Creekstone wants to test ALL of their beef for mad cow...USDA says NO!

[NotGivingUp]

from organicconsumers.org:

MAD COWS AND CRAZED BUREAUCRATS
Despite mounting public pressure for universal testing for Mad Cow disease, USDA
Secretary Mike Johanns has announced a 90% cut back on testing cattle at slaughter. Two cases of Mad Cow disease have been discovered in the U.S. in the last year, likely meaning that other undiscovered cases have entered the food supply. In Japan, 100% of cows age 24 months and older are tested for the fatal brain-wasting disease before slaughter. In contrast, the U.S. currently tests less than 1% of the 35 million cattle slaughtered annually. The USDA is now claiming that testing 1% of all cattle is "unnecessary" and "too expensive." Dr. Michael Hansen, an expert on Mad Cow disease at Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports, described the latest USDA move as "playing Russian roulette with public health."
Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/2006/article_1207.cfm

In related news, a Kansas-based meatpacking company, Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, filed for summary judgment in its suit against the USDA last week. The USDA claims Creekstone does not have the right to voluntarily test all of its beef for the brain-wasting disease. In response, Creekstone filed a lawsuit against the USDA, saying the company has the right to test all of its meat for Mad Cow Disease and that there are no federal laws saying you can't go above and beyond government regulations for food safety. The USDA has until Aug. 25 to respond to Creekstone's filing.
Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/2006/article_1110.cfm

[RB TexLa]

1. a little costly isn't it?

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. But necessary if you're planning to sell overseas.

[malaise]

20. Nope

a few foreign deaths are just collateral damage for the meat corporations.

[MadMaddie]

2. This is what's going to create the blow back on the Repugs

If a company wants to voluntarily test their product it's their right...Creekstone is right....the USDA (this administration) are trying to cut costs by other meat producers by reducing inspections....and they can't have a company that's above board doing the right thing...

Had enough America.....?

[DemoTex]

3. WE. ARE. SO. FUCKED.

[NotGivingUp]

4. I am so totally disgusted with everything going on.

[SammyWinstonJack]

5. As am I! nt

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

6. Makes ya wonder if the testing would reveal something the USDA doesn't

want us to know, eh?

Doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the integrity of the beef supply in the U.S., eh?

[MadMaddie]

7. Exactly....

[kestrel91316]

8. Trust me. That's EXACTLY why they aren't testing. They already

know the truth, and they don't want it to get out.

[Vinnie From Indy]

9. Gee, I wonder if Creekstone Farms would make their testing regimen

part of their advertising? I know that I would buy their beef over any other beef producers products if I ate alot of beef.

[SoCalDem]

10. Same thing that restaurants and bars tried here in CA

when the smoking ban was coming along.. They were told that they could NOT operate a bar/restaurant that allowed it because it would present a "difficulty" for those who chose to go smoke free..

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

14. Completely different scenario. To ban smoking represents a HIGHER level

of protection of the patron from secondhand smoke, so the law established that uniform standard. A restaurant or bar could not independently choose to have a lower standard (allowing smoking), otherwise the law would be irrelevant.

In this case, USDA doesn't WANT increased testing, which can only represent a higher level of security for the consumer, even if an individual supplier wants to do it THEMSELVES beyond what the current USDA standards require. I can't see that they have any legit argument for this.

[truebrit71]

11. There is only one reason for the USDA to want to stop these tests..

..and that is that they know, along with many, many skeptics that Mad Cow is not only here, but it HAS been here for years and the USDA has been burying the truth. If the truth actually came out about how widespread the contamination is the entire beef industry in this country, along with all of the fast-food chains it supplies, would crater the next day. Anyone remember the impact Oprah Winfrey's little spat with the beef industry a few years back had on livestock futures? Now imagine that on a scale magnified hundreds of times over and you'll have an inkling as to why the USDA doesn't want you to know just exactly how dreadful a job of managing this public health threat they've done, and just how reckless they and the beef industry have been. Russian roulette is an absolutely spot-on assessment of the situation.

[BooScout]

13. I know for a fact the US lies about CJD in the US

According to statistics quoted by the CDC: (http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol2no4/holman2.htm) the number of deaths per million in the US averages right around 1 per million.

For 23 years I worked as a Death Claim Examiner with a major US insurer. I alone saw at least 2 to 3 deaths a year come across my desk due to CJD and that was out of maybe out of 6000 to 7000 claims I reviewed yearly. I was one examiner out of 7 that worked for 1 company out of several thousand US Insurers. You do the math. I have said for years that the US is lying about the statistics for CJD.

[bettyellen]

15. they try to classify it as "spontaeously occuring" or some such BS.......

anything not to be upfront about it.

[Javaman]

16. They know something, they don't want us to know...

Eat organic or don't eat meat at all.

[drm604]

17. I don't understand why they even had to ask for the USDA's permission.

Why can't they just do it? Are there actually laws against un-required testing? :crazy:

[eShirl]

18. how in hell can they "not have the right" to perform whatever the hell

tests they want?

[prairie populist]

19. Totally outrageous and contradicts their own free-enterprise

mantra.

Problem is that the large factory farms don't want to ante up for the cost of testing, plus they know their cattle are at higher risk of testing poorly.

There are still thousands of small - 300 head or less - cow/calf operations that would benefit from testing their own animals. These ranches and small feeding operations know the lineage and feeding methods of their herds going back decades. They are clean.

It's orgs like the Cattleman's Association, which climbed into bed with the packing industry years ago, who are pulling the strings on this one.

Johanns should be ashamed. He is stabbing rural Nebraska and every other midwest state in the back.

[xynthee]

21. Unreal and terrifying!!

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C0CE4DD103BF93BA25757C0A9629C8B63

Here's an article from the NYT from 2004 about it. I don't remember hearing about this.

snip:

In response, he built a laboratory five feet from the overhead chain that carries skinned heads through the plant. His staff was trained in testing for mad cow, using a machine that gives results in seven hours, while the carcasses are still in the cooler.

But on April 9, the United States Department of Agriculture forbade Creekstone to test its cattle, saying there was ''no scientific justification'' for testing young steers like those Creekstone sells. Certifying some beef for Japan as disease-free, the department said, might confuse American consumers into thinking that untested beef was not safe.

Here's more:

Top officials of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, which represents 27,000 cattle ranchers, argued strongly in an interview that Creekstone should be stopped. Testing young animals, said Jan Lyons, the group's president, ''is like testing kindergartners for Alzheimer's.''

Terry Stokes, the chief executive, said, ''If you let one company step out and do that, other companies would have to follow,'' at considerable expense.Mr. Fielding also argued that the decision contradicted a recent one on organic meat. For nearly a decade, the department and big beef producers said in unison that the Europeans, who bar beef raised with hormones or antibiotics, were just being protectionist. American beef, they said, was perfectly safe but consumers would be confused if some was certified as hormone-free. Then, in 2002, the department reversed itself and began certifying organic beef.