SEARCH

Entries in USDA (24)

Sunday
Apr142013

Meat Packing Company Recalls 468,000 Pounds of Meat

Comstock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- A Louisiana meat packing company is expanding its recall to include approximately 468,000 pounds of meat.

According to a press release from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service, Manda Packing Company is expanding a previously announced recall to include a number of its products. The products, including roast beef, ham, turkey breast, tasso pork, ham shanks, hog head cheese, corned beef and pastrami. The food in question is at risk of possible contamination with Listeria monocytogenes.

The packages in question were shipped to locations in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.

The potential danger was discovered when the Tennessee Department of Agriculture determined a sample of Manda Packing Company's cooked roast beef had tested positive for the bacteria. Additional samples were taken and also tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes, prompting the expanded recall. There have not been any reports of illness caused by the products.

Consumption of food containing Listeria monocytogenes can cause listeriosis, a potentially deadly disease. Symptoms of listeriosis include fever, headache, neck stiffness and nausea.

The USDA urges people to wash their hands before and after handling raw meat, keep raw meat away from other food, ensure all meats are fully cooked and avoid foods containing unpasteurized milk.

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Wednesday
Sep262012

Snacks: The USDA's Solution to Students' 'Healthy Lunch' Hunger Complaints

iStockphoto/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- According to Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, the solution to the growing grumbling over re-vamped school lunch menus boils down to a good old fashioned snack.

School lunch trays are a bit lighter this year after Congress-approved calorie limits on school lunches went into effect in August. The new regulations, which were championed by First Lady Michelle Obama as part of her "Let's Move" campaign to fight childhood obesity, have inspired protests and even a video parody from students who claim the reduced lunches are making them go hungry.

"It's not surprising that some youngsters will in the middle of the day be hungry," Vilsack told ABC News, responding to the controversy. "I remember my two boys when they came back from school they were always hungry, we always had snacks prepared for them."

Vilsack said the Obama Administration is working with school districts to create snack programs and encouraging parents to pack extra food for their active students to munch on before football practice or band rehearsal.

"We understand that change is difficult," Vilsack said. "Some folks love it, some folks have had questions about it, but that's to be expected when you're dealing with 32 million children and you're dealing with over a hundred thousand school districts."

Under the new regulations, cafeterias are required to serve twice as many fruits and vegetables while limiting proteins and carbohydrates. For an average high school student, that means two baked fish nuggets, a cup of vegetables, half a cup of mashed potatoes, one whole grain roll and eight ounces of fat free milk is the fuel that served to get them through their last four hours of classes.

But for a grumbling crowd of students, those 750 to 850 calories aren't cutting it.

"We hear them complaining around 1:30 or 2:00 that they are already hungry," said Linda O'Connor, a high school English teacher at Wallace County High School in Sharon Springs, Kan. "It's all the students, literally all the students... you can set your watch to it."

O'Connor teamed up with her hungry students and fellow teacher Brenda Kirkham to create a ballad to the growling stomachs that are now pestering her classroom. The YouTube song and dance video "We Are Hungry," set to the tune of Fun's "We Are Young," now has more than 108,000 hits.

"Give me some seconds, I, I need to get some food today," 16-year-old Wallace County High School football player Callahan Grund sings in the video. "My friends are at the corner store getting junk so they don't waste away."

Vilsack said it was "great" that students were speaking out, but said he had not watched the video.

"I think it's great that kids are creative and I think it's great that they're participating in the process by letting their feelings known and using that format to express themselves," he said.

Across the state at St. Mark's Charter School in Colwich, Kan., middle school students are protesting the new regulations, which limit their calories to between 600 and 700 per meal, by bringing their lunches from home.

St. Mark's Principal Craig Idacavage said more than half of his 330-student school are opting for sack lunches because "they feel they are not able to get full" on the school offerings.

"I think they have a valid point and you can only hope that people will listen to them," Idacavage said.

The new school lunch regulations, which first lady Michelle Obama championed and a Democrat-led Congress passed in 2010, set a maximum calorie limit for high school lunches at between 750 and 850 calories. Under the old rules, cafeterias served a minimum of 825 calories per lunch.

