Comments on: Pet-food recall: ‘Because it’s complicated’ edition and open thread http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/ Blogging by a team of pet-care experts. Tue, 07 Feb 2012 07:26:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: safefoods http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-58227 safefoods Wed, 09 May 2007 21:45:28 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-58227 Good summary Blog: Campaign for America's Future http://tinyurl.com/39cl4b Submitted by Rick Perlstein on Wed, 2007-05-09 19:45. Don't eat pork: first it was supposed to be just 6,000 hogs who'd eaten melamine-contaminated salvaged pet food. Now 50,000 have been quarantined in Illinois. Don't eat chicken: first it was three million chicken contaminated with melamine - as the FDA's new food safety "czar" reassured reporters. Then that estimate was revised upward to 20 million. Don't eat fish: Canadian fish meal manufactured from poisoned Chinese flour fed fish now in stores across the U.S. The links above come from David Goldstein, one of our most heroic bloggers, who has pursued the story with the zeal of an old-school investigative report (remember when we used to have those?). Check out the "faith-based" statements he's been collecting from the public relations agencies for U.S. agribusiness funded by your very own tax dollars, the Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture: FDA and USDA believe the likelihood of illness after eating such pork is extremely low.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007 “We have no reason to believe that any of those are currently in the human food supply as a direct ingredient.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007 “We have no reason to believe that anything other than the rice protein concentrate or the wheat gluten have been a problem in the United States recently.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007 “But overall, we believe the risk to be extremely low to humans.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007 “We believe that the likelihood of illness from such exposure is extremely low.” – USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007 “One of the reasons we believe that this is very low in humans is due to the dilution effect.” – USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007 “We believe the situation in the poultry is very much like that for the swine.” – USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007 “We do not believe that there is any significant threat of human illness from consuming poultry.” – USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007 “We believe the likelihood of illness to humans, including infants, is extremely small.” – USDA/FDA, 5/3/2007 “We believe the likelihood of a human illness is very remote.” – USDA/FDA, 5/3/2007 “We have no reason to believe those animals are any risk to the public.” – USDA/FDA, 5/3/2007 Now note the statement he's collected that cancels out all of the above: "There’s no tolerance for any of these compounds, either melamine or cyanuric acid. […] We just don’t know when we get these mixtures together. So there is no, really no acceptable level.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007 Maybe we just shouldn't eat. Good summary
Blog: Campaign for America’s Future
http://tinyurl.com/39cl4b

Submitted by Rick Perlstein on Wed, 2007-05-09 19:45.
Don’t eat pork: first it was supposed to be just 6,000 hogs who’d eaten melamine-contaminated salvaged pet food. Now 50,000 have been quarantined in Illinois.

Don’t eat chicken: first it was three million chicken contaminated with melamine - as the FDA’s new food safety “czar” reassured reporters. Then that estimate was revised upward to 20 million.

Don’t eat fish: Canadian fish meal manufactured from poisoned Chinese flour fed fish now in stores across the U.S.

The links above come from David Goldstein, one of our most heroic bloggers, who has pursued the story with the zeal of an old-school investigative report (remember when we used to have those?).

Check out the “faith-based” statements he’s been collecting from the public relations agencies for U.S. agribusiness funded by your very own tax dollars, the Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture:

FDA and USDA believe the likelihood of illness after eating such pork is extremely low.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007

“We have no reason to believe that any of those are currently in the human food supply as a direct ingredient.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007

“We have no reason to believe that anything other than the rice protein concentrate or the wheat gluten have been a problem in the United States recently.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007

“But overall, we believe the risk to be extremely low to humans.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007

“We believe that the likelihood of illness from such exposure is extremely low.” – USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007

“One of the reasons we believe that this is very low in humans is due to the dilution effect.” – USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007

“We believe the situation in the poultry is very much like that for the swine.” – USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007

“We do not believe that there is any significant threat of human illness from consuming poultry.” – USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007

“We believe the likelihood of illness to humans, including infants, is extremely small.” – USDA/FDA, 5/3/2007

“We believe the likelihood of a human illness is very remote.” – USDA/FDA, 5/3/2007

“We have no reason to believe those animals are any risk to the public.” – USDA/FDA, 5/3/2007

Now note the statement he’s collected that cancels out all of the above:

“There’s no tolerance for any of these compounds, either melamine or cyanuric acid. […] We just don’t know when we get these mixtures together. So there is no, really no acceptable level.” – USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007

Maybe we just shouldn’t eat.

