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
  #51  
Old December 31st 03, 04:15 AM
PawsForThought
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: Cheryl

Joe Canuck wrote in on 30
Dec 2003:

"Outbreak" implies a sudden increase in disease. Just as a report of one
person getting the flu in a city is not considered an outbreak, a report
of one cow getting a disease is also not an outbreak.


So this is an isolated incident. Is that it? For real, how many "isolated
incidents" involving a serious condition involving food sources happen? Is
this a freak? Was the first cow with BSE in the UK an isolated incident?
When did they find out it was not? How *long* did it take before it was
decided it wasn't an isolated incident? Is our government scared this will
escalate beyond an isolated incident? I would bet they are. This isn't
the flu. You people can say how low a risk it is just because it has only
affected so much of a percent of human life but if the FDA bans a diet aid
for causing only a couple of hundred deaths, what do they do about the
possiblity of a tainted food supply? Who cares about one company that
produces a diet aid. **** with the livelyhoods of American agriculture
and exported goods, well it will just have to excalate further before it is
taken seriously. Heh. You people crack me up. The "who cares" attitude
is what makes these things escalate. You keep trusting in FDA and USDA
testing and whatever they say. The rest of us will keep making noise.

--
Cheryl


Well said, Cheryl. If it was such a "nothing" why have over 24 countries
banned import of U.S. beef?

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
  #52  
Old December 31st 03, 05:10 AM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cheryl wrote:

Joe Canuck wrote in on 30
Dec 2003:

"Outbreak" implies a sudden increase in disease. Just as a report of one
person getting the flu in a city is not considered an outbreak, a report
of one cow getting a disease is also not an outbreak.


So this is an isolated incident. Is that it? For real, how many "isolated
incidents" involving a serious condition involving food sources happen? Is
this a freak? Was the first cow with BSE in the UK an isolated incident?
When did they find out it was not? How *long* did it take before it was
decided it wasn't an isolated incident? Is our government scared this will
escalate beyond an isolated incident? I would bet they are. This isn't
the flu. You people can say how low a risk it is just because it has only
affected so much of a percent of human life but if the FDA bans a diet aid
for causing only a couple of hundred deaths, what do they do about the
possiblity of a tainted food supply? Who cares about one company that
produces a diet aid. **** with the livelyhoods of American agriculture
and exported goods, well it will just have to excalate further before it is
taken seriously. Heh. You people crack me up. The "who cares" attitude
is what makes these things escalate. You keep trusting in FDA and USDA
testing and whatever they say. The rest of us will keep making noise.


While one case *is* an isolated incident, any further discoveries will
constitute an outbreak. That is just jargon however as far as the
potential ramifications go. I also find it hard to believe that a
single case can exist in a vacuum.

I'm sure the government uses the term "damage control" in many
situations far more often than asking themselves what is the proper
thing to do. I am glad to see the quick move to ban downers from the
food chain even though it was very overdue.

-mhd
  #53  
Old December 31st 03, 05:10 AM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cheryl wrote:

Joe Canuck wrote in on 30
Dec 2003:

"Outbreak" implies a sudden increase in disease. Just as a report of one
person getting the flu in a city is not considered an outbreak, a report
of one cow getting a disease is also not an outbreak.


So this is an isolated incident. Is that it? For real, how many "isolated
incidents" involving a serious condition involving food sources happen? Is
this a freak? Was the first cow with BSE in the UK an isolated incident?
When did they find out it was not? How *long* did it take before it was
decided it wasn't an isolated incident? Is our government scared this will
escalate beyond an isolated incident? I would bet they are. This isn't
the flu. You people can say how low a risk it is just because it has only
affected so much of a percent of human life but if the FDA bans a diet aid
for causing only a couple of hundred deaths, what do they do about the
possiblity of a tainted food supply? Who cares about one company that
produces a diet aid. **** with the livelyhoods of American agriculture
and exported goods, well it will just have to excalate further before it is
taken seriously. Heh. You people crack me up. The "who cares" attitude
is what makes these things escalate. You keep trusting in FDA and USDA
testing and whatever they say. The rest of us will keep making noise.


While one case *is* an isolated incident, any further discoveries will
constitute an outbreak. That is just jargon however as far as the
potential ramifications go. I also find it hard to believe that a
single case can exist in a vacuum.

I'm sure the government uses the term "damage control" in many
situations far more often than asking themselves what is the proper
thing to do. I am glad to see the quick move to ban downers from the
food chain even though it was very overdue.

-mhd
  #54  
Old December 31st 03, 04:27 PM
dgk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 02:42:42 GMT, Gothmog wrote:

On 30 Dec 2003 16:11:08 GMT, (GAUBSTER2) wrote:

Then how do they explain downer cows being used in Western Washington?
They can't walk. How can they be approved?


Until today, there was no rule to prohibit downer cows from being
processed for human consumption.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ws/7601342.htm


Exactly.


Um, maybe somebody didn't follow the rules? Just because a piece of paper says
something, doesn't mean it is always followed. North Korea Nuke Treaty
advocated by Clinton? Your local speed limits?


The Bush Administration are not interested in safe beef, but have been
forced to take some of the measures long implemented in Europe to
protect beef industry profits.

Too little, too late, but that seems to be the motto of the Bush
administration.


