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

Nobody's COOL

OT wrote:
If you labeled every piece of meat that was imported as such we wouldn't need those inspectors in those countries...

Who would label those pieces of meat that were imported? Surely you wouldn't expect a border inspector to unpack/unbox every container and stamp each piece of meat? They would have to be labeled at the country of origin. You would still need inspectors at some point.

You're not making sense at all. The only way I see to enforce COOL labeling completely and inexpensively is to STOP importing any and all beef. :roll:

Let the trade wars begin.................
 
Mike said:
OT wrote:
If you labeled every piece of meat that was imported as such we wouldn't need those inspectors in those countries...

Who would label those pieces of meat that were imported? Surely you wouldn't expect a border inspector to unpack/unbox every container and stamp each piece of meat? They would have to be labeled at the country of origin. You would still need inspectors at some point.

You're not making sense at all. The only way I see to enforce COOL labeling completely and inexpensively is to STOP importing any and all beef. :roll:

Let the trade wars begin.................

The same folks that put on the USDA inspected stamps now- the Packer... You wouldn't need to inspect every piece- just random inspections of the labeling after they arrived in the US... If you enforced the law by banning any foreign packer/importer caught cheating or falsely labeling, you quickly eliminate the incentive to falsely label... That's the International Trade way of handling things... Remember how many US packers/importers Japan banned ....

And here I thought you were always whining about wanting less government/less spending :???: Here's a way to involve less government, have less government employees/cost (spent in foreign countries) and put the responsibility back in the hands of the citizen/consumer...

Rightwingernuts... One thing 40 years with government showed me- they whine and cry constantly about wanting less government - until its themselves that needs the help/service and then they whine and cry the loudest if its immediately not available at their instant beck and call... :wink: :P :lol:
Now they come up with a way to cut government costs-and allow Americans a way to take a little more responsibility for their own lives---- and they oppose that :roll: Never can make them happy.... :wink: :lol: :lol:
 
Mikey :-) I think you better campaign for the new head of the USDA (OT, in case you missed his problem solving program), he can continue to moonlight as ... well whatever it is that he does :shock:
 
Mike said:
OT wrote:
If you labeled every piece of meat that was imported as such we wouldn't need those inspectors in those countries...

Who would label those pieces of meat that were imported? Surely you wouldn't expect a border inspector to unpack/unbox every container and stamp each piece of meat? They would have to be labeled at the country of origin. You would still need inspectors at some point.

You're not making sense at all. The only way I see to enforce COOL labeling completely and inexpensively is to STOP importing any and all beef. :roll:

Let the trade wars begin.................
That would be interesting. The US cattle industry would sure be different than how it is today.
 
Oldtimer said:
S.S.A.P. said:
Oldtimer said:
.... the same as we can't afford to have an American inspector inspecting every piece of meat imported (the reason 98% never gets inspected)...


.... how are you going to afford the inspectors/audits to make sure "every piece of meat" has the correct 'born, raised, slaughtered label" ? Yesterday you said that many old folks and working folks (that leaves who?) are willing to consume more beef but can't because of today's beef prices. :roll:

ZING- right over your head...We're not talking about inspectors in the US--we're talking about US Inspectors and Auditors Inspecting the foreign slaughter houses and inspectors in these 40+ countries we import meat from to make sure they are doing their job...

If you labeled every piece of meat that was imported as such we wouldn't need those inspectors in those countries... The consumer could make their own decision if they trusted Mexican inspectors and Mexican slaughterhouses... Or Canadian.... Or if they have more faith in US packers and USDA inspectors ...
The US inspectors will always be in the US plants- and they can easily oversee if the packer is slaughtering M or C branded cattle....

I'm not aware of any U.S. or Canadian cattle going to Mexico to be fed out- and as you are aware the Canadian producers barriers have pretty well kept U.S cattle from going north- so there isn't much concern about keeping track of those combinations (and I have a lot more trust in Canadians than in Mexico)...

Even Greg Golden makes mention of the Canuck trade barrier fiasco in his this year Cole Creek Angus sale book:
Canada: Last year we sold four bulls to Canada and found the expense of getting cattle across the border. So, any bull going to Canada that sells over $6500, Cole Creek Angus will split all costs. Under $6,500, buyer assumes all expenses. We will get all work done and even meet close to the border. We will not cross the border into Canada...