Elementary students' lunches pack between 550 and 650 calories as opposed to the 633 calories allotted under the old rules.

For Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, that "scant diet" is a "rude awakening" for schoolchildren across the country. King and Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., introduced the "No Kids Hungry Act" this month to repeal the new lunch menu standards and prohibit the calorie limits.

"Kids are of varying sizes, activity levels and metabolism rates," King wrote in a Des Moines Register op-ed. "How can we expect each child to flourish and grow on subsistence diets? This all because some are overweight."

But it is not just a few overweight kids that are causing calorie cuts across the cafeteria. One out of every four adolescents are too overweight to join the military, according to a report released Tuesday by Mission: Readiness, a group of retired military leaders who claim obesity is now a national security issue.

"Removing the junk food from our schools should be part of comprehensive action that involves parents, schools and communities in helping children make healthy food choices," retired U.S. Coast Guard Admiral James Loy said in a statement. "The bottom line is that the armed services must have a sufficient pool of fit young adults to draw from in order to field enough recruits with the excellent qualifications needed to staff a 21st century military."

Despite students' complaints over growling stomachs, the new nutritional requirements should actually be making them feel fuller, said Kristi King, a registered pediatric dietician at Texas Children's Hospital and a spokeswoman for the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

The new rules double the amount of fruit and vegetables that are served and mandate that half of all bread products are whole grain. All three of those food types are chock full of fiber, which takes longer to digest, King said.

"It should be making kids fuller if they are actually consuming the whole product," King said. "If children are not picking the entire meal available to them they are obviously going to be hungry."

In Jackson, Miss., the state with the highest obesity rate, school cafeterias have been easing kids into the healthy food regulations.

Mary Hill, the executive director of food services at Jackson Public School District said her school district has been phasing in more fruit and vegetable options over the past few years to prepare for the regulations and while the new rules are an "adjustment" for the students, she said she has not heard any complaints.

"To me, if you hear that grumbling it's that typical grumbling with children," Hill said. "You know children will be children."

Meanwhile, other critics have griped that the Obamas'  own daughters don't have to suffer under the new regulations, as they attend private school.

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Thursday
Jul262012

Meat Industry Has Beef with Meatless Monday, Forces USDA Retraction

Comstock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- The USDA has retracted its support for an initiative to cut meat from Americans’ Monday diets, caving in to pressure from livestock producers and complaints from a Kansas Senator.

The original plug appeared in the USDA’s internal “Greening Headquarters Update” on Monday, where three paragraphs on the third page mentioned Meatless Mondays, an initiative by Monday Campaigns, Inc.  The update called them a “simple way to reduce your environmental impact.”

The memo went on to say that animal agriculture -- beef production in particular -- wastes water, fertilizer, fossil fuels and other resources. It also contributes to global climate change, the memo said.

“Because Meatless Monday involves only one day a week, it is a small change that could produce big results,” the newsletter said. “Did you notice that our cafeterias have tasty meatless options?”

Well, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association noticed.

The association’s president, J.D. Alexander, said the newsletter called into question the USDA’s “commitment” to farmers and ranchers. He called the newsletter “awakening,” and condemned the agency for failing to understand efforts made to produce food sustainably. He cited progress the industry has made over the last 30 years to produce more meat with fewer environmental costs.

“This move by USDA should be condemned by anyone who believes agriculture is fundamental to sustaining life on this planet,” Alexander said.

Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., noticed, too. Once he saw Twitter responses to the USDA’s promotion of Meatless Mondays, he immediately printed out the USDA’s newsletter and headed down to the Senate floor, his aide, Garrette Silverman told ABC News. Kansas is the third-largest beef producer in the country.

“We are a beef-producing state and it is one of the items that improves our balance of trade as we export meat and beef around the world,” Moran concluded his three-minute speech on the Senate floor. “And, yet, our own Department of Agriculture encourages people not to consume meat.”

A press release from Moran’s office called the newsletter “demonizing” to the meat industry and meat consumers. He said the letter “attacks” meat production and fails to acknowledge livestock’s role in the economy.

“Never in my life would I have expected USDA to be opposed to farmers and ranchers,” Sen. Moran said.

By Wednesday afternoon, the memo was offline and a USDA tweet said it was posted in error.

“USDA does not endorse Meatless Monday,” the USDA tweeted.

Peggy Nue, President of Monday Campaigns, said she was initially pleased the USDA plugged Meatless Mondays this week, and she was surprised at how fast the USDA reversed its position.

“It shouldn’t be considered a threatening idea,” she said. “We’re not saying give up meat entirely -- just one day a week.”

Nue pointed toward the USDA’s most recent dietary guidelines, which came out in early 2011 and urge people to reduce solid fats and salts.

Indeed, chapter three of the USDA document, titled “Foods and Food Components to Reduce,” includes 14 mentions of the word “beef” and nine mentions of the word “meat.”

“There really is a conflict in their mission,” Nue said. “On one hand, they represent the meat industry, and on the other, they’re putting out dietary guidelines to make America healthier.”

It’s all too familiar to Professor Walter Willett, who chairs the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health. When the USDA replaced its food pyramid with the “Healthy Eating Plate” last year, he told the Wall Street Journal it was “pretty useless” and designed his own.

“There’s a lot of schizophrenia within the department,” Willett said, citing the USDA’s promotion of cheese and beef consumption despite its warnings about saturated fats. “If you really believed in the dietary guidelines and you’re really promoting the dietary guidelines, Meatless Monday is a great thing to do.”

Willett said the newsletter also rightfully depicted red meat as environmentally taxing. Cows take two to three years to mature before they can be sold, they use a considerable amount of resources, and they produce methane, a powerful greenhouse gas.

“Without question, the 1,000-pound steer in the room in terms of environmental impact is beef,” he said.

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Monday
Jun042012

USDA Expands E.Coli Testing of Ground Beef

iStockphoto/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Food inspectors from the U.S. Department of Agriculture will start testing ground beef for six additional strains of the dangerous bacteria E. coli beginning on Monday. The new, quicker testing is designed to detect contaminated meat faster -- before it enters the food supply.

"These strains of E. coli are an emerging threat to human health and the steps we are taking today are entirely focused on preventing Americans from suffering foodborne illnesses," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said. "We cannot ignore the evidence that these pathogens are a threat in our nation's food supply."

Samples testing positive for a dangerous strain of E. coli will be taken out of stores and could be subject to a recall.

There are currently more than 700 different strains of the bacteria. Food scientists say most types are harmless, but some can attack your intestines and cause serious problems.

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Tuesday
Apr242012

Mad Cow Disease Case Confirmed By USDA

Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Tuesday confirmed a case of mad cow disease found in a dairy cow in central California.

In a press briefing Tuesday afternoon, John Clifford, the USDA’s chief veterinary officer, said the cow’s meat did not enter the food supply and the carcass will be destroyed. The animal was found at a rendering facility.

“There is really no concern for alarm here with regards to this animal,” Clifford said. “Both human health and animal health are protected with regards to this issue.”

According to a statement from USDA, milk does not transmit mad cow disease.

This is the fourth case of mad cow disease in the U.S. cattle supply since December 2003. The most recent case occurred in 2006, when officials discovered an infected cow on an Alabama farm.

Mad cow disease affects the brain and spine of an animal, the result of an unusual transmissible protein called a prion, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Those body parts are kept out of grocery stores and restaurants and have no contact with the meat that does make its way to consumers.

No humans in the U.S. have ever been infected with mad cow disease, but fears of the disease became prominent in the 1990s when 140 people in Britain died from the brain-wasting disease.

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Wednesday
Apr182012

USDA to Let Industry Self-Inspect Chicken

Hemera/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Chicken is the top-selling meat in the United States.  The average American eats 84 pounds a year, more chicken than beef or pork.  Sorry red meat, chicken is what’s for dinner.  And now the USDA is proposing a fundamental change in the way that poultry makes it to the American dinner table.

As early as next week, the government will end debate on a cost-cutting, modernization proposal it hopes to fully implement by the end of the year -- a plan that is setting off alarm bells among food science watchdogs because it turns over most of the chicken inspection duties to the companies that produce the birds for sale.

