Voluntary BSE testing for animals over 20 months

[DiamondSCattleCo]

and no market open for OTM beef- How long do you ride a dead horse :???:

Didn't you know OT? Its MUCH better to tow the company (CFIA) line than to lobby in support of producers? Its MUCH better to let the CCIA determine the direction that our markets should go, based on questionable reasoning than to protect our markets?

The more I look around, the more I think we need an R-Calf in Canada. I may not agree with much of what you guys say, vis-a-vis Canadian beef, but at least you have an organization that sticks up for producers and puts their needs ahead of the CFIAs and other government organizations.

Rod

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

As far as having the infrastructure in place, what are we talking about here? A good network of labs, with qualified lab technicians who can process up to 2000 or more tests per day (Batch testing on the first go-round).

You know, I just heard Tam quote that only 15% of our slaughter in Canada is over 20 months. I haven't had a chance to verify that yet, but I'm looking into it.

SO lets take what we slaughter on a daily basis. Someone have the CanFax numbers? 20,000 head? I can't remember now. Thats 3000 animals needing batch testing. Thats ONE well equipped lab to service all the over 20 month cattle in Canada.

Rod

 

[Tam]

As far as having the infrastructure in place, what are we talking about here? A good network of labs, with qualified lab technicians who can process up to 2000 or more tests per day (Batch testing on the first go-round).

You know, I just heard Tam quote that only 15% of our slaughter in Canada is over 20 months. I haven't had a chance to verify that yet, but I'm looking into it.

SO lets take what we slaughter on a daily basis. Someone have the CanFax numbers? 20,000 head? I can't remember now. Thats 3000 animals needing batch testing. Thats ONE well equipped lab to service all the over 20 month cattle in Canada.

Rod

Can you provide the quote where I said anything about 15% of our slaughter in Canada is over 20 months.

And if you would like to tell the CFIA how to do their job then go ahead as all I did was tell you what they told me about Canada's testing capacity. But I guess all of you are smarter about our capacity than the agency that actually does the testing. :wink:

 

[rkaiser]

While you are asking people questions Tam --- Why not ask the president of CBEF if he thinks there is potential for marketing BSE tested beef.

Bsetester seems to have answered the other questions you have about testing validity etc. Do you believe him? Or do you only ask the CEO of Tyson foods or that guy that Scotty asks about profits that kind of stuff :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Bill]

Rod:

Its MUCH better to let the CCIA determine the direction that our markets should go, based on questionable reasoning than to protect our markets?

You lost me on that one.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Rod:

Its MUCH better to let the CCIA determine the direction that our markets should go, based on questionable reasoning than to protect our markets?

You lost me on that one.

Sorry Bill, once again a reference to the CCIA fighting mandatory age verification. With M-Age, we can guarantee that we have sufficient quantities of age verified beef for the Asian markets. Right now, most of the age verified stuff is purchased by the larger packing companies who are pretty much ignoring the Asian marketplace.

Rod

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Can you provide the quote where I said anything about 15% of our slaughter in Canada is over 20 months.

And if you would like to tell the CFIA how to do their job then go ahead as all I did was tell you what they told me about Canada's testing capacity. But I guess all of you are smarter about our capacity than the agency that actually does the testing. :wink:

Tam, if it wasn't you, I apologize. Perhaps it was Tim when I was debating it with him.

And I'm not debating whether or not the CFIA currently has the capacity to handle the extra testing, but if they don't, it wouldn't take much to open up another lab. For the investment of a few hundred thousand, 3 years ago, they could have helped open up the OTM market, saving the producers millions (or billions?) of dollars in losses.

The purpose of government agencies, like the CFIA, is to serve the PUBLIC. Loss of income to Canadian cattle producers has had an effect on virtually everyone in Western Canada, and as such, I expect government and their agencies to respond with all the resources at their disposal. Not just to sit on their hands and wait for things to get better all on their own.

