No Clean Feed - Stop Internet Censorship in Australia

More Horsing Around

By DeusExMacintosh

Some Findus beef lasagne made of 100% horsemeat

People should not throw away frozen meat products in the wake of the revelations about horsemeat in Findus lasagne, the food minister had said. David Heath advised consumers to carry on eating meat unless told otherwise.

The Food Standards Agency has asked UK firms to test all processed beef foods, but said it did not “suspect there is any health issue with frozen food”.

Shadow environment secretary Mary Creagh has expressed fears that other contaminated foods may be found. Mr Heath said the government’s advice was “exactly that” of the FSA’s.

“The FSA says there is no reason to suppose there is a health risk and therefore the advice is to carry on with normal shopping habits until you are told otherwise,” he told the BBC.

Earlier this week, a third-party French supplier alerted Findus to concerns that the beef lasagne product did not “conform to specification”.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) said Findus had tested the meat in 18 of its beef lasagne products and found 11 meals in which it contained between 60% and 100% horsemeat. The company has withdrawn the meals and reiterated its apology.

The FSA said it was “highly likely” criminal activity was to blame for the contamination.

- BBC News

And when your dry heaves are over, this is ALSO the Saturday chit-chat thread.

15 Comments

  1. kvd
    Posted February 9, 2013 at 5:26 am | Permalink

    Can’t really understand all the fuss about this horsemeat business. Surely it’s just a case of food labeling laws being flouted? Would be interested to hear from any nay-sayer.

  2. Adrien
    Posted February 9, 2013 at 9:05 am | Permalink

    In France they serve horsemeat, labelled as such. I don’t want to eat a horse for the same reason I don’t want to eat dogs or cats; they’re my friends.

  3. kvd
    Posted February 9, 2013 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    A@2 dinner with friends is one of life’s little pleasures; You’re not suggesting this should be halted?

  4. davoh
    Posted February 9, 2013 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    um, if it came to the crunch – would i eat horsemeat ? Absolutely yes!

    The problem here is that horses (equines) tend to become friends; but don’t do “Facebook”.

    Would you eat a “Facebook” friend????

  5. stuart chignell
    Posted February 9, 2013 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

    Why dry heaves. In France horse is commonly available at the butchers. I don’t see any logical reason why horses shouldn’t be eaten.

    Unlike many other meats it doesn’t taste like chicken.

  6. kvd
    Posted February 9, 2013 at 1:57 pm | Permalink

    stuart@5 having done more research, I think DEM’s concern is more the veterinary products which might have escaped into the food chain; phenobutylbarbiedoll is one, I think. And that’s enough to give anyone the trots.

  7. stuart chignell
    Posted February 9, 2013 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

    ehhhh. Yes pharmaceuticals. Anyone who was going to break the law about labeling is unlikely to follow the law about withholding periods.

  8. JKUU
    Posted February 9, 2013 at 11:56 pm | Permalink

    “A horse! A horse!. My kingdom for a horse burger”

    —- Early draft of the ‘Hungry Sovereign’ by W. Shakespeare.

  9. Posted February 10, 2013 at 8:33 am | Permalink

    I ate horse in Catania. Sliced thin and cooked in vinegar. It was delicious.

  10. Adrien
    Posted February 10, 2013 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

    You’re not suggesting this should be halted?

    I said I wouldn’t eat horsemeat ’cause I like horses. I currently struggle between gentle times spent in the company of ducks and a friend’s wife’s delicious way with the Peking style of preparing their flesh.

    I like kangaroos too but not enough to stop marinating them in shiraz, soy sauce and rosemary for 24 hours before serving them up with sweet potatoes.

  11. kvd
    Posted February 10, 2013 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

    A@10 my query was a very bad riff on the word halter, as was my ‘dinner with friends’ a pathetic homage to Anthony Hopkins’ line at the end of ‘Silence of the Lambs’: “I’m having a friend for dinner”.

    And to complete the confession, it’s taken maybe three years to become comfortable with fry/scramble/poach -ing the ‘produce’ of my half dozen hens. They are lovely, happy creatures; and probably as much admired as your ducks.

  12. Phill @65
    Posted February 11, 2013 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    Lots of animals can be our friends though:

    I’ve had pet chickens but still eat chicken, had pet rabbits but love a rabbit stew. Cows can be very friendly as can kangaroos.

  13. kvd
    Posted February 11, 2013 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    If this is a chitchat post then could I ask a serious question of the lawyers here about a term I stumbled upon recently – ‘bill of attainder’ – which I’ve now managed to mangle up with both ‘extrajudicial powers’ and ‘executive action’?

    I’m thinking of drone strikes, and Julian Assange, and our own David Hicks – the lack of due process in the treatment thereof; with the overriding government-of-the-day justification that these are ‘bad people’. And never mind that succeeding governments agree, and continue the stance.

    I’ve read the wikipedia entry, but my question is: is this still a ‘living’ legal concept?

  14. JKUU
    Posted February 11, 2013 at 11:19 pm | Permalink

    I’m not a lawyer KVD, but Bills of Attainder are specifically prohibited in the U.S. Constitution.

    Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 states that: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed.”

    “The Bill of Attainder Clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function or more simply – trial by legislature.” U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 440 (1965).

    This prohibition applies to the legislative branch of government (i.e. Congress) rather than the executive branch headed by the President. I suppose that the executive duty to enforce the country’s laws might involve ex-judicial killing in some specific circumstances.

    Note, however, that Congress can try the President (and other high-level officials, I believe) through the impeachment process.

  15. drien
    Posted February 12, 2013 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

    KVD – I believe cannibalism is morally wrong but in Dr Chiltern’s case I’ll make an exception. :)

    Best thing for him really. His therapy was going nowhere.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*