USDA changes position on Tyson Foods regarding poultry labeling
Categories: Nutrition & Supplements
Although the U.S. Department of Agriculture indicated to chicken giant Tyson Foods over the summer that it could begin using "raised without antibiotics" on its products, the federal agency has now reversed that position.
Apparently, the USDA did not catch the inclusion of a very specific item it classifies as an antibiotic, although Tyson indicated that the FDA does not classify the substance -- ionophores-- that way.
Tyson will now probably have to scramble to remove these labels from possibly millions of fresh chicken products. Why the USDA and the FDA disagree on the classification of ionophores seems odd, but hey -- it's the federal government, right?
Apparently, the USDA did not catch the inclusion of a very specific item it classifies as an antibiotic, although Tyson indicated that the FDA does not classify the substance -- ionophores-- that way.
Tyson will now probably have to scramble to remove these labels from possibly millions of fresh chicken products. Why the USDA and the FDA disagree on the classification of ionophores seems odd, but hey -- it's the federal government, right?
Recent Posts
- Has Your Hard Work Paid Off? Show Us The Results! (11/24/2009)
- Ashley Greene's "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" Diet (11/24/2009)
- Can Fat Come Between Friends? (11/24/2009)
- Should Yoga Qualify as an Olympic Sport? (11/24/2009)
- Thanksgiving: Pick Your Poison (11/24/2009)
























Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
John Jones 11-23-2007 @ 11:05AM
There is no question that ionophores are antibiotics. A simple search on the term will reveal that. The FDA does recognize that ionophore are antibiotics - the assertion to the contrary just show how desperate they are trying to cover the tracks. Even the companies that sell ionophore drugs make it clear they are antibiotics.
Reply
Missing the point 11-29-2007 @ 1:26PM
Brian and John Jones are missing the point. One of the main reasons that people want "antibiotic free" meat is to avoid producing or coming into contact with so-called "superbugs"--bacteria that have become resistant to common antibiotic drugs like penicillin and tetracycline.
Ionophone supplements don't have this effect. They are never used as antibacterial drugs in humans. They don't cause the creation of so-called "superbugs."
Just calling anything that kills bacteria an "antibiotic" for the purpose of food labelling doesn't make sense. By that logic, if the butcher used alcohol to sterilize his cutting instruments then the meat wouldn't be antibiotic-free. Of course alcohol has antibiotic properties (that's why Purel works -- it's an alcohol-gel solution) but that doesn't mean that the meat should be labeled.
A professional blogger like Brian White should get to the bottom of these things instead of just posting without giving further thought. The blogger should be adding value through research and understanding rather than just summarizing the work of others and posting a single link.
Reply