Question for Dr. Kenneth Petersen. Whose Chickens are They?

A very simple question for:

Dr. Kenneth Petersen, assistant administrator for field operations with the Food Safety and Inspection Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. OR

Terri Teuber, USDA spokeswoman or
Mike Johanns, Agriculture Secretary or
Julie Zawisza, assistant commissioner for public affairs or
Dr. David Acheson, the assistant commissioner for Food Protection, FDA.
This is regarding the millions of chickens that ate tainted feed. (story here)

Q. If the 20 million chickens are safe to eat, what are the names of the companies who are selling these chickens to the public?

• If you won't tell us, why not?
• If you don't tell us, does that mean they really aren't safe?
• What about the 3.5 million chickens that when out in February? Who sold those to people?
• What rules are you following regarding disclosure of this information?
• Did you cut a deal with the chicken processor(s) to not name the names?

Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said this during comments to the Organic Trade Association.

"We literally found that the dilution is so minute, in fact in some cases you can't even test and find melamine any more in that product," (link)

Great Mike, sounds grand. Now who is selling this chicken? Where can I buy it? It sounds like the Safest. Chicken. Ever.

Since I'm not allowed to ask the question in your press conference, I'm hoping one or more of the team of journalists will use one of their precious questions to get this answer. And when the question is dodged, maybe another journalist will use their ONE precious question to ask it again. And again. Because really, if it's safe enough to eat, why wouldn't you tell us the names? Oh and don't forget which lots, which dates and shipped to which stores.

Maybe the public has a right to know where to buy the Safest. Chicken. Ever.

Below is a list of folks who are playing this game of chicken with the USDA and FDA. The USDA and FDA have held back information until they could put out the, "Melamine Chicken: It's safe as houses" press release. Next the FDA/USDA will dance around the question of whose chicken was processed and whom did they sell them too. I'm really curious to see which spin they will use. These are my guesses:

• We don't know
  
• It's proprietary information
• It's irrelevant since all chicken is safe. Trust us. Trust our assumptions.
  
• It's not really important
• There is no difference between this chicken and regular chicken, therefore it would be irresponsible of us to single out a single processor

My money is on the last one, it has the right mix of arrogance and deference to the honchos in the chicken biz.

Some of the press following this are very sharp (see list below). The USDA and FDA are treating the media (and the public they represent) like they are ignorant of science, politics and how the world works.
Frankly I have great confidence that a few of these folks WILL get to this question. And maybe they will get to some of these other questions in dark blue from my "Calling all science journalists" post.


Abigail Goldman with Los Angeles Times.
Deidre Henderson.Boston Globe.
Joe Johns with CNN
Randy Schmitt, Associated Press
David Curley, ABC News
*Julie Schmitt, USA Today.
*Elizabeth Weiss, USA Today
Nancy Cortis, CBS News or
*Dr. Debbye Turner, CBS Early Show
Brooke Turnbulle, or Dan Grutnech from CNN
Loren Edder, Wall Street Journal
*Steve Hedges, Chicago Tribune
Susan Heedy, Reuters.
Bill Tomson with Dow Jones
Andrew Martin, New York Times
John Rockoff, Baltimore Sun
Heather Harland, NHK Japan
*Karen Roebuck, Pittsburgh Tribune Review
David Brown, Washington Post
Steve Osbey, The Greenville News
Alan Bjerga, Bloomberg News

J.M. Hirsch, Associated Press

(list and spelling from the May 3 2007 transcript of the conference call)
* These are the folks that I have the most confidence in asking sharp questions to get to the truth. If only Christie Keith, from PetConnection were allowed to ask questions. Sigh.

Calling all Science Journalists.Notes for the FDA 5/8 press conference

At the Vulcan Science Academy they don't teach human spin.

I know that there are some good journalists out there that know both science and human spin who can understand what is going on in this press release below. Based on my years of observing humans I'll take a crack at it. Anyone want to jump in, go ahead. Or better yet, ask the FDA one of these questions. But be smart about it because the FDA and the USDA are better at dancing than Gene Kelly in Singing in the Rain.

The FDA knows how to control the press in their press conference. How?

1) Press conferences are short, only one question is allowed, there are no follow ups allowed. They control the phone lines so you CAN'T ask more than one question. Why? Because a focused group of people would bust them for their vague answers to questions.

