Environmental 
Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Animal Carcass Management This Notice 
document was issued by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 
(APHIS)
For related information, Open Docket Folder Docket folder icon 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Show agency attachment(s) DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2013-0044] Environmental Impact Statement; 
Animal Carcass Management Agency Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 
USDA.
Action Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement and 
proposed scope of study.
Summary We are announcing to the public that the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) to 
examine the potential environmental effects of animal carcass management options 
used throughout the United States. This notice identifies potential alternatives 
and environmental effects that will be examined in the EIS and requests that the 
public comment on these proposed alternatives and environmental effects and 
identify other issues that could be examined in the EIS.
Dates We will consider all comments that we receive on or before November 
25, 2013.
Addresses You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2013-0044-;0001. 
Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. 
APHIS-2013-0044, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 
3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Supporting 
documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2013-0044 
or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South 
Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal 
reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 
before coming.
For Further Information Contact For questions related to the carcass 
management program, contact Ms. Lori P. Miller, PE, Senior Staff Officer, 
National Center for Animal Health Emergency Management, VS, APHIS, 4700 River 
Road Unit 41, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-3512. For questions related to the 
EIS, contact Ms. Samantha Floyd, Environmental Protection Specialist, 
Environmental and Risk Analysis Services, PPD, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 149, 
Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-3053.
Supplementary Information Background The Animal Health Protection Act (7 
U.S.C. 8301 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to order the 
destruction or removal of animals to prevent the introduction and spread of 
livestock pests or diseases. Large numbers of animals and carcasses may need to 
be disposed of or otherwise managed during or after an animal health emergency. 
Examples of an animal health emergency include, but are not limited to, an 
outbreak of a foreign animal disease, a natural disaster, or the introduction of 
a chemical or radiological agent. As carcasses begin to degrade, bodily fluids, 
chemical and biological leachate components, and hazardous gases such as methane 
are released into the environment, potentially impacting the health and safety 
of surrounding humans, livestock, and wildlife. Therefore, the management of 
large numbers of carcasses during an animal health emergency must be timely, 
safe, biosecure, aesthetically acceptable, and environmentally 
responsible.
Current Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) regulations 
regarding carcass management, including those found in 9 CFR 53.4, are based on 
World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) recommendations and sound science. 
APHIS regulations specify that animals infected by or exposed to foot-and mouth 
disease, pleuropneumonia, rinderpest, and certain other communicable diseases of 
livestock or poultry are required to be disposed of by burial or burning, 
unlessotherwise specified by the APHIS Administrator. Traditionally, burial has 
involved placement of carcasses in unlined pits or trenches, and burning has 
involved open pyres (i.e., combustible heaps). APHIS may work in conjunction 
with States to manage animal carcasses during or after an animal health 
emergency. However, State regulations concerning carcass management vary, and 
Federal and State regulations are not always based on the most current 
scientific information with regard to impacts of such activities on the 
environment and public health.
Environmental Impact Statement To examine the potential environmental 
effects of animal carcass management options used throughout the United States, 
APHIS is preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS). The EIS will analyze 
and compare all major and readily available mass carcass management options that 
may be utilized during an animal health emergency. APHIS is considering 
classifying mass carcass management as management of 50 tons or more of biomass 
per premises. In the EIS, we intend to compare unlined burial and open-air 
burning disposal methods with other available carcass management options. These 
may include composting (on- or off-site), rendering, landfills compliant with 
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and other fixed facility 
options, such as incinerators compliant with the Clean Air Act, that could 
accommodate a large volume of carcasses over a short period of time.
The findings of the EIS will be used for planning and decision making and 
to inform the public about the potential environmental effects of currently 
available carcass management options. Additionally, when mass carcass management 
options are utilized, site-specific environmental documents may be required. If 
such documents are needed, APHIS may use information presented and analyzed in 
the EIS, which will help APHIS to promptly fulfill its environmental compliance 
obligations when an emergency situation arises requiring immediate action.
We are requesting public comment to help us identify or confirm potential 
alternatives and environmental effects, as well as any other issues, that could 
and should be examined in the EIS. The EIS will be prepared in accordance with: 
(1) The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 
4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for 
implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) 
USDA regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA 
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
Alternatives We have identified the following alternatives for further 
examination in the EIS:
Take no action. Under the no action alternative, existing APHIS regulations 
that recommend unlined burial and open-air burning will be used as the baseline 
against which alternative carcass management methods may be compared. This 
action does not involve changes to the current situation.
Alternative action. Under the alternative action, APHIS is considering 
alternatives in addition to unlined burial and open-air burning as carcass 
management options. Alternative actions may include one or some combination of 
the following: Composting (on- or off-site), rendering, RCRA-compliant 
landfills, and other fixed facility options, such as incinerators compliant with 
the Clean Air Act.
Environmental Effects for Consideration We have identified the following 
potential environmental effects for examination in the EIS. We are requesting 
that the public comment on them during the scoping period:
Effects on soil, air, and water quality. Effects on humans: Health and 
safety. Agricultural lands. Industries and the economy. Public perception. 
Cultural and historic resources. Effects on wildlife populations, including 
effects on federally listed threatened and endangered species. Effects on plant 
populations, including effects on federally listed threatened and endangered 
species. Comments that identify other issues or alternatives that could be 
considered for examination in the EIS would be especially helpful. All comments 
received during the scoping period will be carefully considered in developing 
the final scope of the EIS. Upon completion of the draft EIS, a notice 
announcing its availability and an opportunity to comment on it will be 
published in theFederal Register.
Authority 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
Done in Washington, DC, this 21st day of October 2013. Kevin Shea, 
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. 2013-25158 
Filed 10-24-13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P 
Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Animal Carcass 
Management [Docket No. APHIS-2013-0044]. COMMENT SUBMISSION TERRY S. SINGELTARY 
SR.
Greetings APHIS et al, and thank you kindly for allowing me to comment on 
Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Animal Carcass Management 
[Docket No. APHIS-2013-0044].
I don’t believe I saw the BSE TSE prion aka mad cow type listed in this, 
but I thought I should list my concerns there from anyway, with relations to 
this Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Animal Carcass 
Management [Docket No. APHIS-2013-0044]. With the USDA/APHIS et al now letting 
the mad cow disease freely trade between countries, I was surprised to see this 
concern for animal disease and pyres there from, even though it seems anymore, 
the USDA/APHIS et al can’t even say the word anymore. I well remember what was 
said long ago ;
In Confidence - Perceptions of unconventional slow virus diseases of 
animals in the USA - APRIL-MAY 1989 - G A H Wells 
3. Prof. A. Robertson gave a brief account of BSE. The US approach was to 
accord it a very low profile indeed. Dr. A Thiermann showed the picture in the 
''Independent'' with cattle being incinerated and thought this was a fanatical 
incident to be avoided in the US at all costs. ... 
with the recent mass bovine deaths from the floods, the drought, the recent 
snow storm, and the known fact that mad cow disease of the c-BSE, atypical 
h,g-BSE, atypical h-BSE, and the atypical l-type BASE BSE, two strains of CWD in 
cervids, and the deaths there from in the cervid populations from cwd, and ehd, 
all this proves the USA is, and has been, far from being prepared for any type 
of major animal disease outbreak, foreign or domestic. also, with all the mass 
cattle deaths of late, it would have been a perfect time to test for mad cow 
type disease, if anyone would have attempted such a task, but we know how mad 
cow TSE testing goes by the USDA et al, that would have just made too much sense 
to test a mass cattle death for mad cow disease, and of course difficult, 
with such short time available when turning in and testing samples for a TSE 
prion disease, but still, a perfect opportunity gone by and missed.  
I have long been concerned with the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy 
TSE prion disease, and all it’s strains in the many different species in North 
America, and the ramifications there from when considering carcass disposal, and 
I recent put together the following, about soil contamination from the TSE 
prion, along with other recent science on the potential update of prions to 
plants.
Chronic Wasting Disease CWD, and other TSE prion disease, these TSE prions 
aka mad cow type disease know no borders. 
these TSE prions know no age restrictions. 
The TSE prion disease survives ashing to 600 degrees celsius, that’s around 
1112 degrees farenheit. 
you cannot cook the TSE prion disease out of meat. 
you can take the ash and mix it with saline and inject that ash into a 
mouse, and the mouse will go down with TSE. 
Prion Infected Meat-and-Bone Meal Is Still Infectious after Biodiesel 
Production as well. 
the TSE prion agent also survives Simulated Wastewater Treatment Processes. 
IN fact, you should also know that the TSE Prion agent will survive in the 
environment for years, if not decades. 
you can bury it and it will not go away. 
The TSE agent is capable of infected your water table i.e. Detection of 
protease-resistant cervid prion protein in water from a CWD-endemic area. 
it’s not your ordinary pathogen you can just cook it out and be done with. 
that’s what’s so worrisome about Iatrogenic mode of transmission, a simple 
autoclave will not kill this TSE prion agent. 
I wish to submit the following recent and old TSE prion science, some from 
PRION2013, PRION2012, PRION 2011, data on mass livestock mortality death 
disposal methods such as Alkaline hydrolysis, composting, burial, rendering, 
incineration, and some data from the BSE Inquiry submissions going back to 1989, 
some of which I hope you may find useful. the BSE Inquiry submissions will be at 
the bottom of my submission here. First, the latest science on the TSE prion 
disease and reports there from, then what do other countries think of the USA 
and it’s capability of carcass disposal, and types of methods to dispose of 
large animal mortality events, and last, the old science from the BSE INQUIRY 
and what they thought on carcass disposal and the TSE PRION. 
‘’There are many disposal options for dead livestock currently in use 
throughout the world; however, the knowledge that TSEs and some pathogens may 
not be completely destroyed may limit their utility in the wake of changing 
legislation (e.g. the amended EU Animal By-Products Regulation (1069/2009) which 
comes into effect in March 2011). On-farm disposal methods are favoured by the 
farming community due to the perceived environmental, practical, economical and 
biosecurity benefits, therefore processes such as composting and anaerobic 
digestion have found favour in countries such as the USA and Canada. Under the 
ABPR in the EU, these options are not deemed safe’’
I lost my Mom to the hvCJD back in December 14, 1997, and have been 
disturbed and fascinated at the same time of the science of the TSE prion aka 
mad cow type disease. 
I find even more disturbing at some of the regulations, and or lack of, for 
the TSE prion disease, and how it seems that the OIE, and the USDA et al, have 
dumbed down the science for the TSE prion disease, and then regulations there 
from. by now allowing all countries trade in the TSE prion disease, the relaxing 
of the BSE TSE testing, the relaxing of the feed bans, the relaxing of BSE 
surveillance now, is a very bad decision, and was not based on sound science to 
date, all of which I have listed why, below in references as follows ; 
New studies on the heat resistance of hamster-adapted scrapie agent: 
Threshold survival after ashing at 600°C suggests an inorganic template of 
replication 
The infectious agents responsible for transmissible spongiform 
encephalopathy (TSE) are notoriously resistant to most physical and chemical 
methods used for inactivating pathogens, including heat. It has long been 
recognized, for example, that boiling is ineffective and that higher 
temperatures are most efficient when combined with steam under pressure (i.e., 
autoclaving). As a means of decontamination, dry heat is used only at the 
extremely high temperatures achieved during incineration, usually in excess of 
600°C. It has been assumed, without proof, that incineration totally inactivates 
the agents of TSE, whether of human or animal origin. 
Prion Infected Meat-and-Bone Meal Is Still Infectious after Biodiesel 
Production 
Histochemical analysis of hamster brains inoculated with the solid residue 
showed typical spongiform degeneration and vacuolation. Re-inoculation of these 
brains into a new cohort of hamsters led to onset of clinical scrapie symptoms 
within 75 days, suggesting that the specific infectivity of the prion protein 
was not changed during the biodiesel process. The biodiesel reaction cannot be 
considered a viable prion decontamination method for MBM, although we observed 
increased survival time of hamsters and reduced infectivity greater than 6 log 
orders in the solid MBM residue. Furthermore, results from our study compare for 
the first time prion detection by Western Blot versus an infectivity bioassay 
for analysis of biodiesel reaction products. We could show that biochemical 
analysis alone is insufficient for detection of prion infectivity after a 
biodiesel process. 
Detection of protease-resistant cervid prion protein in water from a 
CWD-endemic area 
The data presented here demonstrate that sPMCA can detect low levels of 
PrPCWD in the environment, corroborate previous biological and experimental data 
suggesting long term persistence of prions in the environment2,3 and imply that 
PrPCWD accumulation over time may contribute to transmission of CWD in areas 
where it has been endemic for decades. This work demonstrates the utility of 
sPMCA to evaluate other environmental water sources for PrPCWD, including 
smaller bodies of water such as vernal pools and wallows, where large numbers of 
cervids congregate and into which prions from infected animals may be shed and 
concentrated to infectious levels. 
A Quantitative Assessment of the Amount of Prion Diverted to Category 1 
Materials and Wastewater During Processing 
Keywords:Abattoir;bovine spongiform encephalopathy;QRA;scrapie;TSE 
In this article the development and parameterization of a quantitative 
assessment is described that estimates the amount of TSE infectivity that is 
present in a whole animal carcass (bovine spongiform encephalopathy [BSE] for 
cattle and classical/atypical scrapie for sheep and lambs) and the amounts that 
subsequently fall to the floor during processing at facilities that handle 
specified risk material (SRM). BSE in cattle was found to contain the most oral 
doses, with a mean of 9864 BO ID50s (310, 38840) in a whole carcass compared to 
a mean of 1851 OO ID50s (600, 4070) and 614 OO ID50s (155, 1509) for a sheep 
infected with classical and atypical scrapie, respectively. Lambs contained the 
least infectivity with a mean of 251 OO ID50s (83, 548) for classical scrapie 
and 1 OO ID50s (0.2, 2) for atypical scrapie. The highest amounts of infectivity 
falling to the floor and entering the drains from slaughtering a whole carcass 
at SRM facilities were found to be from cattle infected with BSE at rendering 
and large incineration facilities with 7.4 BO ID50s (0.1, 29), intermediate 
plants and small incinerators with a mean of 4.5 BO ID50s (0.1, 18), and 
collection centers, 3.6 BO ID50s (0.1, 14). The lowest amounts entering drains 
are from lambs infected with classical and atypical scrapie at intermediate 
plants and atypical scrapie at collection centers with a mean of 3 × 10−7 OO 
ID50s (2 × 10−8, 1 × 10−6) per carcass. The results of this model provide key 
inputs for the model in the companion paper published here. 
PPo4-4: 
Survival and Limited Spread of TSE Infectivity after Burial 
Karen Fernie, Allister Smith and Robert A. Somerville The Roslin Institute 
and R(D)SVS; University of Edinburgh; Roslin, Scotland UK 
Scrapie and chronic wasting disease probably spread via environmental 
routes, and there are also concerns about BSE infection remaining in the 
environment after carcass burial or waste 3disposal. In two demonstration 
experiments we are determining survival and migration of TSE infectivity when 
buried for up to five years, as an uncontained point source or within bovine 
heads. Firstly boluses of TSE infected mouse brain were buried in lysimeters 
containing either sandy or clay soil. Migration from the boluses is being 
assessed from soil cores taken over time. With the exception of a very small 
amount of infectivity found 25 cm from the bolus in sandy soil after 12 months, 
no other infectivity has been detected up to three years. Secondly, ten bovine 
heads were spiked with TSE infected mouse brain and buried in the two soil 
types. Pairs of heads have been exhumed annually and assessed for infectivity 
within and around them. After one year and after two years, infectivity was 
detected in most intracranial samples and in some of the soil samples taken from 
immediately surrounding the heads. The infectivity assays for the samples in and 
around the heads exhumed at years three and four are underway. These data show 
that TSE infectivity can survive burial for long periods but migrates slowly. 
Risk assessments should take into account the likely long survival rate when 
infected material has been buried. 
The authors gratefully acknowledge funding from DEFRA. 
PPo3-22:
Detection of Environmentally Associated PrPSc on a Farm with Endemic 
Scrapie
Ben C. Maddison,1 Claire A. Baker,1 Helen C. Rees,1 Linda A. Terry,2 Leigh 
Thorne,2 Susan J. Belworthy2 and Kevin C. Gough3 1ADAS-UK LTD; Department of 
Biology; University of Leicester; Leicester, UK; 2Veterinary Laboratories 
Agency; Surry, KT UK; 3Department of Veterinary Medicine and Science; University 
of Nottingham; Sutton Bonington, Loughborough UK
Key words: scrapie, evironmental persistence, sPMCA
Ovine scrapie shows considerable horizontal transmission, yet the routes of 
transmission and specifically the role of fomites in transmission remain poorly 
defined. Here we present biochemical data demonstrating that on a 
scrapie-affected sheep farm, scrapie prion contamination is widespread. It was 
anticipated at the outset that if prions contaminate the environment that they 
would be there at extremely low levels, as such the most sensitive method 
available for the detection of PrPSc, serial Protein Misfolding Cyclic 
Amplification (sPMCA), was used in this study. We investigated the distribution 
of environmental scrapie prions by applying ovine sPMCA to samples taken from a 
range of surfaces that were accessible to animals and could be collected by use 
of a wetted foam swab. Prion was amplified by sPMCA from a number of these 
environmental swab samples including those taken from metal, plastic and wooden 
surfaces, both in the indoor and outdoor environment. At the time of sampling 
there had been no sheep contact with these areas for at least 20 days prior to 
sampling indicating that prions persist for at least this duration in the 
environment. These data implicate inanimate objects as environmental reservoirs 
of prion infectivity which are likely to contribute to disease transmission. 
Wednesday, July 10, 2013 
Rapid assessment of bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion inactivation by 
heat treatment in yellow grease produced in the industrial manufacturing process 
of meat and bone meals 
BMC Veterinary Research 2013, 9:134 doi:10.1186/1746-6148-9-134 
AD.81: Detection of prion protein associated with cervid chronic wasting 
disease in environmental samples 
Chad J. Johnson, Christen B. Smith, Michael D. Samuel and Joel A. Pedersen 
University of Wisconsin; Madison. WI USA 
Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy 
(TSE) or prion disease affecting North American members of the deer family 
(cervids). The disease agent may enter the environment through decomposition of 
carcasses and shedding in feces, saliva, and urine. Once in the environment 
disease associated prion protein (PrPTSE) can bind to soil components and remain 
bioavailable for extended time periods. Assessment of the environmental load of 
the disease agent is difficult because relevant levels are below the detection 
limits of immunochemical methods and bioassay is prohibitively expensive to use 
as a surveillance technique. Here, we report that a combination of detergent 
extraction and protein misfolding cyclic amplification with beads (PMCAb) 
substantially improves the sensitivity of PrPTSE detection in environmental 
samples. Using this technique we are able to achieve detection limits 
substantially lower than animal bioassay. Working with amended soils we are able 
to extract and amplify PrPTSE to detectable levels. We have investigated factors 
contributing to PMCAb inhibition and methods to circumvent those inhibitions. 
