Farmed Animal Watch
May 31, 2001                                              (To Search This Page Press Ctrl F)
Issue #10

CONTENTS

1.   RSPCA Accuses Government of Animal Cruelty
2.   Bury, Burn or Buy It, It’s Going to Cost
3.   Mad Cow Disease and the U.S. Meat Supply
4.   Alternative Theories on the Cause of Mad Cow Disease
5.   vCJD Reaps 100^th Victim
6.   Human and Cattle Diseases May Be Linked
7.   Meat Found High in Antibiotic-resistant Bacteria
8.   Fear of Factory “Farms”
9.  Taxing  Environmentally  Taxing  Food
10. Poisoned Chickens
11. Mechanical Chicken Catching
12. Enriching Battery Cages in Europe


1.  RSPCA ACCUSES GOVERNMENT OF ANIMAL CRUELTY
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) is accusing the government of wanton cruelty in connection with the slaughter of some of the animals killed to stop the foot-and-mouth epidemic. The charges include: burying injured animals alive, using bullets which inflict “enormous” wounds, beating baby animals to death with shovels, and shooting trapped cattle with high-power rifles. Animal activists also charge that injured animals have been left alive, and that an excessive number of animals are being killed. The “Sunday Times” reported that 79,000 animals were killed one day during a week in which the government reported an average of 8,000 animals were killed daily.

“Activists charge U.K. with Animal Cruelty in Foot-and-Mouth Culls,” Daily News, Michael Hoes, May 23, 2001.
http://www.meatingplace.com/meatingplace/DailyNews/News.asp?ID=7488


2.  BURY, BURN OR BUY IT, IT’S GOING TO COST
The British government is paying 40 million pounds a year to warehouse the remains of cows killed to control the BSE crisis. About 400,000 tons of animal waste, which has been boiled and ground to dust, is being stored at 15 sites until it can be incinerated. Since there are only 3 incinerators suitable for burning the meat and bonemeal at the required 1,830 degrees F, much of the material dates back five years to the beginning of the program. Meanwhile, the government’s top advisor on the disease warns that cattle with BSE who were killed and buried during the foot-and-mouth epidemic could spread BSE to humans by  contaminating  water. Great Britain’s Meat and Livestock Commission, which claims over 1 million families may have given up red meat due to health fears sparked by the foot-and-mouth epidemic, has asked the government to put $35.9 million towards a meat marketing effort.

“40m [pounds] to keep `BSE mountain’ safe,” The Electronic Telegraph, Macer Hall, May 20, 2001.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=004171553251977&rtmo=Vrgw8DJK&atmo=rrrrrrrq&pg=/et/01/5/20/nbse20.html
“Foot-and-Mouth Burial Sites Run Risk of Spreading BSE,” Daily News, Joshua Lipsky, May 30, 2001.
http://www.meatingplace.com
“More than 1 Million British Families Give Up Red Meat,” Daily News, Joshua Lipsky, May 9, 2001.
http://www.meatingplace.com/meatingplace/DailyNews/News.asp?ID=7399


3.  MAD COW DISEASE AND THE U.S. MEAT SUPPLY
A recent conference on mad cow disease, sponsored by the American Meat Institute, pointed out problems in the current U.S. strategy against the disease. With an average incubation period of 5 years, the disease is difficult to detect. Tests for the disease are only designed for use on dead animals, and are only able to detect it at the end of the incubation period. Over the past decade, samples from 12,103 animals were sent for testing [last year alone, over 36 million cattle were slaughtered]. To prevent transmission of the disease, certain animal products are prohibited from being used in ruminant feed. A “huge risk” is the possibility of cross-contamination of ruminant and nonruminant animal feed processed at the same facility. A 2001 FDA audit found an “unacceptable” 71% of rendering facilities, 37% of licensed feed mills, and 36% of unlicensed feed mills using prohibited material. The use of pneumatic stunning devices on animals and other processing methods can introduce the disease into the human food supply. In a related article, a team of British researchers at Bristol University have found that captive-bolt guns used to kill 40% of the sheep in Britain could cause brain matter infected with the disease to enter the human food supply. 