Rod

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Canada slaughtered 3.8 million head in 2005 (BIC website numbers). Of this, 45% was exported. Thats 1, 710,000. An _average_ lab can process 2000 head per day. So that would be 855 days to process those 1.7 million animals. To process them all within a year, including downers and the high risk stuff, with a working year of 235 days (weekends and holidays off) would require 3.6 labs. Round up to 4 average sized labs, because you'll need additional manpower should batch testing uncover a positive. This is if we tested EVERY SINGLE ANIMAL earmarked for export.

Try as I might, I couldn't find the number of cattle over 20 months who were slaughtered. Most of the slaughter animals in Canada are fed steers and heifers (again, BIC website). These animals are usually between 18 and 24 months of age. So lets figure HIGH (and this will be extremely high) side of 50% of our slaughter animals being over 20 months. We still only need 2 testing labs to test every single animal, including the high risk animals.

Rod

 

[Tam]

Canada slaughtered 3.8 million head in 2005 (BIC website numbers). Of this, 45% was exported. Thats 1, 710,000. An _average_ lab can process 2000 head per day. So that would be 855 days to process those 1.7 million animals. To process them all within a year, including downers and the high risk stuff, with a working year of 235 days (weekends and holidays off) would require 3.6 labs. Round up to 4 average sized labs, because you'll need additional manpower should batch testing uncover a positive. This is if we tested EVERY SINGLE ANIMAL earmarked for export.

Try as I might, I couldn't find the number of cattle over 20 months who were slaughtered. Most of the slaughter animals in Canada are fed steers and heifers (again, BIC website). These animals are usually between 18 and 24 months of age. So lets figure HIGH (and this will be extremely high) side of 50% of our slaughter animals being over 20 months. We still only need 2 testing labs to test every single animal, including the high risk animals.
Rod

Now let us examine the feasibility of a two lab system.

All test results must be able to be correlated to the carasse and all held edible and inedible product pending results. So tell us Rod how can every slaughter plant sample and ship samples to two labs and expect a turn around time that works given the speed and volume that some of the bigger plants process beef? I'd guess that the logistics of your two lab plan will be a nightmare on everyone involved. :wink:
Now According to the industry leaders that have been having meeting since day one on this topic, the only way is to have a lab in every slaughter facility big and small to the tune of a few hundred thousand dollars per. And since the test would only be recognised by our trading partners, according to the CFIA, if the CFIA oversee all testing. That means a CFIA pathologist in every lab. Now some seem to think the test will cost very little, around $20. But according to the CFIA information I recieved that cost is closer to 5 times that. $100 per test, when you consider the professional pathologist salaries, lab overhead. technology upkeep and quality assurance, to mention a few things that you forget to add to the cost of the kit. If every plant that exports beef has to build a few hundred thousand dollar lab and employ a CFIA pathologist just how many will be able to afford it? and just what go you think the cost of that lab and special personel salary is going to do to the price of the cattle we sell. And after all is said and done is the beef any safer than if we just made sure the SRM removal restrictions weren't being violated????

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

All test results must be able to be correlated to the carasse and all held edible and inedible product pending results. So tell us Rod how can every slaughter plant sample and ship samples to two labs and expect a turn around time that works given the speed and volume that some of the bigger plants process beef? I'd guess that the logistics of your two lab plan will be a nightmare on everyone involved. :wink:
Now According to the industry leaders that have been having meeting since day one on this topic, the only way is to have a lab in every slaughter facility big and small to the tune of a few hundred thousand dollars per. And since the test would only be recognised by our trading partners, according to the CFIA, if the CFIA oversee all testing. That means a CFIA pathologist in every lab. Now some seem to think the test will cost very little, around $20. But according to the CFIA information I recieved that cost is closer to 5 times that. $100 per test, when you consider the professional pathologist salaries, lab overhead. technology upkeep and quality assurance, to mention a few things that you forget to add to the cost of the kit. If every plant that exports beef has to build a few hundred thousand dollar lab and employ a CFIA pathologist just how many will be able to afford it? and just what go you think the cost of that lab and special personel salary is going to do to the price of the cattle we sell. And after all is said and done is the beef any safer than if we just made sure the SRM removal restrictions weren't being violated????

