# Meat Recall List From USDA/FSIS



## madcowcutlery (Mar 6, 2010)

Just thought I would provide a link to meat and meat product recalls from USDA. While at the USDA/FSIS website, browse all the food safety information that is available.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/FSIS_Recalls/Open_Federal_Cases/index.asp

D. Clay


----------



## chefedb (Apr 3, 2010)

For years I have been touting the fact that our government food inspection agencies are a total joke. If you look at some of the recalls the products were produced and distributed months before the recalls. In other words have already been consumed. Most plants today are on the government so called self inspection program. This is a joke.. The reason, there are no funds to pay or hire inspectors. Its a matter of time before a group of people die from food born bacteria. Its happened to a few on an individual basis. Our government is inept on most things ,and the only thing it succeeds at in most cases is waging war.

Just watch or follow the BP oil spill fiasco to see how inept the government is. Obama stated "We are on top of it"' 20 days at approx 15000 gallons per day   ( revised from 5000)  ??You figure it out .Thank God they are on top of it. EJB


----------



## free rider (May 23, 2006)

Ed,

What would you like the government to do?

In the case of the USDA, you would like more inspectors?  That expense may cause food prices to rise such that the poor (which is a good lot of people in the US considering the length and depth of this recession) would not be able to afford certain products.  The difference in price is a risk premium.  We are getting lower prices for increased risk.

In the case of the oil spill, what do you expect the President to do?  It sounds like you think he has some special oil-spill-skill or perhaps some special equipment hidden away?  If you look at the history of Ixtoc, a relief well is what finally worked (if I remember correctly).  That took 9 months to do.  This is much deeper and they're getting the relief well done in 4 months instead of 9 (hoping they make their anticipated August timeline).  Some things are not instantaneous.


----------



## chefedb (Apr 3, 2010)

I am sure most people would sooner pay more and know that food they consume is safe and wont poison them . Also if they would stop funding some of the pork barrel things that they fund there would be $ to fund what is really needed. I don't think we should be spending to learn the mating habits of the great humpback whales when we have other priorities. As far as the oil spill, I realize it is not an overnight fix ., but to state to the nation "I am on top of it'' is like a lot of other statements made,pure BS. The government was the one who first told us 5000 gallons a day was leaking when in fact even BP new and said in a confidential memo that was obtained yesterday that it was at least 14000 gallons. I voted for this guy and I am truly embarased that I did.

Getting back to the base of my statement re inspection of food. We need 1 agency for food inspection not 12. 1 budget not 12  everything under 1 czar or 1 agency that can be held responsible and regulate cost. The people who run these various agencies now are former food company executives who ran the companies and programs these agencies inspect.

My wife works for a government subcontractor. I could tell you many stories about the wast of $ that goes on .You would not believe some of them. Example I will pay you 8 weeks salary between projects to do nothing so I can save $ by not having to retrain you for next project. In this recession???  Give me a break.


----------



## free rider (May 23, 2006)

I'm not so sure the poor would agree with you on the food issue.  If everyone looked for the best quality, lowest-risk food, nobody would eat at McDonald's or buy food from Food City.

As for the oil spill, do you really think that the President is not "on top of it".  That is a very vague statement that he made.  Do you think he's not being briefed?  Do you really think there are decisions for him to make considering he has no expertise in oil, oil spills, drilling vessels, etc.?  All he can really do is press BP and the others working on this to work harder and faster.  They seem to be doing that anyway, so... you want him to do some ranting on TV?  This is an awful situation and I really doubt that anyone is slacking when it comes to trying to fix it.  It's just very, very hard to fix.

In regard to the memo about how much oil is leaking, don't forget that these are all estimates.  Nobody knows how much oil is really leaking.  The leak is very, very far down.  They can only make estimates, which have ranges, confidence intervals, confidence levels.  The media then turn these things into "big stories" so that people will watch and absorb the advertising that makes the media company the $$$$.

Now, on the subject of contractors.  Personally, I think the government should give up entirely on contractors because of the incredible waste that contractors engage in.  Contractors will subcontract and the subcontractors will subcontract further.  The guy at the end of the line feels like he's in private business to make a tidy profit and does that at the taxpayers' expense.  He feels no remorse because he's so far away from the source of the funding that he's lost the connection (a bit like killing people with a missile instead of through hand-to-hand combat makes it easier for someone to kill).  Government employees take an oath and they are close to and reminded of the need to be good stewards of the taxpayers' hard-earned, involuntary contribution to the mission.

