[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 102 (Friday, July 28, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1616]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    BANNING CARBON MONOXIDE IN MEAT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. ROSA L. DeLAURO

                             of connecticut

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, July 28, 2006

  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing legislation that 
would ban the practice of injecting packages of meat with doses of 
carbon monoxide to give it an artificially fresh appearance. The sole 
purpose of this practice is to deceive consumers into purchasing and 
potentially eating meat that looks fresh, but could be spoiled.
  This week, the American Meat Institute announced the results of two 
studies claiming that carbon monoxide is safe to use in meat packages 
and urged opponents to concede their position and end the debate. 
Indeed, the carbon monoxide gas itself may be safe and would not cause 
harm to consumers. However, when the gas is injected to deceive 
customers into purchasing meat that could be months past its freshness 
date, then there is no doubt that it would be harmful to consumers.
  These studies released by AMI are an intriguing contribution to the 
debate. One of them was funded by the beef industry. The other study 
was conducted by an AMI ``expert consultant'' who has received numerous 
grants from AMI, and also received an AMI scientific achievement award. 
Therefore, the results of these studies should not calm consumer fears 
and definitely should not cause opponents of this practice to end the 
debate.
  In 2004, the USDA and FDA approved the use of carbon monoxide through 
an informal process without a full public comment process and without 
regulations specifying conditions of use. As a result, meat labels do 
not indicate whether meat has been treated with carbon monoxide--
leaving no way for the consumer to know whether they are purchasing 
fresh meat.
  Meat producers explain that the carbon monoxide process is safe and 
that it helps cut costs that result from discarding meat that has begun 
to turn brown, but still is safe to eat. That certainly is an 
understandable position. However, ground beef treated with carbon 
monoxide still could have the appearance of being fresh months after 
its `sell-by' date. There also have been instances in the past where 
stores have misrepresented the freshness of their food long before the 
carbon monoxide process was introduced.
  Supporters of the carbon monoxide process explain that smell is a 
better indicator of spoilage than color and consumers should base their 
purchases on the `use or freeze by' date as the best guide. This is 
true; however, it should be noted that this date on meat packages is 
not based on any scientific or regulatory guidelines, but is determined 
by the industry. Also, why should consumers be subjected to the hassle 
of bringing meat home from the grocery store, opening the package to 
determine if it still is fresh, and returning it if it is spoiled?
  Canada, Japan, and the European Union already ban the use of carbon 
monoxide in meat packages. I look forward to working with you to also 
protect American consumers from this deceitful practice. During a time 
when we have begun to question the safety of prescription drugs, let's 
ensure that consumers do not have similar concerns about the food they 
buy.

                          ____________________