Ah, towing the company line again. Why is it that US labs are able to do testing for under that magic $100 mark? I don't recall what the U of Kansas study said the costs were, but it was barely over the $20 mark.

As far as the packers having to hold edible or inedible product, I don't frankly give a flying figleaf how much grief they have. Besides, if testing can be turned around in a couple days, the beef will still be at the packing plant, being processed. They can slaughter, send it in, begin processing, then pull it if tests come back positive. Issue solved.

Obviously SRM removal is NOT enough for our customers, since not enough is known about BSE to ensure consumer comfort. If testing can help with consumer comfort, then we do it. Its simple.

Rod

 

[Tam]

All test results must be able to be correlated to the carasse and all held edible and inedible product pending results. So tell us Rod how can every slaughter plant sample and ship samples to two labs and expect a turn around time that works given the speed and volume that some of the bigger plants process beef? I'd guess that the logistics of your two lab plan will be a nightmare on everyone involved. :wink:
Now According to the industry leaders that have been having meeting since day one on this topic, the only way is to have a lab in every slaughter facility big and small to the tune of a few hundred thousand dollars per. And since the test would only be recognised by our trading partners, according to the CFIA, if the CFIA oversee all testing. That means a CFIA pathologist in every lab. Now some seem to think the test will cost very little, around $20. But according to the CFIA information I recieved that cost is closer to 5 times that. $100 per test, when you consider the professional pathologist salaries, lab overhead. technology upkeep and quality assurance, to mention a few things that you forget to add to the cost of the kit. If every plant that exports beef has to build a few hundred thousand dollar lab and employ a CFIA pathologist just how many will be able to afford it? and just what go you think the cost of that lab and special personel salary is going to do to the price of the cattle we sell. And after all is said and done is the beef any safer than if we just made sure the SRM removal restrictions weren't being violated????

Ah, towing the company line again. Why is it that US labs are able to do testing for under that magic $100 mark? I don't recall what the U of Kansas study said the costs were, but it was barely over the $20 mark.

As far as the packers having to hold edible or inedible product, I don't frankly give a flying figleaf how much grief they have. Besides, if testing can be turned around in a couple days, the beef will still be at the packing plant, being processed. They can slaughter, send it in, begin processing, then pull it if tests come back positive. Issue solved.

Obviously SRM removal is NOT enough for our customers, since not enough is known about BSE to ensure consumer comfort. If testing can help with consumer comfort, then we do it. Its simple.

Rod

Rod why are you wasting your time up there in the northern Sask raising cattle? Why don't you move to Alberta and fix the CCIA problems then move right to Ottawa and run the whole Canadian cattle industry single handedly. With your logic and keen senses of budgets I'm sure you can fix everything and not cost the producers a dime. :wink: After all the slaughter plants toss the rotting carasses because they have to be HELD PENDING RESULTS from one of your two over worked labs they will be out of business and you can start fresh. :roll:


And I find it funny that what we are DOING is not good enough for our consumer in your mind in light of the fact our domestic beef demand when UP after we found BSE and we are the first country to actually export beef within a year of finding BSE in our Herd, and we are exporting UNTESTED SRM REMOVED BEEF TO JAPAN. Something that not even the country with the world safest beef is doing!!!!!! But you are right Rod "you the man" so get to Ottawa and teach us all how cheap you can save this industry from all the screw up that have happen since God created us.

