Some 50,000 tonnes of meat supplied by two Dutch trading companies and sold as beef across Europe since January 2011 may have contained horsemeat.
The meat is being recalled where possible, the Dutch authorities say.
There was no evidence that the meat was a threat to human health, the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority said.
In total, 132 companies in the Netherlands and some 370 more around Europe are affected by the discovery.
The suspect meat was supplied by Wiljo Import en Export BV and Vleesgroothandel Willy Selten.
The two companies are owned by one man who has already previously been investigated by food safety officials, the BBC's Matthew Price reports.
The latest find was made as part of EU-wide tests to trace horse DNA in processed beef foods and to detect a veterinary drug used on horses.
The results of the rest of the tests conducted across the EU will be made public next week - giving consumers a better idea of how widespread the scandal has been.
The Dutch decided to release their results early because of the magnitude of what they had discovered, our correspondent says.
'Already consumed'
The recall covers meat dating back to 1 January 2011 up until 15 February this year, the Dutch food authority said on Wednesday.
Continue reading the main story
Analysis
With its imposing grey gates, the Willy Selten factory in Oss does not receive many visitors outside the meat trade. That was according to the owner, whom we met on a chilly Saturday afternoon in February. Investigations into the Netherlands' role in the Europe-wide horsemeat scandal had brought us here.
The suspicion is now that it was here, behind the corrugated shutters, that horsemeat was relabelled and sold on as beef. The Dutch Food Safety Authority offered Willy Selten an ultimatum: "Trace the origins of your meat or we will take over."
On Wednesday morning an urgent recall message was sent out to 502 companies across Europe - a "rapid alert" to locate all of the products that may have been contaminated. Willy Selten has been under strict supervision ever since the initial suspicions emerged in February.
It may be a surprise to many to learn that the factory is still operating, though reports in the Dutch media claim it is facing bankruptcy. A Food Safety Authority spokeswoman explained: "Our policy in the Netherlands is that everybody should be given a second chance."
Due to the lapse of time, a lot of the meat "may already have been consumed", it added.
Inspectors examining the records of the Dutch trading companies found that the origin of the supplied meat was unclear. As a result it was not possible to confirm whether slaughterhouses had respected procedures.
Some of the suspect meat was also exported to Germany, France and Spain, where authorities have been alerted. The British Food Standards Agency has confirmed that a small number of UK companies may have received products from the Dutch wholesalers.
"It might contain traces of horsemeat, but we don't know for certain at the moment if this is the case," said Esther Filon, a spokeswoman for the Dutch food authority.
"The buyers have probably already processed the meat and sold it on. They, in turn, are obliged to inform their own customers."
New EU law
All EU member states have been informed of the Dutch discovery, EU spokesman Frederic Vincent told the BBC.
They have been urged to check whether or not processed meat products coming from the plants in question were still on the market, he added.
"The Dutch announcement is a consequence of the investigations which were launched by EU member states a few weeks ago," the EU spokesman said.
"Given the size of the fraud, the Dutch decided to go public with their discovery."
Traces of horsemeat have been found in numerous processed beef frozen meals across Europe.
In February, Dutch officials raided a meat processing plant suspected of mislabelling beef and ordered the withdrawal of suspicious products from supermarket shelves.
Other countries affected included the UK, the Republic of Ireland, France, Switzerland, Sweden and Germany.
The EU is set to adopt an Animal and Plant Health legislative proposal in the coming weeks, which includes clauses designed to tackle food fraud.
'Sustainable fishing' certification too lenient and discretionary, study findsPublic release date: 10-Apr-2013 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: James Devitt james.devitt@nyu.edu 212-998-6808 New York University
The certification of seafood as "sustainable" by the nonprofit Marine Stewardship Council is too lenient and discretionary, a study by a consortium of researchers has found.
"When consumers want sustainable fish there are two options to meet the demand: fisheries can become more sustainable or the definition of sustainable can be watered down to be practically meaninglesswith MSC seafood, the definition has been repeatedly watered down," said Jennifer Jacquet, a clinical assistant professor in New York University's Environmental Studies Program and one of 11 authors of the study, which appears in the journal Biological Conservation.
The study may be read here: http://bit.ly/ZFKU5Y.
The expansion of fishing in the oceansfurther offshore, deeper, and for different specieshas led to the depletion of many marine fish populations. In response, market-based efforts aimed at consumers, which include "eco-labeling," have emerged to change demand. Among these was the establishment of the London-based Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) in 1997. A joint project between World Wildlife Fund and Unilever, MSC was created as a conservation toolintended to provide "the best environmental choice in seafood" to consumers and to create positive incentives that would improve the status and management of fisheries.
