THE broader issue of false information fueling arguments for eating less meat has reared its head in submissions being lodged as part of the inquiry into labelling of alternative protiens.
Producers and red meat industry leaders have pointed to a growing number of wrong claims made about the way beef is produced and are urging senators assessing submissions to apply rigour to reference sources.
Some claims are around land clearing for grazing, emissions and water usage and others are around consumption rates of red meat in Australia in relation to dietary guidelines.
Producers have been working to address misinformation, particularly around sustainability credentials, promoted by advocates of alternative proteins for some time and say this inquiry provides plenty of examples of how widespread fake information on beef production is.
Submissions are rolling in to the inquiry, which is investigating the use of terms like beef, bacon, chicken and mince on alternative meat labels which contain no animal protein at all.
One from experienced healthcare practitioner and public healthcare academic Dr Alehta Ward has drawn heavy criticism for a plethora of claims ranging from land clearing to red meat consumption levels of Australians.
However, her declaration that nearly half of Australia's beef herd has received doses of growth hormones is being held up as an example of a completely false piece of information being perpetuated in the name of promoting consumption of plant-based products.
Dr Ward's only reference for the claim, which she uses to back her argument that meat being 'natural' does not mean it is more beneficial to health, is an unattributed statement in an article published in The Guardian.
Beef producers argue that is hardly a scholarly source.
In truth
No hard figures are collected on hormone growth promotant use in Australia, however estimates from industry sources including research and development corporation Meat & Livestock Australia and the Australian Lot Feeders Association put it at far, far less than 50 per cent.
In the 2019-20 financial year, 33 per cent of the total number of cattle that graded Meat Standard Australia were treated. In all, 46pc of the cattle slaughter was MSA graded that year.
Supermarket Coles does not buy HGP-treated cattle, nor do key export markets China and the European Union, so no beef produced for these customers is treated. China has been among Australia's top beef customers for the past three years.
A third of the cattle on feed in Australia are now Wagyu, according to ALFA, and they are not treated for HGPs.
Further, HGPs are rarely used in female cattle, and the female percentage of the adult cattle slaughter for the past 18 months has not dropped below 40pc.
While producers also point to the extensive scientific research that shows there are no health risks associated with consuming meat from animals treated with HGPs, they say the blatant misrepresentation of the extent of its use in Australia speaks to the broader lack of credibility in the submissions of many pushing for vegan food labelling to remain devoid of regulation.
ALSO SEE:
Shan Goodwin
Shan Goodwin steers ACM’s national coverage of the beef industry. Shan has worked as a journalist for 30 years, the majority of that with agricultural publications. She spent many years as The Land’s North Coast reporter and has visited beef properties and stations throughout the country and overseas. She treats all breeds equally. Contact 0427686187. E: s.goodwin@austcommunitymedia.com.au
Shan Goodwin steers ACM’s national coverage of the beef industry. Shan has worked as a journalist for 30 years, the majority of that with agricultural publications. She spent many years as The Land’s North Coast reporter and has visited beef properties and stations throughout the country and overseas. She treats all breeds equally. Contact 0427686187. E: s.goodwin@austcommunitymedia.com.au
