The F.D.A. (Food & Drug Administration) is set to ‘ban’ the sale of raw oysters from the Gulf Coast as food items, unless they’re treated in a manner which many experts conclude alters or destroys their unique taste.
What I want to know is, why? The ‘potentially deadly bacteria’ that the F.D.A. says is the problem didn’t just suddenly spring into existence. The offending bacteria, Vibrio vulnificus, kills up to 15 people each year who eat raw oysters. Most of the victims have compromised or weak immune systems. Funny, H1N1 does that, and the F.D.A. isn’t banning the inhalation of air.
The ban would quite possibly destroy a cultural activity enjoyed for generations. Not to mention ruin the “raw bar” industry down here. Plus, all those oyster harvesters would need to seek new jobs. That would mean even more unemployed in the country for Obama to make good on his promise to find work for. And, worse still, it would establish another precedent of ‘big government’ meddling in local culture and community.
The F.D.A. supports a ban largely because consumers aren’t listening to their warnings, and “millions of other people” may not know they’re vulnerable. Really? The F.D.A. knows when consumers aren’t heeding a warning, and know the statistics of the bacteria-related deaths, but they don’t know if people know whether or not they’re vulnerable? Sounds like an excuse.
This comes just after Obama visited New Orleans, claiming that he has ‘cleared’ obstacles, and is working toward the iconic community returning to their glory. Oyster farming and eating has been a business and cultural event for centuries. For some harvesters, the ban has struck people when they are already down, because some have been forced to spend thousands of dollars on ‘upgrades’ to their boats to meet new refrigerating rules.
The F.D.A., who likely don’t eat raw oysters, claim there is no change in taste after the oyster treatment process, which involves heat, freezing temperatures, and exposure to gamma radiation. I don’t think anyone would want to eat an oyster after reading that had been done to it, would you? The F.D.A. cites a California raw oyster ban in 2003 as an example of how the treatment saves lives. Of course, that’s a California matter, not federal.
The ban would only affect oysters farmed in the Gulf Coast area, even though the bacteria is found in other areas. The ‘logic’ is that the bacteria, though present in other areas, lacks the concentrations found in the Gulf Coast. Does that mean the F.D.A. only cares about destroying industries in financially stricken regions of the country? In addition to clearly altering the taste of the treated oysters, the treatment itself is very expensive. So expensive, many believe that compliance with the ban would run successful businesses into the ground.
Is this what Barack Obama and Washington D.C. mean by ‘helping’ the Gulf Coast?
Also, pardon my French, but, WHAT THE FUCK?! The F.D.A. has been furthering a ‘bacteria scare’ for months. Tomatoes, pistachios, spinach.. Now it’s raw oysters. Pick an industry. Seriously, it almost seems carefully planned. As though some business is losing money, then get the F.D.A. to ban things that their rivals sell. But, I’m no conspiracy theorist. Either way, though, it’s a really offensive way to oversee an industry. Maybe it is time the F.D.A. gets one of Obama’s famous ‘reform’ bills. How about some new people in charge? Ones less inclined to take bribes, falsify records, and lie to the public.
No comments:
Post a Comment