Horse drugs - They have safety standards though, right?

If you've read my summary of the two main points of concern regarding horse slaughter for human consumption, whether it be in WA, or at the two export abattoirs in SA and Qld, then you'll know that if there are prohibited horse drugs in the meat, it can be toxic to humans.

But surely the people who work in the horse slaughter trade know this, and there are safety measures in place, right? I mean... many products that are used on horses have a meat withholding period in the first place because the industry is regulated... right?

Sure, horse meat apparently comes under the National Residue Survey, so that for each horse slaughtered, apparently $5 must be contributed towards monitoring and assessing chemical residues in exported agricultural products.

Many consider the current system to be insufficient, and assert that a national system of horse registration is required to keep track of substances used on horses.

The problem can be illustrated thusly: Sandy has a one year old horse. The horse cuts his leg and it blows up like a balloon, so she calls the vet. The vet prescribes Ilium Dermapred ointment to be applied to the wound, and Phenylbutazone to help ease the inflammation.

Both of these drugs are very commonly used on horses, but "NOT TO BE USED on horses that may be slaughtered for human consumption" (says so right there on the label, with those exact capital letters.)

Sandy has no plans for her horse to be slaughtered, so it's not a problem.

The horse takes a little while to heal up, but because treatment was started straight away he heals up really well with no visible scar. Thank goodness for that!

So some time goes by, horsey is now three years old, so Sandy gets him "broken in" to saddle and starts riding him. He bucks, and Sandy falls off a couple of times. She decides that he's too much for her to handle and she needs to sell him. Sandy will be sad, but that's what happens with horses. She needs to make room in the paddock for a horse that she can ride.

So Gus buys him from Sandy. He's an experienced rider who wants to make him into a showjumper. Sandy thinks that'll be great, so the sale goes through.

At no point does it occur to Sandy to tell Gus that she gave the horse 2 restricted medications two years ago. Why would she? The horse healed up perfectly, there's no problem with the horse now. Gus would think her very strange indeed for even mentioning it.

What's more Sandy is under NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to tell ANYONE what drugs she has given to her horse. The vet does not have to report it, no one has to say anything.

So the horse goes showjumping, but he can't jump high enough, so 6 months later he gets sold to a guy called Mark.

Mark has the horse for a while, but then the horse injures himself in the paddock. The injury means the horse can no longer be ridden. Mark isn't going to keep a horse that can't be ridden, so he calls the phone number in the paper for "that guy who buys unwanted horses."

So the horse ends up with the local horse dealer who buys any horse, no matter what's wrong with it. Because the horse is injured he ends up being sold to the abattoir. While the abattoir may ask the person selling them the horse if the horse has had any prohibited medications, there is no way the horse dealer, or even Mark, would know what previous owners have given the horse.

In the absence of any system of registering and microchipping horses to track the medications they are given, each horse needs to be tested for prohibited substances to be sure that there is no health risk to those consuming the meat.

But is testing each horse financially viable?

Of course not. You can't drug test every horse for $5 a head... And this is why I have grave concerns about our export industry.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that I'm a "horse person", and you can argue bias all you like, but I would find this part just as much of a concern as if Australia were exporting contaminated tofu...

Edit: Sorry, nearly forgot to mention what happened in WA!

Apparently the WA Health Department "screened" each of the horses slaughtered for Vince Garreffa to make sure they were safe for human consumption. So far my simple question "What did the screening process actually involve?" has gone unanswered. If they had to do a background check or scientific test on each horse, then surely that's an unsustainable method if horse meat is to find a market here? Is the government going to run around doing this extra work for a meat market that is, in Vince Garrefa's own words, "small potatoes"?