Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

cascadiance

(19,537 posts)
40. A big issue with this decision is U.S. and Canada policy on mad cow "diets" of cattle...
Tue May 19, 2015, 12:51 AM
May 2015

After the big issues with mad cow disease many years, the WHO issued guidelines for the global farming community that animal parts of cows should not be fed to cows OR other animals either such as poultry and pigs.

Most of the rest of the world has followed these guidelines, but the U.S. and Canada hadn't restricted feeding cattle animal parts to poultry and pigs, when their parts are fed back in feed to cattle, even though cattle parts are no longer fed to cattle now. Many experts have concerns that even though poultry and pigs don't get themselves the disease in terms of how it manifests itself in cattle, there is concern that they can be *carriers* of the disease, and that the circle of feeding cow parts to these animals and then these animals back to cattle will still perhaps perpetuate mad cow disease that will bite us back at a later date. Here's one of many articles on this topic from back then...

http://www.greens.org/s-r/33/33-09.html

And guess what, not too long ago, there was another case found in Canada with these reduced restrictions for another incidence of mad cow disease just this year! HMMM!!!!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/13/us-canada-beef-idUSKBN0LH15P20150213

So... If we can no longer have labels on country of origin of cattle meat, then what's to protect those around the world from perhaps a larger potential spread of mad cow disease that happened in Canada recently, likely due to these policies!

You would almost think that this newer policy will have the reverse effect, and make it less problematic for American cattle (at least those that don't have organic certification) to get sold overseas. I'm wondering what places like Europe and Asia with stricter standards feel about this. It certainly will likely hurt organic cattle farmers here in the U.S., who perhaps can no longer have a larger share of cattle exports than the more corporate cattle farmers that aren't putting in place adequate feed restrictions.