I'm completely reassured by the statements of the Bush regime
concerning the safety of our dead animal supply. After all, they
wouldn't lie to us. Well, maybe about the air around the World Trade
Center being healthy to breathe. And maybe about needing to start a
war. I'm sure they aren't just worried about corporate profits though.
  #55  
Old December 31st 03, 04:27 PM
dgk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 02:42:42 GMT, Gothmog wrote:

On 30 Dec 2003 16:11:08 GMT, (GAUBSTER2) wrote:

Then how do they explain downer cows being used in Western Washington?
They can't walk. How can they be approved?


Until today, there was no rule to prohibit downer cows from being
processed for human consumption.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ws/7601342.htm


Exactly.


Um, maybe somebody didn't follow the rules? Just because a piece of paper says
something, doesn't mean it is always followed. North Korea Nuke Treaty
advocated by Clinton? Your local speed limits?


The Bush Administration are not interested in safe beef, but have been
forced to take some of the measures long implemented in Europe to
protect beef industry profits.

Too little, too late, but that seems to be the motto of the Bush
administration.


I'm completely reassured by the statements of the Bush regime
concerning the safety of our dead animal supply. After all, they
wouldn't lie to us. Well, maybe about the air around the World Trade
Center being healthy to breathe. And maybe about needing to start a
war. I'm sure they aren't just worried about corporate profits though.
  #56  
Old December 31st 03, 07:10 PM
GAUBSTER2
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: Cheryl

"Outbreak" implies a sudden increase in disease. Just as a report of one
person getting the flu in a city is not considered an outbreak, a report
of one cow getting a disease is also not an outbreak.


So this is an isolated incident. Is that it?


Yep! Until it becomes an "outbreak" there is no need worrying yourself any
further. (unless you like being played for a fool)

Is our government scared this will
escalate beyond an isolated incident?


Apparently not, as of right now.

I would bet they are. This isn't
the flu.


Let's talk about the flu for a moment. Who got everybody freaked out about the
flu? The "season" started a little bit earlier than normal, yet the media ran
w/ it and made it seem like a epidemic the likes of which hadn't been seen
since the Dark Ages! That caused a run on vaccines which depleted the supply
to the point where people who should probably get the vaccine are left
empty-handed in a lot of cases. Is the media talking about the flu now? Nope,
not really. They've moved on to the ONE "mad cow".

You people can say how low a risk it is just because it has only
affected so much of a percent of human life but if the FDA bans a diet aid
for causing only a couple of hundred deaths, what do they do about the
possiblity of a tainted food supply?


"The possibility"?? What about the possibility of a comet smashing into Earth
tomorrow night, next week, next year, etc.????? What about the possibility
that anything bad "might", "maybe", "could", "perhaps", happen? Cheryl, get a
grip!!

**** with the livelyhoods of American agriculture
and exported goods, well it will just have to excalate further before it is
taken seriously. Heh. You people crack me up.


Well, it does seem like you've cracked up already!

The "who cares" attitude
is what makes these things escalate.


No, not following the guidelines and regulations are what makes these things
escalate.

You keep trusting in FDA and USDA
testing and whatever they say. The rest of us will keep making noise.


I'd rather you make your noise from inside a padded cell.
  #57  
Old December 31st 03, 07:10 PM
GAUBSTER2
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: Cheryl

"Outbreak" implies a sudden increase in disease. Just as a report of one
person getting the flu in a city is not considered an outbreak, a report
of one cow getting a disease is also not an outbreak.


So this is an isolated incident. Is that it?


Yep! Until it becomes an "outbreak" there is no need worrying yourself any
further. (unless you like being played for a fool)

Is our government scared this will
escalate beyond an isolated incident?


Apparently not, as of right now.

I would bet they are. This isn't
the flu.


Let's talk about the flu for a moment. Who got everybody freaked out about the
flu? The "season" started a little bit earlier than normal, yet the media ran
w/ it and made it seem like a epidemic the likes of which hadn't been seen
since the Dark Ages! That caused a run on vaccines which depleted the supply
to the point where people who should probably get the vaccine are left
empty-handed in a lot of cases. Is the media talking about the flu now? Nope,
not really. They've moved on to the ONE "mad cow".

You people can say how low a risk it is just because it has only
affected so much of a percent of human life but if the FDA bans a diet aid
for causing only a couple of hundred deaths, what do they do about the
possiblity of a tainted food supply?


"The possibility"?? What about the possibility of a comet smashing into Earth
tomorrow night, next week, next year, etc.????? What about the possibility
that anything bad "might", "maybe", "could", "perhaps", happen? Cheryl, get a
grip!!

**** with the livelyhoods of American agriculture
and exported goods, well it will just have to excalate further before it is
taken seriously. Heh. You people crack me up.


Well, it does seem like you've cracked up already!

The "who cares" attitude
is what makes these things escalate.


No, not following the guidelines and regulations are what makes these things
escalate.

You keep trusting in FDA and USDA
testing and whatever they say. The rest of us will keep making noise.


I'd rather you make your noise from inside a padded cell.
  #60  
Old December 31st 03, 07:13 PM
GAUBSTER2
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm sure the government uses the term "damage control" in many
situations far more often than asking themselves what is the proper
thing to do. I am glad to see the quick move to ban downers from the
food chain even though it was very overdue.


Agreed. At least some good came out of all of this. This really should have
been done a long time ago. It's amazing how fast things move when they really
want something accomplished, isn't it!
 




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 03:38 PM.


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