Food Politics
Reprinted from The Food Renegade:
"The USDA wants to change their HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) plan requirements to make it almost impossible for small-scale producers to comply. Writing in The Atlantic, Joe Cloud (artisan butcher and co-owner with Joel Salatin of True & Essential Meats), frames the crisis this way:
The intent of HACCP is to prevent contamination of meat by harmful pathogens. Plant HACCP plans are approved and overseen by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), the inspection arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. On March 19, 2010, the FSIS published a draft guidance document on HACCP system validation, outlining new rules which would institute regular, year-round testing of all meats, whether or not problems have been identified. The proposal recommends testing for testing’s sake, and it will cost small plants tens of thousands of dollars, perhaps even hundreds of thousands, every year. The financial burden appears great enough that this will destroy much of the remaining community-based meat processing industry, which is enjoying a renaissance and creating jobs.
Small, local meat processors have always supported food safety. At our plant, we have had a functioning HACCP plan since 1999, and it works. We undergo extensive E. coli testing every year, and we have never had a positive result—ever. The purpose of HACCP is to employ well-recognized, established processes and process-control parameters to produce safe meat products—processes and parameters recognized and published by the USDA itself. Now, for some reason, the USDA wants to test the system and require excessive end-product microbiological testing, rather than allowing us to depend on these well-recognized procedures. Perhaps a large plant slaughtering 5,000 animals per day can afford its own lab and microbiology staff, and can pass the cost along to the consumer, but most small plants can’t. And perhaps large plants should open labs—those are the plants where a massive beef recall can involve millions of pounds.
In my opinion, the USDA needs to recognize that “one size fits all” inspection no longer fits current industry practice and consumer demand. These new HACCP requirements are going to cause a train wreck in a portion of the industry that is growing for the first time in years, and then the USDA is going to have a serious embarrassment on its hands. Someone needs to take a clear-eyed look at this situation and find a way to split the agribusiness mega-plants from the community-based localized plants within the regulatory structure.
This does NOT mean that small plants are not serious about food safety. It is because consumers are serious about food safety that they are coming to us, and we need to keep local infrastructure alive in this country. We need an inspection system that recognizes that the small plants do not put either the food economy or millions of people at risk in case of a food safety event.
All is not lost, though. The USDA opened up the new regulations for public comment. If you’re concerned about what these new regulations might do to your ability to have access to locally-raised, pasture-fed, and humanely-slaughtered meats, you’ve got until June 19th to let them know your opinion!"
Send email comments to: DraftValidationGuideComments@fsis.usda.gov
Tuesday, May 25th, 2010 | Author: KristenM |
When I was a kid in the 50's I ate my fill of sweets, and then some, as did the kids I played with, and we weren't obese. But those sweets we filled up on primarliy contained sucrose, table sugar, not the cheaper, enzymatically processed high fructose corn syrup. Obesity is blamed on supersizing, but we ate to our fill back then, stuffed ourselves even. Times may change but kids are always kids.
As I have long suspected obesity is not caused by supersizing alone; it is caused by a drug mislabeled as a food, high fructose corn syrup, dangerous when taken even in moderate amounts. It's in almost everything the food corporations manufacture. I came across this in Wikipedia, "Critics of the extensive use of HFCS in food sweetening argue that the highly processed substance is more harmful to humans than regular sugar, contributing to weight gain by affecting normal appetite functions."
This is what drugs do, they affect normal functions.
Ban HFCS, get sugar cane from Cuba, raise sugar beets locally and let childern eat what they want, but also do as our parents did, force vegetables on them once a day. Children on diets, preposterous! To blame kids and punish them by holding back food, ridiculous; but that's what mom & dad do obeying the teachings of the governmental-corporate food complex, aka, the USDA, the FDA and their educational minions.
Remember Halloween! Nobody could have eaten more candy than we did; we were skinny kids with a big sweet tooth.