Right, you are not allowed to know what you eat because that discriminates against the bemildred May 2015 #1
You need to FlatBaroque May 2015 #8
Oh noes! A trade war! The pundits will shit a brick Populist_Prole May 2015 #2
Perfect example of trade agreements being used as leverage to attack law and regulation. pa28 May 2015 #3
My thought exactly. This is a preview. Auggie May 2015 #4
Exactly, just the opening act.... daleanime May 2015 #10
Canada has published a hit list of potential U.S. targets, including wine, chocolate, ketchup and ce bananas May 2015 #57
Exactly. Duppers May 2015 #20
Winners are Wellstone ruled May 2015 #5
B-b-but the swooners say this can't happen because "Obama says so." PSPS May 2015 #6
Using the now upheld by tribunal legitimate complaints of Canada and Mexico meat processors about American point of Fred Sanders May 2015 #7
+ up! /nt/ PosterChild May 2015 #21
legitimate? ... we have those laws for a reason Trajan May 2015 #26
Canada will now be able to market it's own labels, like Alberta grain fed Prime beef.....if you can Fred Sanders May 2015 #29
It's illogical to point out nearly identical rules and tribunals are in the leaked parts of the TPP? jeff47 May 2015 #31
Corporate shill much? mindem May 2015 #79
Glad I don't eat meat. CharlotteVale May 2015 #9
Me too. Chan790 May 2015 #11
Yep, and the trade partner will win. CharlotteVale May 2015 #13
I would want to know where my fish comes from also. Ilsa May 2015 #14
I've heard about that, ewwwww! CharlotteVale May 2015 #15
Guess I'm going to wait on dinner. Phlem May 2015 #16
It would be nice to know if the fish comes from a near-collapsed fishery too n/t arcane1 May 2015 #27
Tilapia, no? A bottom feeder catfish type, farmed in Asia w/antibiotics thrown in. Yum. appalachiablue May 2015 #66
That must be why all the bayous and drainage ditches are infested with tilapia... Sunlei May 2015 #73
My fear is the country of origin labels for fruit/veggies will come under fire next peacebird May 2015 #46
I worry about that, too. CharlotteVale May 2015 #55
I want to be able to discriminate based upon where my meat was born, raised, slaughtered, processed, Ed Suspicious May 2015 #12
+1 840high May 2015 #17
I have stopped eating fish because it's impossible to track their origins. Will do the same if meat Lodestar May 2015 #42
My supermarket clearly has it marked in their showcase.... Historic NY May 2015 #78
The Meat Wars. It was the Whiskey Rebellion 200+ years ago- appalachiablue May 2015 #75
Missing the point of the WTO trade ruling completely. Fred Sanders May 2015 #81
This is exactly what will happen under the TPP. Fla Dem May 2015 #18
We signed up to a trade agreement . ... PosterChild May 2015 #22
I signed nothing Trajan May 2015 #28
LOL, You sound like.... PosterChild May 2015 #35
You sound like someone brentspeak May 2015 #44
Where were them apples . ., PosterChild May 2015 #83
Which is why the TPP shouldn't go through. Fla Dem May 2015 #30
Another good reason sarisataka May 2015 #19
If I bought only locally produced food... PosterChild May 2015 #23
Our food production is regulated under FDA and USDA rules. These organizations are at least Ed Suspicious May 2015 #24
The dispute is over source labeling....... PosterChild May 2015 #36
I don't necessarily. Country of origin labels allow me to decide. Do you have a problem Ed Suspicious May 2015 #37
Yes, and no... PosterChild May 2015 #43
Let's sum up some of your ideologies brentspeak May 2015 #45
Accurate observation Fairgo May 2015 #58
Let's examine some of these assertions.... PosterChild May 2015 #84
Because..... PosterChild May 2015 #82
Google farmers market sarisataka May 2015 #25
The dispute is over source labling.... PosterChild May 2015 #34
Imagine that...nt Jesus Malverde May 2015 #32
Here we go. Now we're not allowed to know where the meat we are eating came from? onecaliberal May 2015 #33
yup. There is a guy upthread who seems to hold a very strong opinion that this is the way it should Ed Suspicious May 2015 #38
I will stop eating meat and feeding it to my children. onecaliberal May 2015 #39
k&r nt bananas May 2015 #56
A big issue with this decision is U.S. and Canada policy on mad cow "diets" of cattle... cascadiance May 2015 #40
This message was self-deleted by its author nenagh May 2015 #48
it is the feed problem. That 2004 article was very well written. It even touched on chronic wasting Sunlei May 2015 #74
Ding! Ding! A winner! Nihil May 2015 #77
Labels don't discriminate, people do. n/t Lodestar May 2015 #41
The only point to labeling is to highlight, which is another means to discourage purchase. randome May 2015 #47
True enough; we do indeed need more oversight, but I'd still prefer to be the decision maker Lodestar May 2015 #49
There are probably other labels that can serve a good purpose. randome May 2015 #53
why would anyone care about a country of origin? Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #51
But that's not the point of a trade treaty. randome May 2015 #52
That sounds pretty naive, not altruistic. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #54
+1 appalachiablue May 2015 #67
The point of MAD Trade Agreements is to enable corporations to make more profit appalachiablue May 2015 #68
Not every corporation is a massive GE or Tyson Foods. randome May 2015 #69
Don't forget the closer a product is made, OneCrazyDiamond May 2015 #60
Not to discourage purchase. If Italy puts out a premium beef product, they should be Ed Suspicious May 2015 #59
So far as I know, nothing prevents a company from calling attention to their own products. randome May 2015 #62
Folks should maybe try a Canadian news source for THEIR perspective on this, because there Fred Sanders May 2015 #80
I know this is about Canada and Mexico awoke_in_2003 May 2015 #63
+1 appalachiablue May 2015 #64
If a country does not meet our safety standards -applied uniformly to all signatories- randome May 2015 #65
It may say that awoke_in_2003 May 2015 #71
Part of the problem, if we are going to create these huge global trade sectors, is that there are Lodestar May 2015 #50
Ridiculous. Quantess May 2015 #61
A whinney win reddread May 2015 #70
why would congress want to remove the meat label that says for example on chicken, Sunlei May 2015 #72
There have been problems Rolando May 2015 #76
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. loses meat labeling ...»Reply #40