Subject: Food Safety Week - 8/12/94
From: [email-masked] (Michelle Thom)
Date: 16 Aug 1994 19:49:33 -0000
Newsgroups: alt.sustainable.agriculture

Food Safety Week
Produced by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
August 12, 1994
Volume 2, Number 17
_____________________________________________
HEADLINES
_____________________________________________
- RENO REQUESTS INDEPENDENT COUNSEL FOR ESPY CHICKEN FIASCO
- STATE TO REVOKE LICENSE OF BUSINESS THAT USED UNAPPROVED 
CHEMICAL
- USDA ISSUES NEW POULTRY INSPECTION PROPOSAL
- IRRADIATE BEEF, PANEL RECOMMENDS
- HEALTHY MEALS ACT PASSES HOUSE
- FRENCH GRAPE CROP HURT BY RAIN
- PROCESSORS CAMPAIGN TO CHANGE MILK'S'S IMAGE
- rBGH NEWS OF THE WEEK
- AND PST RIGHT BEHIND
- TAYLOR APPOINTED TO HEAD FSIS
_____________________________________________
NEWS SUMMARIES
_____________________________________________
RENO REQUESTS INDEPENDENT COUNSEL FOR ESPY CHICKEN FIASCO

Attorney General Janet Reno has asked a federal judge to appoint an 
independent counsel to look into allegations that Secretary of 
Agriculture Mike Espy illegally accepted gifts from chicken mogul 
Don Tyson.  The FBI has been investigating whether Espy's 
acceptance of free travel and sporting events tickets constitute a 
violation of the 1907 Meat Inspection Act, which prohibits USDA 
employees from accepting gifts from industries which they may 
regulate.  Reno said thus far, the FBI had not been able to make a 
connection between Espy and the gifts, but added that the law 
required her to appoint an independent counselor unless there "is 
clear and convincing evidence" of no violation.

The allegations involve Espy and two of his aids.  One of the aids, 
Ronald Blackley, is alleged to have halted a department initiative 
that would have imposed more stringent inspection standards on the 
poultry industry.  Other allegations involve the shredding of 
documents on the poultry proposal within the USDA.  White House 
Press Secretary DeeDee Meyers said President Clinton "stands 100 
percent behind" Secretary Espy.

Espy has reportedly retained a high-powered Washington attorney to 
defend himself.  A top aide cautioned that the move was strictly a 
precautionary measure.  Espy hired Reid Weingarten, who 
successfully defended Commerce Secretary Ron Brown against 
charges that he was offered money by the Vietnamese government 
to lift trade sanctions.  "There isn't at all even remotely criminal in 
this matter," Weingarten said of the Espy case.

Source:  Michelle Groenke, "Midwest Farming Today," UPI, August 9, 
1994; "Reno Asks 'Poultrygate' Special Prosecutor," Farming Today, 
UPI, August 10, 1994; Michelle Groenke, "Midwest Farming Today," 
UPI, August 10, 1994; Maggie McNeil, "Agriculture's Espy Hires 
Lawyer for Poultry Probe," REUTER, July 26, 1994; "Espy Denies 
Favoritism Toward Tyson Foods," REUTER, August 5, 1994; Robert 
Greene, "Espy-Attorney," AP, July 27, 1994; "Lawyer Denies Any 
Misconduct By USDA's Espy," REUTER, August 9, 1994.

STATE TO REVOKE LICENSE OF BUSINESS THAT USED UNAPPROVED 
CHEMICAL

The Minnesota Department of Agriculture has moved to revoke the 
license of Y. George Roggy, whose Fumicon company has been 
accused of using an unregistered pesticide on millions of bushels of 
General Mills oats. Commissioner of Agriculture Elton Redalen 
proposed the license revocation and a hearing by an administrative 
law judge has been set for September 1.  "The public health and 
environment could be threatened by the continued operations of Mr.  
Roggy and his company," said Bill Oemichen, assistant commissioner 
of agriculture.  Roggy has not commented on the move.  