2) Only "credentialed press" even get to ask questions. This doesn't include the bloggers who have been following this crisis for weeks. And even the credentialed press get blocked if they aren't high status enough. For example, Christie Keith of PetConnection is blocked from having her questions asked because the high status press had to have their questions asked first.

Christie has better questions and has been tracking this story from day one. She was graced with access but didn't get to ask her great questions because she has busted the FDA twice for not having the right info. She is being treated like Helen Thomas and relegated to the back row because she asks the tough questions. Frankly this is bullsh*t. The FDA/USDA should keep the press conference going until all the questions are asked and everyone is satisfied with the answers.

This whole process is backwards. Instead of simply saying, "We are asking for a voluntary recall the pigs and chicken." they are saying:
"We are going to try and convince people that the chicken and pigs are safe to eat."

Why are they going this route? Because the 3.5 million chickens are already in your belly folks. But they won't tell you who ate those 3.5 million chickens. So they are working very hard to try to prove what you ate was safe. This also has the added benefit of pleasing the swine and poultry industry. They don't want to lose the money from the 20 million chickens.

They are rolling the dice with your health. Thanks FDA and USDA for looking out for our health first (sarcasm smilie here)

Horse gone. Barn door closed.

--------------------------------------------

Here is the press release I've made my comments in quotes.

Scientists Conclude Very Low Risk to Humans from Food Containing Melamine
USDA Releases Some Swine and Poultry for Processing


WASHINGTON, May 7, 2007 – There is very low risk to human health from consuming meat from hogs and chickens known to have been fed animal feed supplemented with pet food scraps that contained melamine and melamine-related compounds, according to an assessment conducted by scientists from five federal agencies.

In the most extreme risk assessment scenario, when scientists assumed that all the solid food a person consumes in an entire day was contaminated with melamine at the levels observed in animals fed contaminated feed, the potential exposure was about 2,500 times lower than the dose considered safe. In other words, it was well below any level of public health concern.

The extreme risk assessment scenario questions:
1) How safe is safe enough? Show the public the scenario, now. We need to be able to interpret the statistics and identify the assumptions. If we don't, then they can hide behind statistics and assumptions. Some questions to ask:
a) Was this assessment based only on consuming melamine? Remember, there are three other chemicals, NOT just melamine. And they reacted with urine.

b) Was any of the pig or poultry food contaminated with wheat, rice or corn gluten DIRECTLY?
They talk about a proportion of pet food given to the poultry. But we know that China created feed just for poultry too. Did any suppliers to the 38 farms give poultry feed that was formulated from contaminated gluten alone? Since we don't know the farms, we can't call them up and ask. "What did you feed them? Where did you get it? Who sold it to you?"
Remember, the 3.5 million birds went out in February. That was long before the recall. Give me names of companies who created the food for the birds and pigs so we can ask THEM what they put into their food.

2) When will they release their risk assessment document? Before or after they release the birds to the chicken eating public?

3) What dose is considered safe? Were these safe dosage tests done on humans or rats? They are probably using an old study based on rats eating melamine only. Melamine alone is NOT the problem.

The risk assessment is an important new science-based component of the continuing federal joint investigation into imported wheat gluten and rice protein concentrate from China that contained melamine and melamine-related compounds.

Risk assessment covers a lot of ground, calling it science-based sounds more scientific I guess. But it really includes a lot of statistics in it and numbers ("too many numbers"?) maybe Kelley B or one of my other real science-talking readers could comment on this.

The risk assessment was conducted by scientists from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). This team is now compiling a scientific assessment of the risk to animal health associated with ingestion of animal feed containing melamine and its compounds.

Who are the independent scientists who will be reviewing this assessment?

FDA and USDA are in the process of identifying a group of experts to convene a scientific advisory board that would be charged with reviewing the risk assessment. This group would also be asked to contribute to future scientific analysis related to the risk of melamine and its compounds to humans and animals.

And this "group of experts" comes from which industries? Who pays their bills? Agribusiness, the pet food industry? The chemical industry?

