Arsenic-It's in Animal Feed Too

By Ben Lilliston

The media has been splashed with recent findings of elevated levels of arsenic in apple juice. Much less attention has been given to concerns about the presence of arsenic in meat. Last week, IATP and the Center for Food Safety filed a series of petitions with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) calling for the agency to vastly reduce the legally permissible levels of arsenic in meat. Pharmaceutical companies produce and sell four arsenic compounds that are added to animal feed for turkey, chicken and swine production to increase weight and improve pigmentation of the meat.

"Arsenic's a poison that causes cancer, among other harm," IATP's David Wallinga, M.D. said in a press release on the petitions. "The FDA can't seriously uphold its public health mission while allowing residues of arsenic in the meat our children and families eat. That's why we've submitted this petition."

View the Original article

USDA and Corporate Agribusiness Continue to Push Animal ID Scheme

WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is expected to issue its new proposed rule for mandatory animal traceability very shortly. While USDA already has traceability requirements as part of existing animal disease control programs, the proposed framework goes much further to require animal tagging and tracing even absent any active disease threat. The framework has raised significant concerns among family farm and ranch advocates, who criticize the agency for failing to provide a coherent, factual explanation for the new program's necessity.

"USDA brags about the success of past programs, but has abandoned the principles that made them successful," argued Bill Bullard of R-CALF USA. "Past programs were based on sound science and were developed in response to the transmission, treatment, and elimination of specific identified diseases. USDA's new approach is a one-size-fits-all approach that does not specifically aim at the control of livestock diseases."

The USDA has presented its traceability scheme as an animal health program, but it has also reiterated the importance of the export market to the United States in promoting its new plan. The powerful meatpacking lobby has continued to push for such mandated traceability requirements in order to develop international standards for exports. Critics have suggested this is not in the American public's best interest, however, since the U.S. is a net importer of beef and cattle and the profits from the export market go to a small handful of massive meatpacking companies.

View the Original article

Big Ag Wants To Make It a Crime to Expose Animal Abuse at Factory Farms

By Wayne Pacelle
What do Florida and Iowa have in common when it comes to animal agriculture? They've both been hot spots, past and present, for the movement to combat some of the worst abuses in industrial agribusiness. And now the factory farming industry is fighting back in both states-and their latest methods represent their biggest overreach yet.

In Florida, the Humane Society of the United States and other groups pushed for the adoption of the first statewide law in the country to restrict the extreme confinement of animals on factory farms. In 2002, voters there passed Amendment 10, to phase out the caging of breeding sows in gestation crates. In Iowa, HSUS and other animal welfare groups have conducted a series of undercover investigations (see the video) to expose cruelty in the nation's biggest factory farming state.

Now, these two states have something else in common. They are trying to make it a crime to photograph or videotape farm animals. They don't want to criminalize animal cruelty, but they do want to make criminals of people trying to document abuse and to put an end to the cruelty. Lawmakers have introduced bills in both states to establish criminal penalties for going undercover at agricultural facilities and simply taking pictures.

View the Original article

GM Soy Making its Way into the UK Food Chain Through Animal Feed

By Jonathan Benson

Labeling laws throughout the European Union (EU) require that all food containing genetically-modified (GM) ingredients be properly labeled. But a new report from The Telegraph explains that many big-name food brands in the UK that sell meat, dairy, and other animal products are sourcing from animals fed GMOs, but selling the final product without a proper GMO label.

The problem of GMOs sneaking in the back door through animal feed is not limited to the EU, as many other countries that require mandatory GMO labeling are experiencing similar scenarios. A recent NaturalNews report highlighted GMO contamination problems with Fonterra, a New Zealand-based cooperative that is the world's largest exporter of dairy products, as well (http://www.naturalnews.com/031776_d...).

Some experts insist that animals fed GM feed do not end up producing GM-contaminated meat and dairy. But others say that GM traits are, indeed, passed on through animal feed into the animal itself, contaminating milk and meat with GM materials. They also say that the growing prevalence of GM feed -- particularly GM soy -- is destroying rainforests, introducing extreme amounts of new pesticides into the environment, and damaging animal and human health.

View the Original article