1
   

Mad Cow Disease Found!

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Jan, 2004 01:51 pm
wenchilina, Your mention of "hot dogs" brings up a whole new issue. If anybody has seen the production of hot dogs, they scrape every bit of meat from the bones. It would seem that bone chips could end up in the final product we eat as hot dogs. Anybody have any more info on this?
0 Replies
 
Ceili
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Jan, 2004 01:57 pm
ewwwwhhh!
I can't stand hotdogs, I can't abide the smell.
or taste for that matter.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Jan, 2004 02:02 pm
Once in a great while, I go to Costco and get their hot dog and large drink for $1.67 for lunch. I may forgo that practice for awhile until we get more info.
0 Replies
 
wenchilina
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Jan, 2004 02:29 pm
Hotdogs can contain spinal cord material.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2004 04:46 pm
Quote:
Katherine DiMatteo, executive director of the Organic Trade Association, said she's certain that some of the standards the government adopted in 2002 for certified organic beef help to reduce the risk of transmitting mad cow disease.

For example, feed containing animal byproducts has been implicated in the spread of the disease in Europe. In the United States, cattle raised for certified organic beef must by law receive vegetative feed only -- meaning grass and grains.


Well, that's standard in Europe for 'normal' beef. (Organic means here, that the cattle just can get organic certified feed as well, and grews up in an as 'organic' certified stable.)
0 Replies
 
Piffka
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2004 05:08 pm
The rules for organic beef are the same here, Walter.

Quote:
The requirements for organic livestock production are defined by the USDA National Organic Program (NOP) standards that went into effect in 2002.

Beef production starts with a calf. Calves must come from a mother cow that is managed organically during the last third of her gestation period. After birth, the calf must be treated organically through its entire life.

All feeds must be organically produced. This includes pastures and purchased feeds such as hay or grains. Rations may not include animal by-products, urea or manure. Some FDA approved mineral and vitamin supplements are allowed if fed at recommended rates.

Living conditions are also regulated by the NOP standards. Your animals must be given access to fresh air and the great outdoors. Cattle must have access to pasture, but pasture does not have to supply all the required feed.

Growth-promoting drugs, including hormones, are not allowed. Cattle may be vaccinated to protect them from disease.

Sick animals must be given medical attention. If antibiotics are required, the animal should be treated but must also be removed from the organic herd. Withholding medical treatment to preserve organic status is not allowed.

The final steps of beef production, slaughter and processing, must occur at a certified organic processing facility.

Information from Larimer County Cooperative Extension, P.O. Box 543, Fort Collins, CO 80522
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2004 06:01 pm
HOTDOGS : i believe it was count otto von bismarck who said : "it is best not to know what goes into the making of sausages and politics" - or was it the other way around ? i have to admit that i have not been able to control my (german) appetite for some nice sausages of various kinds. two years ago when we were in vienna/austria i even managed to find a particularly revolting/revered dish called EDEL-BEUSCHEL(it's a mixture of hearts, lungs ... in a nice mildly spicy gravy !!!). since it was served in the best hotel-restaurant in vienna in the BRISTOL HOTEL and certified as FROM U.S. BEEF , i made a pig of myself (but in a gentlemanly way, wearing suit and tie, white napkin ... ). what a feast ! hbg
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2004 07:07 pm
hbg, I remember our visit to Nuremburg's shopping area where we bought sausages from those stands and ate like pigs. I didn't know what they were made from, but I enjoyed every morsel, and would go back for more if the opportunity presented itself. Wink
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2004 07:41 pm
Y'know, ehbeth, I wish you would prod mr and mrs. hamburger to come to SF in the spring.... I just know I'd like meeting them.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2004 08:04 pm
c.i. : i guess you agree with bismarck, best not to know ... which reminds me ! before coming to canada in 1956, i went to night-school for two years to get my senior-matriculation while working as a clerk in the port of hamburg. after school we would often go out for a few beers and a bite to eat to wind down. one of the fellows in our class was a sales rep for a german meat processor (canned meats and sausages) . when the waiter would try to entice us to order the daily special, this fellow would always cut in, "do you have smoked westphalian ham ?" , "oh, yes we do" , "well, let me see the ham BEFORE you slice it!'. he would inspect it with care and offer his comments ! we NEVER ordered any sausage or other processed meat when he was with us ! of course, we had to change reataurants fairly often since we did not want to risk being kicked out ! EINE GUTE WURST ! hbg
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jan, 2004 08:35 pm
DNA tests confirm 'mad' cow from Canada
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- DNA tests verify "with a high degree of certainty" that the cow in Washington state found to have mad cow disease originated from a dairy farm in Alberta, Canada, USDA chief veterinarian Ron DeHaven said Tuesday.
DNA from the cow's brain was compared with DNA from the semen of her sire as determined by records from the Alberta farm, DeHaven said.
The infected animal was a Holstein that was slaughtered in early December after giving birth left it paralyzed. U.S. investigators say they believe the cow was among a herd of 81 or 82 animals that entered the United States from Canada in 2001.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/01/06/mad.cow/index.html
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jan, 2004 01:42 am
Not good Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jan, 2004 08:59 am
Actually it is not bad either. First of all it must be kept in mind, at least as far as BES is concerned there are no "Canadian" or "American" cattle. There is a population of cattle some members of which have an infection and a border is irrelevant. Once we know the locus of the infection in this population we can start to ask questions about it's parameters, and that is the first step to eradicating it.
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jan, 2004 12:21 pm
Good point.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jan, 2004 01:37 pm
Acquiunk got it right; find the source and eradicate it. Working together for solutions is the answer; not pointing fingers to establish 'blame.'
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jan, 2004 03:39 pm
Quite a good article re this topic seems to be this one here:
Quote:

Bringing the Food Economy Home
Helena Norberg-Hodge and Steven Gorelick

Today's mounting social and ecological crises demand responses that are broad, deep, and strategic. Given the widespread destruction wrought by globalisation, it seems clear that the most powerful solutions will involve a fundamental change in direction - towards localizing rather than globalising economic activity. In fact, 'going local' may be the single most effective thing we can do.

Many people will find this claim exaggerated and unrealistic. But we have to ask ourselves whether it is realistic to continue pulling the entire global population into a single economy - one in which a small fraction of the population already uses the bulk of the world's resources. Today, roughly half the world's people, mostly in the South, still derive a large proportion of their needs from local economies. Do we really believe that those people's lives will be improved if we destroy these economies? What can globalisation offer the majority, other than unrealistic promises? Localisation would not only entail far less social and environmental upheaval, it would actually be far less costly to implement. In fact, every step towards the local, whether at the policy level or in our communities, would bring with it a whole cascade of benefits.

Localisation is essentially a process of de-centralisation - shifting economic activity into the hands of millions of small- and medium-sized businesses instead of concentrating it in fewer and fewer mega-corporations. Localisation doesn't mean that every community would be entirely self-reliant; it simply means striking a balance between trade and local production by diversifying economic activity and shortening the distance between producers and consumers wherever possible.

Where should the first steps towards localisation take place? Since food is something everyone, everywhere, needs every day, a shift from global food to local food would have the greatest impact of all.


link to complete article
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 11:45 am
Last week our Glorious Leader issued a dictum allaying our concerns:

Quote:
President Bush shot quail on a hunting trip yesterday but ate beef, and encouraged Americans to do the same despite concern over mad cow disease. "I think I shot five," Bush told reporters at Brooks County Airport after returning from the hunt with his father on a dusty, desolate stretch of land in southern Texas.


Bush encourages US to eat beef despite mad cow concerns

This raises the question in my mind: If by some remote chance Dubya actually did contract Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease from eating a mad cow, how would we know?

Quote:
In the early stages of disease, patients may have failing memory, behavioral changes, lack of coordination and visual disturbances. As the illness progresses, mental deterioration becomes pronounced...


Could take awhile for us to tell... :wink:
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 11:56 am
PDid, That means we should observe no discernable difference in GWBush before or after.
0 Replies
 
Piffka
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 11:58 am
PDiddie -- good one!

The local morning paper has a front page article about (who else) an attorney who discovered an awful truth. He had fed his family lean hamburger that was part of the recall of meat that may have come from that darn cow. I was amazed that finally there is a use for those ubiquitous grocery identification cards many of us have been issued.

Mercer Island Family Ate Beef From Recalled Batch

I very much enjoyed reading the article that Walter had linked for us and think everyone to check it out. Many old hippies as well as New Agers believe the ideal diet is fresh food produced close to home. These gigantic food corporations should not be encouraged. I've contacted that group that published the article in hopes of getting their "toolkit" for a program at our library.

International Society for Ecology and Culture (ISEC) website
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 12:01 pm
As it turns out it wasn't mad cow but rather passive aggressive cow disease.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 11:18:16