What’s In Your Trash?

Image Source

By: Jazmin Smith, Staff Member

I admit it. I am guilty of buying too many bananas on occasion and letting them go to waste, but haven’t we all done it? Americans throw away anywhere from twenty-nine to forty percent of food produced each year,[i] and nine out of ten families are guilty of needlessly throwing away food.[ii] Food makes up the largest percentage of waste in landfills.[iii] It also has the lowest recovery rate of any material, and produces methane, which contributes to greenhouse gas emissions.[iv] While fifty million Americans are food insecure,[v] so much food goes to waste, and confusing date labeling is one of the contributing factors.

It turns out, that expiration and “sell by” dates have very little bearing on food safety. The dates are merely suggestions from manufacturers for when food is at its “peak quality.”[vi] One of the many problems associated with food labeling is the lack of federal standards and the variability of local rules. Moreover, inconsistent policies harm manufacturers and cause waste at the manufacturer/retail level.[vii] Finally, labeling frustrates recovery and redistribution programs, as it makes handling past-dated products difficult and legally complex.[viii]

The Natural Resources Defense Council prescribes several improvements that could be made to the labeling system. First, “sell by” dates are not for consumers, so they shouldn’t be visible to them.[ix] Those dates are for retailers, and they tend to only confuse consumers. The next step is establishing a more clear and uniform system. Using uniform language and a more consistent date selection method for manufacturers could achieve this.[x] Packages should also include more safety information, such as time-temperature indicators.[xi] Products could contain a safety label or a QR code that consumers mat scan if they would like more information.[xii]

Better labeling alone cannot end the food waste problem because consumers tend to have a “better safe than sorry” attitude. This is where food recovery programs come in. Manufacturers and consumers are wary about donating past-dated food because they don’t want to become liable for outbreaks of foodborne illness, but the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act actually absolves liability of those who donate to nonprofit organizations.[xiii] The Food Recovery Project at the University of Arkansas School of Law brings awareness to the protection of the Bill Emerson Act and encourages food donation/recovery. Several ways to achieve recovery include: turning table scraps into animal feed, composting, mindful grocery shopping, more creative menus (Freeze those brown bananas and make banana bread!), and advanced meal planning.[xiv]

Food waste is an issue that most of us don’t even contemplate when we toss out those eggs that are two weeks past the “expiration” date, but with a little bit of research and planning, it is something that can easily be reduced. Food recovery helps food-insecure families and provides an opportunity to put food waste back into food production through composting. Next time you clean out your pantry, consider whether the product is really expired, and if it is, consider whether there is an alternative way to use it.
_________________
[i] James Haley, The Legal Guide to the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, University of Arkansas School of Law (Aug. 8, 2013), http://media.law.uark.edu/arklawnotes/2013/08/08/the-legal-guide-to-the-bill-emerson-good-samaritan-food-donation-act/.
[ii] The Dating Game: How Confusing Food Date Labels Lead to Food Waste in America, National Resources Defense Council (Oct. 22, 2013), http://www.nrdc.org/food/expiration-dates.asp.
[iii] James Haley, The Legal Guide to the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, University of Arkansas School of Law (Aug. 8, 2013), http://media.law.uark.edu/arklawnotes/2013/08/08/the-legal-guide-to-the-bill-emerson-good-samaritan-food-donation-act/.
[iv] Id.
[v] Food Recovery: A Legal Guide, University of Arkansas School of Law, http://law.uark.edu/documents/2013/06/Legal-Guide-To-Food-Recovery.pdf.
[vi] The Dating Game: How Confusing Food Date Labels Lead to Food Waste in America, National Resources Defense Council (Oct. 22, 2013), http://www.nrdc.org/food/expiration-dates.asp.
[vii] Id.
[viii] Id.
[ix] Id.
[x] Id.

[xi] Id.
[xii] Id.
[xiii] James Haley, The Legal Guide to the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, University of Arkansas School of Law (Aug. 8, 2013), http://media.law.uark.edu/arklawnotes/2013/08/08/the-legal-guide-to-the-bill-emerson-good-samaritan-food-donation-act/.
[xiv] The Dating Game: How Confusing Food Date Labels Lead to Food Waste in America, National Resources Defense Council (Oct. 22, 2013), http://www.nrdc.org/food/expiration-dates.asp.

