don's report archive

by Donald B. Ardell, Ph. D.

Wellness in the Headlines
(Don's Report to the World)

"Anybody who thinks we only have one mad cow in America is smoking the No.1 crop in California."
--Howard Lyman, the cattle rancher who, along with Oprah Winfrey, was famously (and unsuccessfully) sued by the Texas meat industry in 1966 for allegedly making false and disparaging statements about the industry.)

One of my all-time favorite books was The Jungle by Upton Sinclair, published in 1906. It created a public outcry against the beef industry and sparked government investigations of Chicago meatpacking plants. Soon, stringent food laws were passed to protect consumers from the hazards of unsanitary meat conditions in the beef industry. Most of us assumed the problems Sinclair described were long gone, attended to and put right nearly a century ago. Those of us who assumed that were wrong.

Everyone knows about the mad cow that turned up last month in Washington State. Howard Lyman thinks we are looking at the possibility of a terrible epidemic. "Do the math," he says. "Any scientist will tell you that one mad cow tells you there are thousands more." ("Who's Mad Now?" by Reilly Capps, Washington Post, January 7, 2004.) When Oprah vowed, "I will never eat a burger again," she became the subject of the State of Texas' number one bumper sticker: "The Only Mad Cow in Texas is Oprah."

Less well known than potential mad cows in the food supply are routine beef industry practices that could pose much greater threats to the meat-eating population than a herd of lunatic cows. These include practices that allow the slaughter of sick animals classed as "downers" in stockyards, and the custom of feeding cows reprocessed manure, blood and other animal parts. These animals, in turn, are processed for ingredients to make medications, food supplements, gelatin ("natural flavorings") and cosmetics. Sound disgusting? Don't get me started--I might be tempted to do my best Upton Sinclair imitation and have you retching in a few paragraphs. Besides, I don't want to see my name on the bumpers of Florida cattle growers.

Of course, there is always the possibility that the beef industry is right, that is, all this glop is good for us, health-wise and economically. But, don't count on it.

"Is the USDA not looking out for us?" you may be wondering. Not according to the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM). They released a press release in early January containing this bold claim: "The USDA cares far less about public safety than about cattle industry profits and has failed to enact the safety measures we have been recommending for years." That's a little scary, don't you think?

So, what's the harm in a few carcasses that nearly died before they were whacked the normal way we murder cows? Furthermore, what's the harm in a modest amount of animal byproducts? Are we being a little squeamish here?

Not really. Ingredients in beef industry products that are routinely consumed include prions, which are difficult-to-destroy, infectious agents. They are nearly indestructible. According to a NY Times story entitled "With Diseased Animals, Disposal Isn't Simple" (January 6, 2004), "even after being steamed, frozen, disinfected, zapped with ultraviolet light or bombarded with X-rays, tissue from sick animals can still spread the illness" (transmitted via prions).

Here are a few changes in beef industry practices being advocated by consumer groups, and the food scientists at PCRM:

• The use of warning labels on all (at risk) foods similar to those for tobacco and alcohol products.
• That USDA institute comprehensive monitoring programs to check for diseased animals. Although Japan tests every cow at slaughter, the United States tests far less than 1 percent of the 36 million cows slaughtered each year.
• That USDA employ fewer top staffers from the meat and dairy industries. (How about none?!)
• A publicity campaign to demonstrate to the public that the beef industry's ads about "making meat safe" are deceptive, for doing so is not a realistic goal. Apart from the risk of mad cow disease, meat consumption is linked to coronary artery disease, colon and other forms of cancer, diabetes, hypertension, obesity and infection with salmonella, listeria and E. coli.

Finally, the PCRM recommends a generalized labeling on everything that would signal both the presence of animal byproducts and the species of origin of those byproducts.

After pondering all this, I recommend eating more vegetables and fewer animals, dead or alive. Maybe I'm overreacting, but maybe not. What do YOU think?

I think, no matter what, you should always look on the bright side of life.

(Note: This essay will be filed in the archives in the PHYSICAL DOMAIN under the skill area of nutrition. Additional articles related to this theme may be found there.)

(Ed. Note: Views expressed in this and other columns are those of the author and not necessarily those of the SeekWellness Editorial Board.)

 Send e-mail to Don Ardell