In the course of the investigation, it was discovered that pet food was contaminated by wheat gluten and rice protein concentrate that contained melamine and its compounds. Subsequently, scraps of contaminated pet food that contained only low levels of melamine were distributed to farms in a limited number of states and added to the feed consumed by swine and poultry. These scraps constituted only a small percentage of the farm animal rations. In addition, melamine is known to be excreted in animal urine. When exposure levels are much higher, as was the case with cats and dogs, the melamine and its compounds appear to cause the formation of crystals in the kidney systems, resulting in kidney damage. There was no indication of kidney damage in hogs. Both hogs and chickens known to have been fed contaminated feed appear to be healthy.

"Melamine is known to be excreted in animal urine."
1) Which animals? Rats? Cats? Dogs? Pigs? Humans? (Lions? Tigers? Bears? Oh my!)
Is ALL of it excreted? No. With pets the melamine and other chemicals caused vomiting and crystals to form in kidneys. Some was still excreted. That's not the point. When I take Vitamin C it's know to be excreted in my urine. (Ever take too much and pee bright yellow?) that doesn't mean that I don't absorb enough of it to make an impact on my body, just that the excess is excreted. And different animals react different to chemicals. Rats have a more robust digestive track than other animals.

This dilution factor was an important piece of data considered in the multi-agency science-based human risk analysis and helps to support the conclusion that there is very low risk to human health from eating meat from animals that were fed the contaminated product. This conclusion supports the decision announced on April 28 not to recall meat from animals that were fed contaminated product.

Where have I seen a conclusion made to support a decision that has already been made? That's right, The Downing Street Memo, where the "facts are being fixed around the policy."

And what about the accumulation factor? This dilution factor is based on assumptions in which they have no physical evidence. That's hope, not science. See their FAQ where they admit they don't have data.

A safety/risk assessment is a scientific approach to estimating the risk to human health from exposure to specified compounds. It is based on available data and certain scientific assumptions in the absence of data.

Currently, swine and poultry on farms suspected of receiving contaminated feed are being held under state quarantine or voluntarily by the owners. In several cases, feed samples have tested negative for melamine and related compounds. These tests were conducted by federal laboratories or state laboratories using approved methods. It is assumed that because only small amounts of the contaminated feed were mixed with other rations, the melamine and related compounds were no longer detectable. USDA has concluded that, based on the human risk assessment and the inability to detect melamine in the feed samples, these animals no longer need to be quarantined or withheld from processing.

Again with the assumptions! Is all this hoop jumping really necessary for 20 million chickens?
Or are they preping us for 200 million chickens who ate bad feed and trying to excuse the 3.5 million melamine and c-acid contaminated chickens we already ate?

In other cases, feed samples have tested positive for melamine and related compounds; feed samples were not available; or feed samples have not yet been submitted for testing. These animals continue to be withheld from processing, but are not yet being culled, pending the results of the animal risk assessment. This assessment is expected to be completed within one week. At that time, USDA will determine whether these animals can be released for inspection and further processing.

USDA and FDA continue to conduct a full and comprehensive investigation. As additional information is confirmed, updates will be provided and decisions will be made using the best available science to protect the public's health.

Is this really about protecting public health or is it about protecting the poultry and swine industry? The US demanded that China kill millions of birds to stop Avian flu because they were afraid it would jump to humans even thought the "risk assessment" was very low that eating the dead birds would cause bird flu. Why the different standard on this?

To ensure no further contaminated products enter the U.S., the federal government will continue to monitor imported wheat and corn gluten as well as rice protein concentrate and isolates arriving from all countries destined for human and animal consumption. The FDA import alert for these products sourced from China remains in effect and U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue laboratory testing of the products as they enter the U.S. The inspections are a precautionary measure to ensure the safety of products entering at U.S. ports of entry. There is no evidence to suggest products bound for the human food supply are contaminated.

"No evidence to suggest." Okay, could you please tell us the story about how the FDA caught products that WERE bound for the human food supply? Bet a lot of you in the press don't know that story. Maybe someone should ask it, might prove useful to remind people that we KNOW of cases where tainted gluten DID get into the human food supply, but just didn't get delivered to the stores.
That kind of throws a hole in the FDA's line.

For additional information about the pet food and contaminated feed investigation, go to www.fda.gov or www.usda.gov. The human safety/risk assessment will be available online upon completion of an executive summary.

Great. Again I ask this be before or after you release the birds on the chicken eating public?