This technique holds promise for helping to clarify the relative importance of 
direct and indirect transmission of CWD, assess the effectiveness of 
environmental remediation, and determine environmental loads of infectious 
agent. 
===== 
AD.80: Kinetics of chronic wasting disease prion shedding in cervid saliva 
and urine 
Nicholas J. Haley, Davin Henderson, Glenn C. Telling and Edward A. Hoover 
Colorado State University; Fort Collins. CO USA 
Efficient horizontal transmission is a unique hallmark of chronic wasting 
disease (CWD) of deer, elk, and moose. Saliva trans- fer, for example via 
grazing or mutual grooming, is thought to be the primary mechanism of horizontal 
transmission, although urine and feces are also thought ro play an important 
role. It is not known how shortly after exposure an animal may begin shedding 
PrPCWD, though it has been reported that both clinical and pre-clinical animals 
may successfully transmit CWD to naive deer. We hypothesized that transmission 
would occur primarily in end-stage disease, though the purpose of this study was 
to identify earlier time points during the course of CWD infection in which 
saliva and urine may carry infectivity. Using both transgenic mouse bioassay and 
real-rime quaking-induced conversion (RT-QuIC), we evaluated saliva and urine 
from two experimentally infected white tail deer for which samples were 
available from multiple time points post-inoculation (p.i.) (e.g., 3, 6 and 12 
mo p.i., as well as immediately prior to euthanasia at 24-27 mos). We found that 
while saliva collected during clinical disease was infectious in mouse bioassay, 
saliva collected 12 mo p.i., prior to the onset of clinical signs was also 
variably infectious. Saliva from time points earlier than 12 mo p.i. failed to 
transmit infection, while urine collected from clinically affected deer had very 
low potential to transmit infection, as has been reported previously. These 
findings extend our understanding of CWD shedding in the natural host, and may 
improve control of CWD transmission in captive and free-ranging settings. 
PRION UPDATE VIA VEGETABLE PLANTS FROM THE SOIL 
56. Members considered that there is no evidence that crops grown on the 
land which received composted excreta from BSE-challenged animals pose a TSE 
risk to humans or animals. One member suggested that, as some of these animals 
are orally challenged with high doses of BSE-infected materials, and the 
distribution of infectivity in the digestive system is not completely 
understood, it might be premature to conclude that there is no infective agent 
in the manure. 
Furthermore, an unpublished study had indicated low level absorption of PrP 
from soil by tomato plants although it should be noted that this study had not 
been repeated. Details of this work would be sent to the SEAC Secretary. Dr 
Matthews explained that most of the manure from animals challenged with high 
doses of BSE had already been composted and used for coppicing. Members agreed 
that the risks from disposal of residual manure from experimental animals would 
be much less than historic risks of on farm contamination from naturally 
infected animals at the height of the BSE epidemic. ...SNIP...END 
SRM are certain cattle tissues capable of transmitting BSE. There is no 
human health risk assessment to indicate the absence of human health concerns 
associated with use of composted SRM domestically. To date, scientific evidence 
has not been able to demonstrate that composting destroys prions. Although 
domestic use would pose a negligible risk to livestock, there is a potential 
risk to humans via direct ingestion of the compost or of compost particles 
adhered to skin or plant material (e.g. carrots). Another potential route of 
exposure is by ingestion of prions that have been taken up by plants. It has 
been proven that bacteria are readily taken up by some plants (e.g. E. coli in 
lettuce) thus the uptake of prions by plants cannot be precluded or dismissed at 
this time. As a science-based regulator, the CFIA cannot change the policy on 
this issue without a risk assessment demonstrating that the use of composted SRM 
poses an acceptable risk to humans. 
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
***Risk of Prion Disease Transmission through Bovine-Derived Bone 
Substitutes: A Systematic Review
Saturday, November 2, 2013 
***APHIS Finalizes Bovine Import Regulations in Line with International 
Animal Health Standards while enhancing the spread of BSE TSE prion mad cow type 
disease around the Globe 
Saturday, November 2, 2013 
***Exploring the risks of a putative transmission of BSE to new 
species
Wednesday, October 30, 2013 
***SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL (SRM) CONTROL VERIFICATION TASK FSIS NOTICE 
70-13 10/30/13 
Monday, August 26, 2013 
***The Presence of Disease-Associated Prion Protein in Skeletal Muscle of 
Cattle Infected with Classical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy 
Saturday, November 2, 2013 
*** Recommendation of the Swiss Expert Committee for Biosafety on the 
classification of activities using prion genes and prion protein January 2013 
***
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 
*** VARIANT CJD PRESENTS DIFFERENTLY IN OLDER PATIENTS 
Friday, February 08, 2013 
*** Behavior of Prions in the Environment: Implications for Prion Biology 
PO-031: Aerosol transmission of chronic wasting disease to white-tailed 
deer 
Nathaniel Denkers,1 Jeanette Hayes-Klug,1 Kelly Anderson,1 Sally Dahmes,2 
David Osborn,3 Karl Miller,3 Robert Warren,3 Candace Mathiason,1 Edward Hoover1 
1Colorado State University; Fort Collins, CO USA; 2WASCO Inc.; Monroe, GA USA; 
3Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia; 
Athens, GA USA 
Purpose. A signature feature of chronic wasting disease (CWD) is its 
efficient lateral transmission in nature, almost surely by mucosal exposure. Our 
previous studies employing Tg(cerPrP) mice determined that CWD can be 
transmitted to a susceptible host by aerosol exposure, a route with relatively 
little investigation. The present study was designed to determine whether CWD is 
transmissible by aerosol to a native cervid host, white-tailed deer. 
Materials and Methods. Nine white-tailed deer were exposed to two (2) 
aerosol doses of a 5% w/v CWD+ (n = 6) or CWD- (n = 3) brain homogenate, 
delivered via the nasal passages using a customized aerosol apparatus. At 
3-month intervals post inoculation (mpi), tonsil and recto-anal 
mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (RAMALT) biopsies were collected and assayed 
for CWD infection by protein misfolding cyclic amplification (PMCA), western 
blotting (WB), and immunohistochemistry (IHC). 
Results. At 3 mpi and 6 mpi, tonsil and RAMALT biopsies were collected from 
5 of the 6 CWD + aerosol-exposed deer. Three of the 5 (60%) tested positive for 
CWD by PMCA but not IHC or western blot analysis at 3 mpi. By 6 mpi, 5 of 5 
(100%) were tonsil and/or RAMALT biopsy positive by at least two of the three 
assays. Biopsies were collected from all CWD+ aerosol-exposed deer at 9 mpi, 
with 6 of 6 (100%) tonsil and/ or RAMALT positive by western blot or IHC. At 10 
mpi 3 of the 6 prion-exposed deer have developed early clinical signs of CWD 
infection (hyperphagia, polydypsia, wide leg stance and head/neck 
dorsi-flexion). All sham-inoculated deer are showing no clinical signs and have 
remained CWD negative as assessed by all three assays. Interestingly, the prion 
dose delivered to the deer by aerosol-exposure is estimated to be 20-fold lower 
than the historical oral dose that has resulted in detectable CWD infection at 6 
or 12 mpi. 
Conclusions. This study documents the first aerosol transmission of CWD in 
deer. These results further infer that aerosolized prions facilitate CWD 
transmission with greater efficiency than does oral exposure to a larger prion 
dose. Thus exposure via the respiratory mucosa may be significant in the facile 
spread of CWD in deer and perhaps in prion transmission overall. 
PO-073: Multiple routes of prion transepithelial transport in the nasal 
cavity following inhalation 
Anthony Kincaid, Shawn Feilmann, Melissa Clouse, Albert Lorenzo, Jason 
Bartz Creighton University; Omaha, NE USA 
Introduction. Inhalation of either prion-infected brain homogenate or 
aerosolized prions has been shown to cause disease, and in the case of 
inhalation of infected brain homogenate, the nasal route of infection has been 
shown to be 10–100 times more efficient than the oral route. The cell types 
involved in the in vivo transport of prions across the nasal cavity epithelium 
have not been determined. M cells in the follicular associated epithelium have 
been shown to mediate transcellular transport of prions in vitro and in the gut 
of experimentally infected mice. We tested the hypothesis that M-cell mediated 
transport was responsible for prion entry across nasal cavity epithelium 
following inhalation. 
Materials and Methods. Hamsters were inoculated extranasally with 50 or 
100ul of infected (n = 31) or mock-infected (n = 13) brain homogenate. Control 
animals were inoculated with buffer (n = 4) or were untreated (n = 5). Following 
survival periods ranging from 15 to 180 min, animals were perfused, skulls were 
decalcified and nasal cavities were embedded in paraffin. Tissue sections were 
cut and processed immunohistochemically for glial fibrillary acidic protein to 
identify brain homogenate, or for the disease-associated form of the prion 
protein. Tissue sections not further than 112 um apart through the entire extent 
of the nasal cavity were analyzed using light microscopy; photomicrographs were 
obtained wherever inoculum was observed on the surface of, within, or deep to 
the nasal mucosa for each animal. 
Results. Infected or uninfected brain homogenate was identified within the 
nasal cavities of animals at all time points and was seen crossing the nasal 
cavity epithelium within minutes of inoculation; the transepithelial transport 
of brain homogenate continued for up to 3 h after inoculation. Infected or 
uninfected brain homogenate was seen adhering to, or located within, M cells at 
all time points. However, larger volumes of infected or uninfected brain 
homogenate were identified crossing between cells of the olfactory and 
respiratory epithelia in multiple locations. In addition, infected or uninfected 
brain homogenate was identified within the lumen of lymphatic vessels in the 
lamina propria beneath the nasal mucosa at all time points. 
Conclusion. Transepithelial transport of prions across nasal cavity mucosa 
begins within minutes of inhalation and can continue for up to 3 h. While M 
cells appear to transport prions across the follicular associated epithelium, 
larger amounts of prions are transported between the cells of the respiratory 
and olfactory epithelia, where they immediately enter the lymphatic vessels in 
the lamina propria. Thus, inhaled prions can be spread via lymph draining the 
nasal cavity and have access to somatic and autonomic nerves in the lamina 
propria of the nasal cavity. The increased efficiency of the nasal cavity route 
of infection compared with the oral route may be due to the rapid and prolonged 
transport of prions between cells of the respiratory and olfactory 
epithelia.
PO-033: Replication efficiency of soil-bound prions varies with soil type 
Shannon Bartelt-Hunt,1 Samuel Saunders,1 Ronald Shikiya,2 Katie 
Langenfeld,2 Jason Bartz2 1University of Nebraska-Lincoln; Omaha, NE USA; 
2Creighton University; Omaha, NE USA 
Prion sorption to soil is thought to play an important role in the 
transmission of scrapie and chronic wasting disease (CWD) via the environment. 
Sorption of PrP to soil and soil minerals is influenced by the strain and 
species of PrPSc and by soil characteristics. However, the ability of soil-bound 
prions to convert PrPc to PrPSc under these wide-ranging conditions remains 
poorly understood. We developed a semiquantitative protein misfolding cyclic 
amplification (PMCA) protocol to evaluate replication efficiency of soil-bound 
prions. Binding of the hyper (HY) strain of transmissible mink encephalopathy 
(TME) (hamster) prions to a silty clay loam soil yielded a greater-than-1-log 
decrease in PMCA replication efficiency with a corresponding 1.3-log reduction 
in titer. The increased binding of PrPSc to soil over time corresponded with a 
decrease in PMCA replication efficiency. The PMCA efficiency of bound prions 
varied with soil type, where prions bound to clay and organic surfaces exhibited 
significantly lower replication efficiencies while prions bound to sand 
exhibited no apparent difference in replication efficiency compared to unbound 
controls. PMCA results from hamster and CWD agent-infected elk prions yielded 
similar findings. Given that PrPSc adsorption affinity varies with soil type, 
the overall balance between prion adsorption affinity and replication efficiency 
for the dominant soil types of an area may be a significant determinant in the 
environmental transmission of prion diseases. 
PO-039: A comparison of scrapie and chronic wasting disease in white-tailed 
deer 
Justin Greenlee, Jodi Smith, Eric Nicholson US Dept. Agriculture; 
Agricultural Research Service, National Animal Disease Center; Ames, IA USA 
Interspecies transmission studies afford the opportunity to better 
understand the potential host range and origins of prion diseases. The purpose 
of these experiments was to determine susceptibility of white-tailed deer (WTD) 
to scrapie and to compare the resultant clinical signs, lesions, and molecular 
profiles of PrPSc to those of chronic wasting disease (CWD). We inoculated WTD 
intracranially (IC; n = 5) and by a natural route of exposure (concurrent oral 
and intranasal (IN); n = 5) with a US scrapie isolate. 
All deer were inoculated with a 10% (wt/vol) brain homogenate from sheep 
with scrapie (1ml IC, 1 ml IN, 30 ml oral). All deer inoculated by the 
intracranial route had evidence of PrPSc accumulation. PrPSc was detected in 
lymphoid tissues as early as 7 months-post-inoculation (PI) and a single deer 
that was necropsied at 15.6 months had widespread distribution of PrPSc 
highlighting that PrPSc is widely distributed in the CNS and lymphoid tissues 
prior to the onset of clinical signs. IC inoculated deer necropsied after 20 
months PI (3/5) had clinical signs, spongiform encephalopathy, and widespread 
distribution of PrPSc in neural and lymphoid tissues. 
The results of this study suggest that there are many similarities in the 
manifestation of CWD and scrapie in WTD after IC inoculation including early and 
widespread presence of PrPSc in lymphoid tissues, clinical signs of depression 
and weight loss progressing to wasting, and an incubation time of 21-23 months. 
Moreover, western blots (WB) done on brain material from the obex region have a 
molecular profile similar to CWD and distinct from tissues of the cerebrum or 
the scrapie inoculum. However, results of microscopic and IHC examination 
indicate that there are differences between the lesions expected in CWD and 
those that occur in deer with scrapie: amyloid plaques were not noted in any 
sections of brain examined from these deer and the pattern of immunoreactivity 
by IHC was diffuse rather than plaque-like. 
After a natural route of exposure, 100% of WTD were susceptible to scrapie. 
Deer developed clinical signs of wasting and mental depression and were 
necropsied from 28 to 33 months PI. Tissues from these deer were positive for 
PrPSc by IHC and WB. Similar to IC inoculated deer, samples from these deer 
exhibited two different molecular profiles: samples from obex resembled CWD 
whereas those from cerebrum were similar to the original scrapie inoculum. On 
further examination by WB using a panel of antibodies, the tissues from deer 
with scrapie exhibit properties differing from tissues either from sheep with 
scrapie or WTD with CWD. Samples from WTD with CWD or sheep with scrapie are 
strongly immunoreactive when probed with mAb P4, however, samples from WTD with 
scrapie are only weakly immunoreactive. In contrast, when probed with mAb’s 6H4 
or SAF 84, samples from sheep with scrapie and WTD with CWD are weakly 
immunoreactive and samples from WTD with scrapie are strongly positive. This 
work demonstrates that WTD are highly susceptible to sheep scrapie, but on first 
passage, scrapie in WTD is differentiable from CWD. ... snip...see more here 
;
Thursday, May 31, 2012 
CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE CWD PRION2012 Aerosol, Inhalation transmission, 
Scrapie, cats, species barrier, burial, and more 
Saturday, March 10, 2012 
CWD, GAME FARMS, urine, feces, soil, lichens, and banned mad cow protein 
feed CUSTOM MADE for deer and elk 
Monday, July 16, 2012 
Persistence of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy infectious agent in 
sewage 
Thursday, August 08, 2013 
Characterization of the first case of naturally occurring chronic wasting 
disease in a captive red deer (Cervus elaphus) in North America 
Friday, December 14, 2012 
*** DEFRA U.K. What is the risk of Chronic Wasting Disease CWD being 
introduced into Great Britain? 
A Qualitative Risk Assessment October 2012 
snip... 
In the USA, under the Food and Drug Administration’s BSE Feed Regulation 
(21 CFR 589.2000) most material (exceptions include milk, tallow, and gelatin) 
from deer and elk is prohibited for use in feed for ruminant animals. With 
regards to feed for non-ruminant animals, under FDA law, CWD positive deer may 
not be used for any animal feed or feed ingredients. For elk and deer considered 
at high risk for CWD, the FDA recommends that these animals do not enter the 
animal feed system. However, this recommendation is guidance and not a 
requirement by law. Animals considered at high risk for CWD include: 
1) animals from areas declared to be endemic for CWD and/or to be CWD 
eradication zones and 
2) deer and elk that at some time during the 60-month period prior to 
slaughter were in a captive herd that contained a CWD-positive animal. 
Therefore, in the USA, materials from cervids other than CWD positive 
animals may be used in animal feed and feed ingredients for non-ruminants. 
The amount of animal PAP that is of deer and/or elk origin imported from 
the USA to GB can not be determined, however, as it is not specified in TRACES. 
It may constitute a small percentage of the 8412 kilos of non-fish origin 
processed animal proteins that were imported from US into GB in 2011. Overall, 
therefore, it is considered there is a __greater than negligible risk___ that 
(nonruminant) animal feed and pet food containing deer and/or elk protein is 
imported into GB. There is uncertainty associated with this estimate given the 
lack of data on the amount of deer and/or elk protein possibly being imported in 
these products. 
snip... 
36% in 2007 (Almberg et al., 2011). In such areas, population declines of 
deer of up to 30 to 50% have been observed (Almberg et al., 2011). In areas of 
Colorado, the prevalence can be as high as 30% (EFSA, 2011). The clinical signs 
of CWD in affected adults are weight loss and behavioural changes that can span 
weeks or months (Williams, 2005). In addition, signs might include excessive 
salivation, behavioural alterations including a fixed stare and changes in 
interaction with other animals in the herd, and an altered stance (Williams, 
2005). These signs are indistinguishable from cervids experimentally infected 
with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Given this, if CWD was to be 
introduced into countries with BSE such as GB, for example, infected deer 
populations would need to be tested to differentiate if they were infected with 
CWD or BSE to minimise the risk of BSE entering the human food-chain via 
affected venison. 
snip... 
The rate of transmission of CWD has been reported to be as high as 30% and 
can approach 100% among captive animals in endemic areas (Safar et al., 2008). 
snip... 
In summary, in endemic areas, there is a medium probability that the soil 
and surrounding environment is contaminated with CWD prions and in a 
bioavailable form. In rural areas where CWD has not been reported and deer are 
present, there is a greater than negligible risk the soil is contaminated with 
CWD prion. 
snip... 
In summary, given the volume of tourists, hunters and servicemen moving 
between GB and North America, the probability of at least one person travelling 
to/from a CWD affected area and, in doing so, contaminating their clothing, 
footwear and/or equipment prior to arriving in GB is greater than negligible. 
For deer hunters, specifically, the risk is likely to be greater given the 
increased contact with deer and their environment. However, there is significant 
uncertainty associated with these estimates. 
snip... 
Therefore, it is considered that farmed and park deer may have a higher 
probability of exposure to CWD transferred to the environment than wild deer 
given the restricted habitat range and higher frequency of contact with tourists 
and returning GB residents. 
snip... 
SNIP...SEE ; 
Friday, December 14, 2012 
*** DEFRA U.K. What is the risk of Chronic Wasting Disease CWD being 
introduced into Great Britain? A Qualitative Risk Assessment October 2012 
Sunday, September 01, 2013 
*** hunting over gut piles and CWD TSE prion disease ***
CWD TO CATTLE OR BSE TO CERVIDS, potential risk factors ??? LET’S see what 
the science says to date ; 
UPDATED DATA ON 2ND CWD STRAIN 
Wednesday, September 08, 2010 
CWD PRION CONGRESS SEPTEMBER 8-11 2010 
UPDATED CORRESPONDENCE FROM AUTHORS OF THIS STUDY I.E. COLBY, PRUSINER ET 
AL, ABOUT MY CONCERNS OF THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THEIR FIGURES AND MY FIGURES OF 
THE STUDIES ON CWD TRANSMISSION TO CATTLE ; 
CWD to cattle figures CORRECTION 
Greetings, 
I believe the statement and quote below is incorrect ; 
"CWD has been transmitted to cattle after intracerebral inoculation, 
although the infection rate was low (4 of 13 animals [Hamir et al. 2001]). This 
finding raised concerns that CWD prions might be transmitted to cattle grazing 
in contaminated pastures." 
Please see ; 
Within 26 months post inoculation, 12 inoculated animals had lost weight, 
revealed abnormal clinical signs, and were euthanatized. Laboratory tests 
revealed the presence of a unique pattern of the disease agent in tissues of 
these animals. These findings demonstrate that when CWD is directly inoculated 
into the brain of cattle, 86% of inoculated cattle develop clinical signs of the 
disease. 
" although the infection rate was low (4 of 13 animals [Hamir et al. 
2001]). " 
shouldn't this be corrected, 86% is NOT a low rate. ... 
kindest regards, 
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518 
Thank you! 
Thanks so much for your updates/comments. We intend to publish as rapidly 
as possible all updates/comments that contribute substantially to the topic 
under discussion. 
re-Prions David W. Colby1,* and Stanley B. Prusiner1,2 + Author 
Affiliations 
1Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases, University of California, San 
Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143 2Department of Neurology, University 
of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143 Correspondence: 
stanley@ind.ucsf.edu 
Mule deer, white-tailed deer, and elk have been reported to develop CWD. As 
the only prion disease identified in free-ranging animals, CWD appears to be far 
more communicable than other forms of prion disease. CWD was first described in 
1967 and was reported to be a spongiform encephalopathy in 1978 on the basis of 
histopathology of the brain. Originally detected in the American West, CWD has 
spread across much of North America and has been reported also in South Korea. 
In captive populations, up to 90% of mule deer have been reported to be positive 
for prions (Williams and Young 1980). The incidence of CWD in cervids living in 
the wild has been estimated to be as high as 15% (Miller et al. 2000). The 
development of transgenic (Tg) mice expressing cervid PrP, and thus susceptible 
to CWD, has enhanced detection of CWD and the estimation of prion titers 
(Browning et al. 2004; Tamgüney et al. 2006). Shedding of prions in the feces, 
even in presymptomatic deer, has been identified as a likely source of infection 
for these grazing animals (Williams and Miller 2002; Tamgüney et al. 2009b). CWD 
has been transmitted to cattle after intracerebral inoculation, although the 
infection rate was low (4 of 13 animals [Hamir et al. 2001]). This finding 
raised concerns that CWD prions might be transmitted to cattle grazing in 
contaminated pastures. 
snip... 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: David Colby To: flounder9@verizon.net 
Cc: stanley@XXXXXXXX 
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 8:25 AM 
Subject: Re: FW: re-Prions David W. Colby1,* and Stanley B. Prusiner1,2 + 
Author Affiliations 
Dear Terry Singeltary, 
Thank you for your correspondence regarding the review article Stanley 
Prusiner and I recently wrote for Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives. Dr. Prusiner 
asked that I reply to your message due to his busy schedule. We agree that the 
transmission of CWD prions to beef livestock would be a troubling development 
and assessing that risk is important. In our article, we cite a peer-reviewed 
publication reporting confirmed cases of laboratory transmission based on 
stringent criteria. The less stringent criteria for transmission described in 
the abstract you refer to lead to the discrepancy between your numbers and ours 
and thus the interpretation of the transmission rate. We stand by our assessment 
of the literature--namely that the transmission rate of CWD to bovines appears 
relatively low, but we recognize that even a low transmission rate could have 
important implications for public health and we thank you for bringing attention 
to this matter. 
Warm Regards, David Colby -- David Colby, PhD 
Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of 
Delaware 
===========END...TSS============== 
SNIP...SEE FULL TEXT ; 
UPDATED DATA ON 2ND CWD STRAIN 
Wednesday, September 08, 2010 
CWD PRION CONGRESS SEPTEMBER 8-11 2010 
never say never with the potential transmission of one of the strains of 
CWD transmitting to cattle OR humans, OR ANY OTHER SPECIES. ...TSS 
Wednesday, September 04, 2013 
***cwd - cervid captive livestock escapes, loose and on the run in the 
wild... 
*** The potential impact of prion diseases on human health was greatly 
magnified by the recognition that interspecies transfer of BSE to humans by beef 
ingestion resulted in vCJD. While changes in animal feed constituents and 
slaughter practices appear to have curtailed vCJD, there is concern that CWD of 
free-ranging deer and elk in the U.S. might also cross the species barrier. 
Thus, consuming venison could be a source of human prion disease. Whether BSE 
and CWD represent interspecies scrapie transfer or are newly arisen prion 
diseases is unknown. Therefore, the possibility of transmission of prion disease 
through other food animals cannot be ruled out. There is evidence that vCJD can 
be transmitted through blood transfusion. There is likely a pool of unknown size 
of asymptomatic individuals infected with vCJD, and there may be asymptomatic 
individuals infected with the CWD equivalent. These circumstances represent a 
potential threat to blood, blood products, and plasma supplies. 
Prion2013 Chronic Wasting Disease CWD risk factors, humans, domestic cats, 
blood, and mother to offspring transmission 
HD.13: CWD infection in the spleen of humanized transgenic mice 
Liuting Qing and Qingzhong Kong 
Case Western Reserve University; Cleveland, OH USA 
Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is a widespread prion disease in free-ranging 
and captive cervid species in North America, and there is evidence suggesting 
the existence of multiple CWD strains. The susceptibility of human CNS and 
peripheral organs to the various CWD prion strains remains largely unclear. 
Current literature suggests that the classical CWD strain is unlikely to infect 
human brain, but the potential for peripheral infection by CWD in humans is 
unknown. We detected protease-resistant PrpSc in the spleens of a few humanized 
transgenic mice that were intracerebrally inoculated with natural CWD isolates, 
but PrpSc was not detected in the brains of any of the CWD-inoculated mice. Our 
ongoing bioassays in humanized Tg mice indicate that intracerebral challenge 
with such PrpSc-positive humanized mouse spleen already led to prion disease in 
most animals. These results indicate that the CWD prion may have the potential 
to infect human peripheral lymphoid tissues. 
===== 
HD.12: Comparative study of the distribution of the prion protein in the 
squirrel monkey (Saimiri sciureus) following experimental challenge with variant 
and sporadic CJD 
Diane L. Ritchie,1 Paul Brown,2 Susan Gibson,3 Thomas R. Kreil,4 Christian 
Abee3 and James W. Ironside1 
1National CJD Surveillance Unit; Edinburgh, UK; 2Bethesda; Bethesda, MD 
USA; 3Deparment of Comparative Medicine; University of South Alabama; Mobile, AL 
USA; 4Baxter Bioscience; Vienna, Austria 
Introduction, Reports suggest that the number of tissues and organs showing 
the presence of the abnormal prion protein (PrPTSE) in variant CJD (vCJD) 
patients may be greater than previously thought. A limited peripheral 
involvement in some cases of sporadic CJD (sCJD) has also been reported. This 
accumulation of PrPTSE outside the brain has raised concerns about the possible 
iatrogenic transmission risk of vCJD. The squirrel monkey (Saimiri sciureus) has 
been shown to be highly susceptible to experimental challenge with human prion 
disease. Neuropathological and biochemical analyses of CNS tissue have shown 
that sCJD and vCJD can be distinguished in the squirrel monkey and that many of 
the strain characteristics that define these agents are conserved after 
transmission. Following on from these initial studies, immunohistochemistry and 
western blot analysis were performed on a wide range of peripheral tissues 
including, lymphoreticular tissues and peripheral neural tissue to establish the 
full-body distribution of PrPTSE in this primate animal model. 
Materials and Methods. Brain homogenates from sCJD or vCJD patients were 
inoculated into the frontal cortex of squirrel monkeys. Animals were kept under 
constant clinical surveillance. At post-mortem, formalin fixed CNS tissue and a 
wide range of peripheral tissues were taken for immunohistochemical analysis 
together with frozen tissues taken for the biochemical detection of PrPTSE. 
Results. Immunohistochemical analysis showed no evidence of PrPTSE 
deposition in peripheral tissues in either variant or sporadic CJD-infected 
animals. However, western blot assays detected PrPTSE in the spleen of a 
proportion of the vCJD- infected animals. The PrPTSE isotype resembled that 
detected in CNS tissue from the vCJD- infected animals and from human vCJD 
cases. ***In addition, western blot analysis detected PrPTSE in the spleen of a 
single animal following challenge with sporadic CJD. The PrPTSE type in this 
animal resembled that found in CNS tissue from the same animal, with a PrPTSE 
type similar to that found in human sCJD type 1 cases. 
Conclusion. This study confirms the accumulation of PrPTSE in the CNS and 
spleen of a proportion of squirrel monkeys infected intra-cerebrally with human 
vCJD. Furthermore, this study extends the evidence that there may be a 
peripheral involvement in some cases of sCJD. PrPTSE typing confirms the 
conservation of PrPTSE type on transmission to the squirrel monkey and suggests 
that there are no tissue-specific adaptations in the biochemical phenotype of 
the agent strain following primate-to-primate transmission. 
===== 
Oral.15: Molecular barriers to zoonotic prion transmission: Comparison of 
the ability of sheep, cattle and deer prion disease isolates to convert normal 
human prion protein to its pathological isoform in a cell-free system 
Marcelo A.Barria,1 Aru Balachandran,2 Masanori Morita,3 Tetsuyuki 
Kitamoto,4 Rona Barron,5 Jean Manson,5 Richard Kniqht,1 James W. lronside1 and 
Mark W. Head1 
1National CJD Research and Surveillance Unit; Centre for Clinical Brain 
Sciences; School of Clinical Sciences; The University of Edinburgh; Edinburgh, 
UK; 2National and OIE Reference Laboratory for Scrapie and CWD; Canadian Food 
Inspection Agency; Ottawa Laboratory; Fallowfield. ON Canada; 3Infectious 
Pathogen Research Section; Central Research Laboratory; Japan Blood Products 
Organization; Kobe, Japan; 4Department of Neurological Science; Tohoku 
University Graduate School of Medicine; Sendai. Japan; 5Neurobiology Division; 
The Roslin Institute and R(D)SVS; University of Edinburgh; Easter Bush; 
Midlothian; Edinburgh, UK 
Background. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) is a known zoonotic 
prion disease, resulting in variant Creurzfeldt- Jakob disease (vCJD) in humans. 
In contrast, classical scrapie in sheep is thought to offer little or no danger 
to human health. However, a widening range of prion diseases have been 
recognized in cattle, sheep and deer. The risks posed by individual animal prion 
diseases to human health cannot be determined a priori and are difficult to 
assess empirically. The fundamemal event in prion disease pathogenesis is 
thought to be the seeded conversion of normal prion protein (PrPC) to its 
pathological isoform (PrPSc). Here we report the use of a rapid molecular 
conversion assay to test whether brain specimens from different animal prion 
diseases are capable of seeding the conversion of human PrPC ro PrPSc. 
Material and Methods. Classical BSE (C-type BSE), H-type BSE, L-type BSE, 
classical scrapie, atypical scrapie, chronic wasting disease and vCJD brain 
homogenates were tested for their ability to seed conversion of human PrPC to 
PrPSc in protein misfolding cyclic amplification (PMCA) reactions. Newly formed 
human PrPSc was detected by protease digestion and western blotting using the 
antibody 3F4. 
Results. C-type BSE and vCJD were found to efficiently convert PrPC to 
PrPSc. Scrapie failed to convert human PrPC to PrPSc. Of the other animal prion 
diseases tested only chronic wasting disease appeared to have the capability ro 
convert human PrPC to PrPSc. The results were consistent whether the human PrPC 
came from human brain, humanised transgenic mouse brain or from cultured human 
cells and the effect was more pronounced for PrPC with methionine at codon 129 
compared with that with valine. 
Conclusion. Our results show that none of the tested animal prion disease 
isolates are as efficient as C-type BSE and vCJD in converting human prion 
protein in this in vitro assay. However, they also show that there is no 
absolute barrier ro conversion of human prion protein in the case of chronic 
wasting disease. 
===== 
Invited.16: Studies of chronic wasting disease transmission in cervid and 
non-cervid species 
Edward A, Hoover,1 Candace K. Mathiason,1 Davin M. Henderson,1 Nicholas J. 
Haley,1 Davis M. Seelig,1 Nathaniel D. Denkers,1 Amy V. Nalls,1 Mark D. Zabe,1 
Glenn C. Telling,1 Fernando Goni2 and Thomas Wisniewski,2 
1Prion Research Center; Colorado State University; Fort Collins, CO USA; 
2New York University School of Medicine; New York, NY USA 
How and why some misfolded proteins become horizontally transmitted agents 
and occasionally cross species barriers are issues fundamental to understanding 
prion disease. Chronic wasting disease (CWD) of cervids is perhaps a prototype 
of horizontal prion transmission, encompassing efficient mucosal uptake, 
lymphoid amplification, neuroinvasion, peripheralization, and dissemination via 
mucosal excretion. Efficient mucosal transmission of CWD in deer has been 
demonstrated by oral, nasal, aerosol, and indirect contact exposure. In 
addition, other studies (Mathiason CK, et al.) reported at the symposium support 
a significant role for pre- and/or postnatal transmission of CWD from doe to 
offspring. Accumulating, yet still incomplete, evidence also suggests that the 
period of relatively covert CWD infection may be longer than originally thought. 
Given the above, minimally invasive sensitive assays based on body fluids from 
live animals would aid substantially in understanding the biology of CWD. We 
have been applying seeded realtirne quaking-induced amplification of recombinant 
PrP substrates (i.e., RT-QuIC methodology) to: (1) investigate antemortem CWD 
detection, and (2) model PrP-based species barriers and trans-species 
adaptation-topics we previously explored using sPMCA and in vivo bioassays. At 
this symposium, we report sensitive and specific detection CWD prions in saliva, 
urine, blood (Mathiason lab), and rectal and pharyngeal lymph node samples 
(Haley NJ, et al.) from pre-symptomatic and symptomatic experimentally and 
naturally exposed deer. Other ongoing studies are employing RT-QuIC methodology 
to model amplification barriers among CWD, FSE, BSE, and CJD prions using 
cervine, feline, bovine, human, and promiscuous rPrP substrates and the above 
species prion seeds, cellular co-factors, and transgenic mice. Finally, in 
collaboration with the Wisniewski laboratory, we are conducting of experimental 
CWD vaccination studies in deer employing oral administration of an attenuated 
Salmonella vector expressing cervid PrP epitopes. 
===== 
AD.06: Detecting prions in the brain and blood of TSE-infected deer and 
hamsters 
Alan Elder,1 Davin Henderson,1 Anca Selariu,1 Amy Nalls,1 Byron Caughey,2 
Richard Bessen,1 Jason Bartz3 and Candace Mathiason1 
1Colorado State University; Fort Collins, CO USA; 2NIH Rocky Mountain 
Laboratories; Hamilton, MT USA; 3Creighton University; Omaha, NE USA 
While large quantities of protease resistant prion protein (PrPres) can be 
demonstrated by western blot or IHC in lymphoid biopsies or post-mortem brain 
tissues harvested from prion-infected animals, these conventional assays are 
less reliable as means to detect the small quantities of prions thought to be 
present in bodily fluids or associated with early and asymptomatic phases of TSE 
disease. The Real Time-Quaking Induced Conversion (RT-QuIC) assay is capable of 
detecting prions at concentrations below the level of sensitivity of 
conventional assays and provides a real-time fluorescent readout negating the 
use of proteases. We have made modifications to the RT-QuIC assay to utilize it 
for the detection of PrPres in brain and blood harvested from various species 
infected with prions. In this study, we analyzed CWD-infected deer and 
CWD/TME-infected hamster whole blood to determine the effect of: 
(1) various anticoagulants, 
(2) freezing and 
(3) NaPTA precipitation. 
Brain tissue and blood collected from naive deer and hamsters served as 
negative controls. 
We were able to demonstrate amplifiable prions in 
(1) brain and blood samples harvested from CWD/TME-infected animals, 
(2) heparinized blood, 
(3) frozen vs. fresh blood and 
(4) NaPTA treated samples. 
The RT-QuIC assay is able to detect PrPres in various species of animals 
and shows promise as an antemortem diagnostic tool for blood-borne TSEs. 
===== 
Oral.08: Mother to offspring transmission of chronic wasting disease in 
Reeve's Muntjac deer 
Amy Nalls,1 Erin McNulty,1 Jenny Powers,2 Davis Seelig,1 Clare Hoover,1 
Nicholas Haley,1 Jeanette Hayes-Klug,1 Kelly Anderson,1 Paula Stewart,3 Wilfred 
Goldmann,3 Edward A. Hoover1 and Candace K. Mathiason1 
1Colorado State University; Fort Collins, CO USA; 2National Park Service; 
Fort Collins, CO USA; 3The Roslin Institute and Royal School of Veterinary 
Studies; Edinburgh, UK 
To investigate the role mother to offspring transmission plays in chronic 
wasting disease (CWD), we have developed a cervid model employing the Reeve's 
muntjac deer (Muntiacus reevesi). Eight muntjac doe were orally inoculated with 
CWD and tested PrPCWD lymphoid positive by 4 mo post infection. Fourteen fawns 
were born to these eight CWD-infected doe-3 were born viable, 6 were born 
non-viable and 5 were harvested as fetuses from early or end-stage CWD-infected 
doe. All three viable fawns have demonstrated CWD IHC lymphoid biopsy positivity 
between 43 d post birth and 11 mo post birth. Two of these three CWD positive 
viable offspring have developed clinical signs consistent with TSE disease 
(28-33 mo post birth). Moreover, CWD prions have been detected by sPMCA in 11 of 
16 tissues harvested from 6 full-term non-viable fawns and in 7 of 11 fetal 
tissues harvested in utero from the second and third trimester fetuses. 
Additional tissues and pregnancy related fluids from doe and offspring are being 
analyzed for CWD prions. In summary, using the muntjac deer model we have 
demonstrated CWD clinical disease in offspring born to CWD-infected doe, and in 
utero transmission of CWD from mother to offspring. These studies provide basis 
to further investigate the mechanisms of maternal transfer of prions. 
===== 
AD.63: Susceptibility of domestic cats to chronic wasting disease 
Amy V.Nalls,1 Candace Mathiason,1 Davis Seelig,2 Susan Kraft,1 Kevin 
Carnes,1 Kelly Anderson,1 Jeanette Hayes-Klug1 and Edward A. Hoover1 
1Colorado State University; Fort Collins, CO USA; 2University of Minnesota; 
Saint Paul, MN USA 
Domestic and nondomestic cats have been shown to be susceptible to feline 
spongiform encephalopathy (FSE), almost certainly caused by consumption of 
bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)-contaminated meat. Because domestic and 
free-ranging nondomestic felids scavenge cervid carcasses, including those in 
areas affected by chronic wasting disease (CWD), we evaluated the susceptibility 
of the domestic cat (Felis catus) to CWD infection experimentally. Cohorts of 5 
cats each were inoculated either intracerebrally (IC) or orally (PO) with 
CWD-infected deer brain. At 40 and 42 mo post-inoculation, two IC-inoculated 
cats developed signs consistent with prion disease, including a stilted gait, 
weight loss, anorexia, polydipsia, patterned motor behaviors, head and tail 
tremors, and ataxia, and progressed to terminal disease within 5 mo. Brains from 
these two cats were pooled and inoculated into cohorts of cats by IC, PO, and 
intraperitoneal and subcutaneous (IP/SC) routes. Upon subpassage, feline-adapted 
CWD (FelCWD) was transmitted to all IC-inoculated cats with a decreased 
incubation period of 23 to 27 mo. FelCWD was detected in the brains of all the 
symptomatic cats by western blotting and immunohistochemistry and abnormalities 
were seen in magnetic resonance imaging, including multifocal T2 fluid 
attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) signal hyper-intensities, ventricular size 
increases, prominent sulci, and white matter tract cavitation. Currently, 3 of 4 
IP/SQ and 2 of 4 PO inoculared cats have developed abnormal behavior patterns 
consistent with the early stage of feline CWD. These results demonstrate that 
CWD can be transmitted and adapted to the domestic cat, thus raising the issue 
of potential cervid-to- feline transmission in nature. 
Sunday, July 21, 2013 
*** As Chronic Wasting Disease CWD rises in deer herd, what about risk for 
humans? 
*** PRION2013 *** 
Sunday, August 25, 2013 
Prion2013 Chronic Wasting Disease CWD risk factors, ***humans, domestic 
cats, blood, and mother to offspring transmission 
Prion2013 
Friday, August 09, 2013 
***CWD TSE prion, plants, vegetables, and the potential for environmental 
contamination
Uptake of Prions into Plants 
Wednesday, September 04, 2013 
*** cwd - cervid captive livestock escapes, loose and on the run in the 
wild... 
Thursday, August 08, 2013 
*** Characterization of the first case of naturally occurring chronic 
wasting disease in a captive red deer (Cervus elaphus) in North America 
*** The discovery of previously unrecognized prion diseases in both humans 
and animals (i.e., Nor98 in small ruminants) demonstrates that the range of 
prion diseases might be wider than expected and raises crucial questions about 
the epidemiology and strain properties of these new forms. We are investigating 
this latter issue by molecular and biological comparison of VPSPr, GSS and 
Nor98. 
Saturday, July 6, 2013 
*** Small Ruminant Nor98 Prions Share Biochemical Features with Human 
Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker Disease and Variably Protease-Sensitive 
Prionopathy 
Research Article 
Saturday, November 02, 2013 
OREGON DETECTS SCRAPIE 
Sheep disease pops up in Douglas County; 300 animals euthanized 
Friday, July 26, 2013
Voluntary Scrapie Program USA UPDATE July 26, 2013 increase in FY 2013 is 
not statistically meaningful due to the sample size 
Wednesday, October 09, 2013 
*** WHY THE UKBSEnvCJD ONLY THEORY IS SO POPULAR IN IT'S FALLACY, 
£41,078,281 in compensation REVISED ***
Thursday, October 10, 2013 
*** CJD REPORT 1994 increased risk for consumption of veal and venison and 
lamb ***
Monday, October 14, 2013 
*** Researchers estimate one in 2,000 people in the UK carry variant CJD 
proteins ***
Friday, August 16, 2013 
*** Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) biannual update August 2013 U.K. and 
Contaminated blood products induce a highly atypical prion disease devoid of 
PrPres in primates 
WHAT about the sporadic CJD TSE proteins ?
WE now know that some cases of sporadic CJD are linked to atypical BSE and 
atypical Scrapie, so why are not MORE concerned about the sporadic CJD, and all 
it’s sub-types $$$ 
Sunday, August 11, 2013 
Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease CJD cases rising North America updated report 
August 2013 
*** Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease CJD cases rising North America with Canada 
seeing an extreme increase of 48% between 2008 and 2010 
Sunday, October 13, 2013 
CJD TSE Prion Disease Cases in Texas by Year, 2003-2012
Sunday, September 08, 2013 
Iatrogenic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease via surgical instruments and 
decontamination possibilities for the TSE prion 
Thursday, September 26, 2013 
Minimise transmission risk of CJD and vCJD in healthcare settings Guidance 
Sunday, June 9, 2013 
TSEAC March 14, 2013: Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Advisory 
Committee Meeting Webcast 
Tuesday, May 28, 2013 
Late-in-life surgery associated with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: a 
methodological outline for evidence-based guidance 
*** U.S.A. 50 STATE BSE MAD COW CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001 ***
Tuesday, March 05, 2013 
A closer look at prion strains Characterization and important implications 
Prion 
7:2, 99–108; March/April 2013; © 2013 Landes Bioscience
Number 41 January 2009
*** Ruminant Carcass Disposal Options for Routine and Catastrophic 
Mortality ***
An optimal disposal method should mitigate the disease agent or other cause 
of mortality. For complete effectiveness, certain disease agents or other causes 
of mortality may require specific disposal methods or technologies (e.g., 
high-temperature incineration or alkaline hydrolysis for transmissible 
spongiform encephalopathy (TSE)-infected material).
snip...
The disposal of carcasses associated with confirmed mortalities from 
chronic wasting disease (CWD) in landfill sites is not recommended in the United 
States at the present time. The behavior of the infectious agent associated with 
TSEs, the prion, in a landfill presently is not clearly understood. (See 
Appendix 1, page 14, for more information about disposal of TSE-infected 
carcasses.) If a catastrophic situation arose in which thousands of diseased 
carcasses needed to be disposed of in a landfill, the liability likely would 
have to be accepted and indemnified by the federal government.
snip...
Fungi and protozoans do not remain active in an anaerobic environment. 
Discussions about prions in landfills have taken place only recently. In the 
early stages of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) epidemic in the U.K., 
some BSE-infected carcasses were disposed of in landfill sites before routine 
incineration was introduced. Most of these sites were unlined municipal solid 
waste disposal landfills. Nevertheless, a risk assessment carried out for the 
Environment Agency concluded that the potential risks to people through 
contaminated drinking water were extremely small. But the fate of prions in 
landfills and leachate presently is unknown, and no clear method of study or 
testing exists. There are current studies to address these questions, but the 
results will not be known for some time. Presently, the majority of landfill 
owners in the United States are not accepting prion-infected ruminant carcasses 
for disposal because of (1) the inability to monitor for the long-term viability 
of prions and (2) potential liability issues. (See Appendix 1 for further 
information on the disposal of TSE-infected carcasses.)
snip...
Composting also is attractive because it can be performed on-site, 
eliminating the need to transport infected or potentially infected material 
during a disease outbreak. It is advisable, however, to consult local and state 
authorities regarding regulations governing composting of ruminant carcasses; 
there may be issues with composting carcasses infected with certain biological 
agents or TSEs. The regulations may describe what can be done with the composted 
material or may prevent composting altogether.
Research assessing the environmental impacts and biosecurity issues 
associated with composting livestock mortalities during an emergency suggests 
that composting can be a relatively biosecure process when performed properly 
(Glanville et al. 2006). (See Appendix 1 for a more in-depth discussion of 
disposal options for TSE-infected carcasses.)
Table 8. Summary of potential health risks for various methods of handling 
animal by-products1, 2
Exposure of Humans to Hazards from Each Option
Disease/Hazardous Agent Rendering Incineration Landfill Pyre Burial
Prions for BSE, scrapie3 Moderate Very small Moderate Moderate High
Rendering, Incineration, Landfill, Pyre, Burial
Moderate, Very small, Moderate, Moderate, High
3Risk of human exposure to TSEs was rated as very small when solid products 
of rendering were incinerated
snip...
Comparisons Open-air burning can be relatively inexpensive, but it is not 
suitable for destroying prions of TSE-infected carcasses. The method is 
dependent on weather and fuel availability, has the potential for environmental 
contamination, and may pose a problem for public acceptance. Fixed-facility 
incineration is capable of effectively destroying prions of TSE-infected 
carcasses and is highly biosecure (Kastner and Phebus 2004; TAHC 2005). 
Disadvantages of fixedfacility incineration are limited availability, high cost 
of operation, necessity of transporting carcasses to the facility, difficulty of 
securing local licensure or allowance, and inability of equipment to burn large 
volumes of carcasses. Air-curtain incineration is mobile and relatively 
environmentally acceptable. In addition, this method is suitable for combination 
with combustible debris removal, such as downed trees from weather-related 
damage, if dry. Air-curtain incinerators are fuel intensive and require 
experienced personnel operators. Currently, open air-curtain incinerators are 
not validated to dispose of TSE-infected carcasses safely.
snip...
Alkaline Hydrolysis
Description of Process
Alkaline hydrolysis is a natural process by which complex molecules are 
broken down into the constituent small molecules from which they were 
synthesized. The process of alkaline hydrolysis occurs through the action of the 
hydroxyl ions (OH¯) on the bonds connecting the small molecules. This process 
occurs in nature when animal tissues and carcasses are buried in soil of neutral 
or alkaline (high) pH, aided by the digestive processes of soil organisms. In 
digestion, alkaline hydrolysis is the primary process whereby the complex 
molecules of proteins, fats, and nucleic acids are broken down in the small 
intestine into small nutrient molecules that are absorbed by the intestinal 
cells. Alkaline hydrolysis for carcass disposal is based on the same chemical 
reaction, with strong alkali and heat used to speed the process.
The current process for application of alkaline hydrolysis to the disposal 
of animal carcasses and tissues—including infectious and radioactive tissues, 
carcasses, and biohazardous and hazardous materials— dates back to 1992. The 
method was introduced for the release of radionuclides from experimental animal 
carcasses so that this type of low-level radioactive waste could be disposed of 
safely and economically (Kaye, Methe, and Weber 1993; Kaye and Weber 1994). 
Subsequently, the method was applied to the disposal of other research animals 
and infectious human and animal tissues and carcasses. Equipment is commercially 
available for disposal of animal carcasses by this process.
In the simplest current application, whole animal carcasses and tissues are 
loaded into a stainless steel, steam-heated pressure vessel. Once the vessel is 
loaded and the lid is sealed, an appropriate amount of concentrated alkali 
solution and water are added. The vessel is heated to 302ºF (150ºC) and 
maintained at that temperature for a minimum of 3 hours (depending on the target 
pathogen, vessel, and carcass sizes) and up to 6 hours for destruction of 
prions. At the end of the process, the hydrolyzate— a solution of amino acids, 
small peptides, sugars, soaps, and electrolytes— is cooled and drained, leaving 
only “bone shadows” (i.e., the pure calcium phosphate remains of bones and teeth 
from which all the collagen has been digested). The hydrolyzate is a resource 
that can be used directly as liquid fertilizer, dried or absorbed to make a dry 
fertilizer, used as feedstock for anaerobic fermentation biogas generation, or 
further treated to precipitate the lipid components for subsequent conversion to 
biodiesel, still leaving the nutrient solution for other uses.
Alkaline hydrolysis leads to the random breaking of nearly 40% of all 
peptide bonds in proteins, the major solid constituent of animal cells and 
tissues. Under the extreme conditions of high temperature and alkali 
concentration, the protein coats of viruses are destroyed and the peptide bonds 
of prions are broken. Validation testing has demonstrated that all pathogens in 
animal tissue (Kaye et al. 1998), including prions, are completely destroyed 
under the combined operating conditions of heat, moisture, and pH. 
Alkaline hydrolysis has been written into European Union Animal By-Products 
legislation as the only alternative technology approved for all categories of 
animal by-products, including the most highly infectious and prion-contaminated 
material (EC 2005).
Types of Systems
Alkaline hydrolysis systems may be fixed or mobile. The capacity of 
currently available equipment is up to 10,000 lb/cycle for fixed systems and 
4,000 lb/cycle for mobile systems. Designs are available, however, for systems 
that combine pulverization and initial steam disinfection with the tissue 
destruction and resource conservation capability of mobile systems capable of 
processing more than 25,000 lb/hr.
Fixed-base and mobile systems currently are able to handle the routine 
disposal of infectious and suspect animal carcasses and tissues brought to state 
and federal veterinary diagnostic laboratories. These systems also could serve 
for disposal of materials, such as specified risk material, at livestock 
processing facilities.
Since 2004, a single 4,000 lb-capacity mobile system has been used to 
dispose of more than one million pounds of deer confirmed or suspected of having 
CWD, a TSE, in a depopulation program near Madison, Wisconsin.
It is important to distinguish between the issues related to disposal of 
routine infectious and TSE-infected or suspect animals and the issues related to 
disposal in mass animal epidemics or other catastrophic situations. Fixed-base 
systems are able to handle routine and TSE material because the volumes are 
relatively small. Also, TSE outbreaks can be managed by isolation and transport 
of the affected animals without risk to noninfected animals. In mass animal 
epidemics or natural disasters, however, disposal often must take place at the 
site of the outbreak and be done quickly to prevent spread of infectious 
disease; for these situations, mobile systems can be used. The hydrolyzate from 
such a system is only partly hydrolyzed; it exits the system as slurry into a 
tanker truck or rail tank car in which hydrolysis continues until the 
hydrolyzate is emptied into a fertilizer storage trench, fed into a biogas 
generation system, field spread, or otherwise processed for resource 
recovery.
Fixed-base systems generally use institutional steam supplies for heating 
the vessels and domestic water for filling and cooling. Mobile systems require 
“slave trucks” carrying diesel or propane-fired electrical and steam generators, 
as well as alkali and water (if needed). In theory, a fleet of large volume 
mobile comminution-disinfection- digestion systems, strategically distributed 
around the country in a sort of “fire station” pattern, could be gathered on 
short notice to deal with mass animal disposals. When not in use in emergency 
situations, these units could be kept operable and their operators trained by 
using the units for routine depopulations of avian and ruminant livestock and 
control of small outbreaks. The fixed-base units would always be in use for 
disposal of animal carcasses and tissues after routine necropsy and diagnostic 
procedures.
snip...
Appendix 1: Special Considerations for Material Potentially Infected with 
TSEs
Introduction to TSEs
Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies
(TSEs) are a group of rare neurodegenerative diseases, sometimes called 
prion diseases, that can affect both animals and humans. The discovery of 
prion-related cattle diseases in England between 1986 and 2002 changed the 
disposal industry’s perception of the risk involved in disposing of even a small 
number of ruminant carcasses (Karesh and Cook 2005). The occurrence of bovine 
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in England changed policies in the United States 
as well, even though there have been only two cases of BSE identified in the 
United States (OIE 2008) and a relatively small number of TSEs identified in 
other susceptible species.
The main characteristics of TSE diseases are
• Progressive debilitating neurological illness that is always fatal
• Spongiform change in grey matter areas of the brain
• Long incubation period of months to several years
• No detectable specific immune response in the host.
These diseases are experimentally transmissible and some (e.g., familial 
Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease [CJD], Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker syndrome (GSS), 
and fatal familial insomnia) are genetically inherited.
Types of TSEs
There are several forms of TSEs in different animal species and 
humans.
Scrapie is a TSE disease of sheep and goats that has been recognized for 
more than 200 years and is endemic in North America and many parts of Europe. 
Despite this occurrence, there has never been any proven association between 
scrapie in sheep and any human disease. In cattle, BSE first appeared in the 
U.K. in 1986. There have been approximately 184,000 cases of BSE in the U.K., 
plus an additional 5,200 cases in 21 other countries. In 1996, the 
identification of a new form of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) in young people 
in the U.K. raised the concern that the causative agent for BSE had transmitted 
from cattle to humans. There is strong evidence that this is the case, and it is 
now generally accepted that vCJD in humans is caused by exposure to material 
from BSE-infected cattle, although many questions remain about the exact nature 
of the route of transmission. There are other forms of TSEs in humans; sporadic 
CJD is the most common. Other TSEs in animals include CWD, present in wild and 
farmed deer and elk populations in some areas of North America, and 
transmissible mink encephalopathy that appeared in farmed mink 
populations.
TSEs and Prions 
The commonly accepted infectious agent for TSEs (generally designated as 
PrPSc or PrPTSE 3) is a misfolded isoform of a normal cellular protein (PrPc) 
and is called a prion (Prusiner 1998). The term prion was derived from 
proteinaceous and infectious and is defined by Prusiner (1998) as a 
proteinaceous infectious particle that lacks nucleic acid. The normal isoform is 
soluble and primarily monomeric in solution, whereas the infectious form creates 
insoluble aggregates. Prions are not deactivated by the normal procedures that 
would destroy most disease agents. They are resistant to inactivation by heat, 
chemical disinfection, radiation, and proteolytic enzymes (Taylor 2000). 
