The Ridiculously Sensitive Water Buffalo Meat Issue

In more ways than one.

Look, we’re not going to die just by eating water buffalo, goat or donkey. We might die because the meat processing plants have been breaching other regulations that we didn’t know they were either though.
But since we haven’t died yet (and here, I’m speaking for myself), it seems unlikely that that’s actually the case.

So let’s not get carried away here.

But, as long time reader, first time emailer Richard Atkinson pointed out when sending me the Stellenbosch paper – that’s not the only ridiculously sensitive problem here:

They use mtDNA PCR for species typing of the samples. My biggest criticism is how ridiculously sensitive that technique is. They would be picking up contamination from an animal that was slaughtered in the same area, or processed with the same equipment. This would obviously be a problem if found in Halaal/Kosher meat, but they never specifically state that they found contamination in those meats, which is something I’m sure they would have harped on about at length if they had to help drive the PR machine.

It’s a very reasonable point, and furthermore, there’s no mention of any controls on the methods they used (which would have raised alarm bells and prevented Richard’s concerns).
Not to go into too much detail, but mtDNA PCR is a method of analysis which could detect even the tiniest amount of DNA and present it as a possibly significant result. Which is a good thing, because there rightly shouldn’t be any “foreign” DNA in your “100% beef” mince, so the fact even a minute amount of “foreign” DNA can be detected makes the test sensitive. Sensitivity is good.
However, given that abattoirs generally don’t work solely with one species of meat, there’s likely to be a lot of DNA floating around in the areas in which our meat is processed, and it’s entirely likely that some of it may have found its way into “other meat”.
And here, over-sensitivity is bad.

So from that point of view, maybe we shouldn’t be reading too much into the results of this study. Except to perhaps question the donkey (not literally, because he’s dead and he couldn’t talk he was alive). While beef, pork, chicken and even goat and water buffalo are recognised foodstuffs in SA; donkey isn’t. So Eeyore – described in the paper as “undeclared donkey” – shouldn’t be in there:

Perhaps of greatest concern from a regulatory, health and ethical standpoint was the detection of undeclared donkey (E. asinus) in one meat sample sold in KZN as ‘quality sausage’, for which the only animal species declared was beef. Since donkey is not a species commercially processed for human consumption in South Africa, there is a high probability that this indicates a further case of intentional substitution for economic gain.

Although to be fair to the food labellers, it does appear that they never stated that the ‘quality sausage’ was good quality sausage.

Nine

Today marks nine years since I arrived on these shores as a refugee, immigrant, expat, comeover, whatever you want to call it.

While I can’t say that it’s been a smooth ride throughout each of those 3,288 days, I’ve never regretted making the move. Now I find myself with a beautiful and supportive wife, two amazing kids and a view of Table Mountain each day.

And I don’t think anyone could really wish for more than that.

Football reading – with a warning

First off, Oliver Holt in the Mirror, describing Afcon as “the perfect demonstration of South Africa’s World Cup legacy”:

Here’s a funny thing about the African Cup of Nations.
There are no Europeans trying to tell the organisers what to do.
Nobody signing petitions to try to ban fans from blowing vuvuzelas.
Nobody telling the mamas who sell pap and fried chicken outside games they can’t come within five miles of the stadium.
Nobody telling supporters who earn £1 or £2 a day they have to pay £40 a pop for a ticket.
Nobody saying: “Our culture is better than your culture.” Nobody saying: “Why can’t you just be a little bit more like us?”

AFCON 2013 is way better for it, too. It’s like the World Cup in 2010 would have been before Fifa de-Africanised it.

It’s full of life, vigour and colour, the slow drum sway of Nigeria fans, the choreographed vuvuzela-moves of Burkina Faso fans, the delirious joy of the Ethiopians.
It is a celebration of football, of course, and the match between holders Zambia and minnows Ethiopia in Nelspruit on Monday was full of exquisite skill and great drama. But it is also a celebration of South Africa, a showcase for the legacy of hosting the World Cup.

Anyone who read this blog during that World Cup may recall that I argued the same thing while exposing the excuses behind the pathetic French performance against Uruguay:

The vuvuzela is part of the African football experience. I’m sorry you don’t like it. But what you like is not of interest to me right now – you want a World Cup in Africa, then have an African World Cup.

But Holt tonks the nail squarely on the bonce when he notes the real problem with the World Cup legacy is people’s perception:

The legacy of the 2010 World Cup is everywhere in South Africa.
It just depends whether you want to see it or not.

Indeed.

Secondly, a rather (too?) glowing piece on the other side of “football’s bad boy”, Craig Bellamy:

The Manchester City forward is often regarded as being one of football’s bad boys, but off the pitch there is a very different side to him.

Few know… that Bellamy has put hundreds of thousands of pounds into his West African academy, has spent two weeks in Sierra Leone during the past three summers and is well versed in the continent’s history and politics.