I'd like to know what has changed on the Canadian side of crossing?

Most of the issues have been the US requirement of a passport when it comes to getting products north. :?
 
After OT's diatribe about Imported/Foreign Meat Safety, I just happen to read about a processor in California intentionally eluding Beef Safety inspections in order to sell cancerous cow meat to the public. :roll:

I think we need to clean up our own system before we start spewing about others.
PETALUMA, California (CNN) — Earlier this year, a dusty little slaughterhouse in Northern California was ground zero for one of the biggest meat recalls in years. Rancho Feeding Corp. had called back nearly 9 million pounds of bad meat from thousands of unsuspecting stores across the country.


The story of how millions of pounds of bad meat — products the U.S. Department of Agriculture called "unfit for human food" — made it out into the world and triggered a criminal investigation is one of staggering deception and cancerous cows, federal officials familiar with the investigation tell CNN. And the plant where it all went down was also the setting for an illicit romance, according to documents obtained by CNN.

Federal investigators started surveillance on the California facility after getting a tip from a former Rancho employee. In January, federal marshals raided the Petaluma plant and seized the company's records. Days later, the first recall notice went out, officials said.


Read more: http://fox40.com/2014/05/02/cancerous-cows-found-in-petaluma-beef-recall-investigation/#ixzz30nSHT32H

Read more at http://fox40.com/2014/05/02/cancerous-cows-found-in-petaluma-beef-recall-investigation/#QlhgtWCPks6OWp5z.99
But that wasn't the only misconduct going on at the plant. Turns out that one of the government inspectors — someone responsible for protecting consumers from bad meat — was having a romantic relationship with a plant foreman, according to a USDA e-mail obtained by CNN.

In the December e-mail, an assistant Rancho plant manager wrote to a USDA official to let him know about the relationship between inspector Lynnette Thompson and the plant foreman. The manager writes that the foreman admitted to seeing Thompson.

Then, things took a turn for the lascivious.

"He said he went to her trailer three different times and they were intimate," according to the e-mail. "She also sent him a picture of her naked back side in a tanning salon to his cell phone."
 
Mike said:
After OT's diatribe about Imported/Foreign Meat Safety, I just happen to read about a processor in California intentionally eluding Beef Safety inspections in order to sell cancerous cow meat to the public. :roll:

I think we need to clean up our own system before we start spewing about others.
PETALUMA, California (CNN) — Earlier this year, a dusty little slaughterhouse in Northern California was ground zero for one of the biggest meat recalls in years. Rancho Feeding Corp. had called back nearly 9 million pounds of bad meat from thousands of unsuspecting stores across the country.


The story of how millions of pounds of bad meat — products the U.S. Department of Agriculture called "unfit for human food" — made it out into the world and triggered a criminal investigation is one of staggering deception and cancerous cows, federal officials familiar with the investigation tell CNN. And the plant where it all went down was also the setting for an illicit romance, according to documents obtained by CNN.

Federal investigators started surveillance on the California facility after getting a tip from a former Rancho employee. In January, federal marshals raided the Petaluma plant and seized the company's records. Days later, the first recall notice went out, officials said.


Read more: http://fox40.com/2014/05/02/cancerous-cows-found-in-petaluma-beef-recall-investigation/#ixzz30nSHT32H

Read more at http://fox40.com/2014/05/02/cancerous-cows-found-in-petaluma-beef-recall-investigation/#QlhgtWCPks6OWp5z.99
But that wasn't the only misconduct going on at the plant. Turns out that one of the government inspectors — someone responsible for protecting consumers from bad meat — was having a romantic relationship with a plant foreman, according to a USDA e-mail obtained by CNN.

In the December e-mail, an assistant Rancho plant manager wrote to a USDA official to let him know about the relationship between inspector Lynnette Thompson and the plant foreman. The manager writes that the foreman admitted to seeing Thompson.

Then, things took a turn for the lascivious.

"He said he went to her trailer three different times and they were intimate," according to the e-mail. "She also sent him a picture of her naked back side in a tanning salon to his cell phone."


