NoNAIS.org

I’ve been getting a lot of calls and letters from people concerned about the highly miss-informational New York Times article Free-Range Trichinosis. I have written an Op-Ed reply to it and sent it to the NYTimes which may be published but I can’t publish that here since they want first publication rights. However, I can cover some of the basic points.

It is important to realize several things:

1) The NYT article is an opinion piece. As such one should not expect it to contain facts nor should you expect that the NYTimes has fact checked the article. It would be nice if it were factual but this is reality and it is not. It is an opinion piece.

2) The author of the NYT opinion piece is a historian, not scientist. He gets grant funding and is employed by Texas State University, a bastion of Big Ag livestock which has a lot of support for and from Confinement Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). Keep in mind that he has his axe to grind, possibly paid for by someone else.

3) The non-scientific article presented in the Op-Ed piece was based on research funded by Big Ag (e.g., National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), Pork Board) designed to show the results they wanted to demonstrate. One can do faith based research to show anything. Heck, you can prove reading the NYTimes causes cancer of the brain if you design the study right. And then you can have hysteria and fear mongering about the false results, just like this Op-Ed piece does. The reality is there are European studies that show the opposite of what the opinion piece clamed. They demonstrate that pastured livestock are safer and less laden with bacteria than confinement raised livestock.

4) The non-scientist, opinionated Op-Ed author conviently ignores that the very deadly disease MRSA is coming out of confinement feeding operations, not pasture based operations. MRSA kills tens of thousands of people a year but the NPPC doesn’t want you thinking about that so they are presenting spin, illusion and slight of hand with this distracting Op-Ed piece.

5) As to the Op-Ed author’s worry about Trichinosis, realize again he was exaggerating. They didn’t find any Trichinosis. What they found were two pigs on pasture with “seropositive for Trichinella” which is a totally different thing and could have been triggered by exposure to non Trichinosis causing species. According to the MayoClinic: “Trichinosis usually isn’t serious and often gets better on its own.” The fact is Trichinosis is extremely rare, testable, treatable, killed by moderate cooking or freezing and virtually extinct in the USA. This was a non-issue, a red-herring, and simple fear mongering by CAFOs to make pastured pork look bad. It’s the “If you can’t win, beat up your little competitor’s” theory of marketing.

6) Both the confinement and the pastured animals had the almost the bacteria counts despite McWilliam’s exaggerations and hype. The minor difference between the populations was insignificant and all of this hysteria is irrelevant because…

7) USDA Inspected slaughter HACCP/PR and SSOP regulations and routines, also followed by state inspections, all assume that all incoming livestock are contaminated with the bacteria in question so steps are taken to prevent disease from getting into the food supply. When those steps are followed the food is safe. Here’s the reality check: virtually all of the food born illness and disease comes from Big Ag and Mega-Processors after the food leaves the farm. Think about the recent problems. Tens of millions of pounds of recalled beef, millions of heads of spinach, peppers, peanuts and pistachios. This didn’t come from your local pastured pork producer. The problems, and MRSA, originated and spread from Big Ag and Mega-Processors.

There are a lot of other problems with McWilliams’ pseudo-science Op-Ed piece that I won’t dissect here. It is unfortunate that Big Ag feels the need to hire media spin experts, such as historian McWilliams, to distort the truth. It makes you wonder what they’re so afraid of…

If you want healthy food, raise it yourself, buy it from someone you know or buy it from someone who knows someone you know. The closer the connection you have to your food the better off you’ll be.

I also recommend a healthy dose of skepticism while reading the Op-Ed page. Same for everything your read. Check the sources. Investigate. Think. Don’t be led to the slaughter.

Boar Balls on a Cold Winter’s Day
Those are a set of bowling ball size ornaments on the back end of a fully equipped north bound boar. With a harem of 30 ladies to keep happy they aren’t just decorations. Of course he’s got balls since he’s a working boar. What surprises visitors to our farm is that all the male pigs here have their balls. We don’t castrate the pigs we raise because we have no boar taint in our herds. This saves the little piglets a lot of pain on top of the fact that castration is a chore that nobody here enjoys, pigs included.