 

[Mike]

Time for a couple of Midol, Tam. You know you might need to get your estrogen level checked too! :wink: Or is it testosterone? :lol:

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

1) After all the slaughter plants toss the rotting carasses because they have to be HELD PENDING RESULTS from one of your two over worked labs they will be out of business and you can start fresh. :roll:

2) And I find it funny that what we are DOING is not good enough for our consumer in your mind in light of the fact our domestic beef demand when UP after we found BSE and we are the first country to actually export beef within a year of finding BSE in our Herd, and we are exporting UNTESTED SRM REMOVED BEEF TO JAPAN. Something that not even the country with the world safest beef is doing!!!!!! But you are right Rod "you the man" so get to Ottawa and teach us all how cheap you can save this industry from all the screw up that have happen since God created us.

1) If we have sufficient labs, how is the beef going to rot? The way I understand batch testing is that X numbers of animals are all tested together in a matter of 4 hours. If, and only if, a positive is found, then they break out the individual animals. So the only real delays would be if a positive is found, and even then it will only be another couple days. So you're telling me that beef is going to rot in 4 days?

2) WTF has our domestic demand got to do with EXPORTS? When BSE struck, Canadians far and wide pulled together for us and bought beef. For that, myself and thousands of other cattle producers will be eternally grateful. But it HAS NOTHING to do with EXPORTS.

Edit: As an aside, the discussion in this thread relates to over 20 month cattle, which you (or perhaps Tim again) reminded me is closed to Canadian beef. So obviously, SRM removal doesn't work for that class of animal and adding more inspectors isn't going to help open that market up.

And Tam, if you can't stand the criticism, I respectfully suggest you leave your position in the SSGA to someone who can. As a taxpayer and as a cattle producer, I have EVERY RIGHT to criticize government agencies and groups who claim to represent cattle men. The only thing your snotty attitude is doing is making me understand that its time for another cattle producer group in Saskatchewan and that the SSGA will certainly never recieve a dime of my money.

Rod

 

[Tam]

1) After all the slaughter plants toss the rotting carasses because they have to be HELD PENDING RESULTS from one of your two over worked labs they will be out of business and you can start fresh. :roll:

2) And I find it funny that what we are DOING is not good enough for our consumer in your mind in light of the fact our domestic beef demand when UP after we found BSE and we are the first country to actually export beef within a year of finding BSE in our Herd, and we are exporting UNTESTED SRM REMOVED BEEF TO JAPAN. Something that not even the country with the world safest beef is doing!!!!!! But you are right Rod "you the man" so get to Ottawa and teach us all how cheap you can save this industry from all the screw up that have happen since God created us.

1) If we have sufficient labs, how is the beef going to rot? The way I understand batch testing is that X numbers of animals are all tested together in a matter of 4 hours. If, and only if, a positive is found, then they break out the individual animals. So the only real delays would be if a positive is found, and even then it will only be another couple days. So you're telling me that beef is going to rot in 4 days?

2) WTF has our domestic demand got to do with EXPORTS? When BSE struck, Canadians far and wide pulled together for us and bought beef. For that, myself and thousands of other cattle producers will be eternally grateful. But it HAS NOTHING to do with EXPORTS.

Edit: As an aside, the discussion in this thread relates to over 20 month cattle, which you (or perhaps Tim again) reminded me is closed to Canadian beef. So obviously, SRM removal doesn't work for that class of animal and adding more inspectors isn't going to help open that market up.

And Tam, if you can't stand the criticism, I respectfully suggest you leave your position in the SSGA to someone who can. As a taxpayer and as a cattle producer, I have EVERY RIGHT to criticize government agencies and groups who claim to represent cattle men. The only thing your snotty attitude is doing is making me understand that its time for another cattle producer group in Saskatchewan and that the SSGA will certainly never recieve a dime of my money.

Rod

1. Do you know if the CFIA batch test or do they individually test every sample? This is what the agency that does our testing says about test times.

The majority of the tests on the market require around 4-6 hours to run. HOWEVER collecting, identification and preparing the sample still involves the same manual processing for all the above tests and is not factored in. In addition, the turn around time for one sample on a test may not reflect the actual time when expanded to handle several hundred tests at a slaughter establishment. All the test results must be able to be correlated to the carasse and all held edible and inedible product pending results. This may be challenging to do at North American slaughter speeds.

