Reply #27: Here's one - I can give excerpts but don't have the URL [View All]

[Nothing Without Hope]

The copyright is by The New York Times, but I didn't save the URL when I downloaded it last April. I do have the article date and title, so you should be able to find it in the Times archives. (I don't want to register.) I have a lot of articles on Mad Cow saved on my hard drive and will see if there are others that seem particularly germane. If I find any, I'll post again.
--------------------------------------------------------------

April 10, 2004

U.S. Won't Let Company Test All Its Cattle for Mad Cow
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.

The Department of Agriculture refused yesterday to allow a Kansas beef producer to test all of its cattle for mad cow disease, saying such sweeping tests were not scientifically warranted.

The producer, Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, wanted to use recently approved rapid tests so it could resume selling its fat-marbled black Angus beef to Japan, which banned American beef after a cow slaughtered in Washington State last December tested positive for mad cow. The company has complained that the ban is costing it $40,000 a day and forced it to lay off 50 employees.

The department's under secretary for marketing and regulation, Bill Hawks, said in a statement yesterday that the rapid tests, which are used in Japan and Europe, were licensed for surveillance of animal health, while Creekstone's use would have "implied a consumer safety aspect that is not scientifically warranted."

Lobbying groups for cattle ranchers and slaughterhouses applauded the decision, but consumer advocates denounced it, saying the department was preventing Creekstone from taking extra steps to prove its product was safe.

(snip - there is about twice as much as above remaining in the article.)