The Crossroads of Ag and Public Health

What is the connection between what you eat and how you feel?

Does the way an animal or crop is raised impact its nutritional value?

How are farming methods contributing to environmental problems and human health issues?

These questions and others like them represent the crossroads of agriculture and public health, that complex interdependency between what we eat and how it is raised with our individual and collective well-being.

They are the kinds of questions that seem to be popping up more and more, from the mainstream press to scientific journals and trade publications.

But clearly the frequency of the questions does not mean we have answers. In fact, as any researcher knows, most so-called answers just lead to more questions, more debate and more avenues for research.

To help bring some order to all that research and to the multiplicity of answers derived from it, the Center for a Livable Future, a research institute partnering Johns Hopkins University with its School of Public Health, recently launched a new Web site, the Agriculture and Public Health Gateway.

The gateway provides a central starting point for anyone interested in exploring the ag-public health connection. It lets you simultaneously search four key databases dealing with agriculture (NAL's AGRICOLA), ag safety (the National Agricultural Safety Database), medicine (PubMed) and the environment (Earthtrends). Or you can browse a range of Web-based goodies -- articles, reports, databases, programs, videos and more -- organized by topics such as crop production, community and occupational health, or food safety and labeling.

You'll find more details about the site on the Center's blog, or just jump in and start exploring. And when you find answers to the questions above, let us know.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Farm Safety and Food and Nutrition and Libraries and Natural Resources & Environment and Organic Production and Plants and Crops and Rural Life and Water Quality on November 04, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Hey! What a rich and inviting pool you left for exploration here. Thanks!! I also noted related ideas from an NPR broadcast today. This was on gut (human) microflora, and their contributions (or detraction) from our physical well-being. See: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95900616 These connections are not new. JI Rodale started "Prevention" magazine - then soon added "Organic Gardening." This witnesses his belief in food production and health outcome relationships. Thanks for these neat notes! - Karl

Submitted by: Karl Schneider on November 4, 2008 09:55 PM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 5, 2008 11:23 AM

Submitted by: Karl on November 6, 2008 10:00 AM

Submitted by: Water Damage on November 21, 2008 08:12 AM

Submitted by: Alex Tiller on November 26, 2008 01:42 PM

Did You Know USDA Did This?

Did you know that the United States Department of Agriculture was heavily involved in last year's dogfighting case against Michael Vick?

Turns out that one of the laws invoked against Vick, U.S. Code Title 7, Chapter 54, Section 2156, the "Animal fighting venture prohibition," gives to the Secretary of Agriculture the authority to investigate any alleged violations and to get help from any law enforcement agency to do so.

Under that authority, the Department's Office of the Inspector General led the investigation that secured Vick's conviction. Along the way, they also became responsible for the dogs seized from Vick's property.

Because the law put the dogs in U.S. Government custody, someone from the OIG had to arrange for their care, coordinate their rehabilitation, and reimburse the various animal control facilities that had agreed to take in the dogs.

But we all know these weren't just any dogs. Many had been trained to fight or were bait for fights, and all had lived under difficult circumstances. Recognizing that they were out of their depth with what should become of the dogs themselves, the OIG worked with the ASPCA to assemble a team of animal behaviorists to evaluate the dogs.

The U.S. Attorney then petitioned the court to appoint a guardian (PDF | 44KB) to recommend what should ultimately happen to the dogs and to be responsible for the dogs' welfare in the meantime. Rebecca Huss, a law professor at Valparaiso University and an expert on animal law, impressively filled that position.

Huss recommended that the 48 dogs be transferred to various rescue organizations across the country. These organizations then had to agree to conditions laid out by USDA's OIG regarding the dogs' care and conditions for adoption.

By July of this year, according to the Washington Post, "a handful [of the dogs] have been or are being adopted," while others "are expected to move on to foster care and eventual adoption" after retraining.

It would be a happy ending to this difficult story, but for many of the dogs, it will take time to trust people again.

For more information contact NAL's Animal Welfare Information Center or, if you'd like to learn more specifically about the Vick case, see the court documents available online at Valparaiso University's School of Law.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals on October 03, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Wow! What a great thing to hear. Those poor dog's endocrine systems must be shot due to the stress of their former lives. I'm happy to hear that our government was involved in rectifying this shameful event.

Submitted by: Susie on October 8, 2008 11:58 AM

How Is a Cow Like an Ethanol Production Plant?