Last month, USDA officials said they believed Roggy substituted 
Dursban, or chlorphyrifos-ethyl, for Reldan 4E, or chlorphyrifos-
methyl, in treating oats stored by General Mills.  The oats were later 
made into cereals.  Dursban has not been approved by the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for use on oats.  "We're very 
pleased," said Austin Sullivan, vice president for corporate 
communications at General Mills.  "This guy's conduct was outrageous 
and created a lot of problems for a lot of people."  General Mills said 
last month that it would take a charge against its last fiscal year 
rather than try to sell the cereal stocks to the public.

Source:  Tony Kennedy, "State Goes After Edina Pest Control 
Contractor Accused in General Mills Tainted-Oats Case," 
MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE, July 26, 1994; "Charges Brought in 
Pesticide Case," AGRI NEWS, August 4, 1994.

USDA ISSUES NEW POULTRY INSPECTION PROPOSAL

Last month, the Clinton administration issued a new proposal for 
poultry inspection.  Secretary Espy said the proposal includes 
significant improvements in the system, which came into being in 
1957.  Under the new Poultry Enhancement Program (PEP), a single 
poultry inspection system would replace the multiple types currently 
in place.  In addition, the PEP will revise the finished product 
standards for poultry to eliminate fecal contamination; give federal 
inspectors more authority to slow or stop a line; create one new 
inspection position on the line; mandate the use of antimicrobial 
treatments such as rinses and washes; require 100% reinspection  of 
carcasses; and require improved record-keeping procedures.  "We 
are also continuing to aggressively target our research efforts to 
develop a rapid test for the detection of bacterial contamination," 
Espy added, saying he has directed the Agricultural Research Service 
(ARS) to develop such a test.  "This proposal is part of our ongoing 
efforts to use the best available science in conjunction with good 
common sense to improve the safety of our food supply," said Espy.   

Maintaining that it already operates under a zero-tolerance policy, 
the poultry industry responded that it would support Espy.  
Consumer groups, however, said they were not convinced.  "The 
poultry you buy at the store may look a little better," said Carol 
Tucker Foremen of the Safe Food Coalition, but "it may be heavily 
contaminated with bacteria that are not visible and can be detected 
only by scientific tests."

Source:  Robert H. Brown, "USDA Proposes Poultry Inspection 
Changes," FEEDSTUFFS, July 18, 1994; Leila Corcoran, "USDA Proposes 
Stricter Poultry Inspection Standards," REUTER, July 11, 1994; "Safe 
Food Isn't Too Much to Ask For," ST. PETERSBURG TIMES, July 10, 
1994.

IRRADIATE BEEF, PANEL RECOMMENDS

Last month, a panel of experts recommended that the USDA approve 
the use of irradiation for ground beef as soon as possible.  Dr. Martin 
Brotman of the California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco 
testified that "there are no known safety issues associated with 
radiated foods."  He added that it would cost an estimated $10 
million for each meat processing plant to install a system for 
irradiating meat.  But "we must give the safest possible product to 
the consumer," he added.  The panel did not recommend that all beef 
be irradiated; rather, it called for consumers to be given a choice 
between treated beef and traditionally processed beef.  Brotman 
stressed that even if irradiation is approved, Americans should not 
assume their beef is safe.  "You cannot guarantee sterility.  What you 
have to do is reduce the risk."  Other recommendations included:  a 
public education program to discourage eating raw or uncooked meat 
and poultry products; research into understanding how E coli 
contamination is spread; and educating doctors to be more alert to 
the consequences of E coli bacteria so it is not confused with other 
diseases.  The forum was sponsored by the American 
Gastroenterological Association Foundation.

Carol Tucker Foreman noted there were no consumer groups 
represented on the panel.  She said placing the burden on the 
consumer to cook meat thoroughly misses the mark.  

