Sitting On A Story

Center for Consumer Freedom
February 28, 2008

We’re not the only ones asking why the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) sat on its explosive slaughterhouse video for several months, while possibly tainted beef made its way into school lunchrooms. (To be fair, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer started the ball rolling.) Tuesday on Capitol Hill, members of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations had some hard questions for HSUS’s top vegan doctor, Michael Greger. And yesterday The New York Times, usually very friendly to HSUS, took notice in a not-too-flattering way.

HSUS’s well-deserved Congressional grilling left us with the distinct impression that the group was less interested in protecting the public’s health (or with the welfare of actual animals) than in timing its hit-job on meat producers for maximum political effect. This is hardly surprising, coming from a PETA-style organization whose lead farm-animal campaigner, Paul Shapiro, is on record saying that “nothing is more important than promoting veganism.”

HSUS sued the Agriculture Department over the slaughter conditions depicted in its video. This is another outcome which wouldn’t have been as media-friendly had the animal rights group done the right thing and reported its findings on Day One.

To listen to Tuesday’s hearing, click here -- and cue up a few places (listed below) for the relevant bits.

Read more...

Humane Society Criticized in Meat Quality Scandal

New York Times
February 27, 2008

WASHINGTON — As the meat industry scrambles to recover from a public-relations disaster over an undercover video of abused cattle, the secretary of agriculture and at least one congressman have picked an unlikely target to share in the blame: the Humane Society of the United States.

The Humane Society shot the video of what appear to be sick or lame cattle being forced to their feet with forklifts, hoses and electric prods at the Westland/Hallmark Meat Company in Chino, Calif., in October and November.

Released publicly in late January, the video touched off criticism of the Department of Agriculture’s inspection of the meat supply and led to the biggest beef recall in history, 143 million pounds.

At a hearing on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, Representative Michael C. Burgess, Republican of Texas, assailed the Humane Society for waiting to inform the federal government.

“Why wait until February to release the video?” Mr. Burgess demanded of a Humane Society representative. “Why wait until now to bring this to our attention?”

His criticism echoed a point made last week by Ed Schafer, the secretary of agriculture, who said he was “extremely disappointed” in the Humane Society. He complained that “for four months, theoretically, animals were not being properly treated, and the Humane Society stood by and allowed it to happen.”

Humane Society representatives said Tuesday that the criticism was misplaced. They said the primary concern of their organization is animal welfare, not food safety, and as soon as they had the tape they took it to local prosecutors in California.

Read more...

The Elephants In HSUS’s Living Room

Center for Consumer Freedom
February 19, 2008

As fallout from the nation’s largest beef recall continues to float through newsrooms and school districts, Americans have begun to ask hard questions about the safety of our beef supply and the character of the people who bring it to market. We have a few questions of our own.

First, why did the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) sit on its shock-value video for several months? The group has claimed that it spent six weeks “investigating” a Chino, California slaughterhouse and two more weeks looking at the videotapes before giving authorities “extra time” to weigh their options. HSUS also insists that it “is the last entity that would ever want to sit on the results; we had no incentive to do so. We were methodical in how we handled the investigation, and how we publicized it, too.”

We’re not buying it. An organization interested in the welfare of cattle would have taken the very first example of animal abuse it found, the very day it was filmed, and showed it to the plant manager. “Clean up your act today and fire these few employees,” a responsible advocate would have said, “or the Sheriff will be our next stop.”

The drawback of this approach for HSUS, of course, is that no fundraising bonanza would result. (How’s that for an “incentive” for being “methodical” instead of acting with urgency?) And Californians wouldn’t have been politically sensitized to the issues wrapped up in a coming ballot initiative to ban farm-animal-handling practices HSUS doesn’t like. (HSUS has already put over $1.4 million into the effort).

Reacting immediately might not have helped HSUS, but the animals going through that slaughterhouse in the last few months would certainly have been much better off. Remember them, HSUS? The animals?

One other nagging question. HSUS president Wayne Pacelle told the Associated Press yesterday that he chose this particular slaughterhouse at random. What he hasn’t said, though, is how many facilities his workers had to infiltrate before they found one with a problem worth videotaping.

Could it be that HSUS has been planting employees inside California meatpackers since June 2003, when the group first floated the idea of an animal-rights ballot initiative in the Golden State? Inquiring minds want to know. Especially since it now looks like the current problem was the exception—not the rule.

NCBA FACT SHEET: Beef Safety from “Mad Cow” Disease

What is “Mad Cow” Disease?

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), commonly called “mad cow” disease, is a degenerative neurological disease of cattle that is caused by misfolded proteins (called prions) that build up in the central nervous system (CNS) and eventually kill nerve cells.

BSE is spread through certain cattle feed ingredients, which have been banned since 1997.

