Nothing is Real: Paul was Replaced

« Lying Bastards »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
May 23, 2013, 12:51am

Nothing is Real: Paul was Replaced :: Other Stuff :: News and Current events :: Lying Bastards

Author

Topic: Lying Bastards (Read 264 times)

fourthousandholes
Guest

Lying Bastards
« Thread Started on Apr 4, 2007, 9:53am »

FDA urges laxer labeling on irradiated foods
Agency proposes admittedly misleading use of term ‘pasteurized’

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17933793/

Updated: 11:35 p.m. ET April 3, 2007
WASHINGTON - The government proposed Tuesday relaxing its rules on labeling of irradiated foods
and suggested it may allow some products zapped with radiation to be called “pasteurized.”

The Food and Drug Administration said the proposed rule would require companies to label
irradiated food only when the radiation treatment causes a material change to the product.
Examples includes changes to the taste, texture, smell or shelf life of a food, which would be
flagged in the new labeling.

The technique kills bacteria but does not cause food to become radioactive. Recent outbreaks
of foodborne illness have revived interest in irradiation, even though it is not suitable for all food
products. For example, irradiating diced Roma tomatoes makes them mushy, the FDA says.

The FDA also proposed letting companies use the term “pasteurized” to describe irradiated foods. To do so, they would have to show the FDA that the radiation kills germs as well as the pasteurization process does. Pasteurization typically involves heating a product to a high temperature and then cooling it rapidly.

In addition, the proposal would let companies petition the agency to use additional alternate terms other than “irradiated,” something already allowed by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 but that no firms have pursued, according to the FDA.

The FDA posted the proposed revisions to its rules on irradiated foods on its Web site Tuesday, a day before they were to be published in the Federal Register. The FDA is publishing the proposal as required by the 2002 law.

FDA will accept public comments on the proposal for 90 days. A consumer group immediately urged the FDA to drop the idea.

Confusing customers
“This move by FDA would deny consumers clear information about whether they are buying food that has been exposed to high doses of ionizing radiation,” Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, said in a statement.

The FDA acknowledges in the proposed rule that allowing alternative ways of describing irradiation could confuse consumers: “Research indicates that many consumers regard substitute terms for irradiation to be misleading,” the proposal reads in part.

But the requirement that the new labeling explain why a product was irradiated should clear up some consumer confusion, said Barbara Schneeman, director of the FDA’s office of nutrition, labeling and dietary supplements.
“You would be told the material fact: what is it about this product that is different from some other product,” Schneeman said. If a food were irradiated but left unchanged and indistinguishable from an identical but unradiated product, it wouldn’t have to be labeled, she added.

A 1984 FDA proposal to allow irradiated foods to go label-free garnered the agency more than 5,000 comments. Two years later, it reversed course and published a final rule that requires the small number of FDA-regulated foods now treated with radiation to bear identifying labels, including the radiation symbol.

“We have long argued that the use of the term irradiation or radiation has such a negative impact on the consumer that it basically acts as a warning label,” said Jeff Barach, vice president of the Grocery Manufacturers/Food Products Association, an industry group. “Fixing this problem will help in food industry efforts to provide consumers with safe and wholesome foods with reduced risk of foodborne pathogens.”

Foods still require FDA approval before they can be irradiated. Examples currently radiated include a small number of fruits, vegetables, spices and eggs.

The proposed rule would apply only to foods regulated by the FDA. However, if and when the rule is finalized, the Department of Agriculture could undergo a similar process to change the irradiation labeling requirements for the foods it regulates, including meat and poultry, said Amanda Eamich, a spokeswoman for USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service.

« Last Edit: Apr 4, 2007, 9:55am by fourthousandholes »

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

Jai Guru Deva
Revolver

member is offline

[avatar]

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,409
Location: On the magical mystery tour.

Re: Lying Bastards
« Reply #1 on Apr 30, 2012, 7:55pm »

There's a loophole in the F.D.A.’s rules against feeding ruminant protein to ruminants to make exceptions for ”blood products”.
Alex Jones--Prison Planet

Mad Cow Found in California … Because Cows Are Being Fed Blood, Animal Parts and Feces

Washington’s Blog
April 27, 2012

A central California cow tested positive for mad cow disease.

As we’ve previously noted, the government’s policy is ensuring additional cases of mad cow:

The government is so protective of the current model of industrial farming that private citizens such as ranchers and meat packers are prohibited from testing for mad cow disease, and even investigating factory farming may get one labeled as a terrorist, even though a paper in the American Society of Microbiology’s newsletter mBio shows thatoveruse of antibiotics by factory farmers creates “superbugs”.

And the government allows cows to be fed animal parts, which causes mad cow:

[Cows] are fed parts of other animals, which can give them mad cow disease.

Well-known food writer (and meat-lover) Michael Pollan gave a must-read account of modern beef practices in the New York Times in 2002:

[T]he identical industrial logic — protein is protein — led to the feeding of rendered cow parts back to cows, a practice the F.D.A. banned in 1997 after scientists realized it was spreading mad-cow disease.

Make that mostly banned. The F.D.A.’s rules against feeding ruminant protein to ruminants make exceptions for ”blood products” (even though they contain protein) and fat. Indeed, my steer has probably dined on beef tallow recycled from the very slaughterhouse he’s heading to in June. ”Fat is fat,” the feedlot manager shrugged when I raised an eyebrow.