However, conservation groups have raised concerns about MSC's certification process, calling into question the organization's claim that its eco-labeling program is "the best environmental choice in seafood." Its certification process is paid for by the fisheries, with rates dependent on the size and complexity of the fishery. MSC estimates that most certifications cost between $15,000 and $120,000. Since its founding, MSC has attached its certified label to more than 170 fisheries, with fishery clients spending between $2.3 and $18.7 million on certification.
To gauge the viability of MSC's labeling program, the researchers examined 19 formal objectionsraised primarily by environmental groups and amounting to one-third, by weight, of all MSC-certified seafoodto certifications MSC has granted to fisheries for Chilean sea bass, Antarctic krill, and others. Objections are heard by an independent adjudicator appointed by MSC. In all but one of these 19 cases, the certification was upheld.
In the Biological Conservation analysis, the researchers sought to determine whether these fisheries, in fact, met the MSC's principles for certification.
The MSC uses three major principles that third-party certifiers interpret in determining whether a fishery is "sustainable" and may use the MSC label: sustainability of the target fish stock; low impacts on the ecosystem; and effective management. However, the researchers found many of these fisheriesrepresenting 35 percent of eco-labeled seafooddid not meet MSC standards.
For instance, the longline fishery for swordfish in Canada appears to violate the "low impacts on the ecosystem" principle. This fishery has high levels of bycatchsea life accidentally caught in pursuit of other fish. The targeted catch of 20,000 swordfish per year results in bycatch of approximately 100,000 sharks as well as 1,200 endangered loggerhead and 170 critically endangered leatherback turtles.
"The MSC's narrow definition of sustainability is out of step with the general public perception of what that term means," said Claire Christian, one of the study's co-authors and a policy analyst at the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition. "When the MSC labels a swordfish fishery that catches more sharks than swordfish 'sustainable,' it's time to re-evaluate its standards."
The Alaska pollock fishery, one of the largest fisheries in the US, also received MSC certification even though, the researchers noted, several court rulings had determined that the fishery was not in compliance with national lawan indication that it didn't meet MSC's "effective management" principle.
The authors believe the MSC needs to enforce the principles it created for certified fisheries. Otherwise, consumers believe they are buying "the best environmental choice" in seafood, when in fact there is a very good chance they are not.
###
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
'Sustainable fishing' certification too lenient and discretionary, study findsPublic release date: 10-Apr-2013 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: James Devitt james.devitt@nyu.edu 212-998-6808 New York University
The certification of seafood as "sustainable" by the nonprofit Marine Stewardship Council is too lenient and discretionary, a study by a consortium of researchers has found.
"When consumers want sustainable fish there are two options to meet the demand: fisheries can become more sustainable or the definition of sustainable can be watered down to be practically meaninglesswith MSC seafood, the definition has been repeatedly watered down," said Jennifer Jacquet, a clinical assistant professor in New York University's Environmental Studies Program and one of 11 authors of the study, which appears in the journal Biological Conservation.
The study may be read here: http://bit.ly/ZFKU5Y.
The expansion of fishing in the oceansfurther offshore, deeper, and for different specieshas led to the depletion of many marine fish populations. In response, market-based efforts aimed at consumers, which include "eco-labeling," have emerged to change demand. Among these was the establishment of the London-based Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) in 1997. A joint project between World Wildlife Fund and Unilever, MSC was created as a conservation toolintended to provide "the best environmental choice in seafood" to consumers and to create positive incentives that would improve the status and management of fisheries.
However, conservation groups have raised concerns about MSC's certification process, calling into question the organization's claim that its eco-labeling program is "the best environmental choice in seafood." Its certification process is paid for by the fisheries, with rates dependent on the size and complexity of the fishery. MSC estimates that most certifications cost between $15,000 and $120,000. Since its founding, MSC has attached its certified label to more than 170 fisheries, with fishery clients spending between $2.3 and $18.7 million on certification.
To gauge the viability of MSC's labeling program, the researchers examined 19 formal objectionsraised primarily by environmental groups and amounting to one-third, by weight, of all MSC-certified seafoodto certifications MSC has granted to fisheries for Chilean sea bass, Antarctic krill, and others. Objections are heard by an independent adjudicator appointed by MSC. In all but one of these 19 cases, the certification was upheld.
In the Biological Conservation analysis, the researchers sought to determine whether these fisheries, in fact, met the MSC's principles for certification.
