The Scottish Government is enquiring as to how horse meat got into beefburgers supplied for school meals.
In view of the fact that Scotland is said to have the highest child obesity rate in the UK, surely the wrong question is being asked. Logically the more important question is
"Why are beefburgers being served in schools?"
Governments pontificate about obesity, want to ban fast food shops from the vicinity of schools, and then set about serving the very same food as that they are complaining about.
Showing posts with label horse meat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label horse meat. Show all posts
Saturday, 23 February 2013
Tuesday, 12 February 2013
Horsemeat is more important than Patients' Lives
The Horse Meat Environment Secretary Owen Paterson is due to meet food industry
representatives for the second time in a week to discuss the horse meat
crisis. Clearly a matter of serious concern, but as far as we know, no consumers' lives have been put at risk.
Meanwhile, there have been something like 1200 unnecessary deaths at Stafford Hospital and another dozen Health Trusts are being investigated in a rather dilatory manner as it is believed that they, too, have death rates well above the statistical norm.
Can someone please explain why the Health Secretary hasn't held similar "summits" with the heads of the NHS Trusts concerned? Why is there not the same public outrage about what is happening in the NHS as there is about the food industry?
I must admit personal concern as my local NHS trust is now one of those under investigation and frankly I'm not surprised. The husband of an acquaintance died in a local hospital last year following his having a fall and broken his leg. The death certificate recorded something like "Complications arising from surgery on a broken limb". The complication? According to his widow he caught MRSA in the hospital.
Meanwhile, there have been something like 1200 unnecessary deaths at Stafford Hospital and another dozen Health Trusts are being investigated in a rather dilatory manner as it is believed that they, too, have death rates well above the statistical norm.
Can someone please explain why the Health Secretary hasn't held similar "summits" with the heads of the NHS Trusts concerned? Why is there not the same public outrage about what is happening in the NHS as there is about the food industry?
I must admit personal concern as my local NHS trust is now one of those under investigation and frankly I'm not surprised. The husband of an acquaintance died in a local hospital last year following his having a fall and broken his leg. The death certificate recorded something like "Complications arising from surgery on a broken limb". The complication? According to his widow he caught MRSA in the hospital.
Sunday, 10 February 2013
Traceability - Horse or Beef?
"Traceability" is the word of the moment.
The EU demands that almost anything that is manufactured, particularly food products, must be traceable, a process which demands a paper trail from the manufacturer to the retailer. Bureaucrats love this process as it produces paperwork and where would they be if they didn't have paperwork to manage. I'm sure it has existed ever since papyrus was invented, and one can envisage the site engineer at the pyramids receiving an appropriate certificate for every stone block that was brought to the site.
Unfortunately, that is all it is, bits of paper, often adorned with the rubber stamps of the people through whose hands they have passed. Frequently they are not even read and one suspects that little attempt is made to validate their authenticity. And of course, the system relies on everybody in the chain telling the truth, which is a very rash assumption indeed. Even without any real fraud, it is quite easy to imagine a meat processing plant with a batch of perfectly good traceable beef about to leave for the burger manufacturers, when it is discovered to be a few pounds underweight. So easy to add a bit from the another batch which might be beef, but equally might be horse. In general terms, such a system will work within the UK where the majority of those involved are basically honest, but who is going to trust a piece of paper issued by a Romanian abattoir to a French processor? Obviously Findus did, but you and I certainly wouldn't!
I first met this problem when I was a junior engineer in the civil service and was sent to inspect some radio equipment at a well known manufacturer's premises. The Chief Inspector met me and led me to an office and presented me with the documentation, which it was assumed that I would examine. There were documents certifying the origin of the components from approved suppliers, test and inspection certificates produced during the manufacturing process, you name it, there was an appropriate piece of paper; the only incomplete document being the certificate of satisfaction that I would sign in due course. To the considerable consternation of the company's chief inspector, I announced that I would first examine the equipment, that I would pick out one and have it on the test bench. There was even greater consternation when it was discovered that it had all been crated ready for shipment!
And this is what I suspect happens with most of these paper "traceability" systems, as long as the paper is correct nobody even bothers to look at the actual product. As long as the paper is correct all must be well!
The EU demands that almost anything that is manufactured, particularly food products, must be traceable, a process which demands a paper trail from the manufacturer to the retailer. Bureaucrats love this process as it produces paperwork and where would they be if they didn't have paperwork to manage. I'm sure it has existed ever since papyrus was invented, and one can envisage the site engineer at the pyramids receiving an appropriate certificate for every stone block that was brought to the site.
Unfortunately, that is all it is, bits of paper, often adorned with the rubber stamps of the people through whose hands they have passed. Frequently they are not even read and one suspects that little attempt is made to validate their authenticity. And of course, the system relies on everybody in the chain telling the truth, which is a very rash assumption indeed. Even without any real fraud, it is quite easy to imagine a meat processing plant with a batch of perfectly good traceable beef about to leave for the burger manufacturers, when it is discovered to be a few pounds underweight. So easy to add a bit from the another batch which might be beef, but equally might be horse. In general terms, such a system will work within the UK where the majority of those involved are basically honest, but who is going to trust a piece of paper issued by a Romanian abattoir to a French processor? Obviously Findus did, but you and I certainly wouldn't!
I first met this problem when I was a junior engineer in the civil service and was sent to inspect some radio equipment at a well known manufacturer's premises. The Chief Inspector met me and led me to an office and presented me with the documentation, which it was assumed that I would examine. There were documents certifying the origin of the components from approved suppliers, test and inspection certificates produced during the manufacturing process, you name it, there was an appropriate piece of paper; the only incomplete document being the certificate of satisfaction that I would sign in due course. To the considerable consternation of the company's chief inspector, I announced that I would first examine the equipment, that I would pick out one and have it on the test bench. There was even greater consternation when it was discovered that it had all been crated ready for shipment!
And this is what I suspect happens with most of these paper "traceability" systems, as long as the paper is correct nobody even bothers to look at the actual product. As long as the paper is correct all must be well!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
