only have R-CALF to blame aren't you proud. :roll:

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, "But compare you standards Sandhusker you don't have the highest standards in the world by a long shot so are you telling us that the US beef industry including R-CALF is not being honest with the world when they say the US has the highest quality beef in the world. Maybe if the US beef industry would stop dragging their feet about some of these standards that other countries are DOING then maybe you would have the right to boost but until then it is just lip service and I think it is also called false advertizing. You would have been one step closer if R-CALF wouldn't have got M"ID" taken out of M"COOL" but that is just how far into the future R-CALF looks. If you would have had M"ID" it would have taken one small step to age vertify ALL CATTLE by birthdate like it did in Canada but you are still at ground floor on your National ID system aren't you. Not to mention the other standards that are lacking in the US.
Who is profiting from that? who isn't burden with the cost of M"ID" and expects the packers to guarantee a label that has no way of proving it. Who is recieving record high cattle prices and that is the really reason for keeping the border closed. Take a wild guess Sandhusker. Why is it bad for the packers to profit but it is OK for you to kill an industry just so you profit a little longer. Have you taken a good look at the long term effects R-CALF actions are and will cause in the future to the US beef industry. What do you think of R-CALF closing one of the largest export markets the whole US beef industry enjoys profits from. If Mexico closes their border you will only have R-CALF to blame aren't you proud.

Tam, you're trying to fight with me about the US not having the highest standards, but I'm agreeing with you!

Just a week or so, I posted a statement direct from R-CALF on M-ID. Please read it. Don't get your information from SH - get it direct.

You keep bringing up the long term damage R-CALF will cause fighting the Final Rule. Have you considered what long-term damages will be caused by the world knowing we have laxer import requirements on a deadly disease than a third world country such as Egypt? And for what? Think about that, Tam.

 

[agman]

Tam, "But compare you standards Sandhusker you don't have the highest standards in the world by a long shot so are you telling us that the US beef industry including R-CALF is not being honest with the world when they say the US has the highest quality beef in the world. Maybe if the US beef industry would stop dragging their feet about some of these standards that other countries are DOING then maybe you would have the right to boost but until then it is just lip service and I think it is also called false advertizing. You would have been one step closer if R-CALF wouldn't have got M"ID" taken out of M"COOL" but that is just how far into the future R-CALF looks. If you would have had M"ID" it would have taken one small step to age vertify ALL CATTLE by birthdate like it did in Canada but you are still at ground floor on your National ID system aren't you. Not to mention the other standards that are lacking in the US.
Who is profiting from that? who isn't burden with the cost of M"ID" and expects the packers to guarantee a label that has no way of proving it. Who is recieving record high cattle prices and that is the really reason for keeping the border closed. Take a wild guess Sandhusker. Why is it bad for the packers to profit but it is OK for you to kill an industry just so you profit a little longer. Have you taken a good look at the long term effects R-CALF actions are and will cause in the future to the US beef industry. What do you think of R-CALF closing one of the largest export markets the whole US beef industry enjoys profits from. If Mexico closes their border you will only have R-CALF to blame aren't you proud.

Tam, you're trying to fight with me about the US not having the highest standards, but I'm agreeing with you!

Just a week or so, I posted a statement direct from R-CALF on M-ID. Please read it. Don't get your information from SH - get it direct.

You keep bringing up the long term damage R-CALF will cause fighting the Final Rule. Have you considered what long-term damages will be caused by the world knowing we have laxer import requirements on a deadly disease than a third world country such as Egypt? Think about that, Tam.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker,

I knew you would divert!

Here it is again,

SH (previous): "You have a chance to prove me wrong by bringing the OIE recommendations that requires SRM removal in animals under 30 months of age to be the same SRM removal of animals older than 30 months of age. You won't be able to do it because no such standard exists."

Like the R-CULT clone you are, you state USDA is lowering safety standards but as always, you cannot prove it.

For someone who can never back his claims, you sure have staying power. You lasted a lot longer than Mike Callicrate and Leo McDonnel did when they started having to justify their statements.

What USDA understands that you fail to understand and R-CALF fails to understand is that any BSE presidence we establish for Canada, we will have to live with in the event of another BSE outbreak.

That is why USDA has taken the science based route while R-CULT has taken the political route with their sole motive being to stop Canadian imports of live cattle. They fool nobody but themselves.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, I could bury you up to your neck is pig manure and you would still claim to smell cedar.

SH, "Like the R-CULT clone you are, you state USDA is lowering safety standards but as always, you cannot prove it. "

Let's make it simple for simple minds. Customer "1" will take your product if you do "a" and "b". Customer "2" will take your product if you do "a", "b", "c", "d", "e", "f" and "g". Who has the highest standards?

Another example for those who choose not to see the facts. We used to take NOTHING from a BSE positive country. Do we currently take any product from and BSE positive country now? Yes we do. How could we possibly take now what we used to refuse without lowering our standards?

SH, "For someone who can never back his claims, you sure have staying power. You lasted a lot longer than Mike Callicrate and Leo McDonnel did when they started having to justify their statements. "

I just backed my claim again. Are you ever going to provide your proof about Korea's claims? Are you confortable being a hypocrite?

 

[PORKER]

Expects the packers to guarantee a label that has no way of proving it.TAM*******They are not looking in the right direction as SSI has full traceback to origin from the FOOD counter.They just don't want traceback because the full truth on where their cattle that produced the beef they sold as home grown would be told on the label of the beef.Even them good cattle from CANADA.

 

[Tam]

Expects the packers to guarantee a label that has no way of proving it.TAM*******They are not looking in the right direction as SSI has full traceback to origin from the FOOD counter.They just don't want traceback because the full truth on where their cattle that produced the beef they sold as home grown would be told on the label of the beef. Even them good cattle from CANADA.

Can the packers contact SSI on every animal going through their plants. Unless SSI covers ALL US CATTLE it is not a National system. And you can bet if ranchers have to pay to participate there will be alot the will not.

"They just don't want traceback" do you mean R-CALF doesn't want it they were the ones that took M"ID" out so the packers had no way of proving the label. R-CALF didn't want the cost of M"ID" and alot of you think that is fine but when the packers don't want the price of a label they can't guarantee because R-CALF doesn't want to put out the money to guarantee it, it is the BIG BAD PACKERS fault we don't have a label. Give the packers a NATIONALLY recognised way of guaranteeing that label

 

[STAFF]

Can the packers contact SSI on every animal going through their plants. Unless SSI covers ALL US CATTLE it is not a National system.TAM
First Question,Tam our web Based system has all the animals that have been entered and by reading the RFID number the record can be avaiable in a couple seconds on the kill floor.The complete record and movement over many locations with it's indenity 's including brands is online.We sell the complete system from Field to Fork even to goverments.It could be that we will provide the USDA our system for Homeland Security and APHIS as a third party Provider.By the way our Databased system doesn't need a RFID tag as it can use any indentifier that used.Even DNA, Biometrics or thermal prints.We give any packer a INTERNATIONALLY recognised way of guaranteeing any label for any Product at the point of sale.