Just Say No…To High Risk Antibiotics

Image Source

By: Amelia Sandot, Staff Member

The saying goes “you are what you eat,” but we don’t really think about what keeps our food healthy enough to be eaten. The focus seems to be on the quality of food we feed the animals we later plan on consuming. Recently, however, the concern seems to be shifting towards the medicine we are giving our food. According to a recent National Public Radio (NPR) article, many years ago the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found that many of the common antibiotics still fed to our animals pose a “high risk” to humans.[1]

From 2001 to 2010, the FDA conducted a study on some 30 types of previously approved antibiotics for animals, such as chickens, cows, and pigs.[2] Of the 30 antibiotics studied, 18 were found to be unsafe for human consumption because of the risk that they could introduce “antibiotic-resistant bacteria.”[3] Since the conclusion of the study, the FDA has done little to nothing to stop the use of these antibiotics on animals, says the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the group who released the documents containing the FDA’s conclusions.[4] According to the NRDC’s report, none of the 30 antibiotics tested would be approved as new drugs if they were introduced today under the 2003 FDA guidelines.[5]

The problem with the antibiotics is that they are not being used to cure the animals of diseases but are instead being used so that the animals eat more and grow quicker.[6] This abuse of the antibiotics creates bacteria that resist the antibiotics and can be transferred to humans who use similar antibiotics to fight disease.[7] This creates a serious problem when there is a disease outbreak and known antibiotics cannot be used as the cure.

As of late, the FDA is beginning to “phase out” the use of the antibiotics as growth stimulants.[8] The FDA has released rules, which prohibit the use of antibiotics for anything other than disease prevention.[9] The new rules also require that a veterinarian monitor all antibiotic use.[10] It is reassuring to see that steps are being taken to guarantee that the foods we consume are safe and healthy because anything labeled “high risk” probably should not be eaten.
 _________________
[1] Carmen Cordova, Playing Chicken with Antibiotics: Previously Undisclosed FDA Documents Show Antibiotic Feed Additives Don’t Meet the Agency’s Own Safety Standards, NRDC Issue Brief, 2, (2014), http://www.nrdc.org/food/saving-antibiotics/files/antibiotic-feed-fda-documents-IB.pdf.
[2] Dan Charles, FDA Found Drugs Used in Food Animals to be ‘High Risk,’ Food for Thought (Jan. 28, 2014, 10:37 AM), http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014/01/27/267225093/fda-found-drugs-used-in-food-animals-to-be-high-risk.
[3] See Cardova, supra note 1, at 6.
[4] See Charles, supra note 2.
[5] See Cordova, supra note 1, at 7.
[6] See Charles, supra note 2.
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] Webinar to Address FDA Decision on Antibiotics Use in Food Animals, Farm.com, (2014), http://www.farms.com/news/webinar-to-address-fda-decision-on-antibiotics-use-in-food-animals-71420.aspx.
[10] Supra.

Living In Fear: The Impact Of The Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act On American Farmers

Image Source

By: Rictrell Pirtle, Staff Member

Paul Nord is a small-town crop farmer in Indiana who was injured during a routine farming exercise.[1] Paul’s 600-pound mower crushed two of his toes while he performed an act that he had done thousands of times before.[2] Unfortunately, Paul’s story is not unique to farmers. Paul is one of many farmers who routinely injury themselves in farming related accidents.[3] Many of these farmers either do not have health care coverage or have high health insurance premiums. This has left many farmers, like Paul, worrying about paying unbridled amounts in hospital bills. This is where the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) helps. It provides low-cost health insurance for many Americans who may not have otherwise been able to afford health insurance. This is a welcomed surprised to many farmers who fear bankruptcy due to hospital bills.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act became effective on January 1, 2014.[4] This act seeks to provide lower-cost health insurance for millions of Americans.[5] Specifically, it expands Medicaid coverage to low-income individuals in states that decide to expand their Medicaid programs.[6] The ACA pays special attention to farmers and other individuals living in rural areas.[7] First, farm families are eligible for group rates, which ensures that all members of the family are insured regardless of their working status or pre-existing conditions.[8] Second, the ACA provides cost sharing assistance for individuals below 250 percent of the federal poverty line.[9] “Cost-sharing assistance increases an insurance company’s share of covered medical benefits by reducing out-of-pocket costs for certain lower income individuals and families.”[10] Third, the ACA provides tax credits for individuals with income between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty line.[11] This credit reduces health insurance premiums or reduces the carrier’s federal tax liability.[12] Lastly, small businesses with fifty or fewer employees are eligible for tax credits for providing health insurance to their employees.[13] These benefits have been a welcome surprise to many farmers, like those here in the Bluegrass State.

Farming provides financial stability for many Kentuckians. Like all Americans, Kentucky farmers want to enjoy a life free of financial woes. The ACA provides Kentucky farmers with a sense of security that if a health crisis occurs they will be covered. They will no longer have to decide between paying for medical costs and providing for their families. Accidents like Paul’s will no longer threaten to bankrupt Kentucky farm families.