You can find the answer to that question by checking out the colorful and informative handout (PDF | 618 KB) prepared by Paul Weimer, a microbiologist at the U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center.

Before you go, I'll give you a hint: think fermentation.

And if you'd like to learn more about dairy cows and the ins and outs of dairy and forage production, check out the other handouts and fact sheets from the Dairy Forage Research Center, along with the focused collection of Web-based resources on dairy cattle and milk NAL staff have pulled together.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Education and Plants and Crops on September 03, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

I wanted to research this subject and write a paper. Your post gave me what a thousand words would not. Nice job.

Submitted by: Apply food stamp on September 25, 2008 01:21 PM

Got Something to Say About Downer Cattle?

Do you remember the big beef recall from earlier this year? That recall was prompted by a videotape showing workers at Westland's California slaughterhouse using a variety of cruel and inhumane methods to get "downer" cattle to stand for pre-slaughter inspection.

Yesterday the USDA announced a proposed rule to amend the Federal meat inspection regulations to prevent such downer cattle from entering the food supply at all. Instead, under the proposed rule, any cattle that becomes "non-ambulatory" at any time prior to slaughter would be condemned and disposed of.

This new rule would apply even to cattle that have already passed initial inspection.

This complete ban is meant to simplify and clarify inspection standards to prevent any further misunderstanding of the rules regarding downer cattle. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer also hopes it will "maintain consumer confidence in the food supply, . . . and, ultimately, . . . make a positive impact on the humane handling of cattle."

Do you think the proposed rule works? Do you see loopholes that need to be closed? Or does it over-step, hurting ranchers and/or meat producers in the process?

Given the widespread and vocal response to the beef recall in February, I'm guessing you have an opinion. Share it with us below.

And if you really want to participate in government, go a step further and submit your comments on the proposed rule to USDA. You'll find the full instructions for doing so in the last few paragraphs of yesterday's press release. The deadline is September 29, 2008.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on August 28, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Nice bog you have here. I pretty much lurk the internet when I'm bored and read all I can about the organic lifestyle, but I really liked you view on things. I'll bookmark the site and subscribe to the feed!

Submitted by: Acai Cleanse on September 4, 2008 08:52 AM

Photo of the Week: A Brooding Goat

I look at this picture, and I see a goat. Nothing more.

But to the knowledgeable, to veterinarians or to someone who raises goats, this is a meat goat that doesn't quite measure up.

And that, in fact, is why this image is included in the Animal Science Image Gallery.

This growing collection serves up photos, videos and Powerpoint slides for classroom and outreach learning.

In the case of this goat, that means a description that points out the animal's insufficiencies and the photo's educational value:

Meat type doe that is undesirable in her conformation due to inadequate width. She is also plain about the head and stands on a small foot.

This image could be used to help students understand the desirable and undesirable characteristics they should be looking for when selecting replacement meat goat does.

Images can be in the public domain, but many are not, though all have been released for educational use. Cite the specified photo credit when borrowing images from this latter group, and you should be fine.

If these pics don't suit you, you'll find more images--of animals or otherwise--at NAL's Arts, Artifacts and Photos page.

But if you'd rather get your goat on, we've got that, too, along with a host of other resources on animals and livestock.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Art, Artifacts and Photos and Education on July 31, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Looking for a Vet Med Library?

Thanks to my colleagues at the International Association of Agricultural Information Specialists (IAALD), I've found a great new resource on the Web for those of you with interests that run toward veterinary medicine.

The Veterinary Medical Libraries Section of the Medical Library Association has created an international directory of veterinary medical and related libraries and posted it to the Web.

Each listing includes full contact information for the library itself, as well as for personal points of contact, along with the library's Web address.

As IAALD's blog points out, the international listings are still being developed. Even so, the directory's an impressive list of academic and other libraries associated with the vet med, animal care and research communities, including colleges of veterinary medicine, vet hospitals and professional organizations, zoological gardens and aquariums, pharmaceutical companies and national libraries of medicine or agriculture, NAL among them.

So, the next time you need to do research related to veterinary medicine, you might want to start with this directory. Or, if your needs run toward animal welfare and research alternatives, head directly to NAL's own Animal Welfare Information Center. They can give you the lowdown on ways to improve animal care and use in research, testing, teaching, and exhibition, and help you meet the requirements of the Animal Welfare Act.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Libraries on June 12, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Nature's Wonders on Display

It has been a big week for biological diversity.