Co-sponsors of the panel include the American Meat Institute, the 
Centers for Disease Control, the FDA , the National Institute of Allergy 
and Infectious Diseases and the National Restaurant Association.  The 
co-sponsors have agreed to meet in 10 weeks to pursue the panel's 
recommendations.  

An op-ed in the CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR echoed the panel's 
recommendations.  Michael Fumento of the Competitive Enterprise 
Institute said irradiation should be approved but won't be if 
"activists" get in the way.  Fumento said critics of irradiation simply 
want more government regulation.  He goes on to say that cobalt 60, 
used in irradiation, is safer "than the gasoline that powers our cars or 
the natural gas that heats our homes."

New Jersey Senators Bill Bradley and Frank Lautenberg introduced 
legislation that would shift responsibility for meat inspection from 
the USDA to a newly created independent agency.  The bill also 
requires safe cooking and handling instructions and sets strict 
guidelines for restaurants and other commercial food services.  New 
Jersey Representative Robert Toricelli introduced companion 
legislation in the House last spring.  The move came in the wake of a 
serious outbreak of E coli poisoning in New Jersey, which has made 
45 people ill since June 1.  "Its time to do something about it -- get 
the fox out of the chicken coop," said Lautenberg.

Source:  Eva Emerson, "Panel Recommends Irradiating Beef," UPI, July 
13, 1994; "Radiation of Beef to Kill Bacteria Is Urged," NEW YORK 
TIMES, July 14, 1994; Michael Fumento, "U.S. Should Allow 
Irradiation as Means of Preserving Meat," CHRISTIAN SCIENCE 
MONITOR, July 21, 1994;  "New Jersey Senators Unveil Bill on Meat 
Inspection," REUTER, August 2, 1994.

HEALTHY MEALS ACT PASSES HOUSE

Last month, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a measure that 
establishes a minimum for the use of agricultural commodities in the 
school lunch program.  The measure was part of the Healthy Meals 
for Healthy Americans Act.  The House Committee on Agriculture 
successfully amended the bill to mandate that at least 12% of federal 
assistance provided to the school lunch program take the form of 
agricultural commodities.  

Source:  "House Approves Healthy Meals for Healthy Americans Act," 
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE NEWS RELEASE, July 21, 1994.

FRENCH GRAPE CROP HURT BY RAIN

Consumers may pay a little more for French wine in the near future.  
Thunder and hailstorms have rolled across much of France over the 
past few weeks, causing serious damage to many vineyards while 
leaving others untouched.  Experts say that price increases will 
ultimately depend on the quality of the wine.  This marks the second 
year that the grape harvest has been affected by adverse weather.

Source:  John Ridding, "Too Much Water and Wine Don't Mix," 
FINANCIAL TIMES,  July 29, 1994.

PROCESSORS CAMPAIGN TO CHANGE MILK'S'S IMAGE

America's dairy processors are launching a campaign aimed at 
changing milk's fat-laden image.  The Milk Industry Foundation 
(MIF), a coalition of industry groups, said it expects to spend about 
$60 million on the campaign.  The campaign will include media ads 
and billboards.  MIF acknowledges it faces a formidable challenge as 
more adults are abandoning milk and teenagers, a seemingly 
insurmountable obstacle, prefer soft drinks and iced tea.  "The aim of 
our effort is to have consumers put the product back in the 
refrigerator.  We need to address the confusion about milk and what 
is and isn't in it," said Charlie Decker, president of MIF.    Decker says 
there is "a milk for everyone."  The New York office of the public 
relations firm Bozell Worldwide has agreed to take on the campaign.  
Bozell is the same firm that came to the assistance of the National 
Pork Council with its "the other white meat" campaign.  

