Sandhusker
Well-known member
Jason said:
Merck and other drug manufacturers DO test their drugs.
I still do not see the logic in calling BSE testing a trade barrier when Japanese law requires it of their domestic product.
NO USDA GRADE ON IMPORTED MEAT
- Thread starter HAY MAKER
- Start date
Merck and other drug manufacturers DO test their drugs.
I still do not see the logic in calling BSE testing a trade barrier when Japanese law requires it of their domestic product.
Jason said:
I wouldn't trust Tyson any further than I can throw your biggest bull. Verification is where it is. We don't have it now.
Japan is known for its veiled trade barriers. Always have been. They had a reason to stop beef trade and they took it. They don't trust the USDA and I wouldn't either if I were them.
Have you concluded that your arguments on having more than 1 buyer and market power need a little refining? Agman probably does the calculations on that as he is always bragging about demand calculations.
MID will give them more numbers to calculate on.
Andy
Well-known member
Sandhusker "And how much do you think of that product was sold? How much do you think you have eaten?"
We sell alot of beef on the hoof to people that have it slaughtered and they all are very happy with it. None of it is USDA inspected. Basically all the beef i eat at home isn't USDA inspected. And it is all Born, raised, and slaughtered in the USA.
We sell alot of beef on the hoof to people that have it slaughtered and they all are very happy with it. None of it is USDA inspected. Basically all the beef i eat at home isn't USDA inspected. And it is all Born, raised, and slaughtered in the USA.
A
Anonymous
Guest
IT'S NOT!
I'm not following your logic here either. Normally you seem to show a great concern for beef safety. Now you're advocating that a private company should be allowed to conducting BSE testing on cattle less than 24 months of age with a test that, by Creekstone's own admission, would not reveal BSE prions in cattle under 24 months of age.
Where's the consistancy in your health concerns reader?
BSE testing of cattle under 24 months with the tests Creekstone wanted to conduct would not have revealed any BSE prions anyway.
Creekstone's own Fielding stated that "BSE TESTED" does not mean "BSE FREE" so why the hell even test?
I'll tell you why! CHA CHING $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Where's the consistancy in your arguments reader? I would think you would be all over this one and here you are taking a "go ahead and decieve the Japense consumer" attitude regarding BSE testing.
Makes me seriously question your motives.
"WE" know the issues? Who? You and the turd you carry around in your pocket?
You don't know sh*t about the issues and this is just one more example.
You don't want accountability. You want USDA to march to your packer blaming music and find the ghosts that you are chasing.
Yup, one's big and successful and hated by the less successful. CLASS ENVY typical of liberals.
All drugs have to be approved by FDA just as all BSE testing should be conducted or approved by USDA, not some private company who wants to deceive for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
~SH~
Jason
Well-known member
They might test them but they need the FDA to be allowed to sell them to the public.
For Creekstone to be allowed to test it would have to be under the protocol of FDA and/or USDA.
Japan has changed their testing requirements so why set precedence for an unnecessary test?
For Creekstone to be allowed to test it would have to be under the protocol of FDA and/or USDA.
Japan has changed their testing requirements so why set precedence for an unnecessary test?
Quality grading of imported meat in debate
Friday, November 18, 2005, 3:01 PM
by Hannah Jackson
Several senators are proposing that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) no longer provide quality grading of imported lamb or beef carcasses.
Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota introduced a bill on Wednesday, Truth in Quality Grading Act of 2005, which would prohibit labels such as "USDA choice" or "USDA prime" on packages of imported lamb and beef. This move would help consumers differentiate between American product and imported meat, as well as eliminate confusion.
"People sometimes assume that a USDA quality grade for meat products indicates the product is of U.S. origin. This is often not the case," stated Johnson.
In 1999, the American Sheep Industry Association (ASI) petitioned the secretary of agriculture to discontinue the practice of grading imported lamb. ASI supplied comments in 2000 on an Advanced Notice of Rulemaking, again asking the department to not provide USDA grading services on imported carcasses.
At the ASI annual meeting in January 2003, the secretary responded that the department would not initiate this change through rulemaking but rather the effort would require congressional authorization.
"ASI has long standing policy on this issue and we appreciate the Senate action," stated Peter Orwick, ASI executive director. "Nearly every American lamb carcass is quality graded, even though plants participate voluntarily, indicating how important this is to U.S. lamb marketers. U.S. producers, feeders and companies have spent a large amount of time and energy over the years on the grade standards, while importers obviously have not."
The bill comes in response to several delays for a country-of-origin labeling law that was authorized in the 2002 Farm Bill. It was originally scheduled to begin in 2004, but was then delayed until 2006 and has now been pushed back to 2008.
Friday, November 18, 2005, 3:01 PM
by Hannah Jackson
Several senators are proposing that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) no longer provide quality grading of imported lamb or beef carcasses.
Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota introduced a bill on Wednesday, Truth in Quality Grading Act of 2005, which would prohibit labels such as "USDA choice" or "USDA prime" on packages of imported lamb and beef. This move would help consumers differentiate between American product and imported meat, as well as eliminate confusion.
"People sometimes assume that a USDA quality grade for meat products indicates the product is of U.S. origin. This is often not the case," stated Johnson.
In 1999, the American Sheep Industry Association (ASI) petitioned the secretary of agriculture to discontinue the practice of grading imported lamb. ASI supplied comments in 2000 on an Advanced Notice of Rulemaking, again asking the department to not provide USDA grading services on imported carcasses.
At the ASI annual meeting in January 2003, the secretary responded that the department would not initiate this change through rulemaking but rather the effort would require congressional authorization.