Farming is a dangerous job and accidents can occur in an instant.[14] The threat of injury often looms in the minds of farmers and their families. The ACA helps farmers worry less about paying high amounts for hospital bills. It provides a safety net for the people who feed America.
 _________________
[1] Sehvilla Mann, Affordable Care Act’s Impact on Hoosier Farmers Uncertain, Indiana University School of Journalism, http://journalism.indiana.edu/studentwork/gallery/affordable-care-acts-impact-on-hoosier-farmers-uncertain/ (last visited Jan. 25, 2014).
[2] Id.
[3] Agricultural Safety, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/aginjury/ (last visited Jan. 25, 2014).
[4] Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 148, 124 Stat. 119.
[5] Id.
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 148, 124 Stat. 119; See also Mike Rosmann, Can Affordable Care Act Benefit Farm, Rural Residents, Iowa Farmer Today, Sept. 19, 2013, available at http://www.iowafarmertoday.com/feature/columnists/farm_and_ranch_life/can-affordable-care-act-benefit-farm-rural-residents/article_a86ba224-2160-11e3-8fc8-001a4bcf887a.html.
[9] Jon M. Bailey, Making Health Insurance Affordable: Assistance
to Individuals and Families in the Affordable Care Act, Center for Rural Affairs, Aug. 2013, at 5.
[10] Id.
[11] Id. at 2.
[12] Id. at 3.
[13] Mike Rosmann, Can Affordable Care Act benefit farm, rural residents, Iowa Farmer Today, Sept. 19, 2013, available at http://www.iowafarmertoday.com/feature/columnists/farm_and_ranch_life/can-affordable-care-act-benefit-farm-rural-residents/article_a86ba224-2160-11e3-8fc8-001a4bcf887a.html.
[14] Agricultural Safety, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/aginjury/ (last visited Jan. 25, 2014).

The Cold, Hard “Hoof” About Zilmax

Image Source

By: Young-Eun Park, Staff Member

What does it feel like to have your toenails yanked off?[i] Ask the 75 cows that lost their hooves last year. It all started in August 2013, when employees at the Tyson Foods Inc. slaughterhouse noticed that 17 cows were hobbling down the ramps of the cattle trailer.[ii] The reason? Their hooves were “basically coming apart.”[iii] All seventeen animals were euthanized.[iv]

The seventeen animals had one aspect in common: in the weeks before the cattle were shipped to the slaughterhouse, all had been fed Merck & Company’s feed additive, Zilmax.[v] Zilmax is a supplement that makes cattle gain extra weight.[vi] During its manufacture, an estimated 70 to 80 percent of the US cattle herd was being fed Zilmax or its substitute.[vii] However, shortly after discovery of the crumbling hooves, Merck suspended sales in the US and Canada and promised to do research to determine whether Zilmax was the cause of these disturbing side effects.[viii]

This January, after a third-party investigation, Merck announced that it will resume sales of Zilmax since the “hoof loss was not due to the fact these animals had received Zilmax.”[ix]

Merck’s study draws a sigh of relief until the evidence is actually analyzed. First, Merck declined to identify the name of the third-party investigators or provide more detail on the findings[x], which makes a mysterious study backed by a company with $160 million in sales at stake[xi] completely useless. In fact, statistics point very convincingly towards Zilmax as being the culprit for cattle’s crippling side effects: in the two years after Zilmax was introduced, the number of cattle euthanized before slaughter rose nearly 175 percent from previous levels.[xii] The current plateau is at 1,600 to 2,300, well above the average of 670 a year in the four years before Zilmax’s 2007 debut.[xiii] Meatpacking plants and other countries are calling Merck’s bluff, with Tyson and Cargill refusing to accept Zilmax-fed cattle until Merck can prove that it’s safe,[xiv] and China refusing to accept meat from cattle fed with Zilmax.[xv]

Both Merck and the FDA insist that Zilmax-fed cattle are perfectly safe to consume, but that is not the issue.[xvi] Whether safe or not, Zilmax causes severe and unnecessary suffering in cattle. Already banned for use in horses because of the severe side effects,[xvii] cows experiencing lost hooves take tentative steps, as if walking on glass, and even when prodded, they refuse to rise to their feet.[xviii] These cows are inevitably euthanized, and neither the wellbeing of the animal nor its purpose of human consumption is ever realized. Echoing this view, both Tyson[xix] and Cargill have stated that their refusal to accept Zilmax-fed cows is not a food safety issue, but linked to its commitment to ensure the welfare of cattle harvested in the industry.[xx]

