Getting on Board

[cowman]

The UN now says everything over 30 months old should be tested. Japan says everything should be tested. The French say everything over 24 months should be tested. Who is right? Who is safest?
Canada says about one animal in every 5000 should be tested. The US about one in 20,000, preferably with a Canadian ear tag! The Australians figure about one in a million and definitely not the ones hopping around on two legs!
Since testing everything the Japanese have found one animal at 24 months old and one 18 months old so there goes the old 30 month theory.
Hopefully all countries can get their testing protocols harmonized! Now do we go with the safest test(Japan) or the least safe test(Australia)? I guess we just have to hope our politicians are wise.

[topper]

I don't think there is much hope with the politicians. Bob Speller is still trying to convince the Japanese and Koreans that 8000 tests a year are all that's needed. He just doesn't get it.

[rusty1]

Any testing is done on the premis that BSE is no good to put in the human health chian. Therefore if we don't test all the animals to eliminate them from the food chain, then we arn't offering the "safest meat in the world". What are we going to tell the poor bugger that happened to get CJV from eating one we missed testing?

[kato]

I think the argument against universal testing is that if we remove the SRM's, then there is no danger.

Probably a correct assumption, but if the buyers of the product don't believe it, then it really doesn't matter. There has been so much screwy half developed science on this subject that confidence is now the main issue.

We have to remember what every really successful business already knows...the customer is always right. Even when they aren't, we have to operate as though they are. That way we keep them as customers.

[bulltipper]

I'm starting to believe you "test everything" people could be right. Public perception is everything, right or wrong.

http://www.canada.com/calgary/story.asp?id=3B5806DD-133E-438D-B1EA-EDA41935EDDA

[grassfarmer]

One thing to remember in all this is that in N America there has been no consumer confidence crisis - beef consumption has not tanked the way it did in Europe. If we are talking about regaining export markets to the US, Japan, S Korea etc that is different - it's a political issue. Don't use the consumer confidence issue to convince you that we need to test all beef animals, especially as someone else commented the other day,we would invoke this cost without any guarantee of regaining export market share.

[cowman]

The key word here grassfarmer is "YET"! Only two cases so far, right? What happens when it is 3,6, 50? And that should happen if the science is right and they don't fudge the testing?
The trick is to never test again or test everything!
I am amazed that Bulltipper and Rusty have seen the light, so don't rain on my parade with your facts! I had just about convinced myself I could sell ice to the Eskimoes until you came up with your post!
Why I even was having dreams of being a politician before you interjected your negative comments!

[bulltipper]

Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't!

;-D

[kato]

That's right. If we keep going this way, every time they find another one, we get tanked.

I don't know about everyone else, but as far as I'm concerned this is getting to be just a little too much. How many more times do we sit and wait for the market to calm, or go to the bank and say "Just a few more weeks, then it'll get better."

Either paint, or get off the ladder.

[bob-b]

What about labeling? If somebody wants the meat tested; then test it. Put a label saying that it is tested and add it to the cost of the meat. Ultimately the consumer will decide.... not us and they will incure the cost...not us!

[cowman]

Well Bob, it very well may come down to that. Who knows where this will go. It is pretty apparent after the Martin/Bush meeting that Canada sure isn't going to go it alone, so I doubt testing on a national or continental scale is going anywhere.
However, with the so-called increase in testing, we should keep getting more infected cows, resulting in more consumer alarm and a drop in demand for beef. Perhaps the only way we will be able to get people to buy beef will to have it tested and labelled.
The need for a reliable and easy bloodtest becomes more important everyday. Because both governments have seemed to have chosen a different route we'll just have to wait and see. I hope our creditors are understanding?

[raymondb]

I think we need to have at least a couple of things done.
1. Test every animal and mark the meat as tested. With hindsight being 20/20, if all of us producers paid $20.00 per animal sold to pay for testing in the past, we would be way ahead today financially and also without these trying times. The tests should continue until we can go 5 years without any animal being tested positive.
2. The government should ensure that the scientific community is up to speed and that we understand the cause and the consequences and reaction required of any disease that animals that we consume have or can have . We should be able to ensure that we are feeding a world with a safe product. Me as a producer and a consumer must demand that right.

We can all keep looking back and keep hoping for things to be as they were, but this is not and will not be a reality. Our Industry will be changing so fast in the next 10 years that the last 50 years are going to feel like a walk in the park.

[ValueChainFX]

Right on ray

[rodb]

Well guys you have to remember the age old adage,"The customer is always right"
So if Japan tests every animal, then if we want to get in there we will have to test everything that goes there as well.

[Horse]

A question every one talks about 20 -30 $ per hd but is that all the cost how about paper work coolers more storage I would like to hear the total cost And if 20 30 $ does it why not .