The USDA hopes to save $85 million over three years by laying off 1,000 government inspectors and turning over their duties to company monitors who will staff the poultry processing lines in plants across the country.

The poultry companies expect to save more than $250 million a year because they, in turn, will be allowed to speed up the processing lines to 175 birds per minute with one USDA inspector at the end of the line.  Currently, traditional poultry lines move at a maximum of 90 birds per minute, with up to three USDA inspectors on line.

Whistleblower inspectors opposed to the new USDA rule say the companies cannot be trusted to watch over themselves.  They contend that companies routinely pressure their employees not to stop the line or slow it down, making thorough inspection for contaminants, tumors and evidence of disease nearly impossible.  “At that speed, it’s all a blur,” one current inspector tells ABC News.

According to OMB Watch, a government accountability newsletter, cutbacks at the USDA have coincided with a significant rise in salmonella outbreaks.  The group says 2010 was a record year for salmonella infection and 2011 saw 103 poultry, egg and meat recalls because of disease-causing bacteria, the most in nearly 10 years.

The USDA, which has been running a pilot program of the changes in 20 U.S. poultry plants, says the new system is not about cost-cutting, but about bringing food safety up to date.

Watchdog groups insist a combination of increased testing and government inspection is needed to lower salmonella and other disease outbreaks from chicken.  The National Chicken Council says on its website that while “plant employees would have an expanded role in inspecting carcasses,” USDA inspectors will still be in the plant.  And, it says, “we are confident that modernizing the poultry inspection system will enable us to build on our success in providing delicious, safe and wholesome food to our customers.”

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Wednesday
Mar142012

‘Pink Slime’ Will Be a Choice for Schools

Hemera/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- ABC News has the learned that on Thursday the U.S. Department of Agriculture will announce that starting this fall, schools will be able to choose whether or not they buy hamburger that contains lean, finely textured beef known as “pink slime.”

The announcement comes one week after ABC News reported on the beef filler commonly known as “pink slime,” which is found in 70 percent of the ground beef sold at supermarkets.

“It kind of looks like Play-Doh,” said Kit Foshee, who, until 2001, was a corporate quality assurance manager at Beef Products Inc., the company that makes “pink slime.” “It’s pink and frozen, it’s not what the typical person would consider meat.”

Foshee said that he was fired by BPI after complaining about the process used to make the filler, and the company’s claims about it. Since then, he has spoken out against the product.

J. Patrick Boyle, president of the American Meat Institute, defended the practice as a way to safely use what otherwise would be wasted.

“BLBT (Boneless Lean Beef Trimmings) is a sustainable product because it recovers lean meat that would otherwise be wasted,” he said in a statement.

However, the substance, critics said, is more like gelatin than meat, and before BPI found a way to use it by disinfecting the trimmings with ammonia, it was sold only to dog food or cooking oil suppliers.

But Boyle said, “The beef trimmings that are used to make BLBT are absolutely edible,” and Janet Riley, senior vice president of public affairs for AMI, said there was no reason to label beef that contains “pink slime.”

“What are you asking me to put on the label, its beef, it’s on the label, it’s a beef product, it’s says beef so we are declaring…it’s beef,” she said.

The low-grade trimmings come from the parts of the cow most susceptible to contamination, often close to the hide, which is highly exposed to fecal matter. But because the treatment of the trimmings -- simmering them in low heat, separating fat and tissue using a centrifuge and spraying them with ammonia gas to kill germs -- the United States Department of Agriculture says it’s safe to eat.

ABC News traveled across the country to the meat section of grocery stores to see if it’s in the ground beef they sell. At most stores it was impossible to tell for sure whether the beef contained the filler. At one store there was no way to tell from the labels, and the butchers did not know the answer.

There is only one way to know for certain that “pink slime” is not in your beef: If your meat is stamped USDA Organic, it’s pure meat with no filler.

Otherwise, you can’t know from the packaging because “pink slime” does not have to appear on the label. And the USDA is giving no indication it will force meat packers to lift the veil of secrecy any time soon.

