I'm sorry you find my comments rhetorical or irrelevent. However, I disagree.
First of all, your research data is over ten years old and predates NAFTA, which
provided the basis for a much closer coordination of standards. For your
information, Mexican exports are documented by Secretariat of Agriculture field
engineers close to the crop before the truck leaves, and these truckloads are
checked against documents in every state along the way. Futhermore, the USDA has
implemented programs deep in Mexico for many years, and has inspectors in many
export oriented packing sheds. Also, there are buffer areas manned by USDA
inspectors on all main highways leading north, well before the border.
I don't question the need to improve the quality of food available in the US (my
own biggest problem when there - much more so than when I'm in Mexico), or to
eliminate the use of toxic agrochemicals on all food products to the greartest
degree possible, but I find your point of view weakened by what appears to me to
be an assumption that outside the US nothing is done with due conscience.
In general, I share Sal's concerns as much as anyone and have supported his
positions on numerous occasions. But like everyone else, Sal is best when he's
talking about issues he's personally familiar with (e.g. organic certification),
rather than areas far from his own spere of activities.
Sal is one of sanet's biggest opponents to a police state, and doesn't need to fan
the fires of of national chauvinism, to make his point.
In short, I don't question the results of your research, but I do believe there's
more to the issue than was suggested. There are elements of control you evidently
ignore, and the situation today is not what it was in the 80's.
> In a message dated 98-06-12 00:19:16 EDT, email@example.com (Douglas M. Hinds)
> << Do any of you have any experience importing fruit? I'm hearing a lot of
> assumptions based on very litlle first hand contact. Take a run down to the
> border some time. (If I'm there, I'll be glad to help you get deeper into
> it). Do you really think any grower or exporter is going to want to risk the
> of a truckload by shipping a product that might be turned back?>>
> A rhetorical argument about what seems to make sense is irrelevant. Your
> comments do not address mine. My comment was about shipped produce. The
> facts are the monitoring is token and the consequences are typically fines a
> fraction of the profit on the crops. Not only this, but the FDA doesn't test
> AT ALL for many pesticide chemicals that are applied to crops because tests
> simply don't exist. None of this is assumption. I researched this issue
> myself three years ago from the Congressional Record, a GAO review of FDA
> monitoring of imported crops, and the FDA's "Pesticide Monitoring Crop Reports
> for Fruits and Vegetables", 1985-1988.
> ~~Sherry <FionaNyx@aol.com>
> For reference:
> FionaNyx@aol.com wrote:
> > In a message dated 98-06-08 09:57:38 EDT, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
> > << can we assume that a lot of the food in the store does not come from
> > American farms but are crossing the border in big lots. can we assume
> > most those pesticides come from the good old USA and the food is coming
> > back here. can we assume these trucks are not inspected very good so we
> > have no idea where what is going. can we assume that even if pesticides
> > are found unsafe in America the American farmer will fight to keep them
> > because of money. >>
> > Actually, this stuff was documented from FDA records in testimony before
> > Congress. Much of the produce is arriving by ship, but the idea is the
> > It comes from countries which import pesticides that cannot be applied in
> > US, but are still manufactured here for export. The percentage of these
> > shipments that are tested is miniscule, tests often reveal excessive
> > of pesticides, yet much of the produce in those shipments that test
> > contaminated have already moved on into the foodstream by the time the
> > are returned from the labs.
> > ~~Sherry <FionaNyx@aol.com> >>
> To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
Douglas M. Hinds, Director General Centro para el Desarrollo Comunitario y Rural A.C. (CeDeCoR) (Center for Community and Rural Development) - (non profit) Petronilo Lopez No. 73 (Street Address) Apdo. Postal No. 61 (Mailing Address) Cd. Guzman, Jalisco 49000 MEXICO U.S. Voice Mailbox: 1 630 300 0550 (e-mail linked) U.S. Fax Mailbox: 1 630 300 0555 (e-mail linked) Tel. & Fax: 011 523 412 6308 (direct) e-mail: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with "unsubscribe sanet-mg". To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".