tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post7035416852499757970..comments2024-03-28T18:32:05.933-04:00Comments on bensozia: Bureaucrats and EggsJohnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01037215533094998996noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-53293682835380442662017-02-18T21:47:30.588-05:002017-02-18T21:47:30.588-05:00Oh, missed that bit somehow.
That said, they abso...Oh, missed that bit somehow.<br /><br />That said, they absolutely didn't take the full losses due to them, and I agree with the Anon that they got away with a shady compromise that treated the symptoms but didn't actually cure the underlying problem.G. Verlorennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-28583173651032385312017-02-18T20:21:16.444-05:002017-02-18T20:21:16.444-05:00It was in response to this statement from Mr/Ms An...It was in response to this statement from Mr/Ms Anonymous: "but the businesses involved compromised with the washing instead of taking their losses"<br /><br />In fact, as you pointed out, of course they took losses :)pootrsoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05975929246429466067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-2698298852557049732017-02-18T13:08:42.740-05:002017-02-18T13:08:42.740-05:00@pootrsox
I'm not sure you why mention such l...@pootrsox<br /><br />I'm not sure you why mention such losses among egg farmers, though, since it seems like a foregone conclusion that if you let your chickens develop a deadly health risk, you're going to have to spend money eradicating the disease.<br /><br />I mean, what other alternative was there? Let innocent people have their health be risked purely so that negligent farmers who failed to do enough to prevent the disease outbreak in the first place can avoid losing money?G. Verlorennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-73559809340185518272017-02-18T12:36:50.136-05:002017-02-18T12:36:50.136-05:00Actually fewer than 10% of the hens in commercial ...Actually fewer than 10% of the hens in commercial egg farms have salmonella, (the number may be as low as 1%, based on a lot of information I was able to google).<br /><br />And even infected hens lay mostly *non-infected* eggs.<br /><br />Salmonella from inside eggs (as opposed to other sources, from incompletely washed eggs to meats, produce, etc etc etc) is actually pretty rare, and usually comes from food prepared in restaurants or similar settings where eggs are not properly treated (unrefrigerated, or mixed with never-refrigerated eggs and left sitting for some time).<br /><br />In the 1980's, infected hens were indeed a problem. After a massive outbreak among people in Pennsylvania, the state instituted some pretty rigorous protocols. By the late '90's the percentage of infected hens had dropped from almost 40% to under 10%; it's since dropped far lower, and the USDept of Agriculture mandated the Pennsylvania program be instituted nationwide. (Again, I learned this from reading CDC and scientific reports obtained via google. I'm not an "egg-ologist"!)<br /><br />BTW, those Pennsylvania egg farmers took horrendous losses while implementing the new protocols.pootrsoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05975929246429466067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-52112056800986312902017-02-18T11:03:41.287-05:002017-02-18T11:03:41.287-05:00The salmonella is inside our US eggs. It contamina...The salmonella is inside our US eggs. It contaminates our laying hens before they're born. It is a systemic problem that is deemed too expensive to fix because it would mean killing off all of our producing hens and replacing them with salmonella free hens. This was admitted many (15?) years ago when they first discovered the problem. It would have been relatively easily fixed then, but the businesses involved compromised with the washing instead of taking their losses. Imagine the money saved if we didn't have to refrigerate eggs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-4973553886428136782017-02-18T08:00:10.468-05:002017-02-18T08:00:10.468-05:00Each approach makes sense for given parameters.
I...Each approach makes sense for given parameters.<br /><br />If salmonella is less common in the environments of European farms, and most contamination occurs after they've been transported elsewhere, then preserving the cuticle makes more sense than washing the eggs.<br /><br />And if (as I suspect) the opposite is true in America, and eggs are more likely to be exposed to salmonella before they get shipped out to be sold, then washing them prior to transport and sale makes the most sense.<br /><br />American farms operate at larger scales, and from what I understand with fewer restrictions on the sanitary conditions of the animals and their pens. By not better regulating the conditions in which our eggs are produced, it becomes necessary to require cleaning of the eggs prior to sale and consumption.G. Verlorennoreply@blogger.com