From: Gene McAloon 

I am appalled, or am I, that you are willing to sacrifice a few lives just
to save money. The public has demonstrated many times that it is willing to
pay more for clean food, air and so on. We are talking pubic health here
and a civilized society does not skimp on paying for that. That is
especially true when the per capita cost is so low. The aggregate cost is
not a consideration where public health is involved.

Nor is it tolerable to suppose the public must wait for absolute proof that
a health risk exists. Nor does it begin to be tolerable that the beliefs of
one particular "expert" be allowed to influence such policies. We
need a consensus of knowledgeable people, both scientists and public health
people. If no consensus exists, then precautionary measures should be in
place and that means testing. Perhaps not every animal, but certainly a
percentage of animals. No testing at all is not acceptable, regardless of
cost/benefit considerations.

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 22:25:54 -0800, Randall Parker
 wrote:

>Gene,
>
>You miss one basic point: raise costs to private enterprise and you will raise
costs
>to the consumer.
>
>Gene McAloon wrote:
>
>> Yours is the standard Republican-business rant:  Avoiding the loss of a
>> comparatively few lives is not worth the lowering of profits to private
>> enterprise.
>
>The cost would be born by everyone. If everyone pays, say, 10 cents more per
pound of
>beef as a result of mandatory testing of every cow then the cost will run into
the
>hundreds of millions of dollars or more per life saved. That assumes that
there is
>even any sort of risk to begin with and America's foremost prion expert and
Nobel
>laureate says that is unproven.
>
>> It is interesting that the only cost you mention is that to industry. You
>> confine yourself to that because the alternative, public cost through
government
>> regulation, is unacceptable because government regulation is unacceptable.
Yet
>> the cost to government is minimal either as a percentage of spending or on a
per
>> capita basis.  Yet you don't even mention it.
>
>No, the testing could be done by the USDA or by industry. What entities pay
for it
>does not affect whether the public at large ends up paying.
>
>
>> Another interesting aspect of your rant is that you have no objections to
>> government spending millions on research at long as long as that is paid by
>> taxpayers, but costs to the taxpayer through government regulation is
>> unacceptable because regulation of private enterprise is unthinkable to
business
>> interests.
>
>Research provides a real permanent benefit in the form of new scientific
knowledge
>that is useful for preventing and curing disease. Research will lead to
vaccines and
>drugs.
>
>> There is indeed rant here, although it isn't necessarily yours; it is that
of
>> Republican-business origins and it is much older than you are. You are
simply
>> mindlessly repeating it.
>
>You are the mindless one Gene. You are just repeating decades old ideological
lessons
>learned in your youth.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5