You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Shocking hygiene failings found in US meat
March 19 2024 6.36am

Shocking hygiene failings found in US meat

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 6 of 9 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

 

View CambridgeEagle's Profile CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 27 Feb 18 11.45am Send a Private Message to CambridgeEagle Add CambridgeEagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I have been aware of farming practices for a long time.
The ugly side of farming is often a result of trying to meet increasing demand for food while keeping costs down. What I would say is that you can't trust anti farming sources to give balanced information.
We all know that failing antibiotics is a problem and if farming is part of that problem then I'm sure that legislation will follow. It is a balancing act between public health and protecting the industry.

I wish I shared your optimism. The bloke in the Whitehouse is far more interested in keeping lobbyists onside than any matter of public health, be that guns, climate change, food standards or pharmacology.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View CambridgeEagle's Profile CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 27 Feb 18 11.58am Send a Private Message to CambridgeEagle Add CambridgeEagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

It is in fact the exact opposite.
Demand for meat rises with population and questionable farming practices are often a result of the pressure of demand and profit.

You're implying people necessarily eat meat and so increasing populations must mean increasing demand. I agree that is part of the answer, however if society promoted eating meat for every meal less than it does then that link would be far less of a factor. Furthermore demand increased massively in excess of any population impact as meat became more intensively farmed and cheaper. Meat used to be a Sunday afternoon treat if that. That would be a much more desirable situation than the current one.

On questionable farming practices, of course farmers will want to reduce costs, that's totally understandable, and reducing standards is an easy way to do that. The point is that we elect people to put laws and regulations in place to prevent such hollowing out of standards and corner cutting. It's a failure of government to allow that to happen. The FSA and local authorities (who are responsible for auditing food standards) have had their budgets slashed to such an extent that they have been forced to abandon significant amounts of their work to ensure food, especially meat, meets the required standards. This is allowing companies to get away with non-compliance on a vast scale. So not only are the standards already poor, but they are no longer being effectively enforced. The poorest in society have little choice but to accept eating this kind of food. Yet more evidence that austerity is destroying the very fabric of society and hitting the poorest hardest.

Furthermore, there are justifiable concerns that this government plans to go even further and strike trade deals which would necessitate allowing meat to be imported that has been farmed with lower standards than would currently be acceptable and given the way the industry works it would be difficult for consumers to know they were being fed it when they go out to eat.


You can't simply blame increases in population and desire to turn a profit. It's the framework within which farming operates and the society that has been allowed to evolve around meat that you need to be looking at.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 27 Feb 18 1.10pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

You're implying people necessarily eat meat and so increasing populations must mean increasing demand. I agree that is part of the answer, however if society promoted eating meat for every meal less than it does then that link would be far less of a factor. Furthermore demand increased massively in excess of any population impact as meat became more intensively farmed and cheaper. Meat used to be a Sunday afternoon treat if that. That would be a much more desirable situation than the current one.

On questionable farming practices, of course farmers will want to reduce costs, that's totally understandable, and reducing standards is an easy way to do that. The point is that we elect people to put laws and regulations in place to prevent such hollowing out of standards and corner cutting. It's a failure of government to allow that to happen. The FSA and local authorities (who are responsible for auditing food standards) have had their budgets slashed to such an extent that they have been forced to abandon significant amounts of their work to ensure food, especially meat, meets the required standards. This is allowing companies to get away with non-compliance on a vast scale. So not only are the standards already poor, but they are no longer being effectively enforced. The poorest in society have little choice but to accept eating this kind of food. Yet more evidence that austerity is destroying the very fabric of society and hitting the poorest hardest.

Furthermore, there are justifiable concerns that this government plans to go even further and strike trade deals which would necessitate allowing meat to be imported that has been farmed with lower standards than would currently be acceptable and given the way the industry works it would be difficult for consumers to know they were being fed it when they go out to eat.


You can't simply blame increases in population and desire to turn a profit. It's the framework within which farming operates and the society that has been allowed to evolve around meat that you need to be looking at.


