If you eat beef . . .

You might be interested to know that feedlot cattle are routinely fed chicken waste--that is chicken feces, feathers, dead birds, spilled feed, and anything else found on the ground in the chicken houses. Now I'm all for recycling, but that's going too far. Not only is it disgusting but it spreads disease like E. coli, salmonella, etc. -- not to mention, chicken feed often contains meat and bone meal from cows which when fed back to cattle can spread mad cow disease.

If you also find this disgusting, unhealthy and inhumane, sign this petition requesting that the FDA ban the practice of feeding chicken waste to cows.

testing for mad cow

Here's a press release I received today with a few comments from me at the end:


Consumers Union
Nonprofit Publisher of Consumer Reports

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Jennifer Fuson (202) 462-6262
June 10, 2008
USDA Opposition to Mad Cow Testing Is Anti-Consumer, Anti-Competitive;
Tests Could Resolve Korea Beef Trade Dispute

Washington, DC—Consumers Union calls on the U.S. Department of Agriculture to reverse itself and allow a Kansas based meatpacking company, Creekstone Farms, to test their slaughtered cows for mad cow disease. Last year, Creekstone won its suit against the agency for the right to test and label its meat as “tested for BSE”. USDA appealed the ruling, arguing the same rapid test kits used by the agency to screen for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow, are “worthless” when used by a private company. The U.S. Court of Appeals is expected to rule shortly.

“The best thing USDA could do would be to drop its anticompetitive, anti-consumer ban on voluntarily testing for mad cow disease and also allow meat from tested animals to be labeled as ‘tested for BSE’ so that consumers have a choice and free markets can function,” said Michael Hansen, Senior Scientist at Consumers Union. “It is hurting our trade with other countries and consumer confidence in our beef supply at home,” added Hansen.

Currently, the USDA tests only a tenth of a percent of all slaughtered or dead American beef cattle, while Japan tests every cow put into the food system. This discrepancy led to a protracted trade dispute with Japan.

South Korea currently bans all U.S. beef, and tens of thousands of people demonstrated Tuesday against lifting import restrictions there. Creekstone Farms had built a lab to screen all their slaughtered beef using the same tests used by USDA, in order to compete in the overseas beef market. USDA prohibited the testing, calling it “worthless”.

The “rapid test” kits used by USDA to detect mad cow are not infallible, but according to Consumers Union are not “worthless,” as the agency argued in their appeal of the lower Court ruling. These tests can miss a case of mad cow disease if it is in an early stage of incubation, but they can catch the disease in later stages, before the animal is showing symptoms. In fact, the European Union uses the same test on healthy-appearing cattle and turned up over 1,100 cases of BSE between 2001 and 2006, preventing over a thousand infected cattle from reaching European supermarkets.

In late April, Korean President Lee Myung-bak announced that he had made a deal to open up the Korean market to U.S. beef, triggering massive street demonstrations. Candlelight vigils have been held daily for over a month, and major demonstrations have been held in Seoul against importing U.S. beef since last Friday.

“USDA should not wait for the Court's decision, but rather should drop their appeal and allow the sale and use of USDA-validated rapid test kits for the detection of mad cow disease,” added Hansen, who has done extensive media in South Korea on U.S. beef testing and mad cow disease. “If U.S. companies were allowed to test for BSE, then these heavy export restrictions would probably decline or disappear. Indeed, the reason that Creekstone brought the case against USDA was to regain lost income from exports to South Korea and Japan,” said Hansen. “A reevaluation of our beef testing policy is essential to remain competitive in the world beef market and ensure the safety of consumers both home and abroad.”

For more information on USDA’s position on mad cow and developments in Creekstone’s court battle see http://blogs.consumerreports.org/safety/ .

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My comment:

Many people think the USDA was formed to protect the consumer when in reality, it was created to promote agriculture products - and this is another example of putting the consumer last. Is it really necessary to prevent a farmer from guaranteeing a safe product to its customers. Just like with the GE labeling, Bovine Growth Hormone, everyone's afraid that having someone provide a guaranteed safe product - consumers will no longer buy the ones that might potenially not be safe. Why don't they spend their time and energy providing safe food for everybody.

Interesting information about beef recall

There is a great article with lots of information about the recall and beef in general - plus a video of what was done to the cows at Hallmark/Westland Meat.

Does anyone else find it appalling that Hallmark/Westland Meat was named the school lunch program's "Supplier of the Year" ? If they are the best of the bunch, how bad are the other suppliers!

The article also explains that small farmers are not allowed to slaughter their beef even though the could do it in a more humane, clean way but must ship their cattle to federall inspected slaughterhouses - supposedly for the consumers safety . . .

