Source: Michael Fielding, MEATINGPLACE, 10/5/15


The USDA has responded to specific statements made in a January New York Times article that alleged inhumane practices at the Meat Animal Research Center in Clay Center, Neb. (MARC).
The USDA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) stated in an interim report released as a response to the Jan. 19 New York Times article that the center stands behind its protocols and scientists.
In March OIG began its review of USMARC’s research practices and operations in response to concerns expressed by Congress and reported by the media regarding animal welfare.

In January USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack and Nebraska legislators called for an investigation into the animal welfare and care at the research center.
In its interim report, released last week, the USDA said that it identified 33 questionable statements from the article and has reviewed documentation from the Agricultural Research Service and the University of Nebraska at Lincoln documentation dating back 25 years and has interviewed more than 30 current and former ARS and UNL personnel.

Some of the 33 statements made by the New York Times are listed below:
• NYT statement: “... center scientists have been operating on pigs’ ovaries and brains in an attempt to make the sows more fertile.” 
o USDA response: Through a review of USMARC documentation and interviews of USMARC personnel, we determined that surgeries involving pigs’ ovaries have been a part of USMARC’s research. Our fieldwork found that surgeries performed in connection with research are focused on obtaining information on how various biological aspects interact and affect pig fertility, which, in turn, could be utilized by the industry in making selection and management decisions. While surgery on pigs’ brains was approved as part of a research plan at USMARC, we did not find any evidence that such surgery was actually performed at the facility.
• NYT statement: “Of the 580,000 animals the center has housed since 1985, when its most ambitious projects got underway, at least 6,500 have starved.” 
o USDA response: Through a review of USMARC data, we determined that over 6,500 animals have been coded as having died due to starvation since 1985. Based on interviews of current and former USMARC personnel, the starvation code within the USMARC data does not indicate that animals were not provided adequate food by USMARC personnel. They explained that this code is used when an animal is found dead with no fat on its body. These deaths generally occur early in life as a result of complications with nursing.
• NYT statement: “That veterinarian, Shuna A. Jones, wrote to scientists and managers in 2011 and 2012 with a variety of concerns, including barns so stuffed with pigs that workers could not clean them, resulting in spates of diarrhea and respiratory disease. 'This is a scheduling nightmare,’ wrote Dr. Jones, who declined to be interviewed. 'We have pigs everywhere.’” 
o USDA response: Through a review of USMARC data and interviews of USMARC personnel, we determined that this email stemmed from USMARC changing its farrowing system. For a brief period during the transition, the two farrowing systems overlapped and created a hectic situation. Our review of USMARC’s swine health data did not find evidence that there was a marked increase in diarrhea or respiratory diseases during this period. Furthermore, we determined that the live birth piglet mortality rates for this period were within industry norms.
• NYT statement: “Yet unsettling side effects surfaced. Some 95 percent of the females born with male siblings had deformed vaginas.” 
o USDA response: Through interviews of multiple veterinarians and our own research, we determined that the deformity referenced by the article is called “freemartinism.” We determined that it is a very commonly known condition that results from a male/female twin set, rather than a unique side effect that arose as a result of the Twinning Project. Furthermore, multiple veterinarians have confirmed that, other than being sterile, animals with this condition suffer no ill effects or pain and can still enter the food supply.

In its report, USDA declined to respond to 11 statements in the article. To read the entire report, click here.
(The story was updated to reflect that the OIG, not MARC, issued the responses.)


For more stories, go to www.meatingplace.com.