CEOs for Menu and ChemNutra Testify

Paul Henderson, CEO Menu Foods and Stephen Miller, CEO ChemNutra Testimony before the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, April 24, 2007 (video Link)

I was hoping I could use this video to illustrate some conflict between their House testimony, under oath, with what we know now. I didn't spot any yet, but all you recall bloodhounds are welcome to have at it.

But what struck me watching this: Note the excuses. Maybe they just apply to legal property, pets.

The same excuses can't be applied to humans... or can they?

The FDA refuses to tell us the names of the farms that raised the chicken that millions of us ate. If we knew who those farms were we could ask them. "Who did you sell those chickens too?" But it looks like the FDA is applying the same logic to the chickens that Menu and ChemNutra applied to the feed that they got.

"Is there any way we know then if other wheat gluten, or other products or other things have been intentionally altered? You don't know until after the fact? Right" -Rep. Stupak

"There wasn't a testing protocols for identifying it." -Henderson, CEO Menu Foods.

But there is now.

"Before this incident did you ever do any testing of any of the products that came from China?" -Rep. Stupak

"No, there was no known issue to test for."- Miller, CEO ChemNutra

But there is now.

ChemNutra had confidence in the company, but they didn't do any testing.
Do we have confidence in the FDA? Did they do the testing for us or just say, "Well there haven't been a lot of extra deaths from eating chicken so our guess, based on this dilution effect theory, is working."

Remember in the movie 2001 where the killer computer, Hal, decided that they should just let a component fail instead of replacing it first? I guess the plan is to do the same with humans as we did with pets

FDA to Humans: "Let 'em eat Chicken."


If humans start dying, well then we'll tell you who sold you that tainted chicken.

All this talk about dilution effect would be more credible if they had some sample results they could show us. And maybe some tests to look at. They are already experimenting on humans, maybe a few rats could be tested while we are waiting.

Oh, and anyone want to talk about the accumulation effect? Think second-hand smoke or asbestos or even pions from Mad Cows. How much do you have to eat until you get sick or die? We don't know for sure, but when it happens, call us.

The good news? I understand we can buy some human kidneys on the black market in China....

Years of tainted Pet Food from China

NY Time and Reuters have now reported that melamine, used to make plastic, has been added to grains and gluten by some Chinese companies to boost the real protein content of pet food. This has been happening FOR YEARS.

What now?

Reply to all Forward Print Add Kim to Contacts list Delete this message Report phishing Show original Message text garbled?

I have 5 cats that died since 2000 that I am convinced got sick from food, (with a little help from vaccines tossed in for bad measure)

How will we know when our job is done?
-Kim of Petfoodtracker

(Kim along with Ben of Itchmo, Nikki of Howl911, Theresa of PetsitUSA and of course Gina and Christine of Petconnection are the brilliant bloggers tracking this pet food recall crisis, go there and read, and donate too!)

I'll give some advice to the pet food companies on what to do next. (Will they listen to a Brain in a Box? I doubt it, but I have to try.)


1) Stop treating this like a recall of a defective product. This is food that kills living things. Not a product whose malfunction causes an inconvenience. This is not Dell recalling batteries. Think Johnson and Johnson recalling Tylenol. That is your shorthand message. Learn it. Live it. Love it.

2) Listen to your real customers, people with pets. People tell you that, but I know many CEOs DON'T know what their real end users really think. Who do CEOs see as their customer? Wall Street analysts, the board of directors and the major retailers. But they are not the ones whose "fur kids" are dying. Pet parents, as many call themselves, won't just down grade your stock. They want you in jail. You killed their fur kid, they will tell EVERYONE they know, until they trust you again...if ever.

3) Do the hard thing that will restore trust for the end user. The Tylenol story is bandied about as the gold standard of the right way to do things. J&J focused on restoring trust to the end user, based on their corporate value of safety, not "how to I keep the big retailers who buy truckloads happy?"

Don't think, "How do I minimize this for Wall Street so that the quarterlies will look good after the 25 million dollar write down for the recall.' Think, 'What will it take to convince the end user, whose pet is dead, to buy my food again?" When you answer THAT question then you will know what to do.

