|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 30, 2024 0:20:10 GMT
The EU's banned substances are generally brought about by peer-reviewed science. I see a pattern here where the US will sell food with additives with known health concerns whilst the EU bans them. The argument is that it's not peer-reviewed science . Nobody either here in Europe or the USA/Canada is going to knowingly put dangerous foods on the market . The difference is that in North America they look at the probability or likelihood of bad things occurring now or in the future .In Europe they base their reviews on the possibilities . Lobbying also plays a big part in food regulation (I think this is where 'dodgy' corporations come in ) In North America companies and consumers want a longer shelf life of produce where as in Europe its all about protecting the single market Look at the average American and see how fat they are. That's your proof. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 30, 2024 0:23:45 GMT
The EU's banned substances are generally brought about by peer-reviewed science. I see a pattern here where the US will sell food with additives with known health concerns whilst the EU bans them. There's actually no evidence about the EU's claims on health grounds, which pisses the rest of the world off. It's all done under protectionism. Are you telling me you keep up to date on the world's scientific literature in this department? I'm sure I've heard some evidence which swings it into suspect territory. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jan 30, 2024 0:24:54 GMT
There's actually no evidence about the EU's claims on health grounds, which pisses the rest of the world off. It's all done under protectionism. Are you telling me you keep up to date on the world's scientific literature in this department? I'm sure I've heard some evidence which swings it into suspect territory. Where's the evidence? The EU have been doing this for years. Where's the evidence from back then? It's protectionism, plain and simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 30, 2024 0:43:50 GMT
Are you telling me you keep up to date on the world's scientific literature in this department? I'm sure I've heard some evidence which swings it into suspect territory. Where's the evidence? The EU have been doing this for years. Where's the evidence from back then? It's protectionism, plain and simple. OK so I just picked the first one mentioned in the controversy. What it does is very complicated and it is naturally found in the body, however...
Actually it is amazing that scientists have got the body sussed out to this level of detail. There is a lot less guesswork in medicine these days. I'll see what else I can find.
hmm, Melengestrol Acetate
You notice it is a health hazard.
Another problem with another one here:
Virilization, in case you were wondering is physical masculinization. I've noticed women look more butch now than 30 years ago. They lack the hourglass shape.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Jan 30, 2024 6:20:53 GMT
The argument is that it's not peer-reviewed science . Nobody either here in Europe or the USA/Canada is going to knowingly put dangerous foods on the market . The difference is that in North America they look at the probability or likelihood of bad things occurring now or in the future .In Europe they base their reviews on the possibilities . Lobbying also plays a big part in food regulation (I think this is where 'dodgy' corporations come in ) In North America companies and consumers want a longer shelf life of produce where as in Europe its all about protecting the single market Look at the average American and see how fat they are. That's your proof. That's a bit of a leap without any evidence . Obesity has been proven to be caused by a bad diet in general and lack of exercise . |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 30, 2024 12:20:29 GMT
Look at the average American and see how fat they are. That's your proof. That's a bit of a leap without any evidence . Obesity has been proven to be caused by a bad diet in general and lack of exercise . Who feeds them though? |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jan 30, 2024 12:25:26 GMT
There's already an FTA in place. We've drawn a line, the Canuks now need to calm down.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 30, 2024 12:30:49 GMT
It seems Canada isnt very impressed by your sovereignty. Or your idea of what a trade deal is. Get a grip for Christ sake. The Canuks threw their teddy out of the pram because the UK government refused to import their hormone fed beef. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jan 30, 2024 12:36:21 GMT
The EU's banned substances are generally brought about by peer-reviewed science. I see a pattern here where the US will sell food with additives with known health concerns whilst the EU bans them. Well the EU ban Chlorinated Chicken yet mandates Chlorine in Drinking Water.. ..go figure. The ban had nothing to do with chlorine levels. The ban was because US health and safety standards in their processing plants are so low that they have to bleach their chickens to make them safe to eat. |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Jan 30, 2024 13:03:14 GMT
That's a bit of a leap without any evidence . Obesity has been proven to be caused by a bad diet in general and lack of exercise . Who feeds them though? Same as everywhere else with fat people . Too much sugar , carbonated drinks ,fried food , white bread and processed food . Red meat may be a contributing factor but that's the case anywhere regardless of whether its meat with growth hormones or not . Americans do eat a lot of beef though a small % of them eat most of it . As Iv'e previously said beef raised with hormones produces leaner meat which is less fattening than beef without it which is a fact . And thats the only fact in the discussion , everything else is guesswork and assumption , possibility V probability and the probability is that eating hormone reared beef or non hormone reared beef makes no difference to human health |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jan 30, 2024 13:12:37 GMT
Banning hormones in beef is about maintaining a level playing field.
If you care about food security you don't let cheap imports put British farmers out of business.
Otherwise you encourage the same sort of globalisation which destroyed British steel production, shipbuilding and other manufacturing.
Growth hormones make beef production up to 25% cheaper. If we allow beef reared with growth hormones into the country British farmers will have to start using them or go out of business. There will be no choice in the supermarkets, it will all have growth hormones in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Jan 30, 2024 13:17:55 GMT
Well the EU ban Chlorinated Chicken yet mandates Chlorine in Drinking Water.. ..go figure. The ban had nothing to do with chlorine levels. The ban was because US health and safety standards in their processing plants are so low that they have to bleach their chickens to make them safe to eat. Sounds like the USA has a better system with a 2% ceiling on salmonella after production , the EU typically tests at between 15-20% |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Jan 30, 2024 13:26:26 GMT
Banning hormones in beef is about maintaining a level playing field. If you care about food security you don't let cheap imports put British farmers out of business. Otherwise you encourage the same sort of globalisation which destroyed British steel production, shipbuilding and other manufacturing. Growth hormones make beef production up to 25% cheaper. If we allow beef reared with growth hormones into the country British farmers will have to start using them or go out of business. There will be no choice in the supermarkets, it will all have growth hormones in it. Well thats a fair enough argument but if we can get the prices down in the supermarket thats a good thing . We already see Irish beef 20% cheaper than British beef so why not US beef at a similar choice and some would say a better quality meat . By your argument we should ban Irish beef |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jan 30, 2024 13:30:15 GMT
The ban had nothing to do with chlorine levels. The ban was because US health and safety standards in their processing plants are so low that they have to bleach their chickens to make them safe to eat. Sounds like the USA has a better system with a 2% ceiling on salmonella after production , the EU typically tests at between 15-20% We are not in the EU. These are the requirements under law for UK chickens. The US requirement is that you bleach your finished product. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jan 30, 2024 13:32:05 GMT
Banning hormones in beef is about maintaining a level playing field. If you care about food security you don't let cheap imports put British farmers out of business. Otherwise you encourage the same sort of globalisation which destroyed British steel production, shipbuilding and other manufacturing. Growth hormones make beef production up to 25% cheaper. If we allow beef reared with growth hormones into the country British farmers will have to start using them or go out of business. There will be no choice in the supermarkets, it will all have growth hormones in it. Well thats a fair enough argument but if we can get the prices down in the supermarket thats a good thing . We already see Irish beef 20% cheaper than British beef so why not US beef at a similar choice and some would say a better quality meat . By your argument we should ban Irish beef The Irish are not using a potentially dangerous unfair advantage. |
|
