- Change for America on Science and Tech Policy: Part 1
- Taking a Short Break
- Transition Team Deploys Its First Public Web 2.0 Tools
- Victory for Stem Cells in Michigan
- White Open Spaces
- Historical Election Maps and Open Mapping Research
- Scary Regulatory Maneuvers in Bush’s Last Days
- FDA Did Not Finish Its Homework On BPA
- Digital Freedom of Expression and Human Rights
- Traumatic Brain Injury and Helmet Design
- Gates Foundation Funds Research, Venture Capital Style
- A Brief History of Lead Regulation
Downer Cows Out of Burgers Is Good, but as for the Rest of the Food Safety System…
Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture proposed a rule that cattle too sick to stand should not be turned into hamburgers. The move raises the opportunity to consider broader issues regarding federal food safety structures, which have been under additional scrutiny since this summer’s outbreak of salmonella St. Paul, which was eventually traced to imported serrano peppers.
AP
Executives from Hormel Foods Corporation and Cargill, Inc. testify before Congress on food safety in November 2007.
Previously, “downer” cows were deemed fit or unfit for slaughter on a case-by-case basis. But concern over the safety of the beef supply peaked earlier this year when the USDA issued the largest meat recall in history of 143 million pounds. A congressional hearing following the recall raised serious questions about both the ability of the USDA to keep food-borne pathogens out of the food supply, and the problem of overlapping jurisdiction between the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control, and the USDA.
In this instance, oversight responsibility seems clear and it’s a good thing that the USDA is aiming to close this loophole through which E. coli, salmonella and other such nasties can slip (UPDATE: see testimony from the February hearing by Michael Greger, M.D.). But the proposed rule highlights the broader problem of trifurcated food regulation. Writing in Science Progress about “Our Fractured Food Safety System,” Nancy Scola reported recently that, “The GAO, which has long called for a single food agency, last year bumped the current system up to the level of ‘high-risk area.’” She goes on to describe internal conflicts at USDA:
Its primary role in Washington is to promote the food trade—to boost the amount of American pork the Chinese eat, not to worry over whether the pork Americans consume is safe to eat. GAO recently profiled seven countries (Canada, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand and the United Kingdom) that have consolidated food oversight under one roof. Most interesting is the holistic farm-to-fork approach of EU member countries. Ireland is a typical case, moving its food safety agency under the auspices of its existing public health authority—in recognition of the fact that the raison d’etre of their own Department of Agriculture is promotion, not policing.
Keeping sick cows out of the food supply is a good start, but rationalizing food safety will take more than just rulemaking. The comment period on the USDA rule extends until September 29. More info here.
Comments on this article
It sure SEEMS like a good idea to keep “downer” cows out of our hamburger.
But what does the science say? If I read the proposed rule correctly, we’re talking about cows that get hurt between an initial, pre-slaughter inspection and the time they’re actually slaughtered (anybody know how long that time is? Minutes? Hours? Days?) Do they pose an additional risk, and, if they do, how big a risk?
Aside: I’d think the beef industry would be for this regulation; it affects a very, very small number of cows, and it seems to me it would be good for public relations, even if the science says that these cows pose no or negligible risk.
By the way: I found this blog post a little misleading– you seem to be linking the salmonella outbreaks with downer cows. Was that the cause?
The calls to untangle the bureaucratic maze that purports to keep our food supply safe are 100% right. The system is broken.
August 29th, 2008 at 9:24 amGavin:
Thanks for your scrutiny.
In his testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Michael Greger, M.D. said: “Downed cattle may be at a higher risk of contamination with conventional foodborne pathogens as E. coli and Salmonella, and unconventional pathogens that cause mad cow disease and intestinal anthrax.” He went on to cite a USDA-funded study indicating that downer cows were three times more likely to carry E. coli. His testimony is available here; FDA also had data on increased infection rates, also cited in the testimony.
You’re right to note that the risk posed by downer cows is small (the press release says as much), and that the proposed rule is in the interest of the industry as well as consumers. This summer’s Salmonella outbreak is unrelated to this decision, as it pertained to peppers; I’ve clarified that opening graf. But this rule proposal should be a part of the larger discussion about food safety science and regulation.
August 29th, 2008 at 11:04 amThanks for the quick response! Now if only I could wave a magic wand and get everybody to agree to report “increased risk” in some common, easy-to-understand way. “Three times as risky!” means nothing when you don’t say what the base risk is– if it’s “Three times as risky as a one-in-a-billion-per-year chance of getting sick” then, frankly, I have better things to worry about.
Oh, and please don’t take that as a criticism of ScienceProgress– I know that you’re not generating those risk numbers (although you’d be doing a huge public service if you were willing to do the work of translating nebulous risk measurements into something more concrete; I’d love to see somebody tell me “you have an X-in-Y chance of purchasing hamburger infected with enough nasty stuff to make you sick right now, if these new regulations pass then that should decrease to Z in Y…” )
August 29th, 2008 at 11:31 amThe first mad cow found in the US, in 2003, wasn’t a downer cow. It was a seemingly healthy, standing cow. I don’t know if you allow URLs but I posted a few YouTubes about that here:
http://fanaticcook.blogspot.com/2008/08/mad-cow-dont-look-dont-find.html
Also, the USDA refuses to sell their mad cow test kits to private business. They just won their appeal against Creekstone Farms, to keep them from testing their beef for BSE so the Koreans (and others) would buy it:
http://fanaticcook.blogspot.com/2008/08/consumers-union-urges-usda-to-allow.html
It’s good that the USDA is moving to block downer cows. But it’s suspicious that they are moving to block testing for mad cow disease in this country. Japan tests 100% of their cattle for mad cow. The US tests one tenth of one percent.
September 4th, 2008 at 10:04 am