Warning on 'bad science' used against meat sector

Published on Tuesday 9 February 2010 18:04

THE National Beef Association yesterday warned governments not to be taken in by "bad science" that may lead them to making flawed decisions on the future of the red meat industry.

"Cash accumulated by campaigning vegetarians is regularly used to attack meat production and tactics very often concentrate on undermining consumer confidence by linking meat eating with fear of disease, like cancer," said NBA director Kim Haywood.

Another tactic that she said the "anti-meat brigade" were now using centred on the role farmed livestock could be playing in accelerating climate change.

"The association is worried that apparently plausible scientific contentions advanced as a result of cash paid out by determined anti-livestock farming lobbyists may undermine the integrity of crucial decisions taken by food policy specialists acting at national, EU, and international level," she added.

Haywood said one example of this "misleading" information came from the failure of the World Cancer Research Fund to immediately acknowledge that a number of errors and omissions in its 2007 report have helped to support its case that a link exists between colorectal cancer and meat consumption.

"Independent peer review has concluded there is no conclusive evidence of a causal relationship," she said.

More recently, Haywood said there seemed to be a determination to continue to link ruminant animals with accelerating climate change even though the argument that animals eating grass are carbon neutral continues to gain increased scientific acceptance.

"The red meat industry has every reason to be alarmed about the presentation of bad science and the preaching of its flawed conclusions by anti-meat interests," said Haywood.

"And it would be truly worrying if governments, and their advisors, allowed themselves to be influenced by unsound science.

"The UK government has often said that science, not argument and counter-argument by self-interested lobby groups, must guide its decision making but if that is to be the case it must also be sure that the science it uses, on issues like bowel cancer, or greenhouse gas emissions by grazing livestock, is incorruptible."