Monday, January 17, 2011

MAD COW Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE January 13, 2011

January 2011

Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE January 13, 2011

To help prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalophathy (BSE) through feed in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) implemented a final rule that prohibits the use of most mammalian protein in feeds for ruminant animals. This rule, Title 21 Part 589.2000 of the Code of Federal Regulations, here called the Ruminant Feed Ban, became effective on August 4, 1997.

A second rule, Title 21 Part 589.2001 of the Code of Federal Regulations, here called the Enhanced Feed Ban, became effective on April 27, 2009. This rule prohibits the use of certain cattle-derived materials in all animal feed. The BSE inspection report form has been revised and is being used for determining compliance with both the ruminant feed ban and the enhanced feed ban. The inspection results summarized below reflect the compliance status for both rules.

The following is an update on FDA enforcement activities regarding the ruminant feed ban. FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) has summarized results of those inspections that have been entered into FDA's inspection database as of January 8, 2011. As of January 8, 2011, FDA had received over 83,000 inspection reports since 1997. Approximately 73% of these inspections have been conducted by State feed control officials, with the remainder conducted by FDA officials.

Inspections conducted by FDA or State investigators are classified to reflect the compliance status at the time of the inspection based upon the objectionable conditions documented. These inspection conclusions are reported as Official Action Indicated (OAI), Voluntary Action Indicated (VAI), or No Action Indicated (NAI).

An OAI inspection classification occurs when significant objectionable conditions or practices were found and regulatory sanctions are warranted in order to address the establishment's lack of compliance with the regulation. An example of an OAI inspection classification would be findings of manufacturing procedures insufficient to ensure that ruminant feed is not contaminated with prohibited material. Inspections classified with OAI violations will be promptly re-inspected following the regulatory sanctions to determine whether adequate corrective actions have been implemented.

A VAI inspection classification occurs when objectionable conditions or practices were found that do not meet the threshold of regulatory significance, but do warrant advisory actions to inform the establishment of findings that should be voluntarily corrected. Inspections classified with VAI violations are more technical violations of the Ruminant Feed Ban. These include provisions such as minor recordkeeping lapses and conditions involving non-ruminant feeds.

An NAI inspection classification occurs when no objectionable conditions or practices were found during the inspection or the significance of the documented objectionable conditions found does not justify further actions. A firm’s compliance status and whether the firm handles prohibited material is based on its most recent inspection.

The results to date are reported here both by “segment of industry” and “in total”. NOTE – A single firm can operate as more than one firm type. As a result, the categories of the different industry segments are not mutually exclusive.

RENDERERS These firms are the first to handle and process (i.e., render) animal proteins and to send these processed materials to feed mills and/or protein blenders for use as a feed ingredient.

Number of active firms inspected – 276 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 149 (54% of those active firms inspected) Of the 149 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 12 firms (8.1%) were classified as VAI LICENSED FEED MILLS FDA licenses these feed mills to produce medicated feed products. The license is required to manufacture and distribute feed using certain potent drug products, usually those requiring some pre-slaughter withdrawal time. This licensing has nothing to do with handling prohibited materials under the feed ban regulation. A medicated feed license from FDA is not required to handle materials prohibited under the Ruminant Feed Ban.

Number of active firms inspected – 1047 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 472 (45% of those active firms inspected) Of the 472 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 10 firms (2.1%) were classified as VAI FEED MILLS NOT LICENSED BY FDA These feed mills are not licensed by the FDA to produce medicated feeds.

Number of active firms inspected – 5210 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 2722 (52% of those active firms inspected) Of the 2722 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 33 firms (1.2%) were classified as VAI PROTEIN BLENDERS These firms blend rendered animal protein for the purpose of producing quality feed ingredients that will be used by feed mills.

Number of active firms inspected – 303 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 132 (44% of those active firms inspected) Of the 132 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 1 firm (0.8%) was classified as VAI RENDERERS, FEED MILLS, AND PROTEIN BLENDERS MANUFACTURING WITH PROHIBITED MATERIAL This category includes only those firms that actually use prohibited material to manufacture, process, or blend animal feed or feed ingredients.

Total number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders inspected – 6606 Number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials – 467 (7.1%) Of the 467 active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 21 firms (4.5%) were classified as VAI OTHER FIRMS INSPECTED Examples of such firms include ruminant feeders, on-farm mixers, pet food manufacturers, animal feed salvagers, distributors, retailers, and animal feed transporters.

Number of active firms inspected – 26,392 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 8802 (33% of those active firms inspected) Of the 8802 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 140 firms (1.6%) were classified as VAI TOTAL FIRMS Note that a single firm can be reported under more than one firm category; therefore, the summation of the individual OAI/VAI firm categories will be more than the actual total number of OAI/VAI firms, as presented below.

Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 31,188 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 9285 (30% of those active firms inspected) Of the 9285 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 151 firms (1.6%) were classified as VAI

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm239959.htm


Friday, January 7, 2011

MEAT AND BONE MEAL AND MINERAL FEED ADDITIVES MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF ORAL PRION DISEASE TRANSMISSION

Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 74:161–166, 2011 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1528-7394 print / 1087-2620 online DOI: 10.1080/15287394.2011.529066

http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/meat-and-bone-meal-and-mineral-feed.html


Thursday, November 18, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VS GALEN J. NIEHUES FAKED MAD COW FEED TEST ON 92 BSE INSPECTION REPORTS FOR APPROXIMATELY 100 CATTLE OPERATIONS

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/11/united-states-of-america-vs-galen-j.html


Archive Number 20101206.4364 Published Date 06-DEC-2010

Subject PRO/AH/EDR> Prion disease update 2010 (11)

PRION DISEASE UPDATE 2010 (11)

http://www.promedmail.org/pls/apex/f?p=2400:1001:5492868805159684::NO::F2400_P1001_BACK_PAGE,F2400_P1001_PUB_MAIL_ID:1000,86129


Saturday, November 6, 2010

TAFS1 Position Paper on Position Paper on Relaxation of the Feed Ban in the EU Berne, 2010 TAFS

INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR TRANSMISSIBLE ANIMAL DISEASES AND FOOD SAFETY a non-profit Swiss Foundation

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/11/tafs1-position-paper-on-position-paper.html


10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. BLOOD LACED MBM IN COMMERCE USA 2007

Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINES -- CLASS II

___________________________________

PRODUCT

Bulk cattle feed made with recalled Darling's 85% Blood Meal, Flash Dried, Recall # V-024-2007

CODE

Cattle feed delivered between 01/12/2007 and 01/26/2007

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Pfeiffer, Arno, Inc, Greenbush, WI. by conversation on February 5, 2007.

Firm initiated recall is ongoing.

REASON

Blood meal used to make cattle feed was recalled because it was cross- contaminated with prohibited bovine meat and bone meal that had been manufactured on common equipment and labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

42,090 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

WI

___________________________________

PRODUCT

Custom dairy premix products: MNM ALL PURPOSE Pellet, HILLSIDE/CDL Prot- Buffer Meal, LEE, M.-CLOSE UP PX Pellet, HIGH DESERT/ GHC LACT Meal, TATARKA, M CUST PROT Meal, SUNRIDGE/CDL PROTEIN Blend, LOURENZO, K PVM DAIRY Meal, DOUBLE B DAIRY/GHC LAC Mineral, WEST PIONT/GHC CLOSEUP Mineral, WEST POINT/GHC LACT Meal, JENKS, J/COMPASS PROTEIN Meal, COPPINI - 8# SPECIAL DAIRY Mix, GULICK, L-LACT Meal (Bulk), TRIPLE J - PROTEIN/LACTATION, ROCK CREEK/GHC MILK Mineral, BETTENCOURT/GHC S.SIDE MK-MN, BETTENCOURT #1/GHC MILK MINR, V&C DAIRY/GHC LACT Meal, VEENSTRA, F/GHC LACT Meal, SMUTNY, A- BYPASS ML W/SMARTA, Recall # V-025-2007

CODE

The firm does not utilize a code - only shipping documentation with commodity and weights identified.

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Rangen, Inc, Buhl, ID, by letters on February 13 and 14, 2007. Firm initiated recall is complete.

REASON

Products manufactured from bulk feed containing blood meal that was cross contaminated with prohibited meat and bone meal and the labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

9,997,976 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

ID and NV

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR MARCH 21, 2007

http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/EnforcementReports/2007/ucm120446.htm



BANNED MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE IN ALABAMA (where h-g-BSEalabama mad cow was documented)



Date: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST PRODUCT

a) EVSRC Custom dairy feed, Recall # V-130-6;

b) Performance Chick Starter, Recall # V-131-6;

c) Performance Quail Grower, Recall # V-132-6;

d) Performance Pheasant Finisher, Recall # V-133-6.

CODE None RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Donaldson & Hasenbein/dba J&R Feed Service, Inc., Cullman, AL, by telephone on June 23, 2006 and by letter dated July 19, 2006. Firm initiated recall is complete.

