Tesco Horse Meat Scandal

[*MAD DOG*]

In the UK, some supermarkets have admitted that there is horse meat in their
home cooked burgers.

Even places like Burger King have had to admit that there are small amounts of
horse meat in their burgers.

Tesco is a big supermarket chain in the UK.
Within hours of the news that Tesco's 'all beef hamburgers' contained 30% horse meat, these jokes hit the internet

“I'm so hungry, I could eat a horse..... I guess Tesco just listened!

Anyone want a burger from Tesco? Yay or neigh?

Not entirely sure how Tesco are going to get over this hurdle.

Waitress in Tesco asked if I wanted anything on my Burger.
So I had £5 each way!

Had some burgers from Tesco for my tea last night ...
I still have a bit between my teeth.

A woman has been taken into hospital after eating horse meat burgers from Tesco.
Her condition is said to be stable.

Tesco are now testing all their vegetarian burgers for traces of unicorn

"I've just checked the Tesco burgers in my freezer ... AND THEY'RE OFF"

Tesco now forced to deny presence of zebra in burgers,
as shoppers confuse barcodes for serving suggestions.

Said to the missus, These Tesco burgers give me the trots....

"To beef or not to beef, that is equestrian".....

A cow walks into a bar.
Barman says, "Why the long face?"
Cow says "Illegal ingredients, coming over here stealing our jobs!"

I hear the smaller version of those Tesco burgers make great horse d'oeuvres.

These Tesco burger jokes are going on a bit....
Talk about flogging a dead horse!

[why?]

and yet, in France and other european countries, a steak is usually not cow, but horse or rabbit or who knows what.

[DeathBeard]

At least they admitted to it. In the United States big agro business works in the govt and makes laws that serve their interests, at the expense of the sheeple.

[nookandcrannycar]

In the United States big agro business works in the govt and makes laws that serve their interests, at the expense of the sheeple.

^^^^^This. If anyone doubts this, read the book "Diet For a Small Planet". For as long as the content of that book stays in the forefront of your mind, you won't want to eat meat in the U.S. (unless it was 'raised' using the methods used by Nieman Ranch in California and others of their ilk (who mostly, if not wholly, started after "Diet For a Small Planet" was written)). This late 20th century book had a stronger effect on me than Upton Sinclair's early 20th century novel "The Jungle" did while reading it as a kid.

[nookandcrannycar]

In the United States big agro business works in the govt and makes laws that serve their interests, at the expense of the sheeple.

^^^^^This. If anyone doubts this, read the book "Diet For a Small Planet". For as long as the content of that book stays in the forefront of your mind, you won't want to eat meat in the U.S. (unless it was 'raised' using the methods used by Nieman Ranch in California and others of their ilk (who mostly, if not wholly, started after "Diet For a Small Planet" was written)). This late 20th century book had a stronger effect on me than Upton Sinclair's early 20th century novel "The Jungle" did when reading it as a kid.

[why?]

so are you saying you are a vegetarian? I just couldn't do that. I don't care what they do, it tastes wonderful and i am still alive.

[DeathBeard]

Interesting logic

[*MAD DOG*]

so are you saying you are a vegetarian? I just couldn't do that. I don't care what they do, it tastes wonderful and i am still alive.

I'm no vego.

If I order beef. I expect beef. I would not expect to be served Mr Ed's descendants instead.

If it wasn't such a big deal why not just label it as Horse meat or Contains Horse meat?

Imagine turning up to the gas station, you fill pick up the regular nozzle, put it in your cars tank and fill up. Go in and pay. Come out, go to drive off and your car dies because it's diesel........

Your logic is like politician logic....... Your not running for office are you?

[nookandcrannycar]

so are you saying you are a vegetarian? I just couldn't do that. I don't care what they do, it tastes wonderful and i am still alive.

No, but I wouldn't say I eat it routinely either. After reading "Diet For a Small Planet" I didn't eat any meat for a couple of years.

If I'm dining at a restaurant in the Bay Area when visiting family, and one of the selections on the menu includes Nieman Ranch beef, I will always select that item...even if the restaurant is known for some completely unrelated item. If a selection includes Nieman Ranch beef, that source will always be listed on the menu.

I'm curious re the practices/laws/regulations re meat in other industrialized countries.....better re content allowed?....better sanitary practices?.....more practices in place that benefit consumers and are followed religiously?

I hadn't really thought about any of that for quite a while, and then Mad Dog's post popped up.