Not only did the Svalbard Global Seed Vault open, as mentioned Tuesday, but that same day, the Encylopedia of Life launched its Web site.

I would have mentioned it sooner, but the site proved so popular that it was down quite a bit in the early going -- a good sign, to be sure, but an equally good reason not to send more folks their way.

How popular was the site? A local radio station reported that the site "logged 11.5 million page views in 5 1/2 hours -- and two of those hours were downtime." That's quite impressive for any site, but particularly so for one just catching the light of day.

The Encyclopedia of Life is setting out "to document all species of life on earth." Toward that end, they already have well over a million pages, though all but 30,000 of those provide only minimal descriptions and links.

To really get a sense of what they envision, you're better off touring their exemplar species pages, two dozen pages that have been fully fleshed out and convey the breadth and depth all pages are heading toward. These exemplar pages have been reviewed and endorsed by scientists, so they bear the mark of authority. They also include links to full-text articles from the Biodiversity Heritage Library, and -- a highlight for me -- these pages are sporting some great pics, really amazing, beautiful photos that leave me in awe of both nature and the photographer.

Please check it out. They're seeking feedback and are even eager for your involvement. Starting later this year, the public will be able to contribute text, videos, images, and other information about a species, with the best of this info incorporated into the authenticated pages.

EOL describes itself as "an ambitious, even audacious project." I couldn't agree more. But it's also project worth doing, and one I wager you'll dip into more and more as it grows over the next decade.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Education and Plants and Crops on February 29, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Just wanted to say Hello to everyone. Much to read and learn here, I'm sure I will enjoy !

Submitted by: Sensbachtal on March 17, 2008 11:05 AM

Submitted by: SKEETER on March 19, 2008 03:35 PM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on March 20, 2008 01:10 PM

Submitted by: Karl S on March 25, 2008 07:53 AM

The Case of the Disappearing Bees

Did you catch last night's episode of 60 Minutes? They re-ran a segment looking at the mysterious disappearance of honey bees, a problem beekeepers first noted in 2006.

(If you did miss it, you can still catch the video, just be aware that it is television, which means you'll get a commercial first.)

The mystery in a nutshell: the bees are not returning home. Quite uncharacteristically, they are abandoning their hives, even those filled with eggs, larvae, honey and bee pollen. But there are also no dead bees.

The phenomenon, termed Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), has been seen in at least 35 states and has resulted in the loss of about 25% of the country's bees since late 2006.

The missing bees are having a substantial impact on agriculture and business. Without the bees, the necessary pollination doesn't occur for many specialty crops such as almonds and other nuts, berries, fruits, and vegetables. That's a potential loss of nearly $15 billion in added crop value.

Scientists within USDA's Agricultural Research Service are looking for the factors contributing to CCD, but they've yet to determine anything with certainty. They do believe CCD arises from a complex interaction of elements, and they're investigating pathogens, parasites, environmental stresses, and bee management stresses as relevant factors. They're also tackling this through a new bee-focused areawide program that includes university partners, apiculturists, and many others.

The ongoing mystery, however, has beekeepers, growers and food industry folks frightened. Private industry has started to kick in to fund research, with both Haagen-Dazs and Burt's Bees, a manufacturer of personal care products, recently getting involved.

If you'd like to know more about Colony Collapse Disorder, dip into the deep collection of CCD resources my Library colleagues have pulled together. You'll find some great stuff there, including links to articles and Web sites for both the layperson and the beekeeping professional.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Plants and Crops on February 25, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Cattle Abuse, Beef Recall Recap

Let me catch you up on all that has been happening with the investigation of Westland Meat Company, since USDA first suspended them at the end of last month.

As you recall, workers at Westland's California slaughterhouse were caught on tape using a variety of cruel and inhumane methods to get "downer" cattle to stand for pre-slaughter inspection.

In the immediate aftermath, USDA suspended Westland as a supplier to Federal food programs. Then school districts across the country, along with a few fast food chains, stopped serving ground beef from the company as a precaution.

Turns out, that was only the beginning.

A few days later, the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) suspended inspections at the plant after finding "clear violation of Federal regulations and the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act." This step effectively closed the company until corrective actions document improved treatment of the animals.

That was followed by the largest meat recall in USDA history. The 143.4 million pounds of meat in the recall constituted Westland's entire production run from the last two years. Since FSIS determined violations occurred off and on during that time, all beef products produced then are considered "adulterated," though the chances of getting ill from the recalled meat are considered "remote."