Yep- this makes me wonder- If this is happening in a country with so much government oversight and a rule/law for almost every move you make in life-along with all kinds of "whistleblower" laws ---What do you think is happening in a country like Mexico where the common practice for government employees is to obtain a major portion of their monthly wage thru graft and under the table payments :???:
In Mexico that inspector would be just earning part of her salary- double dipping... And someone would be standing at the trailer door collecting - "My seeesta for 20 Peso's"- as they hauled in the deadstock to the plant ..
 
Don't think so. A foreign worker could get his head cut off for interfering with a country's needed trade relations with us.

The California Inspectors will get a few months probation and lose his job at most. :roll:

Do you THINK about things before you type? :???:
 
Mike said:
Don't think so. A foreign worker could get his head cut off for interfering with a country's needed trade relations with us.

The California Inspectors will get a few months probation and lose his job at most. :roll:

Do you THINK about things before you type? :???:

Only if one of the Cartel's is running the plant/export business... And if that's so, God only knows what they're shipping with the beef....

Sorry- but I have more faith in the producers/retailers and oversight laws we have in place in the U.S. than in Mexico, Central/South America and Asia ...

Even as It Hurts Mexican Economy, Bribery Is Taken in Stride


By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD

Published: April 23, 2012


MEXICO CITY — Every now and then, the health department shows up at José Luis García's food store in an affluent neighborhood here. Mr. García immediately reaches for his wallet.

"They first say there is some fine and then they say, 'We can fix this another way,' " said Mr. García, who typically pays $50 to $100 to make the inspectors go away.

It is an article of faith here that the fastest way to resolve difficulties with a health inspector, traffic police officer or nettlesome ministry functionary is to pay a sum under the table.

A baroque bureaucracy, something economists have long warned slows the potential for growth here, and low pay for public servants leads to peso-greased shortcuts for the simplest transactions.

The bigger the project, experts say, the more palms that are likely to spread open.


"Although you may have all your permits, they say you have to contribute something," said Salvador Contreras, a contractor on an office building going up on a major boulevard. "If you do it the normal way or without paying, it can take double the normal time to do anything."

As deep as the bribery, as well as the resulting frustration, is the acceptance. So the report in The New York Times over the weekend that Wal-Mart de México had paid bribes to speed up the expansion of its empire here and then sought to cover up the payments came as no surprise. What raised eyebrows were the amounts involved — more than $24 million — and that the surreptitious behavior, which Mexicans are confronted with on a much smaller scale in their everyday lives, was so publicly revealed.

"They learned all the bad tricks here," Carlos Salas, a food stand vendor who himself admits to paying off municipal inspectors, said of the executives of Wal-Mart.

Fiscal watchdogs chafe at the way bribery and other forms of corruption are taken in stride here. Studies have found it costs the economy upward of $114 billion — 10 percent of its gross domestic product — and dampens potential investment.

The Mexican chapter of Transparency International said corruption over all was on the rise in Mexico and last year ranked it 100 out of 183 countries in its perception of corruption index, and last among the 34 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

A study in January by Global Financial Integrity, a research group in Washington, said Mexico over all had lost $872 billion between 1970 to 2010 to crime, corruption and tax evasion, with an acceleration of losses since the North American Free Trade Agreement began in 1994 and ushered in a wave of foreign investment.

"It is very much a part of business," said Heather Lowe, legal counsel for the group. "It is an international business issue, but it hits Mexico significantly."

"What our report showed," she added, "is a disregard for the rule of the law among a lot of the business community in Mexico, whether it is to evade taxes or engage in bribery or other crimes. There is a general disregard for the law in Mexico, and American law, too."

Mexico is the only developing country that shares a border with a major industrial democracy, making temptation go both ways, she said.

While Mexican bribery investigations are few and far between — government officials here have promised to look into the Wal-Mart allegations — American prosecutors have sought to crack down in recent years, using a 1977 law that bars American companies from paying bribes abroad.

In May, a California company and two of its executives were convicted on conspiracy charges for bribing a Mexican electric utility executive with a yacht, Ferrari and other goods in exchange for contracts. And last month Bizjet agreed to pay $11.8 million to settle charges it bribed Mexican and Panamanian officials to win aircraft maintenance work from government agencies.

But promised reforms in Mexico never seem to take root, with a justice system rife with impunity and botched and delayed investigations. On top of the business-related bribes are the drug-related ones, in which members of organized crime groups buy off police officers or politicians to look the other way.

"We have good laws," Luis Carlos Ugalde, a Mexican political scientist, wrote in Nexos magazine last year, in a lengthy dissection of corruption in Mexico and impediments to cleaning it up. "But they do not have an effect on the real world of corruption."

A report in October by the O.E.C.D. said Mexico needed to make criminal enforcement of foreign bribery a priority.

But there was no sign the Walmart affair would lead to a federal investigation here.

Government officials have generally lavished praise on Walmart, now Mexico's largest private employer and retailer with more than 2,000 stores and restaurants.

Just a couple of weeks ago President Felipe Calderon, after meeting with its chief executive, celebrated its clean energy goals in its stores and its contributions to the economy, including a promised 23,000 new jobs, although labor groups have complained about its wages and the placement of a subsidiary store near archaelogical ruins.

Mr. Calderon's office had no comment Monday.

Late Monday night, the Mexican economy ministry said in a statement that because the Walmart internal probe focused on permits and licences obtained at the municipal and state level it fell outside federal government jurisdiction.

"The federal government does not have province in the matters which the investigation alludes to,'' the statement said. It promised cooperation nonetheless with American authorities.

Sometimes there is no need for an investigation. Street vendors and the other Mexican merchants rebel. A few years ago, a group of vendors near a busy subway station got together and decided against paying off "leaders," who in turn say that they pay off city officials. So far, they have remained, but other vendors still pay bribe money out of fear of a crackdown.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/world/americas/bribery-tolerated-even-as-it-hurts-mexican-economy.html?_r=0

The survey quizzed 15,000 homes on whether they had paid bribes in the course of completing 35 tasks, from installing a phone line (2% had) to running a street stall (23% had). Mexico is only averagely corrupt by Latin American standards.--------------------


http://www.economist.com/blogs/americasview/2011/05/bribery_mexico
 
You're grasping at straws.

Truth is, if beef were labeled in the U.S. many people might shun it due to the cancerous beef and the multitude of E Coli, Listeria, Salmonella that sometimes pervades U.S. beef.

Just this California case includes over 9 Million lbs. alone.

And like I said before. Those that insist on labeled beef have the choice now.
 
Mike said:
The major university study I read said that people will pay up to $0.11 more for labeled beef but the actual cost addition is $0.24 - $0.25. That is called a conundrum.........................

If it costs 25 cents per pound to label generic run-of-the-mill beef "BEEF - Born, Raised, and Processed in the USA," and the consumer is only willing to pay 11 cents per pound for this "service," it looks to be a darn poor investment. Consumers can already buy labeled beef. The free market will make it happen, if there is enough demand. For the government to mandate COOL is not cool. The government is inept at everything they do, and if they get involved in this, too, we can watch our income from ranching shrink even more.
 
Soapweed said:
Mike said:
The major university study I read said that people will pay up to $0.11 more for labeled beef but the actual cost addition is $0.24 - $0.25. That is called a conundrum.........................

If it costs 25 cents per pound to label generic run-of-the-mill beef "BEEF - Born, Raised, and Processed in the USA," and the consumer is only willing to pay 11 cents per pound for this "service," it looks to be a darn poor investment. Consumers can already buy labeled beef. The free market will make it happen, if there is enough demand. For the government to mandate COOL is not cool. The government is inept at everything they do, and if they get involved in this, too, we can watch our income from ranching shrink even more.

You can bet the farm that if it cost $0.25 to label, that cost WILL be passed on to the producer. There's no other way around it.................
 
Mike said:
Soapweed said:
Mike said:
The major university study I read said that people will pay up to $0.11 more for labeled beef but the actual cost addition is $0.24 - $0.25. That is called a conundrum.........................

If it costs 25 cents per pound to label generic run-of-the-mill beef "BEEF - Born, Raised, and Processed in the USA," and the consumer is only willing to pay 11 cents per pound for this "service," it looks to be a darn poor investment. Consumers can already buy labeled beef. The free market will make it happen, if there is enough demand. For the government to mandate COOL is not cool. The government is inept at everything they do, and if they get involved in this, too, we can watch our income from ranching shrink even more.