Big Pharma is trying to convince farmers and consumers that uncastrated male pigs taste bad. This is not true - The reality is that real, independent scientific research shows that only a very small minority of (older) boars have taint - the vast majority of market age boars do not have taint so castration and the new Pfizer vaccine Improvac are unnecessary.

Boar Taint FactsTaint is an unpleasant, musky urine like flavor and smell in the meat that is caused by two chemicals, skatole and androstenone, which can be found in both male pigs and occasionally in female pigs (gilts & sows). Taint is primarily deposited in the fat and most noticeable when cooking so it is simple to test for by using a soldering iron on a piece of fat after slaughter. About 25% of the human population can not detect taint so the taint tester needs to first be validated.

According to some researchers, breeds such as the lighter colored ones like Yorkshire are very low in taint while some of the newer commercial breeds are higher in taint. Boar taint is caused by poor genetics, over crowding, poor sanitation, low fiber diets, feed choices, management issues and other problems.

Slaughtering pigs at a normal market age and weight also virtually always prevents boar taint. We have tested many hundreds of boars up to 30 months of age on our farm without ever finding any taint in them. Castration isn’t necessary so we don’t do it any longer for our herds. If a farmer has a herd where boar taint is present, the taint can be bred out of the pigs and improved with better management practices.

Boar tainted meat is traditionally used trimmed to the lean and combined with fat from beef or sows for making spicy sausages, pepperoni and such which mask the flavor. Old country, low-tech solutions to the occasional strong tasting boar. Some people like the stronger flavor.

Over the years I’ve done a lot of research on this topic here at our farm. Our herd doesn’t have the boar taint, we don’t castrate and the pork from our boars sells like crazy to individuals and in stores and restaurants. It would be a shame to waste money on an unnecessary vaccine injecting extra chemicals into the meat. For more details of my research on this topic see:

NoBoarTaint.org
Boart Taint Articles
which will give you a list of articles about boar taint and lead to further scientific research on the topic of boar taint.

I would strongly suggest that farmers test for boar taint in their swine breeding herds before they spend a lot of money on anti-taint vaccines for their hogs. In the unlikely event they do have taint, then they should look into how to improve their feeding, management and genetics to get rid of it before resorting to costly vaccines that will be necessary for all future pigs if they travel down that path. Let’s humanely raise pigs with NoWeirdStuff in them.

Of course, none of this is going to make money for Big Pharma. If consumers and farmers know the truth then it is hard to justify the high cost of vaccination against a non-problem. Who’s going to be willing to fork over money for unnecessary vaccines unless they’re properly scared into wanting it? Who wants to pay the resulting higher price for food that has been injected with one more chemical? Not me!

One interesting question is that it is not clear if Pfizer’s new anti-taint vaccine Improvac will protect against both kinds of taint since taint is actually caused by two different chemicals, one produced in the testes & adrenal glands (androstenone) and the other taint caused by bacteria in the small intestine (skatole). From what I’ve read, Improvac merely suppresses testicular function and thus only protects against the androstenone from the testes. This ignores the androstenone produced in the adrenal glands above the kidneys and it ignores the skatole induced taint. Thus the vaccine is not 100% effective at preventing “boar taint”. I’m sure they’ll have appropriate disclaimers that keep them from having to be liable for those few remaining cases of taint on farms that depend on their vaccine.