Another related bit of information just popped into my head. A friend of mine here in Texas who, unlike me, is an 'Ugly Texan' (he wants to change lots of things to make it like California (he's also a native Californian...and has been here twice as long as I have)) told me that Texas is much less strict (when compared to California) re what they allow in ground beef. He said this is all in the name of cutting costs and that most Texans are oblivious to this. He doesn't like it. He thinks this is wrong.

[nookandcrannycar]

If it wasn't such a big deal why not just label it as Horse meat or Contains Horse meat?


Because that makes too much sense, and is too honorable. The relationship between the Swedish government and the population comes to mind. It is a little too close for my taste, but at least it is something I can respect from the government side of the equation. Overall, the government really cares about protecting consumers and cares about making things as egalitarian as possible. It isn't just lip service. IMO, many people in the current administration here in the U.S. might have some of the same ideas, but it is just lip service...and political expediency. They don't really give a tinker's damn about the populace.

[why?]

I'm no vego.

If I order beef. I expect beef. I would not expect to be served Mr Ed's descendants instead.

If it wasn't such a big deal why not just label it as Horse meat or Contains Horse meat?

Imagine turning up to the gas station, you fill pick up the regular nozzle, put it in your cars tank and fill up. Go in and pay. Come out, go to drive off and your car dies because it's diesel........

Your logic is like politician logic....... Your not running for office are you?

no, i was responding to nookandcrannycar's post and DeathBeard's comments.

I don't want to eat horse or anything like that either.

No, but I wouldn't say I eat it routinely either. After reading "Diet For a Small Planet" I didn't eat any meat for a couple of years.

If I'm dining at a restaurant in the Bay Area when visiting family, and one of the selections on the menu includes Nieman Ranch beef, I will always select that item...even if the restaurant is known for some completely unrelated item. If a selection includes Nieman Ranch beef, that source will always be listed on the menu.

I'm curious re the practices/laws/regulations re meat in other industrialized countries.....better re content allowed?....better sanitary practices?.....more practices in place that benefit consumers and are followed religiously?

I hadn't really thought about any of that for quite a while, and then Mad Dog's post popped up.

Another related bit of information just popped into my head. A friend of mine here in Texas who, unlike me, is an 'Ugly Texan' (he wants to change lots of things to make it like California (he's also a native Californian...and has been here twice as long as I have)) told me that Texas is much less strict (when compared to California) re what they allow in ground beef. He said this is all in the name of cutting costs and that most Texans are oblivious to this. He doesn't like it. He thinks this is wrong.
I don't know what that book says. I do know that there are many people that overreact to what any industry does in this country.

If you are worried about that, you really need to read up on Halal (Muslim) & Kosher ( Jewish) food preparation practices.

But I'm pretty sure the USA has among the best safety and food standards in the world. Besides Japan, but only because the Japanese love to eat their fish raw, and preparation for that takes amazing above the pale dedication to make sure you don't murder your consumers. Beyond that I would assume most of the first world countries are about the same.

[nookandcrannycar]

Your logic is like politician logic....... Your not running for office are you?

I don't think Why? is running for office, he just lives in a blue, liberal state :biggrin:.

[nookandcrannycar]

I don't know what that book says. I do know that there are many people that overreact to what any industry does in this country.


When I was in high school I was the clean up person in the meat department at a local gourmet grocer for about a year. One of the butchers was Canadian and was always going on and on about how dirty San Francisco was in every conceivable way when compared to his native Vancouver and how Canadian sanitation practices were superior (at that time) to U.S. practices.

I later read "Diet for a Small Planet" (in the 1990s) and I believe that is also when it was written. I agree with you re lots of people overreacting to the practices in different industries in the U.S., but I don't think you'd feel that way if you read "Diet for a Small Planet".

U.S. practices, attitudes, and regulations in meat and related industries MAY have changed a lot since then, but I have my doubts.

[nookandcrannycar]

Your logic is like politician logic....... Your not running for office are you?

It's nice to know that Australians can have the same cynicism toward their politicians that many U.S. citizens do :biggrin:.

[TLyttle]

One really must laugh at USDA's hypocrisy! They are so busy testing Canadian beef that they forget about the sins recorded by outfits like "Sixty Minutes" and others. Personally, I eat very little meat, and I only enjoy it if the recipe is interesting enough. I would pass up the best steak for a plateful of poached scallops or garlic prawns. I was raised on beef (my old man wouldn't eat anything else!), but my palate no longer is pleased by it. By the way, I was vegetarian for a few years, but that was before good restaurants accepted the practice and now prepared veggies properly.