Now you said that we could do it in two labs so what would the time frame be on a couple of thousand tests per day and add to that the transport time to the lab. But I'm sure you could do it better if you were just allowed to take charge :wink:
2.

ROD: WTF has our domestic demand got to do with EXPORTS?

Rod's comment from before: Obviously SRM removal is NOT enough for our customers, since not enough is known about BSE to ensure consumer comfort. If testing can help with consumer comfort, then we do it. Its simple.

I see no mention that you were talking about just foreign consumers. But I do have to ask Rod is there a two tiered food safety system in Canada, one for the domestic consumers and one for the foreign consumers? Why are you willing to do testing for the foreign consumers to ensure their comfort but our domestic consumer that stood by our industry can just eat beef that has the SRM's removed?

So obviously, SRM removal doesn't work for that class of animal and adding more inspectors isn't going to help open that market up.

. How do you know testing is going to open those markets Rod? Did you forget the the international committee knows about the limitations of all approved tests and they have recognised SRM removal as the true Food safety measure. :roll: Do you really think if we tested our OTM cattle and we shipped ban SRM's to a foreign country that the same thing that happen to the US wouldn't happen to us? TESTING IS NOT AN ASSURANCE THE BEEF IS SAFE SRM REMOVAL IS .

And last I don't have a position with the SSGA I'm just a voting member like alot of other producers in Sask that care about this industry enough to get involved.
But if you have a problem with me why not come to a SSGA meeting and see if your ideas will fly with the rest of the membership. I'm just one vote maybe you can convince the rest to give up their marketing options. :wink: Maybe your vote will tip the scale on the testing and M'AGE issues. But if you loss heres a hint, don't react like you do on ranchers as I doubt many will take kindly to your SNOTTY ATTITUDE.

 

[rkaiser]

Tam -

How do you know testing is going to open those markets Rod?

How do you know that it will not Tam? Have you spoken with Ted Haney yet?

Do you really think if we tested our OTM cattle and we shipped ban SRM's to a foreign country that the same thing that happen to the US wouldn't happen to us? TESTING IS NOT AN ASSURANCE THE BEEF IS SAFE SRM REMOVAL IS .

Has anyone argued that we should stop SRM removal and replace it with testing? :roll:

Is it simply a question of not backing down Tam? You have already admitted that testing OTM cattle may be an option for you.

BSEtester has shown you that new tests will identify BSE in younger cattle.

The price of testing is very clear in Mike's post from Japan.

Your opinions on this issue have all been shown to be simply that Tam - your opinion. Time to admit that this is an area that you are simply taking the side of the mutinational for whatever reason. :wink:

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

1. Do you know if the CFIA batch test or do they individually test every sample?

I don't care if the CFIA batch right now or not. They CAN batch test using their current equipment and thats all that matters.

Now you said that we could do it in two labs so what would the time frame be on a couple of thousand tests per day and add to that the transport time to the lab.

Note they said CHALLENGING, not IMPOSSIBLE?

I see no mention that you were talking about just foreign consumers.

OMG, this ENTIRE thread has been about exports. Notice in the numbers of over 20 month, I only used 45% because thats the number of cattle we export? You'd better go back and look. You either forgot, or are simply trying to twist things because you know you're on weak ground with every single stance you take.

But I do have to ask Rod is there a two tiered food safety system in Canada, one for the domestic consumers and one for the foreign consumers? Why are you willing to do testing for the foreign consumers to ensure their comfort but our domestic consumer that stood by our industry can just eat beef that has the SRM's removed?

Repeat after me Tam: The Japanese want it. WTF difference does it make that Canadians don't want it and the Japanese do? If the Japanese want more stringent safety than SRM removal, which they obviously do because we can't ship over 20 month animals, then we damned well give it to them and quit whining and snivelling about how much work it is going to be to give it to them.