Disposal of prion-infected carcasses requires high heat, is costly, and is not 
practical.
snip...
Considerations for Specific Disposal Options
Burial and Landfill
Concerns about worker and public safety, associated with the fate and 
transport of prions disposed in landfills, have prompted the U.S. disposal 
industry to reassess the long-term risks of this type of disposal.
Analytical methods presently do not exist to quantify the destruction and 
retention of prions in the landfill mass. The majority of landfill operators 
will not accept even rendered carcasses that are known to be infected with 
prions. Discussants and presenters at the National Carcass Disposal Symposium in 
December 2006 generally agreed that disposal of carcasses potentially infected 
with TSEs may not be a conservative option (Hater, Hoffman, and Pierce 2006; Lin 
2006).
There are no data on what might happen to the infective agent in a 
landfill, although some studies are now in progress. The original limited data 
on the behavior of a TSE agent when buried in the ground is from a single 
experiment reported by Brown and Gajdusek (1991); this research has been used to 
support the assumption that TSE infectivity will degrade in the ground. Comer 
and colleagues (1998) indicated that 98% of TSE infectivity will degrade in the 
ground over 3 years (or longer). The results also showed only limited leaching, 
with most of the residual infectivity remaining in the originally contaminated 
soil. Johnson and colleagues (2006) have studied the interaction of PrPTSE with 
common soil minerals and soils. They showed that PrPTSE can bind strongly to 
soils and could be difficult to desorb, and they found that the PrPTSE bound to 
the soil particles remained infectious. Leita and colleagues (2006) also showed 
that PrPTSE was absorbed in all three soil types tested. More recently, Seidel 
and colleagues (2007) have shown that the scrapie agent can transmit disease by 
the oral route after persistence in soil for up to 29 months. The change in 
infectivity over time was not measured, but Western blot analysis clearly showed 
a marked decrease in the strength of the target protein after one month and 
further decrease over time up to 29 months.
The Institute for Animal Health in Edinburgh currently is conducting a 
study of the behavior of infectivity in carcasses buried in the ground. An 
initial report was given at Prion 2006 (Fernie et al. 2006), which stated that 
TSE infectivity may bind strongly to soil components and has very limited 
mobility in soils with controlled rates of water percolation.
These results and the biophysical properties of the prion protein suggest 
that any infectivity released from decaying animal material is likely to remain 
bound to solid matter in the landfill and, thus, is unlikely to be present in 
the leachate. With current knowledge, however, it is not possible to be certain 
that TSE infectivity could not be present at some level in leachate.
A number of risk assessment studies have considered the risks from TSE 
material deposited in landfill sites or by burial. Not all these studies are in 
the public domain, but they have shown that the potential risk to people or 
other livestock through contamination of drinking water is extremely small (DNV 
1997a, 2001b).
Isolation using macro-encapsulation in the landfill is an option for 
TSE-related deaths. Macroencapsulation, however, is an unusual practice in 
subtitle D landfills and does add significant costs to landfill disposal. 
Current research may determine whether the additional costs are justified.
Rendering
Research has demonstrated that rendering lowers the infectivity of prions, 
but no currently available rendering processes totally inactivate the prions 
(Taylor, Woodgate, and Atkinson 1995). Cohen and colleagues (2001) reported that 
batch rendering systems achieved a 1,000- fold reduction in BSE infectivity, 
whereas continuous systems with and without fat recycling reduced infectivity 
100-fold and 10-fold, respectively. Because rendering does not totally 
inactivate prion infectivity, any product from the disposal of TSEdiseased 
carcasses should not be used in animal feeds.
There may be other practical difficulties with rendering as an option for 
prion-contaminated materials. As was found during the 2001 FMD outbreak in the 
U.K.—when rendering was regarded as the preferred option— rendering facilities 
may already have existing functions and requirements, limiting their capacity. 
In addition, rendering plants may rely on the sale of meat and bone meal and 
tallow as part of their production cycle; use of those end products would almost 
certainly cease to be an option if there was risk of TSE-agent contamination in 
them.
Composting
Presently, no work has been done to demonstrate TSE-agent inactivation by 
composting. There has been some laboratory work related to prion destruction by 
specific enzymes, but no field research has been done involving the addition of 
such enzymes to composting operations.
Certain challenges exist in using composting for prion disposal, including 
(1) the need for some form of enclosed vessel to avoid environmental 
contamination and to prevent scavenger access, (2) the need for complete mixing, 
(3) potential difficulties in accessing neural tissue encased within bone (skull 
and spinal cord), and (4) ensuring the correct conditions are maintained (e.g., 
temperature and levels of microbial degradation).
Incineration
Incineration is one of the most effective techniques for removal of 
infectivity from prion-contaminated material. Disadvantages, however, include 
the large energy requirement, environmental concerns, location of incinerators, 
and the need to ensure a consistent and complete burn.
Incinerators vary from small animal incinerators, used to dispose of small 
amounts of material, to large commercial operations, or even to power station 
furnaces used to dispose of the products of rendering. Analysis of the ash for 
protein content after incineration of BSE-infected carcasses suggests that prion 
infectivity is reduced by at least 1 million-fold (DNV 1997b, 2001a). Some 
facilities in the U.K. currently use fixed gasification units for processing 
carcasses that potentially contain prions. Research continues in the United 
States on similar portable gasification equipment that should offer a daily 
capacity of more than 25 tons per unit.
Alkaline Hydrolysis
The alkaline hydrolysis process has been through a validation study by the 
Institute of Animal Health, and an Opinion has been issued by the Scientific 
Steering Committee of the European Commission (EC 2002) on the effectiveness of 
the process. There was detectable infectivity from samples held for 3 hours, but 
not from samples held for 6 hours. The committee concluded that the by-products 
after 3 hours of processing could contain some residual TSE infectivity and that 
this risk may decrease with increased duration of processing. 
Glossary
snip...see ;
Alkaline Hydrolysis
========================================
There are many disposal options for dead livestock currently in use 
throughout the world; however, the knowledge that TSEs and some pathogens may 
not be completely destroyed may limit their utility in the wake of changing 
legislation (e.g. the amended EU Animal By-Products Regulation (1069/2009) which 
comes into effect in March 2011). On-farm disposal methods are favoured by the 
farming community due to the perceived environmental, practical, economical and 
biosecurity benefits, therefore processes such as composting and anaerobic 
digestion have found favour in countries such as the USA and Canada. Under the 
ABPR in the EU, these options are not deemed safe;
========================================
Review 
The environmental and biosecurity characteristics of livestock carcass 
disposal methods: A review 
Ceri L. Gwyther a, A. Prysor Williams a,⇑, Peter N. Golyshin b, Gareth 
Edwards-Jones a, David L. Jones a a School of Environment, Natural Resources and 
Geography, College of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Gwynedd, LL57 2UW, UK 
b School of Biological Sciences, College of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, 
Gwynedd, LL57 2UW, UK
a b s t r a c t 
Livestock mortalities represent a major waste stream within agriculture. 
Many different methods are used throughout the world to dispose of these 
mortalities; however within the European Union (EU) disposal options are limited 
by stringent legislation. The legal disposal options currently available to EU 
farmers (primarily rendering and incineration) are frequently negatively 
perceived on both practical and economic grounds. In this review, we assess the 
potential environment impacts and biosecurity risks associated with each of the 
main options used for disposal of livestock mortalities in the world and 
critically evaluate the justification for current EU regulations. Overall, we 
conclude that while current legislation intends to minimise the potential for 
on-farm pollution and the spread of infectious diseases (e.g. transmissible 
spongiform encephalopathies, bacterial pathogens), alternative technologies 
(e.g. bioreduction, anaerobic digestion) may provide a more cost-effective, 
practical and biosecure mechanism for carcass disposal as well as having a lower 
environmental footprint. Further social, environmental and economic research is 
therefore warranted to assess the holistic benefits of alternative approaches 
for carcass disposal in Europe, with an aim to provide policy-makers with robust 
knowledge to make informed decisions on future legislation.
snip...
4. Conclusions 
There are many disposal options for dead livestock currently in use 
throughout the world; however, the knowledge that TSEs and some pathogens may 
not be completely destroyed may limit their utility in the wake of changing 
legislation (e.g. the amended EU Animal By-Products Regulation (1069/2009) which 
comes into effect in March 2011). On-farm disposal methods are favoured by the 
farming community due to the perceived environmental, practical, economical and 
biosecurity benefits, therefore processes such as composting and anaerobic 
digestion have found favour in countries such as the USA and Canada. Under the 
ABPR in the EU, these options are not deemed safe; however, the legal 
alternatives are not favoured by the farming community leading to widespread 
non-compliance and potentially greater environmental risk (due to illegal 
dumping, etc. (Kirby et al., 2010)). There is therefore a real need for new 
methods to be developed and validated and the legislation reconsidered following 
submission of new evidence. From this perspective, bioreduction and freezing 
seems to be promising on-farm storage methods for livestock mortalities, 
limiting the need for offfarm transport thus reducing associated biosecurity 
risks. While the implementation of highly precautionary, risk-averse mortality 
disposal systems is admirable in many ways, similar risk assessments and 
legislation do not apply to other components of the livestock sector which may 
pose a similar or even greater risk to human health or environmental 
contamination (e.g. spreading of animal waste, animal access to watercourses, 
public access to grazing land). It is important therefore that mortality 
disposal systems are based on a realistic and proportionate level of acceptable 
risk in comparison to other components of the food chain, rather than the 
current zero-risk approach. It is clear that more evidence is needed on each 
disposal and storage method in order to make substantiated risk assessments, 
e.g. the effects of spreading carcass ash on crops or the potential of leachate 
from burial to contaminate ground or surface water. This review has initiated 
this process by applying a simple five-star award system to each livestock 
disposal and storage method (Table 3 and Table 4, respectively) in order to 
rudimentarily classify various biosecurity and environmental factors based on 
current scientific evidence. Methods in need of greater research have also been 
highlighted where there is either limited or no existing published literature. 
Further research into the economic impacts of dead livestock disposal is 
necessary for legislators to appreciate the cost implications on the livestock 
sector, whilst life-cycle assessments are needed to help provide more 
environmentally sustainable disposal solutions.
OPINION AND REPORT ON : THE TREATMENT OF ANIMAL WASTE BY MEANS OF HIGH 
TEMPERATURE (150°C, 3 HOURS) AND CORRESPONDING HIGH PRESSURE ALKALINE 
HYDROLYSIS. 
ADOPTED BY THE SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE AT ITS MEETING OF 16 MAY 
2002
FINAL OPINION AND REPORT ON : A TREATMENT OF ANIMAL WASTE BY MEANS OF HIGH 
TEMPERATURE (150°C, 3 HOURS) AND HIGH PRESSURE ALKALINE HYDROLYSIS. 
ADOPTED BY THE SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE AT ITS MEETING OF 10-11 APRIL 
2003
BSE INQUIRY 1989 TO ...
The BSE Inquiry / Statement No 19B (supplementary) Dr Alan Colchester 
Issued 06/08/1999 (not scheduled to give oral evidence) 
SECOND STATEMENT TO THE BSE INQUIRY 
Dr A Colchester BA BM BCh PhD FRCP Reader in Neurosciences & Computing, 
University of Kent at Canterbury; Consultant Neurologist, Guy’s Hospital London 
and William Harvey Hospital Ashford April 1999 
snip... 
88. Natural decay: Infectivity persists for a long time in the environment. 
A study by Palsson in 1979 showed how scrapie was contracted by healthy sheep, 
after they had grazed on land which had previously been grazed by 
scrapie-infected sheep, even though the land had lain fallow for three years 
before the healthy sheep were introduced. Brown also quoted an early experiment 
of his own (1991), where he had buried scrapie-infected hamster brain and found 
that he could still detect substantial infectivity three years later near where 
the material had been placed. 89. Potential environmental routes of infection: 
Brown discusses the various possible scenarios, including surface or subsurface 
deposits of TSE-contaminated material, which would lead to a build-up of 
long-lasting infectivity. Birds feeding on animal remains (such as gulls 
visiting landfill sites) could disperse infectivity. Other animals could become 
vectors if they later grazed on contaminated land. "A further question concerns 
the risk of contamination of the surrounding water table or even surface water 
channels, by effluents and discarded solid wastes from treatment plants. A 
reasonable conclusion is that there is a potential for human infection to result 
from environmental contamination by BSE-infected tissue residues. The potential 
cannot be quantified because of the huge numbers of uncertainties and 
assumptions that attend each stage of the disposal process". These comments, 
from a long established authority on TSEs, closely echo my own statements which 
were based on a recent examination of all the evidence. 90. Susceptibility: It 
is likely that transmissibility of the disease to humans in vivo is probably 
low, because sheep that die from scrapie and cattle that die from BSE are 
probably a small fraction of the exposed population. However, no definitive data 
are available. 
91. Recommendations for disposal procedures: Brown recommends that material 
which is actually or potentially contaminated by BSE should be: 1) exposed to 
caustic soda; 2) thoroughly incinerated under carefully inspected conditions; 
and 3) that any residue should be buried in landfill, to a depth which would 
minimise any subsequent animal or human exposure, in areas that would not 
intersect with any potable water-table source. 
92. This review and recommendations from Brown have particular importance. 
Brown is one of the world's foremost authorities on TSEs and is a senior 
researcher in the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). It is notable that 
such a respected authority is forthright in acknowledging the existence of 
potential risks, and in identifying the appropriate measures necessary to 
safeguard public health. Paper by SM Cousens, L Linsell, PG Smith, Dr M 
Chandrakumar, JW Wilesmith, RSG Knight, M Zeidler, G Stewart, RG Will, 
"Geographical distribution of variant CJD in the UK (excluding Northern 
Ireland)". Lancet 353:18-21, 2 nd January 1999 93. The above paper {Appendix 41 
(02/01/99)} (J/L/353/18) examined the possibility that patients with vCJD 
(variant CJD) might live closer to rendering factories than would be expected by 
chance. All 26 cases of vCJD in the UK with onset up to 31 st August 1998 were 
studied. The incubation period of vCJD is not known but by analogy with other 
human TSEs could lie within the range 5-25 years. If vCJD had arisen by exposure 
to rendering products, such exposure might plausibly have occurred 8-10 years 
before the onset of symptoms. The authors were able to obtain the addresses of 
all rendering plants in the UK which were in production in 1988. For each case 
of vCJD, the distance from the place of residence on 1st January 1998 to the 
nearest rendering plant was calculated 
snip... 
BSE INQUIRY DATA 1989 through the 1990’s REPORT ON BOVINE CARCASE 
INCINERATION, incinerations temps., plume, etc. ...tss 
some unofficial info. from a source on the inside looking out;
Confidential!!!!
As early as 1992-3 there had been long studies conducted on small pastures 
containing scrapie infected sheep at the sheep research station associated with 
the Neuropathogenesis Unit in Edinburgh, Scotland. Whether these are 
documented...I don't know. But personal recounts both heard and recorded in a 
daily journal indicate that leaving the pastures free and replacing the topsoil 
completely at least 2 feet of thickness each year for SEVEN years....and then 
when very clean (proven scrapie free) sheep were placed on these small 
pastures.... the new sheep also broke with scrapie and passed it to offspring. I 
am not sure that TSE contaminated ground could ever be free of the agent!! A 
very frightening revelation!!!
xxxxxxxxxxx 
you can take that with however many grains of salt you wish, and we can 
debate these issues all day long, but bottom line, this is not rocket-science, 
all one has to do is some experiments and case studies, but for the life of me, 
i don't know what they are waiting on? 
kind regards, Terry S. Singeltary Sr., Bacliff, Texas USA 
more here; 
INCINERATION TEMPS
requirements include;
a. after burning to the range of 800 to 1000*C to eliminate smell;
well heck, this is just typical public relations fear factor control. do 
you actually think they would spend the extra costs for fuel, for such extreme 
heat, just to eliminate smell, when they spread manure all over your veg's. i 
think not. what they really meant were any _TSE agents_.
b. Gas scrubbing to eliminate smoke -- though steam may be omitted;
c. Stacks to be fitted with grit arreaters;
snip...
1.2 Visual Imact
It is considered that the requirement for any carcase incinerator disign 
would be to ensure that the operations relating to the reception, storage and 
decepitation of diseased carcasses must not be publicly visible and that any 
part of a carcase could not be removed or interfered with by animals or birds. 
REPORT ON BOVINE CARCASE INCINERATION
IF GOD DEMANDED 
full text; 
http://web.archive.org/web/20040521230540/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/04/03006001.pdf 
New studies on the heat resistance of hamster-adapted scrapie agent: 
Threshold survival after ashing at 600Ò à °C suggests an inorganic template of 
replication
Paul Brown*, [dagger ] , Edward H. Rau [Dagger ] , Bruce K. Johnson*, 
Alfred E. Bacote*, Clarence J. Gibbs Jr.*, and D. Carleton GajdusekÒ à §
* Laboratory of Central Nervous System Studies, National Institute of 
Neurological Disorders and Stroke, and [Dagger ] Environmental Protection 
Branch, Division of Safety, Office of Research Services, National Institutes of 
Health, Bethesda, MD 20892; and Ò à § Institut Alfred Fessard, Centre National 
de la Recherche Scientifique, 91198 Gif sur Yvette, France
Contributed by D. Carleton Gajdusek, December 22, 1999
Abstract Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion 
References
One-gram samples from a pool of crude brain tissue from hamsters infected 
with the 263K strain of hamster-adapted scrapie agent were placed in covered 
quartz-glass crucibles and exposed for either 5 or 15 min to dry heat at 
temperatures ranging from 150Ò à °C to 1,000Ò à °C. Residual infectivity in 
the treated samples was assayed by the intracerebral inoculation of dilution 
series into healthy weanling hamsters, which were observed for 10 months; 
disease transmissions were verified by Western blot testing for 
proteinase-resistant protein in brains from clinically positive hamsters. 
Unheated control tissue contained 9.9 log10LD50/g tissue; after exposure to 
150Ò à °C, titers equaled or exceeded 6 log10LD50/g, and after exposure to 
300Ò à °C, titers equaled or exceeded 4 log10LD50/g. Exposure to 600Ò à °C 
completely ashed the brain samples, which, when reconstituted with saline to 
their original weights, transmitted disease to 5 of 35 inoculated hamsters. No 
transmissions occurred after exposure to 1,000Ò à °C. These results suggest 
that an inorganic molecular template with a decomposition point near 600Ò à °C 
is capable of nucleating the biological replication of the scrapie agent.
transmissible spongiform encephalopathy | scrapie | prion | medical waste | 
incineration
Introduction Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results 
Discussion References
The infectious agents responsible for transmissible spongiform 
encephalopathy (TSE) are notoriously resistant to most physical and chemical 
methods used for inactivating pathogens, including heat. It has long been 
recognized, for example, that boiling is ineffective and that higher 
temperatures are most efficient when combined with steam under pressure (i.e., 
autoclaving). As a means of decontamination, dry heat is used only at the 
extremely high temperatures achieved during incineration, usually in excess of 
600Ò à °C. It has been assumed, without proof, that incineration totally 
inactivates the agents of TSE, whether of human or animal origin. It also has 
been assumed that the replication of these agents is a strictly biological 
process (1), although the notion of a "virus" nucleant of an inorganic molecular 
cast of the infectious [beta ] -pleated peptide also has been advanced (2). In 
this paper, we address these issues by means of dry heat inactivation 
studies.
snip...
GUTTING DEER/ELK AND THOSE THIN GLOVES;
Distribution of prion protein in the ileal Peyer?s patch of scrapie-free 
lambs and lambs naturally and experimentally exposed to the scrapie agent
Ragna HeggebÃ’â¬"à ¸1, Charles McL. Press1, Gjermund Gunnes1, Kai Inge 
Lie1, Michael A. Tranulis2, Martha Ulvund3, Martin H. Groschup4 and Thor 
Landsverk1
Department of Morphology, Genetics and Aquatic Biology1 and Department of 
Biochemistry, Physiology and Nutrition2, Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, 
PO Box 8146 Dep., N-0033, Oslo, Norway Department of Sheep and Goat Research, 
Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, Kyrkjevegen 332/334, 4300 Sandnes, 
Norway3 Federal Research Centre for Virus Diseases of Animals, Paul-Ehrlich-Str. 
28, 72076 TÃ’â¬"à ¼bingen, Germany4
Author for correspondence: Charles Press. Fax +47 22964764. e-mail 
Charles.Press@veths.no
A sensitive immunohistochemical procedure was used to investigate the 
presence of prion protein (PrP) in the ileal Peyer?s patch of PrP-genotyped 
lambs, including scrapie-free lambs and lambs naturally and experimentally 
exposed to the scrapie agent. The tyramide signal amplification system was used 
to enhance the sensitivity of conventional immunohistochemical procedures to 
show that PrP was widely distributed in the enteric nervous plexus supplying the 
gut wall. In scrapie-free lambs, PrP was also detected in scattered cells in the 
lamina propria and in the dome and interfollicular areas of the Peyer?s patch. 
In the follicles, staining for PrP was mainly confined to the capsule and cells 
associated with vascular structures in the light central zone. In lambs 
naturally exposed to the scrapie agent, staining was prominent in the dome and 
neck region of the follicles and was also found to be associated with the 
follicle-associated epithelium. Similar observations were made in lambs that had 
received a single oral dose of scrapie-infected brain material from sheep with a 
homologous and heterologous PrP genotype 1 and 5 weeks previously. These studies 
show that the ileal Peyer?s patch in young sheep may be an important site of 
uptake of the scrapie agent and that the biology of this major gut-associated 
lymphoid tissue may influence the susceptibility to oral infection in sheep. 
Furthermore, these studies suggest that homology or heterology between PrP 
genotypes or the presence of PrP genotypes seldom associated with disease does 
not impede uptake of PrP. 
====================================================== 
BSE, KURU, DENTAL AND ___CUT ABRASIONS___ from gutting a deer 
perhaps;
snip...
since there was a suggestion that kuru had been transmitted through the 
gums and/or gum abrasions... 
snip... 
http://web.archive.org/web/20040625025306/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/04/17005001.pdf 
Summary of Conclusions on the Vulnerability of Groundwater to Contamination 
by BSE Prions at Thruxted Mill. 
[PDF]BSE INQUIRY Statement of behalf of the Environment Agency ... File 
Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML ... his Statement of March 1998 to the 
BSE Inquiry ... systems subject to regular or intermittent contamination by 
rapid movement of recharge water ... www.bse.org.uk/files/ws/s490.pdf
BSE INQUIRY
Statement of behalf of the Environment Agency Concerning Thruxted Mill By 
Mr C. P. Young Principal Hydrogeologist, Soil Waste and Groundwater Group WRc 
plc; Medmenham, Bucks
OPINION ON SIX ALTERNATIVE METHODS FOR SAFE DISPOSAL OF ANIMAL BY-PRODUCTS 
ADOPTED BY THE SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE AT ITS MEETING OF 10-11 APRIL 2003 
OPINION on the use of small incinerators for BSE risk reduction (Scientific 
Steering Committee Meeting of 16-17 January 2003)(158KB)
OPINION on open burning of potentially TSE-infected animal materials 
(Adopted by the Scientific Steering Committee at its meeting of 16-17 January 
2003)
OPINION n the use of burial for dealing with animal carcasses and other 
animal materials that might contain BSE/TSE (Adopted by the Scientific 
snip...
4. CONCLUSION In the absence of new evidence the opinion of the SSC 
â¬SOpinion on Fallen Stock⬠(SSC 25th June 1999) must be endorsed strongly 
that land burial of all animals and material derived from them for which there 
is a possibility that they could incorporate BSE/TSEs poses a significant risk. 
Only in exceptional circumstances where there could be a considerable delay in 
implementing a safe means of disposal should burial of such materials be 
considered. Guidelines should be made available to aid on burial site 
selection.
snip...
> What about alkaline tissue digestion?
UPDATED OPINION AND REPORT ON : A TREATMENT OF ANIMAL WASTE BY MEANS OF 
HIGH TEMPERATURE (150°C, 3 HOURS) AND HIGH PRESSURE ALKALINE HYDROLYSIS. 
INITIALLY ADOPTED BY THE SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE AT ITS MEETING OF 16 MAY 
2002 AND REVISED AT ITS MEETING OF 7-8 NOVEMBER 2002
snip...
C:\WINNT\Profiles\bredagi.000\Desktop\WR2_0209_REVISED_OPINION_0211_FINAL.doc 
2 
OPINION BACKGROUND AND MANDATE Commission Services received a submission 
and accompanying dossier from a commercial company requesting endorsement of a 
process for the safe disposal of animal waste which may be contaminated by TSEs. 
This process consists of a treatment of animal waste by means of high 
temperature (150°C, 3 Hours) and corresponding high pressure alkaline 
hydrolysis. Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) was requested to address the 
following questions: 1. Can the treatment of animal waste, as described by the 
dossier, be considered safe in relation to TSE risk? Can the liquid residues be 
considered safe in relation to TSE risk? 2. Can the by-products resulting from 
this treatment (i.e. ash of the bones and teeth of vertebrates ) be considered 
safe in relation to TSE risk? It is not in the remit of the SSC to endorse 
specific commercial products and processes. This opinion therefore relates only 
to the nature of the process in regard to possible human health and 
environmental risks arising from possible exposure to BSE / prion proteins. The 
opinion does not address practical issues such as economics and potential 
throughput of carcasses/tissues. An opinion was initially adopted on 16 May 
2002. Subsequently, comments, substantial additional data including analytical 
results, a risk assessment as well as a number of proposals for the safe 
recycling or disposal of the residues were submitted to the SSC secretariat by 
the company in June 2002. These were analysed by the rapporteurs, the TSE/BSE ad 
hoc Group (at its meeting of 5 September 2002) and the SSC (at its meeting of 
7-8 November 2002). The amended opinion and report follow hereafter. 
OPINION 1. Regarding the first question of the mandate the SSC concludes 
that the liquid residue after a 3-hour digestion cycle could retain infective 
potential. Under controlled laboratory conditions in a single experiment the 
treatment of animal waste by means of high temperature (150°C, 3 Hours) and 
high pressure alkaline hydrolysis has been shown to reduce the infectivity of 
TSE/BSE by a factor of 103.5 ⬠ 104.5. Due to constraints specific to this 
experiment, further studies on the combination of heat, pH and time in clearance 
studies are needed before any final assurance could be given regarding the 
safety of the process with respect to TSE risks. No infectivity was found after 
6 hours. This may indicate that the clearance after 6 hours processing time is 
higher than after 3 hours. However, these experiments can only give a measure of 
the minimum clearance possible and do not permit the quantification of the 
clearance factor after 6 hours. Regarding the second question of the mandate, 
the SSC concludes that, on the basis of the data available, by-products of the 
3-hour process could carry a risk of BSE/TSE infectivity and that this risk may 
decrease with the duration of processing; further data would be needed in order 
to make a definitive statement. 
C:\WINNT\Profiles\bredagi.000\Desktop\WR2_0209_REVISED_OPINION_0211_FINAL.doc 
3 
The SSC refers to the attached report for some comments on the experimental 
conditions, which were considered when drawing the above conclusions. 
2. The possible human BSE exposure and/or environmental contamination risks 
under field conditions not only depends on the maintenance of the efficiency of 
the equipment during processing, but also on factors such as: the probability 
that a TSE-infected animal is processed, the type of material processed (e.g., 
carcasses as compared to byproducts and waste from animals that tested negative 
for BSE), the relationship between effectiveness and throughput and workplace 
control, dilution of the possible residual infectivity, and environmental 
protection measures. The consideration whether or not the inactivation capacity 
of a process is effective must take fully into account such factors, but the SSC 
nevertheless considers, as a principle, that the release into the environment of 
residual TSE infectivity should be avoided. 
3. The dossier supporting the request for the endorsement of the process 
states that the levels of 68 priority pollutant semi-volatiles was low and that 
odour emission was moderate. Detailed analyses provided recently1 by the company 
shows that dioxins in the air could not be detected nor chlorophenols and other 
polychlorinated hydrocarbons in the residual fluid of the alkaline process, but 
high biological oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) values were 
identified in the residual fluid. Most of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 
were reported to be below the given chemical detection limits. For the compounds 
detected most concentrations were below their respective odour thresholds. 
Emissions of some reduced sulphur compounds and amines require special attention 
in order to avoid potential odour impacts. Appropriate emission-reduction 
measures and air ventilation exhaust systems are recommended. The SSC is 
nevertheless concerned about the fact that, if formed in a liquid medium, dioxin 
is most unlikely to pass into air, instead it will adsorb to solids or to the 
sides of the processing chamber. The analyses of air emissions are therefore not 
a sufficient method to exclude the possible presence of dioxins in the effluent 
(either as â¬Snatural⬠environmental background contamination or as newly 
formed substances during the alkaline treatment). As the air emission analysis 
is not sufficient to confirm the possible presence of dioxins in the effluent, 
additional data/ analyses are needed to verify whether during the alkaline 
hydrolysis process described in the attached report, dioxins are formed in 
addition to background levels that may already have been present. For that 
purpose samples taken both before and after the process would need to be 
analyzed using a method of sufficient sensitivity. Such results would also 
provide the basis to decide whether or not the levels of possibly newly produced 
dioxins and dibenzofurans (if any) would exceed pre-set safety margins. The 
solidification of the digestate is reported by the company to be uncommon. 
However, from the test experiments that exclusively used materials of sheep 
carcass (with a high fat content) it appears that, if hydrolysate is released on 
a large scale to a sewer in a warm condition without extensive dilution, it 
might solidify under certain circumstances. In the absence of data to the 
contrary it must thus be assumed that any 1 On 18 July 2002, following a 
recommendation in the initial opinion adopted on 16 May 2002. 
C:\WINNT\Profiles\bredagi.000\Desktop\WR2_0209_REVISED_OPINION_0211_FINAL.doc 
4 residual BSE/TSE material could co-precipitate and hence be accessible to 
sewer vermin. On the basis of the above evidence, the SSC considers that for the 
time being the direct discharge of the liquid residues to the sewer without 
further treatment is not appropriate. The SSC opinion of 24-25 June 1999 on 
â¬SFallen Stock⬠2provides some further guidance on the disposal or possible 
recycling for certain uses of the residues. As a summary this opinion implies: - 
If the risk of TSE infectivity can be excluded, recycling of residues from the 
treatment of animal waste by means of high temperature (150°C, 3 Hours) and 
high pressure alkaline hydrolysis could be acceptable for various purposes 
provided the other risks discussed in the SSC opinion of 24-25 June 1999 are 
excluded (e.g., presence of heavy metals, toxic substances, etc.). If analyses 
of the various types of residues (air, effluent, sludge) from the field 
equipment, carried out as part of a risk analysis prior to its installation, 
show that such is the case3, the use of the sludge as fertiliser, as soil 
additive or as feed is acceptable provided the standards4 for these uses are 
met. - If the presence of residual TSE infectivity cannot be excluded, residues 
should be disposed of as described in the SSC opinion of 24-25 June 1999. This 
opinion of 1999 did not consider anaerobic digestion as safe because the TSE 
clearance level by anaerobic digestion process is unknown. However, should 
reliable published data show that the levels of residual TSE infectivity in 
biogas are likely to be very low and would be eliminated during the burning of 
the gas, the recovery of bio-energy from anaerobically produced biogas could be 
acceptable if sufficient precautions (e.g., filters) are taken to exclude 
contamination of the gas. As the anaerobic process for the production of biogas 
may result in sludge containing infectious activity, burning, incineration or 
controlled landfill should be the methods of disposal for the residual sludge, 
filter contents, etc. 
Note: The formation of chlorophenols, dioxins and polychlorinated 
hydrocarbons in a combustion process can use any form of chlorine including 
chloride ions. Combustion of the effluent could thus give rise to dioxin 
formation. However, the SSC considers that this risk is minimized/excluded if 
the standards set for that purpose are respected, i.e., a rapid combustion at 
900°C or above followed by rapid chilling (quenching) and with appropriate 
filtration by adding charcoal to the emissions or other air pollution devices. 
4. Like for all waste disposal and recycling processes, a site-specific risk 
assessment of the process as a whole (from animal collection to final disposal 
of the residues) is required when considering the installation of the equipment 
in a particular situation, so as to minimise workers exposure, environmental 
impacts, etc. 2 Scientific Opinion on The risks of non conventional 
transmissible agents, conventional infectious agents or other hazards such as 
toxic substances entering the human food or animal feed chains via raw material 
from fallen stock and dead animals (including also: ruminants, pigs, poultry, 
fish, wild/exotic/zoo animals, fur animals, cats, laboratory animals and fish) 
or via condemned materials. Adopted By the Scientific Steering Committee at its 
meeting of 24-25 June 1999 and re-edited at its meeting of 22-23 July 1999. 3 
The dossier and the additional effluent analysis data submitted for this 
opinion, and taking into account the scientific report attached to its opinion 
of 24-25 June 1999, indicate that these other risks are probably minimal or 
excluded. But this would need to be confirmed for each installation and for each 
type and source of waste to be processed. 4 For example: Na or K concentrations 
and pH of the fertiliser. 
C:\WINNT\Profiles\bredagi.000\Desktop\WR2_0209_REVISED_OPINION_0211_FINAL.doc 
5 UPDATED REPORT ON : A TREATMENT OF ANIMAL WASTE BY MEANS OF HIGH 
TEMPERATURE (150°C, 3 HOURS) AND HIGH PRESSURE ALKALINE HYDROLYSIS 
C:\WINNT\Profiles\bredagi.000\Desktop\WR2_0209_REVISED_OPINION_0211_FINAL.doc 
6 I. 
MANDATE AND BACKGROUND According to the EU regulation in force on 1 January 
2001, animals, animal waste or products derived thereof (e.g., animal meat and 
bone meal), potentially contaminated with TSE agent by-products, shall be 
disposed of by incineration or co-incineration. Alternative ways may be allowed 
following a positive scientific opinion. The Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) 
has previously provided opinions on the use of rendering and incineration to 
reduce the risk from TSEs in animal tissues and products derived from these. It 
has also provided a framework for evaluating the risks involved in the storage, 
transport and handling of animal materials which may contain TSEs. The 
Commission has now received a submission from a commercial company requesting 
endorsement of a process for the safe disposal of animal waste which may be 
contaminated by TSEs. This process consists of a treatment of animal waste by 
means of high temperature (150°C, 3 Hours) and high pressure alkaline 
hydrolysis5. The Commission Services therefore submitted the following questions 
for opinion to the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC): 
1. Can the treatment of animal waste, as described by the dossier, be 
considered safe in relation to TSE risk? Can the liquid residues be considered 
safe in relation to TSE risk? 
2. Can the by-products resulting from this treatment (i.e. ash of the bones 
and teeth of vertebrates ) be considered safe in relation to TSE risk? 
A report was initially prepared for the SSC, who discussed it at its 
meeting of 16 May 2002. Subsequently, comments, substantial additional data 
including analytical results, a risk assessment as well as a number of proposals 
for the safe recycling or disposal of the residues were submitted to the SSC 
secretariat by the company at various dates between June and November 2002 (see 
list of references at the end of the report). At the request of the SSC, the 
secretariat also organised additional external expertise. All this information 
was analysed by the rapporteurs Prof.Dr.J.Bridges and Prof.Dr.Em.M.Vanbelle, the 
TSE/BSE ad hoc Group (at its meeting of 5 September 2002) and the SSC (at its 
meeting of 7-8 November 2002). The amended opinion and report follow hereafter. 
III BASIS FOR THE OPINION III.1. NATURE OF THE PROCESS 
A whole carcass or parts of a carcass is placed in a steel alloy container. 
A measured amount of alkali is added either in solid form or as a solution of 
NaOH or KOH, (starting concentration: 1 molar), the vessel is sealed and the 
contents heated at 150° for 3 to 6 hours and at a high pressure (approximately 
5 Bars). (In practice, the volume of alkali solution is and the duration of the 
process may be adjusted according to the load and composition of the material). 
In respect to basicity at ~ 1 N base 5 This process is currently applied in the 
USA on high volumes of several carcasses of deer and elk carcasses with CWD. 
concentration, almost no difference exists between NaOH and KOH. At the 
beginning of the process, entire animal carcasses can be used. Six parts of 
aqueous alkaline solution are used to 4 parts of tissue material. The physical 
energy generated by a constant pumping action continually circulates the liquid 
material present in the vessel thereby aiding the digestion process. Under these 
conditions the tissues are dissolved and bones and teeth softened. The solid 
residue is a small fraction of the original weight. The use of alkaline 
conditions minimises gaseous emissions of gases such as CO2, NO2, SO2. 
III.2. HUMAN HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 
In evaluating the process in respect of the questions posed by the 
Commission Services, three issues need to be addressed: 
i) Does the process destroy/inactivate TSEs (including BSE) and if so how 
effective is the destruction/inactivation? 
ii) Are there pathogens and/or chemicals whose potency is not reduced 
significantly or inactivated by the process? 
iii) Are any of the end products of the process of concern from a human 
health risk or an environmental risk viewpoint? 
