U.S. Company Used Melamine in Feed

[Demeter]

Source: Washington Post


U.S. Company Used Melamine in Feed
Humans Unlikely to Be Harmed

By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 31, 2007; A03




...The company used the chemical as a binding agent to hold feed granules in pellet form, in contrast to the recent pet food scandal, which involved imported ingredients that were spiked with melamine to provide a false measure of protein content, officials said...The company, Tembec BTLSR of Toledo, sold the melamine-laden ingredients to Uniscope of Johnstown, Colo., which used them to make three finished food products -- one for cattle, sheep and goats, and two for fish and shrimp.

The contamination came to the FDA's attention on May 18 after Uniscope officials tested for melamine in the feed components they were buying -- something the FDA has been encouraging food producers to do.
The FDA began an investigation the next working day, officials said, and after about 10 days decided how to proceed.Officials said that Tembec initiated a formal recall of its products yesterday and that the company has stopped adding the chemical.

It remains unclear why Tembec did not stop using melamine months ago, given the intense publicity generated by the recent pet food scandal, during which officials repeatedly made it clear that melamine is not an approved additive for human or animal food...Officials said they do not know how many animals may have eaten the food or how long melamine has been used to make pellets. But the presumption, Acheson said, is that it has been a long-standing practice.

...
Acheson said that the two fish feed products, which Tembec made for Uniscope using tainted ingredients, were exported. The FDA is trying to track the amounts shipped and to find out what countries those feeds went to. He said it is not known whether China -- which has suffered significant political damage in recent months for having been caught exporting melamine-tainted pet food ingredients to the United States -- was among the countries that may have received the melamine-tainted U.S. products.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/30/AR2007053002227.html?referrer=email

[fasttense]

1. Just one more success for "free trade" and globalization.

We get too many more of these successes and it will kill us.

[Igel]

4. You're right. First the Chinese, then the Canadians--on our own soil!

Tembec (based in Ohio) is a unit of a Canadian company with the same name.

[Robbien]

2. "It remains unclear why Tembec did not stop using melamine" Ha

Why should Tembec stop using melamine? No US government entity is going to sanction the company. The US government no longer does anything which gets in the way of a company and its pursuit of profits.

[aquart]

3. "Unlikely"????? And they know this HOW?

By exhaustive study? By looking at kidney replacement rates among their customers? HOW DO THEY KNOW?

[Demeter]

5. Magic 8 Ball, I guess

[KansDem]

6. I can't fathom why *anybody* would put poison in *anything* to be eaten?!?!?

It's almost as if this was planned: "Hey, Joe! Should we put this poison in with the food?" "Yeah, sure, I guess it'll be o.k.."

It remains unclear why Tembec did not stop using melamine months ago...--You don't suppose $$$ had anything to do with this? And the fact that...

The FDA is trying to track the amounts shipped and to find out what countries those feeds went to...--The FDA appears to have become a totally-reactive agency. The FDA should be in on this before it becomes necessary to "find out" what happened.

The company used the chemical as a binding agent to hold feed granules in pellet form--I suggest the company look for organic binding agents. "Cheap" means "synthetic and poisonous"

[Lone_Star_Dem]

7. Had to be more profitable

If they accused the company in China of doing it to falsely raise protein levels, why are we to believe that a U.S. company didn't have the same motive?

I know their official story is that it was used as a binder, but if that binder also gave false high protein levels all the better.

[KansDem]

8. You have a point...

I know their official story is that it was used as a binder, but if that binder also gave false high protein levels all the better.

I hadn't thought of this.

[Demeter]

9. Maybe The Boss Thought It Was More Profitable

but I doubt that any real analysis would reach that conclusion, even before the lawsuits.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

10. Well, I didn't say that whoever made the decision was smart

I'm saying they were greedy and sought to increase their profits even if what they used was illegal. I'll also go so far as to say I don't think they ever expected to be called out for their actions. Either that or they felt comfortable that whatever punishment they receive would be minimal.

[pinniped]

11. I see China is not the only country trying to poison us. Boycott US food.

Humans Unlikely to Be Harmed

==

the company has stopped adding the chemical.


This makes perfect sense to me.

[19jet54]

12. Does anybody know?

How toxic is melamine for humans? I.E. Chocolate is very toxic for pets, but not humans. Just curious...

[mhatrw]

13. No, because it's never been meant for consumption for either humans of animals. n/t

[cosmicdot]

14. don't know, but the FDA issued a warning to its staff

@May 1st

FDA Warns Staff On Major Melamine Health Risks

http://www.itchmo.com/read/fda-melamine-surveilance-order-warns-against-major-health-risks_20070509


link to the FDA press conference re this latest announcement
http://www.itchmo.com/read/itchmo-liveblogging-fda-conference-3pm-et_20070530

[TroubleMan]

15. Even if we ingest a "harmless" amount, once you add up everything that we eat that might have it....

it can't be good. Sure whatever animal eats these melamine-tainted pellets might only pass on a harmless amount when we consume it, but I'm sure these "harmless amounts" add up now that we've discovered how much stuff has this crap in it and for how long we've been ingesting it.

Even if our body processes it, you would think ingesting this stuff over a long period of time, even in harmless amounts, would harm your kidneys or liver, which I'm guessing would be the organs that do the processing.

