notes from underground - societal whispers
all the news that print will fit.


Tuesday, September 28, 2004  

np: wilco - a ghost is born

okay, so i received an email statement from the representative of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and here's what they had to say: (some editing, by me, for conciseness)

It is important to understand that NCBA is NOT fighting these regulations as claimed erroneously by today's New York Times...U.S. beef producers have worked with federal authorities for more than 15 years to set up the system of science-based firewalls that is working today to keep the food supply safe.

The most recent firewall established by USDA and FDA ensures that all material that could potentially carry the BSE agent (such as brain and spinal cord) does not enter the food supply. The BSE agent is not found in beef. Current science indicates that BSE is NOT found in the meat we commonly eat, such as steaks, roasts and ground beef. After years of research, scientists have never found BSE infectivity in beef muscle or fat.

Without a safe product, we have no customers. We have consistently been leaders in the food safety arena. We have been working to prevent BSE for decades. We continue fighting for science-based rules, based on the Harvard Risk analysis. USDA has a rigorous testing program in place, with more that 60,000 cattle testing negative this year for BSE.

Our endorsement of Bush as an organization has NOTHING to do with these comments. NCBA Political Action Committee (PAC) has, for the first time in its 106 year history, publicly endorsed the candidacy of President George W. Bush because they agreed this summer that never before has one presidential candidate been so clearly opposed to the ideals of our industry while the other defends them so strongly. Bush understands that our industry has always worked to make animal health and food safety a top priority in the U.S. The Bush Administration has worked to emphasize the importance of realistic, science-based safety measures that maximize the benefits to consumers and producers alike.

i've heard a lot of this before in other arguments about the relative safety of beef. the idea of cattle being fed ground-up, deceased cattle at all is still quite spooky and disconcerting to me. if, as the spokesperson said, the NYT reporter was wrong in claiming that the NCBA (and the feed and cattle industry in general) were opposing the FDA regulations, that's quite a mis-statement on the reporter's part. i've been trying to find a contact email for the article's author, but so far have failed in my cursory attempts. we'll see.
--
i ran out of time (and energy) last night to post my thoughts on the erskine bowles/richard burr debate, but rest assured i will get to them this afternoon. the whole thing was a hoot, in my opinion, but i'll get to that later.


posted by J. Neas | 9/28/2004 08:16:00 AM


Comments: Post a Comment
communique
are 'friends' electric?
political science
local motion
ministry of information