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%
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%