Beef Safety from BSE

The world’s leading scientists, medical professionals and government officials agree that BSE is not a public or animal health risk in the United States:

• In 2007, the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) classified the United States as a controlled risk country in regard to BSE, meaning U.S. regulatory controls are effective and fresh beef and products from cattle of all ages is safe.
• The modeling experts at Harvard’s Center for Risk Analysis reported in 2003 that a detailed analysis shows the food safety measures in place reduce an already very small potential for human exposure to BSE infectivity.
• The results of a 2005 study published in the journal Lancet also provided scientific evidence about the effectiveness of current measures to protect against BSE.According to the study’s lead researcher, “Our results provide reassurance that BSE screening procedures combined with CNS (central nervous system – brain and spinal tissue) removal are effective measures to protect the human food chain.”

Interlocking Safeguards


For nearly 20 years the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has been developing and implementing a series of interlocking safeguards to ensure a safe, BSE-free food supply.

Tissues that could potentially carry BSE in an animal – including the brain and spinal cord – must be removed from cattle prior to processing, and therefore are not allowed into the food supply. This step along with other safeguards ensures BSE has no affect on public health.

The United States began an active BSE surveillance program in 1990 and, since its inception, more than 1 million cattle at greatest risk for BSE have been tested. USDA’s ongoing BSE surveillance program tests approximately 40,000 high-risk cattle annually. This program is rigorous and exceeds international guidelines by 10 times.

Enhanced BSE Surveillance

In June 2004, USDA instituted a one-time expanded testing program to determine the incidence of BSE in the United States. From June 1, 2004 through Aug. 20, 2006, USDA tested 787,711 cattle and found just two BSE positives.

A scientific analysis of seven years of surveillance data found the estimated prevalence of BSE in the United States to be less than one infected animal per 1 million adult cattle (http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/BSEprev-estFINAL_7-20-06.pdf).

Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

BSE is in a class of rare neurological diseases called Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (TSE), some of which affect animals while others affect humans. All TSE are associated with accumulation of prions in CNS tissue. Human TSEs include sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJD or CJD), which accounts for about 85 percent of CJD cases and has an annual incidence of about one case per 1 million population worldwide.

Another human TSE is the very rare variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD), which research from the United Kingdom has associated with consumption of products contaminated with CNS tissue from BSE-infected cattle. There have been about 200 cases of vCJD in the world (most of these in the U.K.) and zero cases associated with beef consumption in the United States.

Additional Information

Additional information about BSE can be found at the following Web sites:

• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Q&A: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/bse/
  U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Q&A: www.fda.gov/cber/bse/bseqa.htm#a1
• USDA Overview: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/BSEbrochure12-2006.pdf
• Beef Industry BSE facts and information: http://www.BSEInfo.org

NCBA FACT SHEET: Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. Recall

Animal Welfare

Animal care and raising cattle go hand-in-hand. America’s beef producers know that giving animals the proper care, handling and nutrition they deserve is the right thing to do and it makes good business sense.

• Beef producers have long recognized the need to properly care for their livestock. Sound animal husbandry practices – based on research and decades of practical experience – affect the well-being of cattle, individual animal health and herd productivity.
• The treatment of cattle depicted in a video released by the Humane Society of the United States on Jan. 30 in no way represents the types of treatment cattle receive on a daily basis. We strongly encourage action against anyone who violates animal welfare laws in this way.
• The Producer Code of Cattle Care serves as formalized animal welfare guidelines for the beef industry in areas including feeding and nutrition; animal health practices; and handling sick, disabled or diseased livestock. Importantly, these guidelines state that “persons who willfully mistreat animals will not be tolerated.”

The Humane Slaughter Act of 1958 dictates strict animal handling and slaughtering standards for packing plants that are monitored by thousands of federal meat inspectors nationwide. More information about humane animal slaughtering practices can be found at http://www.meatami.com/.

Understanding Recalls

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA-FSIS) recalls food products for a variety of reasons, including the potential presence of pathogens like E. coli O157:H7, undeclared allergens such as peanuts or soy or physical contaminants like plastic material. More information about the government’s food recall process can be found at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets/FSIS_Food_Recalls/index.asp

The Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. recall of 143.38 million pounds of beef is the largest meat recall to date (a 1998 Sarah Lee recall was 35 million pounds of various ready-to-eat meat products; Topps was 21.7 million pounds of ground beef). FSIS classified this recall as a “Class II” recall rather than a “Class I” because there is only a remote probability of adverse health consequences.

Safety of U.S. Beef Supply

The “downer cow” ban is just one of many safeguards designed to protect animal health and the human food supply from BSE. Because the inability of cattle to walk can be a symptom of BSE (commonly referred to as “mad cow” disease), USDA prohibits all animals that are unable to walk from entering the human food supply.

USDA mandates that when cattle are processed, all tissues that could potentially carry BSE in an animal must be removed and cannot go into the food supply. This ensures this disease has no access to the rest of the processed product and is another safeguard protecting public health.

Robust surveillance data show BSE is rare in this country (existing in fewer than one animal per 1 million adult cattle). USDA maintains an ongoing BSE surveillance program and currently tests approximately 40,000 high-risk cattle annually, a number that exceeds the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) recommended testing levels.

Timeline of Events

The following are the most relevant developments since USDA launched its investigation into allegations of animal cruelty at Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. in Chino, Calif. on Jan. 30, 2008:

• USDA suspended the company as a supplier of the National School Lunch Program and placed an administrative hold on products produced by the company on Jan. 30.
• The company voluntarily stopped all operations at the plant on Feb. 1 and FSIS officially suspended plant production on Feb. 4;
• USDA extended its hold on products produced by the plant on Feb. 8 pending the results of its investigation.
• On Feb. 15, criminal charges were filed against two former Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Company employees.
• FSIS announced Feb. 17 Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. is recalling 143 million pounds of beef products because the cattle did not receive proper inspection.

Beef Industry at a Glance

The U.S. beef industry is made up of more than 1 million businesses, farms and ranches. In 2006, there were more than 800,000 ranchers and cattle producers in the United States caring for an average inventory of 97.1 million cattle.

NCBA Hallmark/Westland Recall Key Message Platform

We fully support USDA’s recall as a precautionary measure.

• The system we have created to keep our beef supply wholesome and safe must be complied with which is why we support USDA’s action today to implement a Class 2 precautionary type recall.
• The person or persons responsible should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
  

At the same, time, we can say with confidence that the beef supply is safe because of the multiple interlocking safeguards we have in place.

• In the United States beef industry, we have multiple, interlocking safeguards at the processing plant that keeps beef safe.
• Other systems inside this facility have been audited and tested extensively over the past several months giving us confidence that safety measures were operating at the highest standard.
• The ban on non-ambulatory animals from entering the food supply is one of many safety measures in the U.S. food system, but it is not the only step taken to ensure the safety of the beef supply.
• From stringent feeding guidelines to processing guidelines, there are multiple safety hurdles in the beef production chain before our product arrives at our grocery stores or restaurants.
• The fact that one of the multiple safeguards in place was bypassed in this case is unacceptable but does not compromise the safety of the beef.
• I am confident in the safety of beef because I know there are multiple hurdles beef goes through to make it safe before I serve it to my family.
  

BSE is not a food safety concern because of significant interlocking safeguards that began in 1989.

• What happened at this plant DOES NOT mean kids were exposed to BSE. There are multiple safeguards are in place to help ensure the safety of beef.
• There are about 97 million cattle in this country. In the past 18 years, only three cases of BSE (one of which was imported) have been identified after widely testing of our herd. The fact is: this disease is not present to any significant extent in our cattle herd.
• The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) conducted an expanded BSE surveillance program that verified the risk of BSE in the U.S. cattle population is less than one case per 1 million cattle. (from June 2004 to August 2006, more than 759,000 cattle were tested)
• But even though this disease is extremely rare, the beef industry has taken all the steps necessary to make sure we produce beef in a way that this disease never enters the food chain.

As an organization representing beef producers, we have two expectations when our cattle leave our farms or ranches: that our animals are treated humanely and that every step is taken to produce safe beef.

• NCBA supports full-time USDA supervision of the ante-mortem (before slaughter) animal receiving area and holding pens to ensure proper treatment of all animals.
• By law, every beef processing facility in the United States must follow humane handling procedures as outlined in the Humane Slaughter Act. NCBA strongly supports strict compliance with and enforcement of the Act.
• We also believe it is our role to work with our industry partners in the dairy, packing and processing industries to ensure the same high level of humane care is given to animals every step along the way.
• Beef producers understand that animal care and raising cattle go hand-in-hand. We know that giving animals the proper care, handling and nutrition they deserve is the right thing to do. We stand behind this principle with educational programs such as the Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) certification program, which outlines the essential elements for cattle care on the farm.

America is Running Out of Electricity

National Anxiety Center
February 12, 2008

The provision of electrical power nationwide has become the chosen battleground for environmental groups laboring night and day to insure there will not be enough of it to meet our needs.

The U.S. Department of Energy predicts that overall energy demand will grow by 45% between now and 2030.

The effort to insure Americans will not have enough electricity is deadly serious. Take, for example, the exultant news release (Jan 17) from the Rainforest Action Network, "Proposed Coal Plants Losing Steam" celebrating "59 coal plants cancelled or shelved in 2007."

Since coal-fired utilities provide over 50 percent of the electricity generated in America, the need for additional plants would seem obvious. A May 2007 Business Week article about coal noted that, "Today, making electricity from coal can cost half as much as using cleaner-burning natural gas." Half as much at the plant translates to half as much in the monthly energy bill to homeowners and others.

The Greens, however, using the utterly bogus "global warming" hoax and asserting the false notion that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions will transform the climate of the earth, are successfully denying Americans electrical power.

There is no global warming and CO2 constitutes about 0.038% if the earth’s atmosphere. In past eras there was a lot more CO2 and the result was the lush vegetation that kept a lot of dinosaurs munching away for several million years.

The brownouts in California are testimony to what happens when there are an insufficient number of plants to generate electricity, whether it comes from coal, nuclear, or hydroelectric power.

Right now the population of America is just over 300 million. The rate of population growth is 3 to 4 million people a year. All will want and need electricity. Where will it come from if the Greens are successful in thwarting the building of power generation plants?

Read more...