REASON

Dairy and poultry feeds were possibly contaminated with ruminant based protein.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 477.72 tons

DISTRIBUTION AL

______________________________


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00968.html

PRODUCT Bulk custom dairy pre-mixes,

Recall # V-120-6 CODE None RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Ware Milling Inc., Houston, MS, by telephone on June 23, 2006. Firm initiated recall is complete. REASON Possible contamination of dairy animal feeds with ruminant derived meat and bone meal.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 350 tons

DISTRIBUTION AL and MS

______________________________

PRODUCT

a) Tucker Milling, LLC Tm 32% Sinking Fish Grower, #2680-Pellet, 50 lb. bags, Recall # V-121-6;

b) Tucker Milling, LLC #31120, Game Bird Breeder Pellet, 50 lb. bags, Recall # V-122-6;

c) Tucker Milling, LLC #31232 Game Bird Grower, 50 lb. bags, Recall # V-123-6;

d) Tucker Milling, LLC 31227-Crumble, Game Bird Starter, BMD Medicated, 50 lb bags, Recall # V-124-6;

e) Tucker Milling, LLC #31120, Game Bird Breeder, 50 lb bags, Recall # V-125-6;

f) Tucker Milling, LLC #30230, 30 % Turkey Starter, 50 lb bags, Recall # V-126-6;

g) Tucker Milling, LLC #30116, TM Broiler Finisher, 50 lb bags, Recall # V-127-6

CODE All products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/20/2006 RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Recalling Firm: Tucker Milling LLC, Guntersville, AL, by telephone and visit on June 20, 2006, and by letter on June 23, 2006. Manufacturer: H. J. Baker and Brothers Inc., Stamford, CT. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.

REASON Poultry and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant based protein were not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 7,541-50 lb bags

DISTRIBUTION AL, GA, MS, and TN

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006

###

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ENFORCE/2006/ENF00964.html

Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL AL AND FL VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 125 TONS Products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006

Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:16 pm PST PRODUCT

a) CO-OP 32% Sinking Catfish, Recall # V-100-6;

b) Performance Sheep Pell W/Decox/A/N, medicated, net wt. 50 lbs, Recall # V-101-6;

c) Pro 40% Swine Conc Meal -- 50 lb, Recall # V-102-6;

d) CO-OP 32% Sinking Catfish Food Medicated, Recall # V-103-6;

e) "Big Jim's" BBB Deer Ration, Big Buck Blend, Recall # V-104-6;

f) CO-OP 40% Hog Supplement Medicated Pelleted, Tylosin 100 grams/ton, 50 lb. bag, Recall # V-105-6;

g) Pig Starter Pell II, 18% W/MCDX Medicated 282020, Carbadox -- 0.0055%, Recall # V-106-6;

h) CO-OP STARTER-GROWER CRUMBLES, Complete Feed for Chickens from Hatch to 20 Weeks, Medicated, Bacitracin Methylene Disalicylate, 25 and 50 Lbs, Recall # V-107-6;

i) CO-OP LAYING PELLETS, Complete Feed for Laying Chickens, Recall # 108-6;

j) CO-OP LAYING CRUMBLES, Recall # V-109-6;

k) CO-OP QUAIL FLIGHT CONDITIONER MEDICATED, net wt 50 Lbs, Recall # V-110-6;

l) CO-OP QUAIL STARTER MEDICATED, Net Wt. 50 Lbs, Recall # V-111-6;

m) CO-OP QUAIL GROWER MEDICATED, 50 Lbs, Recall # V-112-6 CODE

Product manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Alabama Farmers Cooperative, Inc., Decatur, AL, by telephone, fax, email and visit on June 9, 2006. FDA initiated recall is complete.

REASON Animal and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant based protein not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 125 tons

DISTRIBUTION AL and FL

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006

###

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html

MAD COW FEED RECALL USA EQUALS 10,878.06 TONS NATIONWIDE Sun Jul 16, 2006 09:22 71.248.128.67

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE -- CLASS II

______________________________

PRODUCT

a) PRO-LAK, bulk weight, Protein Concentrate for Lactating Dairy Animals, Recall # V-079-6;

b) ProAmino II, FOR PREFRESH AND LACTATING COWS, net weight 50lb (22.6 kg), Recall # V-080-6;

c) PRO-PAK, MARINE & ANIMAL PROTEIN CONCENTRATE FOR USE IN ANIMAL FEED, Recall # V-081-6;

d) Feather Meal, Recall # V-082-6 CODE

a) Bulk

b) None

c) Bulk

d) Bulk

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER H. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL, by telephone on June 15, 2006 and by press release on June 16, 2006. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.

REASON

Possible contamination of animal feeds with ruminent derived meat and bone meal.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 10,878.06 tons

DISTRIBUTION Nationwide

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR July 12, 2006

###

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00960.html




let's take a closer look at this new prionpathy or prionopathy, and then let's look at the g-h-BSEalabama mad cow.

This new prionopathy in humans? the genetic makeup is IDENTICAL to the g-h-BSEalabama mad cow, the only _documented_ mad cow in the world to date like this, ......wait, it get's better. this new prionpathy is killing young and old humans, with LONG DURATION from onset of symptoms to death, and the symptoms are very similar to nvCJD victims, OH, and the plaques are very similar in some cases too, bbbut, it's not related to the g-h-BSEalabama cow, WAIT NOW, it gets even better, the new human prionpathy that they claim is a genetic TSE, has no relation to any gene mutation in that family. daaa, ya think it could be related to that mad cow with the same genetic make-up ??? there were literally tons and tons of banned mad cow protein in Alabama in commerce, and none of it transmitted to cows, and the cows to humans there from ??? r i g h t $$$

ALABAMA MAD COW g-h-BSEalabama

In this study, we identified a novel mutation in the bovine prion protein gene (Prnp), called E211K, of a confirmed BSE positive cow from Alabama, United States of America. This mutation is identical to the E200K pathogenic mutation found in humans with a genetic form of CJD. This finding represents the first report of a confirmed case of BSE with a potential pathogenic mutation within the bovine Prnp gene. We hypothesize that the bovine Prnp E211K mutation most likely has caused BSE in "the approximately 10-year-old cow" carrying the E221K mutation.

http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1000156


http://www.plospathogens.org/article/fetchObjectAttachment.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1000156&representation=PDF


Saturday, August 14, 2010

BSE Case Associated with Prion Protein Gene Mutation (g-h-BSEalabama) and VPSPr PRIONPATHY


(see mad cow feed in COMMERCE IN ALABAMA...TSS)


http://prionpathy.blogspot.com/2010/08/bse-case-associated-with-prion-protein.html


Saturday, June 12, 2010

PUBLICATION REQUEST AND FOIA REQUEST Project Number: 3625-32000-086-05 Study of Atypical Bse

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/06/publication-request-and-foia-request.html


Wednesday, July 28, 2010

re-Freedom of Information Act Project Number 3625-32000-086-05, Study of Atypical BSE UPDATE July 28, 2010

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/07/re-freedom-of-information-act-project.html


P.9.21

Molecular characterization of BSE in Canada

Jianmin Yang1, Sandor Dudas2, Catherine Graham2, Markus Czub3, Tim McAllister1, Stefanie Czub1 1Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Centre, Canada; 2National and OIE BSE Reference Laboratory, Canada; 3University of Calgary, Canada

Background: Three BSE types (classical and two atypical) have been identified on the basis of molecular characteristics of the misfolded protein associated with the disease. To date, each of these three types have been detected in Canadian cattle.

Objectives: This study was conducted to further characterize the 16 Canadian BSE cases based on the biochemical properties of there associated PrPres. Methods: Immuno-reactivity, molecular weight, glycoform profiles and relative proteinase K sensitivity of the PrPres from each of the 16 confirmed Canadian BSE cases was determined using modified Western blot analysis.

Results: Fourteen of the 16 Canadian BSE cases were C type, 1 was H type and 1 was L type. The Canadian H and L-type BSE cases exhibited size shifts and changes in glycosylation similar to other atypical BSE cases. PK digestion under mild and stringent conditions revealed a reduced protease resistance of the atypical cases compared to the C-type cases. N terminal- specific antibodies bound to PrPres from H type but not from C or L type. The C-terminal-specific antibodies resulted in a shift in the glycoform profile and detected a fourth band in the Canadian H-type BSE.

Discussion: The C, L and H type BSE cases in Canada exhibit molecular characteristics similar to those described for classical and atypical BSE cases from Europe and Japan. This supports the theory that the importation of BSE contaminated feedstuff is the source of C-type BSE in Canada. *It also suggests a similar cause or source for atypical BSE in these countries.

http://www.prion2009.com/sites/default/files/Prion2009_Book_of_Abstracts.pdf


Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed/Adulterated/Misbranded Rangen Inc 2/11/10 USA

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/03/animal-proteins-prohibited-in-ruminant.html


Monday, March 1, 2010

ANIMAL PROTEIN I.E. MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE A REVIEW 2010

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/03/animal-protien-ie-mad-cow-feed-in.html


Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question): Monday, April 5, 2010

Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE April 5, 2010

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/04/update-on-feed-enforcement-activities.html


Friday, April 23, 2010

Upcoming BSE Webinar on Thursday, April 22, 2010 a review

http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2010/04/upcoming-bse-webinar-on-thursday-april.html


Friday, October 8, 2010

Scientific reasons for a feed ban of meat-and-bone meal, applicable to all farmed animals including cattle, pigs, poultry, farmed fish and pet food

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/10/scientific-reasons-for-feed-ban-of-meat.html


O.4.3

Spread of BSE prions in cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis) after oral transmission

Edgar Holznagel1, Walter Schulz-Schaeffer2, Barbara Yutzy1, Gerhard Hunsmann3, Johannes Loewer1 1Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Federal Institute for Sera and Vaccines, Germany; 2Department of Neuropathology, Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany, 3Department of Virology and Immunology, German Primate Centre, Göttingen, Germany

Background: BSE-infected cynomolgus monkeys represent a relevant animal model to study the pathogenesis of variant Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease (vCJD).

Objectives: To study the spread of BSE prions during the asymptomatic phase of infection in a simian animal model.