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Friday
Mar092012

Where You Can Get ‘Pink-Slime’-Free Beef

Hemera/Thinkstock(NEW YORK) -- After an ABC News investigation detailing the use of a cheap meat filler, finely textured lean beef, commonly called pink slime, which is in 70 percent of the ground beef sold at supermarkets, J. Patrick Boyle, president of the American Meat Institute, defended the practice as a way to safely use what otherwise would be wasted.

“BLBT (Boneless Lean Beef Trimmings) is a sustainable product because it recovers lean meat that would otherwise be wasted,” he said in a statement.

However, the substance, critics said, is more like gelatin than meat, and before Beef Products Inc. found a way to use it by disinfecting the trimmings with ammonia it was sold only to dog food or cooking oil suppliers.

But Boyle says “the beef trimmings that are used to make BLBT are absolutely edible” and Janet Riley, senior vice president of public affairs for AMI, said there was no reason to label beef that contains “pink slime.”

“What are you asking me to put on the label, its beef, it’s on the label, it’s a beef product, it’s says beef so we are declaring … it’s beef,” she said.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

But Kit Foshee, who, until 2001, was a corporate quality assurance manager at BPI, the company that makes pink slime, contends the trimmings bear little resemblance to beef.

“It kind of looks like Playdough,” he said. “It’s pink and frozen. It’s not what the typical person would consider meat.”

He and two former USDA inspectors told ABC News the filler commonly referred to as pink slime comes from a low grade of beef trimmings unlike what they call real ground beef. Foshee said that he was fired by BPI after complaining about the process used to make the filler, and the company’s claims about it. Since then, he has spoken out against the product.

The low-grade trimmings come from the parts of the cow most susceptible to contaminaton, often close to the hide, which is highly exposed to fecal matter. But because of BPI’s treatment of the trimmings -- simmering them in low heat, separating fat and tissue using a centrifuge and spraying them with ammonia gas to kill germs -- the United States Department of Agriculture says it’s safe to eat.

The company calls the final product “Finely Textured Lean Beef.” Foshee said it was not as nutritious as ground beef because the protein comes mostly from connective tissue, not muscle meat.

But BPI, its inventor and primary manufacturer, told ABC News in a letter from a lawyer Friday that pink slime was USDA approved beef and was nutritious.

“All beef is a good or excellent source of 10 essential nutrients, including protein, iron, zinc and B vitamins,” H. Russell Cross, head of the department of animal science at Texas A&M University, said in a statement to ABC News. "Finely textured lean beef helps us meet consumer demand for safe, affordable and nutritious food.”

ABC News was flooded with questions from concerned viewers following its investigation into pink slime.

Many, like Dale Rittenhouse, wanted to know where beef with pink slime was sold.

So ABC News traveled across the country to the meat section of grocery stores to see if it’s in the ground beef they sell. At most stores it was impossible to tell for sure whether the beef contained pink slime. At one store there was no way to know from the labels and the butchers did not know the answer.

ABC News emailed the top 10 grocery chains in America and seven responded:

1. Safeway
“We rely on the federal government to help guide us on food safety issues. USDA has been clear in its judgment that Lean Finely Textured Ground Beef is a safe source of nutrition. However, we are reviewing the matter at this time.”

2. Ahold (Stop & Shop/Giant)
“Stores operated by the divisions of Ahold USA do carry ground beef made with Boneless Lean Beef Trimmings (BLBT), also called Finely Textured Beef (FTB). Boneless Lean Beef Trimmings (BLBT) is beef and is absolutely safe for consumption. To make the product, beef companies use beef trimmings, which are the small cuts of beef that remain when larger cuts are trimmed down. These trimmings are USDA-inspected, wholesome cuts of beef. This process has been an industry standard for almost 20 years. Alternatives to the conventional ground beef supply, in the form of Certified Angus Beef and Nature’s Promise ground beef products, are available to customers in stores across all of the divisions of Ahold USA. These products do not include the use of BLBT. Customers are being encouraged to ask any meat associate should they have any questions or would like to be directed to meat that does not include Boneless Lean Beef Trimmings. Our labeling is in compliance with USDA regulations. BLBT is USDA tested and approved ground beef and therefore does not require labeling.”