The Department is working to identify the locations where meat from the Westland plant might have ended up. At this point, the Food and Nutrition Service has determined that one third of the meat under recall, about 50.3 million pounds, went to federal nutrition programs, with 19.6 million pounds of that consumed.

No associated illnesses have been reported.

As an ongoing precaution, the USDA has taken steps to increase inspections at the 900 establishments across the country that slaughter livestock. Though the Department does not believe inhumane handling of cattle is widespread, "The extra checks will give us a better handle on it," said Kenneth Peterson, FSIS assistant administrator for field operations.

Back in California, at about the same time the recall notice hit the streets, the two company employees implicated in the animal abuse were officially charged with animal cruelty and arrested. The two men had already lost their jobs as a result of the undercover video. Now, the manager must respond to five felony counts of animal cruelty and three associated misdemeanors, and his assistant faces three misdemeanor charges.

Meanwhile, the food safety system is under a microscope. Editorials calling for increased oversight and investigations are thick on the ground. Four Democratic lawmakers asked the Government Accountability Office to review the process for assessing the safety of food in the school lunch programs. And pending legislation that would keep downer cattle out of the food supply is receiving renewed interest both the House and the Senate.

But what impact will all this have on consumers? A recent Reuters story suggests not much of one. The beef-loving public is expected to "shrug off" the recall, though the unwavering demand, coupled with this sudden reduced supply, has prompted economists to project a slight price increase for beef.

But if you're a member of the public who wants to stay informed, USDA has created a Web page on which are collected the Department's official statements, press releases, technical briefings, transcripts and informational Q&As pertaining to the Westland Meat Company allegations and the associated beef recall. Or see InfoFarm's overview of how a recall works from last October for a quick look at the process now underway.

More will very likely be forthcoming about all this, but for now, we're both caught up on the news.

How has all of it impacted your feelings about eating beef? Or what, if anything, do you think should be done to improve the inspection process? We'd love to hear your thoughts, so feel free to comment below.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on February 21, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

It's quite scary having such a huge recall. Working in schoolfoodservice I would hope that better inspections will take place knowing what grand caos this kind of action can take. Personally it makes me think of how these producers are not following all the rules and what really does go on in the slaughterhouses

Submitted by: Nancy on March 23, 2008 07:17 PM

USDA Investigates Slaughterhouse

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has responded quickly and seriously to the video footage released yesterday showing workers at a California slaughterhouse using a variety of methods to get "downer" cattle to stand for a pre-slaughter inspection.

Secretary of Agriculture Ed Schafer included in his statement on the matter word that Westland Meat Company will be "indefinitely suspended ... as a supplier to Federal food and nutrition programs" while the Department fully investigates the allegations.

The Department also held a technical briefing on the situation this afternoon. The audio briefing, which runs just short of an hour, provides some background on the animal inspection process and offers details of the Department's plans for investigating the matter.

Federal regulations prohibit cattle unable to stand or walk on their own from entering the food supply. This standard serves as a safeguard against Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, or BSE.

To learn more about BSE, see the NAL resource page on the topic, or consult the Web sites on the welfare of farm animals pulled together by the Library's Animal Welfare Information Center.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on January 31, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

This is the first I've looked at the InfoFarm. I think its a good idea. After looking at what's been posted my only comments are that I noticed how President Lincoln spoke (the style back in those days possibly)was quite different than today. Also, I finally see what is the problem with the beef recall.

Submitted by: David on February 19, 2008 12:48 PM

Submitted by: delta jim on February 19, 2008 07:34 PM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on February 22, 2008 08:05 AM

Meat: Less, More or Just Right?

Just a quick heads-up about a thought-provoking article from yesterday's New York Times titled "Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler."

At the time of this writing, it's still listed as the second-most e-mailed article off the Times' site. It has also kicked up some play across the blogosphere, most of it supporting the author's main thrust, that eating less meat would do us and the world some good.

But what do you think? Do we need to change our relationship to meat for the good of the planet? Or is there another way to understand the figures Bittman presents? Are we on the verge of a "sea change," as Bittman suggests, or just in the midst of a eating fad?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on January 28, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

I am surprised at the effects of the meat industry on carbon dioxide emissions and the consumption of grain. Why, then, aren't environmentalists focusing on the meat industry as much as they are on the transportation industry? Why, then, aren't those who decry ethanol for taking grain away from the food supply saying anything about using grain to feed livestock? As with everything, I think moderation is in order. Eating meat isn't bad by itself, but being conscious about where it comes from and how it's raised (including what resources go into it) would go a long way to helping Americans re-think their meat habits. Hopefully it would result in more individuals choosing meat raised in a more sustainable fashion.

