"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
lid (Windmill) wrote:

Tim Streater writes:

In article ,
lid (Windmill) wrote:

DrTeeth writes:

On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 01:07:32 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
(Windmill) disturbed my reverie
and
wrote:

Maybe they could take just a few samples, every few months, and
subject
them to rigorous analysis to identify every kind of DNA

Have you given some serious thoughts to the massive cost of this?

If 10 supermarkets selected one meat product at random every 3 months,
that would be 40 tests a year.

And they would test for *what*, precisely?

Non-beef DNA sequences, perhaps?

I think this is where the knowledge level of all us armchair critics is
too low.

Speak for yourself.

Can you uniquely and definitively characterise a non-beef DNA sequence?

Its certainly possible to say that it isnt beef DNA.

Doing that you're gonna get false positives from all the other
ingredients.

Nope.

And how low is "low enough"? 1% horsemeat seems to be causing the
chatterati to have a fit of the vapours. But what about .1%? Or 0.001%?