Methods: Orally BSE-dosed macaques (n=10) were sacrificed at defined time points during the incubation period and 7 orally BSE-dosed macaques were sacrificed after the onset of clinical signs. Neuronal and non-neuronal tissues were tested for the presence of proteinase-K-resistant prion protein (PrPres) by western immunoblot and by paraffin-embedded tissue (PET) blot technique.

Results: In clinically diseased macaques (5 years p.i. + 6 mo.), PrPres deposits were widely spread in neuronal tissues (including the peripheral sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system) and in lymphoid tissues including tonsils. In asymptomatic disease carriers, PrPres deposits could be detected in intestinal lymph nodes as early as 1 year p.i., but CNS tissues were negative until 3 – 4 years p.i. Lumbal/sacral segments of the spinal cord and medulla oblongata were PrPres positive as early as 4.1 years p.i., whereas sympathetic trunk and all thoracic/cervical segments of the spinal cord were still negative for PrPres. However, tonsil samples were negative in all asymptomatic cases.

Discussion: There is evidence for an early spread of BSE to the CNS via autonomic fibres of the splanchnic and vagus nerves indicating that trans-synaptical spread may be a time-limiting factor for neuroinvasion. Tonsils were predominantly negative during the main part of the incubation period indicating that epidemiological vCJD screening results based on the detection of PrPres in tonsil biopsies may mostly tend to underestimate the prevalence of vCJD among humans.

P.4.23

Transmission of atypical BSE in humanized mouse models

Liuting Qing1, Wenquan Zou1, Cristina Casalone2, Martin Groschup3, Miroslaw Polak4, Maria Caramelli2, Pierluigi Gambetti1, Juergen Richt5, Qingzhong Kong1 1Case Western Reserve University, USA; 2Instituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale, Italy; 3Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Germany; 4National Veterinary Research Institute, Poland; 5Kansas State University (Previously at USDA National Animal Disease Center), USA

Background: Classical BSE is a world-wide prion disease in cattle, and the classical BSE strain (BSE-C) has led to over 200 cases of clinical human infection (variant CJD). Atypical BSE cases have been discovered in three continents since 2004; they include the L-type (also named BASE), the H-type, and the first reported case of naturally occurring BSE with mutated bovine PRNP (termed BSE-M). The public health risks posed by atypical BSE were largely undefined.

Objectives: To investigate these atypical BSE types in terms of their transmissibility and phenotypes in humanized mice. Methods: Transgenic mice expressing human PrP were inoculated with several classical (C-type) and atypical (L-, H-, or Mtype) BSE isolates, and the transmission rate, incubation time, characteristics and distribution of PrPSc, symptoms, and histopathology were or will be examined and compared.

Results: Sixty percent of BASE-inoculated humanized mice became infected with minimal spongiosis and an average incubation time of 20-22 months, whereas only one of the C-type BSE-inoculated mice developed prion disease after more than 2 years. Protease-resistant PrPSc in BASE-infected humanized Tg mouse brains was biochemically different from bovine BASE or sCJD. PrPSc was also detected in the spleen of 22% of BASE-infected humanized mice, but not in those infected with sCJD. Secondary transmission of BASE in the humanized mice led to a small reduction in incubation time. The atypical BSE-H strain is also transmissible with distinct phenotypes in the humanized mice, but no BSE-M transmission has been observed so far.

Discussion: Our results demonstrate that BASE is more virulent than classical BSE, has a lymphotropic phenotype, and displays a modest transmission barrier in our humanized mice.

BSE-H is also transmissible in our humanized Tg mice.

The possibility of more than two atypical BSE strains will be discussed.

Supported by NINDS NS052319, NIA AG14359, and NIH AI 77774.

http://www.prion2009.com/sites/default/files/Prion2009_Book_of_Abstracts.pdf


P03.137

Transmission of BSE to Cynomolgus Macaque, a Non-human Primate; Development of Clinical Symptoms and Tissue Distribution of PrPSC

Yamakawa, Y1; Ono, F2; Tase, N3; Terao, K3; Tannno, J3; Wada, N4; Tobiume, M5; Sato, Y5; Okemoto-Nakamura, Y1; Hagiwara, K1; Sata, T5 1National Institure of Infectious diseases, Cell biology and Biochemistry, Japan; 2Corporation for Production and Research Laboratory Primates., Japan; 3National Institure of Biomedical Innovation, Tsukuba Primate Reserch Center, Japan; 4Yamauchi Univ., Veterinary Medicine, Japan; 5National Institure of Infectious diseases, Pathology, Japan

Two of three cynomolgus monkeys developed abnormal neuronal behavioral signs at 30-(#7) and 28-(#10) months after intracerebral inoculation of 200ul of 10% brain homogenates of BSE affected cattle (BSE/JP6). Around 30 months post inoculation (mpi), they developed sporadic anorexia and hyperekplexia with squeal against environmental stimulations such as light and sound. Tremor, myoclonic jerk and paralysis became conspicuous during 32 to 33-mpi, and symptoms become worsened according to the disease progression. Finally, one monkey (#7) fell into total paralysis at 36-mpi. This monkey was sacrificed at 10 days after intensive veterinary care including infusion and per oral supply of liquid food. The other monkey (#10) had to grasp the cage bars to keep an upright posture caused by the sever ataxia. This monkey was sacrificed at 35-mpi. EEG of both monkeys showed diffuse slowing. PSD characteristic for sporadic CJD was not observed in both monkeys. The result of forearm movement test showed the hypofunction that was observed at onset of clinical symptoms. Their cognitive function determined by finger maze test was maintained at the early stage of sideration. However, it was rapidly impaired followed by the disease progression. Their autopsied tissues were immunochemically investigated for the tissue distribution of PrPSc. Severe spongiform change in the brain together with heavy accumulation of PrPSc having the type 2B/4 glycoform profile confirmed successful transmission of BSE to Cynomolgus macaques. Granular and linear deposition of PrPSC was detected by IHC in the CNS of both monkeys. At cerebral cortex, PrPSC was prominently accumulated in the large plaques. Sparse accumulation of PrPSc was detected in several peripheral nerves of #7 but not in #10 monkey, upon the WB analysis. Neither #7 nor #10 monkey accumulated detectable amounts of PrPSc in their lymphatic organs such as tonsil, spleen, adrenal grands and thymus although PrPSc was barely detected in the submandibular lymph node of #7 monkey. Such confined tissue distribution of PrPSc after intracerebral infection with BSE agent is not compatible to that reported on the Cynomolgus macaques infected with BSE by oral or intra-venous (intra-peritoneal) routs, in which PrPSc was accumulated at not only CNS but also widely distributed lymphatic tissues.

P04.27

Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the Oral Route

Holznagel, E1; Yutzy, B1; Deslys, J-P2; Lasmézas, C2; Pocchiari, M3; Ingrosso, L3; Bierke, P4; Schulz-Schaeffer, W5; Motzkus, D6; Hunsmann, G6; Löwer, J1 1Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Germany; 2Commissariat à l´Energie Atomique, France; 3Instituto Superiore di Sanità, Italy; 4Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease control, Sweden; 5Georg August University, Germany; 6German Primate Center, Germany

Background: In 2001, a study was initiated in primates to assess the risk for humans to contract BSE through contaminated food. For this purpose, BSE brain was titrated in cynomolgus monkeys.

Aims: The primary objective is the determination of the minimal infectious dose (MID50) for oral exposure to BSE in a simian model, and, by in doing this, to assess the risk for humans. Secondly, we aimed at examining the course of the disease to identify possible biomarkers.

Methods: Groups with six monkeys each were orally dosed with lowering amounts of BSE brain: 16g, 5g, 0.5g, 0.05g, and 0.005g. In a second titration study, animals were intracerebrally (i.c.) dosed (50, 5, 0.5, 0.05, and 0.005 mg).

Results: In an ongoing study, a considerable number of high-dosed macaques already developed simian vCJD upon oral or intracerebral exposure or are at the onset of the clinical phase. However, there are differences in the clinical course between orally and intracerebrally infected animals that may influence the detection of biomarkers.

Conclusions: Simian vCJD can be easily triggered in cynomolgus monkeys on the oral route using less than 5 g BSE brain homogenate. The difference in the incubation period between 5 g oral and 5 mg i.c. is only 1 year (5 years versus 4 years). However, there are rapid progressors among orally dosed monkeys that develop simian vCJD as fast as intracerebrally inoculated animals.

The work referenced was performed in partial fulfilment of the study “BSE in primates“ supported by the EU (QLK1-2002-01096).

http://www.neuroprion.org/resources/pdf_docs/conferences/prion2007/abstract_book.pdf


Simian vCJD can be easily triggered in cynomolgus monkeys on the oral route using less than 5 g BSE brain homogenate.

http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf


WE know now, and we knew decades ago, that 5.5 grams of suspect feed in TEXAS was enough to kill 100 cows.

look at the table and you'll see that as little as 1 mg (or 0.001 gm) caused 7% (1 of 14) of the cows to come down with BSE;

Risk of oral infection with bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent in primates

Corinne Ida Lasmézas, Emmanuel Comoy, Stephen Hawkins, Christian Herzog, Franck Mouthon, Timm Konold, Frédéric Auvré, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie Lescoutra-Etchegaray, Nicole Salès, Gerald Wells, Paul Brown, Jean-Philippe Deslys Summary The uncertain extent of human exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)--which can lead to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD)--is compounded by incomplete knowledge about the efficiency of oral infection and the magnitude of any bovine-to-human biological barrier to transmission. We therefore investigated oral transmission of BSE to non-human primates. We gave two macaques a 5 g oral dose of brain homogenate from a BSE-infected cow. One macaque developed vCJD-like neurological disease 60 months after exposure, whereas the other remained free of disease at 76 months. On the basis of these findings and data from other studies, we made a preliminary estimate of the food exposure risk for man, which provides additional assurance that existing public health measures can prevent transmission of BSE to man.

snip...

