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

WTO ruling on beef hormones

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Location
Nebraska
GENEVA (AP) — The World Trade Organization will rule against the European Union next week in a dispute over beef treated with hormones, the Associated Press learned Friday, allowing the U.S. and Canada to keep in place millions of dollars in sanctions on European products.

The EU argues that the hormones pose a risk to human health. But Canada and the U.S. have successfully challenged the 27-nation bloc at the WTO, which ruled in 1998 that the ban was not based on solid scientific evidence.

A year later, the global commerce group authorized Washington and Ottawa to impose $125 million worth of retaliatory duties each year on European delicacies such as Roquefort cheese, truffles and Dijon mustard. The sanctions remain in force.

The WTO's latest panel decision, which will be made public on Monday, was released confidentially to the parties involved in December. It upholds that the EU failed to properly assess the risks before banning certain hormones in beef imports, according to an official summary obtained by the AP.

The EU brought the case back to the WTO in February 2005 after the U.S. and Canada refused to review their sanctions in light of new EU directives upholding the bans.
 
Ain't gonna matter if they force them to let it in or not- if the consumers don't want hormone implanted beef, they won't buy it anyway....

And US Packers have a history of not giving consumers what they want- they give them what they want to give them and tell them to like it or not....And NCBA stands there slapping them on the back "Them thar dum furrin folk can et what we give them and like it".... :roll: :( :mad:
 
OT, can you show us a valid report from an independent lab showing residues of hormones usedto implant cattle in the beef produced from those cattle?

Re. the EU regulation, and "giving consumers what they want".....if there is NO residue in that beef and consumers are given that FACT, what do you bet they will buy the leaner beef produced by proper implanting with accepted as safe ionophores?

Also re. the EU reg., can you say 'bogus trade barrier'?

mrj
 
You would think that if a customer wanted or didn't want something it would be a no brainer. It sure would be easier to produce some hormone free meat than to convince the populous that what they want isn't what they want. I always like dealing with people that know what they want. I do my best to come up with it and if I can't then they will be recommended to someone who can. Customers appreciate that and will come to you again. Why does the commodity beef industry not get that?
 
Maxine- you really don't understand it do you :roll: :???:

When a customer wants to buy a cadillac- you don't try to sell them a Yugo...
Like per says- whatever happened to giving customers what they want and ask for :???:
 
per said:
You would think that if a customer wanted or didn't want something it would be a no brainer. It sure would be easier to produce some hormone free meat than to convince the populous that what they want isn't what they want. I always like dealing with people that know what they want. I do my best to come up with it and if I can't then they will be recommended to someone who can. Customers appreciate that and will come to you again. Why does the commodity beef industry not get that?

Excellent points, per.

MRJ, when you do your grocery shopping, I'm sure you consider price, personal preference, brand names, etc... How much weighting do you give to whether or not a product is based on sound science or not?
 
You boys act like you don't know that there are consumers who want many different things from the beef they choose, and there are many different beef products to serve those varied consumer wishes.

per, it isn't as if 'hormone free' beef is not available, as there are many cashing in on the perception that it is better, doing just as you are, givng consumers what they want.

Discriminating beef consumers have a vast arrayof choices today. What do you have to gain by limiting their choices? Some consumers focus on lean beef, much to RobertMacs' disgust. Implants produce more lean muscle than without them, serving needs of those consumers who choose leaner beef. The 'commodity beef industry' definitely does "get that" consumer preference!

It is one thing to hype "hormone free beef" as being superior; and something else entirely when the fact is that ALL beef has naturally occuring hormones, and until you present validation to the contrary, 'commodity' beef has no real 'problem' and no more hormone content than does beef from non-implanted animals.

"Hormone Free" is simply a marketing tool to get more money for beef that is really no better, which is fine if consumers understand that it simply is a 'feel good' thing, rather than a valid health issue.

For the "customer wanting to buy a Cadillac"......you should not need to sell them your product under false pretenses, but proudly sell it on the real qualities of flavor, tenderness, leak proof packaging, hide color, whatever! Just don't scam them with perceived health claims.

