<p>I’m more concerned about my food budget for the summer than about being infected by a dead animal I’ve cooked thoroughly. (Unless you tell me this particular virus can survive in a 400 degree oven too.)</p>
<p>So, in terms of a buyer’s market – a good thing or a bad thing?</p>
<p>Decreased demand for pig products might lead to lower prices.</p>
<p>However, more pigs could be destroyed in efforts to contain the flu, raising prices. </p>
<p>I’m just hoping the former effect outweighs the latter. Could pork be even cheaper than chicken? Last time I checked the cheapest was selling for like 1.49/ib at the nearby supermarket, but that was <em>before</em> the “pandemic”. I haven’t visited since then. I know around Thanksgiving the cheapest meat cuts (chicken) were selling for like 0.79/ib but now they regularly sell for than twice that, so hopefully we can see a return to cheaper meat prices…</p>
<p>There’s a lot of misinformation circulating about this. From what I’m reading from sources I consider credible, the U.S. swine herd is NOT infected with swine flu, and even if it were there’s no evidence the disease can be acquired by eating pork. It can be transmitted to humans by contact with live hogs, and possibly through contact with hog manure though that’s less certain. So unless you live on or near a hog farm in Mexico, where some hogs are apparently infected, you’re going to get the disease from other humans, some of whom are infected in the United States.</p>
<p>But public misunderstanding of the nature of the disease is apparently causing a reduction in demand for pork. That’s a mixed blessing for consumers. First, the misinformed may turn to more expensive meat products and/or drive up the price of cheaper alternatives like chicken. Those who stick with pork should find lower prices in the short term. But even a short-term reduction in demand will cause pork producers to cut back on production, which will lead to higher prices once demand returns to normal levels. So I guess the message is, eat pork now while it’s cheap, because it’s probably going to become more expensive later.</p>
<p>While I agree that irrational thinking may cause a lot of consumers to TEMPORARILY avoid U.S. pork products, it will be hard for large pork producers (think ‘Smithfiled’ and Tyson; yes Tyson owns pork farms, too) to significantly reduce their production. The swine business is a huge U.S. industry. Folks should also realize that pork prices at the farm are already at relatively low levels and have been for years. The U.S. pork industry has become highly efficient producers over the last 20 years. But as in other lines of food production, the farmer has not received the full benefit of innovation and increased demand reflected in the price he gets. The pork processors and retail outlets get the lion’s share of the consumer market price, as usual.</p>
<p>Hope I didn’t get too far afield from the OP’s question. To sum it up, sure, there could be a short term reduction in pork prices at the retail market. Compare it to the ‘mad cow’ scare in the U.S. a few years ago when infected beef cattle were discovered in Washington State. Prices for beef didn’t stay low for long, if they ever declined in the first place. And that event [mad cow in the U.S.] has been essentially forgotten</p>
<p>According to CNBC, pork bellies futures plummeted upon the swine flu, excuse me, H1N1 influenza A news. However, I doubt it will translate into lower bacon prices any time soon.</p>
<p>LakeWashington, when the CJD scare hit WA, beef prices dropped somewhat for a few weeks, but other proteinaceous foods (chicken, fish, pork) went up in price, since the demand for those items increased (we are a nation of meat protein eaters).</p>