There has always been far more to this Welsh firebrand, who physically and verbally confronted a Manchester United supporter on the pitch at the end of last Sunday’s Old Trafford derby, than his ‘Mr Angry’ caricature suggests. His apparent compulsion to venture where others fear to tread is not always misplaced.

It’s an enlightening and thought-provoking article, indicating that there is something to be said for looking beyond first impressions.  And while the writer describes scenes from Freetown, one wonders whether she has ever actually met Bellamy or is just relying on hearsay. That’s because the “she” is Louise Taylor and my first impression of her, which I’m struggling to look beyond, was this:

Why going to South Africa for the World Cup terrifies me:
Statistics, anecdotes and research suggest that touring the Rainbow nation as a fan next summer could be a dangerous option.
In fact, the 2010 World Cup should have gone to Egypt.

And lest we forget, when she wrote that back in July 2009, Louise had never been to South Africa. I’m not sure if she’d ever been to Egypt, but her rationale for awarding them the World Cup at South Africa’s expense was:

surely if the Egyptians could build the pyramids they could host a World Cup.

oh, and:

Moreover, staging football’s biggest and best event in a key centre of the Arab world might just have helped ease tensions between the international Muslim community and the west while simultaneously weakening the Islamic fundamentalists growing hold over hearts and minds.

*cough* Quality predictive journalism, right there.

So Louise, I hope that based on your track record you’ll excuse my reluctance to take your ramblings seriously. I’d love it if Craig Bellamy and his Academy was doing wonderful work in Sierra Leone, but I’ll wait until I see some evidence of it elsewhere before I actually believe it.

Still, if we’re looking for alternative precariously-positioned and potentially risky nations for Craig to further pursue his altruism, perhaps I might be so brave as to suggest… er… Egypt?

Zeitgeist

Well done, South Africa.
The Google Zeitgeist results have been released, detailing exactly what the world was looking for in the 1.2 trillion searches done throughout 2012 and the good news is that you can narrow it down and see exactly what those people who walk amongst us were looking up this year.

You can see the full results for South Africa here, but have a few highlights courtesy of me:

The most searched image was “Lady Gaga”.
The most searched TV programme was “American Idol”.
The most searched person was “Whitney Houston”.
The most searched “How to” term, was “How to kiss”.

Can you say “Shallow”? (Although I have to say that it’s not really much better globally speaking).
And then, just in case you were wondering if things could get any worse, the most searched term overall was “OLX”.

OLX.co.za is a local online classifieds site. And that doesn’t seem so bad as your top searched term until you actually look at what it is you are searching for: “OLX”.

Why on earth would you need to search for “OLX”?

Were you perhaps struggling over the spelling of the company name? Because that spelling would be “O-L-X”, pretty much exactly what you just typed into Google.
Google is hugely useful to find shortcuts and information on a huge range of subjects. However, searching for “OLX” on Google actually just adds an extra and wholly unnecessary step to your web experience. For me, it’s just another sad reminder that people have actually stopped thinking altogether and will just autonomously Google anything rather than actually working it out for themselves.

Oh dear.

Well done, South Africa. Well done.

If govt can keep da lama out so can they keep satanis out

YES!

Fullscreen capture 2016-05-16 112040 AM.bmp

So says michangel.justice while commenting on this channel24.com post:

The South African Council of Churches is planning to prevent Lady Gaga from performing in South Africa

Now, if this were a campaign based on her musical efforts, I could understand – I could even join in. But no. SACC are not worried about that, they’re worried about this:

The church group has now raised their concerns, stating that they are in fact worried about the “destructive impact” Lady Gaga can have on South Africa’s youth.
Reverend Mxolisi Sonti, secretary of the youth forum, told Beeld they are afraid of the extent of Satanism in South Africa at this time, and that Gaga’s visit could lead to an exponential growth of Satanism.

One wonders if anyone has told them about YouTube, DVDs or the many other ways that people can listen to Gaga’s gaga message whether or not she actually comes to South Africa. You can also find out about real Satanists on the internet, which will be available in South Africa until Uncle Jacob says its not ok any more.

SACC’s stance follows on from the Facebook group: South Africa: No to Lady Gaga and satanists [sic] which was launched when the concerts were announced and has already reached the heady heights of 378 likes. There are ample opportunities for your reading enjoyment on there. It’s like a plethora of michangel.justices attempting to justify themselves.

The group is currently planning a march to the department of Arts and Culture in Pretoria on Friday, where they will be handing over a written request to the department in a plea to stop Gaga from coming to South Africa.

Of course, I’m all for these people being able to voice their opinions. Individuals should not be gagged just because of their religious views. Sadly, for Mxolisi, michangel et al, that goes for Satanists as well – not that I believe Lady Gaga is necessarily one of them. Can you imagine if Satanists marched on Parliament calling for some Christian singer to be banned?

Uproar. Bedlam. Hilarity.

Maybe if these people want to increase support for their cause they should bring over some popular Christian singer, leading to an exponential growth of Christianity.

I wonder why that hasn’t happened yet?