Friday, November 6, 2009

TP: Raw-oyster proposal targeted by federal legislation

One would hope that the entire Gulf Coast congressional delegation would get on board with this, and soon:

"Three Gulf Coast senators introduced legislation Thursday that would bar the Food and Drug Administration from using federal money to enforce a ban on the sale of raw, untreated oysters during warm-weather months."

Read the full story >>

3 comments:

Jennie said...

So essentially they are trying to ban the FDA from doing their job of protecting the public from dying. when it is clearly documented that 15 people consistently die each year from eating untreated raw oysters each year, there is an obvious problem. Of course, the oyster industry just wants to blame the individuals who die rather than accept the fact that oysters are not safe for all consumers and there is a process available to make the oysters safe that they just want to ignore in order to safe money. They are looking at the economic gains rather than the safety of consumers.

GIshuck said...

Jennie,
The FDA can't claim that it will prevent 15 people from dying, all they can do is say that it will reduce illnesses by 35%.

Hundreds more people each year die from choking on hot dogs, because the shape is conducive, shall we regulate that? Tens of thousands are made sick and many die due to tainted meat and vegetables, should we irradiate everything we eat? Do you known that irradiating food is safe, there is a growing debate.

Take a look at this article by Dr. Samuel Epstein
http://www.riles.org/musings37.htm

This legislation will affect tens of thousands of people directly, and many more indirectly. This is a $500 million industry, which could easily be decimated.

I think you're right in that it seems like a pretty easy fix, of course we don't want people to die from eating oysters, or anything for that matter. Once you get beyond the surface, however, it's an entirely different issue.

Stacy said...

If the cost is filtered to consumers, adding a few dollars per BAG, I'd sure pay it to keep anyone I love from the horrors of vibrio. The warnings make it sound like you may get sick. They don't tell you that you may DIE. And FAST. and HORRIBLY. Also, the warnings make it sound like only people with serious illnesses are at risk. ANYONE can be at risk just because they took an over-the-counter medication that affected their liver function without their knowledge. Just being under the weather with a hidden virus could be enough. For once, I'd like the value to be put on human life. Just tossing out that the industry could be decimated? Did the milk industry keel over because they had to pasteurize? There is no substitute for oysters. Oyster lovers will still buy them, even if the cost is higher. What studies have been done to compare higher cost with pasteurization and the possible a small decrease in sales versus lower cost unpasteurized with the same sales? What serious neutral feasibility studies are being done OUTSIDE of the industry/producers?