Salem, Massachusetts
By Inger Pols
---
The Maze of Meat Safety Regulators
A Tale of Tainted Meat
How You Can Take Action
---
In March, I wrote about the practice of using ammonia to treat meat and the problems associated with it. A few weeks ago, I wrote about some of the problems with the presence of hormones, antibiotics and pesticides in our meat supply.
Since this newsletter is only a few months old and I’ve discussed meat safety twice, you are probably catching on to the fact that this subject is near and dear to my heart. So I knew I had to write about a new report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that acknowledges that pesticides, drugs and heavy metals regularly contaminate our meat supply. The report says that this meat is knowingly and regularly distributed to big box stores, fast food restaurants and school lunch programs. It also states that various government agencies are unable to align to take action.
When we looked at ammonia, the rationale for using it was to treat the meat to prevent pathogens like E. coli. This new report focused on chemical contaminants like veterinary drugs and antibiotics, heavy metals (like copper, cadmium and arsenic), dioxins, polybrominated diphenylethers (fire retardants), and pesticides with canceled registrations that remain in the meat. The problem with these chemical contaminants is that cooking does not destroy them (unlike E. coli) and they can actually become even more harmful when cooked.
The report concludes that the various agencies policing our meat supply are not working together: The agencies are not testing for these contaminants and the appropriate thresholds for testing safety levels have not even been established. It appears to be a take off on the Abbott and Costello skit of “Who’s on First.”
Let’s look at how the system is supposed to work. (Bear with me through all the acronyms and initials.)
The Maze of Food Safety Regulators
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) administers the national residue program. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) each play a key role in the process and in addition, they established a joint Surveillance Advisory Team (SAT) and an Interactive Residue Control Group (IRCG) to help reach their program goals.
Each year, the Surveillance Advisory Team is supposed to call on the FDA, the EPA and FSIS to determine what residues they will be testing. Despite convening and forming a joint consensus, the FSIS continues to test for only one type of pesticide each year.
The EPA claims that FSIS refuses its requests for additional pesticide testing. The FSIS, however, counterclaims that the EPA has not set the established tolerances for which the FSIS is supposed to test, so it cannot test for them. (At the same time, the FSIS also states that it doesn’t have the resources to do the testing.)
For any testing that does occur, the FDA must approve the proper testing methods. However, the FDA continues to make use of antiquated testing methods and has continually been unwilling or unable to use newer testing methodologies.
The methods employed by the various agencies are often in conflict with each other, so the SAT was created to help them coordinate and communicate. But year after year, no progress has been made. The report concludes there is a problem and that improvements must be made. Not surprisingly, this did not make headlines!
A Tale of Tainted Meat
The USDA report indicates that meat plant violations do not seem to concern the FSIS as they should. In 2008, one plant received over 200 violations, but was still allowed to continue operating after the FSIS declared the violations “not likely to occur.”
One of the concerns highlighted is the practice of cow “recycling.” When dairy cows get too old or sick to produce any more milk, they are slaughtered and the “spent” dairy cow meat makes it way into our meat supply. This is troubling because of the hormones, antibiotics and pesticides present in the meat fat of those cows. A 2008 investigation revealed that 90% of the residue violations occurred in plants that process spent dairy cows.
The same plants also process what is known as “bob” veal, or male calves born to dairy cows. Dairy cows receive large amounts of antibiotics after they give birth to calves to treat and prevent birth-related infections. Dairy producers must wait a certain amount of time before they can sell the antibiotic-laden milk for human consumption. So rather than waste the milk, they feed the antibiotic laden milk to the bob veal calves. The drugs never have a chance to leave their systems, and so they remain in the veal meat that is ultimately purchased by consumers. (And if the dairy cow does not recover after birth, she is slaughtered and her meat enters our food supply as well.)
Another concern highlighted in the report is the fact that livestock are now being fed industrial waste that remains after the process of converting corn into ethanol fuel. The waste is known as “distillers’ grains.” The USDA is aware that these grains are more likely to contain E coli, but it does not regulate the use of distillers’ grains in cattle feed. The ethanol fermentation process requires a lot of antibiotics, so those residues are present in distillers’ grains. In addition, they are laden with mycotoxins, which are linked to an imbalance in pigs called Mulberry Heart Disease, which can cause sudden death.
In the end, because there are no regulations and testing is not being done, all this substandard meat ends up in our food supply and the more tainted it is, or the lower the quality, the cheaper it is. That makes it more appealing to fast food restaurants, big chain supermarkets, and of course, school lunch programs where it is fed to developing children who are even more sensitive to the drugs, chemicals and antibiotics than adults.
Talking in Circles
Another section of the USDA report highlighted how the federal agencies fail to communicate. In one example, the EPA has recently canceled use of all pesticides containing lindane and will revoke its current lindane tolerance (or allowance).
The report states “One FSIS official stated that without a tolerance or a zero tolerance if FSIS finds lindane as a residue, it will have no basis for acting to protect the U.S. food supply from unacceptable levels of this pesticide. Another FSIS official disagreed and noted that in the absence of a tolerance (e.g., for lindane) any residue of a pesticide would be illegal and would adulterate the food—making it unnecessary to create a zero tolerance. Regardless of their position, both officials agreed that the agency needed to clarify its procedures regarding the actions agency personnel are to take concerning the disposition of carcasses that contain a potentially hazardous substance where no official tolerance has been established by the FDA or EPA.”
I don’t quite understand how canceling use of all pesticides containing lindane can be considered not establishing an official tolerance level, but that’s why I don’t work for the government!
How You Can Take Action
So what can we do? These stories are so common now that it’s possible we are becoming desensitized. Or perhaps we just accept the inability of our government to adequately protect us and our food supply. But there are things we can do. Support local farmers and Community Supported Agriculture where you get to know the producers of the food you are eating and ask them questions about their practices. Educate yourself by reading the reports such as the one discussed here and become aware of the challenges faced by our current food practices. Vote with your wallet and speak to your representatives: Let them know you care about our food supply and that you want something better.
There’s no point reforming our health care system if we are not changing our farming and food policies: Let’s get to the cause and not just treat the symptom.
To your health!
留言列表