BSE bovine brain inoculum

100 g 10 g 5 g 1 g 100 mg 10 mg 1 mg 0·1 mg 0·01 mg

Primate (oral route)* 1/2 (50%)

Cattle (oral route)* 10/10 (100%) 7/9 (78%) 7/10 (70%) 3/15 (20%) 1/15 (7%) 1/15 (7%)

RIII mice (ic ip route)* 17/18 (94%) 15/17 (88%) 1/14 (7%)

PrPres biochemical detection

The comparison is made on the basis of calibration of the bovine inoculum used in our study with primates against a bovine brain inoculum with a similar PrPres concentration that was inoculated into mice and cattle.8 *Data are number of animals positive/number of animals surviving at the time of clinical onset of disease in the first positive animal (%). The accuracy of bioassays is generally judged to be about plus or minus 1 log. ic ip=intracerebral and intraperitoneal.

Table 1: Comparison of transmission rates in primates and cattle infected orally with similar BSE brain inocula

Published online January 27, 2005

http://www.thelancet.com/journal/journal.isa


It is clear that the designing scientists must also have shared Mr Bradleys surprise at the results because all the dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.

http://web.archive.org/web/20040523230128/www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s145d.pdf


it is clear that the designing scientists must have also shared Mr Bradleyâs surprise at the results because all the dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030526212610/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s147f.pdf


Subject: BSE FEED VIOLATIONS UPDATE From 01/01/2009 To 06/10/2009

FDA BSE/Ruminant Feed Inspections Firms Inventory Report

Data reported as of: 06/06/2009 Search by: Last BSE Insp Date From 01/01/2009 To 06/10/2009 Sort by: FDA District, State, Firm Name

FDA District Firm Id (FEI) Firm Name Street Address City State Zip Code Opr. Status Firm Type(s) Prgm Risk Last BSE Insp Date Last BSE Dist. Dcsn** Handles Feed for Rum. Animals?

ATL-DO 3007582627 Hoffner Brothers Dairy 610 Ketchie Rd Mount Ulla NC 28125-9685 OPR FR, OF, OT NP 02/03/2009 VAI Y

CIN-DO 3002766655 Lester J Stutzman Feed Mill 2811 Mt Zion Rd Marion KY 42064 OPR DR, FR, NL, OF DP 01/05/2009 VAI Y

CIN-DO 3003407434 Direct Action Co Inc 6668 Old SR 39 NW Dover OH 44622 OPR DR, NL, OT HP 05/04/2009 VAI Y

KAN-DO 1000050408 Mid-South Milling Co Inc 213 Central Ave Kansas City KS 66118-1117 OPR OT, PB, TH HP 01/14/2009 VAI N

KAN-DO 3007495971 Midwest Bulk Inc 3404 N Emporia St Wichita KS 67219-3615 OPR TH DP 02/26/2009 VAI Y

KAN-DO 3007458821 Murray Grain Co Inc 900 E 21st St N Ste 201 Wichita KS 67214-1406 OPR TH DP 02/26/2009 VAI Y

KAN-DO 3006292356 Orscheln Farm & Home 1702 W 11th St Coffeyville KS 67337-3115 OPR DR DP 02/02/2009 VAI Y

LOS-DO 2027094 Nestle, USA/ Nestle Prepared Foods Company 9601 Canoga Ave Chatsworth CA 91311-4115 OPR HF HP 05/26/2009 VAI N

NYK-DO 1310558 Birkett Mills 1 Main St Penn Yan NY 14527-1615 OPR DR, HF, NL NP 01/11/2009 RTS Y

Data reported as of: 06/06/2009 Search by: Last BSE Insp Date From 01/01/2003 To 06/10/2009 and Last BSE District Decision = OAI Sort by: FDA District, State, Firm Name

FDA District Firm Id (FEI) Firm Name Street Address City State Zip Code Opr. Status Firm Type(s) Prgm Risk Last BSE Insp Date Last BSE Dist. Dcsn** Handles Feed for Rum. Animals?

KAN-DO 1927975 Hahn & Phillips Grease Co Inc 913 N Odell, PO Box 130 Marshall MO 65340 OPR NL, PB, TH HP 12/22/2008 OAI Y

Legend - Opr.Status:OPR=Operational, SEA=Seasonal, PRP=Pre-Production, Firm Type: AF=Animal Feed/Pet Food Salvager, DR=Distributor/Retailer, FL=Feed Mill (FDA Licensed), FR=Feeder of Ruminants, HF=Human Food Processor, NL=Feed Mill (not FDA Licensed), OF=On-farm Feed Mixer, OT=Other, PB=Protein Blender, PF=Pet Food Manufacturer, RE=Renderer, RO=Feeder of Ruminants and Other Species, TH=Transporter (Hauler), Prgm Risk:DP=Only Distributes Prohib.Mat.(DP), HP=Handles Prohibited Materials(HP), NP=Does not handle Prohib.Mat.(NP), Dist Dcsn:OAI=Official Action Indicated (OAI), VAI=Voluntary Action Indicated (VAI), NAI=No Action Indicated (NAI), RTS=Referred to State (RTS),

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/BSEInspect/bse_excel.jsp


February 6, 2004

To help prevent the establishment and amplification of BSE through feed in the United States, FDA implemented a final rule that prohibits the use of most mammalian protein in feeds for ruminant animals. This rule, Title 21 Part 589.2000 of the Code of Federal Regulations, became effective on August 4, 1997.

This is an update on FDA enforcement activities regarding the ruminant feed (BSE) regulation. FDA's CVM has assembled data from the inspections that have been conducted AND whose final inspection report has been recorded in the FDA's inspection database as of January 23, 2004. As of January 23, 2004, FDA had received over 26,000 inspection reports. The majority of these inspections (around 70%) were conducted by State officials under contract to FDA, with the remainder conducted by FDA officials.

Inspections conducted by FDA or State investigators are classified to reflect the compliance status at the time of the inspection based upon the objectionable conditions documented. These inspection conclusions are reported as Official Action Indicated (OAI), Voluntary Action Indicated (VAI), or No Action Indicated (NAI).

An OAI inspection classification occurs when significant objectionable conditions or practices were found and regulatory sanctions are warranted in order to address the establishment's lack of compliance with the regulation. An example of an OAI inspection classification would be findings of manufacturing procedures insufficient to ensure that ruminant feed is not contaminated with prohibited material. Inspections classified with OAI violations will be promptly re-inspected following the regulatory sanctions to determine whether adequate corrective actions have been implemented

A VAI inspection classification occurs when objectionable conditions or practices were found that do not meet the threshold of regulatory significance, but do warrant advisory actions to inform the establishment of findings that should be voluntarily corrected. Inspections classified with VAI violations are more technical violations of Title 21 Part 589.2000 of the Code of Federal Regulations, (here called the Ruminant Feed Ban) became effective on August 4, 1997. Ruminant Feed Ban provisions such as minor recordkeeping lapses and conditions involving non-ruminant feeds.

A NAI inspection classification occurs when no objectionable conditions or practices were found during the inspection or the significance of the documented objectionable conditions found does not justify further actions.

The results to date are reported here both by “segment of industry” and “in total”. NOTE – A single firm can operate as more than one firm type. As a result, the categories of the different industry segments are not mutually exclusive.

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm048448.htm




Greetings,


THERE were 100s of NAI's, but you get the just. also, please note ;




>>> A VAI inspection classification occurs when objectionable conditions or practices were found that do not meet the threshold of regulatory significance, but do warrant advisory actions to inform the establishment of findings that should be voluntarily corrected. Inspections classified with VAI violations are more technical violations of Title 21 Part 589.2000 of the Code of Federal Regulations, (here called the Ruminant Feed Ban) became effective on August 4, 1997. Ruminant Feed Ban provisions such as minor recordkeeping lapses and conditions involving non-ruminant feeds. <<<



PLEASE note, most of the VAIs DID handle feed for ruminant animals. sure would be nice to be able to read the complete report, on a single page, for each violation, on a single day, given once a week, at a simple url, like it use to be. here is an example ;


Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration San Francisco District 1431 Harbor Bay Parkway Alameda, CA 94502-7070 Telephone: 510/337-6700 VIA HAND DELIVERY Our Reference No. 1000123954 June 23, 2004 Ronald M. Foster, Manager Randall C. Boyce, Manager Trevor O. Foster, Manager George P. Foster, Manager Fresno Farming LLC P.O. Box 457 1000 Davis Street Livingston, California

WARNING LETTER


Dear Mssrs. Foster, Boyce, Foster, and Foster:


The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducted an inspection of your medicated animal feed mill operation, Fresco Farming LLC, located in Traver, California from April 14, 2004 through May 6, 2004, and found significant deviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 589.2000 (21 C.F.R. 589.2000) - Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. The regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Because you failed to follow this rule, products you manufactured and distributed are adulterated within the meaning of Section 402(a)(4) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) because they were prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby they may have been rendered injurious to health. Our inspection found the following violations of 21 C.F.R. 589.2000:

1. Failure to provide for measures to avoid commingling or cross-contamination of products that contain or may contain protein derived from mammalian tissues into animal protein or feeds that may be used for ruminants to comply with 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(e)(1)(iii).

