Derek lied:
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:50:17 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >Derek wrote:
> >> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:20:15 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >>>Derek wrote:
> >>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:56:45 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >>>>>Derek wrote:
> >>>>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:38:17 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >>>>>>>Derek wrote:
> >>>>>>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:14:53 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>Derek wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 10:21:42 -0400, dh@. wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 14:08:58 +0100, Derek > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>Claim and Standard:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>[sbull] Grass Fed.--Grass, green or range pasture, or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>forage shall be 80% or more of the primary energy
> >>>>>>>>>>>>source throughout the animal's life cycle.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>Dated: December 20, 2002.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>A.J. Yates,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>[FR Doc. 02-32806 Filed 12-27-02; 8:45 am]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>BILLING CODE 3410-02-P]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/ls0202.txt
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>These "proposed minimum requirements mean that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>grass fed beef can in fact be fed up to 80% grains for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>60 days in a feedlot, just like any other steer, and still
> >>>>>>>>>>>>qualify as grass fed beef.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>Grass fed beef, then, isn't exactly what it's name
> >>>>>>>>>>>>implies,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>If you're not lying
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>The evidence before you and which you'll ignore
> >>>>>>>>>>at any cost to your already ruined integrity is from
> >>>>>>>>>>U.S.D.A.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>False.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>No, it's perfectly true.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>No, it's false.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Go to the links and find yourself on U.S.D.A.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Been there, long before you found it.
> >>>>
> >>>>Then you will no option but to agree that the
> >>>>evidence I put before Harrison is from U.S.D.A.
> >>>
> >>>No. It is not "from" USDA.
> >>
> >> http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/ls0202.txt
> >
> >That is the proposal.
>
> And found on usda's web site

It is not a standard; it is merely a proposed standard.


> >>>>>>>You have reposted producers' public
> >>>>>>>comments. You have not posted a USDA standard.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I've produced both the standard
> >>>>>
> >>>>>FALSE. You have "produced" only a PROPOSED standard.
> >>>>
> >>>>That was the standard you asked for
> >>>
> >>>No. A proposed standard isn't a standard; it's a proposal.
> >>
> >> And that's exactly the standard you asked for
> >
> >No. You're lying. I asked for an ADOPTED standard.
> >That proposal has not been adopted.
>
> There is no adopted standard, so when asking me to
> produce the standard supporting my claims you were
> in fact asking me for the standard I gave you

No. You should have replied, "There is no adopted standard." That's
what an honest person would have done, but not you.


> >>>>>>>>>***No consensus standards currently exist*** for
> >>>>>>>>>production or marketing claims related to meat and
> >>>>>>>>>livestock products.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Yet you earlier claimed their was a standard, and that
> >>>>>>>>that standard is followed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>No. There IS an implied standard. It's not a USDA
> >>>>>>>standard.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>As things stand at the moment, according to U.S.D.A.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>"Some segments of the livestock and meat industries
> >>>>>> make claims to distinguish their products from
> >>>>>> competing products and may request third-party
> >>>>>> verification by USDA to increase the credibility of
> >>>>>> their claims."
> >>>>>> http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/ls0202.txt
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>As we can plainly see, so-called grass fed beef
> >>>>>>producers are lying
> >>>>>
> >>>>>No
> >>>>
> >>>>Both the producer and U.S.D.A. are misleading the
> >>>>consumer into believing that the grass fed beef they're
> >>>>buying is grass fed
> >>>
> >>>Currently, beef sold as grass-fed beef IS 100% grass fed.
> >>
> >> Ipse dixit and false.
> >
> >No, TRUE. Western Grasslands in California, and
> >Slanker's Grass-fed in Texas both sell beef that is
> >100% grass fed; ZERO grain.
>
> I don't believe Western Grasslands in California,

You have no reason NOT to believe them.


> just as equally as you refuse to believe statements made
> by Kent Lundberg concerning his collateral death-free
> rice.

He did not say his rice is "collateral death-free". You are lying
again.