There is already a trend toward eating less red meat in Britain. People eat far less of it than say 40 years ago which I assume is partly because of perceived health issues. Part of the problem for farmers is what they are paid for their meat. We all want cheap food and the farmer is squeezed as a result of competition.
Less meat being eaten and cheap prices at the till will only make factory farmers more enclined to cut overheads further with the potential negative effect for the animals.
As far as imports of meat go. We don't know the conditions attached to any trade deals so any fearmongering is speculative.



 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stuk's Profile Stuk Flag Top half 27 Feb 18 4.30pm Send a Private Message to Stuk Add Stuk as a friend

Originally posted by sitdownstandup

I merely pointed out that many of the world's most intelligent people were vegetarians. There are intelligent meat eaters in terms of IQ but if you can see that your diet is the leading cause of the destruction of the planet, leads to health problems and causes unnecessary cruelty to animals then its difficult for any person to justify continue eating that diet with logical arguments.

You're not one of them.

The leading cause of the destruction of the planet is too many humans and them living for too long.

All of your information is subjective, or for a better word biased.

 


Optimistic as ever

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag The garden of England 27 Feb 18 7.15pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Stuk

You're not one of them.

The leading cause of the destruction of the planet is too many humans and them living for too long.

All of your information is subjective, or for a better word biased.

Definitely correct
So all the veggies and non meat eaters don't seem to comprehend the total circle of life.
Kill all animals so no-one can eat them.
Then when there isn't enough vegetables and other non meat products we all starve.
Imagine if all we had on our Sunday dinner plate was vegetables. At present meat is about 40_50% of the plate.
That could never be sustained with organic farming so then vegetables are artificially grown with
Erm chemicals
Does that not put us where you presume we are now with animals and their farming.
Get a grip
You eat what you want and I will eat what I want.
I won't tell you not to so sod off and stop bashing me.
Some veggies eat fish as well so riddle how that's not an animal.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View steeleye20's Profile steeleye20 Flag Croydon 28 Feb 18 8.59am Send a Private Message to steeleye20 Add steeleye20 as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

Definitely correct
So all the veggies and non meat eaters don't seem to comprehend the total circle of life.
Kill all animals so no-one can eat them.
Then when there isn't enough vegetables and other non meat products we all starve.
Imagine if all we had on our Sunday dinner plate was vegetables. At present meat is about 40_50% of the plate.
That could never be sustained with organic farming so then vegetables are artificially grown with
Erm chemicals
Does that not put us where you presume we are now with animals and their farming.
Get a grip
You eat what you want and I will eat what I want.
I won't tell you not to so sod off and stop bashing me.
Some veggies eat fish as well so riddle how that's not an animal.

What battle are you fighting.

What we eat is a personal choice.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Lyons550's Profile Lyons550 Flag Shirley 28 Feb 18 9.32am Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger


There is already a trend toward eating less red meat in Britain. People eat far less of it than say 40 years ago which I assume is partly because of perceived health issues. Part of the problem for farmers is what they are paid for their meat. We all want cheap food and the farmer is squeezed as a result of competition.
Less meat being eaten and cheap prices at the till will only make factory farmers more enclined to cut overheads further with the potential negative effect for the animals.
As far as imports of meat go. We don't know the conditions attached to any trade deals so any fearmongering is speculative.


i also think that this will start reducing demand and as such not necessarily see standards cut but see Farmers either selling up or changing what they farm.

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View europalace's Profile europalace Flag Europe 28 Feb 18 1.15pm Send a Private Message to europalace Add europalace as a friend

Originally posted by Lyons550


i also think that this will start reducing demand and as such not necessarily see standards cut but see Farmers either selling up or changing what they farm.


did you see my link regarding the copying of EU law into UK law?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View CambridgeEagle's Profile CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 28 Feb 18 2.05pm Send a Private Message to CambridgeEagle Add CambridgeEagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger


There is already a trend toward eating less red meat in Britain. People eat far less of it than say 40 years ago which I assume is partly because of perceived health issues. Part of the problem for farmers is what they are paid for their meat. We all want cheap food and the farmer is squeezed as a result of competition.
Less meat being eaten and cheap prices at the till will only make factory farmers more enclined to cut overheads further with the potential negative effect for the animals.
As far as imports of meat go. We don't know the conditions attached to any trade deals so any fearmongering is speculative.