Source:  Kevin Goldman, "Milk Processors Plan Campaign to Change 
Drink's Fatty Image," WALL STREET JOURNAL, July 29, 1994.

rBGH NEWS OF THE WEEK

Cedar Grove Cheese, based in Plains, Wisconsin, has announced plans 
to expand its processing facilities.  Cedar Grove made headlines this 
spring when it became the first company to label its product 
"Farmer-certified rBGH-Free."  Bob Wills, owner of the plant, said 
sales of his products, which are made with milk from cows that have 
not been treated with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH), 
are up 20%.  The new plant will increase his production by 25%.  "We 
seem to have some momentum going," Wills said.  Despite opposition 
when Wills began to label the product, Wisconsin Agriculture 
Secretary Alan Tracy joined him for the groundbreaking ceremony.  
Wills added that he is annoyed with a state proposal to require the 
FDA's suggested contextual language on labels.  This means a 
paragraph would have to be added which says something to the 
effect that the government believes there is be no difference 
between naturally occurring BGH and rBGH.  The department will 
hold public hearings on its labeling proposal August 23 in Green Bay; 
August 25 in Eau Claire; August 30 in Milwaukee; and September 1 
in Madison.

The Pure Food Campaign began running television ads criticizing 
rBGH in Texas last week.  The ads will run during showings of "The 
Oprah Winfrey Show" and "Wheel of Fortune." 

A recent article in the New York magazine METROLAND reveals the 
dissatisfaction of one dairy farmer with Monsanto's rBGH product, 
Posilac.  John Shumway, who farms in western New York state, said 
he had to stop using Posilac recently because of the deleterious 
effects he believed it was having on his cows.  "I've probably had to 
sell 50 cows on it and I've got a 200-head herd so I've lost a quarter 
of my dairy herd," he said.  He said his profits were up while using 
rBGH; however, his cows suffered from mastitis, swollen hocks and 
weight loss.  "Every time I went to give a shot, I had 20 cases of 
mastitis.  It's been devastating."  Tom McDermott, a spokesperson for 
Monsanto, said "We are not seeing this kind of problem.  We are 
obligated to report any adverse effects to the FDA."  He said the 
company was "doing call-outs" to maintain contact with farmers but 
would not comment on how often those "call-outs" occurred.  "I'm not 
saying we have not received any calls from farmers who believe 
their problems are related to the use of our product, but in most 
cases when we investigate we find it isn't related."  He said that by 
following Monsanto's recommendations for good herd management, 
nutrition and "udder health" maintenance, farmers will avoid the 
adverse effects of rBGH.  Shumway responded, "I can't really find 
fault with the drug that much because it did what it said it would do 
-- raise production.  Now I'm about $25,000 in the red.  So I hope 
I've learned my lesson."

In a related story, the Wisconsin Farmers Union has announced it is 
beginning to document all cases of adverse health effects on animals 
treated with rBGH.  Mark Kastel of WFU said his organization will 
collect data on herd health irregularities from farmers who are using 
it.  An 800 number has been set up to handle calls from producers.  
"The purpose of our data collection is to determine the actual effect 
on dairy cattle being injected with the hormone," he said.  

The WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL reports that groups lobbying the 
labeling effort in Wisconsin spent $339,000 collectively this past 
legislative session.  Monsanto spent a total of $73,047 on five 
lobbyists.  The Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation led the pack, 
spending $156,649.  The other groups include the Wisconsin 
Federation of Cooperatives, which spent $44,093; the National 
Farmers Organization, which spent $22,560; the Wisconsin Restaurant 
Association, which spent $21,861; the Wisconsin Dairy Products 
Association, which spent $12,818; and Upjohn, which spent $8,291.  
A. Gerald Barnett, Monsanto's director of governmental and 
environmental affairs, defended his company's spending as an effort 
to educate, not pressure, state lawmakers.  Dan Poulson of the 
Wisconsin Farm Bureau said his group opposed the labeling effort 
because it puts milk in a bad light.  The Animal Health Institute had 
yet to file its lobbying report.  The groups spent a total of 3,376 
hours at the legislature.