* Your firm uses a vacuum system to clean up spilled product in the tunnel area. This tunnel area houses the two receiving conveyor systems and the elevators for the two conveyor systems. When product, including ruminant meat and bone meal, is spilled onto the floor of this area, the spilled product is vacuumed up by the vacuum system and, via a discharge hose, was placed into a conveyor system that your firm had designated as free of ruminant meat and bone meal. Your firm admitted that it was unaware of the vacuum system discharging into the conveyor systems designated as free of ruminant meat and bone meal and that this had been in place since April 2003. Your firm remedied this problem during FDA s April/May 2004 inspection by removing the discharge hose connection to the conveyer system that your firm had designated as free of ruminant meat and bone meal .


* Your firm uses a dust collection system that pulls dust from systems that receive both ruminant meat and bone meal and feed ingredients intended for ruminants. This dust system then discharged collected product back into the two conveyor systems via a cross connection, thereby making it likely that ruminant meat and bone meal became commingled with ruminant feed ingredients. Your firm admitted that it was unaware of the cross connection and that it had been in place since April 2003. Your firm removed the cross connection during FDA s April/May 2004 inspection.


2. Failure to maintain written procedures specifying the clean-out procedure or other means, and specifying the procedures for separating products that contain or may contain protein derived from mammalian tissue from all other protein products from the time of receipt until the time of shipment, to comply with 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(e)(1)(iv). This observation was also noted during FDA s July/August 2003 inspection of your firm. * There are no written procedures for separating products that contain prohibited material from ingredients used in ruminant feeds from the time of receipt until the time of shipment.


* The written procedure for cleaning out or flushing equipment after mixing feeds containing prohibited material was not adequate to prevent contamination of ruminant feed with prohibited material. 3. Failure to maintain records sufficient to track materials that contain protein derived from mammalian tissues throughout their receipt, processing, and distribution to comply with 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(e)(1)(i). This observation was also noted during FDA s July/August 2003 inspection of your firm.


* Specifically, your firm has failed to develop and implement complete written procedures to separate ruminant meat and bone meal from feed ingredients intended for ruminants from the time of receipt until the time of distribution. The written procedures that do exist fail to address the use of equipment common to ruminant meat and bone meal and ruminant feed ingredients. The above is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of deficiencies at your facility. As a manufacturer of materials intended for use as animal feed, you are responsible for assuring that your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should take prompt action to correct these violations, and you should establish a system whereby such violations do not recur. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in regulatory action without further notice, such as seizure and/or injunction. You should notify this office in writing within fifteen (15) working days of receiving this letter of the steps you have taken to bring your firm into compliance with the law. Your response should include an explanation of each step being taken to correct the violations and prevent their recurrence. If corrective actions cannot be completed in fifteen (15) working days, state the reason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will be completed. Include copies of any available documentation demonstrating that corrections have been made. Please send your reply to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Attention: Ms. Harumi Kishida, Compliance Officer, 1431 Harbor Bay Parkway, Alameda, California 94502-7070. If you have questions regarding this letter, please contact Ms. Kishida at (510) 337-6824.


Sincerely, /s/ CD Moss, Acting DD for Barbara J. Cassens District Director San Francisco District cc: VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED C. Michael Blasco, Feed Mill Manager Fresno Farming LLC P.O. Box 430 Traver, California 93673

http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g4849d.htm



Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Chicago District 550 West Jackson Blvd., 15th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60661 Telephone: 312-353-5863

July 12, 2004

WARNING LETTER CHI-16-04 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Donald E. Hamilton, President/Owner Illini Feeds, Inc. P.O. Box 86, 1145 State Hwy. 94 Aledo, Illinois 61231


Dear Mr. Hamilton:

On February 19 and 20, 2004, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducted an inspection of your animal feed handling facility located at 1145 State Highway 94, Aledo, Illinois. The inspection found significant deviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 589.2000 (21 CFR 589.2000) - Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). The deviations cause the swine feed manufactured by your facility to be misbranded within the meaning of Section 403(a)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act).


Our investigation found that salvaged pet food containing prohibited material was added as an ingredient to the swine products manufactured at your facility. During the inspection, our investigator found that you failed to label your non-ruminant products with the required caution statement - Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants.

[21 CFR 589.2000(d)(1)] The above is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of violations.

As a manufacturer of materials intended for use in animal feed, you are responsible for assuring that your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should take prompt action to correct this violation, and you should establish a system whereby such violations do not recur. Failure to promptly correct this violation may result in regulatory action without further notice, such as seizure and/or injunction.

During the inspection, you told the investigator that you would put the required cautionary statement on your products that contain prohibited material, and maintain tracking documents for all incoming ingredients, including animal proteins prohibited in ruminant feed.

Please notify this office in writing within 15 working days of receiving this letter of any further steps you have taken to assure that your firm is in compliance with the law. Your response should also include an explanation of each step taken to correct the violations, and prevent their recurrence. Please include copies of any available documentation such as written procedures, corrected labeling, etc., demonstrating that corrections have been made. If corrections cannot be completed within 15 working days, state the reason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will be completed. Your reply should be directed to Paul A. Boehmer, Compliance Officer, at the above address. Sincerely, /s/ Scott J. MacIntire District Director


http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g4840d.htm



Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Chicago District 550 West Jackson Blvd., 15th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60661 Telephone: 312-353-5863

June 15, 2004

WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Mr. David W. Bernauer CEO and Chairman of the Board Walgreen co. 200 Wilmot Rd. Deerfield, IL 60015


Dear Mr. Bernauer:


Inspection of your firm s warehouse at 5100 Lake Terrace N.E., Mt. Vernon, Illinois, by the Illinois Department of Public Health and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on February 25, 26, and 27, and March 2, 2004, documented numerous insanitary conditions which caused the food and drug products stored there to become adulterated.

Our inspection showed that the food and drug products stored and held at your facility violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act), rendering them adulterated. These adulterated fwd and drug products:

a) consisted in whole or in part of filthy substances, including rodent fecal pellets, rodent hair, and insects, in violation of Section 402(a)(3) of the Act [21 U.S.C. 342(a)(3)]; and/or

b) had been held under insanitary conditions whereby they have become contaminated with rodent filth, in violation of Sections 402(a)(4) and 501(a)(2)(a) of the Act [21 U.S.C. 342(a)(4), 351(a)(2)(a)].

Evidence of rodent activity documented throughout the old and new warehouse included dead mice in traps, excreta pellets, and gnawed paper material observed in, on, and near food and drugs stored in the warehouse. Rodents gnaw holes were observed into several packaged food products with rodent hairs at gnaw holes into products. Many more fecal pellets were on food and drug packages and still more were found near the stored foods, drugs, and cosmetics in the warehouse. Other conditions observed during the inspection that could be contributing factors to rodent infestation include damaged and/or poorly fitting rail and truck dock doors, gaps around a conduit entry into the building, and the structural condition of the concrete and expansion gaps at floor/wall/support beam junctions in various areas of the warehouse allowing the entry or harborage of pests.

Additionally, the investigators observed cobwebs, dead insects, dust, debris, product spillage, and papers in the warehouse, indicating a general lack of good sanitation practices.

Also, products that contain or may contain animal protein prohibited ruminant feed (BSE material) failed to bear the caution statement, Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants. Specifically, pet food products were salvaged, repackaged, and donated to [redacted] and other similar organizations in the area, without the proper labeling and agreement that they would not be used for ruminants.

Please refer to Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 589.2000, concerning these requirements. Our laboratory confirmed the findings of rodent excreta, rodent hairs on product gnaw holes, and rodent gnawed fibers (packaging material) sampled from the warehouse during the inspection. The above listed violations are not intended to be all-inclusive. It is your responsibility to assure adherence with each requirement of the Act and its implementing regulations.

The investigators reported that you destroyed food products that showed evidence of contamination and began to take some steps to correct the insanitary conditions in your facility. We request that you take prompt action to correct all violations. Please provide this office, within 15 working days of receipt of this letter, a detailed response stating the actions you plan to take and have taken to correct and prevent the recurrence of these objectionable conditions.

Provide the time within which corrections will be completed, reasons why any corrective action cannot be completed, and documentation to show that corrections have been made. Failure to take prompt action to correct all violations may result in regulatory action without further notice. Such action includes seizure and/or injunction. Your reply should be directed to Paul A. Boehmer, Compliance Officer, at the Chicago District Office. Sincerely, /s/ Scott J. MacIntire District Director cc: Stephen J. Lawrence, Distribution Center Manager Walgreen Co. 5100 Lake Terrace NE Mount Vernon, IL 62864-9665


http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g4853d.htm


USA BSE GBR SHOULD BE GBR III, but someone dropped the ball... TSS


######### http://mailhost-alt.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/warc/bse-l.html ##########


Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Minneapolis District Office Central Region 212 Third Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 758-7119 FAX: (612) 334-4142 June 9, 2005


WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED


Refer to MIN 05-15 Michael J. Langenhorst President Anamax Corporation P.O. Box 10067 Green Bay, WI 54307


Dear Mr. Langenhorst:


Our inspection of your rendering plant located at 505 Hardman Avenue South, South St. Paul, Minnesota, from January 12-20, 2005, revealed significant deviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations , Part 589 .2000 (21 CFR 589 .2000), Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Because you failed to follow the requirements of this regulation, products being manufactured and distributed by your facility are adulterated within the meaning of Section 402(a)(4) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) [21 U.S.C. 342(a)(4)], and misbranded within the meaning of Section 403(a)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C. 343(a)(1)]. Our investigation found that you failed to provide for measures to prevent commingling or cross-contamination and to maintain sufficient written procedures [21 CFR 589.2000(e)] in that:

1. You failed to use clean-out procedures or other means adequate to prevent carryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into feeds that may be used for ruminants.