Companies ask, "What are blogs good for? " Most companies want to push to bloggers, to sell them stuff. They ask, "How do I get them to write good stuff about my products?"
Wrong question. Ask, "What are they saying about my company and product?" READ them for customer attitudes instead of figuring out how to sell stuff to people with blogs. What would you learn? Just how PISSED people are and, since your customers are smart, what they want you to do before they trust you again.

4) Bring in third party trusted testers. Not just "inspectors", TESTERS. People who actually analyze food. Then need to be independently funded and above reproach. Test EVERYTHING. Give them veto power over everything that goes into the food. For manufacturers the phase you are afraid of but you need? "They can stop the line."

5) Open up your records. Where does it comes from, what's in it? The cat's out of the bag (and he's not eating your food!) People now know about the Chinese connection, but do they know about the other dirty little secrets like rendering plants and what THEY put in the food? Dead, diseased, dying and down cattle are not good things to put in any food.
Now is the time to do this, or just wait until the mad cow strikes again, your choice.

6) Spend more on labeling than on marketing for 6 months.

7) Demand more of the FDA and the USDA and government regulators. Instead of screaming, "We can regulate ourselves!" Admit you have done a crummy job and say, "Please FDA, inspect us MORE. Here is MORE and FASTER access to our information. And here is the information about our suppliers. Here are our databases. This is NOT proprietary any more, you don't have to beg us for paperwork anymore." (I'm looking at you ConAgra).

8) Really communicate with your end users. The CEO and operations person should be on the phone talking to the folks whose pets have died. What do THEY want? What will it take to make they trust you again? If your communications people told you to do this and you didn't, listen to them now. If they didn't, get someone who understands how to keep your end users happy.

Lots of lawyers might have tried to help you minimize this. That ship has sailed, you need to go big with your story and THEN it will be minimized, but as we see from politics, it's often the attempts to cover up and down play a crisis that just makes it bigger.

I don't expect any companies to listen to or follow any of this advice. Why? Because right now they are listening to the "experts". The experts you need to hear from first are the people whose pets are sick or dead. Then trust your gut, if you have a heart you'll know what really needs to be done.

We hear you say, "We have pets too." But we don't hear what you would do if this happened to YOUR pet. What could you do to make your dead dog proud of you again? What would your dog, who you fed tainted food, ask of you to make it stop, so it never happened again? Your dog can't talk to you, but their guardians can. The parents of "fur kids" can tell you want they need.

What do I think? The company that goes big and demands testing, and welcomes regulation and opens up their books, will "win" this crisis. Everyone else might survive, but they will never come out of this like Johnson and Johnson did.

Who do you want to be like Mr. Pet Food CEO and Mr. Pet Food Brand Manager? Union Carbide after Bhopal or Johnson and Johnson after Tylenol? The choice is yours.

IHT Article: "Feed sellers in China routinely use protein substitute" Pulled?

For some reason the article below about melamime routinely being added to animal feed in China disappeared. I wrote them a letter to find out why. I'd call, but it's 5:00 AM in Hong Kong. Probably just a technical glitch because of heavy traffic. Just to help them out I've replicated the entire article below. Once they get more capacity up I'll snip it and link to it (don't want to violate any copyrights!)

April 29, 2:45 pm PDT, San Francisco

Press Relations, Asia/Pacific
International Herald Tribune
May-Ling Nam
1201 K Wah Centre
191 Java Road, North Point
Hong Kong

Press Relations, U.S.
Diane C McNulty
229 West 43rd Street
New York
NY 10036-3959
USA

Dear Ms. McNulty and Ms. Nam:

The article titled "Feed sellers in China routinely use protein substitute"

Is currently unavailable on your website.

By David Barboza and Alexei Barrionuevo
Published: April 29, 2007

Story at url:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/29/news/food.php?page=1
and http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/29/news/food.php?page=2

This has disappeared from the International Herald Tribune website as of 1:45 pm Pacific Daylight time in San Francisco. As of 2:45 pm PDT it is still off line. I have spoken to several colleagues around the United States and it is unavailable for them as well. This does not appear to be an isolated problem in my region.

Is there a problem with the story that is being corrected? Is there another source of this important story? There are many people that are very interested in a story about contaminated food being sold to the United States.