I agree with you. I think the problem is with education and social conditioning and inequality which drives demand for poor quality cheap meat.

Farmers should not be allowed to cut standards and local authorities should be provided with the means to ensure food safety, however this has been slashed to the bone by austerity. If farmers can't make a profit on meat then they will have to change what they produce. If we can move people's eating habits away from meat there will be more demand for other goods, but less overall demand on the soil and food production which will massively help the environment. You can then over time put that land to more efficient uses and/or production of renewable energy.

In terms of trade deals it's fairly clear from US trade deals that have been negotiated elsewhere that access to food markets would be an important part of any deal for the US. It is speculation but it's not baseless nor unreasonable to be concerned about it.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 28 Feb 18 2.22pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

I agree with you. I think the problem is with education and social conditioning and inequality which drives demand for poor quality cheap meat.

Farmers should not be allowed to cut standards and local authorities should be provided with the means to ensure food safety, however this has been slashed to the bone by austerity. If farmers can't make a profit on meat then they will have to change what they produce. If we can move people's eating habits away from meat there will be more demand for other goods, but less overall demand on the soil and food production which will massively help the environment. You can then over time put that land to more efficient uses and/or production of renewable energy.

In terms of trade deals it's fairly clear from US trade deals that have been negotiated elsewhere that access to food markets would be an important part of any deal for the US. It is speculation but it's not baseless nor unreasonable to be concerned about it.

Education about nutrition has to be a good thing broadly speaking but not all information is unbiased. Nor is it exact, proven science. Also, the old adage is that a little information can be dangerous and that certainly applies to nutrition in my opinion. People tend to absorb the information that suits their mindset.
The difficulty with scientific studies on the effects of diet are obvious. The population is not being observed under strict scientific conditions and the variables are numerous. I don't think there is any evidence that people should stop eating meat and the obvious common sense model would see people eating everything with a red flag in moderation. Remember that thinking on diet changes from one year to te next.
I know you like to work the poverty /austerity angle into everything but that really is just your political bias talking. People have never been better fed.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View CambridgeEagle's Profile CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 01 Mar 18 9.32am Send a Private Message to CambridgeEagle Add CambridgeEagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Education about nutrition has to be a good thing broadly speaking but not all information is unbiased. Nor is it exact, proven science. Also, the old adage is that a little information can be dangerous and that certainly applies to nutrition in my opinion. People tend to absorb the information that suits their mindset.
The difficulty with scientific studies on the effects of diet are obvious. The population is not being observed under strict scientific conditions and the variables are numerous. I don't think there is any evidence that people should stop eating meat and the obvious common sense model would see people eating everything with a red flag in moderation. Remember that thinking on diet changes from one year to te next.
I know you like to work the poverty /austerity angle into everything but that really is just your political bias talking. People have never been better fed.

The point is inequality and austerity impact on almost everything in society. Recent studies have shown life expectancy has decreased in the UK, and austerity is the major factor in that decrease. That's shocking.

In terms of evidence, according to Cancer Research UK, if no one ate processed or red meat in Britain, there would be 8,800 fewer cases of cancer. (That is four times the number of people killed annually on Britain’s roads.)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 01 Mar 18 9.41am Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

The point is inequality and austerity impact on almost everything in society. Recent studies have shown life expectancy has decreased in the UK, and austerity is the major factor in that decrease. That's shocking.

In terms of evidence, according to Cancer Research UK, if no one ate processed or red meat in Britain, there would be 8,800 fewer cases of cancer. (That is four times the number of people killed annually on Britain’s roads.)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 6 of 9 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Shocking hygiene failings found in US meat