Executive Yuan States Position for the First Time: Conditional Lifting of the Ban on Ractopamine-Fed US Beef

Image/Public Television Service At the second National Security Council meeting on March 4, President Ma Ying-jeou said on the ractopamine issue that the government would "put health first while also taking into account the interests of industry and diplomacy."

Editor's note: Executive Yuan spokesperson Yang Yung-ming announced on the evening of the 5th that, based on the conclusions of three inter-ministerial technical advisory group expert meetings held over the past 3 weeks - "there is no scientific evidence that eating meat from animals fed ractopamine is harmful to the human body" - the Executive Yuan proposed the policy direction of "safe tolerance, separation of beef and pork, mandatory labeling, exclusion of offal," and "conditionally lifted the ban" on beef from animals fed ractopamine.

However, Chou Chin-cheng, dean of National Taiwan University's College of Veterinary Medicine, and Lin Chieh-liang, director of the Division of Clinical Toxicology at Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, who took part in the "third ractopamine expert meeting" on March 3, said the conclusion of that day's meeting was clearly "no research report proves it is dangerous, and no research report proves it is safe," and therefore the conclusion reached was that there was "no consensus" on lifting the ban. As for the Executive Yuan and the president interpreting the expert meeting this way, Hsu Li-min, an attending physician in the Division of Traumatology at National Taiwan University's College of Medicine who attended the meeting, even described his feelings as "angry" and "feeling cheated."

Below are two news pieces. One is the Executive Yuan press release issued by the Central News Agency at 22:35:00 on the evening of March 5, and the other is PNN reporter Chung Sheng-hsiung's interviews with the experts who attended the "third expert meeting" on March 3, reconstructing what happened on site.

1. Executive Yuan: US Beef Policy Moves Toward Conditional Lifting of the Ban (Central News Agency press release)

(Central News Agency reporter Tsai Ho-ying, Taipei, March 5) Executive Yuan spokesperson Yang Yung-ming announced this evening that the Executive Yuan, on the basis of valuing national health and respecting expertise, has proposed the policy direction of "safe tolerance, separation of beef and pork, mandatory labeling, exclusion of offal," and has "conditionally lifted the ban" on beef from animals fed ractopamine.

The Executive Yuan issued a press release this evening proposing the 16-character policy direction of "safe tolerance, separation of beef and pork, mandatory labeling, exclusion of offal" on the US beef issue. Yang Yung-ming stressed that the "conditional lifting of the ban" does not include pork, nor does it include leanness-enhancing agents other than ractopamine, and that the Executive Yuan will cooperate with legislative amendments by the Legislative Yuan and strengthen communication with lawmakers.
Yang Yung-ming said the imported meat issue has drawn attention from all sectors, and President Ma Ying-jeou yesterday again invited heads of executive agencies to a meeting, instructing the Executive Yuan to conduct a complete assessment of the country's overall interests under the principle of prioritizing national health, and to propose comprehensive and thorough policy planning.

Yang Yung-ming further said that, based on the conclusions of three inter-ministerial technical advisory group expert meetings held over the past 3 weeks, "no case report of consumer poisoning was found (in the existing literature)," meaning that "there is no scientific evidence that eating meat from animals fed ractopamine is harmful to the human body."

He said President Ma and Executive Yuan Premier Chen Chun repeatedly stressed that national health is the priority consideration in related policies, and that respecting expertise is an important basis for government decision-making. The government must first confirm that eating beef from animals fed ractopamine poses no risk to human health before it can consider and judge other aspects of policy.

Yang Yung-ming relayed Chen Chun's view that only on the premise of ensuring health safety can the government weigh other important national interests, including the development of the domestic livestock industry, international trade and trade liberalization, the process of regional economic integration, and external relations.
Chen Chun also stressed, "In the position of premier, taking national health as the priority consideration while also thinking holistically about Taiwan's long-term interests, this is my responsibility." 1010305

2. Ractopamine Risk Unclear: Presidential Office One-Sidedly Distorts Experts' Conclusion? (PNN report)

Text/PNN reporter Chung Sheng-hsiung

The Council of Agriculture held the third ractopamine expert meeting last Saturday, and the Presidential Office chose to hold the second US beef national security meeting the following day. Presidential Office spokesperson Fan Chiang Tai-chi said President Ma Ying-jeou cited the expert meeting conclusion, saying "there is no scientific evidence showing that eating meat from animals fed ractopamine is harmful to the human body," but that he would respect expert opinions to safeguard national health while also taking into account the interests of industry and diplomacy. In response, some scholars who attended the meeting sharply criticized that the conclusion of that day's meeting was not like this at all, yet it was distorted by Ma Ying-jeou or the Council of Agriculture, leaving them feeling cheated.