The MSC uses three major principles that third-party certifiers interpret in determining whether a fishery is "sustainable" and may use the MSC label: sustainability of the target fish stock; low impacts on the ecosystem; and effective management. However, the researchers found many of these fisheriesrepresenting 35 percent of eco-labeled seafooddid not meet MSC standards.
For instance, the longline fishery for swordfish in Canada appears to violate the "low impacts on the ecosystem" principle. This fishery has high levels of bycatchsea life accidentally caught in pursuit of other fish. The targeted catch of 20,000 swordfish per year results in bycatch of approximately 100,000 sharks as well as 1,200 endangered loggerhead and 170 critically endangered leatherback turtles.
"The MSC's narrow definition of sustainability is out of step with the general public perception of what that term means," said Claire Christian, one of the study's co-authors and a policy analyst at the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition. "When the MSC labels a swordfish fishery that catches more sharks than swordfish 'sustainable,' it's time to re-evaluate its standards."
The Alaska pollock fishery, one of the largest fisheries in the US, also received MSC certification even though, the researchers noted, several court rulings had determined that the fishery was not in compliance with national lawan indication that it didn't meet MSC's "effective management" principle.
The authors believe the MSC needs to enforce the principles it created for certified fisheries. Otherwise, consumers believe they are buying "the best environmental choice" in seafood, when in fact there is a very good chance they are not.
###
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Some of the largest female birds in the world were almost twice as big as their male mates. Research carried out by the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) shows that this amazing size difference in giant moa was not due to any specific environmental factors, but evolved simply as a result of scaling-up of smaller differences in male and female body size shown by their smaller-bodied ancestors.
The paper is published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
In an environment lacking large mammals, New Zealand's giant moa (Dinornis) evolved to be one of the biggest species of bird ever, with females weighing more than two hundred kilograms ? the same as about 3 average sized men.
Male and female birds often show differences in body size, with males typically being larger. However some birds, like many ratites ? large, flightless species such as emus and cassowaries ? are the opposite, with the females towering over the males.
Moa were huge flightless ratites. Several different species inhabited New Zealand's forests, grasslands and mountains until about 700 years ago. However, the first Polynesian settlers became a moa-hunting culture, and rapidly drove all of these species to extinction.
Dr Samuel Turvey, ZSL Senior Research Fellow and lead author on the paper, says: "We compared patterns of body mass within an evolutionary framework for both extinct and living ratites. Females becoming much larger was an odd side-effect of the scaling up of overall body size in moa.
"A lack of large land mammals ? such as elephants, bison and antelope ? allowed New Zealand's birds to grow in size and fill these empty large herbivore niches. Moa evolved to become truly huge, and this accentuated the existing size differences between males and females as the whole animal scaled up in size over time," Dr Turvey added.
Future research should investigate whether similar scaling relationships can also help to explain the evolution of bizarre structures shown by other now-extinct species, such as the elongated canines of sabretoothed cats.
###
Zoological Society of London: http://www.zsl.org
Thanks to Zoological Society of London for this article.
This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.
A renowned technology analyst has revealed that while Microsoft?s Corp.?s next-generation video game console will be heavily based on PC technology, it will cost more than an average personal computer. The reasons for Xbox code-named Durango are not completely clear, given the fact that it will compete against mobile devices, PCs and Sony PlayStation 4.
"Durango is going to be expensive ? $500, $300 with a subscription ? that kind of thing. Originally, they were going to announce this thing on April 24. Now they are going to announce it on May 21. We know there are events occurring this year where we are going to learn more about Durango. E3 is going to occur, Build is going to occur in San Francisco in June when they are going to talk about the developer story because it is a Windows 8 device. It is going to have the same, or basically the same, developer tools and developer APIs," said Paul Thurrott, a well-known Microsoft expert, in the recent What The Tech's video podcast.
Microsoft released the Xbox 360 console in the U.S. back in 2005 at $299 and $399 price-points and it has taken the company quite some time to slash pricing of the product to mainstream $199. With models priced at $399 and $499 the software giant will hardly be able to outsell the Xbox 360 game console at least early in the lifecycle. Mr. Thurrott also revealed that according to his sources, the console would require a constant internet connection
It is also rumoured that Microsoft intends to release a low-cost Xbox 360 version code-named Stingray at $99 price-point later this year, bringing value gaming and advanced entertainment capabilities to customers in budget. While the company is clearly interested in such an offering, given that modern Xbox 360 games cost $50 and higher, the Stingray will barely get popular among casual gamers, but will rather be a substitute for those, who want to play current titles that will not work on Xbox Next.
