January 22, 2004 The Japan Times

An American request for an early resumption of imports is expected, as an extended ban will deal a heavy blow to the U.S. cattle industry. Washington says U.S. beef is safe since it has taken additional safety measures, such as banning the distribution of all meat from "downers" - sick cattle that can't walk properly. Measures such as these, which were announced in late December, are welcome, but they are inadequate in light of the fact that cows other than downers have also been found infected with the disease.

Japanese officials say assuring the safety of U.S. beef is the primary condition for resuming imports. Tokyo is expected to request that the U.S. test all cattle before they are slaughtered, as Japan is currently doing. The bottom line is that the U.S. should carry out full-scale tests in ways similar to, if not identical to, Japan's. A hasty settlement, not to mention a political compromise, would only undermine consumer confidence. There must be little or no difference between testing standards for Japan's domestic beef and those for beef exported from countries with BSE cases.

In addition to suspending all shipments from downers - whose meat had been distributed despite doubts about safety - U.S. officials expanded the range of "dangerous" cattle parts for which human consumption is explicitly prohibited. Washington intends to increase the number of cows subject to BSE testing, which at present covers a tiny fraction of the annual slaughter - about 20,000 out of some 35 million head. It is hoped that the U.S. administration will take more appropriate steps that will work to erase the concerns of Japanese consumers about the safety of American beef.

The U.S. has banned beef imports from Japan since a BSE case was reported here in October 2001. According to the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Washington has been noncommittal on when and how imports can resume. The U.S. will be seen as selfish if it demands a lifting of the import ban on the Japanese side only.

Japan has been testing all cows at its meat-processing facilities to prevent any contaminated beef from entering the food supply. This is said to be the most stringent measure ever taken in the world to check for mad cow disease. It has produced a telling result: A calf no more than 2 years old has tested positive, contrary to the general belief that such young cows were free from infection.

Much remains unknown about this brain-wasting disease. That is why the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization has issued a statement urging the U.S. to take stronger measures, saying that consumers will become more confident about the safety of beef if all cows 30 months or older are tested.

Such wholesale testing requires much money and time. Japan spends more than Yen 3.3 billion just to provide testing kits, or nearly Yen 3,000 per head. And it takes five or six hours to test each cow. The FAO estimates the cost of testing at about Dollars 50 per head. The U.S., a major beef exporter, should bear the burden. If it cannot afford to do so, Japan can possibly help by sharing the cost of testing beef bound for the Japanese market.

Japan currently bans beef imports from 23 countries where BSE cases have been confirmed. These countries, including Britain and Canada, have yet to conduct full-scale testing. Just because the U.S. supplies 30 percent of Japan's beef demand does not mean that it should be treated as an exception.

A prolonged ban on U.S. beef is likely to create a serious shortage that prompts Japan's restaurant and retail food industries to step up their demands for an early resumption of imports. U.S. pressures to remove the ban will also increase ahead of the presidential election in November. Texas - home to President George W. Bush, who is seeking re-election - is America's largest cattle-raising state. Lobbying by the cattle industry is bound to intensify.

All of this threatens to politicize the beef issue. This must be avoided; otherwise, consumer confidence in food safety will suffer again. Japan and the U.S. - and other countries involved - must seek a settlement based on scientific evidence, not political expediency.