意外と正直？―1000件超の危険部位除去違反がアメリカで発覚

昨日のニュースだが、記録のために書いておく。
意外と正直というか、ちゃんと監査部門が独立に機能してるんだなぁと感心しつつ、この報告でカヴァーしきれていないケースが、それこそゴキブリのごとくたくさんあるんだろうなとも思ってしまう。下記記事によると、米農務省のウェブサイトのスポークスパーソンは、「義務違反は検査全体の１％以下だ」と説明しているそうだが。

＜ＢＳＥ＞感染防止の危険部位除去で違反　米農務省発表
　【ワシントン及川正也】米農務省は１５日、牛海綿状脳症（ＢＳＥ）感染防止のため、生後３０カ月以上の牛を食肉処理する際に定めている脳や脊髄（せきずい）など特定危険部位の除去義務について、０４年１月～０５年５月の１年５カ月に１０３６件の違反を確認したと発表した。
　いずれも食肉としては流通しておらず、消費者への影響はないというが、日本では米国の危険部位除去の確実性に対し不安が根強く、輸入再開論議に微妙な影響を与えそうだ。・・・（毎日新聞） – 8月16日15時41分更新

なお、今回の調査を発表した農務省食品安全局（FSIS）のサイトには、この件に関する記事はあるものの、具体的なデータを記した報告書本体はまだ（？）公開されていない。（笹山登生の掲示板の記事606によると、どうやら件の報告書”Non-compliance Reports”は、なぜか非公開なんだそうだ。 そんなんで客＝日本に輸入再開迫るとは、相変わらず恥知らずな鉄面皮だな。）記事自体も、”BSE Rules Being Strictly Enforced“というタイトルが示すように、むしろ規制がうまくいってると主張している。まぁ、１０３６件という数字が、本当に正直なものならいいんだが、それよりずっと多い数がスルーされてるんじゃないかと、どうしても疑ってしまうなぁ。。

ちなみに昨夜は、ガイアの夜明けが、「アメリカ牛肉は大丈夫か」というタイトルで、アメリカの食肉加工工場の実態について報じていた。昨年、来日して、日本政府や消費者に米国牛肉加工現場のひどい実態と危険性を訴えた大手食肉加工企業タイソン・フーズ社の労組委員長（元）も出演していた（関連記事１、関連記事２、関連記事３）。ちなみにこの番組の取材時には彼は、同社を辞めていたようだったが、その理由については番組では触れていなかった。彼は以前、加工工場の内部の非衛生的な実態を告発するためのビデオを撮影し、米メディアにも公開していたのだが、番組ではそれも流されていた。
そのなかで、解体した牛の肉に緑色の変な豆状の塊がいくつもくっついているのが映っていたのだが、日本の獣医学の専門家に見てもらった結果、それは、牛の身体に細菌が入り込んでできた膿瘍だということが分かった。日本では、こういうのが見つかった牛は、当然食肉にはせず廃棄するのだそうだが、タイソン・フーズ社ではそのまま食肉として出荷しているのだという。（ゲロゲロ。。）
さらに今も同社に勤める社員によれば、月例判別や危険部位除去などBSE対策については、講習すら行われていないのだという。仕方ないので、現場の作業員同士で自主的に勉強しているのだそうだ。
ちなみに番組では、タイソン・フーズ社という社名は出ていなかったが、元委員長たちが昨年来日したのを知ってる人にとってはバレバレの話だった。
それともう一つ、数日前にはこんなニュースもあった。ほんとにただのCJDなんでしょうかね？「１００万人に１人」という発生率のCJDが、たった半年の間に同じ州で6件も発生する確率ってどれくらいだろう？

＜ヤコブ病＞米アイダホ州で６件発生　５人死亡
　【ロサンゼルス國枝すみれ】ロイター通信は１２日、米アイダホ州で今年２月以降、牛海綿状脳症（ＢＳＥ）の病原体によっても生じる「クロイツフェルト・ヤコブ病」とみられる症例が６件発生したと報じた。全員が６０歳以上で、隣接する地区に住んでおり、うち５人は既に死亡している。
　州政府は「自然発生によるもので、ＢＳＥの牛を食べたためではない」と説明した。しかし、自然発生は１００万人に１人の割合とされるヤコブ病が、人口１４０万人の同州で６件も多発した理由については不明なままだ。
　米疾病対策予防センター（ＣＤＣ）によれば、米国では年間３００件近いヤコブ病患者が出ている。集団発生としては、８８～９２年、ニュージャージー州の競馬場に勤務もしくは通っていた１３人が死亡した例がある。（毎日新聞） – 8月13日13時15分更新