You can bet the farm that if it cost $0.25 to label, that cost WILL be passed on to the producer. There's no other way around it.................

Safe bet. All you need to do is look at the Canadian discount to back that point.
 
Wal-Mart Recalls Donkey Meat Tainted With Fox Meat

May 15 • "Food" to Avoid •

by REBECCA WINTERS

As if anyone even needs yet another reason to be wary of the food coming out of China, Reuters is reporting that Wal-Mart customers are outraged to learn that their donkey meat was recently found to contain "the DNA of other animals," including fox.



Wal-Mart issued an apology and has announced that customers who purchased "Five Spice" donkey meat will be reimbursed. Confoundedly, Reuters went on to note, "The scandal could dent Wal-Mart's reputation for quality in China's $1 trillion food and grocery market…." Really?



China and Wal-Mart: an inimitable combination to say the least

Wal-Mart has been involved in everything from child labor scandals and mislabeling organic products to being fined over $80 million earlier this year for violating EPA regulations on improperly disposing hazardous waste. Currently, the company is under a Department of Justice investigation over possible Foreign Corrupt Policies Act violations regarding some $24 million in bribes to build 19 stores in Mexico and other alleged misconduct in Brazil, India and, again, China. Closer to home, the media was splashed around the holidays by reports that Wal-Mart stores across the U.S. were setting up donation boxes for employees to give Thanksgiving food… to other Wal-Mart employees who couldn't afford a decent Thanksgiving dinner, because apparently they don't earn enough.

China's food and drug scandals read like a House of Horrors checklist. Babies dying from industrial chemical-tainted infant formula? Check. Rat meat sold as lamb meat? Check. Some 600 dogs dropping dead after eating pet jerky treats made in China? Check. Glow-in-the-dark blue "Avatar" pork? Check. "Gutter oil" scavenged from drains beneath Chinese restaurants being using to cook one of every ten meals in Chinese restaurants? Check. Farmed, powdered cockroaches being sold to pharmaceutical companies as medicine? Check. The list goes on and on.

But China has perhaps become most well-known lately for its vast amounts of air, soil and water pollution. Shanghai recently suffered what the media dubbed an "airpocalypse" – choking, toxic smog so heavy and thick that it closed down major airports, roadways and public schools for over a week. A deputy minister of China's Ministry of Land and Resources has also just announced that 3.3 million hectares of Chinese farmland is so polluted, it is literally unsafe to grow crops on it. Estimates are that a whopping 90 percent of groundwater supplying China's cities is severely contaminated, to the point that Chinese people reportedly do not even trust the bottled water sold there. NGOs, Chinese media and academics have estimated that China is home to over 450 "cancer villages" – residential areas built up around power, chemical or pharmaceutical plants where people are riddled with above-average levels of illness and disease. The Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection even mentioned these villages in one of its latest reports.

There are no limits on how close crops can be grown to chemical plants or how much pollution the water spayed on crops can contain in China. All of that toxic runoff and pollution finds its way into rivers and soil used to grow Chinese crops and feed livestock. The food and water is ingested by the Chinese people, and that food is exported to the rest of the world as well.



Chinese food failures coming to a grocery store near you?

As Natural News has reported before, you may be eating more food imported from China than you think. Back in 2007, CNN declared that avoiding Chinese food ingredients is nearly impossible. The U.S. imports billions in food from China every year.

Just a few months ago, the USDA announced its intention to allow processed, cooked chicken from China to be exported to the U.S., as the agency determined that China's poultry inspection process is "equivalent to that of the United States".


The "certified organic" label has also come under scrutiny (and rightfully so) after it was revealed that the USDA was licensing organic certifiers to operate in China as well. These certifiers may have rules about whether or not added petroleum-based fertilizers, pesticides or synthetic hormones in the case of animal feed are allowed; they are not required to test for limits on toxic heavy metals like arsenic, mercury, lead or cadmium – heavy metals found contaminating the food grown in China all the time. The FDA wouldn't know anyway, considering that the agency inspects less than 2 percent of the food imported from China.

