A cat forum. CatBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CatBanter forum » Cat Newsgroups » Cat health & behaviour
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The meat industry



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old January 3rd 04, 06:13 PM
Steve Crane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(Meghan Noecker) wrote in message ...

I really believe that most of these problems would not exist, if all
down cows were put down humanely on the spot, a sample taken for
testing, and the rest of the cow destroyed with no usage whatsoever.
Yes, it would be a loss financially, but I would rather pay higher
prices for meat and products and cover that farmers' costs of doing
bsuiness, than risk a sick animal being put into the food system. If
the animal is sick enough to warrant testing, then it should be
considered a loss. As it is, they go into the system, and end up
spreading the problem.


Meghan,
I concurr with your idea of simply destroying the downer cows. I
agree that I would be willing to pay marginally higher prices for the
beef. Unfortunately the real world situation is that a significant
percentage of the beef consumed in this country comes from outside the
borders of this country, where the use of downer cows in neither
regulated nor stopped. What you would be doing is putting the American
rancher at an increased financial disadvantage again. The American
rancher already pays significantly more for every part of the costs of
production, from wormers to fencing to labor, all these costs are much
higher here than in Bolivia or Argentina or Brazil. Neither are they
supported by government funding as they are in Canada. The average
consumer isn't going to care - if they have a choice between hamburger
at $1.00 a pound or hamburger at $1.05 per pound they will buy the
cheaper meat. While you and I may be willing to pay additional amounts
for beef, most people won't and thus the rancher once again takes an
economic loss.

The use of downer cows in pet foods poses no real danger to pets.
You have to think about the difference between "possibility" and
"probability". Yes it is possible the moon will crash into the earth,
but it is not probable anytime in the next milllion years or so,
especially since it is slowly moving away. It is extremely remotely
possible that a downer cow will escape detection as the one in Mabton
did, but it is not probable that it will cause any harm to any pets. I
find it extremely frustrating that so much "bandwidth" is being used
to discuss extremely remote possibilities as if there was any real and
present danger and yet real animal disease like renal failure is
totally ignored. Where's the outcry over excessive levels of
phosphorus in foods? Where are the screaming displays of outrage at
excessive levels of sodium in pet foods? These things are real dangers
that really cause pet deaths in this country.
  #102  
Old January 3rd 04, 10:13 PM
PawsForThought
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: (Steve Crane)

(Meghan Noecker) wrote in message
...

I really believe that most of these problems would not exist, if all
down cows were put down humanely on the spot, a sample taken for
testing, and the rest of the cow destroyed with no usage whatsoever.
Yes, it would be a loss financially, but I would rather pay higher
prices for meat and products and cover that farmers' costs of doing
bsuiness, than risk a sick animal being put into the food system. If
the animal is sick enough to warrant testing, then it should be
considered a loss. As it is, they go into the system, and end up
spreading the problem.


Meghan,
I concurr with your idea of simply destroying the downer cows. I
agree that I would be willing to pay marginally higher prices for the
beef. Unfortunately the real world situation is that a significant
percentage of the beef consumed in this country comes from outside the
borders of this country, where the use of downer cows in neither
regulated nor stopped. What you would be doing is putting the American
rancher at an increased financial disadvantage again. The American
rancher already pays significantly more for every part of the costs of
production, from wormers to fencing to labor, all these costs are much
higher here than in Bolivia or Argentina or Brazil. Neither are they
supported by government funding as they are in Canada. The average
consumer isn't going to care - if they have a choice between hamburger
at $1.00 a pound or hamburger at $1.05 per pound they will buy the
cheaper meat. While you and I may be willing to pay additional amounts
for beef, most people won't and thus the rancher once again takes an
economic loss.

The use of downer cows in pet foods poses no real danger to pets.
You have to think about the difference between "possibility" and
"probability". Yes it is possible the moon will crash into the earth,
but it is not probable anytime in the next milllion years or so,
especially since it is slowly moving away. It is extremely remotely
possible that a downer cow will escape detection as the one in Mabton
did, but it is not probable that it will cause any harm to any pets. I
find it extremely frustrating that so much "bandwidth" is being used
to discuss extremely remote possibilities as if there was any real and
present danger and yet real animal disease like renal failure is
totally ignored. Where's the outcry over excessive levels of
phosphorus in foods? Where are the screaming displays of outrage at
excessive levels of sodium in pet foods? These things are real dangers
that really cause pet deaths in this country.


