The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has issued a March 2012 report urging the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to adopt several measures to reduce Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) in cattle before they are slaughtered. According to GAO, USDA currently recognizes bacteriophages, probiotics, vaccines, and sodium chlorate as preslaughter interventions able to control STEC, but has received few applications for commercial products that use these methods. The report notes that even in the case of STEC vaccines, USDA’s requirements for approval are “unclear” and do not address “some of the unique challenges faced by manufacturers of animal health products.” GAO found that, unlike the Canadian Centre for Veterinary Biologics, USDA fails to specify when it requires laboratory or field demonstrations of vaccine efficacy, resulting in delayed application approval. There is also apparently a lack of available products designed to test for six STEC strains—other than STEC O157:H7—that are now considered…
Tag Archives beef
Several consumer organizations have called on President Barack Obama (D) to appeal a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that favored Canada and Mexico in a dispute over U.S. country-of-origin-labeling (COOL) requirements for beef and pork products. In their February 24, 2012, letter, Consumers Union, Food & Water Watch, Public Citizen, and the Consumer Federation of America contend that the WTO panel issued a “conflicted ruling” by affirming this country’s right to require COOL for meat products, but finding that specific requirements were less favorable to Canada and Mexico. Details about the WTO ruling appear in Issue 419 of this Update. According to the letter, COOL “is wildly popular in the U.S., as poll after poll show overwhelming support for labeling. Indeed, nations around the world are implementing variants of such laws.”
A federal court in Minnesota has determined that General Mills Operations, LLC was entitled to an award of prejudgment interest of 10 percent per year from the date it provided a written notice of claim to the company that supplied it with contaminated beef products subject to a recall in 2008. Gen. Mills Operations, LLC v. Five Star Custom Foods, Ltd., No. 10-15 (D. Minn., decided February 24, 2012). According to the court, the only matters in dispute in this contract action were whether General Mills’ May 27, 2008, letter informing the defendant that it had incurred losses of at least $1.4 million constituted a “written notice of claim” under Minnesota’s prejudgment interest statute and the appropriate interest rate to apply. While the letter indicated that costs could continue to accrue and did not include evidentiary support, it did demand prompt payment of $1.4 million “in full settlement of this…
A World Trade Organization (WTO) panel has issued a ruling against the United States in a dispute with Mexico and Canada over country-of-origin labeling (COOL) regulations for beef and pork products. According to the November 18, 2011, panel report, Canada and Mexico filed complaints arguing that U.S. COOL regulations enacted in 2008 afford “imported livestock treatment less favorable than that accorded to like domestic livestock.” In addition to labeling requirements, the regulations evidently required the segregation of imported livestock before processing, as well as ear tags certifying that the cattle are free of bovine spongiform encephalopathy. Although the WTO panel reportedly affirmed the right of the United States to enact COOL regulations, it found that the specific requirements provided less favorable treatment to Canadian and Mexican livestock. “Additionally, the panel determined that the U.S. COOL requirements fail to fulfill their consumer information objective because the information included on the labels…
Alleging that a government contractor sprayed an herbicide on their property as part of transmission-line maintenance, the owners of a state-certified organic beef farm in Skagit County, Washington, have sued the U.S. government and the contractor for damages incurred by the contamination of their property. Benson v. United States, No. 11-1619 (W.D. Wash., filed September 28, 2011). According to the complaint, the plaintiffs have a contract with the government “with regards to all maintenance on the power lines and providing recovery of any resulting damages.” In 2008, the plaintiffs were allegedly notified that spraying would take place, and they spoke with a government representative explaining that their property could not be sprayed. They were allegedly assured that this would be noted in the paperwork and that no herbicide would be sprayed on their property. Despite the assurances and despite a “no spray” sign on the access gate to the plaintiffs’ property,…
Japanese officials have reportedly confirmed that beef registering up to seven times more radioactive cesium than permitted has entered the food supply, raising concerns among consumers about the country’s safety precautions. The first batch of tainted beef apparently came from six cattle farmed within 18 miles of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, which was compromised by an earthquake and tsunami earlier this year. After passing external radiation tests, the cattle were sold to butchers in Tokyo—where government workers first detected the contamination—and then to wholesalers and retailers in eight prefectures. A second batch of compromised cattle originated in Asakawa, approximately 37 miles from the power plant, and was shipped to slaughterhouses in Tokyo, Kanagawa, Chiba and Miyagi prefectures three months ago. In both cases, the cattle allegedly ate rice straw containing 97,000 becquerels of cesium per kilogram instead of the 300 becquerels permitted by law, thus causing internal contamination…
The World Trade Organization (WTO) has reportedly issued a preliminary ruling that U.S. country-of-origin labeling (COOL) laws violate the organization’s Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. According to Feedstuffs, a WTO panel found that COOL “constitutes an illegal, non-tariff trade barrier that treats U.S. livestock and perishable commodities more favorably than livestock, fruits and vegetables and other covered commodities from Canada and Mexico.” The preliminary ruling will remain confidential for 30 days with a final version slated for release in September 2011, when the United States will have two months to appeal. See Feedstuffs, May 25, 2011. News of the preliminary ruling has since elicited a favorable reaction from the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), which described the decision as “unfortunate for the U.S. government” but a positive development for industry. As NCBA President Bill Donald explained, “Proponents of COOL have always believed that restricting imports of Mexican and/or Canadian…
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has sent a letter to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, drawing attention to a plan that would allegedly prohibit FDA from considering drug residues in bob veal calf tissues “as an indicator of possible drug misuse on dairy farms.” According to CSPI, bob veal cattle are young beef animals “harvested directly from dairy farms, and therefore, these cattle are key indicators of drug use on the specific farms and are also important indicators of potential use in dairy cattle residing on those farms.” The consumer group thus feels that a policy barring test results from these animals “would make it harder for FDA to detect misuse of animal drugs in dairy cattle and, as a result, consumers may be more likely to be exposed to hazardous drugs in milk and milk products and/or resistant strains of human pathogens…
Taco Bell® has launched a nationwide public relations campaign calling for an apology from the law firm that voluntarily dismissed a lawsuit alleging that the company misrepresented the beef filling in its taco and burrito products. Obney v. Taco Bell Corp., No. 11-00101 (C.D. Cal., notice of dismissal filed April 18, 2011). Additional information about the putative class action appears in Issue 379 of this Update. The company apparently launched the campaign “to make sure consumers know that it has not changed products, ingredients or advertising despite what the Beasley Allen law firm has claimed.” According to a news source, the firm said, “From the inception of this case, we stated that if Taco Bell would make certain changes regarding disclosure and marketing of its ‘seasoned beef’ product, the case would be dismissed.” Taco Bell® asks the attorneys, “Would it kill you to say you’re sorry?” See Taco Bell® News Release,…
Nebraska Beef Ltd. has reportedly agreed to settle its lawsuit against Meyer Natural Foods LLC, and a federal court in Nebraska has apparently ordered the parties to file a motion to dismiss by April 25, 2011. Nebraska Beef recalled about 7 million pounds of beef in a 2008 E. coli outbreak linked to some 76 illnesses. According to a news source, some of the meat came from cattle that the defendant purchased and sent to Nebraska Beef’s plant for processing. While the terms of the settlement have not been disclosed, Nebraska Beef, which contends the contamination did not originate at its facility, had been seeking a declaration that it was not required to indemnify Meyer for legal claims related to the recalled meat filed against Meyer. See Fremont Tribune, March 26, 2011.
