Free markets?

[DavidEBSmith]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080509/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/mad_cow

 

Creekstone, a small meat producer, wants to sell beef to Japan. As a selling point, they want to test all their beef for mad cow disease, because their customers demand it. The government, allied with large beef producers, has sued to prevent Creekstone from testing all their beef for mad cow disease. The money quote:

 

Larger meatpackers have opposed Creekstone's push to allow wider testing out of fear that consumer pressure would force them to begin testing all animals too.

 

Heaven forbid consumer demand should drive product innovation. If only the government would get out of the way and let free markets take their course, right?

[SANTA]

No the USA is not really free market. after they shutdown all Canadian beef because1 cow tested positive, but it is a well known that there have been numerous tests of cattle in the USA of USA origin with positive test results, where the cattle were destroyed but the records disappeared.... i'm not bitter,

 

but i believe if we want to protect our food supply we need to do exactly the opposite of what big business wants...

 

in this case test every cow,

 

Actually i believe our (USA & Canada)food protection standards are way to lax

[Mike]

but i believe if we want to protect our food supply we need to do exactly the opposite of what big business wants...

 

in this case test every cow,

 

Makes sense to me. A few years ago, the British cattle industry was totally destroyed by this illness. It seems like the opposition to 100% testing is very short-sighted--spare the expense now, risk the entire industry down the road.

[russell_bynum]

Seems like the smart ones would turn this into a marketing opportunity. "We test every single cow instead of one in every 1,000 like our competitors to ensure that the prime rib you buy is safe."

[leikam]

That's what Creekstone is doing: going after markets that reward more aggressive testing. What worries me is that it sounded like the justice department is less confident in the test's ability to avoid false negatives. If you go to the expense of 100% testing but the results are useless and the industry crumbles anyway, then what exactly have you achieved? I hope that's not the government's argument.

 

Anybody have some 3rd party data on how reliable the testing is?