It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Risking Food Safety, FDA to allow Slaughterhouses to Self Police

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Well ya gotta admit that the FDA hasn't exactly done a great job protecting the public in the past.

Not to mention that making people sick is not very good for business.




posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Bad mortgages nearly collapsed the global economy. None of the "regulations" prevented it.

Just because a government organization was created does not mean that organization is effective. Many would argue kids are dumber after the Dept of Ed was created. HUD?

One of the reasons there is so much food waste is because of regulations. Regulations are what prevents people from feeding the homeless.

Look, again, I am NOT arguing that regulations aren't needed. Just saying regulations need evaluating from time to time and there may be more effective and cost efficient ways.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated


Look, again, I am NOT arguing that regulations aren't needed. Just saying regulations need evaluating from time to time and there may be more effective and cost efficient ways.


That isn't what this is though. This isn't an investigation into whether there are better and more cost efficient ways to regulate food safety.

It's putting the safety of food into the hands of the companies that produce it. By cutting the power of the regulatory agencies that were created because of companies failure to properly police themselves.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Don't want to risk getting E. Coli or Salmonella? Buy more expensive food, even if you were buying the cheaper stuff for a reason. There's money to be made!



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: underwerks

Well ya gotta admit that the FDA hasn't exactly done a great job protecting the public in the past.

Not to mention that making people sick is not very good for business.


I'd rather not depend on the free market to decide whether or not my food is clean.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Because self policing always works!!



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Oh, it is more expensive alright. Walk into that place and you are assaulted with the smugness of it all. They have weekly wine tasting for the more refined smug arseholes.

As far as the food being any safer I wouldn't know because like I said it is all laid out just like they do in public. You can buy what they already cut up or leave. I think there may be even more risk involved with those places because I doubt they throw out what doesn't sell the day before and their foot traffic is less. More money doesn't mean better it just means it costs more.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: underwerks


Look, again, I am NOT arguing that regulations aren't needed. Just saying regulations need evaluating from time to time and there may be more effective and cost efficient ways.


I have no qualms about reviewing regulations to determine their relevance and efficacy.

However, it’s alll too often the case that those charged with effecting those reviews are being drawn from the very industries which stand to gain the most by weakening, or eliminating, the regulations protecting the public. And then they are often re-hires into those same industries as consultants and lobbyists!

A situation where hiring “a fox to guard the hen house”, is not only seen as non-problematic, but as “industry standard practice”.

And, when we are talking about large corporations producing food for tens or hundreds of thousands, an incident or two of contamination, even if a number of people die, isn’t likely to end the corporation.

How many times has Tyson foods, for example, had to recall product due to contamination (discovered After consumers were sucked)?

And yet those chicken tenders keep filling up the freezers of America.

Too big to fail applies to more than just the bank and finance industry.

How do we keep the “reviewers” insulated from the power of the industries they are meant to oversee?

How do we insure that their input and directives are enacted in the face of industry lobby money acting to dilute or deny those inputs and directives?

Who watches the watchers, and how do we do it?
edit on 23-9-2019 by Bhadhidar because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-9-2019 by Bhadhidar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Your headline says the FDA is changing the regulations..

It's should read the USDA.

I also noticed trump has been mentioned several times, but I haven't noticed where anyone has linked to where he has instructed the usda to make this change.
I'm not saying he didn't but is this change coming from the president?
edit on 23-9-2019 by Bluntone22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: underwerks

Your headline says the FDA is changing the regulations..

It's should read the USDA.

I also noticed trump has been mentioned several times, but I haven't noticed where anyone has linked to where he has instructed the usda to make this change.
I'm not saying he didn't but is this change coming from the president?


I said in the OP the administration..


Another brilliant move from the administration that appoints oil company executives as stewards of the environment, and enemies of education as those tasked with protecting it.


Trump appointed the head of the FDA, who is behind this:


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump has chosen Dr. Scott Gottlieb, a conservative health policy expert with deep ties to the pharmaceutical industry, to lead the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the White House said on Friday.