“Industry presenting unified front on mad cow disease,” Meat Marketing & Technology Magazine, Joshua Lipsky, May 2001.
http://www.meatingplace.com
“Captive-Bolt Guns May Spread CJD,” AgWeb News, May 23, 2001.
http://www.agweb.com/news_show_news_article.asp?file=AgNewsArticle_20015231543_259&newscat=GN


4.  ALTERNATIVE THEORIES ON MAD COW CAUSE
The American Red Cross recently decided to disallow blood donations from anyone who consecutively spent 3 months in Britain or 6 months in Europe since 1980 out of fear they may have acquired the infectious agent which causes the human form of  mad cow disease from eating contaminated beef and could transmit it to others via a transfusion. A Cambridge University researcher, however, has proposed that mad cow disease is not caused by infected beef products but instead from overexposure to manganese, a heavy metal. This helps support the theory that the use of an organophosphate pesticide, a constituent of nerve gas, used on cattle in the 1980's, led to the disease. This theory holds that the use of this pesticide caused a dangerous combination of low copper and high manganese (some derived animal feed containing the manure of chickens fed high doses of manganese to strengthen eggshells) which triggered the disease mechanism.

“Mad Cow Disease Increasing in Britain,” Health Headlines, ABCNews.com, Nicholas Regush, May 29, 2001.
http://www.dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/abc/20010528/hl/secondopinion010525_1.html


5.  vCJD REAPS 100^TH VICTIM
100 people have died from variant CJD (vCJD), the human form of mad cow disease. British government advisors warn that elderly patients with the disease may be dying without it being diagnosed [since it is commonly only associated with younger people], masking the true scale of the epidemic. More post mortem exams for elderly people who die with suspected dementia, a symptom of vCJD are being called for.

“CJD on increase as human death toll passes 100,” Electronic Telegraph, David Derbyshire, May 25, 2001.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=004171553251977&rtmo=axHJxNHL&atmo=rrrrrrrq&pg=/et/01/5/25/ncjd25.html

6.  HUMAN AND CATTLE DISEASES MAY BE LINKED
The organism which causes Johne’s disease, an intestinal disorder of cattle, may be the same organism which causes Crohn’s disease, an intestinal disorder of humans. The disease infects an estimated 22% of U.S. dairy herds and 8% of beef herds. Current diagnostic tests detect less than 50% of infected animals at any specific time. The organism might be transferrable to humans through cows’ milk, and studies in the U.K. have found the organism even in pasteurized milk. Similar studies are underway in the U.S. These findings are contained in a report recently released by the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST).

“CAST Addresses Johne’s Disease,” AgWeb News, Darcy Maulsby, May 29, 2001.
http://www.agweb.com/news_show_news_article.asp?file=AgNewsArticle_2001529928_329&newscat=GN

http://www.cast-science.org/pubs/johnes.pdf


7.  MEAT FOUND HIGH IN ANTIBIOTIC-RESISTANT BACTERIA
A recent FDA study of meat in the Washington, D.C. area found relatively high levels of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Researchers tested for resistance to 29 types of antibiotics, including 6 commonly used in animal feed to boost the animals’ growth rate. Chicken and turkey samples were much more resistant to the antibiotics than were beef samples, which may be due to a wider low-level usage of the drugs in poultry production. Experts fear antibiotic-resistant bacteria are a major public health threat globally. A national study may follow, which could lead the FDA to act to reduce the amount or types of drugs used in U.S. meat production.