Also, read about the link between downer cows and mad cow disease and how it is virtually impossible to trace the meat causing mad cow disease because it can take up to 30 years to show up.

Also, it reiterates what I've said before - if you choose to eat meat, go grassfed and local if possible.

Here's the link: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/3/4/usda-orders-largest-meat-recall-in-u-s-history.aspx

Meat from sick animals served at schools

The USDA is investigating Chino, CA company Hallmark after release of a video showing workers using illegal practices on sick cows to get them into the slaughterhouse. Federal and California law prohibits the slaughter of "downer" cattle - cows that cannot stand or walk - to protect the human food supply from eating the meat of unhealthy animals. Several studies have shown a correlation between meat from downer cows and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), more commonly know as Mad Cow Disease.

Employees at Hallmark were shown using forklifts to pick up and roll animals too weak to stand and, much worse, shooting high pressure water sprays into the nostrils of cows and repeatedly shocking them with electricity so they could get the animals to get up and walk past the inspector assigned to monitor that only healthy cows were slaughtered.

Beef from the Hallmark slaughterhouse is distributed by Westland Meat Co. (also of Chino). According to the USDA, Westland sold 27 million pounds of meat last year to federal food and nutrition programs including school lunches and meals for the poor and elderly.

For more info, check out the article in the LA Times at http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-humane31jan31,1,7693001.story?ctrack=3&cset=true

USDA allowing Candadian meat with high risk of mad cow

Beginning Monday, November 19, the USDA will allow Canadian cattle born after 1999 to enter the U.S., where they can be slaughtered and sold to Americans for meat. Previously, USDA only allowed cattle up to 2.5 years old to enter the country. Older cattle are believed to be at higher risk for carrying mad cow disease, in fact, at least five cases of mad cow disease have been detected in Canadian cattle born after 1999 according to Dr. Michael Hansen, Senior Scientist for Food Safety for Consumers Union, nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports. He adds that "these cattle have been detected in a relatively small test program that tests only about one percent of slaughtered or dead Canadian cattle. How many more are there that are escaping detection?" If an infected animal does come across the border, it is very unlikely that the extremely small U.S. testing program, which tests just a tenth of a percent of beef that die or are slaughtered, would detect it.

In addition to going into the food supply, a cow's remains (like that of most slaughtered cattle) would be rendered and converted into pet food and feed for pigs and chickens. Because the remains of slaughtered pigs and chickens can be fed back to cattle, it is possible that the infectious agent could find its way into U.S. born cattle in the future.

"Allowing these cows to enter into the U.S. food system is a foolhardy course," Hansen said. "According to the Center for Disease Control, the prevalence of mad cow disease is 30 times higher in Canadian than in U.S. cattle. USDA's plan to reopen the border to cows born after March 1999 puts both consumers and the livestock industry at risk."

As of now, there is no labeling of country of orgin on meat so consumers would not know if they were eating beef from Canadian cows or not.

Independent Testing for Mad Cow Disease May Be Allowed

Remember last year when Creekstone Farms, a meatpacker in Kansas, wanted to test all of its cows for mad cow disease at its own expense. Then the Department of Agriculture, who currently administers the test to less than 1 percent of all slaughtered cows, threatened them with prosecution. It seems that larger meat companies were afraid that given the choice between tested beef and untested, the consumers might chose the safe beef.

Well, on Thursday, a federal judge ruled that the federal government must allow meatpackers to test their animals for mad cow disease if they so choose and does not have the authority to regulate the test. Robertson put his order on hold until the government can appeal. If the government does not appeal by June 1, he said the ruling would take effect.

Mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, is linked to more than 150 human deaths worldwide, mostly in Britain.There have been three cases of mad cow disease in the U.S. The first, in December 2003 in Washington state, was in a cow that had been imported from Canada. The second, in 2005, was in a Texas-born cow. The third was confirmed last year in an Alabama cow. After the first case of mad cow disease heightened concern about the disease, the department increased its testing for the disease to about 1,000 tests each day. Last July, the department cut its testing by about 90 percent.

Mad Cow

There was an interesting article in this week's newsletter from the Organic Consumers Association. It seems that McDonalds Corporation is complaining about how poorly the FDA is monitoring U.S. beef safety. Currently, they test less than 1% of cattle for mad cow disease. It will be interesting to see if anything changes now that a major beef buyer is speaking out.

Check out this link for more articles about mad cow http://www.organicconsumers.org/madcow.htm. While you're there, sign the petition urging the government to enforce the same testing standards required by the European Union and Japan.

To subscribe to the Organic Consumers Association newsletter, go to www.organicconsumers.org.