Meatpacker sparks mad cow testing fight

[Celebration]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11967001/

WASHINGTON - A Kansas meatpacker has sparked an industry fight by proposing testing all the company's cattle for mad cow disease.

Creekstone Farms Premium Beef wants to look for the disease in every animal it processes. The Agriculture Department has said no. Creekstone says it intends to sue the department.

"Our customers, particularly our Asian customers, have requested it over and over again," chief executive John Stewart said in an interview Wednesday. "We feel strongly that if customers are asking for tested beef, we should be allowed to provide that."

................snip

Larger companies worry that Japanese buyers would insist on costly testing and that a suspect result might scare consumers away from eating beef.

[Options Remain]

1. scare people away from eating beef?

I'm pretty sure deregulation did that for them already.

[savemefromdumbya]

2. they want to cover up BSE and they really shouldn't

it is a fact of life it is in our beef but no one knows

[atommom]

3. So the potential loss in sales is worth that much more than our

safety, eh? I wish we had better food safety requirements (read: a different administration) to prevent companies from pulling stunts like this.

[napi21]

4. I don't understand the argument this meatpacker has issued.

As far as I know, NOBODY is prevented from testing every animal they own. If they feel that would be a marketing tool for their company, knock yourself out!

It sounds to me like they want the ag. Dept. to make it mandatory so it would be an expense for everyone instead of only THEM.

[Celebration]

6. WRONG!!!

The agriculture department WILL NOT ALLOW HIM TO TEST EVERY ANIMAL. He is fighting that, and well he should!!

[napi21]

12. How is the Ag Dept preventing him from testing?

I don't mean to pi** you off, but I don't know of ANY regulations in any area that says you can't go farther than their requirements, as long as you meet the minimums.

I realize this is somewhat distant from the Beef issue, but I foster dogs in my home...one at a time, until we find a good permanent home for them. I was required to get a Ga. Dept of Ag. license, and my home had to be inspected by an Ag. officer before I got the license, and every year thereafter to keep it. Costs me $100/yr. I have to meet certain requirements, but they don't tell me I can't ggo way beyond those requirements!

I am forced to wear my seat belt while driving or riding in a car, but there's no restriction if I want to put a rollcage in my car...just for MY benefit!

What is the Ag Dept doing that prevents this Co. from testing on their own?

[Celebration]

13. more info here

http://www.organicconsumers.org/madcow/preventtesting010305.cfm

USDA has sole control of the testing processes in meat plants. And its
officials say they have rejected Creekstone Farms' pleas because the
company's tests don't detect mad cow disease in animals younger than 30
months. Most U.S. beef comes from 12- to 18-month-old cows.

"The tests are not designed to detect BSE in younger animals," said Andrea
McNally, a spokeswoman for the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service. "So for Creekstone Farms to use the test to say its product is 100
percent BSE-free would be giving consumers a false sense of food safety, a
sense the test is not designed to give."

Creekstone's Pentz said the company knows that. But the issue, he said,
isn't whether the tests are effective, it's whether the federal government
should -- or can -- prevent a private business from meeting the legal
expectations of its customers. In this instance, the customers want the
testing.

"If you go to a grocery store in Japan today, in the meat section you'll see
a sticker on Japanese beef that says it's BSE-tested -- they're already
doing what they want us to do," Pentz said. "Our (Japanese) customers tell
us they want American beef, but it needs to have a BSE-tested sticker on
it," he said. "That's what we're trying to do and that's what USDA is
stopping us from doing."

Really, it is the large meatpackers that don't want this idea to spread.

[napi21]

14. That is an whole different argument.

It sounds to me like the DOA is not preventing the Co. from doing it's own testing, but saying the tests they propose would not meet the requirement to guarantee "their cows" don't have mad cow disease because the TEST wouldn't find it.

I have no idea if the DOA is right or wrong about the test, but the Co. should work to prove the test would prove their cows were pure instead of complaining that they aren't allowed to test! That's very misleading.

I can understand, if a test isn't considered valid proof of anything, the DOA wouldn't allow that Co. to put a sticker on their beef saying it did.

[Celebration]

15. it is a pretext

The company wants to do the testing to meet the demands of the Japanese consumer and their rules for labeling. The Japanese obviously have a different view of it than the Agriculture Department. He is simply trying to conform to Japanese regulations.

IMHO, our Department of Agriculture should not be allowed to interfere. Honestly the Department of Agriculture does not want any spread of testing at all, because the more tests that are done, the more sick cows will show up. That is the bottom line.

[toymachines]

19. not giving them testing equip

there is a law saying pivate companies cant test themselves

[kestrel91316]

10. The USDA SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITS any testing for BSE outside of

their own "testing" program, which is not a legitimate program IMHO. USDA only tests downer cows over a certain age, so there is a substantial chance of MISSING cases. They don't WANT to find it, IMHO, becaus then the truth about how widespread it really is will come out.

This little producer's cattle may very well be clean, but if he gets to test them all, then the public will demand that ALL cattle tested and the beef industry can't HAVE that!

[HereSince1628]

5. so, why not get Japanese certification for the lab?

As long as the company pays for its own lab I don't understand the issue. Except that it might create further customer demand for such tested beef.

If the USDA doesn't recognize the result what does it matter as long as the meatpacker complies with USDA standards of identification suspect BSE cases, reporting and handling of the beef?

[Celebration]

7. this is it in a nutshell

"Except that it might create further customer demand for such tested beef."

That is the whole issue.

I don't think the USDA will allow him to test AT ALL (whether or not they recognize it).

[HereSince1628]

8. Under what authority could the USDA prevent it?

I understand they have the authority to enforce minimum standards. If those standards are met and the meatpacker makes no false claims about the product where is the USDA's issue?

Big corporate competition needs protection? Is that actually in the USDA mandate?

[kestrel91316]

11. I believe USDA has legal control over access to the testing materials, too

[HereSince1628]

16. Really? I don't doubt you, but I'd like to know under what authority

that works. I guess the company will just have to export the beef and samples of the cattle it came from to Mexico, where they can test it, send all the passes to Japan, and send the questionable cases back to US.

[kestrel91316]

17. Hey, works for me. The Japanese will find a "workaround".

And more power to them.

I wish we didn't live in an idiotic fascist state, but what the heck..........

[fasttense]

9. I would buy beef that was 100% tested.

I don't buy it now because I'm afraid of giving my family mad cow disease. We have eaten so much pork these last few years it is coming out our ears. I'm afraid of foul because I might catch the virus while cleaning and preparing the chicken. I would buy chicken that was 100% tested too. I would also buy fish, if I knew for certain it didn't have mercury. Safety is a big selling point for food and my family. Why not let the market determine if this is a good idea? What happened to free markets?

[Nightflurry]

18. I hate to tell ya

But from what I understand pork can have the disease too. From what I know the cow remains are boiled and fed to the pork, and since pork isn't tested for the disease.. who knows. But there are tons of downer pigs as well.

For what it's worth I don't eat beef anymore, but I do honestly eat pork..

[Sgent]

20. Keep in mind

that the USDA has broad control over food products.

They can imprison you for growing wheat w/o reporting it and conforming to price controls & quantity limits -- even if your growing it for your own consumption (they've done it, and it was upheld by the SC).

They can force you to pay for a marketing campaign that you disagree with (SC again concirmed).

They regulate what you can say, and what you can do in agriculture. In many ways, food / meat processing is the most regulated industry in existance (certainly moreso than medicine).