In an already mechanized and industrialized food industry, some weight should be given to animal treatment, even if the end product is safe to consume. Animal welfare is an important and integral part of animal agriculture and should be considered when making decisions about what we feed to livestock. Furthermore, while Zilmax-fed cows may be safe to consume at the outset, there is no telling what long-term effects the drug will have on humans. In the meantime, meatpacking plants, farmers, and other involved industries should refuse to use Zilmax even after its reintroduction into the market. That way, we won’t ever have to wonder what it feels like to live without toenails, and thankfully, cattle won’t have to experience it either.
_________________
[i] P.J. Huffstutter and Tom Polansek, Lost hooves, dead cattle before Merck halted Zilmax sales, AGWEEK (Jan. 6, 2014), http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/22402/#sthash.sYuGa8CH.dpuf.
[ii] Tracy Staton, Mulling a Zilmax relaunch, Merck faces reports of hoofless cattle and skeptical customers, FIERCE PHARMA (Jan. 2, 2014), http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/mulling-zilmax-relaunch-merck-faces-reports-hoofless-cattle-and-skeptical-c/2014-01-02.
[iii] See Huffstutter, supra note 1.
[iv] See Staton, supra note 1.
[v] See Huffstutter, supra note 1.
[vi] Zilmax, Merck Animal Health (last visited January 22, 2014), http://www.merck-animal-health-usa.com/products/zilmax/overview.aspx.
[vii] Cargill’s view on Zilmax being pulled from the market, Cargill (last visited January 22, 2014), http://www.cargill.com/news/cargill-view-on-zilmax-being-pulled-from-the-market/index.jsp.
[viii] See Huffstutter, supra note 1.
[ix] Lance Turner, Reuters: Lost Hooves Prompted Tyson Foods to End Use of Zilmax, ARKANSAS BUSINESS (Jan. 6, 2014), http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/post/96448/reuters-lost-hooves-prompted-tyson-foods-to-end-use-of-zilmax.
[x] See Huffstutter, supra note 1.
[xi] See Staton, supra note 1.
[xii] See Huffstutter, supra note 1.
[xiii] Id.
[xiv] See Staton, supra note 1.
[xv] Id.
[xvi] See Huffstutter, supra note 1.
[xvii] Dr. Mercola, Merck Continues Promoting Zilmax, Despite Cattle Losing Their Hooves, Mercola.com (Jan. 15, 2014), http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/01/15/zilmax-beta-agonist-drug.aspx.
[xviii] See Huffstutter, supra note 1.
[xix] Mercola, supra note 1.
[xx] Cargill, supra note 1.

Asian Carp Invade Kentucky!

Image Source

By: Sam Norman, Staff Member

“It's incredible what the fish are doing to our waterways. Not only is it predatory, but the safety issue with boaters and skiers. Those things jump. ... Once a waterway is infested, they multiply at an alarming rate and weed out all the other fish. They have the potential to totally wreck our major waterways."

-State Senator Joe Bowen[1]

Asian Carp are two different large species of carp know as Bighead Asian Carp and Silver Asian Carp.[2] Asian Carp have settled in freshwater ecosystems all across the United States, including Kentucky.[3] Asian Carp pose a problem to many jurisdictions because they are incredibly damaging to the ecosystem, reproduce at an alarmingly quick rate, have almost no natural predators in North America, and can harm recreations boaters and their property (boats).[4] Asian Carp are very damaging to the ecosystem because they can eat five to twenty percent of their body weight a day in plankton, algae, and other tiny organisms.[5] When this essential part of the food chain is removed so quickly from the environment it causes devastating consequences for other aquatic life.[6] When boats pass over waters that contain Asian Carp, this causes Silver Asian Carp to jump into the air.[7] Since these fish can weigh anywhere from thirty to forty pounds, this can create potential injuries for boaters and their property.[8] Thus, Asian Carp pose a very serious threat to Kentucky’s freshwater ecosystems in more ways than one.

In order to control Asian Carp populations Kentucky, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR), has implemented a well-rounded multilayered strategy.[9] This strategy includes: a ban on Asian Carp, working with other states in the region to slow the spread of Asian Carp into new waters, educating fisherman on the issue, lobbying federal and state government for financial support, laying a framework for a viable commercial fishing industry in Kentucky, and most importantly, issuing a regulation that allows for commercial fishing of Asian Carp.[10] This is known as the Asian Carp Harvest Program.[11] This regulation allows for limited commercial fishing of Asian Carp if the fisherman has met the qualifications for program participation and abides by the requirements set forth after qualification is met.[12] These requirements include releasing by catch, providing summary information about the catch, etc.[13] As with any policy, this course of action has its advantages and disadvantages. The most important advantage is that commercial fishing is currently the only effective, meaningful way to control Asian Carp populations.[14] Additionally, the framework for a commercial fishing industry is in place in Kentucky and the surrounding region, and there is a market for Asian Carp in Europe and Asia.[15] The disadvantages include the possibility that this could lead to the further spread of Asian Carp because some would want to introduce them into new waters for financial gain.[16] Another concern is that this could lead to a deep decline in the Asian Carp population and ultimately endangered species protection.[17]

