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

Processor Profits Over Sound Science---BSE in Canada

Econ101

Well-known member
Cattle policy pure madness

It doesn't take an expert to figure out critter cannibalism must end



By Licia Corbella

Columnist

The Calgary Sun

July 9, 2006

Canada



What, pray tell, do we pay our government experts for?



After all, three years ago, after a few days of intensive research, I came to a rather obvious conclusion that there was one way -- and only one way -- to ensure that Canada wouldn't keep on producing mad cows -- that is cows with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).



How did I propose to do that?



By completely banning all animal protein from entering livestock feed.



Period.



No exceptions.



Last month, Canada took one more baby step towards such a ban, but really still has a long way to go before it does the right thing and turns Canada's cattle into herbivores again rather than meat eaters -- and in many cases cannibals.



On June 26, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency announced that it will ban the use of so-called "specified risk material" such as the brain, spinal cord and eyeballs from all livestock feed as of July 12, 2007.



It's frankly, an outrageous delay to protect our food source and an important multi-billion dollar industry.



Currently, our pigs and chickens are eating cows and our cows are eating pigs and chickens even though they're all supposed to be herbivores.



It's a disgusting practice made all the worse since it's known the feed often gets mixed up, turning all of those consumable animals into cannibals.



Just this past Tuesday, federal officials confirmed a 15-year-old cow from near Gimli, Man. was infected with mad cow disease, making it the country's sixth case since the first Alberta case was discovered in 2003.



But if Canada had followed the lead of Britain -- which caused mad cow disease to begin with -- Canada most likely wouldn't have had ANY mad cows at all and countless ranchers and feedlot operators wouldn't have gone bankrupt after the U.S. border and borders around the world were slammed shut to our beef when an Alberta-born cow was discovered with the dreaded disease on May 20, 2003.



In July 1988, Britain banned the practice of turning cows into cannibals by imposing a ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban, which means all animals with four stomachs, such as sheep, cows and elk -- herbivores all -- weren't allowed to eat one and other any more.



The U.S. and Canada waited another nine long years until 1997 to follow suit.



And guess what?



This latest mad cow was born in 1991, three years after the Brits banned cattle cannibalism (a practice they started).



While it's not fair to compare Canada's fabulous beef industry with Britain's abysmal one, surely our experts could have and should have gleaned some important information from the disaster that occurred there and throughout Europe as a result of the grotesque practice of feeding Bessy the cow to Bart the bull and Bart the bull to Bessy and so on.



In total, some 183,000 British cows were infected with BSE.



Nevertheless, despite the ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban, more than 43,000 of those infected cows were born AFTER July 1988.



If it's true BSE can't be spread from cow to cow and only either at birth or through its feed, then what was happening?



Experts say it's safe to assume that many of those 43,000 cattle were infected by what they were eating.



Clearly, cattle cannibalism hadn't stopped, despite the limited feed ban.



So, were British farmers defying the ruminant-to-ruminant ban?



Yes, though not necessarily intentionally.



Those cruddy cattle parts -- like the eyeballs, brains and spinal columns, called specified risk materials (SRMs)-- were now finding their way into chicken and pig feed and that feed was finding its way back to Bessy the cow and Bart the bull.



The Brits finally figured it out and in August 1996, the government there imposed a feed ban that completely prohibited cattle and sheep parts from being rendered into ANY kind of feed.



And Canada is only planning on banning SRMs from livestock feed in July 2007?



It makes no sense.



Several years ago I interviewed Dr. Connie Argue, veterinary program specialist for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) who said after the first mad cow was discovered in Alberta in May, the CFIA "scrutinized" 200 Canadian farms and found three farms where cattle were found inadvertently eating their own kind when they broke into bags destined for pigs and chickens instead.



That's 1.5%.



Recognizing the risk of exactly that happening, in 2001 the European Union banned all cattle, chicken AND pig protein from the feed market altogether. Cows in Europe are herbivores again!



Imagine that?



The answer to this problem is simple.



Why are we trying to reinvent the wheel when the answer is so obvious?



Cattle and other ruminant protein should not be finding its way into ANY feed for any animal or fertilizer because history proves it is inevitably fed back to cows.



If a lay person like me could figure that out way back in July 2003, why has it taken our government experts another three years to come to the same conclusion?



And why are we waiting another year to implement the ban?



What do we pay these experts for?





calsun.canoe.ca
 

PORKER

Well-known member
What do we pay these experts for? On June 26, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency announced that it will ban the use of so-called "specified risk material" such as the brain, spinal cord and eyeballs from all livestock feed as of July 12, 2007.

To keep Canada out of the Loop .
 

Judith

Well-known member
Does anyone know why it will take so long for feed mills to get "body parts" out of the feed? Seems to me most farmers don't keep feed in the hoppers for over a year. Mills can stop with the next run of product so what is the problem?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Judith said:
Does anyone know why it will take so long for feed mills to get "body parts" out of the feed? Seems to me most farmers don't keep feed in the hoppers for over a year. Mills can stop with the next run of product so what is the problem?