And for why?'s comment about not being able to go meatless, I went to a restaurant 4 or 5 times before I realised it was Vegetarian; they had a lasagna that was to die for!!

[bronsin]

After the Chinese take all our jobs we wont have any money so we will no longer be any use to the Chinese as a market for their products.

However the Rich in this country will still have to live in the lifestyle they are accustomed to.

So they will be offering FREE cruises on specially built cruise ships to China. Millions of people will go to China.

As the only thing the mass of common people are worth anymore.

FOOD.

[DeathBeard]

Interesting meat facts:

1) Europe the source of the scandal will not even import US meat, in fact it is banned.
2)Cows are fed genetically modified corn, not grass. Cows were never meant to eat corn.
3) Cows are pumped full of bgh bovine growth hormone. Research what this does not only to the cow, but to us after we consume it.
4) Cows are routinely fed other cow carcass (mad cow) and live in there own feces, big agro counters this with tons of antibiotics. As a result we have new super viruses that cannot be countered.
5) Only 10% of ground meat comes from the US, the majority is comprised of meat from China, where there is no EPA oversight.
6) Meat industry uses "glue" to join parts of a cow to make appear like a continuous piece of meat.
7) Big agro is one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington that routinely places their puppets in govt.
8) soy and spirulina actually have more protein than meat, despite how you have been brainwashed.

We eat more "meat" in the USA than any other country in the world and have more cancer than the rest of the world combined, don't think that's a coincidence.

[bronsin]

If that not bad enough 110 million in the US have STD....

[DeathBeard]

Actually its much higher, considering viruses stay in a dormant state before they start appearing

[why?]

Diet For a Small Planet was actually written sometime in the 70's at the latest.

Interesting meat facts:

1) Europe the source of the scandal will not even import US meat, in fact it is banned.
2)Cows are fed genetically modified corn, not grass. Cows were never meant to eat corn.
3) Cows are pumped full of bgh bovine growth hormone. Research what this does not only to the cow, but to us after we consume it.
4) Cows are routinely fed other cow carcass (mad cow) and live in there own feces, big agro counters this with tons of antibiotics. As a result we have new super viruses that cannot be countered.
5) Only 10% of ground meat comes from the US, the majority is comprised of meat from China, where there is no EPA oversight.
6) Meat industry uses "glue" to join parts of a cow to make appear like a continuous piece of meat.
7) Big agro is one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington that routinely places their puppets in govt.
8) soy and spirulina actually have more protein than meat, despite how you have been brainwashed.

We eat more "meat" in the USA than any other country in the world and have more cancer than the rest of the world combined, don't think that's a coincidence.

This is the type of stuff they point out. At best it is undocumented pseudo science. I've never seen any of these claims proven with actual scientific studies. To me it is about as worthwhile as believing global warming is actually a problem and not something made up completely and falsified as much as possible.

[DeathBeard]

Science ethical? Please research Dr. Burzynski, hear about his battle with the science establishment

[nookandcrannycar]

Diet For a Small Planet was actually written sometime in the 70's at the latest.



This is the type of stuff they point out. At best it is undocumented pseudo science. I've never seen any of these claims proven with actual scientific studies. To me it is about as worthwhile as believing global warming is actually a problem and not something made up completely and falsified as much as possible.

In post #11 on this thread, re "Diet for a Small Planet", you wrote "I don't know what that book says". Your claim quoted above (from post #20 on this thread) is pretty much antithetical to the quote from post #11. You became well versed enough re this book to refute it's content within a few hours?

I'm not quite as cynical as you are about the information re global warming, but I'm possibly more cynical re whether the U.S. should focus research resources toward it. A study from outside the U.S. (can't remember who did the research) indicated that the U.S. is currently responsible for 16% of the climate of the world. We could sink many billions of dollars (maybe even a trillion over time) into improving 'our part of the pie', but 84% of the pie would still be out of our control, and I don't trust so called commitments most other nations might claim to make in that arena...and I don't have much more faith in any claimed commitment coming from our government. Over time private sector innovation might bring about (or even force) the change that environmentalists want and that is what it is. The owners of that capital would face the risk and benefit from the potential reward.