＜追記＞
笹山登生の掲示板の記事606にリンクされていたUnited Press International (UPI)の記事USDA documents show mad cow violationsによると、どうも件の報告書の内容の一部は、すでに昨年末には、その時点までのものが、米国老舗の消費者団体Public Citizenによって知られていたようだ。Public Citizenは、検査官へのインタヴューを通じて裏取りをしつつ、情報公開も求めていたそうだが、記事が発行された先月20日現在、全容は未だに公開されていない。
しかも農務省は、以前は、この報告書の存在をもとに、「違法行為の証拠は何もない。報告書は、危険部位使用禁止令が適切に実施されているしるしである」とまでいってたそうだ。ちなみにこの発言は、農務省検査官で全米食品検査官合同評議会（National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals）の議長も勤めるスタンリー・ペインター（Stanley Painter）氏が、昨年12月に、「アメリカでのＢＳＥの特定危険部位の処理は不十分」とする警告書を農務省に提出したことに対する返答である。しかもペインター氏に対して農務省は、「行動に対する強制調査」――UPIの記事では「犯罪捜査」と書かれてる――を行ったという（参照記事）。
こうした一連の動きに対してPublic Citizenは、昨年12月23日に情報公開法（FOIA）に基づき、と殺場および加工工場でのBSE関連規制の実施状況に関するすべての記録を公開するよう、農務省に求めたのだが、7月12日現在、未だに何の書類も公開されていないのである（参照：Public Citizen’s FOIA Timeline）。先のUPIの記事によると、その理由は「農務省のコンピューター・システムのせいで、報告を探し出すのが困難になっているから」なんだそうだ。情報検索が困難になるなんて、いったい、何のためのシステムだろう？
また、UPIが農務省のスポークスパーソンに、「検査官はすべての違反行為について把握しているのか」と尋ねたところ、彼は何も答えず電話を切ったそうだ。
やっぱり限りなく怪しい。（とても正直で分かりやすいとも言うが。）

USDA documents show mad cow violations
By Steve Mitchell
Medical Correspondent
Published 7/19/2005 6:29 PM

WASHINGTON, July 19 (UPI) — The U.S. Department of Agriculture claims it has found no evidence to support allegations by one of its meat inspectors that mad cow disease safeguards are being violated, possibly exposing consumers to the deadly illness, but United Press International has seen internal agency documents that verify violations have occurred for many months.

The documents, called non-compliance reports or NRs, show several instances in which slaughterhouses were cited by USDA inspectors for not properly marking cows over the age of 30 months. This means the specified risk materials, or SRMs — brains, spinal cords and other parts of the animals deemed to be the most risky for transmitting mad cow disease to humans — did not have to be removed.

The failure to correctly identify older animals or remove the SRMS is a violation of a USDA policy established in 2004, after the first confirmed case of mad cow in U.S. herds was announced. That policy was meant to protect consumers if additional mad cow cases were detected.

Stanley Painter, a USDA inspector and chairman of the National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals, claimed last December he knew of several instances in which this policy had been violated. Painter said union officials worried that many violations may go undetected and SRMs could enter the food supply if shortcomings in the USDA policy were not fixed.

The concern is humans can contract a fatal brain illness called variant Creutzfeldt Jakob disease from consuming beef products contaminated with the mad cow pathogen — which is not destroyed by cooking.

Felicia Nestor, a consultant to the watchdog group Public Citizen, said she also has seen NRs that support the allegations. Nestor said interviews with inspectors, together with information contained in the documents, indicate the infractions have been occurring for a year and a half.

“I talked to an inspector last week who said it’s still going on,” Nestor told UPI. “I’ve seen or heard of violations that span almost a year and a half,” she said.

USDA officials, who said previously the agency had conducted an investigation and found no evidence supporting Painter’s claims, said the NRs are a signal the SRM ban is being adequately enforced.