Did you forget the the international committee knows about the limitations of all approved tests and they have recognised SRM removal as the true Food safety measure. :roll: Do you really think if we tested our OTM cattle and we shipped ban SRM's to a foreign country that the same thing that happen to the US wouldn't happen to us? TESTING IS NOT AN ASSURANCE THE BEEF IS SAFE SRM REMOVAL IS .

You truly are a TeaPOT. :roll: The Japanese don't give a flying damn about the international committees and its obvious that SRM removal IS NOT ENOUGH FOR THEM OTHERWISE WE'D BE SHIPPING OVER 20 MONTH ANIMALS TO THEM. And since we have business stating that the Japanese will accept BSE tested beef, then yes, we know it would open up the market, at least for those two businesses, and more to come. Its bloody logical.

But if you loss heres a hint, don't react like you do on ranchers as I doubt many will take kindly to your SNOTTY ATTITUDE.

Tam, you look back on the posts. The only time I acted SNOTTY is when you've pulled attitude. If someone treats me with respect and decency, they'll get it in return. If someone acts like a mad cow, they'll get it in return.

Rod

 

[Tam]

Tam -

How do you know testing is going to open those markets Rod?

How do you know that it will not Tam? Have you spoken with Ted Haney yet?

Do you really think if we tested our OTM cattle and we shipped ban SRM's to a foreign country that the same thing that happen to the US wouldn't happen to us? TESTING IS NOT AN ASSURANCE THE BEEF IS SAFE SRM REMOVAL IS .

Has anyone argued that we should stop SRM removal and replace it with testing? :roll:

Is it simply a question of not backing down Tam? You have already admitted that testing OTM cattle may be an option for you.

BSEtester has shown you that new tests will identify BSE in younger cattle.

The price of testing is very clear in Mike's post from Japan.

Your opinions on this issue have all been shown to be simply that Tam - your opinion. Time to admit that this is an area that you are simply taking the side of the mutinational for whatever reason. :wink:

I had been at more than a few meetings where we have been told that our lack of testing is not the issue that is holding up some of these export markets but other issues are. And I also heard it from the CFIA by email, so I guess I will believe them over you and YOUR OPINIONS.
Can you provide any proof not opinion but proof that Japan or any other country would take our OTM beef if we tested it?

The problem with BSE testers new test is IT'S NOT APPROVED We are talking about the tests that are INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED AND APPROVED.

And again if you don't think the CFIA knows what the test cost why not debate it with them I just posted what they told me. I do how ever believe they just might just know more than those that don't actually do any testing.

Isn't it true that all you bring is your opinion? I seem to remember you saying your were not going to prove anything you post with facts as all you do is post statements and opinion to get things going. The thing about my opinion is it much be share by a few as if it wasn't we would be testing. And why is it just because someone doesn't agree with you they automatically are taking the side of the multinationals? Why can't I and the others just be concerned about the precedent you want to set that could be used against us in the future?

 

[Sandhusker]

Creekstone said they could test for around $20. It looks to me the CFIA is as credible as the USDA.

 

[Tam]

Tam, you look back on the posts. The only time I acted SNOTTY is when you've pulled attitude. If someone treats me with respect and decency, they'll get it in return. If someone acts like a mad cow, they'll get it in return.

Rod

Rod let me explain something to you If I have pulled attitude towards you it comes from months of read your posts belittleing every aspect of the Canadian cattle industry. If you are not bad mouthing the packers, you are bad mouthing the CFIA. If you aren't bad mouthing them you are bad mouthing the CCIA and if not them its the CCA or the SSGA or the federal government that investigated the packers or the selfish large producers or the ranchers.net posters that don't happen to think you are right all the time. So maybe it is time for you to take a step back and truly look at who is the real problem here. Why are all these organizations, agencies, businessmen, fellow producers and posters wrong and you are right? :wink:

And I think we all know by now that you do not treat people the way they treat you as you have insulted and name called at the drop of a hat. Or do I need to remind you of your actions by bringing the M'AGE post back that your started with an INSULT about large producers which snowballed into insults of CCIA, CCA, SSGA and myself, all because we disagreed with you on making Age vertification manditory. You seem to think you have a right to critize which you probably do and you do more often than not. BUT people also have a right to critize back or take the other road and just ignore you. I have been asked by some why I don't just ignor you but I guess it's like I explained to them I feel ignoring you is dangerous as people might just think you are right if nobody is there to tell the other side of the story. In that respect you are a bit like a few on the US side of the border. So I will not ingor you and will do my best not to call you insulting names but if attitude is all you understand then so be it. And if that gets name calling and insults from you I guess we will all then know what kind of a man you are.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

I had been at more than a few meetings where we have been told that our lack of testing is not the issue that is holding up some of these export markets but other issues are.

Have you met with the Japanese yet? You were in meetings with the Japanese and they told you that BSE testing isn't the only hold up? Obviously SRM removal isn't enough for them. What else is holding up over 20 month cattle from being shipped into Japan? If there are other reasons, please enlighten us.

And again if you don't think the CFIA knows what the test cost why not debate it with them I just posted what they told me. I do how ever believe they just might just know more than those that don't actually do any testing.

So why is it that the Japanese can test for $40/animal and its going to cost us $100? I ask for evidence. I'm sorry, but I don't believe in blindly following government agencies, especially when I see other countries and companies doing things for less money. Another example, Creekstone - $20/animal WITH THE SAME TEST AS THE CFIA USES. Why can Creekstone test for $20 while the CFIA is $100?

Isn't it true that all you bring is your opinion? I seem to remember you saying your were not going to prove anything you post with facts as all you do is post statements and opinion to get things going.

You'd best have your memory checked Tam. Do you read any of the other threads on here? Did you read the 24 page study that Mike posted that showed that Japanese consumers wanted BSE Tested beef? Perhaps my opinions are just that, but they are based with sound facts and more than just the ramblings of someone from the CFIA.

Do you honestly believe everything that government agencies tell you? Haven't the number of government screw ups taught you to examine everything with a critical eye? GigaText ring any bells? How about CAIS? 12 years ago SaskTel sold all their mainframe computing power to Westbridge (now ISM), then rented space on those very same mainframes for THREE times what they were originally paying for maintenance and upkeep. They finally went out and bought more computing power again, since they couldn't afford to pay for the rented mainframe space. And the list goes on and on. With the track record of our government (both provincial and federal), I tend to take everything they say with a grain of salt and look for independent confirmation. In testing over 20 month animals, I've got more outside confirmation than I can shake a stick at, PLUS I've got 85% of the producers who say YEAH, lets do it. Its our industry. If the CFIA is going to get in the way, then they're in for a hell of a fight.

The thing about my opinion is it much be share by a few as if it wasn't we would be testing. And why is it just because someone doesn't agree with you they automatically are taking the side of the multinationals?

Where did I say you were taking the side of the multinationals? All I said is that the multinationals have ways to get beef into Japan from other countries, so they don't need to worry about Canadian beef. And keeping our over 30 month animals within Canada is also helping them.

Why can't I and the others just be concerned about the precedent you want to set that could be used against us in the future?

What precendent? Allowing companies to test whatever the heck they want to test? Is everyone afraid that eventually the consumers in Canada and the US will wise up and start asking for testing too? I say GOOD. Force lacadasical government agencies to start earning their keep, and start really proctecting the people. Research BSE. Force the CFIA to become truly efficient so that it doesn't cost us $100/animal to test, but rather the proven $40 that Japan has to spend. While I doubt Creekstone's estimate of $20, perhaps they can indeed do it. In which case the CFIA had better find out how. I expect my government and the agencies in which my future is invested to be the absolute best they can be.

Rod