Submitted by: Cindy on February 5, 2008 11:30 AM

Ag Words on the Growing Edge

As a follow-up to yesterday's entry on locavores, I wanted to quickly mention the other agriculturally related words that have recently been in the running for Word of the Year.

In 2005 Oxford gave the nod to "podcast," a decidedly non-agricultural word, but a technology the aggies have certainly taken advantage of, including the folks over at USDA's Economic Research Service and National Agricultural Statistics Service.

And among the runners-up that year we had "bird flu" and "trans fats," two very different but significant challenges to our health that ag researchers are addressing.

The following year was also big for agriculture and the environment. "Carbon neutral" took the top spot, encouraging all of us to reduce our carbon emissions and to then balance "our remaining emissions...by purchasing a carbon offset, paying to plant new trees or investing in 'green' technologies such as solar and wind power."

Then "CSA," community supported agriculture, occupied a key runner-up position, and -- who knows? -- maybe contributed to "locavore's" win in 2007 by building momentum in the "buy local" movement.

For the librarians in the audience, 2006 also brought us "DRM," digital rights management, a mere hop, skip and a jump from the copyright issues we discussed the other day.

Then, as noted earlier, "locavore" snagged Oxford's latest blue ribbon, but the mysterious "colony collapse disorder" made the list, as did "upcycling," a innovative alternative to waste disposal, one that puts a value-added spin on recycling.

So, not bad, nine words in three years related to agriculture, the environment, nutrition or librarianship. (I cast a wide net.)

But what did Oxford miss? Any other good, new agricultural words out there? Send 'em along or make 'em up. We're always ready to push that growing edge.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment and Plants and Crops on January 18, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Hello! Nice site ;) Bye

Submitted by: BersJonrete on January 20, 2008 12:26 AM

Submitted by: David Engel on January 23, 2008 09:57 AM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on January 23, 2008 01:26 PM

Submitted by: Lori Finch on January 24, 2008 05:18 PM

Are Cloned Animals Safe to Eat? FDA Says "Yes"

Oh, boy.

The new stories are flying, and I expect they'll soon to be followed by a flurry of op-ed pieces and blog postings.

On my morning tour through the news, I noticed that the Washington Post had broken the story on the Food and Drug Administration's approval of cloned animals for food consumption. The FDA hadn't even officially released its report yet, but the word was out that they'd found no evidence to ban or restrict meat or milk from cloned animals. The Post even included excerpts from the report.

Other news sources across the Web quickly picked up the story. In fact, each time I refreshed my search on Google News, I got more results. It would seem to be one of the day's hot topics. The New York Times is on it, as are Business Week, CNN and the Associated Press. Actually, by the time you read this, everyone might have picked this one up.

Overall, the stories summarize the FDA's report, explore the associated scientific and ethical concerns, and address the expected uproar from consumers if cloned meat and milk are allowed to sit -- unlabeled -- on store shelves with non-cloned meat.

Though all the articles convey the reasons behind the FDA's assessment and the food safety issues taken into consideration, so far, only the Baltimore Sun (that I've seen) has run a focused piece on the science behind the decision. "In Defense of Cloning" offers comments from a Unversity of Maryland professor who served as one of three animal scientists who reviewed the FDA's research. It's an informative read.

On the government side, I was about to write that neither the FDA nor USDA had release any public statement on the matter, but that's no longer true. In the last hour, both Departments posted press releases to their Web sites about the report and are providing links to more information about animal cloning and food safety.

If you'd like to learn more about cloning than USDA's Questions and Answers page can give you, I invite you to check out the books and articles on the topic here at NAL. And check back here at InfoFarm. I'll keep on eye on reactions to this story in the coming weeks and post key updates.

This one's gonna be interesting.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on January 15, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Duck...Duck...Goose

Next week, mixed in with the last of their holiday cards and the first bills of 2008, farmers and ranchers across the U.S. will be getting their packets for the 2007 Census of Agriculture. The folks at USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service are dropping them in the mail today.

NASS conducts the survey every five years to count the nation’s farms and ranches and the people who operate them. Census questions cover land use and ownership, operator characteristics, production practices, crop yields, livestock count, and machinery used, along with income, expenditures and other topics.