Please advise,
Sincerely,
Mr. Spocko

www.spockosbrain.com

For your identification purposes below is the text of the article:
Feed sellers in China routinely use protein substitute

The Shandong Mingshui Great Chemical factory in Zhangqiu, Shandong Province, which manufactures urea, melamine and melamine scrap (Ariana Lindquist for The New York Times)

By David Barboza and Alexei Barrionuevo
Published: April 29, 2007

ZHANGQIU, China: American food safety regulators trying to figure out how an industrial chemical called melamine contaminated so much pet food in the United States might come to this heavily polluted city in Shandong Province in the northern part of the country.

Here at the Shandong Mingshui Great Chemical Group factory, huge boiler vats are turning coal into melamine, which is used to create plastics and fertilizer.

But the leftover melamine scrap, small acorn-sized chunks of white rock, is then being sold to local entrepreneurs, who say they secretly mix a powdered form of the scrap into animal feed to artificially enhance the protein level.

The melamine powder has been dubbed "fake protein" and is used to deceive those who raise animals into thinking they are buying feed that provides higher nutrition value.

"It just saves money," says a manager at an animal feed factory here. "Melamine scrap is added to animal feed to boost the protein level."

The practice is widespread in China. For years animal feed sellers have been able to cheat buyers by blending the powder into feed with little regulatory supervision, according to interviews with melamine scrap traders and agricultural workers here.

But now, melamine is at the center of a massive, multinational pet food recall after it was linked earlier this month to the deaths and injuries of thousands of cats and dogs in the United States and South Africa.

No one knows exactly how melamine - which had not been believed to be particularly toxic - became so fatal in pet food, but its presence in any form of American food is illegal.

U.S. regulators are now headed to China to figure out why pet food ingredients imported from here, including wheat gluten, were contaminated with high levels of the chemical.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has banned imports of wheat gluten from China and ordered the recall of over 60 million packages of pet food. And last week, the agency opened a criminal investigation in the case and searched the offices of at least one pet food supplier.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture also stepped in Thursday, ordering more than 6,000 hogs to be quarantined or slaughtered after some of the pet food ingredients laced with melamine were accidentally sent to hog farms in eight states, including California.

Scientists are now trying to determine whether melamine could be harmful to human health.

The huge pet food recall is raising questions in the United States about regulatory controls at a time when food supplies are increasingly being sourced globally. Some experts complain that the FDA is understaffed and underfunded, making it incapable of safeguarding America's food supply.

"They have fewer people inspecting product at the ports than ever before," says Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of food safety for the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington. "Until China gets programs in place to verify the safety of their products, they need to be inspected by U.S. inspectors. This open-door policy on food ingredients is an open invitation for an attack on the food supply, either intentional or unintentional."

The pet food case is also putting China's agricultural exports under greater scrutiny because the country's dubious food safety record and history of excessive antibiotic and pesticide use.

In recent years, for instance, China's food safety scandals have involved everything from fake baby milk formulas and soy sauce made from human hair, to instances where cuttlefish were soaked in calligraphy ink to improve their color and eels were fed contraceptive pills to make them grow long and slim.

China's government disputes any suggestion that melamine from the country could have killed pets. But Friday, regulators here banned the use of melamine in vegetable proteins made for export or for use in domestic food supplies.

Yet it is clear from visiting this region of northern China is that for years melamine has been quietly mixed into Chinese animal feed and then sold to unsuspecting farmers as protein-rich pig, poultry and fish feed.

Many animal feed operators advertise on the Internet seeking to purchase melamine scrap. And melamine scrap producers and traders said in recent interviews that they often sell to animal feed makers.

"Many companies buy melamine scrap to make animal feed, such as fish feed," says Ji Denghui, general manager of the Fujian Sanming Dinghui Chemical Company. "I don't know if there's a regulation on it. Probably not. No law or regulation says 'don't do it,' so everyone's doing it. The laws in China are like that, aren't they? If there's no accident, there won't be any regulation."

(Page 2 of 2)

Most local feed companies do not admit that they use melamine. But last Friday here in Zhangqiu, a fast-growing industrial city southeast of Beijing, a pair of animal feed producers explained in great detail how they purchase low-grade wheat, corn, soybean or other proteins and then mix in small portions of nitrogen-rich melamine, whose chemical properties give a bag of animal feed an inflated protein level under standard tests.