Four groups recently filed a petition in the state of California, which 
claims the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is 
violating state law by not notifying consumers about their purchases 
of rBGH milk.  The petition was filed July 27 by the Consumers Union, 
the Community Alliance with Family Farmers, the California Dairy 
Campaign and the Natural Resources Defense Council.  According to 
the petition, the department is required to make public the sale of all 
livestock hormone drugs.  Failure to do this has denied consumers 
the choice between rBGH-free milk and milk derived from cows 
treated with the drug, the groups claim.  "The CDFA has done 
everything it can to make it impossible for consumers to just say no 
to milk produced with synthetic hormones," said Harry Snyder of the 
Consumers Union west coast office.  CDFA Secretary Henry Voss 
accused the groups of telling "half truths.  CDFA is not required to 
track and make public the sales of all livestock hormone drugs, but 
only those which have an adverse biological effect on humans and/or 
animals."  

An recent op-ed piece in the WALL STREET JOURNAL criticizes the 
Consumers Union for its position on rBGH.  Written by a former 
employee, the article states, "CU's most valuable asset -- its 
credibility -- is in danger of sliding down the drain, because of the 
organization's campaign against bovine somatotropin."

And finally, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), 
famous for its recent critiques of movie theater popcorn and Mexican 
food, is facing conflict of interest allegations.  Last month, CSPI's 
newsletter NUTRITION ACTION HEALTHLETTER contained an article 
essentially condoning the products of food biotechnology, such as 
rBGH and the Flavr Savr.  Writer David Schardt said he spent "long 
hours" researching all sides of the issue and had to conclude that 
rBGH and the Flavr Savr are safe.  At the same time, Schardt 
recommends that companies be required to demonstrate the safety 
of their products to the FDA and that genetically engineered foods 
carry a label "until consumers become more comfortable with 
biotechnology."  John Stauber, editor of the publication PR WATCH, 
revealed that Bonnie Liebman, head of CSPI's nutrition department, 
is married to Eric Flamm, a former staffer in the FDA's Office of 
Biotechnology.  Flamm now works as an analyst in the agency's Office 
of Policy.  A May 1993 article in THE COUNTRY TODAY has Flamm 
debating the Wisconsin Rural Development Center's Kat Griffith on 
labeling genetically engineered foods.  At the forum, Flamm states 
that the FDA "didn't see how the use of genetic engineering per se 
would impart some necessary difference in food that would call for 
labeling."

Source:  Joel McNair, "'rBGH Free' Cedar Grove to Expand," AGRI 
VIEW, July 29, 1994; Joel McNair, "Rifkin Running Anti-BGH TV Ads," 
AGRI VIEW, August 5, 1994; Amy Poe, METROLAND MAGAZINE, 
August 11, 1994; "Wisconsin Farmers Union to Collect Data on Animal 
Health Impact of Bovine Growth Hormone," WFU NEWS RELEASE, July 
26, 1994; Michael C. Buelow, "rBGH Lobbies Spend $339,000," 
WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL, August 3, 1994; "BST Opponents 
Petition California," DAIRY PROFIT WEEKLY, August 8, 1994; Virginia 
Ellis, "Group Calls for Disclosure on Cow Hormone," LOS ANGELES 
TIMES, July 26, 1994; Larry Katzenstein, "Consumers Union 
Credibility -- Good But Slipping," WALL STREET JOURNAL, August 8, 
1994; David Schardt, "Diving Into the Gene Pool," NUTRITION ACTION 
HEALTHLETTER, July/August 1994; "Safety Presents Thorny Problem 
in Genetically Altered Food," THE COUNTRY TODAY, May 1993.