Packers have found that if they take the guts, and the bones and make MBM (meat and bone meal) they can make a little extra money by feeding back to cattle or chickens.

They are not willing to give this up and will take the whole industry down to keep their little systems going.

The USDA and Canadian counterpart are too wimpy to take them on in any significant way. They can not govern.
 

Jason

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
Judith said:
Does anyone know why it will take so long for feed mills to get "body parts" out of the feed? Seems to me most farmers don't keep feed in the hoppers for over a year. Mills can stop with the next run of product so what is the problem?

Packers have found that if they take the guts, and the bones and make MBM (meat and bone meal) they can make a little extra money by feeding back to cattle or chickens.

They are not willing to give this up and will take the whole industry down to keep their little systems going.
The USDA and Canadian counterpart are too wimpy to take them on in any significant way. They can not govern.

The statement highlighted is very telling. How will packers continue to exist if they take down the whole industry?

How can anyone believe anything an idiot says that thinks packers are wanting to ruin the whole industry?

As for setting a target date, things take time. A few months is rather quick for something of this magnitute.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Jason said:
Econ101 said:
Judith said:
Does anyone know why it will take so long for feed mills to get "body parts" out of the feed? Seems to me most farmers don't keep feed in the hoppers for over a year. Mills can stop with the next run of product so what is the problem?

Packers have found that if they take the guts, and the bones and make MBM (meat and bone meal) they can make a little extra money by feeding back to cattle or chickens.

They are not willing to give this up and will take the whole industry down to keep their little systems going.
The USDA and Canadian counterpart are too wimpy to take them on in any significant way. They can not govern.

The statement highlighted is very telling. How will packers continue to exist if they take down the whole industry?

How can anyone believe anything an idiot says that thinks packers are wanting to ruin the whole industry?

As for setting a target date, things take time. A few months is rather quick for something of this magnitute.

If they don't stop with the food safety issues they will ruin the industry.

Don't tell me you have forgotten your little lesson there, Jason.

Maybe you need it repeated so you can pass the second time.
 

Jason

Well-known member
People are still eating beef. Beef is a very safe food.

But But But packers want to destroy the industry.... duh
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Jason said:
People are still eating beef. Beef is a very safe food.

But But But packers want to destroy the industry.... duh

So BSE concerns had no effect on the Canadian beef markets and you can prove it because people still eat beef.

Your intelligence is really shining tonight, Jason. Maybe you should try out for mensa.
 

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
The two feed mills that we get our minerals and products from have not used any blood or bone meal in their ingrediants for chicken and pig feed in the past 3 years. They are completely certified free of it from the CFIA. Jason you might as well give up on Econ its like kicking a dead horse that was dumb all its life!! :roll:
 

Silver

Well-known member
Currently, our pigs and chickens are eating cows and our cows are eating pigs and chickens even though they're all supposed to be herbivores.

Pigs are herbivores???? Learn something new on here every day.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
Jason, when Econ101 rips on you with the mensa smack, you're supposed to feel big towned and stupid. Just give up before you're subjected to "I know sombody important" along with marginally relevant data.


I say Econ is overstating something that otherwise has some merit. I suggest everyone involved in processing and feeding animal protein should stop right now. If you have a semi on the road, bring it home, bin of feed, destroy it. I think this affects very little feed and won't break anyone. I'm tired of giving the antibeef guys such good amunition.
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
So if allowing MBM processing isn't going to ruin the industry, whats it going to do? Help? Did someone forget what happened to calf prices when the border closed? Have you guys forgotten what the price of culls is?

:roll:

Sometimes the obvious is to obvious for some of you guys. Its obvious that only reason the government is allowing MBM processing to continue is to allow feed companies the opportunity to find alternatives. I say too damned bad. Kill ALL animal refuse use, now. The feed companies have had many years in Canada to find adequate alternatives, and if they haven't bothered, its obvious they care more for their own profits than they do the health of the livestock industry.

Are some of you guys actual producers? If so, get some balls and start going to bat for PRODUCERS. I don't frankly give rats sore ass if Purina (or whoever) ends up losing money because they didn't bother finding alternatives. I also don't give a rats sore ass if Tyson loses 4 cents/lb worth of refuse, especially since they've made BILLIONS from BSE.

Sorry for the rant. Been long, hard haying season :)

Rod
 

Murgen

Well-known member
The two feed mills that we get our minerals and products from have not used any blood or bone meal in their ingrediants for chicken and pig feed in the past 3 years. They are completely certified free of it from the CFIA. Jason you might as well give up on Econ its like kicking a dead horse that was dumb all its life!!