[url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-health-fda-gottlieb/trump-chooses-gottlieb-to-run-fda-pharma-breathes-sigh-of-relief-idUSKBN16H2AM]Link[/u rl]

Trump owns this through his appointments and his lack of disagreement. Unless you want to argue that Donald Trump has no idea what the agencies that answer to him are doing.
edit on 23-9-2019 by underwerks because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-9-2019 by underwerks because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Wait until a republicans kid dies from eating a tainted hotdog. The regulations will be back stronger than ever. It's an established pattern.

The democrats should uses this as a talking point for 2020. Even the GOP won't support this BS.
edit on 23-9-2019 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

For some reason the link function isn't working. Here's the link from the post above to a PDF describing the oversight the FDA has over food safety:

PDF


Federal responsibility for the regulation of food safety in the U.S. primarily falls under the FDA and the USDA-FSIS



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

That's an emotional response...

The incentive is that your company winds up going out of business if a consumer gets sick.

I am NOT saying regulations aren't needed. Just saying I want the actual facts in regards to the regulations and if they are effective, etc. As I pointed, there is often a lot of hysteria and spin in regards to what certain regulations actually do and if they are needed.

I am actually in the process of starting a food business. The regulatory burden is HUGE.


I agree a company can lose billions in lawsuits and lose a ton of business in crappy work. Reading more it seems this has been floating around for 20 years and it is to change antiquated regulations to allow new systems to be more efficient. One main point that is continually overlooked is that there will still be FDA officials at EVERY plant still.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks




Risking Food Safety,

And animal welfare.
Sad move.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero


Reading more it seems this has been floating around for 20 years and it is to change antiquated regulations to allow new systems to be more efficient.


What are the new systems and how are they more efficient?



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated




From purely a statistical standpoint, it would seem to me that having large producers in general would be more susceptible to food contamination vs small butchers, etc.


Large producers operate in a very rigid fashion, almost like robots if you will.
A grocery store kitchen doesn't work in that manner. That could be very good or bad. From what my friend told me, it is actually very bad.




As always though, people are addicted to low prices.


That is right on the money, and is exactly the reason we have any food issues at all!



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Well I honestly don't know how much input a president has on the day to day operation of every government department.
But as with every person on top they do share in the responsibility for their underlings.
This is under trump.

But I should point out that trump nominated the head of the USDA. The senate approved the nomination 87-11. Do they get off without any responsibility?

And this is not set in stone, it must be voted into effect.

"Fortunately, Congress can still have a say on whether the USDA’s radical overhaul of pork inspection is allowed to go forward. An amendment put forward in the House of Representatives would ensure that no funds are used to implement this rule until all of the investigations into the USDA’s handling of the rule are completed. The Senate has yet to agree to the measure, but it should. The USDA should not be allowed to play politics with the safety of the American food supply and workers’ lives. "

Checks and balances works I suppose.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

What are the new systems and how are they more efficient?


Well, I'm glad you asked... It's funny I Googled this topic and almost every article had the same statements in them as if 100s of articles were created from one..hmmm

Here is an article from May 2017 that spells it all out as to why this industry needs a major overhaul, and much of the push to do this was not evil Trump, it was two Harvard Law student groups, the first of many from other major universities.

Enjoy the read



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

That article definitely reads differently than the one in the op.

Journalists have gotten kinda lazy with their cut and paste reporting..



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: underwerks

What are the new systems and how are they more efficient?


Well, I'm glad you asked... It's funny I Googled this topic and almost every article had the same statements in them as if 100s of articles were created from one..hmmm

Here is an article from May 2017 that spells it all out as to why this industry needs a major overhaul, and much of the push to do this was not evil Trump, it was two Harvard Law student groups, the first of many from other major universities.

Enjoy the read



Good read. That is exactly what I was getting at when I said that some of the regulations may need to be streamlined as they are ineffective and may be doing more harm than good. A good counter argument.




top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join