Maybe this is where that old game "Duck, Duck, Goose" got its start -- farmers counting their animals for the annual ag census. Okay, I admit that's not likely, but you do have to report your poultry numbers on the survey, so there actually might be folks mumbling that very phrase to themselves as they walk through barnyards across the country this January.

But lest you think the ag census is equally silly, let me assure you that the reponses provide vital information that factors into a range of decisions, from crafting agricultural policy like the farm bill, to making funds and services available to rural communities. Businesses might use the information to determine the locations of facilities serving agricultural producers, while the farmers and ranchers themselves can use census data to make informed decisions about the future of their own operations. (More ducks, perhaps? Or maybe more geese? Hmmm, let me run around in a circle while I think about it.)

So, when that envelope arrives next week from the government, don't just toss it into recycling. Open it. Look it over. Fill it out. Or grab your Census ID from the mailing and click your way to the online response version.

After all, filling out the ag census is not only a good idea, it's the law (Title 7, U.S. Code), regardless of the size or type of your operation. Fortunately, the same law makes your responses confidential and limits their use to statistical purposes, so no worries that your survey will be passed along to the IRS or your local inspectors.

Instead, think about getting yourself counted so that decision-makers know you're out there. If nothing else, it'll be a great way to spend a cold January evening, right? Right? Um, right?

Census reports are due February 4, 2008.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Farm Bill and Marketing and Trade and Organic Production and Plants and Crops and Rural Life on December 28, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Six Important Updates You Don't Want to Miss

In just the last two days I've noticed how many of the stories I've addressed over the last two months continue to pop up in the news. Given that, I thought it'd be interesting to see how things have moved on a few of them, or what fresh angles more recent coverage offers.

So, without further ado, here are the updates you don't want to miss:

• Since my October 15 entry on food recalls, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued a Food Protection Plan that seeks to identify potential foodborne hazards before they sicken or kill anyone, but the plan isn't impressing Congress. Members of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions have made some pretty strong statements indicating that neither it, nor the plan to enhance import safety, goes far enough.


• The potato cyst nematode doesn't seem too interested in joining the Year of the Potato celebration. Instead, it's spoiling the party by spreading to its eighth field in Idaho, threatening crop production there.


• Faster computers are accelerating the pace of discovery, but they're also making it possible to generate more realistic, more accurate and more powerful computer simulations. Such progress validates our October post on schools and industries moving away from using animals for education and experimentation.


• Avocado farmers who have started to regroup after October's wildfires are learning that their crop insurance doesn't cover as much as they thought it would. And even those that can expect some payments might not see money until early 2009.


• The farm bill has stalled on its way through the Senate, and there's really no telling where this one's gonna end up. Today word hit that U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would be filing a cloture motion this afternoon. Such a motion, if passed, would limit any further debate on the farm bill to 30 hours, but a similar attempt a few weeks ago failed to get the 60 votes required for passage.


• "Sometimes it pays to read the old literature." So said Dr. Peter Palese, a researcher who determined why winter is flu season. And though I've not written a lick about the flu, I thought the lesson Dr. Palese offers to be a timely reminder that some ideas have been thunk before, which was, in fact, the main point behind the Starting Right with Turkeys entry. The Web holds valuable, historical stuff. Make use of it.

If you have more updates to add, feel free to send 'em along.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Emergency Response and Farm Bill and Food and Nutrition and History of Agriculture and Plants and Crops on December 05, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Starting Right with Turkeys

Turkey raising offers a most interesting project. It will fascinate your friends who visit you. You will be envied by them, especially as Thanksgiving approaches and you have no worries about having a tasty bird for this feast. The project will offer diversions from the anxieties of office work or business. It can be excellent training for a boy or girl, particularly in 4-H Club work, or any kind of a home project.

Thus opined G. T. Klein in his 1947 publication Starting Right with Turkeys, a product of his days working as an Extension Poultry Husbandman at the Massachusetts State College, Amherst.

The book, a no-nonsense manual on raising turkeys, tackles the practical details of a do-it-yourself backyard turkey project from a time when such a thing was more feasible than most city ordinances make it today. (Though urban chickens are gaining ground, so maybe the pendulum will swing back for turkeys as well.)

Klein's work joins over 1,800 other books and journals in Cornell Library's collection of the Core Historical Literature of Agriculture. The materials there track the evolution of farming, agriculture and rural life through the 19th and 20th centuries, providing a deep look into a social, economic and industrial phenomenon.

