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

"N.Y. Times" Already Quoting Cebull's Inaccuracies

Help Support Ranchers.net:

CattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
543
Reaction score
0
"N.Y. Times" Already Quoting Cebull's Inaccuracies
Key Beef Industry Issue Further Taken Over By Judicial System

Colorado Springs, CO March 21, 2005

One of the fears we expressed when Judge Richard Cebull issued his horribly sensational injunction opinion was that the mass media would pick up on it and start quoting his opinion.

It didn't take long for this to happen. The New York Times has already published an editorial, quoting Cebull and indicating they have been sucked into Cebull's and R-CALF's misleading science and unpracticed understanding of international trade. The worst of this is that the Times is making proclamations based on ideology, not science or facts, and their wire service is picked up by hundreds of papers across the country.

The Times editorial ridicules USDA's efforts to establish international trade of under-30-month cattle from countries with minimal risk as, "based on a hope and a wish." It quotes Cebull's regurgitations of R-CALF's claims of "catastrophic damages" and "genuine risk of death," just as if these were facts, instead of sensationalist claims made in a legal brief attempting to scare a judge.

The Times also misreads Japan's evaluation of the situation, claiming as R-CALF does, that opening the border to Canadian cattle under 30-months will automatically cause the Japanese to keep our exports out. Instead, as those involved in the negotiations have pointed out, the opposite is true. Any indication by the U.S. that it does not trust young Canadian cattle creates mistrust and confusion among Japanese government officials and consumers. In fact, the negotiations were going along sedately, bolstered by the fact that Canadian boxed beef was flowing nicely through our system, because everyone knows the beef is safe. That is until R-CALF raised unwarranted questions.

So R-CALF's legal gymnastics have succeeded in throwing a monkey wrench into the Canadian border trade and the Japanese export trade. The "bonuses" are that R-CALF is now the godfather of the Canadian packing industry expansion, has damaged U.S. packers large and small and is the catalyst for the largest and most determined effort Canada has ever made to compete with us in the world market.

Thanks to R-CALF, Canada's biggest nightmare has been prolonged far beyond what was necessary. But in the long-term, R-CALF could have helped propel Canada's beef chain development efforts farther and faster than would have happened in decades without their interference.

The Times claims that Japan is requiring the U.S. to prove it is free of mad cow. We haven't heard that and that is not the issue. The issue is that the beef exported to Japan be free of BSE - and that we can guarantee. Specified Risk Material (SRM) removal, tailored to the age of the animal, is internationally recognized as yielding safe beef, even if by some unlikely chance an animal actually had BSE. The OIE has even stated that it does not recommend against importing beef from countries with a high BSE risk. The SRM removal renders the country's BSE status a moot point.

Yet R-CALF continues to ignore that fact. Instead it is trying to get people to believe SRM removal is ineffective. On top of that, R-CALF wants people to believe Canada is really a high-risk country - another U.K. - and that no one else but R-CALF has figured it out yet.

To prove that the Times has bought into R- CALF's furthest stretches for obstacles to throw in the path of imports, the Times said that the only way to resume international trade is to test all cattle.

Even worse, the Times implies that there is no feed ban in place, by calling for an "end to the feeding practices that can spread mad cow disease." The feed ban was instituted in 1997 but the New York Times is unaware of that fact. But ignorance of the facts does not keep the Times from telling everyone how to solve their problems. Add that to the lawyers and judges already in the mix, and it means science and verified facts get buried even deeper under a growing pile of misinformation, hyperbole and short-sighted obstructionism.

Which is just what American consumers or the beef industry does not need.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
The Times claims that Japan is requiring the U.S. to prove it is free of mad cow. We haven't heard that and that is not the issue. The issue is that the beef exported to Japan be free of BSE - and that we can guarantee. Specified Risk Material (SRM) removal, tailored to the age of the animal, is internationally recognized as yielding safe beef, even if by some unlikely chance an animal actually had BSE. The OIE has even stated that it does not recommend against importing beef from countries with a high BSE risk. The SRM removal renders the country's BSE status a moot point.
THIS COMMENT by the TIMES shows that THE STORY is a PAY OFF.
Japan just wants BSE tested BEEF.
SRM removal is old TECHNOLOGY,Everyone KNOWS BSE PIRONS are in the BLOOD and TISSUES of BOVINES,NOT a MOOT POINT unless you are PROTECTING the STATUS QUO!
 

Kato

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,679
Reaction score
0
Location
Manitoba - At the end of the road
SRM removal is current technology.

The level of prions necessary to infect is speculation, and the ability to contract CJD from muscle cuts and blood is speculation. For that matter, the ability to infect cattle by feeding them SRM's is speculation, since it hasn't been proven in a lab under controlled conditions.

The ability to get into a car accident is not speculation, yet we all get behind the wheel every day. Who here knows someone who has died in a car accident? I bet everyone does.

Who here knows someone who has died of new variant CJD ? (not including Reader 2, because I know you have been intimately involved with this, I just mean average 'guys on the street')

What ever happened to perspective? :???:

My point is that all of this wild rhetoric being tossed about, will over the course of time lose it's proper status as speculation. If enough people hear these half baked ideas about the so called dangers of eating beef enough times, they will begin to believe it. They will remember what has been said about Canadian beef, and they will apply that so called knowledge to American beef when you guys finally have to look domestic BSE in the face.

Good luck. :roll:
 

cowsense

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,394
Reaction score
0
Location
Central Saskatchewan
Porker..... Consider this.... The only cases of infected prions being found in blood or muscle tissue were in lab mice that were brain injected with concentrated doses of infected material!

We've been hearing for years now first with CWD and now BSE that blood based tests were almost developed/patented and would be ready for market soon. Invariably they have proven to be theories and the owners are looking for funding to "further develop" these ideas!! Not one of them has ever got beyond an initial press release!! While a live test for TSE's would be desirable it will probably be years away!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Porker: "SRM removal is old TECHNOLOGY,Everyone KNOWS BSE PIRONS are in the BLOOD and TISSUES of BOVINES,NOT a MOOT POINT unless you are PROTECTING the STATUS QUO!"

Everyone also knows that detection is a moot point under 24 months of age AT THIS TIME.

Unless you have detectable prions, detection testing is a moot point.

You keep wanting to hang your hopes on BSE testing (creating the "ILLUSION of safety) but you cannot reveal what is not yet there to reveal.

I'm all for advances in testing technology. If it's affordable and justified, it can certainly be part of the equation.

What do you know about blood and tissue prions that the OIE with the world's best researchers does not know?

I think you want to ignore the OIE "peer reviewed" science and sink your teeth into speculative theories.




~SH~
 

doug

New member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Location
Manitoba
The level of prions necessary to infect is speculation, and the ability to contract CJD from muscle cuts and blood is speculation. For that matter, the ability to infect cattle by feeding them SRM's is speculation, since it hasn't been proven in a lab under controlled conditions.

The ability to get into a car accident is not speculation, yet we all get behind the wheel every day. Who here knows someone who has died in a car accident? I bet everyone does.

Who here knows someone who has died of new variant CJD ? (not including Reader 2, because I know you have been intimately involved with this, I just mean average 'guys on the street')

What ever happened to perspective





How many do you know that have died of smoking or drinking as well . I bet the odds are far greater than BSE. I think it is time we got over the BS and get on with life.[/quote]
 
Top