The beef about increased Salmonella testing and proposed standards for primal cuts of beef, that is.

Four weeks ago, on Oct. 24, Meatingplace posted my blog about Dr. Engeljohn’s, and maybe FSIS’s, plan to subject beef primals to the same testing standards for salmonella as the current ones for boneless trim.

Two weeks ago I was at NIAA’s annual conference on antibiotics used in animals raised for food.It was there I heard from an industry rep that I was unfair in my last blog and that things had changed since I left USDA. I don’t doubt that they have, and the numbers will be different than those I was privy to way back when.

So I asked the rep to email the correct numbers, and any other changes s/he would like to see to the blog and I would consider a retraction. I have not received the requested response, so here is my take on what the beef with the blog was all about.

I said industry has done testing and that the results are being held close and not shared, “and for good reason.” I also said that industry would be holding meetings with FSIS leadership to discuss the possible “serious repercussions” that could “evolve from such testing.”

It was stated at NIAA that I suggested industry would “sneak around D.C.” meeting with Al Almanza and others.

Al’s meeting records are made public on a regular basis, a policy that I started in 2005. There is no “sneaking” around and I did not say there would be. In fact, Almanza told Meatingplace on Sept. 28 that there have already been such discussions.

I was told that industry data today for primal results is skewed because primal testing is done when there is a “high event” day, which I think means the trim testing positive is higher than normal.

I was told the numbers would be higher than average also on primals since they are not tested on low event days. That may be very true, but we eat beef from both high and low event days, and I think we should know how much the Salmonella and E coli rates are across the board. And I still think they are scary high, but I cannot speak for the year 2016, only for 2005-2008.

So I am hoping that in the next few days, those currently in the industry or FSIS will share the current numbers with our readership. If I am wrong, I will admit it and “man up.” If the numbers are scary high, high event day testing be damned, we need to figure out some way to get a handle on the problem.

All ideas — except just cook it — are welcome.

I found the beef!

Join for free* to continue reading.