With an Asian Carp population that is growing bigger everyday, these concerns have to be dismissed as speculative. KDFWR should continue implementing this strategy because the initial signs show that the commercial fishing has been a success;[18] it’s well rounded, it’s a perfect balance between competing interests, and it turns lemons into lemonade. With this plan and the resolve of the people of Kentucky, I am confident the Asian Carp problem will be solved.
_________________
[1] Janet Patton, Large Asian carp jump, breed quickly — and they're invading Kentucky's waters, kentucky.com (Jan. 1, 2013), http://www.kentucky.com/2013/01/01/2461567/large-asian-carp-jump-breed-quickly.html.
[2] Asian Carp Frequently Asked Questions, Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee, http://www.asiancarp.us/faq.htm (last visited Jan. 18, 2014).
[3] Asian Carp Information, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, http://fw.ky.gov/Fish/Pages/Asian-Carp-Information.aspx (last visited Jan. 18, 2014).
[4] Asian Carp Frequently Asked Questions, Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee, http://www.asiancarp.us/faq.htm (last visited Jan. 18, 2014).
[5] Id.
[6] Id.
[7] Asian Carp Information, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, http://fw.ky.gov/Fish/Pages/Asian-Carp-Information.aspx (last visited Jan. 18, 2014).
[8] Asian Carp Frequently Asked Questions, Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee, http://www.asiancarp.us/faq.htm (last visited Jan. 18, 2013).
[9] Asian Carp Information, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, http://fw.ky.gov/Fish/Pages/Asian-Carp-Information.aspx (last visited Jan. 18, 2014).
[10] Asian Carp Information, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, http://fw.ky.gov/Fish/Pages/Asian-Carp-Information.aspx (last visited Jan. 18, 2014); 301 Ky. Admin. Regs. 1:122 (4)(1)(a-b)(2013).
[11] Asian Carp Information, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, http://fw.ky.gov/Fish/Pages/Asian-Carp-Information.aspx (last visited Jan. 18, 2014).
[12] 301 Ky. Admin. Regs. 1:152 (2)(1-4)(2013).
[13] 301 Ky. Admin. Regs. 1:152 (3)(6)( 8)(2013).
[14] Asian Carp Information, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, http://fw.ky.gov/Fish/Pages/Asian-Carp-Information.aspx (last visited Jan. 18, 2014).
[15] Id.
[16] Id.
[17] Id.
[18] Id.

Make It “SNAP”py, Congress: Debate Over The Farm Bill and Its Effects On Impoverished Lexington, Kentucky Families

Image Source

By: Laura Myers, Staff Member

On November 1, 2013, impoverished families across the United States saw their monthly Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits decrease when the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) expired on October 31, 2013.[1] ARRA, better known as the Stimulus Package, provided “a temporary boost in benefits to help individuals and families impacted by the economic downturn.”[2] In addition, the remaining amount of benefits to these low-income families is currently on the chopping block as Congress renegotiates the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Farm Bill).[3] The Farm Bill expired on September 30, 2012, and its nutritional programs, like SNAP, were extended for one year and have continued to be extended up to the present.[4]

Currently, the pending legislation Congress intends to pass will include staggering cuts to SNAP and other nutritional programs included in the Farm Bill.[5] Thus far, on June 10, 2013, a substantial majority (66-27) of the Senate passed a version of the bill that cut SNAP expenditures by $4.1 billion. Then, the House passed the “Farm only version,” on July 11, 2013, with a slim majority (216-208)—from which all Democrats abstained—that completely removed SNAP from the Farm Bill legislation.[6] The bill is now in conference between the two Houses, but clearly, both parties embrace SNAP funding cuts—it now just becomes a question of how much.[7]

