Regulated Market Failure

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journal...g/17297411.htm

Quote:

Not all to be tested for mad cow

The Bush administration said Tuesday it will fight to keep meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease.

The Agriculture Department tests less than 1 percent of slaughtered cows for the disease, which can be fatal to humans who eat tainted beef. But Kansas-based Creekstone Farms Premium Beef wants to test all of its cows.

Larger meat companies feared that move because, if Creekstone tested its meat and advertised it as safe, they might have to perform the expensive test, too.

The Agriculture Department regulates the test and argued that widespread testing could lead to a false positive that would harm the meat industry. A federal judge ruled in March that such tests must be allowed. U.S. District Judge James Robertson noted that Creekstone sought to use the same test the government relies on and said the government didn’t have the authority to restrict it.

The ruling was to take effect June 1, but the Agriculture Department said Tuesday it would appeal – effectively delaying the testing.

What's most interesting is the notion that widespread testing for mad cow would generate a false positive. Like people would start preparing their meat less safely knowing they won't get mad cow... which they already presume they won't get?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I still can't get over the false positive. I mean, seatbelts make you think you're safer and drive less safely, which causes more accidents (lower fatalities). Bicycle helmets will also make the user more reckless, and make motorists think that the cyclist knows what he's doing and take unnecessary risk, putting the user at greater danger.

How do you get a false positive from testing for mad cow? That 1% that might not get tested is more of a threat than the 99% that they aren't? Testing for mad cow breeds a strain of test-resistant Super Mad Cow?

There's nowhere I can't reach.