Sandhusker, how much "weighting do YOU give to whether or not a product is based on sound science or not"?

Are you actually promoting "sound science"?

I rely on sound science, especially re. Modified Atmospheric Packaging (important to me because it doesn't leak and I live a long way from the stores but especially because oxygen contact can't change the color of the meat prematurely), "Use By" dates, quality grading, creating new cuts, and more. Thickness of the cut and quality grade for steaks, along with price and planned use for the beef guide my buying.

mrj
 
MRJ, " What do you have to gain by limiting their choices? "

That is the exact question we've been asking you and the USDA/NCBA/AMI trio on why we can't sell BSE tested beef?
MRJ, ""Hormone Free" is simply a marketing tool to get more money for beef that is really no better"

The same can be said for CAB. Are you going to treat that product the same?

MRJ, "Sandhusker, how much "weighting do YOU give to whether or not a product is based on sound science or not"? "

Not a dang bit, and I'll bet the vast majority of other consumers are the same - which illustrates the stupidity of making "sound science" a requirement for marketing.
 
I think you'll find that the beef won't go over...... I've talked with family members (my mother was born and raised in England and came here in 1954). Europe is very much into their health. Beef is expensive over there and most families have it on special occasions (such as roast or steak).

Back in 1974, when my mom and I went for a visit, my uncle took us out to a french restaurant and thought he was really doing something as he ordered t-bone for all of us (I thought the smoked salmon entree was wonderful) but we had a beef at home every year so that wasn't "special", now if he'd ordered some seafood that would have been the very berries (but see that's what they eat a lot of) because you don't get seafood out of the Middle Fork of Black River (where I was raised at).......... so its location, location, location.....

I think another thing people totally disregard is that these coutries (Japan, Germany, China, Europe) want the USA to receive all their exports while they import nothing.... keeps their economy going.

If they do receive any imports watch the tariffs get added so its too expensive for the native people to buy......... that's how they keep USA out and we're too stupid to do it in return because we need to borrow money from Japan/China every day.
 
MoGal, you reinforced my point: "Hormone Free" IS a beef marketing ploy! Or a Protectionism tool, in the case of the EU.

OT, how do you know the EU consumers "don't want hormone implanted beef", or that they "won't buy it anyway"?

Their governments won't ALLOW them to buy it, want it or not!

Sandhusker, though you won't admit it, many people do understand there is a difference between private testing for BSE and other marketing tools.

You do not trust packers to be honest about much of anything, so why would you trust them to be honest about reporting a BSE positive in their own plant????

BTW, I've never said CAB was NOT a marketing ploy or tool. It most certainly is! However, it is NOT being marketed as safer or more healthful than non-CAB beef, is it? That is a significant difference.

Junk science as a tool for marketing is the real stupidity........and when verified and exposed it will come back to haunt those who use it.

mrj
 
mrj said:
OT, how do you know the EU consumers "don't want hormone implanted beef", or that they "won't buy it anyway"?

mrj

When Greece imported beef from the US to sell at the Olympics- their first requirement was for it to be "hormone free"...They knew what would and would not sell....

If you ever read any of the medical writings of the European Doctors, you will find that the biggest share of them promote drug free and hormone free- with many putting out papers on the consequences/hazards of both....(In fact countries like Norway-that isn't in the EU- won't even let you buy either across the counter- with antibiotics having to be prescribed and administered by a Vet)...
Apparently the Drs./scientist there and so therefore their research papers- aren't all controlled (paid off) by the Ag chemical/Pharmaceutical Companies like the US ones are....
 
I've got no problem at all with BSE testing being used as a marketing tool. As long as they are being truthful on the testing, who the heck am I and who are you to say they can't do it? How Kennedyesqe of you. Hormone Free is a marketing tool, and it is allowed. It is also being marketed as being healthier. Is it healthier? You can't see the hypocracy? Open your damn eyes, MRJ, and quit being a tool used against US producers.