I read both "Diet for a Small Planet" and "Diet for a New America" in the 90s, and I may have merged some of the contents in my memory. After reading both, I remember thinking two things:

1. Shaking my head re what happens in the meat and poultry industries overall (content, practices, etc.) Regulators can't be everywhere. After reading these books, I asked one of my relatives some questions. He was one of the founders of a law firm that represents large agribusiness concerns. His evasiveness and lack of candor would have made his clients happy, but I knew him well enough (he's no longer living) to read between the lines.

2. I was amazed at the incredible amount of water used, especially overall in the meat industry.

If you know anyone who has lived in a rural part of Iowa (but no longer has a vested interest in the area) ask how he or she feels about what goes on in the meat industry. You might get an earful.

P.S. others = see post #20 for the list (from DeathBeard) in the middle of Why?'s quote of DeathBeard. This list didn't post through in my quote from Why?'s post.

[why?]

Science ethical? Please research Dr. Burzynski, hear about his battle with the science establishment

nope, never said science was ethical. in fact scientists are some of the most rigid ideologues in existence. One of our biggest problems atm is science without ethics, and people who are masquerading as ethical with darker flat out evil ulterior motives.

In post #11 on this thread, re "Diet for a Small Planet", you wrote "I don't know what that book says". Your claim quoted above (from post #20 on this thread) is pretty much antithetical to the quote from post #11. You became well versed enough re this book to refute it's content within a few hours?

I'm not quite as cynical as you are about the information re global warming, but I'm possibly more cynical re whether the U.S. should focus research resources toward it. A study from outside the U.S. (can't remember who did the research) indicated that the U.S. is currently responsible for 16% of the climate of the world. We could sink many billions of dollars (maybe even a trillion over time) into improving 'our part of the pie', but 84% of the pie would still be out of our control, and I don't trust so called commitments most other nations might claim to make in that arena...and I don't have much more faith in any claimed commitment coming from our government. Over time private sector innovation might bring about (or even force) the change that environmentalists want and that is what it is. The owners of that capital would face the risk and benefit from the potential reward.

I read both "Diet for a Small Planet" and "Diet for a New America" in the 90s, and I may have merged some of the contents in my memory. After reading both, I remember thinking two things:

1. Shaking my head re what happens in the meat and poultry industries overall (content, practices, etc.) Regulators can't be everywhere. After reading these books, I asked one of my relatives some questions. He was one of the founders of a law firm that represents large agribusiness concerns. His evasiveness and lack of candor would have made his clients happy, but I knew him well enough (he's no longer living) to read between the lines.

2. I was amazed at the incredible amount of water used, especially overall in the meat industry.

If you know anyone who has lived in a rural part of Iowa (but no longer has a vested interest in the area) ask how he or she feels about what goes on in the meat industry. You might get an earful.

P.S. others = see post #20 for the list (from DeathBeard) in the middle of Why?'s quote of DeathBeard. This list didn't post through in my quote from Why?'s post.

i still have no idea what the book says. That does not mean I do not know what people who attack the meat industry claim. The same type of thing is used to attack GM foods.

Being anti global warming is not cynical, it is honest. First off, using NOAA bouys, the earth has not warmed the past few years. Secondly, that gigantic Cambridge e-mail scandal that caught so called scientists bragging about falsifying data. Thirdly, in the US, and other countries, heat sensors are put in obviously foolish places that are designed to make it look like higher temperatures are normal, ie the middle of parking lots, within a foot of an a/c vent for a large building. Junkscience.com is a great source for defeating global warming zealots, ie eco terrorists.

Most importantly though, climatologists can't get the 5 day weather forecast correct, why should anyone think they have any idea what will happen any time beyond that? The fact is they might know 1% of how the earth's climate works, and that is probably overestimating things.

I'm not saying the meat industries, or anyone anywhere at any time not named Jesus Christ is perfect.

I am saying there are cases where people not knowing the reality of what is going on, and trusting those who do, is not necessarily a bad thing. I wouldn't trust a 'government' regulator, watcher, etc further than I could throw him, or more accurately, further than the bullet i shot him with carried him.

I would trust someone who makes their living on having consumers want to choose to buy what they sell not to start killing off said consumers.

Sometimes quack ideas are just quack ideas, or even worse, wrongful ideas put out to manipulate people into giving their own personal power away for nothing. That is the basis of the environmental movement, and from where i stand the basis of the anti meat industry, and the anti GMO movement at this point.

Scaring people into acting a certain way has never produced anything worthwhile.

[*MAD DOG*]

I've just clicked "unsubscribe" on my own thread.......