“The existence of NRs demonstrates that enforcement of (mad cow) regulations is being effectively carried out,” Steven Cohen, an agency spokesman, told UPI.

Asked if the USDA presumes its inspectors catch every violation, Cohen did not answer and hung up the telephone.

Nestor said inspectors have told her they do not think all of the infractions have been caught and they are concerned some SRMs from older cows may have reached consumers.

“So people may have eaten this stuff,” she said.

Although the non-compliance reports UPI viewed indicated the beef products from the older cows were condemned and did not make it into the food supply, some of the documents suggested the products were ready for distribution and could have reached consumers if they had not been caught at the last moment.

Nestor said based on what she remembers of the NRs, combined with discussions with inspectors, the SRM violations affected thousands of pounds of meat. In some cases, Nestor said, inspectors have told her a processing plant has been cited several times many months apart for SRM violations, suggesting the problem may not have been corrected in the intervening months.

Cohen said when a slaughterhouse receives an NR, “the plant is required to take immediate corrective action to prevent a repetition of the event.”

This presumes the animals involved appeared healthy, or they would not have been permitted for human consumption, but this does not mean they were free of mad cow disease. In Europe, hundreds of seemingly healthy animals have tested positive for the disease.

In addition, mad cow disease has existed in the United States for several years, if not longer. The infected Washington cow came into the country from Canada in 2001 and the disease may have been circulating in U.S. herds as far back as the early 1990s — the Texas cow that recently tested positive for the disease was born around 1992 and could have become infected at that time.

Nestor said due to inadequate USDA policies and a lack of training and instruction, some inspectors may not be catching SRM violations, while other violations might not be documented.

“So there may not be NRs for a variety of reasons and the NRs we are aware of are probably just a portion of what the inspectors saw and that’s probably the tip of the iceberg of what actually occurred at plants across the country,” she said.

The USDA has refused to turn over other NRs it might be holding in response to a request made by Public Citizen last December under the Freedom of Information Act. By federal law, the agency is required to respond in 30 days, but so far the request has been pending for 120 business days.

Nestor said that during a meeting with consumer groups earlier this month, Merle Pierson, USDAs acting undersecretary for food safety, said the reason for the delay in fulfilling Public Citizen’s FOIA request is the agency’s computer system makes it difficult to search for NRs.

Nestor said if that is true, it calls into question the USDA’s public statements back in December — when the SRM allegations first emerged — that the SRM verification process was working.

“How could they do that when eight months later they’re saying they still haven’t gotten to the bottom of the evidence in their own computer system?” she asked.

Cohen said fulfilling the FOIA request “is a massive undertaking in time and resources” and has required bringing in additional staff to respond “as quickly as possible.”

Painter first raised the issue with USDA officials in a letter last December. After receiving no response, Painter informed media representatives about his concerns and was subsequently interrogated twice by the USDA and charged with personal misconduct.

Painter, consumer groups and at least one Member of Congress — Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y. — have charged the USDA’s actions were intended to intimidate and retaliate against him for divulging the information.

Painter’s allegations apparently have been an issue in the U.S. government’s ongoing negotiations with Japan to open their borders to U.S. beef imports. The State Department recently posted a notice on the Web site of the U.S. Embassy in Japan stating USDA officials found no evidence to substantiate Painter’s claims and had requested a criminal investigation into his actions. USDA officials subsequently said the statement was erroneous and it was removed in July three days after UPI reported its existence.

Cohen said the USDA interviewed other union officials and they said they had not been contacted by inspectors concerned the SRM regulations were not being enforced.

Nestor disputed that assertion, saying she had talked with one inspector who had been interviewed by the agency who said he never was asked that question.

“It’s a falsehood,” Nestor said. “It’s another misrepresentation designed to call Painter’s credibility into question. She added that other inspectors with whom she has spoken said they are concerned about the implications of the SRM violations.

“People are terrified to talk, but when I talk to them they recognize it as a major problem,” she said. “They actually even sound kind of incredulous that it still could be going on.”

Cohen said the agency “will continue to seek information relevant to these issues and reminds all personnel of their ability to directly contact the Office of Inspector General should they desire.”

The OIG has launched an investigation to determine whether the SRM ban is being effectively implemented and results are due by the end of the summer.

E-mail: sciencemail@upi.com
Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International