Impact of meat recall beginning to show

[flashl]

Source: USA Today

The full costs of the biggest beef recall ever are beginning to emerge six weeks later and they are hitting retailers, meat processors, other businesses and the government.

In California alone, more than $1.1 million has been spent to destroy the beef and products containing it that were distributed via the federal school lunch program, state officials say.

That covers 4.2 million pounds of beef and 155,000 cases of processed food, says Phyllis Bramson-Paul, a director of nutritional services for the state education department.

California was one of 46 states that got beef from now-closed Westland/Hallmark Meat through the National School Lunch Program. But officials say it was likely one of the largest recipients because Westland/Hallmark's plant was in Chino, Calif. Westland/Hallmark recalled 143 million pounds of beef Feb. 17.

USA Today

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2008-03-30-meat-recall_N.htm

---

How is it that when regulations are enforced for public safety reasons, there is always a follow-up with dire warnings about business 'costs'? Is there a formula in existence that measures human costs when businesses fail to follow standards?

[tech3149]

1. Simply put, the economic equasion doesn't assign a value for human life

[MadMaddie]

6. We should be specific, "The Republican Economic Equation"

doesn't assign a value for human life.

It's all about making themselves richer no matter what the cost.

[rasputin1952]

2. I find it amazing that anyone could put a "cost" on a public

health problem.

Those that allowed the "downers" into the system should pay for the resolution of the problem, since they were/are aware of what was/is happening. the only way they ever seem to "get it", is when they get hit in the wallet.

Regardless though, the problem needs to be dealt with...the $1.1 million equates to about 30 seconds of our presence in Iraq/Afghanistan, interesting that the media does not bring that to light. After all, the $1.1 million is dealing w/a serious problem that could easily run into the billions of $ if disease runs rampant through the population of those that might have consumed the tainted meat. Prevention always costs less that resolution.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. Exactly and interestingly, they don't factor in the health care costs

borne by the consumers when illnesses result due to salmonella or e. coli or listeria or any myriad of bugs that shouldn't been in our food. The $1.1 million is a drop in the bucket. It's that ounce of prevention and that stitch in time...

[fasttense]

4. How dare the USDA keep these corporations from selling tainted food.

That's basically what the pro free market idiots are telling us. The end of the article makes it sound like the USDA overreacted.

"The USDA says the beef posed only a "remote" health risk. No illnesses have been reported. There was no evidence of contamination, as is the case in most meat recalls, the USDA says.

The recall was done because the USDA says the plant didn't always get USDA clearance when slaughtering non-ambulatory cattle, making the meat unfit to eat."

Yeah those non-ambulatory animals are just so tasty, harboring everything from mad cow disease to huff an mouth disease. Some of the diseases, the non-ambulatory cattle could have, don't show up in people until years later. And the tests for some of the diseases aren't able to identify a contagion especially if it is a new strain. http://www.nodowners.org/BSE_final_rule.htm

So don't worry, even if the USDA says "there was no evidence of contamination" (and exactly what does that mean? Did they test for every strain of disease? Did they just do a visual inspection of the slaughter house?) The meat could still be seriously infected with mad cow disease and no one will ever know until they get sick and die.

[Gonnuts]

5. Doesn't bother me

I gave-up red meat some time ago, not just for health, but for political reasons too. But is wasn't until I watched the documentary "Earthlings" and saw what horrid conditions animals are keep in, how they're slaughtered and saw the poisons that are given to them and in turn you're putting into your own body that made me give-up all meat and my physical and mental health are much the better for it.

So, eat your meat. Contribute to the destruction of your environment. Get sick, go insane. Enjoy your meal.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1282796533661048967&hl=en

[High Plains]

8. Thanks. Maybe I'll eat me an insufferable, smart-ass vegetarian.

[defendandprotect]

7. Is there a connection between animal-exploitation and violence against humans?

I think so --