But more than that, this early literature records information about sustainable agricultural methods that is still relevant today. It is, in large part (pre-1942, that is), farming without pesticides and chemical fertilizers using techniques that, by their nature, are more "organic," more geared toward ecological balance (even if that contemporary principle wasn't in the forefront back then).

The Library's Alternative Farming Systems Information Center has pulled together a similar collection specifically on organic agriculture called Organic Agriculture Information Access (aka Organic Roots). This budding database contains almost 200 historic USDA publications from before 1942, clearly making what was old new again.

So over this holiday weekend, in between the eating, sleeping and shopping, explore the history of the agricultural field of your liking. You might be surprised by what you find -- a new hobby, new methods or just a way to fascinate your friends (even if the tasty bird you're eating didn't grow up in your own backyard).

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and History of Agriculture and Organic Production on November 21, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Dreaming of James Herriot

You have heard of James Herriot, haven't you? The British vet (real name: James Alfred White) who plied his trade in the Yorkshire countryside and went on to write about his experiences in a series of popular books.

Harriot touched folks with his tender, funny stories and keen observations of human nature. I suspect he also made many want to become veterinarians, even with all the frank and colorful descriptions of calvings gone wrong and winter nights spent in the company of ailing sheep.

Seems we could use a good dose of James Herriot-style inspiration right about now.

The American Veterinary Medical Association has put out an alert about the dwindling ranks of large animal veterinarians, a trend that could have serious implications for food safety, public health and even animal welfare.

Many news outlets have picked up the story, including the New York Times, Washington Post, and National Public Radio, but the startling shortage might be best conveyed by the data maps the Association has pulled together. These maps stake out, county by county, the number of food animal vets available for the food animal population.

The results highlight the trouble spots, like the seventeen counties in South Dakota with more than 25,000 food animals but no food animal veterinarians. Or the entire state of Kansas, where only five counties (out of 105) have enough food animal vets to keep the ratio of animals to vets below 5,000. (And only thirteen fall below 10,000.) All the Plain States, in fact, are a sea of red flags (25,000 or more animals, zero food supply vets), but the Southeast is just behind, with blue and white flags designating zero vets for smaller animal populations.

Copyright © and (P) 1988-2006 Microsoft Corporation and/or its suppliers. All rights reserved. http://www.microsoft.com/mappoint/

What has brought us to this point?

Dr. Gregory Hammer, president of the American Veterinary Medical Association, attributes it to a demographic shift among new veterinary students. The higher percentage of women entering the field, coupled with an overall population swing away from rural areas -- and the resulting lack of familiarity with food animals -- means that an interest in and comfort with large animals just isn't there.

Of course, it can also be physically demanding work, as James Harriot's stories attest, with a schedule and a life not your own. But the technologies, tools and medicines now in place make brute strength less of a factor, and for some, like Herriot, the rewards of working side-by-side with farmers make it worthwhile.

Many states are working to find their James Herriots by offering incentives (PDF | 114KB) to those willing to pursue large animal medicine, even if only for a few years. Student loan and debt-forgiveness programs have cropped up in Kansas and Missouri, with a similar bill in the pipeline in New Hampshire. Georgia and Michigan are using the early-admission carrot to lure incoming college freshmen to the field, and the Academy of Rural Veterinarians is sponsoring its own externship program to sway vet students who've yet to pick a field.

The programs are still too young to gauge their success, but the goal -- to get more trained veterinarians into rural areas to treat animals in our food supply -- is seen as crucial to our country's overall food safety and public health.

To learn more about large animal care or veterinary medicine, visit the links sprinkled throughout this piece, or check out the following collections from NAL:

• Animals and Livestock: Animal Health and Veterinary Medicine
• Animal Welfare Information Center
• Information Resources on Veterinary History at the National Agricultural Library

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals on November 15, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Check your stats. A LOT of women are in food animal medicine. So the Pres of AVMA is speaking out of turn.

Submitted by: Dawn K Looken on November 16, 2007 06:52 PM

Submitted by: Dane Henry, DVM on November 19, 2007 11:00 AM

Now We're Squawkin'

Take a moment and consider the number of chicken sandwiches served up by your local fast food joint on any given day. Multiply that by all the fast food joints in your town.

Now, think restaurants, diners, dinner theaters, caterers.

Then add in the rotisserie chickens at your local grocery, along with the packaged whole birds, the drumsticks and chicken thighs, and the frozen patties, nuggets and ready-strips.

