Gothamist: Salmonella Suspicion Shifts from Tomato to Jalapeno

NannyState

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:35:40 -0500

Now they're going to have a good look at nacho cheese. Stadium toilets across the U.S. will heave a huge collective flush of relief.

babyhitler

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:44:31 -0500

Man, I knew it was Jalapenos! It couldn't be my friend the Tomato. Jalapenos have a mexican name, DUH!

matty

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:23:06 -0500

I remember reading this story yesterday while eating a burrito that had jalapenos in it. I finished the burrito anyway.

Politburo

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:02:58 -0500

SP obviously there are good regulations and there are bad regulations. The NAIS proposal, which is completely different from the produce barcoding we were discussing, appears to be a bad regulation (though the article isn't exactly an unbiased source and presents some silly arguments, and one ridiculous commenter somehow managed to compare this proposal to the Holocaust and Stalin). Most regulations will impact a small business more than a large business, due to basic economies of scale. That's just a fact of life, so I don't think that alone is a valid argument against a regulation. I also don't like the attitude expressed by some, including yourself, that small producers are automatically good and large producers are automatically bad. While large producers are certainly the source of most, if not all, problems (and their practices are unsustainable, polluting, etc), small producers aren't saints just because they only have a 50-head herd.

SP

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:53:33 -0500

Politburo, you may want to raad this: http://blog.ruhlman.com/ruhlmancom/2007/05/nais_support_an_1.html

HowBoutDemCowboys

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:20:31 -0500

You want to know how this happens? Just ask George Lopez. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5r9aK3mWtQ

Politburo

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:08:49 -0500

The anti-regulator's cry is always "small businesses!!!" But I don't see anything that is all that difficult to implement at the grower's level. They just need some barcode printers and a basic recordkeeping system. It's the middlemen that would have more issues, since they're buying from multiple sources, possibly mixing everything together and repacking, then selling that to several outlets. Note that records are already required under the Bioterrorism Act of 2002. They just don't have to be electronic or have barcodes. I'm not convinced that barcodes are really a solution to anything, but I don't think it would be that difficult to implement.

breaknight

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:02:28 -0500

"'1,251 people in 43 states'" is statistically insignificant" I agree completely. This whole thing is completely media driven. Fear, fear, fear. Fear everything! And also, are they saying all the cases are caused by ONE jalepeno?

SP

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:30:58 -0500

Bar codes are a horrible idea. This would effectively kill small growers with enormous expenses. And it is the small growers who are producing the safest cleanest products. It's the mega agribusiness farms that are the biggest polluters and users of pesticides and victims of animal waste runoff they themselves create. This bar code idea would only benefit these large operations, primarily by putting the smaller farms out of business.

Roquentin

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:30:21 -0500

"1,251 people in 43 states" is statistically insignificant. That's most of the US, probably more than 200 million people. You're probably more likely to win the lottery than eat a contaminated jalapeño.

Bottomless Chips

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:22:40 -0500

The FDA is such a joke; when will we wake up and realize that a federal bureaucracy like the FDA is the problem?