“Drug-resistant bacteria found in US meat,” Reuters Health Information (American Heart Association), May 23, 2001.
http://www.justmove.org/fitnessnews/archive/20010523elin020.txt.html


8.  FEAR OF FACTORY “FARMS”
Two lengthy articles consider the effects of factory farming on water safety in  Canada, where 7 people died last year from water believed to have been contaminated by cattle manure. The explosive growth of these operations in the last 30 years is described, as is the staggering amount of manure they generate and its correlation to disease incidence. One article notes that a recent North Carolina study found higher rates of particular health problems in people living downwind from pig factories, and that up to 70% of employees working in these operations suffered respiratory illness caused by “the corrosive nature” of pig waste. The other article examines the sources of specific waterborne pathogens, noting, for example, that Cryptosporidium, a waterborne parasite, occurs more often in rural areas with intensive animal agriculture.

“Should We Fear the Factory Farm?” Maclean’s (Reader’s Digest Canada), Andrew Nikiforuk and Danylo Hawaleshka, June 2001.
http://www.readersdigest.ca/mag/2001/06/factory_farm.html
“A Bug’s Life,” Danylo Hawaleshka, Maclean’s, May 21, 2001.
http://www.macleans.ca/xta-asp/storyview.asp?viewtype=print&tpl=story_print&vpath=/2001/05/21/canada/51077.shtml


9.  TAXING ENVIRONMENTALLY TAXING FOOD
To promote sustainability in agriculture, David Pimentel, a Cornell University professor of ecology and agricultural science, advocates taxing foods that have the worst environmental impacts. To help accomplish this, he has devised an ecological tax scale which sorts foods into six categories determined by their environmental impact, efficiency and health value. Animal products comprise the top (most expensive) 4 categories and all other foods comprise the final 2. Dr. Pimentel’s concept is contained in the book “Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation, and Health,” which also contains many statistics on global meat costs and trends.

“Ecologist Says Unsustainable Food Should be Taxed,” EarthVision Environmental News, May 14, 2001.
http://www.earthvision.net/coldfusion/News_Page2.cfm?NewsID=16031


10.  POISONED CHICKENS
421,000 pounds of chicken were recalled February 14^th after a Gold Kist, Inc., contract grower reported that about 2,200 birds in one of his 4 “houses” had suddenly died. Laboratory tests showed that the birds had eaten lethal amounts of an insecticide that, according to a company statement, “had apparently been placed maliciously by an unknown person in the feed delivery system in one house.”

“Gold Kist Suspects Contamination Deliberate,” First News, Watt Poultry USA, March 2001.
http://www.wattnet.com


11.  MECHANICAL CHICKEN CATCHING
“A pervasive degree of animal welfare awareness among consumers” is now starting to be felt in major U.S. production centers, states the April/May issue of “Poultry” Magazine. This, coupled with a tight labor market and other economic reasons, is said to be causing industry to consider using machines instead of people to catch “broiler”chickens.  According to the magazine, catching is arguably the most physically demanding and “destructive activity in livestock production.” In addition to worker ailments, manual catching “may result in rough handling and excessive excitement” of the birds which can result in the birds piling on top of each other and smothering to death. The latter is “inconsistent with the standards now being imposed by the large quick-service restaurant chains with European affiliations.” Bruising and wing injuries are reported to be lower with mechanical catchers, which will need to match or exceed the 7,000 to 8,000 chickens per hour which a typical 8-9 member crew can catch. An average of 150 million “broilers” are caught every week in the U.S.

“The U.S. poultry industry is ready for mechanical harvesting,” Watt Poultry USA, Simon M. Shane, April/May 2001.
http://www.wattnet.com


12.  ENRICHING BATTERY CAGES IN EUROPE: A 2 PART SERIES
The April 2001 issue of Egg Industry features the initial installment of a two part series on the enrichment of battery cages in Europe. Enriched cages are ones which have nests, perches, litter boxes and other such amenities which are lacking in conventional battery cages. The article is heavy on statistics and focuses on economic concerns for the different countries involved. Industry’s main problem, according to the article, is the acceptance of a new directive (mandate) without  specifically defining what qualifies as an enriched cage and without preliminary research results on tested cage prototypes.

“Enriched Cages in Europe,” Egg Industry, April 2001.
http://www.wattnet.com