There is an additional layer to this debate over food assistance programs. The 2008 Farm Bill identified areas called “food deserts,” defined as “area[s] in the United States with limited access to affordable and nutritious food, particularly such an area composed of predominantly lower-income neighborhoods and communities.” [8] Lexington-Fayette County, Kentucky has been identified as a city with food deserts.[9] Located in Lexington, God’s Pantry is a food bank that serves client families, and its highest-served population’s zip code-area is one of the food desert pockets located within the city.[10] In 2011, the Lexington-branch site saw a 51% overall increase in its client-base.[11] Further, of its total clientele, 60% are SNAP recipients and have indicated that food stamps do not last them the entire month.[12] This creates an added dynamic to the SNAP problem: SNAP benefits are not the only benefits up for cuts—all nutritional programs funded by the Farm Bill are in danger, including those funding charities like God’s Pantry.[13] Put more bluntly: if Congress makes these reductions, more people will be hungry with fewer resources to feed them.
_________________
[1]Kevin Concannon, United States Department of Agriculture, Helping SNAP Recipients Prepare for November 1st Benefit Changes, USDA Blog (Oct. 28, 2013, 11:00 AM), http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/10/28/helping-snap-recipients-prepare-for-november-1st-benefit-changes/.
[2] Id.
[3] Id.
[4] Nat’l Farmers Union, 2013 Farm Bill, National Farmers Union (last visited Jan. 12, 2014), http://nfu.org/farmbill.
[5] Nat’l Farmers Union, 2013 Farm Bill—Comparisons (last visited Jan. 20, 2014), http://nfu.org/images/stories/legislation/SideBySide%20FINAL.pdf; House Comm. on Agric., H.R. 2642 Summary (last visited Jan. 20, 2014), http://agriculture.house.gov/sites/republicans.agriculture.house.gov/files/documents/HR2642Summary.pdf.
[6] Id.; David Rogers, Farm Bill 2013: House Narrowly Passes Pared-Back Version, Politico.com (July 11, 2013, 3:51 PM), http://politi.co/12pxU3B.
[7] Legislators indicate that they do not want to cut the program entirely but the topic has been too contentious for parties to agree on the amount of cuts to be able to include the nutrition program in the 2013 Farm Bill, and the nutrition program will be dealt with separately for the first time since 1973. Scott Neuman, House Passes Farm Bill Without Food Stamps, National Public Radio (July 11, 2013, 5:20 PM), http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/07/11/201215276/house-passes-farm-bill-without-food-stamps.
[8] Food, Conservation, and Energy Act, 7 U.S.C.A. § 7527 (2008).
[9] Keiko Tanaka et al., Lexington Community Food Assessment 2004-07, at 13 (2008), http://lcfa.ca.uky.edu/files/pdfs/LCFA-2003-07_Research_Report.pdf.
[10] God’s Pantry Food Bank, Hunger in Fayette County Report 2 (2011), http://godspantry.org/press-room/hunger-reports.
[11] Id.
[12] Id. at 3.
[13] Nat’l Farmers, supra note 4.

Appalachian Coal Country: Fueling the Future of Kentucky Tourism?

Image Source

By: Benjamin Metzger, Staff Member

Call it a tale of two Appalachian regions. On one hand, there is the Appalachian region of Eastern Tennessee. The picturesque area is anchored by the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Millions of tourists flock to Gatlinburg, a quaint Tennessee town nestled at the base of the towering Smokies.[i] Contrast this with the Appalachian region of Eastern Kentucky, an area encompassing Daniel Boone National Forest. No community is seizing tourism opportunities. Instead, rural towns cling to coal mining, and they are losing jobs by the thousands.[ii]

To explore this intriguing contrast, the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce commissioned an international consulting firm to analyze the feasibility of creating a robust tourism industry in Eastern Kentucky.[iii] The study’s conclusions were encouraging. The study supported Eastern Kentucky’s potential to capitalize on its natural resources by turning them into tourism generators. The culture and history-rich Appalachian region offers natural beauty and numerous opportunities for outdoor recreation; these are essential factors contributing to the success of rural tourism destinations.[iv]

However, developing an Eastern Kentucky version of Gatlinburg is not without some obstacles. Perhaps the most formidable challenge is renovating existing lodging and creating new hotels. The region lacks any upscale hotels, which are important to conference organizers and vacation planners.[v] Local ordinances regulating alcohol sales also pose a hurdle. Of the thirty-four Eastern Kentucky counties, only six are wet counties. The other twenty-eight are either dry or have limitations on alcohol sales.[vi] Finally, the study noted that a lack of broadband Internet access discourages tourism.[vii]

What steps must Kentucky take to create a tourism center? The study first suggested that state parks should pursue private-public partnerships. Although the government is cash-strapped, private funding could provide the dollars required for much-needed renovations and development within the state parks.[viii] The Kentucky legislature may also attract higher-end hotels—along with golf courses, spas, and restaurants—by promoting public incentives to private developers.[ix] These types of businesses open the door for tourism. Eastern Kentucky could also focus on developing a tourism workforce via training and education.[x] A tourism center requires a specialized workforce, so high schools and colleges in Eastern Kentucky would be wise to offer hospitality management and customer service training.