Meghan,
FYI Steve Crane works for the pet food company Hill's. I'm sure Steve meant to
let you know that

Lauren
________
See my cats:
http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm
  #103  
Old January 3rd 04, 10:13 PM
PawsForThought
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: (Steve Crane)

(Meghan Noecker) wrote in message
...

I really believe that most of these problems would not exist, if all
down cows were put down humanely on the spot, a sample taken for
testing, and the rest of the cow destroyed with no usage whatsoever.
Yes, it would be a loss financially, but I would rather pay higher
prices for meat and products and cover that farmers' costs of doing
bsuiness, than risk a sick animal being put into the food system. If
the animal is sick enough to warrant testing, then it should be
considered a loss. As it is, they go into the system, and end up
spreading the problem.


Meghan,
I concurr with your idea of simply destroying the downer cows. I
agree that I would be willing to pay marginally higher prices for the
beef. Unfortunately the real world situation is that a significant
percentage of the beef consumed in this country comes from outside the
borders of this country, where the use of downer cows in neither
regulated nor stopped. What you would be doing is putting the American
rancher at an increased financial disadvantage again. The American
rancher already pays significantly more for every part of the costs of
production, from wormers to fencing to labor, all these costs are much
higher here than in Bolivia or Argentina or Brazil. Neither are they
supported by government funding as they are in Canada. The average
consumer isn't going to care - if they have a choice between hamburger
at $1.00 a pound or hamburger at $1.05 per pound they will buy the
cheaper meat. While you and I may be willing to pay additional amounts
for beef, most people won't and thus the rancher once again takes an
economic loss.

The use of downer cows in pet foods poses no real danger to pets.
You have to think about the difference between "possibility" and
"probability". Yes it is possible the moon will crash into the earth,
but it is not probable anytime in the next milllion years or so,
especially since it is slowly moving away. It is extremely remotely
possible that a downer cow will escape detection as the one in Mabton
did, but it is not probable that it will cause any harm to any pets. I
find it extremely frustrating that so much "bandwidth" is being used
to discuss extremely remote possibilities as if there was any real and
present danger and yet real animal disease like renal failure is
totally ignored. Where's the outcry over excessive levels of
phosphorus in foods? Where are the screaming displays of outrage at
excessive levels of sodium in pet foods? These things are real dangers
that really cause pet deaths in this country.


Meghan,
FYI Steve Crane works for the pet food company Hill's. I'm sure Steve meant to
let you know that

Lauren
________
See my cats:
http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm
  #106  
Old January 5th 04, 06:09 AM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hagar wrote:
humans, too.
And they're probably right - I'm not aware of any human cases in
either the USA or Canada.

Hope that makes the meat industry feel better as they absorb
that $17 billion loss.


Yeah. Honestly I think Mad Cow's biggest impact on the US is not going to
be health wise but economy wise. There has been (including the England
epidemic which constitutes most of the cases) around 150 (I think the
exact number was 153 but I'm not sure, could be 163) cases ever of the
syndrom that is caused by injesting the prion. There is the same syndrom
that is caused by genetics or even just random occurance. It is also very
rare.

Of course, with the way Mad Cow is spread, one could point out it would be
very easy to get rid of it and have pretty much 100% safety from it. Feed
cows what htey were meant to be fed, herbivore food. From what is
described of the disease, I'm not sure if it would be totally 100% (could
be that it can randomly occur when a protien turns into a prion), but it
would be a lot closer than any other measures we put into place. Of course
beef would become more expensive (even fast food hamburgers).

But, I think really what needs to be addressed is other countries fear of
our beef now. To be fair, ti sounds hypocritical to say that we were not
allowing beef from countries with incidences into our country and then
to try to get other countries to take our beef. But, at least in Japan's
case it's not as if Japan hadn't already had an incident of it (they had
two cows found to have it). When we weren't allowing beef in we never had
a case of it. I can understand not wanting to risk getting it when you've
never had it. I think though Japanese culture probably is more picky about
what goes in their meal (it seems meal and presentation is very important.
Not that I claim to know much about Japanese culture, it's just the
impression I get).