Stories like fox-tainted donkey meat just continue to highlight the fact that, if its marked "Made in China," it's a safe bet you don't know what's in it.



Read more at http://www.realfarmacy.com/wal-mart-recalls-donkey-meat-tainted-with-fox-meat/#b4RXqmoCv4XVSSzi.99



Stories like fox-tainted donkey meat just continue to highlight the fact that, if its marked "Made in China," it's a safe bet you don't know what's in it.

Problem is- under current COOL rules/laws much of it is not being Marked! As more globalization comes about we should be fighting to strengthen our labeling laws to give consumers an informed honest choice of what they want to feed their families- not fighting to weaken the laws..
 
Maybe Buckwheat needs to write an "Executive Order" about Tyson and the chicken coming from China? :lol: :lol:


http://www.tysonfoods.com/Around-the-World/International-Operations/Tyson-China/About-Tyson-China.aspx
 
June 17, 2014, 05:00 pm
Chinese food safety is worse than you think



By Nancy Huehnergarth


In April, I began an email correspondence with an American I'll call Susan (she prefers to remain anonymous), who has lived in China for 15 years while working in publishing. She currently resides in Beijing and also lived in a small town in Hubei province.

Susan came across our Change.org petition (322,000+ signatures) asking Congress to "Keep Chinese Chicken Out of Our Schools and Supermarkets" and reached out to me. While she loves China and its people, Susan's first-hand knowledge of China's poor food safety practices leave her deeply concerned about the prospect of American chicken being processed in China for consumption in the U.S.

Today in Washington, the Congressional-Executive Commission on China is holding a hearing entitled "Pet Treats and Processed Chicken from China: Concerns for American Consumers and Pets." To provide the Commission with even more information about how a weak Chinese food safety system poses a real threat to Americans, I have compiled a brief Q&A excerpt from my often-startling correspondence with Susan.

Why do you think China suffers from such spectacular food safety problems?

Food safety has always been an issue (in China), due to lack of knowledge about hygiene standards. Even in Beijing I can count on contracting food poisoning at least once a year, despite all my precautions. The problem is, buying anything here that is processed becomes a roll of the dice.

Most Chinese believe the food safety system is thoroughly corrupt. Although there are protests, in general people say "mei ban fa." Nothing can be done. This is the traditional Confucist attitude that teaches one to bend like a reed in the wind–never stand against it like a tree.

What about large multinational food corporations operating in China? Aren't their food safety standards equivalent to those in the United States?

I don't think so. Shuanghui International, China's biggest meat products company (which purchased Smithfield Foods last year for $4.7 billion), has been plagued by constant reports here in this country of meat infested with maggots, customers succumbing to food poisoning and random testing that shows illegal levels of bacteria and illegal additives like clenbuterol in their meat. Negative Chinese articles about Shuanghui were pulled off the web in advance of the Smithfield purchase, but you can still read about them at edition.cnn.com/2013/05/31/business/china-food-tainted-shuanghui-maggots/."

Are Chinese citizens fully aware of food safety problems in their country? How do they deal with them?

The residents of Beijing are well aware of (food safety) problems. I can think of four ways in particular that their concern has become evident in recent years.

The first is the proliferation and patronage of foreign import food stores. When I first came to Mainland China there was one such store in Beijing, little more than hole in the wall, which catered entirely to the foreign population. Today that original shop has eight locations in the city. There are now four competing chains as well, and most have numerous full-sized grocery stores. Even as recently as five years ago, the vast majority of patrons were still foreigners. However today, these stores are filled with Chinese patrons, even though the product markup can often be 100 percent or more above what those items would cost back home.

The second change has been in behavior when eating out. Anyone who can afford it avoids street food and cheaper restaurants, which are notorious for their poor quality. Food consequently often takes up to 50 percent of the average person's monthly budget. Food poisoning is extremely common and the rates of cancer in China are rising. I know personally three people under the age of 40 with liver or kidney failure. Gastrointestinal cancer is one of the most common cancers in China. People largely view this as unavoidable and a consequence of dirty food.

The third piece of evidence is that Hong Kong and other countries are restricting the amount of baby formula Chinese citizens purchase or carry out of the country. These laws were necessary because the Chinese were going abroad in droves and buying up all the baby formula.