F.D.A. rules still permit feedlots to feed nonruminant animal protein to cows. (Feather meal is an accepted cattle feed, as are pig and fish protein and chicken manure.) Some public-health advocates worry that since the bovine meat and bone meal that cows used to eat is now being fed to chickens, pigs and fish, infectious prions could find their way back into cattle when they eat the protein of the animals that have been eating them. To close this biological loophole, the F.D.A. is now considering tightening its feed rules.

***

”When we buy supplement, the supplier says it’s 40 percent protein, but they don’t specify beyond that.” When I called the supplier, it wouldn’t divulge all its ”proprietary ingredients” but promised that animal parts weren’t among them. Protein is pretty much still protein.

Dr. Michael Greger notes at Huffington Post:

Though some dairy farmers still wean calves on whole milk, the majority of producers use milk replacer, which too often contains spray-dried cattle blood as a cheap source of protein.According to the American Protein Corporation, which boasts to be the world’s largest spray-dryer of blood, the chief disadvantage of blood-based milk replacer is simply its “different color.”

***

Stanley Prusiner … won the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his discovery of prions, the infectious proteins that cause mad cow disease. He was quoted in the New York Times as calling the practice of feeding cattle blood to young calves “a really stupid idea,” because it could complete the “cannibalistic” circuit blamed for the spread of the disease.

The European Commission also recommended against the practice of “intraspecies recycling of ruminant blood and blood products” — the practice of suckling calves on cows’ blood protein. Even excluding the fact that brain matter may pass into the trough that collects the blood once an animal’s throat is slit, the Commission report concluded a decade ago that “[a]s far as ruminant blood is concerned, it is considered that the best approach to protect public health at present is to assume that it could contain low levels of infectivity.” Since then, evidence that blood can be infectious has only grown, yet dairy calves in the United States are still drinking up to three cups of “red blood cell protein” concentrate every day.

Although the U.S. Food and Drug Administration initially proposed to ban the feeding of blood and blood products to livestock, the agency ended up reneging on their much touted promise. Let’s hope that the newly reported case of mad cow disease in a California dairy cow will renew interest in closing the loopholes in feed regulations that continue to allow the feeding of slaughterhouse waste, blood and manure to farm animals in the United States.

In a second article, Greger writes:

More than a decade ago, the World Health Organization called for the exclusion of the riskiest bovine tissues — cattle brains, eyes, spinal cord and intestine — from the human food supply and from all animal feed to protect against the spread of mad cow disease. Unfortunately, the United States still allows the feeding of some of these potentially risky tissues to people, pigs, pets, poultry, and fish. Cattle remains are still fed to chickens, for example, and the poultry litter (floor wastes that include the feces and spilled feed) is fed back to cows. In this way, prions — the infectious proteins that cause mad cow disease — may continue to be cycled back into cattle feed and complete the cow “cannibalism” circuit blamed for the spread of the disease.

[T]he U.S. cattle industry may feed as much as a million pounds of poultry litter to cattle each year. A thousand chickens can make enough waste to feed a growing calf year-round. Although excrement from other species is fed to livestock in the United States, chicken droppings are considered more nutritious for cows than pig feces or cattle dung.

A single cow can eat as much as three tons of poultry waste a year, yet the manure does not seem to affect the taste of the subsequent milk or meat.

***

Cows are typically not given feed containing more than 80% poultry litter, though, since it’s not as palatable and may not fully meet protein and energy needs.

***

When the Kansas Livestock Association dared to shine the spotlight on the issue by passing a resolution urging the discontinuation of the practice, irate producers in neighboring states threatened a boycott of Kansas feedyards.

Maybe this new case of mad cow disease will reinvigorate consumer campaigns to close the “no-brainer” loopholes in feed regulations that continue to allow the feeding of suchfilthy feed to farm animals.

This is yet another example of companies engaging in crazily unsafe activities which put us all at risk …just to save a couple of bucks.

Of course, meateaters assume we are eating a wholesome food which doesn’t contain prions, chicken body parts … or feces. As former United States Department of Agriculture scientist Gerald Zirnsteinpointed out recently in a related context:

It’s economic fraud … It’s a cheap substitute being added in

« Last Edit: Apr 30, 2012, 7:56pm by Jai Guru Deva »

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

What's he like as a person?"
"He's the most intelligent man I've ever met."--David Vaughan asking Tara Browne about Paul McCartney

LOVELYRITA
Revolver

member is offline

[avatar]

Sitting in an English Garden waiting for the sun

Joined: May 2005
Gender: Female

Posts: 3,236
Location: Here, there and everywhere

Re: Lying Bastards
« Reply #2 on May 20, 2012, 6:21pm »

The horrid thing called "pink slime"...something that makes you want abstain from eating...period....

My advice is to read the ingredient labels on "food"

Several things to consider:

1. If there are words you cannot pronounce, good chance you really shouldn't eat it..

2. If there are more than 10 things listed, you shouldn't eat it.

3. Avoid high fructose corn syrup

3. partially hydrogenated oils

4. Monosodium glutamate

5. propylene glycol (That's in anti-freeze)

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

The one and the only lonely heart!

Page Loads Since March 2005

Click Here To Make This Board Ad-Free