Interestingly enough, the problem with one agency v lots has come up with this oil leak.  They now have to divide an agency into two because of conflicts of interest in mission being handled by one person.  As for expertise, I'm not sure where one would get food industry experts to work for the government except for from the food industry itself.  Oil spill issue has the same problem.  The real experts come from industry and you really wouldn't want to have to pay a government worker with specific expertise to just be on-hand.

Rock and hard place.


----------



## chefedb (Apr 3, 2010)

In regard to the poor eating and then dying from contaminated food instead of paying more in order to insure inspection ,it really does not matter what they think If  they are dead from eating it they can't have any opinion anyway. As far as the rest of the government is concerned, you are entitled to your opinion and I am to mine. That what makes this a great country.


----------



## free rider (May 23, 2006)

People are willing to smoke, which kills them too. 

Just out of interest... have any idea how much food contamination occurs after the inspection would take place?  I've seen some really bad habits, but I'm really not sure of the rate of such behavior.  That may give a clue as to how concerned people are about food contamination.  If they contaminate it themselves, display risky behavior with it themselves, maybe it's related to how much they would pay to avoid the risk of the food arriving contaminated.


----------



## chefedb (Apr 3, 2010)

Apples and orange comparison. But

The government also permits the sale of cigarettes. Where would the income from cig taxes come from that they collect if they banned its use? They have stopped sales to minors  though,. this is a start.


----------



## free rider (May 23, 2006)

Not apples to oranges comparison at all.

People are willing to engage in risky behavior.  Smoking and eating at McDonald's are examples.  Their own propensity to mishandle food is another.

They have stopped sales of cigarettes directly to minors, but what if the parent supplies the minor with cigarettes?

Anyway, the point is this:  Some people would not mind accepting higher risk and paying a lower price for food.  Other people would rather pay a higher price and avoid the risk.  Therefore, why not label?  Cigarettes are labeled that they are dangerous to one's health and people smoke anyway.  I am willing to bet that there are plenty of people who would accept the riskier food.


----------



## pete (Oct 7, 2001)

Ed, I totally agree with you on the food inspection issue.  It is a joke and our government needs to start figuring out what the priorities are.  I don't buy this BS that it would cause food prices to rise that dramatically and if the government figured how to spend less on frivilous stuff, it wouldn't cost the average person anything more.  Besides, we in this country, have access to some of the cheapest food in the world based on income.  Yeah, some people might gripe about having to pay a little more for food, but guaranetee, those same people and others will and do cry even more loudly about government shirking thier responsibility when there is a major food borne illness that kills people.  In this day and age, where the vast majority of people don't know the farmers that produce their food we rely on the government to ensure that the foods on the market shelves are safe.


----------



## chefedb (Apr 3, 2010)

Free Rider have you ever been in a slaughter house or meat processing plant? I have worked in them. If you had you would change your thinking  re. how foods are inspected.and possibly what you eat.Pete is right the government is  ineffective.


----------



## free rider (May 23, 2006)

Yes, I have in fact seen the meat processing, well, process, from beginning to end.  I am a vegetarian.  I am an adult and made the decision for myself.  I acquired the knowledge to make a proper decision.  Labeling would do that.

Government shirking responsibility?  The government is supposed to watch what you eat?  In that case, a lot of what is called food in this country should be banned, including the huge money-maker called McDonald's.

As for the food prices, add a cost on the input and it will come out in the output.  Otherwise, all restaurants would be charging the same price, even if more expensive ingredients were used.


----------



## addicted2food (Jun 1, 2010)

A sad reality really. I wonder how this things get neglected at times when in fact, food has always been a valuable need to everyone. So the government should make this as top priority since they too, eat meat (I'm sure!). Session dataThey should always see to it that our meat are being processed in a clean and safe manner.


----------



## chefedb (Apr 3, 2010)

/??????????


----------



## free rider (May 23, 2006)

addicted2food said:


> A sad reality really. I wonder how this things get neglected at times when in fact, food has always been a valuable need to everyone. So the government should make this as top priority since they too, eat meat (I'm sure!). Session dataThey should always see to it that our meat are being processed in a clean and safe manner.


Why must it be the government? Why would you not simply choose to buy a product from a company that has a "clean and safe manner"? Vote with your dollars?

Edited to add:

Hey, Ed, check this out, some ranting on TV. 

CNN: Asked about his anger toward the oil spill situation, Obama said he was furious because "somebody didn't think through the consequences of their actions."


----------