The downturn in the coal industry has triggered an important dialogue about ways in which Eastern Kentucky can diversify its economy.[xi] This is an opportune time to consider tapping natural resources for tourism instead of coal. Economic analysis concludes a “modern, well-planned Gatlinburg” is not out of reach for the Appalachian region of Eastern Kentucky.[xii] The Commonwealth’s business and political leaders should seize the chance to develop rural tourism and revitalize a suffering economy.
_________________
[i] AECOM, Potential for Tourism Development in Eastern Kentucky, Kentucky Chamber Foundation, 85-89 (Oct. 8, 2013), http://www.kychamber.com/sites/default/files/EasternKyTourism2013.pdf.
[ii] Bill Estep, Study: Eastern Kentucky could create 'modern, well-planned Gatlinburg' (Oct. 30, 2013), http://www.kentucky.com/2013/10/30/2903321/study-eastern-kentucky-could-create.html.
[iii] Chamber Touts Tourism Potential of Eastern Kentucky, Kentucky Chamber of Commerce (Oct. 29, 2013), http://www.kychamber.com/news/2013/10/29/chamber-touts-tourism-potential-eastern-kentucky.
[iv] AECOM, Potential for Tourism Development in Eastern Kentucky, Kentucky Chamber Foundation, 4 (Oct. 8, 2013), http://www.kychamber.com/sites/default/files/EasternKyTourism2013.pdf.
[v] Id. at 24.
[vi] Id. at 95-8.
[vii] Id. at 98-9.
[viii] Id. at 2-3.
[ix] Id.
[x] Id.
[xi] Bill Estep, Study: Eastern Kentucky could create 'modern, well-planned Gatlinburg' (Oct. 30, 2013), http://www.kentucky.com/2013/10/30/2903321/study-eastern-kentucky-could-create.html.
[xii] AECOM, Potential for Tourism Development in Eastern Kentucky, Kentucky Chamber Foundation, 4 (Oct. 8, 2013), http://www.kychamber.com/sites/default/files/EasternKyTourism2013.pdf.

FDA Asks Big Pharma to Moooove Out

Image Source

By: Marc Manley, Staff Member

After an intense finals week diet of Red Bull and granola bars, one of my favorite holiday past times is tearing into a plump, moist turkey. I swear, each year the bird looks bigger, but that could be the sleep deprivation talking. This year, with the holiday feast looming, I was surprised to discover my favorite tradition was supplying me with more than just a full belly and refreshing nap. This past December, the FDA introduced a new policy aimed at curbing widespread antibiotic use in livestock production.[i] It seems farmers have stumbled across an unanswered secret regarding antibiotic use: it makes my holiday turkey fatter.[ii]

While examining mold in 1929, Alexander Fleming made the most revolutionary discovery in modern medicine. He noticed bacteria would not grow near Penicillium and harnessed this power to create the world’s first antibiotic, Penicillin.[iii] For the next several decades, mankind wielded its most powerful weapon against the deadly microbes, ushering in the golden age of antibiotics.[iv] Unfortunately, the good times are coming to an end as bacteria adapts to the current tides of war. In one example, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, the infamous sexually transmitted infection known as gonorrhea, is now 98% resistant to antibiotic treatment in Asia.[v] One in four Americans with the infection can sympathize with their Asian neighbors.[vi] Scientists attribute the widespread overuse of antibiotics to the development of these super bacteria.[vii]

The largest consumer of antibiotics in America is the livestock industry. In fact, 80% of all antibiotics sold in the United States are fed to livestock.[viii] Unfortunately, these antibiotics are utilized to fatten Wilbur, not to help him forget about his one night stand with Ms. Piggy.[ix] Scientists have been urging Congress to take action to reduce antibiotic use in livestock production for years as a means for slowing antibiotic resistance.[x] The FDA has now implemented a policy aimed at limiting antibiotic use in livestock production to disease management only.[xi] FDA is asking pharmaceutical companies to change the labeling of their bottles to discourage antibiotic use for feed purposes, and is seeking to require a veterinarian’s prescription before a farmer can access antibiotics.[xii] Some critics argue this is a toothless mandate since pharmaceutical participation is strictly voluntary.[xiii] But the two largest pharmaceutical companies, Zoetis and Elanco, have agreed to participate, and hopefully, most companies will follow their lead.[xiv]

While this FDA action may not be the silver bullet to stopping antibiotic overuse, it does signify an important first step. Only through collaboration and education can humanity preserve its most important chemical weapons stockpile. My turkey next year may not be as big as this year’s, but that is a sacrifice I am willing to accept in this war effort. Maybe I’ll just study longer hours and rely on a sleep deprived brain to trick me into believing the bird grew.
_________________
[i] FDA Takes Significant Steps to Address Antimicrobial Resistance, US Food and Drug Administration, http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm378166.htm.
[ii] Sabrina Tavernise, F.D.A. Restricts Antibiotic Use For Livestock, N.Y. TIMES (Dec. 11, 2013), http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/health/fda-to-phase-out-use-of-some-antibiotics-in-animals-raised-for-meat.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.
[iii] See Fleeming Discovers Penicillin, A Science Odyssey, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/dm28pe.html.
[iv] See Antibiotic Resistance: Delaying the Inevitable, Understanding Evolution, http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/medicine_03.
[v] Id.
[vi] Id.
[vii] Id.
[viii] See Letter from Public Health Organizations to Congress, (Sept. 6, 2011), available at http://www.pewhealth.org/uploadedFiles/PHG/Content_Level_Pages/Issue_Briefs/Joint-Letter-State-Science-Antibiotic-Use-2011-09-06.pdf.
[ix] See Tavernise, supra note 2.
[x] See Letter from Public Health Organizations to Congress, supra note 8. 