"ASI has long standing policy on this issue and we appreciate the Senate action," stated Peter Orwick, ASI executive director. "Nearly every American lamb carcass is quality graded, even though plants participate voluntarily, indicating how important this is to U.S. lamb marketers. U.S. producers, feeders and companies have spent a large amount of time and energy over the years on the grade standards, while importers obviously have not."
The bill comes in response to several delays for a country-of-origin labeling law that was authorized in the 2002 Farm Bill. It was originally scheduled to begin in 2004, but was then delayed until 2006 and has now been pushed back to 2008.
reader (the Second) said:
reader 2, I'm amazed that a person so involved in science and lore of BSE and other TSE's as you say you are, did not realize that a label stating "USDA Graded Choice", etc. or "USDA Inspected" would fail to understand that those labels mean exactly what they say: "Graded" or "Inspected".
Surely, we do want USDA to have oversight of the US trained inspectors in foreigh nations exporting beef to the USA, don't we?
Sandhusker, doesn't it give you the least bit of a chill to think of what consumers' reaction might be to a label stating your touted "DISCLAIMER: BSE testing does not guarantee the product is BSE free". Wouldn't take much of a leap for consumers to think all that testing we have done means nothing, and that there just might be more BSE out there, would it?
BTW, are those promoting changing the law/rules re. COOL ready to do the right thing and include ID of domestic beef? That is the ONLY way to give the consumers the food safety benefits you have falsely told them are in the COOL law.
MRJ
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
What I can't figure is R-CALF backing Creekstone proposal to test UTM cattle and Creekstone wanting to bring in Canadian cattle. Maybe DeBruycker was going to supply them.
Sandhusker
Well-known member
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Sandman: "But what if the following was put on the label on each package of BSE tested beef;...."
SH, "IT'S NOT! "
We all know that, SH. Why are you having such a hard time answering the queston? Gets kind of hard blindly trying to justify the packer's positions, doesn't it.
I'm looking for a yes/no - why answer.
Quote:
Sandman: "But what if the following was put on the label on each package of BSE tested beef;...."
SH, "IT'S NOT! "
We all know that, SH. Why are you having such a hard time answering the queston? Gets kind of hard blindly trying to justify the packer's positions, doesn't it.
I'm looking for a yes/no - why answer.
PORKER
Well-known member
Japan has changed their testing requirements so why set precedence for an unnecessary test?
Don't worry,Japan isn't the only country. And remember ,the news of a piron test on meat on the shelf is just around the corner.Maybe thats what Japan is waiting for??
Don't worry,Japan isn't the only country. And remember ,the news of a piron test on meat on the shelf is just around the corner.Maybe thats what Japan is waiting for??
A
Anonymous
Guest
Sandman,
Unless Creekstone offered a disclaimer your point is moot as most of your points are.
As far as "blind packer support", you've never corrected me on anything I have stated regarding packer issues. Not once. You just believe what you want to believe, not what you can prove. Mindless follower of the packer blaming gospel according to R-CULT. Must suck to always lose in court where facts matter. Any bets on whether R-CULT loses the Captive Supply Reform Act to save the feeding industry from their pricing mechanisms. You are the follower which is exactly why you accuse me of it. Conscience cleansing.
~SH~
Unless Creekstone offered a disclaimer your point is moot as most of your points are.
As far as "blind packer support", you've never corrected me on anything I have stated regarding packer issues. Not once. You just believe what you want to believe, not what you can prove. Mindless follower of the packer blaming gospel according to R-CULT. Must suck to always lose in court where facts matter. Any bets on whether R-CULT loses the Captive Supply Reform Act to save the feeding industry from their pricing mechanisms. You are the follower which is exactly why you accuse me of it. Conscience cleansing.
~SH~
~SH~ said:
SH, I don't really care what you think of me. You bring the discussions on the board to a low level. That is MO. Every name you call someone else shows how little you have to offer in any substantive discussion. You may have personal experience with turds in your pocket but don't project that on me.
Sandhusker
Well-known member
~SH~ said:
You've danced around providing an answer and tried to misdirect the conversation how many times now?
Would you support BSE testing if that label was placed on each package of tested beef? Yes/NO - and why/why not. Anything else is dancing and diversion.
Andy said:
Andy, I'm supposing your beef is slaughtered at a state inspected local plant. Isn't there a requirement that such plants which are state inspected meet or exceed the USDA inspection protocols?
The refusal of legislators to make such "meet or exceed" state inspections equivalent to federal and allow interstate sales of beef from small plants is incomprehensible and would be a way to promote more local business, IMO.
MRJ
A
Anonymous
Guest
Nobody brings the discussions to a lower level than you do with all your misinformation and outright lies.
No I would not!
A test that does not reveal anything in cattle under 24 months of age is worthless so there is no sense in testing.
NEXT!
~SH~
Sandhusker
Well-known member
SH, 'No I would not! A test that does not reveal anything in cattle under 24 months of age is worthless so there is no sense in testing."
Now a follow up; If somebody wants that worthless test done, and somebody is willing to perform that worthless test, and it effects nobody else in the least, how is an outside party justified in blocking any transactions?
Now a follow up; If somebody wants that worthless test done, and somebody is willing to perform that worthless test, and it effects nobody else in the least, how is an outside party justified in blocking any transactions?
PORKER
Well-known member
SO, what happens when the BSE urine test can detect PIRONS at ANY AGE,do you stay at the 20 MONTH level or CHANGE? Its the current science!
TimH
Well-known member
reader (the second) -"There's a Pandora's Box here given that they now have detected prions in milk."
Who has detected prions in milk,R2?? I'd like to read that study.
Who has detected prions in milk,R2?? I'd like to read that study.
PORKER
Well-known member
Do you stay at the 20 MONTH level or CHANGE?