Interesting Lunch Discussion

[PORKER]

Talk about Marketing;
Sept. 12/08
IFA welcomes Boel’s tough stance on beef import standards into EU

By Ray Ryan, Agribusiness Correspondent
THE strong stance taken by European agriculture and rural development commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel at the World Meat Congress in Cape Town regarding the standards for beef imports into the EU has been welcomed by the Irish Farmers Association.


Livestock committee chairman Michael Doran, speaking from South Africa, said Mrs Fischer Boel declared that it is essential that anyone who wants to trade into the EU must meet its safety standards.

He said the commissioner was sharing a platform with the Brazilian deputy minister for agriculture Inacio Alfonso Koretz when she made her unequivocal statement in her defence of EU standards.

Mr Doran said Brazilian minister Koretz made no reference to the EU ban at all or Brazil’s capacity to meet EU standards on traceability or food safety.

He said the minister spoke on the generality of meeting sanitary and hygiene standards and the problems and difficulties foot and mouth disease created for Brazil.

Mr Doran said minister Koretz told the congress that Brazil was making significant progress in controlling foot and mouth with the active participation of producers and that 60% of Brazilian territory was free of the disease with vaccination.

“There must be a level playing field on standards for all EU imports. As producers we meet the high standards set by EU consumers.

“Imports must match these standards on traceability, food safety, animal welfare and environmental controls,” he said

Non of these South American Countries can Match the US. COOL rules either!

[mrj]

I may have used the wrong term, "ruminant by-products", when I meant SRM's, which are not allowed in feed. I do not know if fats are allowed, since gcreekrch didn't show a source for his comment indicating it is.

burnt, you may not have been on the site at the time, but I believe the cow in question was a difficult diagnosis and the British people who determined that it probably was positive indicated it was a questionnable call. Does that prove reluctance to admit to a positive? I believe it further highlights the difficulty of determining the presence of BSE. With SRM removal, it is a moot point. I don't know if anyone still feeds poultry litter. That is a regional thing, and I'm not in that region. Personally, I think the only reason not to feed properly prepared litter is the "Yuk factor", which trumps science all too often.

According to some often held up on this site as exemplary (grass fed beef and organic producer groups in particular) all you have to do to prevent the possiblity of getting "human Mad Cow disease" is eat only organically grown food. Bogus as it can be, scientifically, but believable to the gullible!

mrj

[gcreekrch]

[burnt]

[Sandhusker]

[PORKER]

COFCO's significant step
The huge Chinese company's investment in Smithfield Foods establishes a foothold in the U.S. industry


(MEATPOULTRY.com, September 12, 2008)
by Steve Bjerklie

The purchase of 7 million shares of Smithfield Foods common stock by COFCO, a company owned by the Chinese government, last July "represents a significant step" in cementing Smithfield’s relationship with COFCO for the long term, a Smithfield investment executive told MEATPOULTRY.com.

Keira Ullrich, who is in investment relations management at Smithfield’s office in New York City, said Smithfield has been working closely with the Chinese firm, which is the largest agricultural trading and processing company in China. "COFCO is a widely respected leader in China 's food and agriculture industry. China is experiencing rapid growth in pork consumption and consumes more pork than the rest of the world combined. COFCO has introduced Smithfield to many opportunities in China and we look forward to continue working together," she wrote to MEATPOULTRY.com in an e-mail this week.
The $122 million Smithfield realized from the stock purchase was used by the company to pay down debt, she added, calling COFCO’s investment "passive in nature." The purchase agreement contains standstill provisions and also restricts sales or other transfers of the shares by COFCO until July 9, 2009.

In a presentation made Sept. 3 at Lehman Bros.’ second annual "Back to School Consumer Conference," Smithfield CEO C. Larry Pope noted sharply higher input costs in the U.S., including a 37% increase in the cost of feed over a year ago and a 3.5% increase in the price of hogs, have created "highly volatile and sharply higher markets" for raw materials as well as a difficult market for pricing packaged meats. An excellent market for exported U.S. pork has somewhat helped Smithfield’s bottom line, he told the conference, but it has depended on a cheap U.S. dollar relative to other world currencies.

Ullrich does not expect to see Smithfield Foods use more of COFCO’s money to make acquisitions of its own, even though the company has been active in recent years, especially in Eastern Europe. Pope, she wrote, "has said publicly that the company’s main focus is on integrating the acquisitions we have made in the last few years and on paying down debt, not acquisitions."

[mrj]

burnt, what in the world makes you think I'm denigrating Ben or RM's product???? Unless, of course, you believe or know that they are guilty of false claims that their product cannot possibly have BSE because it is organically grown. I don't recall that either of them has said that on this site, which is the only place I've seen anything they say about their product.

I've frequently applauded the fact that there are people filling those niche markets.

I have no problem with anyone claiming they raise organically grown products UNTIL they make unverified and unverifiable claims about the safety of their product over conventionally produced beef.

Organically grown beef may taste better to some people, or it may have been processed in a way or at an age that makes it more tender than some other beef, but it does not test scientifically significantly better than other beef of comparable age and method of processing.

Some organic and natural producer groups and individuals have hired PR firms and lobbyists to protect their industry, including the Turning Point Project which ran a series of full-page ads in the NY Times which trashed biotechnlogy and conventional agriculture.

The Center for Food Safety, which has ties on their board with organic food lobbyists and the Turning Point Project has pushed the American mad cow disase scare pushing the viewpoint that the US beef supply is unsafe. You can check this out at www.ActicvistCash.com.

Are you saying it is not true that the British researcher said the diagnosis was difficult and he didn't fault the people in making the inconclusive call????

No, those activists in S.Korea will do what activist anywhere do.....twist the facts to serve their own political agenda.

I believe it more important to follow the safety protocol of removing the SRM's, don't you?

Apparently, you have not bothered to notice that I have not been a 'Canada Basher', believing that is simply a tragedy for your cattle producers that BSE was found there. With the exception of pointing out the fact that it is likely not all imported cattle were found and killed in Canada, as they were in Canada, I've never said anything against Canadian cattle, HAVE supported your exports to the USA, and HAVE defended you to others on this site and in this country to the point that our family businesses have received threats.

Everyone will be best served by getting over the fact that few BSE positives have been found in the US and getting on with life in the post BSE world.

Ignoring and denying the facts and science of the US protocol for testing and prevention, serves no one well.

If you are so certain of the validity of that scientist whom you say believes there have been over 2000 BSE positive US cattle consumed, would you please post his name? What about SRM removal? Don't you believe there is any reason to remove that material?

It is truly beyond ridiculous for you to say I might be an r-cult person, as I'm one of the more anti-R-CALF people you could even find in SD because I favor science based decisions, open financial reports, and term limited offices in cattle organizations, to name a few differences.

mrj

[Sandhusker]

That's real great, MRJ, except for the fact that science has no weighting in consumer's purchasing decisions. Learn about marketing. Get a book, do an internet search, read a pamphlet, something.

Please tell me how much science is in the shopper's decision making when they buy Angus beef over the lesser priced mystery meat in the cooler.

[Cinch]

Since the USDA does not allow meatpackers to test for BSE, what else can be concluded but that the US has something to hide!!!!

[Oldtimer]

[Cinch]