The final change has been the proliferation of balcony gardens. Anyone who has room in Beijing tries to turn their apartment balcony into a small garden since vegetables are among the foods most likely to make one ill.

What do you hear about soil and water contamination in China?

The soil and water are both are widely and terribly contaminated. The soil study (the government) finished in 2010 had been locked away as a state secret until recently, when they admitted that 20 percent of the nation's farmland is contaminated -- a figure that most who live here would suspect to be low, as well as out-of-date. As to the water, I've read that the groundwater of 90 percent of our cities is contaminated to some degree while 64 percent of the groundwater in our cities is severely polluted.

Based on your experiences, do you think it's safe to process American raised chickens in China?

I was horrified to learn that any food from America might come here to be processed. In my opinion, it will certainly return contaminated–even if nothing is added to it.
There is no guarantee that the food will be kept at the proper temperature here, or that anyone involved will ensure the sanitation standards needed.

What's a good resource to learn about Chinese food safety scandals?

The website "Throw it Out the Window" is a Chinese student's compilation of all food scandal reports and articles that come out here every month. Running it through Google translate will help you keep up with our food safety issues.

Huehnergarth is a national food policy activist, journalist, coalition leader and president of Nancy F. Huehnergarth Consulting
.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/209561-chinese-food-safety-is-worse-than-you-think#ixzz34zlaMjSt
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
 
Now that you mention China:

By Brian Wingfield (Bloomberg)
Food-safety advocates are raising alarms over a decision by the Obama administration to permit chicken processed in China to be sold in the U.S. even after several high-profile incidents of food contamination.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, in addressing a decade-long trade dispute over farm imports, said it will allow poultry slaughtered in the U.S. and Canada to be processed in China and returned to the U.S. for consumption. Critics are vowing to fight the decision, which they say puts consumers at risk due to lax Chinese factory oversight.

"The Chinese food-safety system has had significant failures in the enforcement of its food-safety laws and regulations," Senator Charles Schumer wrote in a Sept. 16 letter to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.

The issue is the latest flashpoint for U.S. concerns over the safety of goods from China, which since 2007 have included tainted baby formula and evidence of the chemical melamine in pet food and eggs. China in recent months has had an outbreak of avian influenza in its chicken flocks and in March, Shanghai authorities retrieved more than 11,000 dead pigs floating in a river.

"Consumers should know that any processed poultry from China will be produced under equivalent food safety standards and conditions as U.S. poultry," the Agriculture Department said in a fact sheet.

No Fear

Poultry producers say almost all the chicken eaten in the U.S. will still be produced and processed domestically. The U.S. government currently allows Canada, Chile, France and Israel to export processed poultry to the U.S.

"Ninety-nine percent of the chicken we consume here is hatched, raised and processed in the U.S.," Tom Super, a spokesman for the National Chicken Council, a Washington-based industry group, said in an e-mail. "We don't expect that to change any time soon."

Officials from the Chinese embassy in Washington didn't respond to e-mail or phone requests for comment.

The U.S. last year exported $354.1 million worth of poultry products to China, representing about 7 percent of total U.S. poultry exports, according to Census Bureau data. The U.S. doesn't currently import poultry from China.

"There's a concern that this might be the first step to that," Chris Waldrop, director of the Food Policy Institute at the Consumer Federation of America in Washington, said by phone.

Tyson Foods Inc. (TSN), the largest U.S. meat processor, chicken producer Sanderson Farms Inc. (SAFM), and McDonald's Corp. (MCD), the world's largest restaurant chain, are among companies that don't plan to import processed chicken from China, according to company officials.

Another: http://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/news_home/Global/2014/02/Poultry_imports_from_China_cau.aspx?ID=%7B7A6EA0AE-02B9-46AF-AE88-A1713495CF02%7D&cck=1
 
Food-safety advocates are raising alarms over a decision by the Obama administration to permit chicken processed in China to be sold in the U.S. even after several high-profile incidents of food contamination.

This chicken processed in China won't be "COOL" labeled either.

Where's your backbone? :roll: Oh, that's right. You lost it rodeoing. :roll:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top