]]> By: China Law Blog http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-57749 China Law Blog Wed, 09 May 2007 13:39:32 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-57749 The more coverage of this, hopefully, the more careful American companies will be in the future. Great job! The more coverage of this, hopefully, the more careful American companies will be in the future. Great job!

]]> By: PJ http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-57126 PJ Wed, 09 May 2007 02:22:05 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-57126 Didn't the FDA or one of the testing places say WAY WAY back in the beginning that it was very difficult to test the gluten because it was a very thick, sticky substance ansd they had to first figure out how to get it into their machines? I've never known flour to come out of a bag thick and sticky? MORE SPIN PLEASE! Didn’t the FDA or one of the testing places say WAY WAY back in the beginning that it was very difficult to test the gluten because it was a very thick, sticky substance ansd they had to first figure out how to get it into their machines? I’ve never known flour to come out of a bag thick and sticky? MORE SPIN PLEASE!

]]> By: Peg http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-57101 Peg Wed, 09 May 2007 02:05:56 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-57101 I sitting here reading with tears just streaming down my face............ I sitting here reading with tears just streaming down my face…………

]]> By: David http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-57036 David Wed, 09 May 2007 01:19:07 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-57036 Comment by Shawn — May 8, 2007 @ 3:52 pm Or maybe the "food" in question is made by careless rednecks who simply dump 55 lb bags of ingredient into a big hopper, and a huge machine heats, it, churns it, and spews it out into cans... are human eyes even involved in the "cooking" process? Does anyone really think this stuff is made by hand...? And if human eyes *were* involved, why didn't any of those eyes notice the tiny sparkling granules in the "gluten" they were adding to the hopper in the first place? Comment by Shawn — May 8, 2007 @ 3:52 pm

Or maybe the “food” in question is made by careless rednecks who simply dump 55 lb bags of ingredient into a big hopper, and a huge machine heats, it, churns it, and spews it out into cans… are human eyes even involved in the “cooking” process? Does anyone really think this stuff is made by hand…?

And if human eyes *were* involved, why didn’t any of those eyes notice the tiny sparkling granules in the “gluten” they were adding to the hopper in the first place?

]]> By: Aunt Granny http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-57005 Aunt Granny Wed, 09 May 2007 00:53:43 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-57005 Transcript of todays farce has been posted: May 8, 2007 Transcript of Media Briefing Update by FDA and USDA Regarding Adulterated Animal Feed http://tinyurl.com/2jyyen Transcript of todays farce has been posted:

May 8, 2007 Transcript of Media Briefing Update by FDA and USDA Regarding Adulterated Animal Feed

http://tinyurl.com/2jyyen

]]> By: CathyA http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-57002 CathyA Wed, 09 May 2007 00:53:03 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-57002 Acheson: If I could tell you what I don’t know, I’d know. My absolute favorite part......Rummy's back! Acheson: If I could tell you what I don’t know, I’d know.

My absolute favorite part……Rummy’s back!

]]> By: Serijna http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-56963 Serijna Wed, 09 May 2007 00:16:17 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-56963 consumption; progressive bodily wasting away. Guess the FDA is not lying. It is not against consumption but (safe) for consumption. Dum, dum ,dum dum, another one bites the dust. Suggest we rename the USA the "isle of Dr.Moreau". Sorry to be so cynical. consumption; progressive bodily wasting away.
Guess the FDA is not lying. It is not against consumption but (safe) for consumption.
Dum, dum ,dum dum, another one bites the dust.
Suggest we rename the USA the “isle of Dr.Moreau”. Sorry to be so cynical.

]]> By: CathyA http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-56957 CathyA Wed, 09 May 2007 00:13:46 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-56957 “There must be accountability and Consequences.” Is that like Truth or Consequences? “There must be accountability and Consequences.”

Is that like Truth or Consequences?

]]> By: straybaby http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-56891 straybaby Tue, 08 May 2007 23:25:12 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/05/08/pet-food-recall-because-its-complicated-edition-and-open-thread/#comment-56891 well at least they didn't say it was hard work . . . well at least they didn’t say it was hard work . . .

]]>