You're exactly right MR, there are feeds out there that don't contain any animal by-products. Until the government makes it mandatory, which I hope is sooner than later, it would be best to search out those companies.
 

mrj

Well-known member
What if..........oh, that's right, we mustn't give ANY consideration to the possibility that BSE just MIGHT have no connection to vCJD, nor that there MAY be NO causality between feeding MBM and cows acquiring BSE because Econ, flounder, reader2, et.al. 'know' there just has to be such connections.

Why not stick with what is currently known and accepted in the international science community, enforce the rules, and put as much effort into finding the FACTS of BSE and other TSE's as we are putting into "blaming the current Canadian and US cattle/beef industry leaders and damning those who dare to think beyond the mindset that packers, USDA, NCBA, et. al are "covering up" and/or "trying not to find" BSE?

Why not stop leaving the impression that offal is simply ground up and put into animal feeds? While I do not know the exact procedures, I do know that there is more processing than that!

Where are useful suggestions for what should be done to dispose of SRM and other offal you want banned from any form of feed for any animals?

Of course, making useful suggestions and stopping innuendo and mis-leading statements about "feeding animals to animals" or "making cannibals of animals" would not feed agenda's nor be so much fun for those who seem to need to bash and bad-mouth the US and Canadian systems that produce beef envy of the rest of the world in terms of safety, quality, and quantity.

MRJ
 

Mike

Well-known member
safety, quality, and quantity.



Safety-Japan has the least amount of foodborne illnesses in the world.

Quality-Everyone knows that KOBE beef is the highest quality in the world

Quantity-South America's beef herd is growing by leaps and bounds. Prolly more than ours by now. Don't know for sure though.

1 out of 3 ain't bad. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
MRJ, "What if..........oh, that's right, we mustn't give ANY consideration to the possibility that BSE just MIGHT have no connection to vCJD, nor that there MAY be NO causality between feeding MBM and cows acquiring BSE because Econ, flounder, reader2, et.al. 'know' there just has to be such connections"

Here's a stock market tip for you, MRJ; It does't do any good to be right if everybody else is wrong.

Another thing, if there is no causality between feeding MBM and BSE, can you explain the drastic reduction in cases when MBM feeding is stopped?
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Another thing, if there is no causality between feeding MBM and BSE, can you explain the drastic reduction in cases when MBM feeding is stopped?

You'd think we'd be able to learn from Britain and the errors they made with their feed ban. The corporate sponsors would rather see large companies make it, rather than attempt to protect the producer.

MRJ, that BSE is spread through infected feed is virtually uncontested in almost all scientific circles. The USDA and CFIA, by not introducing complete MBM bans, are simply pandering to feed companies and packers who don't want to lose their livelihood.

BTW, our food safety, both in Canada and the US, is not the envy of the world. Thats North American arrogance talking. Japan, New Zealand, Australia, and most of Europe have more stringent beef safety rules than we do.

Rod
 

mrj

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
MRJ, "What if..........oh, that's right, we mustn't give ANY consideration to the possibility that BSE just MIGHT have no connection to vCJD, nor that there MAY be NO causality between feeding MBM and cows acquiring BSE because Econ, flounder, reader2, et.al. 'know' there just has to be such connections"

Here's a stock market tip for you, MRJ; It does't do any good to be right if everybody else is wrong.

Another thing, if there is no causality between feeding MBM and BSE, can you explain the drastic reduction in cases when MBM feeding is stopped?


Re. your "stock market tip".....judging by many of your comments on this site, it would be at least as risky to buy your pick as to buy which ever stock a bobble-head doll points at!

Will you verify that there have been "drastic reductions in cases when MBM feeding is stopped"? What of the claimed VERY long incubation period for BSE from such ingestion and document that there could be no possible 'contraband' feed available, as well as the point some have claimed on this site, that it is possible for minute amounts to contaminate feeds. Such as a bit of MBM that may have been inadvertently left in corners or such, on the storage or manufacturing facilities.

My point is that the ranchersnet doom and gloom basher crowd, so determined to make everyone believe that packers/usda/ncba are all in league to harm producers and consumersby willingly mismanaging BSE, contribute nothing of merit to solving the problem. Possibly some things you refuse to consider in your zeal to blame has clues to the 'cure'.

MRJ
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
I said "reduction" of BSE, MRJ, not "elimination".

I don't think NCBA/AMI/USDA are deliberately trying to harm producers nor do I think anybody on this site has implied as such. What they are doing is placing big packer profits at the top of their list and every action they take appears to have to pass the "money lithsmus test" first and foremost.
 

Jason

Well-known member
Most seem to believe that every cattle producer uses MBM or other animal protien.

Truth be told, dairy animals, 4 H steers and purebred show stock are the main ones that get animal source protien suppliments.

I have never used animal protiens, dad used a bone meal mineral once, but had salmonella issues so never used it again.

Instead of waiting for the gov't to ban all animal parts in feed, just don't use them.

As for the mensa remarks, I passed the entry requirements long ago. Never felt the need to be labeled as a member.
 
Top