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

Steve Cornett on the Creekstone Case

Mike

Well-known member
Appealing the Creekstone case
6/4/2007

Steve Cornett

Your reporter remains skeptical about USDA’s refusal to allow voluntary BSE testing. As has been argued before, it’s not that voluntary testing is needed or the expense justified.

That’s not the question.

It’s a matter of the proper role of government and the fact that, from a public relations angle, this looks awful.

It looks like there is something to hide. When USDA announced last week that it would appeal the ruling allowing Creekstone to conduct voluntary testing, it made the consumer news. As usual--as can be expected--the stories were uniformly pro-testing.

If you remain in agreement with the agency on this, please go to this MSNBC story and look at the poll results, then scan the comments.

While granting that this is a bit skewed—normal people don’t participate in polls or watch MSNBC—your reporter frets about the near-unanimous condemnation and the freaky language.

The cattle industry’s best thinkers agree with USDA on this, and history has taught me to tread carefully when I’m on a different track than they. NCBA, for instance, does not just jump to hasty conclusions.

But I suspect they're overly scared of false positives. I think false positives will be like booster shots for the "anti panic" vaccine that has helped consumers react intelligently to recent scares.

Yes, testing will add an uncessary expense. But not nearly as much as those voluntary natural and organic claims add. There is a market for them, and one presumes that at least some of those markets are additive. That is to say, a few people will buy "organic" beef that would otherwise buy no beef at all.

The same would probably be true of BSE tested product.

Voluntary testing should be carefully monitored, but USDA should change course on this. Not for food safety, nor to protect the public. BSE is not a significant health risk in the U.S. Just as a matter of fairness and keeping government’s nose out of private business.
*******************************************************

MSNBC Poll on BSE testing:

Should widespread testing for mad cow disease be allowed? * 4994 responses

Absolutely. I want to know what's in my burger before I eat it.
86%

Not if it makes my steak more expensive.
8.8%

I don't know.
1.7%

I don't eat beef.
3.3%
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Agriculture spokesman calls for Brazilian beef ban Published: (07-06-2007)
A Conservative agriculture spokesman has called for a ban on EU imports of Brazilian beef and pork.

Neil Parish, MEP, called for the ban in a letter to Peter Mandelson, the EU trade Commissioner, Mariann Fischer Boel, agriculture commissioner and Markos Kyprianou, the health commissioner.

Brazil currently exports around 270,000t of bovine meat to the EU - making it the largest exporter of bovine meat to Europe.

Parish is concerned about traceability after a new report from the EU’s Food and Veterinary office (FVO) reported ear tagging of cattle sometimes only takes place between 30 and 60 days before the animal is slaughtered.

The report also raises concerns about the use of medicines that are banned from EU meat.


Parish said: “There is no point us having stringent traceability and safety standards for our own farmers when imported meat from Brazil is well below standards.

“The European Commission needs to slap an immediate ban on Brazilian beef, honey, eggs and pig meat. After BSE and Foot and Mouth, the EU has had to ensure meticulous standards and our farmers have had considerable pressures placed upon them.”

Just like Cornish says above;It’s a matter of the proper role of government and the fact that, from a public relations angle, this looks awful.

It looks like there is something to hide.YES ,EVEN IN BRAZIL
ARE These governments RUN by a FEW packers??????
 

Kato

Well-known member
Credibility credibility credibility. You can't have too much of it. 8)

It's not false positives that they are worried about. Testing young healthy slaughter animals isn't going to find any BSE.

It's the fear that the testing will spread to other higher risk groups where real positives may show up that has them worried. If private testing of older slaughter cows suddenly started finding positives, the past few years of USDA policy will look really bad... :help: It would only take one or two to completely blow up the credibility of the entire existing system. Whether that credibility deserves to be destroyed or not is irrelevant. Common sense has nothing to do with it.

That's why they don't want private testing.
 
Top