Mad Cow Facts

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.

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.

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…

Financial Post
Robert Sopuck
January 11, 2008

Cows efficiently convert grass and hay, non-human food, to people food. Big deal you say. However, grass and hay are perennial plants that cover the land with a permanent layer of vegetation that prevents soil erosion during rains and windstorms, and they provide habitat for wildlife such as nesting ducks, songbirds and my beloved sharp-tailed grouse. Extensive beef production in ranch country is an agricultural system that promotes animal welfare, landscape conservation and wildlife preservation.

Critics of the cattle industry cite the plight of the rainforest, methane production and overgrazing as reasons to shut down the cattle industry, all the while ignoring the landscape conservation benefits of well-managed, extensive cattle ranching. To be blunt, cattle create an economic incentive to conserve, manage and create diverse and productive grasslands. Those great, and seemingly boring, vistas of native Prairie in Saskatchewan and Alberta (often contemptuously dismissed as “drive-through country”) represent a treasure trove of wildlife and biodiversity, one of the great natural wonders of North America. And it is still in existence because of ranchers.

Cattle critics argue that humans should bypass meat and consume the plant products of the land, thus ensuring more efficient use of the Earth’s resources. The problem with that argument is that not all hectares are created equal. We have millions of hectares of sandy, sloping and fragile land that will produce grain crops for a few years, but as the soil is played out, higher and higher levels of inputs are required to grow crops during this downward spiral of soil degradation. Much better to have such fragile land covered with a conservation blanket of perennial vegetation that is cropped by a well-managed cattle herd. By the way, for the holier than thou tofu eaters out there, your dietary preference encourages the expansion of row-crop soybean production, often at the expense of native grasslands. No tofu will ever find its way into our home; we care too much about the land.

As for the red-meat-is-bad-for-you argument, I take the view that if you give up fat (and sugar and alcohol, too, for that matter) you may not live longer; it will just seem that way. Make your own call on that one, but I am here to live a little. As Clifton Fadiman wrote, “I have yet to meet a man who, with a good tournedos Rossini inside him, was not the finer for it, the more open to virtuous influences.”

So, when you are about to tuck into a big juicy steak, ponder what it represents. That meal of Canadian ranched beef has contributed to landscape and wildlife conservation and kept generations of land stewards in the ranching business for the benefit of all of us.

— - Robert Sopuck, a member of the National Round Table on the Environment and Economy, directs the Frontier Centre for Public Policy’s Smart Green Frontiers Project.

University of Kentucky – College of Agriculture
Katie Pratt
January 09, 2008

LEXINGTON, Ky. (Jan. 9, 2008) – After recent conflicting studies regarding a potential link between meat, obesity and cancer, many people might be puzzled about the nutritional value of meat and the proper amount to include in a healthy diet. Gregg Rentfrow, University of Kentucky meat science extension specialist, said studies show there is no link between meat, obesity and cancer, and meat consumption is a part of a healthy lifestyle.

Rentfrow said meat often is associated with high levels of trans fat, which causes so-called “bad” cholesterol levels to rise and increases the risk for heart disease. While cattle and sheep meats contain a small amount of trans fat when produced naturally, this is nowhere near the amount of trans fat that is added during food preparation when meat is cooked with hydrogenated cooking oils.

While many people are aware meat is a good source of protein, they may not realize it also contains many vitamins and minerals. Meat is the only natural source of some B-vitamins and contains 40 percent of the daily recommended amount of zinc. It also contains iron and amino acids. Protein found in meat is 95 to 100 percent digestible by the human body while only 65 to 70 percent of plant proteins can be digested, Rentfrow said.

Similar to many diet plans, he said the key healthy ways for people to incorporate meat into their diets are portion size and exercise.

“The amount of meat a person should eat depends on their activity level,” Rentfrow said. “Athletes need more protein in their diets than others to keep their muscles strong.”

He said a suggested serving size of meat for the average person is the size of a deck of cards, but that doesn’t mean people cannot occasionally enjoy a 12-ounce prime rib at a restaurant. However, they should not eat such large portions every night, he added. Limit portion size and fat content in meat by shopping for leaner cuts, which are offered in each meat commodity.