Chou Chin-cheng, dean of National Taiwan University's College of Veterinary Medicine, who attended that day, said Ma Ying-jeou's remarks made him very surprised and very regretful, because the conclusion of that day's meeting was clearly "no research report proves it is dangerous, and no research report proves it is safe." Precisely because there was no large-scale epidemiological study, the scholars had no consensus and could not discuss it. "I very much regret that the president said this. I do not know who gave him the information. Was it the Council of Agriculture minister?" Chou Chin-cheng questioned.

Council of Agriculture Minister Chen Bao-ji rebutted, saying the meeting was recorded, and the minutes were indeed reported truthfully to the president, so it was absolutely impossible to distort the meeting minutes. When reporters pressed on whether the final meeting minutes submitted contained something like "no research shows it is safe, and no research shows it is dangerous," Chen Bao-ji also said yes, but he deflected by saying he did not yet understand exactly what Ma Ying-jeou had said and would have to look into it before saying more.

"The meeting minutes say that so far no report of human poisoning from ractopamine meat has been found. Since there is no case report, it is relatively safe," Chen Bao-ji said. In response, Lin Chieh-liang, director of the Division of Clinical Toxicology at Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, said, "No poisoning does not mean no side effects." The US side should further clarify whether the mortality rate of patients with cardiovascular disease has risen.

Lin Chieh-liang: The government already had a preset position, so do not waste everyone's time holding meetings

Lin Chieh-liang questioned that if the government already had a preset position, namely to open up imports of ractopamine US beef, then it should now put its energy into how to reduce the risks brought by imports, rather than using expert meetings to endorse the "safety" of ractopamine.

"I feel cheated," questioned Hsu Li-min, an attending physician in the Division of Traumatology at National Taiwan University's College of Medicine. If the national security meeting was held immediately after the expert meeting, then if the Council of Agriculture did not deliberately distort the conclusion, the Ma administration originally had a preset position and wanted to move toward conditional opening, which is why it used the term "expert meeting conclusion" and attached its own words to it.

Hsu Li-min used "angry" to describe how he felt when he learned the meeting conclusion had been twisted. He stressed that the correct conclusion that day was actually "there was simply no research being done, so you do not know whether it is harmful," and the experts that day simply had no consensus. Hsu Li-min believed that a matter with clearly no consensus was ultimately described as having consensus and was distorted, which made him very angry. Would he still be willing to attend the next expert meeting? Hsu Li-min said that would depend on the topic of the next meeting before he could decide, but if the government continued to make him feel it was "deceiving society," he would not be willing to attend again.

Lin Chieh-liang, director of the Division of Clinical Toxicology at Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, said helplessly, "How can they talk like this so recklessly! We said no research report confirms it is safe and hoped the United States would give us a report confirming it is safe. They have people who ate it and people who did not, so they should compare whether the mortality rate among people with cardiovascular disease increased. We said it so clearly then, so how can they say this now... I feel very weary."

Because the Council of Agriculture has publicly said it will hold a fourth expert meeting in the future, but the scholars who attended the third expert meeting are angry that the conclusion was distorted, would they still be willing to attend? Lin Chieh-liang said, "I think there is no need to hold it. They just want to let it pass. Do not spend more time holding meetings," clearly expressing his position of unwillingness to attend again.

Lin Chieh-liang believed the Ma administration already had a preset position on opening up ractopamine US beef. Since that is so, it would be better to start discussing now how to reduce the impact after opening and set the strictest standards, rather than wasting experts' time discussing whether ractopamine is harmful. "I have nothing to be angry about. It is not my decision. We only provide professional opinions. If you really want to let it in, say so early. We do not want to expend energy talking about these things," Lin Chieh-liang said.

Lee Hui-jen: What difference is there between Ma Ying-jeou and Hsu Tien-lai?

Documentary director Lee Hui-jen, who clashed with the Council of Agriculture over investigating the avian influenza outbreak and even indirectly caused the resignation of Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine Director General Hsu Tien-lai, believed that if the Council of Agriculture really did submit the meeting minutes truthfully, but Ma Ying-jeou still said things contrary to the experts' conclusion, "then what difference is there between Ma Ying-jeou and Hsu Tien-lai?" Lee Hui-jen believed that information passed from the Council of Agriculture through staff to the president could have been transmitted incorrectly at any point, and that it should now be investigated who passed the wrong conclusion to Ma Ying-jeou; otherwise, Ma Ying-jeou arbitrarily distorted the experts' conclusion. Lee Hui-jen questioned, "Is there still hope for this country?"

Related reports:

Apple Daily - Ma Ying-jeou: Respect experts' conclusion that there is "no evidence ractopamine is harmful"

Third ractopamine expert meeting held yesterday: revised and overturned the previous conclusion