Another interesting point is that when giving injections it is not all that rare for farmers to accidentally inject themselves. In a report by the European Medicine’s Agency it says:

“Accidental self- injection may produce similar effects in people to those seen in pigs. The risk of these effects is greater after a second or subsequent accidental injection than after a first injection.“

After a lot of Googling around I also found this expanded a bit on Pfizer’s web site:

“accidental self-injection may produce similar effects in people to those seen in pigs. These may include a temporary reduction in sexual hormones and reproductive functions in both men and women and an adverse effect on pregnancy. The risk of these effects will be greater after a second or subsequent accidental injection than after a first injection. The product label advises anyone who has received an accidental self-injection to seek medical attention immediately and not to use the product in the future.“

Apparently even women are susceptible to this issue. So if you use Improvac I would strongly suggest that you have already had any children you plan before using this product - You may not get another chance.

Another big problem I see with this vaccination is that these same Big Pharma companies may covertly, or overtly, aid the animal liberation and animal rights groups in pushing through laws banning castration. Big Pharma would benefit from a ban on castration because that will further their sales agenda and profits since so many people believe the Boar Taint Myth. While I am against the practice of castration I am even more against governmental interference in our lives. Castration is unnecessary but we need to let education and the market decide, not Big Corp lobbyists and government bureaucrats.

In a totally related irony, it is our dear friends at Pfizer that make little blue pills for erectile dysfunction. Our big boar Spot has no problem with this either.

And if that wasn’t more than you wanted to hear about boar balls, click through to the links for long evenings of reading…

There is a nasty situation growing in Britain regarding herbicides containing Aminopyralid killing off home gardens:

Gardeners across Britain are reaping a bitter harvest of rotten potatoes, withered salads and deformed tomatoes after an industrial herbicide tainted their soil. Caroline Davies reports on how the food chain became contaminated and talks to the angry allotment owners whose plots have been destroyed.

Gardeners have been warned not to eat home-grown vegetables contaminated by a powerful new herbicide that is destroying gardens and allotments across the UK.

The Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) has been inundated with calls from concerned gardeners who have seen potatoes, beans, peas, carrots and salad vegetables wither or become grossly deformed. The society admitted that it had no idea of the extent of the problem, but said it appeared ’significant’. The affected gardens and allotments have been contaminated by manure originating from farms where the hormone-based herbicide aminopyralid has been sprayed on fields.
-Guardian

On the one hand we’re faced with food shortages and rising prices. On the other hand we have the destruction of families’ ability to grow their own vegetables via herbicide resides in manures.

This story is not limited to Europe. In Minnesota they are warning against the feeding of ditch hay as well as hay from areas treated with these same herbicides:

Recently labeled herbicides containing the active ingredient aminopyralid (commonly sold as Milestone, Milestone VM, and ForeFront R&P) are beginning to replace picloram and clopyralid in many roadside treatment programs due to increased Canada thistle control with aminopyralid. Aminopyralid is in the same herbicide family as picloram and clopyralid, and poses the same potential to cause injury to broadleaf crops from contaminated manures. However, sensitive crop injury from aminopyralid contaminated manure has not yet been reported in Minnesota.

When animals are fed ditch hay that has been treated with either picloram or clopyralid, these chemicals pass quickly through the animal without significant degradation and end up in the manure via the urine, usually within a day or two. If sensitive crops (i.e. soybeans, lentils, peas, legumes, potatoes, tomatoes or peppers) are planted in fields where contaminated manure has been applied, injury or crop death can occur. Injured plants can exhibit twisting (epinasty), leaf cupping, and loss of apical dominance, resulting in short plants and abnormal side shoots.
-University of Minnesota

Who’s behind this toxic pollution, this destruction of the environment and home gardens? Why, it’s everyone’s favorite chemical corporation, Dow Chemical.

Dow AgroSciences, which manufactures aminopyralid, has posted advice to allotment holders and gardeners on its website. Colin Bowers, Dow’s UK grassland marketing manager, told The Observer that links to their products had been proved in some of the cases, but it was not clear whether aminopyralid was responsible for all of them and tests were continuing. ‘It is undoubtedly a problem,’ he said, ‘and I have got full sympathy for everyone who is involved with this.’