In considering the evidence available to deal with these issues it is 
important to consider whether the data has been generated under very controlled 
laboratory conditions or under practical large scale working conditions. In this 
context it should be noted that it is often the case that data derived under 
laboratory conditions demonstrates higher efficiency in destruction/inactivation 
and lower levels of contamination than will occur in regular use at the 
industrial scale. 
snip... 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL 
Directorate C - Scientific Opinions C1 - Follow-up and dissemination of 
scientific opinions 
OPINION ON THE USE OF BURIAL FOR DEALING WITH ANIMAL CARCASSES AND OTHER 
ANIMAL MATERIALS THAT MIGHT CONTAIN BSE/TSE ADOPTED BY THE SCIENTIFIC STEERING 
COMMITTEE MEETING OF 16-17 JANUARY 2003 1 OPINION 
On 17 May 2002, the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) was invited by 
Commission Services to advice on the examples of conditions under which safe 
burial of potentially TSE-infected (animal) materials can be achieved. The 
details of the SSC's evaluation are provided in the attached report. The SSC 
concludes as follows: 
(1) The term "burial" includes a diversity of disposal conditions. Although 
burial is widely used for disposal of waste the degradation process essential 
for BSE/TSE infectivity reduction is very difficult to control. The extent to 
which such an infectivity reduction can occur as a consequence of burial is 
poorly characterised. It would appear to be a slow process in various 
circumstances. 
(2) A number of concerns have been identified including potential for 
groundwater contamination, dispersal/transmission by birds/animals/insects, 
accidental uncovering by man. 
(3) In the absence of any new data the SSC confirms its previous opinion 
that animal material which could possibly be contaminated with BSE/TSEs, burial 
poses a risk except under highly controlled conditions (e.g., controlled 
landfill). 
The SSC reiterates the consideration made in its opinion of 24-25 June 1999 
on "Fallen Stock"1. The limited capacity for destruction of animal wastes in 
certain countries or regions in the first place justifies the installation of 
the required facilities; it should not be used as a justification for unsafe 
disposal practices such as burial. 
However, the SSC recognises that for certain situations or places or for 
certain diseases (including animals killed and recycled or disposed of as a 
measure to control notifiable diseases), the available rendering or incinerator 
or disposal capacity within a region or country could be a limiting factor in 
the control of a disease. Thus if hundreds or even millions of animals need to 
be rendered after killing or if the transport of a material to a rendering or 
disposal plant proved to be impractical, an appropriate case by case risk 
assessment2 should be carried out before deciding upon the most appropriate way 
of disposal. In principle, the risk is expected to be the lower for small 
incinerators3 as compared to burial. As such decisions in practice may have to 
be taken at very short notice, risk management scenarios according to various 
possible risks should be prepared in advance to allow for a rapid decision when 
the need arises. 
1 Scientific Opinion on The risks of non conventional transmissible agents, 
conventional infectious agents or other hazards such as toxic substances 
entering the human food or animal feed chains via raw material from fallen stock 
and dead animals (including also: ruminants, pigs, poultry, fish, 
wild/exotic/zoo animals, fur animals, cats, laboratory animals and fish) or via 
condemned materials. Adopted By the Scientific Steering Committee at its meeting 
of 24-25 June 1999. (and re-edited at its meeting of 22-23 July 1999). 
2 See also the relevant sections and footnotes on risk assessment in the 
report accompanying the SSC opinion of 24-25 June 1999. 3 See SSC opinion of 
16-17 January 2003 on the use of small incinerators for BSE risk reduction. 2 
THE USE OF BURIAL FOR DEALING WITH CARCASSES AND OTHER MATERIALS THAT MIGHT 
CONTAIN BSE/TSE REPORT 
1. MANDATE On 17 May 2002, the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) was 
invited by Commission Services to advice on the examples of conditions under 
which safe burial of potentially TSE-infected animal materials can be achieved. 
The SSC appointed Prof.J.Bridges as rapporteur. His report was discussed and 
amended by the TSE/BSE ad hoc Group at its meeting of 9 January 2003 and by the 
SSC at its meeting of 16-17 January 2003. 
2. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS "Burial" covers a range of disposal situations 
ranging from the practice of burying animals on farms and other premises in a 
relatively shallow trench (with or without treatment such as lining) to deep 
disposal to a lined and professionally managed landfill site (SSC 2001). Buried 
organic material is normally decomposed by microbial and chemical processes. 
However this is not a process amenable to control measures. As noted by the SSC 
"Opinion on Fallen Stock" (SSC 25th June 1999) there is little reliable 
information on the extent and rate of infectivity reduction of BSE/TSEs 
following burial. An old paper by Brown and Gajdusek 1991 assumed a reduction of 
98% over 3 years. However it is noted that the rate of degradation of materials 
following burial can vary very considerably between sites. This is not 
surprising because the degradation process is strongly influenced by factors 
such as water content of the site, temperature inside the site, nature of 
adsorptive "material" present etc. The previous SSC opinion noted that BSE/TSEs 
appear to be resistant to degradation when stored at room temperature over 
several years. It also raised concerns that mites could serve as a vector and/or 
reservoir for the infected scrapie material. Burial sites may have a thriving 
animal population. Uncovering of risk material that is not deeply buried is 
therefore possible. The SSC in its opinion of 28th-29th June 2001 set out a 
framework for assessing the risk from different waste disposal processes. These 
criteria may be applied to burial as follows: 
(1) Characterisation of the risk materials involved. Unlike many other 
waste disposal options there are no technical or economic factors that would 
limit the nature of the material that can be disposed of by burial. Moreover in 
many cases the location of burial sites is uncertain. The potential for 
transmission of BSE/TSEs for SRM that is buried near the surface is also poorly 
characterised.3 
(2) Risk reduction. The extent to which the infectivity is reduced is 
likely to vary substantially according to the nature of the site depth of burial 
whether pre-treatment by burning or through the addition of lime is used etc. 
There appears to be no scientific basis at present for the prediction of the 
rate of loss of infectivity. In the absence of such data, as a worst case, it 
has to be assumed that over a three-five year period the loss of infectivity may 
be slight. In principle on a well-managed fully contained landfill the risks 
from infective material can approach zero. However this requires rigorous 
management over many years. This is difficult to guarantee. 
(3) Degree to Which the Risks can be Contained The principal concerns are: 
* Prevention of access to the SRM by animals that could result in the 
transmission (directly or indirectly) of the BSE/TSE. 
* Penetration of prions into the leachate/groundwater. It is noted that on 
some landfill sites leachate is sprayed into the air to facilitate oxidation of 
some organic components. Such a practice could in principle lead to dispersal of 
BSE/TSEs. It is also noted that it is not uncommon for landfill sites to be 
re-engineered to increase their stability, gas and leachate flow and/or total 
capacity. If this re-engineering involved an area where previous burial of 
BSE/TSE contaminated material had taken place and additional risk could accrue. 
The possibility of contaminated material being dug up in shallow and unmarked 
burial sites on farms etc constitutes a considerably greater risk. 
3. FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS Research is needed on specific aspects of the 
behaviour of prion like molecules in controlled landfills i.e.: 
* Potential for adsorption to other material present in the waste that 
might limit their mobility. 
* Principal factors influencing rates of degradation. 
* Effectiveness of encasement in cement in controlling/reducing the risk. 
4. CONCLUSION In the absence of new evidence the opinion of the SSC 
"Opinion on Fallen Stock" (SSC 25th June 1999) must be endorsed strongly that 
land burial of all animals and material derived from them for which there is a 
possibility that they could incorporate BSE/TSEs poses a significant risk. 
Only in exceptional circumstances where there could be a considerable delay 
in implementing a safe means of disposal should burial of such materials be 
considered. Guidelines should be made available to aid on burial site selection. 
C:\WINNT\Profiles\bredagi.000\Desktop\Burning_OPINION_0301_OPINION_FINAL.doc 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL 
Directorate C - Scientific Opinions C1 - Follow-up and dissemination of 
scientific opinions 
OPINION ON OPEN BURNING OF POTENTIALLY TSE-INFECTED ANIMAL MATERIALS 
ADOPTED BY THE SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE AT ITS MEETING OF 16-17 JANUARY 
2003 
2 OPINION 
On 17 May 2002, the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) was invited by 
Commission Services to advice on the examples of conditions under which safe 
burning of potentially TSE-infected (animal) materials can be achieved. The 
details of the SSC's evaluation are provided in the attached report. The SSC 
concludes as follows: 
(1) "Burning" covers a wide variety of combustion conditions. This opinion 
is concerned with the process of open burning e.g. bonfires. 
(2) There are serious concerns regarding the use of open burning for the 
destruction of pathogen contaminated animal waste, particularly for waste which 
may be contaminated with relatively heat stable pathogens. Issues include: the 
potentially very high variability of the pathogen inactivation, the nature of 
the gaseous and particulate emissions, and the risks from the residual ash. 
(3) The SSC recommends that open burning is only considered for pathogen 
destruction under exceptional circumstances following a specific risk 
assessment. 
In the case of animal waste possibly contaminated with BSE/TSE in view of 
the uncertainty of the risk open burning should be considered a risk. 
Suitable monitoring methods for TSE contamination of both air and ash are 
needed. 
Protocols for safe burning in emergency situations need to be established. 
The SSC reiterates the consideration made in its opinion of 24-25 June 1999 
on "Fallen Stock"1. 
The limited capacity for destruction of animal wastes in certain countries 
or regions in the first place justifies the installation of the required 
facilities; it should not be used as a justification for unsafe disposal 
practices such as burial. 
However, the SSC recognises that for certain situations or places or for 
certain diseases (including animals killed and recycled or disposed of as a 
measure to control notifiable diseases), the available rendering or incinerator 
or disposal capacity within a region or country could be a limiting factor in 
the control of a disease. 
Thus if hundreds or even millions of animals need to be rendered after 
killing or if the transport of a material to a rendering or disposal plant 
proved to be impractical, an appropriate case by case risk assessment2 should be 
carried out before deciding upon the most appropriate way of disposal. 
In principle, the risk is expected to be the lower for small incinerators3 
as compared to open burning. As such decisions in practice may have to be taken 
at very short notice, risk management scenarios according to various possible 
risks should be prepared in advance to allow for a rapid decision when the need 
arises. 
1 Scientific Opinion on The risks of non conventional transmissible agents, 
conventional infectious agents or other hazards such as toxic substances 
entering the human food or animal feed chains via raw material from fallen stock 
and dead animals (including also: ruminants, pigs, poultry, fish, 
wild/exotic/zoo animals, fur animals, cats, laboratory animals and fish) or via 
condemned materials. Adopted By the Scientific Steering Committee at its meeting 
of 24-25 June 1999. (and re-edited at its meeting of 22-23 July 1999). 
2 See also the relevant sections and footnotes on risk assessment in the 
report accompanying the SSC opinion of 24-25 June 1999. 3 See SSC opinion of 
16-17 January 2003 on the use of small incinerators for BSE risk reduction. 
3 OPEN BURNING OF POTENTIALLY TSE-INFECTED ANIMAL MATERIALS REPORT 1. 
MANDATE On 17 May 2002, the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) was invited by 
Commission Services to advice on the examples of conditions under which safe 
burning of potentially TSE-infected animal materials can be achieved. The SSC 
appointed Prof.J.Bridges as rapporteur. His report was discussed and amended by 
the TSE/BSE ad hoc Group at its meeting of 9 January 2003 and by the SSC at its 
meeting of 16-17 January 2003. 2. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Burning is a combustion 
process to which a range of control measures may be applied to contain emissions 
and to ensure the completeness of the degradation process for organic matter. 
Depending on the source (waste) material the burning process may or may not 
require addition of other energy sources. Incineration/pyrolysis are contained 
combustion processes are contained combustion processes and therefore have the 
potential for a high level of control. (However see opinion on small 
incinerators). At the other end of the control spectrum is open burning; such as 
bonfires. Typically combustion of animal waste requires the addition of a high 
calorific fuel in order to initiate (and for some materials to sustain) the 
process. It is recognised that open burning of animal waste is a very cheap and 
convenient method of disposal. However uncontained burning has a number of 
problems in terms of the potential risks involved: 
(1) In the open burning situation a range of temperatures will be 
encountered. It is difficult therefore to ensure complete combustion of the 
animal waste. If the waste is contaminated with pathogens there will remain 
considerable uncertainty as to the degree of their inactivation. 
(2) Gaseous and particulate emissions to the atmosphere will occur and 
consequently worker and public exposure is likely. There is very little data to 
indicate whether or not some pathogens could be dispersed to air as a 
consequence of open burning. 
(3) The supporting/secondary fuel may be a source of contamination itself. 
For example in the recent foot and mouth disease outbreak in the UK timbers were 
used at some sites that were heavily contaminated with pentachlorophenol. 
(4) The residual ash must be considered to be a risk source. Its safe 
disposal needs to be assured (see opinion on small incinerators) to prevent 
human and animal contact and protect from groundwater contamination. While 
careful selection of burning sites can reduce the risks open burning should only 
be considered in emergency situations. For each such emergency situation a 
specific risk assessment should be conducted which must include the risk 4 from 
the pathogen of immediate concern but also other pathogens that might be 
present. 
3. RISK ASSESSMENT OF OPEN BURNING FOR BSE The SSC, at its meeting of 
28th-29th June 2001, recommended "a framework for the assessment of the risk 
from different options for the safe disposal or use of meat and bone meal (MBM) 
and other products which might be contaminated with TSEs and other materials. 
Applying the framework to the practice of open burning, the following 
conclusions can be drawn: 
3.1. Nature of the materials handled Potentially a wide variety of 
materials can be used provided suitable secondary fuel is available. The burning 
process is very simple in principle and difficult in practice to regulate 
effectively. 
3.2. Risk reduction due to open burning There is no reliable data to 
indicate the extent of risk reduction that could be achieved by open burning. It 
is reasonable however to assume that overall it will be rather less effective in 
reducing the infectivity of BSE/TSE than wellconducted incineration. Moreover 
the reproducibility of the risk reduction is likely to be very variable even at 
a single location. 
3.3. Airborne emissions and residue ash The composition of airborne 
emissions and residue ash is rarely monitored. From a risk assessment viewpoint 
particular attention needs to be given to the potential for the airborne 
dispersal of relatively heat stable pathogens as a consequence of open burning. 
In the absence of reliable data both airborne emissions and residual ash must be 
considered to constitute a significant risk if animal waste that might be 
contaminated with TSEs is being burnt. 
4. FURTHER INVESTIGATION Research is needed particularly on: 
* The potential for airborne dispersal of relatively heat stable pathogens. 
* Methodologies to improve the efficacy of the combustion process to ensure 
the inactivation of pathogen contaminated animal waste. 
5. CONCLUSION Open burning potentially represents a significant risk where 
the animal waste has the possibility of being contaminated with BSEs/TSEs. 
Suitable monitoring methods for TSE contamination of both air and ash are 
needed. Protocols for safe burning in emergency situations need to be 
established. 
C:\WINNT\Profiles\bredagi.000\Desktop\Incinerator_OPINION_0301_FINAL.doc 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL 
Directorate C - Scientific Opinions C1 - Follow-up and dissemination of 
scientific opinions OPINION ON THE USE OF SMALL INCINERATORS FOR BSE RISK 
REDUCTION SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING OF 16-17 JANUARY 2003 2 OPINION 
On 17 May 2002, the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) was invited by 
Commission Services to 
(i) evaluate a risk assessment1 prepared for the UK's Spongiform 
Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC), on the potential risk arising from the 
use of small incinerators to dispose of specified risk materials and 
(ii) to advise on the safety with regard to TSE risks of the use of such 
small incinerators. 
The details of the SSC's evaluation are provided in the attached report. 
The SSC concludes as follows: 
(i) The SSC, at its meeting of 28th -29th June 2001, recommended "a 
framework for the assessment of the risk from different options for the safe 
disposal or use of meat and bone meal (MBM) and other products which might be 
contaminated with TSEs and other materials." This framework comprised five 
components: 
(1) Identification and characterisation of the risk materials involved, the 
possible means for their transmission and potential at risk groups. 
(2) The risk reduction achieved by the particular process. 
(3) The degree to which the risks can be contained under both normal and 
emergency operating conditions. This inevitably includes consideration of the 
effectiveness of control measures. 
(4) Identification of interdependent processes for example transport, 
storage, loading of any TSE related risk materials. 
(5) The intended end-use of the products for example disposal, recycling 
etc. 
The risk assessment prepared for SEAC focuses on the risks involved steps 1 
and 2 in respect of BSE/TSEs only and is based on a visit to 10 incinerators out 
of a total of 263 in the UK of which 60% had after burners. The risk assessment 
is also using a number of assumptions and data that may be valid for certain 
incinerator types under certain conditions, but are not necessarily applicable 
either for all types of materials to be disposed of, or to the whole range of 
types of small incinerators in use the EU and the UK. 
(ii) Small incinerators are widely used to meet the needs of local 
communities. These incinerators vary greatly in their design, nature of use and 
performance characteristics and the quality of their management. As a 
consequence of this variability there are many uncertainties in identifying 
risks posed by small incinerators that are used to treat SRM materials and each 
type should eventually receive its own assessment. Also, general operating and 
control criteria should be established for 1 DNV Consulting (Det Norske 
Veritas), 2001. Risk assessment of SRM incinerators. Prepared for the UK 
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Revision 2 of the Draft report, 
February 2001. 24 pages. 3 Potential risk sources arising from the incineration 
process include: gaseous emissions and residual ash. Research is currently 
ongoing mimicking incineration of TSE-infected brain tissue to assess the 
infectivity clearance level under various scenarios2. However, there are no 
final reported measurements that enable the risk to be assessed from either the 
emissions or the ash from small incinerators. It has been argued that the 
protein content of the ash is a reasonable surrogate measure of the degree of 
risk deduction caused by the incineration process. This assumption is 
questionable in view of the resistance to heat of prions as compared to other 
proteins. Protein measurements in ash are however probably a useful general 
measure of the overall efficiency and reproducibility of the incineration 
process. Results in the aforementioned report1 indicate a large degree of 
variability in performance among the small incinerators in the UK that have been 
evaluated. It is anticipated that small incinerators, used by other Member 
States will also show a considerable variation in performance. In evaluating the 
risk of small incinerators, consideration should be given to the risk of 
potential contamination of the ash and of the gaseous emissions. In the absence 
of generally accepted and enforced performance standards for small incinerators 
handling SRMs each such facility therefore needs to be the subject of a specific 
risk assessment. The SSC considers that the standards set up by the new Waste 
Incinerator Directive (2000/76/EC) and in its opinion of June 1999 on waste 
disposal should serve as guidance. In the absence of reliable data on the 
possible residual infectivity of the ash, it should be disposed of, i.e., in 
controlled landfills as described in the SSC opinion of June 1999 on safe 
disposal of waste. The SSC finally wishes to emphasise the need for suitable 
monitoring methods in order that risks can be assessed readily for individual 
types of small incinerators. 2 P.Brown, pers.comm., December 2002. Publication 
in progress.4 
THE USE OF SMALL INCINERATORS FOR BSE RISK REDUCTION REPORT 
1. MANDATE 
On 17 May 2002, the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) was invited by 
Commission Services to 
(i) evaluate a risk assessment3 prepared for the UK's Spongiform 
Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC), on the potential risk arising from the 
use of small incinerators to dispose of specified risk materials and 
(ii) to advise on the safety with regard to TSE risks of the use of such 
small incinerators. 