[orleans]

16. jesus! we're doing it too? didn't the chinese government give

the guy in charge of this a death sentence?

and now we're up to the same shit?

kill me!

[WePurrsevere]

17. Ask me if I completely believe anything the FDA says anymore. This is criminal...

I wonder if there's a list of all the FDA mess ups over the years. How often have they approved drugs that shouldn't have been w/o more study and not approved drugs that had been studied and should have been approved. It would also be interesting to see if there's any real difference between how FDA does things under a RepubliCON admin versus a Democrat Admin. My SWAG is that a Dem admin FDA puts people above profits and a 'CON admin puts profits above people. :grr:

[The Sushi Bandit]

18. FDA Says U.S. Suppliers Put Melamine in Feed

Source: Los Angeles Times & Gourmet Retailer

JUNE 01, 2007 -- Food safety officials Wednesday announced a recall of U.S.-made animal and fish feed products that contained melamine, the chemical linked to sickness and death in thousands of pets, reports the Los Angeles Times.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said the risks to human health were "very small" from eating cattle, sheep, goats, fish or shrimp that might have ingested feed produced by Tembec BTLSR Inc. of Toledo, Ohio, and Uniscope Inc. of Johnstown, Colo.

Both companies have voluntarily recalled the products. They were the first U.S. companies found to have melamine in their feed.


Read more: http://www.gourmetretailer.com/gourmetretailer/headlines/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003592793

[ruiner4u]

19. Yum!!!!!

Kidding and sarcasm aside, one little snippet in that article caught my eye.. "the chemical linked to sickness and death in thousands of pets"

Gee, up till now the FDA and news reports were saying it was just a handful of pets..

[napi21]

20. That headline sure looks misleading to me!

I read the post AND the linked article. I didn't read anything that said any mfg. ADDED melamine to the product, only that they used imported raw material from China that contained the melamine. The headline give the impression that these companies deliberately added melamine to their production, and as far as I know, that's not true.
I'm certainly not letting them off the hook, and I'll be quite surprised if Menu Foods survies this disaster...so be it. But I really don't believe any mfg. did this on purpose!

[Erika]

22. That's your belief and I respect it

But I certainly do not agree with it. Profit has become the God, internationally.

[napi21]

23. OH I agree...Profit is KING! But do you really believe those co's

KNEW there was a toxic additive in their product, or were they just greedy and bought the cheapest gluten product they could find?

[Princess Turandot]

24. This is an different incident than the pet food 'wheat gluten' fiasco..

Per the article

"Tembec, which supplied Uniscope with the ingredient that contained melamine, said it reformulated its product in April after hearing news of the problems associated with the chemical.

But a Tembec executive said the company believed before then that its product, which used melamine to improve binding properties, was safe.

"We assumed we were producing a compliant product for the applications and the markets into which it was going," said John Valley, an executive vice president for the Toledo subsidiary's parent company, Tembec Inc. of Quebec, Canada."

This (to me) says that the Tembec subsidiary in Ohio added melamine, unapproved for human consumption, to a product that they then sold to a US livestock/fish feed company to be used as an ingredient in the second company's final product. Tembec removed the melamine from their formula in April per the above after the Chinese pet food wheat gluten et al fiasco occurred. (Italics added by me.) The pet food poisoning is not the same as this incident.

The Chinese wheat gluten fiasco was clearly fraud (among other things) since the melamine resulted in a higher but false protein level analysis in the 'wheat gluten.' So far, Tembec appears to have knowingly added an unauthorized food ingredient to the raw material they were manufacturing, although there isn't enough info to know why they did that beyond what they said. (I realize that the underlying reason is virtually always $$; it's just not clear whether the melamine in this case made their product appear more valuable than it was or whether it was an ill advised shortcut etc.)

[anotherdrew]

27. did they KOW it was toxic? well, suposedly no one KNEW it was toxic until just recently

before that it was thought to not be especially harmful, so who's to say they weren't thinking with their wallets just like the Chinese businessmen were.

[aquart]

30. "Not be especially harmful."

Was it approved for human consumption? It was not.

How "especially harmful" does something have to be before it's NOT OKAY with you?

[anotherdrew]

34. I follow the precautionary principle, so I say test everything

I was just trying to get into the heads of the people who ran the feed factory...

[Cobalt-60]

32. craven negligence

The deal was too good to be true.
So they didn't check it out.

[gravity]

33. This incident will lower their profits though

While profit is king, giving people poison will likely lower long term profits. It might work in China, but it would just be a bad business decision in the states.

[Erika]

21. Hives and sick stomachs abound here

which never occurred before. The numbers affected are shocking.

Soylent Green next.

[Newsjock]

25. Hives? Stomach aches??

OK, this I've not heard before. But, um, er, yes, I've had more than a little of both in recent weeks/months. Link, please?

[Erika]

28. This is personal acknowlegement

Basically co workers and friends. People who have said they've never had these problems before.

[tiptoe]

31. What geographical area are those symptoms in "co-workers and friends"?

[anotherdrew]

26. if investigation shows they did intentionally add the melamine, they should do time for fraud

...at least fraud; reckless endangerment, I don't know... there must be 10 different laws they could and should be charged with.

[aquart]

29. Never mind recall. Let's talk hard time.

Let's talk parading the executives in public with signs saying, "I poisoned your food."