He said the company was unable to advise gardeners that it was ’safe’ to consume vegetables that had come into contact with the manure because of pesticide regulations. ‘All we can say is that the trace levels of aminopyralid that are likely to be in these crops are of such low levels that they are unlikely to cause a problem to human health.’

The Dow website says: ‘As a general rule, we suggest damaged produce (however this is caused) should not be consumed.’ Those who have already used contaminated manure are advised not to replant on the affected soil for at least a year.

Aminopyralid, which is found in several Dow products, the most popular being Forefront, a herbicide, is not licensed to be used on food crops and carries a label warning farmers using it not to sell manure that might contain residue to gardeners. The Pesticides Safety Directorate, which has issued a regulatory update on the weedkiller, is taking samples from affected plants for testing.
-Guardian

You would think that a reasonable, rational response would be to stop dumping toxic herbicides in the environment yet apparently Dow doesn’t get it:

Problems with the herbicide emerged late last year, when some commercial potato growers reported damaged crops. In response, Dow launched a campaign within the agriculture industry to ensure that farmers were aware of how the products should be used. Nevertheless, the herbicide has now entered the food chain. Those affected are demanding an investigation and a ban on the product. They say they have been given no definitive answer as to whether other produce on their gardens and allotments is safe to eat.

It appears that the contamination came from grass treated 12 months ago. Experts say the grass was probably made into silage, then fed to cattle during the winter months. The herbicide remained present in the silage, passed through the animal and into manure that was later sold. Horses fed on hay that had been treated could also be a channel.
:
Dow is planning a major publicity campaign to reiterate warnings to farmers over usage, and to encourage allotment holders to check the provenance of manure that they put down in an effort to prevent the problem escalating. On compensation, it was less forthcoming. ‘There is no easy answer to that,’ said Bowers. ‘The first port of call is always where the manure comes from. From that point on, I can’t really comment.

‘The chain is horrendously complicated. In the cases we have managed to trace back, we might find that the farmer who supplied the manure didn’t spray anything himself, but he might have bought in a couple of bales of silage from one of his neighbours, and that farm might have sprayed.’
-Guardian

Of course, the shareholders and profits must be protected at all cost.

Should the finger be pointed at Dow AgroSciences? While admitting some of the manure can be linked back to their products, the company says it is by no means clear that all the episodes of contamination now being reported are as a result of aminopyralid.

They have broken no rules. Nevertheless, they acknowledge it is “undoubtedly’ a problem. To help, they have set up an online hotline and posted an information page on their website which advises concerned people to email them at UKHotline@dow.com.

They are also now planning a publicity campaign to drive home the message to farmers that they must handle these products with utmost care, and to warn gardeners they must check the provenance of any manure they buy.

Should the farmer who sold the manure be held responsible? That is not an easy one. In some cases the farmer had not sprayed his grassland at all and behaved completely responsibly, but still the manure was contaminated. One explanation could be that the farmer bought in silage off other farmers to feed livestock - and one of them had been sprayed. Or, perhaps, it came from a horse fed hay bought from a hay merchant, who bought from several farmers. Tracing back the chain becomes horribly complicated.

Should the product be banned? Certainly that’s the opinion of some gardeners I spoke to for the story in today’s Observer. Or will strengthening the label warning be enough to prevent the problem escalating? These are just some of the questions currently being debated in the gardening community.
-Word Of Mouth Blog

Frankly, it’s time for Dow to step up to the plate and pay for dinner.

NAIS is taking away our basic right to raise our own meat by creating a licensing system whereby eventually only those who have the permission of the government would be allowed to raise meat. The release of potent, long lived herbicides like these containing Aminopyralid take away our right to grow our own vegetables - all with the support of the government. No vegetables, no meat, no choices. Pretty soon the starving masses of people become totally dependent on the corporate state for their daily dole of manna. If you step out of line, forget eating.

“Control the food and you control the people.”
-Henry Kissenger

Hat tip to Sue.