3. Costco
Does not use pink slime.
“Anything that we sell at Costco we want to explain it’s origins, and I personally don’t know how to explain trim treated with ammonia in our ground beef,” Craig Wilson, vice president of quality assurance for Costco, told ABC News. “I just don’t know how to explain that. I’m not that smart.”

4. Publix
“We have never allowed the use of LFTB (pink slime) in our meat. It’s 100 percent ground beef with no LFTB.”

5. H-E-B
“All our ground beef sold at H-E-B is 100% pure with no additives.”

6. Whole Foods
Does not use pink slime.

7. Kroger
“We do not use finely textured beef in our fresh ground beef. … We are routinely presented the finely textured beef as an option, but have always refused.”

An ABC News viewer, Miles Herbert, wanted to know, “Is there any evidence that organic meat contains this pink slim?”

It turns out there isn’t. If your meat is stamped USDA Organic, it’s pure meat with no filler.

Otherwise, you can’t know from the packaging because pink slime does not have to appear on the label. And the USDA is giving no indication it will force meat packers to lift the veil of secrecy any time soon.

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Wednesday
Mar072012

Seventy Percent of Ground Beef at Supermarkets Contains ‘Pink Slime’

Hemera/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Gerald Zirnstein grinds his own hamburger these days. Why? Because this former United States Department of Agriculture scientist and, now, whistleblower, knows that 70 percent of the ground beef we buy at the supermarket contains something he calls “pink slime.”

“Pink slime” is beef trimmings. Once only used in dog food and cooking oil, the trimmings are now sprayed with ammonia so they are safe to eat and added to most ground beef as a cheaper filler.

It was Zirnstein who, in a USDA memo, first coined the term “pink slime” and is now coming forward to say he won’t buy it.

“It’s economic fraud,” he told ABC News. “It’s not fresh ground beef. …It’s a cheap substitute being added in.”

Zirnstein and his fellow USDA scientist, Carl Custer, both warned against using what the industry calls “lean finely textured beef,” widely known now as “pink slime,” but their government bosses overruled them.

According to Custer, the product is not really beef, but “a salvage product …fat that had been heated at a low temperature and the excess fat spun out.”

The “pink slime” is made by gathering waste trimmings, simmering them at low heat so the fat separates easily from the muscle, and spinning the trimmings using a centrifuge to complete the separation. Next, the mixture is sent through pipes where it is sprayed with ammonia gas to kill bacteria. The process is completed by packaging the meat into bricks. Then, it is frozen and shipped to grocery stores and meat packers, where it is added to most ground beef.

The “pink slime” does not have to appear on the label because, over objections of its own scientists, USDA officials with links to the beef industry labeled it meat.

“The under secretary said, ‘it’s pink, therefore it’s meat,’” Custer told ABC News.

ABC News has learned the woman who made the decision to OK the mix is a former undersecretary of agriculture, Joann Smith. It was a call that led to hundreds of millions of dollars for Beef Products Inc., the makers of pink slime.

When Smith stepped down from the USDA in 1993, BPI’s principal major supplier appointed her to its board of directors, where she made at least $1.2 million over 17 years.

Smith did not return ABC News’ calls for comment and BPI said it had nothing to do with her appointment. The USDA said while her appointment was legal at the time, under current ethics rules Smith could not have immediately joined the board.

video platform video management video solutions video player

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Wednesday
Feb292012

Organic Milk -- Are You Getting What You Pay For?

Creatas/Thinkstock (WASHINGTON) -- The USDA’s inspector general has released a new report raising questions about whether paying $7 per gallon for organic milk is buying you a drink that’s completely free of the chemicals and genetically modified material that may be in plain old milk.

It’s not that investigators found traces of prohibited genetically modified material in organic milk. They did not.

What they did find is that the agents who certify which milks can carry the “USDA Organic” label aren’t looking for it. If they looked and found GM material, that would mean the organic cows were eating the same sort of feed that is allowed to be fed to all the rest of the cows.

Also, the tankers that transport organic milk are sterilized with the same FDA-approved sanitizers that are used for regular milk.

“So there is a risk that organic milk can come into contact with prohibited substances as it is being transported,” the report says.

The IG also noted organic certifying agents have been tipping off farmers before inspections.

Click here to read the full IG report.

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio







ABC News Radio