2. You failed to maintain written procedures specifying the clean-out procedures or other means to prevent carryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into feeds that may be used for ruminants.

Our investigation also found that you failed to label products that may contain protein derived from mammalian tissues with the statement, "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants." For example, your Feather Meal and Stabilized Poultry By-Product Meal lack this statement, even though the absence of sufficient measures to avoid commingling or cross-contamination may result in these products containing protein derived from mammalian tissues. Because your products do not bear this caution statement, they are misbranded under Section 403(a)(1) of the Act [21 U.S .C. 343(a)(1)). The above is not intended as an all-inclusive list of violations. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you are responsible for ensuring that your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should acknowledge this letter within 15 working days of receiving and include any additional corrective actions concerning your facility. We have received your letter dated January 31, 2005, which replies to the Form FDA-483 issued on January 20, 2005, and your letter dated February 25, 2005, that states all corrections have been implemented. The corrections you have reported appear to be adequate but will be evaluated further during our follow-up inspection. Your response should be directed to Compliance Officer Jane E . Nelson at the address on the letterhead. If you have any questions regarding this letter, you may phone Ms. Nelson at (612) 758-7119. Sincerely, /S/ W. Charles Becoat Director Minneapolis District


http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g5373d.pdf



New Orleans District 297 Plus Park Blvd. Nashville, TN 37217 Telephone: 615-781-5380 Fax: 615-781-5391 May 17, 2006


WARNING LETTER


NO. 2006-NOL-06 FEDERAL EXPRESS OVERNIGHT DELIVERY Mr. William Shirley, Jr., Owner Louisiana.DBA Riegel By-Products 2621 State Street Dallas, Texas 75204


Dear Mr. Shirley:

On February 12, 17, 21, and 22, 2006, a U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) investigator inspected your rendering plant, located at 509 Fortson Street, Shreveport, Louisiana. The inspection revealed significant deviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 589.2000 [21 CFR 589.2000], Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). You failed to follow the requirements of this regulation; products being manufactured and distributed by your facility are misbranded within the meaning of Section 403(a)(1) [21 USC 343(a)(1)] of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act).


Our investigation found you failed to provide measures, including sufficient written procedures, to prevent commingling or cross-contamination and to maintain sufficient written procedures [21 CFR 589.2000(e)] because:


You failed to use clean-out procedures or other means adequate to prevent carryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into animal protein or feeds which may be used for ruminants. For example, your facility uses the same equipment to process mammalian and poultry tissues. However, you use only hot water to clean the cookers between processing tissues from each species. You do not clean the auger, hammer mill, grinder, and spouts after processing mammalian tissues.


You failed to maintain written procedures specifying the clean-out procedures or other means to prevent carryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into feeds which may be used for ruminants.

As a result, the poultry meal you manufacture may contain protein derived from mammalian tissues prohibited in ruminant feed. Pursuant to 21 CFR 589.2000(e)(1)(i), any products containing or may contain protein derived from mammalian tissues must be labeled, "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants." Since you failed to label a product which may contain protein derived from mammalian tissues with the required cautionary statement. the poultry meal is misbranded under Section 403(a)(1) [21 USC 343(a)(1)] of the Act.


This letter is not intended as an all-inclusive list of violations at your facility. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you are responsible for ensuring your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should take prompt action to correct these violations, and you should establish a system whereby violations do not recur. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in regulatory action, such as seizure and/or injunction, without further notice. You should notify this office in writing within 15 working days of receiving this letter, outlining the specific steps you have taken to bring your firm into compliance with the law. Your response should include an explanation of each step taken to correct the violations and prevent their recurrence. If corrective action cannot be completed within 15 working days, state the reason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will be completed. Include copies of any available documentation demonstrating corrections have been made. Your reply should be directed to Mark W. Rivero, Compliance Officer, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2424 Edenborn Avenue, Suite 410, Metairie, Louisiana 70001. If you have questions regarding any issue in this letter, please contact Mr. Rivero at (504) 219-8818, extension 103.


Sincerely, /S Carol S. Sanchez Acting District Director New Orleans District


http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g5883d.htm



now that's what i'm talken about. but those were shut down just after the


Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 09:04:42 -0700

Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy

Sender: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy

From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

Subject: MAD COW FEED BAN WARNING LETTERS USA 'update' (where did all Terry's MAD COW warning letters go?) Docket Management Docket: 02N-0273 - Substances Prohibited From ...

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be07.html


>>> Mr. Singeltary is correct that Dr. Detwiler asked participants to use the FDA ...... oh where, did all Terry's mad cow feed ban warning letters go$ >>>FDA ...

www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be07.html -


Subject: MAD COW FEED BAN WARNING LETTERS USA 'update' (where did all Terry's MAD COW warning letters go?) From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 09:04:42 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain

where, oh where, did all Terry's mad cow feed ban warning letters go$

FDA Cuts Back on Warnings

10/01/02

WASHINGTON -- The Food and Drug Administration has substantially cut back on warnings sent to companies that run afoul of its rules, a move the agency contends will result in more-effective enforcement but that critics say lets violators off the hook.

The drop results from a policy change in late February that requires the FDA chief counsel's office to clear all warning letters to ensure they are legally sound. Before the change, division and district offices around the country issued such letters unilaterally. In the six months since, the agency issued 279 warning letters, a drop of 64% from the same period last year, a review of agency records shows. The FDA says the chief counsel's office rejected only 6% of the 699 warning letters and other citations it reviewed. At the same time, division and district enforcers may be holding back letters they once would have sent.

SEE FULL STORY

http://online.wsj.com/


snip...end

10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. BLOOD LACED MBM IN COMMERCE USA 2007

Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINES -- CLASS II

___________________________________

PRODUCT

Bulk cattle feed made with recalled Darling's 85% Blood Meal, Flash Dried, Recall # V-024-2007

CODE

Cattle feed delivered between 01/12/2007 and 01/26/2007

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Pfeiffer, Arno, Inc, Greenbush, WI. by conversation on February 5, 2007.

Firm initiated recall is ongoing.

REASON

Blood meal used to make cattle feed was recalled because it was cross- contaminated with prohibited bovine meat and bone meal that had been manufactured on common equipment and labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

42,090 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

WI

___________________________________

PRODUCT

Custom dairy premix products: MNM ALL PURPOSE Pellet, HILLSIDE/CDL Prot- Buffer Meal, LEE, M.-CLOSE UP PX Pellet, HIGH DESERT/ GHC LACT Meal, TATARKA, M CUST PROT Meal, SUNRIDGE/CDL PROTEIN Blend, LOURENZO, K PVM DAIRY Meal, DOUBLE B DAIRY/GHC LAC Mineral, WEST PIONT/GHC CLOSEUP Mineral, WEST POINT/GHC LACT Meal, JENKS, J/COMPASS PROTEIN Meal, COPPINI - 8# SPECIAL DAIRY Mix, GULICK, L-LACT Meal (Bulk), TRIPLE J - PROTEIN/LACTATION, ROCK CREEK/GHC MILK Mineral, BETTENCOURT/GHC S.SIDE MK-MN, BETTENCOURT #1/GHC MILK MINR, V&C DAIRY/GHC LACT Meal, VEENSTRA, F/GHC LACT Meal, SMUTNY, A- BYPASS ML W/SMARTA, Recall # V-025-2007

CODE

The firm does not utilize a code - only shipping documentation with commodity and weights identified.

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Rangen, Inc, Buhl, ID, by letters on February 13 and 14, 2007. Firm initiated recall is complete.

REASON

Products manufactured from bulk feed containing blood meal that was cross contaminated with prohibited meat and bone meal and the labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

9,997,976 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

ID and NV

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR MARCH 21, 2007

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2007/ENF00996.html

NEW URL

http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/EnforcementReports/2007/ucm120446.htm


Thursday, March 19, 2009

MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF POUNDS OF MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE USA WITH ONGOING 12 YEARS OF DENIAL NOW, WHY IN THE WORLD DO WE TO TALK ABOUT THIS ANYMORE $$$

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/03/millions-and-millions-of-pounds-of-mad.html


Wednesday, January 28, 2009

TAFS1 Position Paper on Specified Risk Materials (January, 2009)

TAFS INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR TRANSMISSIBLE ANIMAL DISEASES AND FOOD SAFETY a non-profit Swiss Foundation

(January 2009)

TAFS1 Position Paper on Specified Risk Materials

http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2009/01/tafs1-position-paper-on-specified-risk.html


Sunday, June 07, 2009

L-TYPE-BSE, H-TYPE-BSE, C-TYPE-BSE, IBNC-TYPE-BSE, TME, CWD, SCRAPIE, CJD, NORTH AMERICA

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/06/l-type-bse-h-type-bse-c-type-bse-ibnc.html


Thursday, April 9, 2009

Docket No. FDA2002N0031 (formerly Docket No. 2002N0273) RIN 0910AF46 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/04/docket-no-fda2002n0031-formerly-docket.html


http://flounder068.vox.com/library/post/docket-no-fda2002n0031-formerly-docket-no-2002n0273-rin-0910af46.html


http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064808b3843&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf


Docket Management Docket: 02N-0273 - Substances Prohibited From Use in

Animal Food or Feed; Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed

Comment Number: EC -10

Accepted - Volume 2

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be07.html


PART 2

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be09.html


Docket APHIS-2006-0026 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Animal Identification and Importation of Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0026-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions, Identification of Ruminants and Processing and Importation of Commodities Public Submission APHIS-2006-0026-0012 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801e47e1


Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary

Comment 2006-2007 USA AND OIE POISONING GLOBE WITH BSE MRR POLICY

THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species.

MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did. ...

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f8151


Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singletary comment

January 28, 2007

Greetings APHIS,

I would kindly like to submit the following to ;

BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f8152&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8


Docket APHIS-2007-0033 Docket Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2007-0033-0001 Document Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Public Submission APHIS-2007-0033-0002.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singeltary comment

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648027c28e


Thursday, April 9, 2009

Docket No. FDA2002N0031 (formerly Docket No. 2002N0273) RIN 0910AF46 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/04/docket-no-fda2002n0031-formerly-docket.html


Thursday, March 19, 2009

MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF POUNDS OF MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE USA WITH ONGOING 12 YEARS OF DENIAL NOW, WHY IN THE WORLD DO WE TO TALK ABOUT THIS ANYMORE $$$

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/03/millions-and-millions-of-pounds-of-mad.html


http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2008/04/mbm-greaves-meat-offal-live-cattle.html


http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/


Thursday, April 30, 2009

FDA Issues Final Guidance for Renderers on Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed CVM Update Back April 30, 2009

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/04/fda-issues-final-guidance-for-renderers.html


Sunday, May 10, 2009

Identification and characterization of bovine spongiform encephalopathy cases diagnosed and NOT diagnosed in the United States

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/05/identification-and-characterization-of.html


TSS

Saturday, June 13, 2009

BSE FEED VIOLATIONS USA UPDATE From 01/01/2009 To 06/10/2009

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/06/bse-feed-violations-usa-update-from.html


Thursday, March 19, 2009

MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF POUNDS OF MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE USA WITH ONGOING 12 YEARS OF DENIAL

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/03/millions-and-millions-of-pounds-of-mad.html


Saturday, June 19, 2010

U.S. DENIED UPGRADED BSE STATUS FROM OIE

see full text and reasons why here ;

http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2010/06/us-denied-upgraded-bse-status-from-oie.html


Wednesday, December 29, 2010

TRANSMISSIBLE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY PRION END OF YEAR REPORT DECEMBER 29, 2010

http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2010/12/transmissible-spongiform-encephalopathy.html


Saturday, December 18, 2010

OIE Global Conference on Wildlife Animal Health and Biodiversity - Preparing for the Future (TSE AND PRIONS) Paris (France), 23-25 February 2011

http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2010/12/oie-global-conference-on-wildlife.html


Monday, January 17, 2011

Aerosols Transmit Prions to Immunocompetent and Immunodeficient Mice

http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/aerosols-transmit-prions-to.html


Sunday, August 09, 2009

CJD...Straight talk with...James Ironside...and...Terry Singeltary... 2009

http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2009/08/cjdstraight-talk-withjames.html


Tuesday, August 18, 2009

BSE-The Untold Story - joe gibbs and singeltary 1999 - 2009

http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/2009/08/bse-untold-story-joe-gibbs-and.html


TSS

Aerosols Transmit Prions to Immunocompetent and Immunodeficient Mice

Aerosols Transmit Prions to Immunocompetent and Immunodeficient Mice

Johannes Haybaeck1#¤a, Mathias Heikenwalder1#¤b, Britta Klevenz2#, Petra Schwarz1, Ilan Margalith1, Claire Bridel1, Kirsten Mertz1,3, Elizabeta Zirdum2, Benjamin Petsch2, Thomas J. Fuchs4, Lothar Stitz2*, Adriano Aguzzi1*

1 Department of Pathology, Institute of Neuropathology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland, 2 Institute of Immunology, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Tübingen, Germany, 3 Department of Pathology, Clinical Pathology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland, 4 Department of Computer Science, Machine Learning Laboratory, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

Abstract Top Prions, the agents causing transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, colonize the brain of hosts after oral, parenteral, intralingual, or even transdermal uptake. However, prions are not generally considered to be airborne. Here we report that inbred and crossbred wild-type mice, as well as tga20 transgenic mice overexpressing PrPC, efficiently develop scrapie upon exposure to aerosolized prions. NSE-PrP transgenic mice, which express PrPC selectively in neurons, were also susceptible to airborne prions. Aerogenic infection occurred also in mice lacking B- and T-lymphocytes, NK-cells, follicular dendritic cells or complement components. Brains of diseased mice contained PrPSc and transmitted scrapie when inoculated into further mice. We conclude that aerogenic exposure to prions is very efficacious and can lead to direct invasion of neural pathways without an obligatory replicative phase in lymphoid organs. This previously unappreciated risk for airborne prion transmission may warrant re-thinking on prion biosafety guidelines in research and diagnostic laboratories.

Author Summary Top Prions, which are the cause of fatal neurodegenerative disorders termed transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs), can be experimentally or naturally transmitted via prion-contaminated food, blood, milk, saliva, feces and urine. Here we demonstrate that prions can be transmitted through aerosols in mice. This also occurs in the absence of immune cells as demonstrated by experiments with mice lacking B-, T-, follicular dendritic cells (FDCs), lymphotoxin signaling or with complement-deficient mice. Therefore, a functionally intact immune system is not strictly needed for aerogenic prion infection. These results suggest that current biosafety guidelines applied in diagnostic and scientific laboratories ought to include prion aerosols as a potential vector for prion infection.

Citation: Haybaeck J, Heikenwalder M, Klevenz B, Schwarz P, Margalith I, et al. (2011) Aerosols Transmit Prions to Immunocompetent and Immunodeficient Mice. PLoS Pathog 7(1): e1001257. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1001257

Editor: David Westaway, University of Alberta, Canada

Received: March 22, 2010; Accepted: December 13, 2010; Published: January 13, 2011

Copyright: © 2011 Haybaeck et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: This work was supported in part by EU grants ANTEPRION and PRIORITY (LS), and the TSE-Forschungsprogramm des Landes Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany (LS). This work was also supported by grants from the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (AA), the EU grants LUPAS and PRIORITY (AA), the Novartis Research Foundation (AA), and an Advanced Grant of the European Research Council to AA. MH was supported by the Foundation for Research at the Medical Faculty, the Prof. Dr. Max-Cloetta foundation and the Bonizzi-Theler Foundation. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

* E-mail: adriano.aguzzi@usz.ch (AA); lothar.stitz@fli.bund.de (LS)

# These authors contributed equally to this work.

¤a Current address: Institute of Pathology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria

¤b Current address: Institute of Virology, Technical University München/Helmholtz Zentrum München, Munich, Germany

snip...

In summary, our results establish aerosols as a surprisingly efficient modality of prion transmission. This novel pathway of prion transmission is not only conceptually relevant for the field of prion research, but also highlights a hitherto unappreciated risk factor for laboratory personnel and personnel of the meat processing industry. In the light of these findings, it may be appropriate to revise current prion-related biosafety guidelines and health standards in diagnostic and scientific laboratories being potentially confronted with prion infected materials. While we did not investigate whether production of prion aerosols in nature suffices to cause horizontal prion transmission, the finding of prions in biological fluids such as saliva, urine and blood suggests that it may be worth testing this possibility in future studies.

http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1001257



Greetings,

This science is really old news, science that should have been taken seriously long ago. The ramifications from this could be monumental for all grazing livestock for human and animal consumption. The environmental poisoning of the land with prions from so many different strains, and so many different species here in the USA, and with these animals grazing and feeding off these prion toxic lands, and then rendered up for consumption for both man and animal, it's just a toxic mess. The fact the testing and surveillance for the TSE prion in the USA bovine was so flawed with corruption and fraud, there is no telling just how much of the pasture grazing land is contaminated. NOT to forget the meat-bone-meal for flowers, plants, etc., that most all of us have used, and still are in use, and the inhalation of these prions there from via this very mode of transmission. We were discussing this a decade ago. I mean, how long do we have to keep discussing all these potential routes and modes of transmission of the prion diseases that are killing people, before the industries involved take this seriously $


Then you have water tables contaminated with prion disease ;

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Detection of protease-resistant cervid prion protein in water from a CWD-endemic area

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/10/detection-of-protease-resistant-cervid.html


Friday, January 7, 2011

MEAT AND BONE MEAL AND MINERAL FEED ADDITIVES MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF ORAL PRION DISEASE TRANSMISSION

Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 74:161–166, 2011 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1528-7394 print / 1087-2620 online DOI: 10.1080/15287394.2011.529066

http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/meat-and-bone-meal-and-mineral-feed.html



April 6, 2010 12:45 PM

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. said...

Greetings,

I have been following the novel polyradiculoneuropathy that was identified at a pork abattoir with great interest.

MY concern are with not only the pig brains, but cattle brains and risk fact to Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy.

my concern ;

nasal aerosol CJD, never say never.

PLEASE note, certain orthopedic surgery and bone grinding is a risk factor for potential nasal aerosol transmission of TSE. There may be no documented case of this mode of transmission to date, however, this does not mean it has not, or cannot take place, and a keen watch should be mandated. There is recent science with other TSE that indeed this mode of transmission is real. AS well, precaution should be used when working with TSE and aerosol of the TSE agent at hand i.e. bone grinding for example.