Also to address the idea that other countries test every
single cattle... other countries have a lot smaller herd of cattle than we
do (America eats a lot more beef and has a lot more land to grow that beef
than most other countries where beef is more of a luxury). I would venture
to say it is impractical to ask every single cow get tested before
slaughtered and the meat eaten for this country, especially when you
consider the risk which really isn't that big. I think maybe it would be
fair for Japan to ask that any cattle/beef we import there get tested.

Even the epidemic in England wasn't that many. More kids go into the
hospital for cancer everyday than total amount of people who have gotten
diagnosed with Varient Jacob's xxx syndrom (I cna't spell that one
word, the varient is the jacob's xxx syndrom that is caused by eating a
mad cow). I'm not sure from what I've read that it is gaurenteed you
will develop the disease if you ingest the prion. As some one has pointed
out they would do the public's health a lot better favor by focusing on
safe meat handling to prevent salmanella and that kind of stuff.

It probably affected England's culture and how they viewed beef more than
their health. It is the perfect disease for the media. It is 100% fatal,
it has a nice horrid description (how it affects the brain, the symptoms),
and it's odd (specially the whole idea of a prion).

Alice

--
The root cause of problems is simple overpopulation. People just aren't
worth very much any more, and they know it. Makes 'em testy. ...Bev
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://havoc.gtf.gatech.edu/tigress
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat by Felix Lee.
  #107  
Old January 5th 04, 06:09 AM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hagar wrote:
humans, too.
And they're probably right - I'm not aware of any human cases in
either the USA or Canada.

Hope that makes the meat industry feel better as they absorb
that $17 billion loss.


Yeah. Honestly I think Mad Cow's biggest impact on the US is not going to
be health wise but economy wise. There has been (including the England
epidemic which constitutes most of the cases) around 150 (I think the
exact number was 153 but I'm not sure, could be 163) cases ever of the
syndrom that is caused by injesting the prion. There is the same syndrom
that is caused by genetics or even just random occurance. It is also very
rare.

Of course, with the way Mad Cow is spread, one could point out it would be
very easy to get rid of it and have pretty much 100% safety from it. Feed
cows what htey were meant to be fed, herbivore food. From what is
described of the disease, I'm not sure if it would be totally 100% (could
be that it can randomly occur when a protien turns into a prion), but it
would be a lot closer than any other measures we put into place. Of course
beef would become more expensive (even fast food hamburgers).

But, I think really what needs to be addressed is other countries fear of
our beef now. To be fair, ti sounds hypocritical to say that we were not
allowing beef from countries with incidences into our country and then
to try to get other countries to take our beef. But, at least in Japan's
case it's not as if Japan hadn't already had an incident of it (they had
two cows found to have it). When we weren't allowing beef in we never had
a case of it. I can understand not wanting to risk getting it when you've
never had it. I think though Japanese culture probably is more picky about
what goes in their meal (it seems meal and presentation is very important.
Not that I claim to know much about Japanese culture, it's just the
impression I get).

Also to address the idea that other countries test every
single cattle... other countries have a lot smaller herd of cattle than we
do (America eats a lot more beef and has a lot more land to grow that beef
than most other countries where beef is more of a luxury). I would venture
to say it is impractical to ask every single cow get tested before
slaughtered and the meat eaten for this country, especially when you
consider the risk which really isn't that big. I think maybe it would be
fair for Japan to ask that any cattle/beef we import there get tested.

Even the epidemic in England wasn't that many. More kids go into the
hospital for cancer everyday than total amount of people who have gotten
diagnosed with Varient Jacob's xxx syndrom (I cna't spell that one
word, the varient is the jacob's xxx syndrom that is caused by eating a
mad cow). I'm not sure from what I've read that it is gaurenteed you
will develop the disease if you ingest the prion. As some one has pointed
out they would do the public's health a lot better favor by focusing on
safe meat handling to prevent salmanella and that kind of stuff.

It probably affected England's culture and how they viewed beef more than
their health. It is the perfect disease for the media. It is 100% fatal,
it has a nice horrid description (how it affects the brain, the symptoms),
and it's odd (specially the whole idea of a prion).

Alice

--
The root cause of problems is simple overpopulation. People just aren't
worth very much any more, and they know it. Makes 'em testy. ...Bev
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://havoc.gtf.gatech.edu/tigress
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat by Felix Lee.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Before commercial cat food..... Kitten M Cat health & behaviour 716 October 18th 03 02:04 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 CatBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.