Microsoft Xbox Next ?Durango? is expected to be architecturally similar to the PlayStation 4. It is believed that the future Xbox will be powered by AMD Fusion custom-designed system-on-chip with eight x86 low-power/low-cost Jaguar cores, AMD Radeon HD graphics with GCN architecture as well as 8GB of DDR3 system memory. The console is projected to feature hard disk drive, Blu-ray disc drive as well as robust Xbox Live online service. It is believed that Microsoft Xbox ?Durango? has lower-performance graphics sub-system as well as slower memory sub-system when compared to Sony PS4.
?
An analysis of what is known about the Xbox Next clearly points to the fact that Microsoft had put a great deal of attention to make the Durango a high-quality general-purpose device for the living room, while compromising some of the gaming-related aspects (e.g., graphics performance). The video games for the Microsoft Xbox Next will clearly look better and feel better than titles developed for the Xbox 360 simply because of the eight-year gap in technologies under the hoods of the systems. However, only time will show how future-proof will be Microsoft?s Durango console for the core gamers who demand improvements of titles throughout the active lifetime of the console that could span for eight years, as in the case of the Xbox 360.
Comments currently: 4 Discussion started: 04/10/13 01:47:15 AM Latest comment: 04/10/13 10:49:52 AM Expand all threads | Collapse all threads
[1-2]
1.?
always on = DRM. Thanks, but no thanks M$.
I can wait for 2 min for console to boot up, no problem.
+ expand thread (2 answers) - collapse thread
That is not what they mean. 'Always on' means when the console is on you need to be connected to the internet for it to function correctly.
You can turn the power off when ever you want.
But you are right that it means DRM, but I really don't have any issues with DRM as long as it doesn't massively impede on my system performance. I am more than happy to wait for a game to come down to a price I feel it is worth. The game makers have put a lot of time and money into their games and if we want good, high quality games we have to accept to part with our money. I also think second hand games should be banned too. If there was no piracy and no second hand games then possibly the game price would come down but mainly the games companies would make more money which on the whole will lead to more and better games.
The bigger problem is that Durango will be tightly integrated into Microsoft' ecosystem and will not use any exclusive technologies. Therefore, "always on" requirement and constant DRM will likely be a part of all Microsoft's products going forward.
2.?
I can't help but laugh everytime I see the word Durango because ir is very close to the word Drongo which means in Australisn English someone who is an idiot.
[1-2]
Add your Comment
Close
Enter your username and e-mail address. Password will be sent to you.
It placed number 1 in this year?s triple j?s Hottest 100 but not everyone is loving Macklemore & Ryan Lewis catchy rap tune about second-hand shopping ? a Colorado woman has allegedly choked her boyfriend for incessantly singing Thrift Shop after a drunken argument.
As reported by The Smoking Gun, 23-year-old Samantha Malson was arrested for domestic violence and harassment by the Longmont Police Department after choking and repeatedly shoving her partner, Lars Hansen.
According to the police report the couple were inebriated due to celebrations for Hansen?s 26th birthday. The two initially argued over Malson?s apparent consumption of ?all alcohol in the house? but evidentally resolved that dispute.
It was at this stage they decided to listen to Thrift Shop when Hansen, laying on the couch, began to sing the lyrics repeatedly. Malson told police she asked Hansen to stop singing ?25 times? before it became clear that choking him was the only sensible thing to do.
?He just annoyed me,? Malson admitted before revealing she also pushed her partner a couple of times. She then confessed, ?I grabbed him around the throat? I did it for intimidation.?
The police report notes that Hansen?s neck was red on both sides and that his face was flush but that the redness could also have been caused by intoxication. Hansen claims to not remember the incident. From the sounds of it, the dude should have been the one arrested for domestic violence and harassment.
A recent study found that the key to expelling annoyingly catchy songs from your head is to find the appropriate level of challenge to occupy your thinking. Apparently locking someone in a guillotine hold is also an effective measure.
AU Optronics says it'll soon join Samsung at a table for two making 5-inch, full-HD OLED smartphone displays. It'll show off the technology at the China Optoelectronics Display expo starting tomorrow, promising 443 ppi, lower power consumption, fast response times and wide viewing angles. While others build 1,080 x 1,920 LCD screens for models like HTC's One, currently Samsung has a monopoly on OLEDs of that size and resolution. However, it likely wants to set those aside for its soon-to-ship 5-inch, 1080p Galaxy S 4 -- so, AU's announcement is likely good news for other handset makers seeking something punchier than LCD for that form factor.