Melamine is the new scam of choice, they say, because urea - another nitrogen-rich chemical that works similarly - is illegal for use in pig and poultry feed and can be easily tested for in China as well as the United States.

"If you add it in small quantities, it won't hurt the animals," said one animal feed entrepreneur whose name is being withheld to protect him from prosecution.

The man - who works in a small animal feed operation that consists of a handful of storage and mixing areas - said he has mixed melamine into animal feed for years.

He said he was not currently using melamine, which is actually made from urea. But he then pulled out a plastic bag containing what he said was melamine powder and said he could dye it any color.

Asked whether he could create an animal feed and melamine brew, he said yes, he has access to huge supplies of melamine. Using melamine-spiked pet food ingredient was not a problem, he said, even thought the product would be weak in protein.

"Pets are not like pigs or chickens," he said casually, explaining that cheating them on protein won't matter. "They don't need to grow fast."

The feed seller makes a heftier profit because the substitute melamine scrap is much cheaper than purchasing soy, wheat or corn protein.

"It's true you can make a lot more profit by putting melamine in," said a second animal feed seller here in Zhangqiu. "Melamine will cost you about $1.20 per ton for each protein count whereas real protein costs you about $6, so you can see the difference."

Few people outside of agriculture know about melamine here. The Chinese media, which is strictly censored, has not reported much about melamine or the pet food recall overseas. And no one in agriculture here seems to believe that melamine is particularly harmful to animals or pets in small doses.

A man named Jing, who works in the sales department at the Shandong Mingshui Great Chemical Group, said Friday that melamine scrap prices had been rising but he was not aware of how the company's product was being used.

"We have an auction for melamine scrap every three months," he said. "I haven't heard of it being added to animal feed. It's not for animal feed."

David Barboza reported from Zhangqiu and Alexei Barrionuevo reported from Chicago. Rujun Shen also contributed reporting.

Q. Can the FDA recall Food? A. No.*

Windows media Video of GAO superstar Lisa Shames speaking about FDA. Link about 7 minutes

Q. Can the FDA recall food? A. No. (*with the exception of baby formula)

The FDA can not make mandatory recalls for food tainted with bad wheat, rice or corn gluten. They can't issue a recall for HUMAN food folks. NOT just pet food. I've been asking people this question lately and most are surprised to find out this simple piece of information.

So if you hear a story about this bad gluten getting into the human food chain AND that gluten is put into a product shipped to a store near you, remember, the company has to voluntarily issue a recall, the company has NO deadline to issue information to the public (or the FDA for that matter) in a timely fashion.

Now most companies are smart enough to do the right thing, but if they delay, dither and withhold information there are no penalties.

Frightening Food Facts about the FDA from the GAO

From Tuesday's House hearings about the FDA:

Did you know:
The federal government can issue mandatory recalls for tires and toys but not food?
The only exception is baby formula. Did you know that? Does that surprise you?

How the heck did this happen? Who decided that killing your customers is just the cost of doing business? Is letting citizen's pets die a good way to get votes? I thought that even illogical humans would figure out that old Vulcan saying,
"Killing your customers is bad PR."
For those who didn't get to watch the hearing they feature my new hero
Lisa Shames, Acting Director Natural Resources and Environment, Government Accountability Office.


How cool is she? First she has a great name like "shamus - as in detective or it could be "She shames the people who rip us off. " And she works for our beloved GAO! I think Scout Prime and I will have to give them The Greatest Government Agency in America Award.
Seriously doesn't everyone want MORE accountability in government?

For this video I some titles and pulled out some key quotes for emphasis. I'm still new at this video stuff so your advice is welcome and yes, I'm sure you could have done it better Rich.

The video is in Real Media format. I'll try and get it in WMA soon.

Opening Statement Paul Henderson Menu Foods Congressional Hearing

Paul K. Henderson, President and CEO of Menu Foods Income Fund.
Opening Statement Video (link)

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
Diminished Capacity: Can the FDA assure the Safety and Security of the Nations Food Supply. on April 24, 2007

Things I want you to notice.
1) Everyone is under oath
2) He says inspections would not have fixed this. What would? Remember, inspection is not the same as testing. Who does the testing?
3) Regarding testing. "Industry standard testing" took several weeks. I think we should compare time lines. The one he submitted and Itchmo's.