The SSC appointed Prof. J. Bridges as rapporteur. His report was discussed 
and amended by the TSE/BSE ad hoc Group at its meeting of 9 January 2003 and by 
the SSC at its meeting of 16-17 January 2003. 
2. CURRENT LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK 
Until 2000, small incinerators were exempt from the emission limits set by 
the EC for MSW and hazardous waste incinerators with throughputs greater than 50 
kg/hour. An "incineration plant" is defined by the new Incineration of Waste 
Directive (2000/76/EC) as "any stationary or mobile technical equipment 
dedicated to the thermal treatment of waste with or without recovery of the 
combustion heat generated". This definition would appear to exclude open burning 
of waste. The new Directive, which must be transposed into the legislation of 
each Member State by December 2002, replaces a range of previous directives on 
incineration. It applies to all new incinerator installations from December 28th 
2002 and all existing installations from December 28th 2005. The principal aim 
of the Directive is to prevent and/or limit negative environmental effects due 
to emissions into air, soil, surface and ground water and the resulting risks to 
human health from the incineration and co-incineration of waste. It covers many 
aspects from a requirement for afterburners to airborne emission limits and 
criteria for the composition of residual ash. Previous EC legislation has 
exempted small incinerators (i.e. those operating at less than 50 kg per hour). 
The Waste Incinerator Directive (WID) (2000) allows such small incinerators to 
be exempt from licensing at the national level however they will still be 
subjected to the same onerous requirements of the WID as larger incinerators. In 
the UK it is proposed that in future incinerators dealing with non-hazardous 
waste but with a throughput of less than 1 tonne per hour will be regulated by 
local authorities whereas those with a larger throughput will be regulated by 
the national authority. It is possible that different regulatory mechanisms may 
result in differences in the rigour with which the new standards are enforced. 
The position on the disposal of animal waste is complicated. Animal carcass 
incineration use not covered by the WID and therefore the existing regulatory 
framework (90/66/EEC which covers animal and public health requirements to 
ensure destruction of pathogens) will continue to be applied. A new Animal 
By-Products Regulation 3 DNV Consulting (Det Norske Veritas), 2001. Risk 
assessment of SRM incinerators. Prepared for the UK Ministry of Agriculture, 
Fisheries and Food. Revision 2 of the Draft report, February 2001. 24 pages. 5 
(ABPR) will apply in Member States during the first part of 2003. The 
relationship to WID has been included in the ABPR. It is important that it does 
not result in less strict standards being applied for animal carcass 
incineration. In contrast to whole carcasses WID will apply to the burning of 
meat and bone meal, tallow or other material (even if they burn animal carcasses 
too). Additional specific directives will continue to apply to waste that could 
be contaminated with BSE/TSEs. (96/449/EC) 
3. CURRENT USE OF SMALL INCINERATORS TO DISPOSE OF ANIMAL WASTE 
Small incinerators are used for a variety of purposes and in a range of 
locations among Member States. Many are located alongside small abattoirs, 
knackers, hunt kennels, or laboratories. Thus they meet the needs of relatively 
small communities. Across Member States these small incinerators include a 
variety of designs and operating conditions (as indicated above in principle 
they will probably be required to meet specific standards for emissions and for 
the composition of the residual ash by December 28th 2005). In the UK there are 
indications (see DNV Report 2001) that a considerable quantity of SRM which 
would have previously been sent for rendering is now being incinerated directly 
in small incinerators. Thus evaluation of the risks from such incinerators is of 
increasing importance. 
4. RISK ASSESSMENT FOR SMALL INCINERATORS 
The SSC, at its meeting of 28th -29th June 2001, recommended "a framework 
for the assessment of the risk from different options for the safe disposal or 
use of meat and bone meal (MBM) and other products which might be contaminated 
with TSEs and other materials. This framework comprised five components: (1) 
Identification and characterisation of the risk materials involved, the possible 
means for their transmission and potential at risk groups. (2) The risk 
reduction achieved by the particular process. (3) The degree to which the risks 
can be contained under both normal and emergency operating conditions. This 
inevitably includes consideration of the effectiveness of control measures. (4) 
Identification of interdependent processes for example transport, storage, 
loading of any TSE related risk materials. 
(5) The intended end-use of the products for example disposal, recycling 
etc. 
Recently a report has been prepared by DNV consulting (2001) for the UK 
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (now known as DEFRA) that assesses 
the risks from small incinerators in the UK that receive SRMs. This report 
focuses on the risks involved steps 1 and 2 in respect of BSE/TSEs only. 10 
incinerators out of a total of 263 in the UK were visited of which 60% had after 
burners. 
(1) Nature of the materials handled. 
The DNV report 2001 starts with the assumption that "the materials 
incinerated at small abattoirs will be mainly SRM and bones from animals that 
are fit for human consumption. It may also include material from animals failed 
by meat inspectors. The likelihood of there being an animal 6 with significant 
BSE infectivity is very small and certainly much less than for the fallen stock 
handled by hunt kennels and knackers4. For this reason the study has 
concentrated on the latter type of operation". The Report notes that "the 
material handled by both knacker and hunt kennels is highly variable and 
difficult to characterise". In terms of input the key factors to consider are: 
* The number of adult bovines processed and the proportion of these 
carcasses that are likely to be infected. 
* The extent of infectivity (in terms of human oral Infectious Units) that 
may occur (average and worst case). 
In the DNV (2001) risk assessment only the BSE risk from processing bovine 
SRMs was considered. For quantitative risk assessment purposes the mean value of 
the oral ID50 for cattle was taken as 0.1 gram. A range of values was taken to 
cover uncertainty in the inter-species barrier from 104 to 1 (as recommended by 
the SSC 2000). In order to assess the likelihood that a particular carcass could 
be infected, UK and Swiss monitoring data was used. An incidence rate based on 
Prionics test findings of between 0.013 and 0.0025 was calculated. The DNV 
Report notes that prevalence rates are progressively reducing from these 1998/99 
figures. Finally the report concludes that the SRM from an infected bovine could 
contribute 700 Infectious Units. 
(2) Risk reduction due to incineration 
Once a carcass/SRM has been introduced into a small incinerator there are 
two main sources for the potential release of BSE infectivity 
(a) Airborne emissions 
(b) Residual ash There is no direct data on the TSE levels that may occur 
in those two media. 
The SSC however is aware of currently ongoing heat studies mimicking 
various incineration conditions and scenarios and aiming at assessing the TSE 
clearance efficacy of these processes (P.Brown, pers.comm., 16.01.03) on both 
the residual ash and the trapped emission gases. In the absence of final data 
from such experiments for individual (small) incinerator types, the DNV Report 
(2001) assumes that measurement of the total protein content of ash is a 
relevant surrogate for BSE/TSE material. Protein content is a useful indicator 
of the general performance of an incinerator. However it is much more 
problematic whether it is also a valid marker for possible BSE/TSE contamination 
as it known that BSE/TSE are relatively heat resistant as compared to other 
proteins. Failure to detect certain amino acids present in prions is encouraging 
but the sensitivity limits for amino acids are relatively poor for reassurance 
purposes. Equally important, the data provided in the DNV report shows moderate 
split sample 4 It may be mentioned that this assumption may be valid for the UK 
as a whole, but note necessarily for all other Member States. 7 variation but 
often substantial inter sampling variation (up to 600 fold). This indicates a 
wide span of performance standards among the small SRM incinerators in the UK 
and most likely across the whole of the EU. Typically performance was 
substantially poorer than is the case for larger incinerators. Unburned material 
is not uncommonly noted in the ash from small incinerators. If the reduction in 
protein content due to incineration is accepted as a valid indicator, typical 
infectivity reduction can be calculated to be of the order of 1600 (DNV Report 
2001). Incinerators are known to emit particulate matter from their stacks. 
Larger incinerators have much higher stacks to facilitate disposal of emissions, 
they also have gas cleaning equipment to minimise the emission of particulate 
matter, metals and acidic gases. Small incinerators generally do not have any 
gas cleaning equipment. It can be speculated (as in the DNV Report 2001) that 
unburned materials (and therefore potentially infections is much less likely to 
be emitted in the form of particulate matter than burnt material. Nonetheless 
there is no data to support this assumption. 
(3) Other considerations. 
(a) Disposal of ash. In the case of small incinerators ash is often 
dispersed of locally to a trench, which is typically neither lined, nor is the 
residue buried deeply. In contrast for larger incinerators in the UK ash is 
normally disposed of to a contained landfill. The risk from disposal to a trench 
is difficult to gauge in the absence of reliable data on the possible 
infectivity of the ash. 
(b) Management factors. Almost inevitably the level of expertise available 
for the management of small incinerators is highly variable because few such 
facilities can afford to employ specialists in incineration. This is also likely 
to be often the case for the inspectors as well. While such considerations 
cannot formally be taken into account in a risk assessment, they are not the 
less relevant factors that need to be considered in assessing the risk from a 
particular plant. 
(c) Benchmarking. The DNV 2001 risk assessment relies greatly on the 
assumption that BSE/TSE contaminated material is very unlikely to be processed. 
The Report seeks to compare the risks from a small incinerator with that from 
large SRM incinerators which the author had assessed previously (DNV, 1997). It 
identifies that the risk is four-five -fold less from a typical small 
incinerator because the scale of activities is much lower. However it is noted 
that the amount of experimental data to back this conclusion is extremely 
limited and does not take into account either risks from the residual ash or any 
consequences of a substantially lower stack height limiting the dilution of the 
emitted particulate and gaseous matter. 8 
5. FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS 
In view of the uncertainty regarding the risks due to BSE/TSE contamination 
of the fly and bottom ash and airborne emissions it is recommended that further 
research is conducted to identify the residual risks (along with attendant 
uncertainties) from the burial of ash (without further treatment,) in 
uncontained sites. It is essential that suitable monitoring methods are 
developed. 
6. LITERATURE EC (European Commission), 1999. 
Opinion on The risks of non conventional transmissible agents, conventional 
infectious agents or other hazards such as toxic substances entering the human 
food or animal feed chains via raw material from fallen stock and dead animals 
(including also: ruminants, pigs, poultry, fish, wild/exotic/zoo animals, fur 
animals, cats, laboratory animals and fish) or via condemned materials. Adopted 
By the Scientific Steering Committee at its meeting of 24-25 June 1999 and 
re-edited at its meeting of 22-23 July 1999. DNV Consulting (Det Norske 
Veritas), 1997. Risks from disposing of BSE infected cattle in animal carcass 
incinerators. Report prepared for the UK Environment Agency. DNV Consulting (Det 
Norske Veritas), 2001. Risk assessment of SRM incinerators. Prepared for the UK 
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Revision 2 of the Draft report, 
February 2001. 24 pages. SEAC (Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee, 
UK), 2001. Public summary of the SEAC meeting of 25 April 2001. 
Revised TSE Guidance Part 4 Part 4   Infection control of CJD and related 
disorders in the healthcare setting Summary of revised advice published: 2 June 
2003
snip...
Use of laser for tonsillectomy : smoke plumes 4.45 Some ENT surgeons may 
use laser techniques as an alternative to  conventional  surgery for 
tonsillectomy. There is no evidence of the transmission of TSEs by the 
respiratory route. Any risk to surgeons from smoke plumes is thought to be very 
low, but there are no data on vCJD. General guidance on the safe use of lasers, 
Guidance on the safe use of lasers in medical and dental practice, Medical 
Devices Agency (MDA) (1995) is available from MDA Business Services on tel: 0207 
972 8360.
snip...
some other data on incineration and plume, filters, etc;
what about those healthy looking deer/elk everyone wants to bury? 
> The DOW Web site advises hunters "not to shoot, handle or consume any 
animal
> that appears sick" and to avoid consuming the "brain, spinal cord, 
eyes, spleen, tonsils
> and lymph nodes of harvested animals." 
THOSE HEALTHY LOOKING DEER/ELK ''SUB-CLINICAL'' INFECTION 
DEAD DEER WALKING 
Issued: Monday, 28 August 2000 NEW EVIDENCE OF SUB-CLINICAL PRION 
INFECTION: IMPORTANT RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT TO CJD AND BSE
A team of researchers led by Professor John Collinge at the Medical 
Research Council Prion Unit1 report today in the Proceedings of the National 
Academy of Sciences, on new evidence for the existence of a 'sub-clinical' form 
of BSE in mice which was unknown until now.
The scientists took a closer look at what is known as the 'species barrier' 
- the main protective factor which limits the ability of prions2 to jump from 
one species to infect another. They found the mice had a 'sub-clinical' form of 
disease where they carried high levels of infectivity but did not develop the 
clinical disease during their normal lifespan. The idea that individuals can 
carry a disease and show no clinical symptoms is not new. It is commonly seen in 
conventional infectious diseases.
Researchers tried to infect laboratory mice with hamster prions3 called 
Sc237 and found that the mice showed no apparent signs of disease. However, on 
closer inspection they found that the mice had high levels of mouse prions in 
their brains. This was surprising because it has always been assumed that 
hamster prions could not cause the disease in mice, even when injected directly 
into the brain.
In addition the researchers showed that this new sub-clinical infection 
could be easily passed on when injected into healthy mice and hamsters.
The height of the species barrier varies widely between different 
combinations of animals and also varies with the type or strain of prions. While 
some barriers are quite small (for instance BSE easily infects mice), other 
combinations of strain and species show a seemingly impenetrable barrier. 
Traditionally, the particular barrier studied here was assumed to be 
robust.
Professor John Collinge said: "These results have a number of important 
implications. They suggest that we should re-think how we measure species 
barriers in the laboratory, and that we should not assume that just because one 
species appears resistant to a strain of prions they have been exposed to, that 
they do not silently carry the infection. This research raises the possibility, 
which has been mentioned before, that apparently healthy cattle could harbour, 
but never show signs of, BSE.
"This is a timely and unexpected result, increasing what we know about 
prion disease. These new findings have important implications for those 
researching prion disease, those responsible for preventing infected material 
getting into the food chain and for those considering how best to safeguard 
health and reduce the risk that theoretically, prion disease could be contracted 
through medical and surgical procedures."
ISSUED FRIDAY 25 AUGUST UNDER EMBARGO. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE EMBARGO IS SET 
BY THE JOURNAL. 
Aguzzi warns of CWD danger
The TSE family of diseases also includes chronic wasting disease (CWD) in 
deer, a condition that has spread in the US in recent years (Nature 416, 569; 
2002). Speaking at the Days of Molecular Medicine conference in La Jolla in 
March, prion expert Adriano Aguzzi issued a strong warning against 
underestimating this form of TSE.
"For more than a decade, the US has by-and-large considered mad cows to be 
an exquisitely European problem. The perceived need to protect US citizens from 
this alien threat has even prompted the deferral of blood donors from Europe," 
he said. "Yet the threat-from-within posed by CWD needs careful consideration, 
since the evidence that CWD is less dangerous to humans than BSE is 
less-than-complete. Aguzzi went on to point out that CWD is arguably the most 
mysterious of all prion diseases.
"Its horizontal spread among the wild population is exceedingly efficient, 
and appears to have reached a prevalence unprecedented even by BSE in the UK at 
its peak. The pathogenesis of CWD, therefore, deserves a vigorous research 
effort. Europeans also need to think about this problem, and it would be timely 
and appropriate to increase CWD surveillance in Europe too." Aguzzi has secured 
funding from the National Institutes of Health to investigate CWD, and the 
effort will be lead by Christina Sigurdson in his department at the University 
of Zurich. KAREN BIRMINGHAM, LONDON
This quote from Dr. Gambetti is especially significant since he is the 
rather cautious TSE researcher under contract with the Centers for Disease 
Control to examine the brains of individuals who have died of CJD. 
-----------------
Pierluigi Gambetti, director of the National Prion Disease Pathology 
Surveillance Center at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, said all 
deer should be tested for chronic wasting disease before any processing is 
done.
"There is no way around it," he said. "Nobody should touch that meat unless 
it has been tested." 
--------------------------------------
Greetings again,
extreme caution should be used, plume should be taken very seriously, with 
the best filters available being used, but by far, incineration is the only way 
to go, with present knowledge of agent...
do not bury this material in any land fill! 
TSS 
########### http://mailhost.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/warc/bse-l.html 
############ 
END...NOV...2013
LAYPERSON
MOM DOD 12/14/97 HEIDENHAIN VARIANT OF CREUTZFELDT JAKOB DISEASE a rare 
sub-type of the infamous sporadic CJDs, just one of many strains of the sporadic 
CJDs. ...UNKNOWN ROUTE AND SOURCE. ...TSS
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
Your comment was submitted successfully!. View all documents and comments 
in this Docket Success! You will now be commenting directly on: 
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) Notice: 
Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Animal Carcass 
Management
For related information, Open Docket Folder Docket folder icon
.. 3.Your Receipt.3 Your Receipt 2 Your Preview 1 Your Information 
...publicly viewable Information entered will be viewable on Regulations.gov 
Agency Posting Guidelines: More infoView Commenter's Checklist (PDF) Alternate 
Ways to Comment. .Comment(Required) publicly viewable Greetings APHIS et al, and 
thank you kindly for allowing me to comment on Environmental Impact Statements; 
Availability, etc.: Animal Carcass Management [Docket No. APHIS-2013-0044]. 
SNIP...
see my full text submission with source references in attachment...TSS
Uploaded 
File(s)(Optional)
- [Docket No. APHIS-2013-0044] COMMENT SUBMISSION TERRY S. SINGELTARY SR..pdf: success
end...November 2013...TSS

 
Friday, October 09, 2015
ReplyDeleteTexas TWA Chronic Wasting Disease TSE Prion Webinars and Meeting October 2015
http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2015/10/texas-twa-chronic-wasting-disease-tse.html