AND PST RIGHT BEHIND

Rumor has it that the FDA may soon be ready to consider porcine 
somatotropin (PST), a hog hormone intended to boost feeding 
efficiency and produce leaner meat.  The article speculates that the 
approval of rBGH has opened the door for PST.  "If the bovine 
product wouldn't have flown, I'm afraid all the rest of this would 
have shut down as well," said John Klindt of the U.S. Meat Animal 
Research Center.  He said Monsanto has already had success with a 
PST capsule that is inserted under the skin behind a pig's ear and 
absorbed into the circulatory system.  "The loin eyes are bigger and 
the fat covering is less," he said.  Richard Perrin, an ag economist 
with the University of Nebraska, said researchers are still working on  
a way to deliver PST as a feed additive.  "If they were to overnight, 
come up with a feed-additive version, then the cost of that would be 
pretty minimal," he said.  Producer Kent Gansebom, said, "I'd say at 
the present time, everybody has backed away from it ... nobody is 
pushing the issue at this time."

Source:  "Pork's BST:  Door May Be Open to PST," THE NEIGHBOR, July 
29, 1994.

TAYLOR APPOINTED TO HEAD FSIS

Michael Taylor, Deputy Commissioner for Policy at the FDA, has been 
appointed to head the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) at 
the USDA.  His appointment was applauded by both industry and 
consumer groups.  Commissioner David Kessler said, "Mike Taylor 
comes at issues from the public perspective.  That is what this 
appointment represents.  It's an important shift."  A  conflict of  
interest investigation was prompted by three representatives in 
April of this year when it was revealed that Taylor was an attorney 
with the law firm King & Spaulding, which represents Monsanto.  
Taylor's department at the FDA was responsible for issuing labeling 
guidelines for rBGH and rBGH-free milk.

Source:  Carole Sugarman, "A People-Oriented Lawyer for Meat 
Inspection," WASHINGTON POST, July 28, 1994; Marian Burros, 
"Eating Well," NEW YORK TIMES, July 27, 1994.
_____________________________________________
RESOURCES
_____________________________________________
HEALTHY SCHOOL LUNCH ACTION GUIDE is a publication of 
EarthSave.  The book serves as a comprehensive guide to making 
healthy food choices for children and parents.  It also explains the 
structure and politics behind the USDA's school lunch program.  The 
guide is available for $4.00 plus $2.00 shipping.  For more 
information, contact EarthSave, 706 Frederick Street, Santa Cruz, CA 
95062, Tel:  (408) 423-4069.
_____________________________________________
CALENDAR OF EVENTS
_____________________________________________
INTRODUCTION TO SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS, June 27-
August 18, 1994, Davis, CA.  FFI, contact:  Mark Van Horn, Student 
Experimental Farm, Department of Agronomy, University of 
California, Davis, CA 95616, Tel:  (916) 752-7645.

NATIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE, 
September/October 1994, St. Paul, MN.  FFI, contact:  Land 
Stewardship Project, 14758 Ostlund Trail North, Marine on St. Croix, 
MN 55047, Tel:  (612) 433-2770.

FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY:  CHALLENGES FOR AFRICA, September 
12-16, 1994, Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe.  FFI, contact:  Senior Assistant 
Registrar, Institute of Food Nutrition and Family Sciences, University 
of Zimbabwe, P.O. Box 167, Mount Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe.

DOWN TO EARTH:  PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF ECOLOGICAL 
ECONOMICS, October 24-28, 1994, San Jose, Costa Rica.  FFI, contact:  
III International Conference of Ecological Economics, P.O. Box 555-
3000, Heredia, Costa Rica.
_____________________________________________
Produced by:  Michelle Thom, Institute for Agriculture and Trade 
Policy, 1313 5th Street SE Suite 303, Minneapolis, MN 55414, Tel:  
(612) 379-5980  Fax:  (612) 379-5982  EMail:  [email-masked] or 
[email-masked].  In addition to this news bulletin, the 
Institute publishes a variety of news bulletins on agriculture, the 
environment and international trade.  All bulletins may be 
reproduced and distributed freely without prior permission as long 
as proper attribution is included.  A copy of any publication in which 
an IATP bulletin is cited would be appreciated.