By Jeremy Cooke
BBC News*
I have to confess, until now the whole debate about genetically-modified (GM) food has pretty much passed me by.
Most of my career has been spent as a foreign correspondent.
But last summer I returned to the UK to start a new job with the BBC. I now glory in the title Rural Affairs Correspondent. Read the rest of this entry »
Terry D. Etherton
It is hard to believe that two years have past since I launched the Terry Etherton Blog on Biotechnology and Terry Etherton’s Blog on Hormones, Biotechnology and Food Safety. Read the rest of this entry »
Dave Natzke
Published in Midwest Dairy Business (April 2008)
More vertical integration, what many consider the “evil empire” afflicting segments of food production, is headed toward dairy. As in other industries, most vertical integration pressure will come from the top down, in an effort to squeeze as much money out of incremental margins as possible. But in an evolving business climate, I think more dairy pressure will ultimately come from the bottom up. Read the rest of this entry »
Dave Natzke
Published in Midwest Dairy Business (February 2008)
The buzzword at the International Dairy Foods Association’s Dairy Forum ’08 was “sustainability.” While the word gives everyone a warm and fuzzy feeling they’re doing something – anything – to make the world a better place to live, the definition of “sustainability” can be elusive and confusing. Many Dairy Forum speakers used the term to cover environmental and social aspects of milk and dairy product production, packaging and transportation. Read the rest of this entry »
Terry D. Etherton
The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) recently has issued two contradictory press releases (see below) that relate to labeling of milk and dairy products. In one, they promote absence claim labeling; in the other they propose labels are not needed.
IDFA supports the use of deceptive absence labels in the rbST-free milk market battle! However, they are opposed to labels on ultra-filtered (UF) milk used in cheesemaking because those labels may confuse the consumer! Read the rest of this entry »
Terry D. Etherton
Two outstanding podcasts are posted on DairyCast.com. Enjoy listening to these thought provoking presentations on:
SHERRY BUNTING
Published in Farmshine (March 28, 2008 Issue)
Dairymen respond to Wal-Mart’s “Great Value”
Wal-Mart announced this week that its Great Value milk brand now sources milk exclusively from cows not treated with rbST. Milk selections at Sam’s Club are also offered from suppliers sourcing milk from non-supplemented cows.
With this announcement came a report on Wal-Mart’s blogging website, where Rand Waddoups, “author for sustainability” writes about several new “sustainability-related” initiatives at Wal-Mart, including this recent change for Great Value milk. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted on Truth About Trade & Technology
April 2, 2008
Sixty-six university dairy and veterinary scientists launched a broad attack Monday against milk processors and retail marketers who increasingly seek to advertise and label milk produced by cows not treated with Monsanto’s recombinant bovine somatotropin. A letter from professors at nearly every major land grant university asserted there was no difference between conventional and “rBST-free” or organic milk but that consumers were being misled by emotional advertising claims to pay higher prices. Read the rest of this entry »
Henry I. Miller and Gregory Conko
Washington Times (February 29, 2008)
European Union officials adamantly refuse to let the World Trade Organization save them from themselves.
Despite a 2005 WTO ruling that some European countries were breaking international trade rules by prohibiting the importation of gene-spliced, or “genetically modified (GM),” crops and foods, Europe remains recalcitrant, unrepentant and on the verge of slaughtering its own livestock industry. Read the rest of this entry »
William Henning, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus of Meat Science
The Pennsylvania State University
Consumer concerns have once again been raised after 143 million pounds of ground beef was recalled this week from a California firm that manufactures and distributes ground beef to retailers and schools. The problems initially surfaced when a member of a special interest group (The Humane Society of the United States; HSUS) filmed a case of brutal animal handling of a cow that was unable to get up and posted it on YouTube. Normally, this would have been a case of animal cruelty that would have been dealt with by the USDA and the plant in question. Since the USDA Food Safety Inspection Service is responsible for animal welfare in packing plants, this should have been all handled within the regulatory system for animal handling. However, it was apparently revealed later that this non-ambulatory cow was, in fact, harvested and entered the food supply that raised the food safety questions. Since non-ambulatory animals are not considered fit for processing due to the possible relationship with BSE (mad cow disease), it should been prevented from entering the food supply. Read the rest of this entry »
Listen