[xi] FDA Takes Significant Steps to Address Antimicrobial Resistance, US Food and Drug Administration, http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm378166.htm.
[xii] Id.
[xiii] See Peter Lehener, The FDA’s Toothless Action on Animal Antibiotics Isn’t Enough, Los Angeles Times, http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/13/news/la-ol-antibiotics-animals-fda-blowback-20131213.
[xiv] Jason Koebler, The FDA Has Finally Taken Steps to End Antibiotic Use in Livestock, Vice, 

http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-fda-has-finally-taken-steps-to-end-antibiotic-use-in-livestock.

Talk Turkey to Me: Chemicals, Grades, and Temperatures Oh My!

Image Source

By: Sara Johnston, Staff Member

This past week, news of arsenic-infested poultry from one of America’s largest research-based pharmaceutical companies announced voluntary production halt of its product.[i] The arsenic announcement sent most Americans into a meat selection panic. Poultry and beef products are consistent ingredients to American diets, and announcements of harmful additives to these meats are nothing short of unsettling. With dozens of different brands in the freezer isle, multiple options of cooking instructions, and few options of meat grades, what is the likelihood of a consumer’s confidence in the meat they purchase? Unknown to many, beef is not the only meat with available grades; poultry products are also graded. With the Holidays right around the corner, what better opportunity to examine the appropriate grade, cooking instructions, and steps to have a clean turkey?

The pink coloration of turkey, regardless of grade, often worries consumers. Pink meat does not have the same red flag associated with it as beef.[ii] Pink meat, as long as 165 °F throughout the turkey, is safe. [iii] The coloration difference emanates from oxygen-storing myoglobin, located in muscle cells and retains oxygen from food in the blood until the animal’s cells need it. [iv] The reasons coloration remains after cooking are: chemical changes during cooking, natural nitrites, turkey’s young age, and grilling.[v]

If a turkey is issued a grade, this alone entails the bird has gone through laborious review processes by USDA graders who follow official standards developed by USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service.[vi] Grade A, the most common grade, means absence of defects such as feathers and bruises.[vii] Depending on the number of defects, the turkey may be down-graded to B or C. When considering grade, it is important the consumer consider age. Younger turkeys will be labeled as fryer-roaster, young hen, or young tom and will have tender and plump meat.[viii]

Chemicals and bacteria become concerns with birds taking hours to thaw, potentially feeding a dozen people. When thawing a large turkey, it is important not to thaw the bird on a counter, or garage.[ix] Thawing can be accomplished through refrigerator thawing, cold-water thawing, and microwave thawing.[x] Refrigerator thawing takes 24 hours for every five pounds of meat.[xi] Cold water thawing takes less time than refrigerator thawing, but more attention, as bacteria can reach into the packing if not properly sealed.[xii] Microwave thawing is the fasted safe method, but requires immediate cooking after thawing.[xiii]

In order to avoid chemical scares, the safest, but more expensive route is to buy organic and cage free birds. The FDA’s lethargic action tactics to force meat distributers to discontinue arsenic, penicillin, and other toxins has caused confidence in our governmental monitoring programs to dissipate.[xiv] Poultry feed containing toxins to increase appetite and weight gain in animals is thought to be harmless, however, once the arsenic is digested, it becomes a carcinogen.[xv] It is unfortunate the answer to choosing a healthy meal for your family needs to be a more expensive one, even after choosing the right grade and preparation method, but it seems that until the FDA enacts more ambitiously to monitor guidelines keeping us safe from carcinogens, organic is the best option.
_________________
[i] Nitro (Roxarsone) And Chicken, U.S. Food & Drug Admin., http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ProductSafetyInformation/ucm257540.htm (last updated Sept. 6, 2013).
[ii] Is Pink Turkey Meat Safe?, U.S. Food & Drug Admin., available at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/food-safety-education/get-answers/food-safety-fact-sheets/poultry-preparation/is-pink-turkey-meat-safe_/CT_Index (last modified Aug. 02, 2013).
[iii] Id.
[iv] Id.
[v] Id.
[vi] Craig A. Morris, Let's Talk Turkey About USDA Poultry Grades, U.S. Food & Drug Admin., (Nov. 18, 2013, 10:15 AM), http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/11/18/lets-talk-turkey-about-usda-poultry-grades/.
[vii] Id.
[viii] Id.
[ix] Kathy Bernard, The Big Thaw For Thanksgiving, USDA FOOD & SAFETY INSPECTION SERVICE, available at http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/11/19/ the-big-thaw-for-thanksgiving.
[x] Id.
[xi] Id.
[xii] Id.
[xiii] Id.
[xiv] James Greiff, What was Arsenic Doing in Our Chicken Anyway?, BLOOMBERG (Oct. 10, 2013, 10:57 AM) http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-10/what-was-arsenic-doing-in-our-chicken-anyway-.html.
[xv] Id.