CAB is being marketed as being of a higher quality and as Angus. Is it higher quality and is it Angus?
 
You zealots paint with very broad brushes.

Have either of you presented ANY scientific evidence that modern, approvedand properly administerd and withdrawn 'hormone' implanted beef has any more hormone content than non implanted beef, or that the beef is verifiably any less safe than non implanted beef?

That the "Greeks knew what would and would not sell" has NOTHING to do with safety of the beef!

You have no more scienticific community accepted and verifiable proof that what those EU scientists claim against hormones in implanted beef are factual than you do that US scientists and researchers are "controlled (paid off) by the Ag chem./Pharmaceutical companies"...which is....NONE!

It is at least as equally likely that the EU scientists are as motivated by profits as are the chemical/pharmaceutical companies in the USA. Some of us are not afraid of trade on an equal basis.

mrj
 
Are you trying to win a science fair or sell beef?

If the customer wants it, you sell it to them. Good grief, MRJ, millions are spent trying to figure out what the consumers want just so businesses can get them what they want. Then we have the NCBA/USDA who want to argue with the consumers!

Has anybody at NCBA taken even a high-school marketing class? Why do we all have to be held down by such idiots?
 
mrj said:
That the "Greeks knew what would and would not sell" has NOTHING to do with safety of the beef!

You have no more scienticific community accepted and verifiable proof that what those EU scientists claim against hormones in implanted beef are factual than you do that US scientists and researchers are "controlled (paid off) by the Ag chem./Pharmaceutical companies"...which is....NONE!



mrj

Maxine- What the Greeks and the Europeans are told by their medical professionals/scientists and what they perceive from those professionals does have something to do with what they THINK the safety of their beef is- and to what beef they want to buy.....
How do you think the EU got the political support to oppose the importing of US beef :???: Not that many farmers in Europe.. :roll:

Just like the Japanese have been convinced that BSE tested beef is safer- it doesn't matter if it is or not- if thats what they want- TESTED BEEF...

You're more arrogant than GW Bush if you think we are smarter than, and further advanced in science than them "dum furriners" are- and that by us just saying its safe they are going to believe us or buy it...

They want BSE tested beef, and the unecessary use of hormones and antibiotics banned- or at least the meat from those cattle identified and segregated.....
 
MRJ. wakeUP
The Europeans banned hormornes in meat because it causes early developement problems of childern and also causes hormonal cancers, of the carcinogenic risks of estrogenic additives which can cause imbalances and increases in natural hormone levels. The male human is close to being sterile and females fail to ovalate and to have the correct organs. Since the outlawing of hormones in the EU. birth's of normal childern have risen and the amount of gay men has decreased to the point of a random incedient of the population. If You want proof go to google.

CHICAGO, Feb. 2 /PRNewswire/ — The following was released today by Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., Professor of Environmental Medicine, University of Illinois School at Chicago of Public Health:

The World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled in favor of the 1989 European ban on the use of sex hormones for growth promotion of cattle in feedlots prior to slaughter. While subject to further assessment before it can be made permanent, this ruling is a major victory for European consumers. It is also a major defeat for the United States and Canada which challenged the European ban claiming that it was "protectionist," costing over $100 million a year in lost exports, and that it reflected "consumerism versus science." The WTO ruling also raises serious concerns on the safety of U.S. meat, recently questioned on different grounds by Oprah Winfrey, based on the following considerations:

Confidential industry reports to the FDA, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reveal high residues of natural and synthetic sex hormones in meat products even under ideal test conditions. This is contrary to repeated and explicit assurances by the FDA and USDA.
Following legal implantation in the ear of steers of Synovex-S, acombination of estradiol and progesterone, estradiol levels in meat products ranged up to 20-fold in excess of the normal. Based on conservative estimates, the amount of estradiol in two hamburgers eaten by an 8-year-old boy could increase his hormone levels by 10%.
Much higher hormone residues are found in meat products followingillegal implantation in cattle muscle which is commonplace in U.S. feedlots. The WTO ruled that such abuse alone would justify the European ban.
Contrary to repeated and explicit assurances by the FDA and USDA, none of the approximately 130 million U.S. livestock slaughtered annually are tested for residues of cancer-causing and gene-damaging estradiol or any related sex hormones. This misrepresentation has been confirmed by European Commission inspectors, in a November 1997 survey of U.S.control programs, who reported that there was no monitoring for residues of sex hormones nor for illegal animal drugs, including antibiotics, and that U.S. residue monitoring was totally inadequate to meet European standards.
Repeated assurances on the safety of hormonal meat by two World Health Organization bodies, the Food and Agriculture Organization and the Codex Alimentarius Commission (FAO/CODEX), reflect minimal expertise in public health, high representation of senior FDA and USDA officials and industry consultants, reliance on unpublished industry and outdated scientific information, and conflicts of interest. Paradoxically, the same Codex Commission which approved hormonal meat, explicitly warned over a decade ago that baby meat foods "shall be free from residues of hormones."
The endocrine-disruptive effects of estrogenic pesticides and other industrial food contaminants, known as xenoestrogens, are now under intensive investigation by U.S. regulatory and health agencies. But contamination of meat with residues of the thousands-fold more potent estradiol remains ignored.
Lifelong exposure to high residues of natural and synthetic sex hormones in meat products poses serious risks of breast and other reproductive cancers, whose incidence in the U.S. has sharply escalated since 1950 -- 55% for breast cancer, 120% for testicular cancer, and 230% for prostate cancer. Those residues have also been incriminated in increasing trends of precocious sexual development.

Commenting on these facts, Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., Professor of Environmental Medicine at the University of Illinois Chicago, School of Public Health, stated: "The European ban on hormonal meat should serve as a long- overdue wake-up call for U.S. consumers to demand an immediate ban on hormone use or, minimally, the explicit labeling of hormonal meat products. It should also lead to a congressional investigation of the FDA and USDA for gross regulatory abdication besides suppression of information vital to consumer health. The dangers of U.S. hormonal meat can no longer be ignored."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormonal_meat
 
When I talked to my cousins about it they were the ones to quickly point out to me that the EU beef doesn't have hormones in it. They are very health conscious people over there....... there's been a lot of study about hormones in beef especially affecting the young people, earlier puberty and breast development for one thing (that was the studies I read).

The US is lagging behind in research (I think they've sourced that out too) and they aren't interested in keeping people healthy (as evidenced with all the poison from China) and the ships going from one port to another until they get past food inspections.

You know its kind of like other countries that wanted USA beef only and they keep jamming it down their throat that they have to take whatever is sent.

Whatever happened to customer service, "the customer is always right".
 
MoGal said:
When I talked to my cousins about it they were the ones to quickly point out to me that the EU beef doesn't have hormones in it. They are very health conscious people over there....... there's been a lot of study about hormones in beef especially affecting the young people, earlier puberty and breast development for one thing (that was the studies I read).

The US is lagging behind in research (I think they've sourced that out too) and they aren't interested in keeping people healthy (as evidenced with all the poison from China) and the ships going from one port to another until they get past food inspections.

You know its kind of like other countries that wanted USA beef only and they keep jamming it down their throat that they have to take whatever is sent.

Whatever happened to customer service, "the customer is always right".


MOGAL, The Europeans might not use additional hormones as in Implants but I have a hard time to believe that their meat contains no hormones.
 
Great post PORKER!! I'm really glad to see somone with common un-biased sense on here. Using hormones and the health asssociated risks are the same as the smoking issue. For many years those that were receiving the benefits of selling cigarettes said smoking isn't bad for you. But today look at all the toombstones and people with oxygen tanks. I raise clean organic beef, which I'm proud to sell. My calves weigh a little less but my concience is a whole lot lighter too. You know that "Golden Rule" thing. It's just the right thing to do to my fellow man.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top