PrPTSE has also been detected in olfactory epithelium in sporadic CJD patients at post mortem (11), and in the olfactory tract in vCJD


http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@ab/documents/digitalasset/dh_114045.pdf


http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@ab/documents/digitalasset/dh_111792.pdf


P10. Aerosol, Nasal, and Oral Transmission of Chronic Wasting Disease

Nathaniel D. Denkers1, Glenn C. Telling2 and Edward A. Hoover1

1Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Pathology Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523. E-mail: nddenk@lamar.colostate.edu 2Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics, and Department of Neurology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40536

Purpose: While the exact mechanisms of chronic wasting disease (CWD) prion transmission, entry, and trafficking remain incompletely elucidated, transmission by exposure of the oral and/or nasal mucous membranes seems certain. Little is known regarding the potential risk posed by aerosolized prions. In addition, as part of foraging, cervids likely experience minor lesions in the oral mucous membranes. We explored whether CWD may be transmissible by aerosol or nasal mucosal exposure and whether or not micro-abrasions to the lingual mucosa may enhance susceptibility to oral CWD infection in mice transgenetically expressing cervid PrP.

Methods: FVB mice transgenically expressing the normal cervid PrPC protein [Tg(cerPrP) mice] were exposed to CWD prions by either nose-only exposure to an aerosol (0.5 ml of a 5% w/v brain homogenate), by drop-wise instillation into the nostrils (10µl of a 10% w/v brain homogenate), or inoculated orally (same inoculum) with or without micro-abrasions on the lingual mucosa. Cohorts were sacrificed at 1, 2, 12, 52, 78, and 104 weeks post inoculation (pi) or when signs of neurologic disease were observed. Mice were assessed for PrPCWD by western blotting and immunohistochemistry, with particular scrutiny directed to the nasal mucosa, vomeronasal organ, tongue, lymphoid tissue, and brain.

Results: Six of 7 aerosol-exposed and 2 of 9 IN-inoculated Tg(cerPrP) mice developed clinical signs of neurologic dysfunction mandating euthanasia between 411 and 755 dpi. Between 296 and 515 dpi, 9 of 9 CWD-inoculated mice with lingual lesions developed clinical signs of neurologic dysfunction mandating euthanasia. Conversely, all mice without oral lesions remain asymptomatic at >575 dpi. All of the symptomatic mice were positive for PrPCWD by western blot and immunohistochemistry. No evidence of PrPCWD could be detected in any Tg(cerPrP) mice sacrificed and examined at any of the pre-terminal time points.

Conclusions: CWD can be transmitted by aerosol and nasal exposure--potentially implicating exposure via the respiratory mucosa in CWD. Micro-abrasions to the lingual surface substantially facilitated CWD transmission, suggesting a co-factor that may be significant in foraging cervids or other species. These findings could have implications for the mucosal transmission of other prion diseases.

http://www.neuroprion.org/resources/pdf_docs/conferences/prion2009/brochure-tse_workshop.pdf


P.4.26

Aerosol and intranasal transmission of CWD

http://www.prion2009.com/sites/default/files/Prion2009_Book_of_Abstracts.pdf


J Gen Virol (2010), DOI 10.1099/vir.0.017335-0 © 2010 Society for General Microbiology

Aerosol and Nasal Transmission of Chronic Wasting Disease in Cervidized Mice

Nathaniel D Denkers1, Davis M Seelig1, Glenn C. Telling2 and Edward A Hoover, Jr1,3

1 Colorado State University; 2 University of Kentucky Medical Center

These results demonstrate that CWD can be transmitted by aerosol (as well as nasal) exposure and suggest that exposure via the respiratory system merits consideration for prion disease transmission and biosafety.

Received 30 October 2009; accepted 15 February 2010.

http://vir.sgmjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/vir.0.017335-0v1


http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/83/13/6435


http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/83/8/3657


http://vet.sagepub.com/content/46/1/59.abstract


see ;


April 6, 2010 12:45 PM

http://neuropathologyblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/interferon-gamma-in-pig-pin.html



Aerosol and nasal transmission of chronic wasting disease in cervidized mice

Nathaniel D. Denkers1, Davis M. Seelig1, Glenn C. Telling2 and Edward A. Hoover1 1 Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Pathology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1619, USA 2 Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics, Sanders Brown Center of Aging and Department of Neurology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA Correspondence Edward A. Hoover edward.hoover@colostate.edu

Little is known regarding the potential risk posed by aerosolized prions. Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is transmitted horizontally, almost surely by mucosal exposure, and CWD prions are present in saliva and urine of infected animals. However, whether CWD may be transmissible by the aerosol or nasal route is not known. To address this question, FVB mice transgenetically expressing the normal cervid PrPC protein [Tg(cerPrP) mice] were exposed to CWD prions by either nose-only aerosol exposure or by drop-wise instillation into the nostrils. Mice were monitored for signs of disease for up to 755 days post-inoculation (p.i.) and by examination of tissues for lesions and PrPCWD after necropsy. In particular, nasal mucosa, vomeronasal organ, lungs, lymphoid tissue and the brain were assessed for PrPCWD by Western blotting and immunohistochemistry. Six of seven aerosol-exposed Tg(cerPrP) mice developed clinical signs of neurological dysfunction mandating euthanasia between 411 and 749 days p.i. In all these mice, CWD infection was confirmed by detection of spongiform lesions and PrPCWD in the brain. Two of nine intranasally inoculated Tg(cerPrP) mice also developed transmissible spongiform encephalopathy associated with PrPCWD between 417 and 755 days p.i. No evidence of PrPCWD was detected in CWD-inoculated Tg(cerPrP) mice examined at pre-terminal time points. These results demonstrate that CWD can be transmitted by aerosol (as well as nasal) exposure and suggest that exposure via the respiratory system merits consideration for prion disease transmission and biosafety.

http://vir.sgmjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/91/6/1651


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2010/11/cwd-update-98-november-10-2010.html



nasal aerosol CJD

PLEASE note, certain orthopedic surgery and bone grinding is a risk factor for potential nasal aerosol transmission of TSE. There may be no documented case of this mode of transmission to date, however, this does not mean it has not, or cannot take place, and a keen watch should be mandated. There is recent science with other TSE that indeed this mode of transmission is real. AS well, precaution should be used when working with TSE and aerosol of the TSE agent at hand i.e. bone grinding for example.

ALSO, there has been a documented case of husband and wife CJD, and a man and his cat, both with CJD. a cat with Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease instead of Feline Spongiform Encephalopathy raises many questions, as with the man and his wife with CJD. ...

Kindest Regards, Terry S. Singeltary Sr.


PrPTSE has also been detected in olfactory epithelium in sporadic CJD patients at post mortem (11), and in the olfactory tract in vCJD

http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@ab/documents/digitalasset/dh_114045.pdf


http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@ab/documents/digitalasset/dh_111792.pdf

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3390684



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...please see full text here ;


http://cshperspectives.cshlp.org/content/3/1/a006833.full.html#ref-24


***

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Alimentary prion infections: Touch-down in the intestine, Alzheimer, Parkinson disease and TSE mad cow diseases $ The Center for Consumer Freedom


http://betaamyloidcjd.blogspot.com/2010/12/alimentary-prion-infections-touch-down.html


http://betaamyloidcjd.blogspot.com/




Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories Fifth Edition 2007 (occupational exposure to prion diseases)


http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2008/08/biosafety-in-microbiological-and.html



snip...

In BASE, in addition to PrP-amyloid plaques in the olfactory bulb, the highest levels of PrPSc were recovered from the thalamus and olfactory regions.2 Also, in both captive and free-ranging mule deer with chronic wasting disease, the olfactory cortex has been found to be among the most severely affected areas of the brain.8 Such patterns may be solely a reflection of selective vulnerability of certain neuroanatomic loci and, in end-stage disease, a reflection of phenotype, but equally, they arouse speculation as to possible olfactory portals of infection or excretion of agent. In human transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs), PrPSc immunolabeling has been reported in the olfactory tract of a variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease patient, and in sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJD), selective deposition of PrPSc in olfactory glomeruli, olfactory tracts, and olfactory cortex is recorded.6 In the latter study, PrPSc was also reported in the cilia of olfactory receptor neurons and basal cells of the olfactory epithelium but not in the respiratory epithelium. Detection of PrPSc in an olfactory mucosa biopsy, performed 45 days after disease onset in a sCJD patient, led to the suggestion that the involvement of olfactory epithelium might be an early event in sCJD.6

snip...

The present study demonstrates that, in clinical cases, involvement of the olfactory lobe is a consistent phenotypic feature of classic BSE but, in contrast to BASE,3 it is not preferentially affected compared with the cerebral cortex or brainstem. In studies of the pathogenesis of classical BSE after oral exposure, infectivity has not been demonstrated in nasal mucosa,11 but it has been shown, albeit at low titer, in this tissue in clinical cases of scrapie of sheep and goats.5 The detection of PrPSc in olfactory bulb in this study and indeed in other TSEs in terminal disease suggests that olfactory pathways cannot be excluded as a secondary or ancillary route of infection.

http://www.vetpathology.org/cgi/content/abstract/46/1/59


http://www.vetpathology.org/cgi/reprint/46/1/59



see full text ;


http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/10/atypical-bse-bse-and-other-human-and.html



Friday, December 11, 2009

CWD, FECES, ORAL LESIONS, Aerosol and intranasal transmission

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/12/cwd-feces-oral-lesions-aerosol-and.html


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/


http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2010/06/cjd-annex-h-update-after-death.html


http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3681s2_09.pdf


Wednesday, December 29, 2010

TRANSMISSIBLE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY PRION END OF YEAR REPORT DECEMBER 29, 2010

http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2010/12/transmissible-spongiform-encephalopathy.html



TSS