Now, go national; multiply it all by 51 (allowing for the District of Columbia -- which, by the way, has more people than Wyoming, but that's another topic all together).

How many chickens do you figure that is?

According to the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the United States poultry industry produces nearly 9 billion chickens annually, which equals more than 48 billion pounds of meat. Sure, some of that is exported, but even allowing for that, we're still averaging well over 100 pounds of chicken per person. And that's not even taking out the vegetarian and vegan portion of the population, which would raise the figures for the rest of us.

I'm also not counting eggs.

Wow.

Obviously, the poultry industry has a huge impact on the U.S. economy. Production, processing, transportation, food service -- all derive benefits.

But nothing comes without a cost. Chicken's ascent to America's favorite meat has brought with it concerns about industrialization, pollution, food safety and animal rights. Even what constitutes "natural" is now up for debate.

Regardless of what side of the chicken coop you're on, there's always more to read and learn. You can start with the array of resources my colleagues have pulled together, including some original stuff for the poultry historians among you:

• Animals and Livestock: Poultry and Eggs
• Alternative Farming: Meat, Dairy and Eggs
• Alternative Farming: Organic Lifestock
• Animal Welfare: Poultry
• Food Safety: Meat and Poultry HACCP
• Food Safety: Avian Influenza
• Natural Resources: Pollution, Waste Management and Conservation
• Water Quality: Manure Management
• Special Collections: American Poultry Historical Society Papers
• NAL's Digital Repository: World's Poultry Congress (Select the title from the list for full-text of the proceedings.)

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on November 07, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Great blog post!! Chickens rock, and all the cool people know it. I think everyone should be allowed to have a hen laying about, no matter where you live. Check out www.henhutch.com. Even a city chicken deserves a chance!

Submitted by: Chicken Little on November 8, 2007 09:27 AM

Submitted by: Gudvin on November 12, 2007 03:58 AM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 21, 2007 11:31 AM

Submitted by: Vegan on December 11, 2008 02:17 AM

Move Over, Rover

As I write this, a group of folks sits fourteen stories above me learning about the Animal Welfare Act. Today and tomorrow, the Library's Animal Welfare Information Center is conducting its workshop on the information requirements of that Act.

This workshop teaches investigators, veterinarians and others how to search for and assess alternatives to experiments involving animals and to ensure that their planned tests do not unnecessarily duplicate previous experiments. In this case, an alternative is "any procedure which results in the reduction in the numbers of animals used, refinement of techniques, or replacement of animals." In animal welfare circles, these actions -- reduction, refinement, replacement -- are called the 3Rs.

And though the Animal Welfare Act applies only within the United States, the 3Rs movement is worldwide, with organizations around the globe set up to promote and develop the 3Rs in research and teaching.

Of course, the issue of using animals in experiments continues to kick up controversy, but there does seem to be a definite movement away from the practice. The Chronicle of Higher Education recently ran a story addressing the drop in U.S. medical schools that still use live animals to teach hands-on skills. They reported that only twelve of the 125 accredited schools do so, though one doctor believes schools have underreported the practice to avoid a backlash from animal rights activists. (And sorry, but the Chronicle article is for subscribers only.)

The New York Times covered the topic last month, tackling the commercial angle. That piece examined available alternatives for testing drugs, cosmetics, cleaning products, etc., along with the barriers companies must overcome to really implement those alternatives. "It takes years of testing," the Times noted, "to satisfy users and regulators that the results are as accurate or better than animal trials."

Still, there remain social and economic benefits to non-animal alternatives, and thanks to advancing technologies, options are growing. Computer simulations, interactive models, human tissue samples and "bleeding" mannequins can often take the place of dogs, cats, rabbits and other animals, sometimes with improved results, sometimes not. As with most controversial topics, it depends on the circumstances and who you ask.

To learn more about the Animal Welfare Act, what it covers and how it is enforced, read the overview (PDF | 4.12MB) prepared by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service or consult their extensive Animal Welfare section.

But if you need to get a handle on the 3Rs, whether as a researcher or as a member of an institutional care and use committee, then check out AWIC's workshop. You missed this week's session, but they've got more coming up next year. Tell 'em InfoFarm sent you.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals on October 24, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

I am glad to see that attention is being given to this issue. While some animal experimentation may be necessary, the cosmetic end of things could certainly use this 3R method.

Submitted by: Anonymous on October 26, 2007 02:11 PM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on January 11, 2008 10:50 AM