Are these claims about beef imports and ranchers actually connected?

Break it into separate claims instead of treating them as one story. A change to origin-labeling rules is something you can check in the actual regulation and its effective date. A claim that the change was made to deceive shoppers or damage ranchers needs separate evidence about intent. One doesn’t prove the other.

The same goes for claims about a particular country’s beef or what another country accepted or rejected. Look for specific trade records or reliable reporting, not a broad assertion. If the claim doesn’t give a date, product, or source, it’s hard to verify.

Alpha-gal is a real allergy associated with certain tick bites, and it can make people react to mammalian meat. That explains a possible health issue, not a plan to create one. The claim of deliberate coordination would need evidence beyond the existence of the disease and its effect on some people.

I’d keep the health question and the beef-market question separate. Otherwise, several real but different things can get bundled together and made to sound like proof of a single cause.

If your practical concern is where your beef comes from, ask the seller or ranch directly about the animal’s origin and how it was processed. Labeling requirements and voluntary origin claims can differ, so don’t assume every package tells the full story, but also don’t assume a label change means imported beef can automatically be presented as domestic.

Buying locally is a reasonable choice if that matters to you. You can make that choice without needing to accept the larger claim about a deliberate effort to ruin ranchers.