On March 6, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced its requirements for exports to the EU. Those requirements included demands that prior to the export of beef, samples must be taken by inspectors in charge at slaughter facilities specified by the EU and sent for analysis. In other words, prior to their export to the EU, liver, kidney, muscle tissue, fat and urine samples must first be analyzed to show that they do not contain residues of the leanness-enhancing additives ractopamine and zilpaterol, the heavy metals lead and cadmium, or other toxins. Only beef with zero amounts of such additives and toxins can be exported to the EU.
Annually, the EU imports about 30,000 tonnes of US beef — called organic beef — a similar volume to the level imported by Taiwan. This year, the EU is increasing imports to 45,000 tonnes.
The EU uses a model that has been adopted by many advanced countries that require inspections overseas. Taiwan, on the other hand, enforces the so-called “three controls and five checkpoints,” in which the product first enters the country before huge sums are spent on sample inspection. This is a waste of national capital and social resources and serves only to stoke public concerns.
Consumers’ Foundation studies show that up to 70 percent of the public oppose meat products containing leanness--enhancing additives. The best policy when attempting to resolve the US beef controversy, which has now dragged on for four or five years, would be to learn from the EU, focus on overseas inspections and adopt zero--tolerance policies.
US data indicates that young cattle are fed milk and grass; it is only when they are older that about three-quarters are moved into cowsheds where they receive corn and other feed or are fed leanness-enhancing additives, antibiotics, hormones and other drugs.
According to Chou Chin-cheng (周晉澄), dean of National Taiwan University’s School of Veterinary Medicine, only about 35 percent of cattle in cowsheds, which do not eat grass, are given leanness-enhancing additives.
I have confirmed with USDA officials at the American Institute in Taiwan that the US produces about 360,000 tonnes of organic beef — from cattle that have not been given leanness-enhancing additives — annually, about one-tenth of which is purchased by the EU.
If Taiwan switched to organic beef, consumer prices would increase by 15 to 20 percent. Many people say that the price of high-quality beef free of leanness-enhancing additives and antibiotics should be decided by the market.
Although Taiwan is a member of the WTO, the ongoing US beef controversy has developed into a situation where the buyer is being forced to do what the seller wants.
Bizarrely, the president has gone on TV to say that he wants everyone living in Taiwan to ingest leanness-enhancing additives — which are still suspected of being toxic — and that they should do so “for the sake of the country.”
However, Taiwan is not North Korea. A solution to this issue should reflect public health concerns and nothing else.
With a government that has shown itself to be incapable of managing, but adept at playing tricks with food safety issues while putting on a show worthy of an election, the public is all but certain to refuse to consume meat products containing leanness-enhancing additives.
Taiwan needs to consider the EU model so that Taiwanese can consume meat without any nagging health concerns.
Winston Dang is a former head of the Environmental Protection Administration and foreign relations adviser to the Democratic Progressive Party.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS