| May 2, 2012: Update from APHIS Regarding a Detection of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) in the United States | |||
Contact:
Lyndsay Cole (970) 494-7410
Lawrence Hawkins (916) 930-5509
Lyndsay Cole (970) 494-7410
Lawrence Hawkins (916) 930-5509
Update from APHIS Regarding a
Detection of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) in the United States
On April 24, USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service confirmed the nation's 4th case of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) in an animal that was sampled for the disease at a rendering facility in central California. This animal was never presented for slaughter for human consumption, so at no time presented a risk to the food supply, or to human health in the United States.
Through its continuing
epidemiological investigation, APHIS--in collaboration with the California
Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA)--has identified that one progeny born
to the positive cow in the last 2 years was stillborn, and another has been
located on a site in another state. That animal has been appraised, humanely
euthanized, and sampled for BSE at the National Veterinary Services Laboratories
in Ames, Iowa. Test results for that animal are negative for BSE. No birth
cohort cattle have been located through the investigation.
A hold order has been placed on all
cattle at a second dairy (dairy 2) that is associated with the dairy of the
initial positive cow (also called the index dairy). Both dairies remain under
quarantine. Inventories of both the index dairy and dairy 2 have been completed
by CDFA. Records are still being matched and validated to determine if any
at-risk cattle may be present.
In addition, a calf ranch where the
initial positive cow was raised 10 years ago is being investigated.
The Food and Drug Administration and
CDFA continue the investigation of feed records at the index dairy, rendering
facility and calf ranch. To date, 10 feed firms have been identified as
suppliers for the index dairy during the time period of interest. At the
rendering facility, feed investigators confirmed that all domestic distribution
of meat and bone meal meets federal labeling requirements.
USDA will continue to work closely
with CDFA and FDA to provide additional information as it is
available.
The United States has a longstanding
system of three interlocking safeguards against BSE that protects public and
animal health in the United States, the most important of which is the removal
of specified risk materials - or the parts of an animal that would contain BSE
should an animal have the disease - from all animals presented for slaughter in
the United States. The second safeguard is a strong feed ban that protects
cattle from the disease. The third safeguard - which led to this detection - is
our ongoing BSE surveillance program that allows USDA to detect the disease if
it exists at very low levels in the U.S. cattle population.
#
Note to Reporters: USDA news
releases, program announcements and media advisories are available on the
Internet and through Really Simple Syndication (RSS) feeds. Go to the APHIS news
release page at www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom and click on the RSS feed link.
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD).
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD).
The United
States has a longstanding system of three interlocking safeguards against BSE
that protects public and animal health in the United States, the most important
of which is the removal of specified risk materials - or the parts of an animal
that would contain BSE should an animal have the disease - from all animals
presented for slaughter in the United States.
Valley Farm Meats (DBA Strasburg Provision, Inc) Issues Precautionary Recall for Beef Products Due to Possible Contamination with Prohibited Materials SRM Ohio Department of Agriculture and Ohio Department of Health
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/07/valley-farm-meats-dba-strasburg.html
YET, FSIS seems to find it important enough to list this recall from Ohio ;
Ohio Firm Recalls Various Beef Jerky Products due to Misbranding and Undeclared Allergens
Recall Release CLASS II RECALL FSIS-RC-053-2011 HEALTH RISK: LOW
Congressional and Public Affairs (202) 720-9113 Adam Tarr
WASHINGTON, July 22, 2011 –
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_053_2011_Release/index.asp
HOWEVER, look at the recalls of the past (see below), the first two were other voluntary recalls from other Companies, which i am using as an example (and see others that follow), but my question, WHY has the FSIS et al apparently chosen NOT to announce this recall on their website here ;
Valley Farm Meats (DBA Strasburg Provision, Inc) Issues Precautionary Recall for Beef Products Due to Possible Contamination with Prohibited Materials SRM Ohio Department of Agriculture and Ohio Department of Health
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/FSIS_Recalls/Open_Federal_Cases/index.asp
I have written both the FSIS and MEATINGPLACE.COM/, both of which have failed to report this important, life long exposure and human health risk factor for TSE from this voluntary recall, and all it got me was being banned from meatingplace.com/ again, and this time i did not even post anything, just sent them a kind note ;
see full text ;
SEE MORE SRM VIOLATIONS HERE
;
North Dakota Firm Recalls Whole Beef Head Products That Contain Prohibited Materials
Recall Release CLASS II RECALL FSIS-RC-023-2010 HEALTH RISK: LOW
Congressional and Public Affairs (202) 720-9113 Catherine Cochran
WASHINGTON, April 5, 2010 - North American Bison Co-Op, a New Rockford, N.D., establishment is recalling approximately 25,000 pounds of whole beef heads containing tongues that may not have had the tonsils completely removed, which is not compliant with regulations that require the removal of tonsils from cattle of all ages, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today.
Tonsils are considered a specified risk material (SRM) and must be removed from cattle of all ages in accordance with FSIS regulations. SRMs are tissues that are known to contain the infective agent in cattle infected with Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), as well as materials that are closely associated with these potentially infective tissues. Therefore, FSIS prohibits SRMs from use as human food to minimize potential human exposure to the BSE agent.
The product subject to recall includes: Various weight cases of "Beef Heads KEEP FROZEN." Each case bears the establishment number "EST. 18859" inside the USDA mark of inspection and a case code number "16999." "North Dakota Natural Beef" is printed in the bottom left-hand corner of each label.
The recalled products were produced between June 25, 2009, and February 19, 2010. These products were shipped to distribution centers in Md., Mich., and Minn. for further sale.
The problem was discovered during FSIS inspection activities at the establishment. FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer available to consumers.
Media with questions about the recall should contact Philip Wicke, Vice President of Operations, at (701) 356-7723. Consumers with questions about the recall should contact Jeremy Anderson, Director of Customer Service, at (952) 545-2495.
Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov. The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in English and Spanish and can be reached from l0 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday through Friday. Recorded food safety messages are available 24 hours a day. #
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_023_2010_Release/index.asp
Missouri Firm Recalls Cattle Heads That Contain Prohibited Materials
Recall Release CLASS II RECALL FSIS-RC-021-2008 HEALTH RISK: LOW
Congressional and Public Affairs (202) 720-9113 Amanda Eamich
WASHINGTON, June 26, 2008 – Paradise Locker Meats, a Trimble, Mo., establishment, is voluntarily recalling approximately 120 pounds of fresh cattle heads with tonsils not completely removed, which is not compliant with regulations that require the removal of tonsils from cattle of all ages, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service announced today.
Tonsils are considered a specified risk material (SRM) and must be removed from cattle of all ages in accordance with FSIS regulations. SRMs are tissues that are known to contain the infective agent in cattle infected with BSE, as well as materials that are closely associated with these potentially infective tissues. Therefore, FSIS prohibits SRMs from use as human food to minimize potential human exposure to the BSE agent.
The products subject to recall include: Boxes of “BEEF HEAD, PARADISE LOCKER MEATS.” Each shipping package bears the establishment numbers “EST. 31865” inside the USDA mark of inspection.
These products were sent to retail establishments and restaurants in the Kansas City, Kansas, area.
The problem was discovered through routine FSIS inspection that verified there had been incomplete removal of the tonsils by the recalling establishment.
Media and consumers with questions about the recall should contact company Production Supervisor Louis Fantasma at (816) 370-6328.
Consumers with food safety questions can “Ask Karen,” the FSIS virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov. The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in English and Spanish and can be reached from l0 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday through Friday. Recorded food safety messages are available 24 hours a day. #
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_021_2008_Release/index.asp
HAS the greed and money gotten so bad that the FSIS, USDA, APHIS, OIE et al, just decided that not only to exempt the atypical Scrapies and apparently now the BSE's, exempt them all, and just agreed to choose to not even speak about it anymore. i mean...really, the USDA and OIE have systematically covered up mad cow disease i.e. they call it SSS policy. where is USA burying them all at ? i do not accept the star trek like cloaking device that appears to be the only thing left that could be protecting the USA from mad cow disease....really. sadly, Canada has now taken the same low road as the USA in regards to discussing and making public documents on there mad cow cases. all this, 2011, with the science mounting, still follow the global myth of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory, and that all the sporadic CJDs (85%+ of all human TSE) are a mear happenstance of bad luck, when North America is plum full of different strains of the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy in different species, all of which over a period of time, decades, were rendered and fed to food producing animals for human and animal food...really. i really just don't buy it...tss
some history on SRM's IN COMMERCE ;
SEE FULL TEXT HERE ;
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Missouri Firm Recalls Cattle Heads That Contain Prohibited Materials SRMs
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/missouri-firm-recalls-cattle-heads-that.html
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Wisconsin Firm Recalls Beef Tongues That Contain Prohibited Materials SRM WASHINGTON, October 17, 2009
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/10/wisconsin-firm-recalls-beef-tongues.html
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Nebraska Firm Recalls Beef Tongues That Contain Prohibited Materials SRM WASHINGTON, Oct 15, 2009
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/10/nebraska-firm-recalls-beef-tongues-that.html
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Texas Firm Recalls Cattle Heads That Contain Prohibited Materials
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/06/texas-firm-recalls-cattle-heads-that.html
Friday, August 8, 2008
Texas Firm Recalls Cattle Heads That Contain Prohibited Materials SRMs 941,271 pounds with tonsils not completely removed
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/08/texas-firm-recalls-cattle-heads-that.html
Saturday, April 5, 2008
SRM MAD COW RECALL 406 THOUSAND POUNDS CATTLE HEADS WITH TONSILS KANSAS
http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/04/srm-mad-cow-recall-406-thousand-pounds.html
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Consumption of beef tongue: Human BSE risk associated with exposure to lymphoid tissue in bovine tongue in consideration of new research findings
http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/04/consumption-of-beef-tongue-human-bse.html
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Consumption of beef tongue: Human BSE risk associated with exposure to lymphoid tissue in bovine tongue in consideration of new research findings
http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/04/consumption-of-beef-tongue-human-bse.html
Friday, October 15, 2010
BSE infectivity in the absence of detectable PrPSc accumulation in the tongue and nasal mucosa of terminally diseased cattle
http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2010/10/bse-infectivity-in-absence-of.html
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIALS SRMs
http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2008/02/specified-risk-materials-srm.html
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/
http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/
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
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
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
PRION, TSE, typical, atypical BSE, aka mad cow disease, spray dried blood, feed, and a recipe for disaster
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/05/prion-tse-typical-atypical-bse-aka-mad.html
============================================
The second
safeguard is a strong feed ban that protects cattle from the disease.
LET’S see how that mad cow triple firewall aka mad cow feed ban is working
out $$$
*** BANNED MAD COW FEED IN THE USA IN COMMERCE TONS AND TONS
THIS is just ONE month report, of TWO recalls of prohibited banned MBM,
which is illegal, mixed with 85% blood meal, which is still legal, but yet we
know the TSE/BSE agent will transmit blood. we have this l-BSE in North America
that is much more virulent and there is much concern with blood issue and l-BSE
as there is with nvCJD in humans. some are even starting to be concerned with
sporadic CJD and blood, and there are studies showing transmission there as
well. ... this is one month recall page, where 10 MILLION POUNDS OF BANNED MAD
COW FEED WENT OUT INTO COMMERCE, TO BE FED OUT. very little of the product that
reaches commerce is ever returned via recall, very, very little. this was 2007,
TEN YEARS AFTER THE AUGUST 4, 1997, PARTIAL AND VOLUNTARY MAD COW FEED BAN IN
THE USA, that was nothing but ink on paper. i have listed the tonnage of mad cow
feed that was in ALABAMA in one of the links too, this is where the infamous
g-h-BSEalabama case was, a genetic relation matching the new sporadic CJD in the
USA. seems this saga just keeps getting better and better.......$$$
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
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)
BANNED MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE IN ALABAMA
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
______________________________
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
###
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
###
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
###
please see full text ;
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed/Adulterated/Misbranded Rangen
Inc 2/11/10 USA
Monday, March 1, 2010
ANIMAL PROTEIN I.E. MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE A REVIEW 2010
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Feed Safety and BSE/Ruminant Feed Ban Support Project (U18)
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
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
Archive Number 20101206.4364 Published Date 06-DEC-2010 Subject
PRO/AH/EDR>
Prion disease update 2010 (11) PRION DISEASE UPDATE 2010 (11)
Sunday, February 5, 2012
February 2012 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of
BSE
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.
==============================================
The third
safeguard - which led to this detection - is our ongoing BSE surveillance
program that allows USDA to detect the disease if it exists at very low levels
in the U.S. cattle population.
How the California cow got the disease remains unknown. Government
officials
expressed confidence that contaminated food was not the source, saying
the
animal had atypical L-type BSE, a rare variant not generally associated
with
an animal consuming infected feed.
However, a BSE expert said that consumption of infected material is the
only
known way that cattle get the disease under natural conditons.
“In view of what we know about BSE after almost 20 years experience,
contaminated feed has been the source of the epidemic,” said Paul Brown,
a
scientist retired from the National Institute of Neurological Diseases
and
Stroke.
BSE is not caused by a microbe. It is caused by the misfolding of the
so-called “prion protein” that is a normal constituent of brain and
other
tissues. If a diseased version of the protein enters the brain somehow,
it
can slowly cause all the normal versions to become misfolded.
It is possible the disease could arise spontaneously, though such an
event
has never been recorded, Brown said.
counterpart: Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD).
In a statement released on 24 April, Karen Ross, Secretary of the
California
Department of Food and Agriculture said, “The detection of BSE shows
that
the surveillance program in place in California and around the country
is
working.” Food safety advocates such as Yonkers, New York, -based
Consumers
Union say it’s a warning sign that surveillance is inadequate and needs
to
be stepped up.
Ross’s statement also makes a point of noting a key feature of this
particular case: The infected cow carried what is known as ‘L-type’ BSE,
a
version of the disease that has not been detected before in the US and
has
so far not been associated with transmission through animal feed. As
the
policy debate over testing rumbles on, here is a short guide to what
is
known and not known about this rare strain and its unexpected
appearance.
STATEMENT FROM CDFA SECRETARY KAREN ROSS ON USDA ANNOUNCEMENT OF
DETECTION
OF BSE
Release #12-016
Print This Release
SACRAMENTO, April 24, 2012 – CDFA Secretary Karen Ross issued this
statement
following the USDA’s announcement of the detection of atypical bovine
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in a California dairy cow:
“The detection of BSE shows that the surveillance program in place in
California and around the country is working. Milk and beef remain safe
to
consume. The disease is not transmitted through milk. Because of the
strength of the food protection system, the cow did not enter the food
or
feed supply. There are numerous safeguards in place to prevent BSE
from
entering the food chain.
“The atypical BSE designation is important because this is a very rare
form
of BSE not generally associated with an animal consuming infected feed.
CDFA
veterinarians are working with the USDA to investigate this case and
to
identify whether additional cows are at risk. Feed restrictions in place
in
California and around the country for the last 15 years minimize that
risk
to the greatest degree possible. We will provide additional
information
about this case as it becomes available.”
The USDA announcement may be viewed at:
CDC - Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Variant Creutzfeldt ... Dr.
Paul
Brown is Senior Research Scientist in the Laboratory of Central
Nervous
System ... Address for correspondence: Paul Brown, Building 36, Room
4A-05,
...
CDC DR. PAUL BROWN TSE EXPERT COMMENTS 2006
In an article today for United Press International, science reporter
Steve
Mitchell writes:
Analysis: What that mad cow means
By STEVE MITCHELL UPI Senior Medical Correspondent
WASHINGTON, March 15 (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture was
quick
to assure the public earlier this week that the third case of mad cow
disease did not pose a risk to them, but what federal officials have
not
acknowledged is that this latest case indicates the deadly disease has
been
circulating in U.S. herds for at least a decade.
The second case, which was detected last year in a Texas cow and which
USDA
officials were reluctant to verify, was approximately 12 years old.
These two cases (the latest was detected in an Alabama cow) present a
picture of the disease having been here for 10 years or so, since it
is
thought that cows usually contract the disease from contaminated feed
they
consume as calves. The concern is that humans can contract a fatal,
incurable, brain-wasting illness from consuming beef products
contaminated
with the mad cow pathogen.
"The fact the Texas cow showed up fairly clearly implied the existence
of
other undetected cases," Dr. Paul Brown, former medical director of
the
National Institutes of Health's Laboratory for Central Nervous System
Studies and an expert on mad cow-like diseases, told United Press
International. "The question was, 'How many?' and we still can't
answer
that."
Brown, who is preparing a scientific paper based on the latest two mad
cow
cases to estimate the maximum number of infected cows that occurred in
the
United States, said he has "absolutely no confidence in USDA tests
before
one year ago" because of the agency's reluctance to retest the Texas
cow
that initially tested positive.
USDA officials finally retested the cow and confirmed it was infected
seven
months later, but only at the insistence of the agency's inspector
general.
"Everything they did on the Texas cow makes everything they did before
2005
suspect," Brown said.
Despite this, Brown said the U.S. prevalence of mad cow, formally known
as
bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE, did not significantly
threaten
human or cattle health.
"Overall, my view is BSE is highly unlikely to pose any important
risk
either in cattle feed or human feed," he said.
However, Jean Halloran of Consumers Union in Yonkers, N.Y., said
consumers
should be troubled by the USDA's secrecy and its apparent plan to
dramatically cut back the number of mad cow tests it conducts.
"Consumers should be very concerned about how little we know about
the
USDA's surveillance program and the failure of the USDA to reveal
really
important details," Halloran told UPI. "Consumers have to be really
concerned if they're going to cut back the program," she added.
Last year the USDA tested more than 300,000 animals for the disease, but
it
has proposed, even in light of a third case, scaling back the program
to
40,000 tests annually.
"They seem to be, in terms of actions and policies, taking a lot more
seriously the concerns of the cattle industry than the concerns of
consumers," Halloran said. "It's really hard to know what it takes to
get
this administration to take action to protect the public."
The USDA has insisted that the safeguards of a ban on incorporating
cow
tissue into cattle feed (which is thought to spread the disease) and
removal
of the most infectious parts of cows, such as the brain and spinal
cord,
protect consumers. But the agency glosses over the fact that both of
these
systems have been revealed to be inadequately implemented.
The feed ban, which is enforced by the Food and Drug Administration,
has
been criticized by the Government Accountability Office in two reports,
the
most recent coming just last year. The GAO said the FDA's enforcement of
the
ban continues to have weaknesses that "undermine the nation's
firewall
against BSE."
USDA documents released last year showed more than 1,000 violations of
the
regulations requiring the removal of brains and spinal cords in at least
35
states, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, with some plants being
cited
repeatedly for infractions. In addition, a violation of similar
regulations
that apply to beef exported to Japan is the reason why Japan closed
its
borders to U.S. beef in January six weeks after reopening them.
Other experts also question the adequacy of the USDA's surveillance
system.
The USDA insists the prevalence of mad cow disease is low, but the
agency
has provided few details of its surveillance program, making it
difficult
for outside experts to know if the agency's monitoring plan is
sufficient.
"It's impossible to judge the adequacy of the surveillance system
without
having a breakdown of the tested population by age and risk status,"
Elizabeth Mumford, a veterinarian and BSE expert at Safe Food Solutions
in
Bern, Switzerland, a company that provides advice on reducing mad cow
risk
to industry and governments, told UPI.
"Everybody would be happier and more confident and in a sense it might
be
able to go away a little bit for (the USDA) if they would just publish
a
breakdown on the tests," Mumford added.
UPI requested detailed records about animals tested under the USDA's
surveillance plan via the Freedom of Information Act in May 2004 but
nearly
two years later has not received any corresponding documents from the
agency, despite a federal law requiring agencies to comply within 30
days.
This leaves open the question of whether the USDA is withholding the
information, does not have the information or is so haphazardly
organized
that it cannot locate it.
Mumford said the prevalence of the disease in U.S. herds is probably
quite
low, but there have probably been other cases that have so far gone
undetected. "They're only finding a very small fraction of that low
prevalence," she said.
Mumford expressed surprise at the lack of concern about the deadly
disease
from American consumers. "I would expect the U.S. public to be more
concerned," she said.
Markus Moser, a molecular biologist and chief executive officer of
Prionics,
a Swiss firm that manufactures BSE test kits, told UPI one concern is
that
if people are infected, the mad cow pathogen could become "humanized"
or
more easily transmitted from person to person.
"Transmission would be much easier, through all kinds of medical
procedures"
and even through the blood supply, Moser said.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
PAUL BROWN COMMENT TO ME ON THIS ISSUE
Tuesday, September 12, 2006 11:10 AM
"Actually, Terry, I have been critical of the USDA handling of the mad
cow
issue for some years, and with Linda Detwiler and others sent lengthy
detailed critiques and recommendations to both the USDA and the
Canadian
Food Agency." ...END...TSS
IN A NUT SHELL ;
(Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 23 May 2006)
11. Information published by the OIE is derived from appropriate
declarations made by the official Veterinary Services of Member Countries.
The OIE is not responsible for inaccurate publication of country disease
status based on inaccurate information or changes in epidemiological status
or other significant events that were not promptly reported to then Central
Bureau............http://www.oie.int/eng/Session2007/RF2006.pdf
Audit Report
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program Phase II
and
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Controls Over BSE Sampling, Specified Risk Materials, and Advanced Meat
Recovery Products - Phase III
Report No. 50601-10-KC January 2006
Finding 2 Inherent Challenges in Identifying and Testing High-Risk Cattle
Still Remainhttp://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-10-KC.pdf
Report to Congressional Requesters:
February 2005:
Mad Cow Disease:
FDA's Management of the Feed Ban Has Improved, but Oversight Weaknesses Continue to Limit Program Effectiveness:
[Hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-101]:http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05101.html
http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d05101high.pdf
January 2002 MAD COW DISEASE Improvements in the Animal Feed Ban and
Other Regulatory Areas Would Strengthen U.S. Prevention Efforts GAO-02-183http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02183.pdf
BIO-RAD BSE TEST POLITICAL REPLY TO TSS
Subject: FSIS NOTICE SAMPLE COLLECTION FROM CATTLE UNDER THE BOVINE
SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY (BSE)
ONGOING SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 17:32:58 -0600
Subject: Re: USDA/APHIS JUNE 2004 'ENHANCED' BSE/TSE COVER UP UPDATE
DECEMBER 19, 2004 USA
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:27:06 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
BSE-L
snip...
>
> OH, i did ask Bio-Rad about this with NO reply to date;
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: USA BIO-RADs INCONCLUSIVEs
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:37:28 -0600
> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
> To: susan_berg@bio-rad.com
>
>
>
> Hello Susan and Bio-Rad,
>
> Happy Holidays!
>
> I wish to ask a question about Bio-Rad and USDA BSE/TSE testing
> and there inconclusive. IS the Bio-Rad test for BSE/TSE that complicated,
> or is there most likely some human error we are seeing here?
>
> HOW can Japan have 2 positive cows with
> No clinical signs WB+, IHC-, HP- ,
> BUT in the USA, these cows are considered 'negative'?
>
> IS there more politics working here than science in the USA?
>
> What am I missing?
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: USDA: More mad cow testing will demonstrate beef's safety
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 09:26:19 -0600
> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
> snip...end
>
>
> Experts doubt USDA's mad cow results
snip...END
WELL, someone did call me from Bio-Rad about this,
however it was not Susan Berg.
but i had to just about take a blood oath not to reveal
there name. IN fact they did not want me to even mention
this, but i feel it is much much to important. I have omitted
any I.D. of this person, but thought I must document this ;
Bio-Rad, TSS phone conversation 12/28/04
Finally spoke with ;
Bio-Rad Laboratories
2000 Alfred Nobel Drive
Hercules, CA 94547
Ph: 510-741-6720
Fax: 510-741-5630
Email: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
at approx. 14:00 hours 12/28/04, I had a very pleasant
phone conversation with XXXX XXXXX about the USDA
and the inconclusive BSE testing problems they seem
to keep having. X was very very cautious as to speak
directly about USDA and it's policy of not using WB.
X was very concerned as a Bio-Rad official of retaliation
of some sort. X would only speak of what other countries
do, and that i should take that as an answer. I told X
I understood that it was a very loaded question and X
agreed several times over and even said a political one.
my question;
Does Bio-Rad believe USDA's final determination of False positive,
without WB, and considering the new
atypical TSEs not showing positive with -IHC and -HP ???
ask if i was a reporter. i said no, i was with CJD Watch
and that i had lost my mother to hvCJD. X did not
want any of this recorded or repeated.
again, very nervous, will not answer directly about USDA for fear of
retaliation, but again said X tell
me what other countries are doing and finding, and that
i should take it from there.
"very difficult to answer"
"very political"
"very loaded question"
outside USA and Canada, they use many different confirmatory tech. in
house WB, SAF, along with
IHC, HP, several times etc. you should see at several
talks meetings (TSE) of late Paris Dec 2, that IHC- DOES NOT MEAN IT IS
NEGATIVE. again, look what
the rest of the world is doing.
said something about Dr. Houston stating;
any screening assay, always a chance for human
error. but with so many errors (i am assuming
X meant inconclusive), why are there no investigations, just false
positives?
said something about ''just look at the sheep that tested IHC- but were
positive''. ...
TSS
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Your questions
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:58:11 -0800
From: To: flounder@wt.net
Hi Terry:
............................................snip Let me know your phone
number so I can talk to you about the Bio-Rad BSE test.
Thank you
Regards
Bio-Rad Laboratories
2000 Alfred Nobel Drive
Hercules, CA 94547
Ph: 510-741-6720
Fax: 510-741-5630
Email: =================================
snip...end...TSS
TSS REPORT ON 2ND TEJAS MAD COW Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:12:15 -0600 (the one
that did NOT get away, thanks to the Honorable Phyllis Fong)
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:12:15 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To: Carla Everett
References: <[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask] us>
Greetings Carla,still hear a rumor;
Texas single beef cow not born in Canada no beef entered the food chain?
and i see the TEXAS department of animal health is ramping up forsomething,
but they forgot a url for update?I HAVE NO ACTUAL CONFIRMATION YET...can you
confirm???terry
==============================
==============================
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:38:21 -0600
From: Carla Everett
To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
References: <[log in to unmask]>
The USDA has made a statement, and we are referring all callers to the USDA
web site. We have no informationabout the animal being in Texas. CarlaAt
09:44 AM 11/19/2004, you wrote:>Greetings Carla,>>i am getting
unsubstantiated claims of this BSE 'inconclusive' cow is from>TEXAS. can you
comment on this either way please?>>thank you,>Terry S. Singeltary Sr.>>
===================
===================
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:33:20 -0600
From: Carla Everett
To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
References: <[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask] us>
<[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]
us> <[log in to unmask]>
our computer department was working on a place holder we could postUSDA's
announcement of any results. There are no results to be announced tonightby
NVSL, so we are back in a waiting mode and will post the USDA
announcementwhen we hear something.At 06:05 PM 11/22/2004, you wrote:>why
was the announcement on your TAHC site removed?>>Bovine Spongiform
Encephalopathy:>November 22: Press Release title here >>star image More BSE
information>>>>terry>>Carla Everett wrote:>>>no confirmation on the U.S.'
inconclusive test...>>no confirmation on location of
animal.>>>>>>==========================
==========================
THEN, 7+ MONTHS OF COVER-UP BY JOHANN ET AL! no doubt about it now $$$
NO, it's not pretty, hell, im not pretty, but these are the facts, take em
or leave em, however, you cannot change them.
with kindest regards,
I am still sincerely disgusted and tired in sunny Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
FULL 130 LASHINGS TO USDA BY OIG againhttp://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-10-KC.pdf
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Statement
May 4, 2004
Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242
Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA
Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms
On Friday, April 30 th , the Food and Drug Administration learned that a cow
with central nervous system symptoms had been killed and shipped to a
processor for rendering into animal protein for use in animal feed.
FDA, which is responsible for the safety of animal feed, immediately began
an investigation. On Friday and throughout the weekend, FDA investigators
inspected the slaughterhouse, the rendering facility, the farm where the
animal came from, and the processor that initially received the cow from the
slaughterhouse.
FDA's investigation showed that the animal in question had already been
rendered into "meat and bone meal" (a type of protein animal feed). Over the
weekend FDA was able to track down all the implicated material. That
material is being held by the firm, which is cooperating fully with FDA.
Cattle with central nervous system symptoms are of particular interest
because cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, also known as
"mad cow disease," can exhibit such symptoms. In this case, there is no way
now to test for BSE. But even if the cow had BSE, FDA's animal feed rule
would prohibit the feeding of its rendered protein to other ruminant animals
(e.g., cows, goats, sheep, bison).
FDA is sending a letter to the firm summarizing its findings and informing
the firm that FDA will not object to use of this material in swine feed
only. If it is not used in swine feed, this material will be destroyed. Pigs
have been shown not to be susceptible to BSE. If the firm agrees to use the
material for swine feed only, FDA will track the material all the way
through the supply chain from the processor to the farm to ensure that the
feed is properly monitored and used only as feed for pigs.
To protect the U.S. against BSE, FDA works to keep certain mammalian protein
out of animal feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. FDA established
its animal feed rule in 1997 after the BSE epidemic in the U.K. showed that
the disease spreads by feeding infected ruminant protein to cattle.
Under the current regulation, the material from this Texas cow is not
allowed in feed for cattle or other ruminant animals. FDA's action
specifying that the material go only into swine feed means also that it will
not be fed to poultry.
FDA is committed to protecting the U.S. from BSE and collaborates closely
with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on all BSE issues. The animal feed
rule provides crucial protection against the spread of BSE, but it is only
one of several such firewalls. FDA will soon be improving the animal feed
rule, to make this strong system even stronger.
####
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html
http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d05101high.pdf
January 2002 MAD COW DISEASE Improvements in the Animal Feed Ban and
Other Regulatory Areas Would Strengthen U.S. Prevention Efforts GAO-02-183http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02183.pdf
BIO-RAD BSE TEST POLITICAL REPLY TO TSS
Subject: FSIS NOTICE SAMPLE COLLECTION FROM CATTLE UNDER THE BOVINE
SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY (BSE)
ONGOING SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 17:32:58 -0600
Subject: Re: USDA/APHIS JUNE 2004 'ENHANCED' BSE/TSE COVER UP UPDATE
DECEMBER 19, 2004 USA
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:27:06 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
BSE-L
snip...
>
> OH, i did ask Bio-Rad about this with NO reply to date;
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: USA BIO-RADs INCONCLUSIVEs
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:37:28 -0600
> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
> To: susan_berg@bio-rad.com
>
>
>
> Hello Susan and Bio-Rad,
>
> Happy Holidays!
>
> I wish to ask a question about Bio-Rad and USDA BSE/TSE testing
> and there inconclusive. IS the Bio-Rad test for BSE/TSE that complicated,
> or is there most likely some human error we are seeing here?
>
> HOW can Japan have 2 positive cows with
> No clinical signs WB+, IHC-, HP- ,
> BUT in the USA, these cows are considered 'negative'?
>
> IS there more politics working here than science in the USA?
>
> What am I missing?
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: USDA: More mad cow testing will demonstrate beef's safety
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 09:26:19 -0600
> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
> snip...end
>
>
> Experts doubt USDA's mad cow results
snip...END
WELL, someone did call me from Bio-Rad about this,
however it was not Susan Berg.
but i had to just about take a blood oath not to reveal
there name. IN fact they did not want me to even mention
this, but i feel it is much much to important. I have omitted
any I.D. of this person, but thought I must document this ;
Bio-Rad, TSS phone conversation 12/28/04
Finally spoke with ;
Bio-Rad Laboratories
2000 Alfred Nobel Drive
Hercules, CA 94547
Ph: 510-741-6720
Fax: 510-741-5630
Email: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
at approx. 14:00 hours 12/28/04, I had a very pleasant
phone conversation with XXXX XXXXX about the USDA
and the inconclusive BSE testing problems they seem
to keep having. X was very very cautious as to speak
directly about USDA and it's policy of not using WB.
X was very concerned as a Bio-Rad official of retaliation
of some sort. X would only speak of what other countries
do, and that i should take that as an answer. I told X
I understood that it was a very loaded question and X
agreed several times over and even said a political one.
my question;
Does Bio-Rad believe USDA's final determination of False positive,
without WB, and considering the new
atypical TSEs not showing positive with -IHC and -HP ???
ask if i was a reporter. i said no, i was with CJD Watch
and that i had lost my mother to hvCJD. X did not
want any of this recorded or repeated.
again, very nervous, will not answer directly about USDA for fear of
retaliation, but again said X tell
me what other countries are doing and finding, and that
i should take it from there.
"very difficult to answer"
"very political"
"very loaded question"
outside USA and Canada, they use many different confirmatory tech. in
house WB, SAF, along with
IHC, HP, several times etc. you should see at several
talks meetings (TSE) of late Paris Dec 2, that IHC- DOES NOT MEAN IT IS
NEGATIVE. again, look what
the rest of the world is doing.
said something about Dr. Houston stating;
any screening assay, always a chance for human
error. but with so many errors (i am assuming
X meant inconclusive), why are there no investigations, just false
positives?
said something about ''just look at the sheep that tested IHC- but were
positive''. ...
TSS
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Your questions
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:58:11 -0800
From: To: flounder@wt.net
Hi Terry:
............................................snip Let me know your phone
number so I can talk to you about the Bio-Rad BSE test.
Thank you
Regards
Bio-Rad Laboratories
2000 Alfred Nobel Drive
Hercules, CA 94547
Ph: 510-741-6720
Fax: 510-741-5630
Email: =================================
snip...end...TSS
TSS REPORT ON 2ND TEJAS MAD COW Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:12:15 -0600 (the one
that did NOT get away, thanks to the Honorable Phyllis Fong)
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:12:15 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To: Carla Everett
References: <[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask] us>
Greetings Carla,still hear a rumor;
Texas single beef cow not born in Canada no beef entered the food chain?
and i see the TEXAS department of animal health is ramping up forsomething,
but they forgot a url for update?I HAVE NO ACTUAL CONFIRMATION YET...can you
confirm???terry
==============================
==============================
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:38:21 -0600
From: Carla Everett
To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
References: <[log in to unmask]>
The USDA has made a statement, and we are referring all callers to the USDA
web site. We have no informationabout the animal being in Texas. CarlaAt
09:44 AM 11/19/2004, you wrote:>Greetings Carla,>>i am getting
unsubstantiated claims of this BSE 'inconclusive' cow is from>TEXAS. can you
comment on this either way please?>>thank you,>Terry S. Singeltary Sr.>>
===================
===================
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:33:20 -0600
From: Carla Everett
To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
References: <[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask] us>
<[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]
us> <[log in to unmask]>
our computer department was working on a place holder we could postUSDA's
announcement of any results. There are no results to be announced tonightby
NVSL, so we are back in a waiting mode and will post the USDA
announcementwhen we hear something.At 06:05 PM 11/22/2004, you wrote:>why
was the announcement on your TAHC site removed?>>Bovine Spongiform
Encephalopathy:>November 22: Press Release title here >>star image More BSE
information>>>>terry>>Carla Everett wrote:>>>no confirmation on the U.S.'
inconclusive test...>>no confirmation on location of
animal.>>>>>>==========================
==========================
THEN, 7+ MONTHS OF COVER-UP BY JOHANN ET AL! no doubt about it now $$$
NO, it's not pretty, hell, im not pretty, but these are the facts, take em
or leave em, however, you cannot change them.
with kindest regards,
I am still sincerely disgusted and tired in sunny Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
FULL 130 LASHINGS TO USDA BY OIG againhttp://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-10-KC.pdf
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Statement
May 4, 2004
Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242
Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA
Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms
On Friday, April 30 th , the Food and Drug Administration learned that a cow
with central nervous system symptoms had been killed and shipped to a
processor for rendering into animal protein for use in animal feed.
FDA, which is responsible for the safety of animal feed, immediately began
an investigation. On Friday and throughout the weekend, FDA investigators
inspected the slaughterhouse, the rendering facility, the farm where the
animal came from, and the processor that initially received the cow from the
slaughterhouse.
FDA's investigation showed that the animal in question had already been
rendered into "meat and bone meal" (a type of protein animal feed). Over the
weekend FDA was able to track down all the implicated material. That
material is being held by the firm, which is cooperating fully with FDA.
Cattle with central nervous system symptoms are of particular interest
because cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, also known as
"mad cow disease," can exhibit such symptoms. In this case, there is no way
now to test for BSE. But even if the cow had BSE, FDA's animal feed rule
would prohibit the feeding of its rendered protein to other ruminant animals
(e.g., cows, goats, sheep, bison).
FDA is sending a letter to the firm summarizing its findings and informing
the firm that FDA will not object to use of this material in swine feed
only. If it is not used in swine feed, this material will be destroyed. Pigs
have been shown not to be susceptible to BSE. If the firm agrees to use the
material for swine feed only, FDA will track the material all the way
through the supply chain from the processor to the farm to ensure that the
feed is properly monitored and used only as feed for pigs.
To protect the U.S. against BSE, FDA works to keep certain mammalian protein
out of animal feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. FDA established
its animal feed rule in 1997 after the BSE epidemic in the U.K. showed that
the disease spreads by feeding infected ruminant protein to cattle.
Under the current regulation, the material from this Texas cow is not
allowed in feed for cattle or other ruminant animals. FDA's action
specifying that the material go only into swine feed means also that it will
not be fed to poultry.
FDA is committed to protecting the U.S. from BSE and collaborates closely
with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on all BSE issues. The animal feed
rule provides crucial protection against the spread of BSE, but it is only
one of several such firewalls. FDA will soon be improving the animal feed
rule, to make this strong system even stronger.
####
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Mad Cow Disease typical and atypical strains, was there a cover-up ?
MAD COW
USDA ATYPICAL L-TYPE BASE BSE
***Oral Transmission of L-type Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy in Primate
Model
***Infectivity in skeletal muscle of BASE-infected cattle
***feedstuffs- It also suggests a similar cause or source for atypical BSE
in these countries.
***Also, a link is suspected between atypical BSE and some apparently
sporadic cases of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans.
full text ;
atypical L-type BASE BSE
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
BSE MAD COW LETTERS TO USDA (Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture) and FDA
(Magaret Hamburg, Commissioner of FDA) May 1, 2012
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
ARS FLIP FLOPS ON SRM REMOVAL FOR ATYPICAL L-TYPE BASE BSE RISK HUMAN AND
ANIMAL HEALTH
Subject: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Importation of
Bovines and Bovine Products APHIS-2008-0010-0008
RIN:0579-AC68
Comment from Terry Singeltary
| Document ID: APHIS-2008-0010-0008 | Document Type: Public Submission |
This is comment on Proposed Rule: Bovine Spongiform
Encephalopathy; Importation of Bovines and Bovine
Products
Docket
ID:
|
RIN:0579-AC68 |
Topics: No Topics associated with this
document
View
Document:
| ||
Comment:
comment submission Document ID
APHIS-2008-0010-0001 Greetings USDA, OIE et al, what a difference it makes with
science, from one day to the next. i.e. that mad cow gold card the USA once
held. up until that fateful day in December of 2003, the science of BSE was NO
IMPORTS TO USA FROM BSE COUNTRY. what a difference a day makes$ now that the
shoe is on the other foot, the USDA via the OIE, wants to change science again,
just for trade $ I implore the OIE decision and policy makers, for the sake of
the world, to refuse any status quo of the USA BSE risk assessment. if at al,
the USA BSE GBR should be raise to BSE GBR IV, for the following reasons. North
America is awash with many different TSE Prion strains, in many different
species, and they are mutating and spreading. IF the OIE, and whatever policy
makers, do anything but raise the risk factor for BSE in North America, they I
would regard that to be highly suspicious. IN fact, it would be criminal in my
opinion, because the OIE knows this, and to knowingly expose the rest of the
world to this dangerous pathogen, would be ‘knowingly’ and ‘willfully’, just for
the almighty dollar, once again. I warned the OIE about all this, including the
risk factors for CWD, and the fact that the zoonosis potential was great, way
back in 2002. THE OIE in collaboration with the USDA, made the legal trading of
the atypical Nor-98 Scrapie a legal global commodity. yes, thanks to the OIE and
the USDA et al, it’s now legal to trade the atypical Nor-98 Scrapie strain all
around the globe. IF you let them, they will do the same thing with atypical BSE
and CWD (both strains to date). This with science showing that indeed these TSE
prion strains are transmissible. I strenuously urge the OIE et al to refuse any
weakening to the USA trade protocols for the BSE TSE prion disease (all
strains), and urge them to reclassify the USA with BSE GBR IV risk factor. SEE
REFERENCE SOURCES IN ATTACHMENTS
SEE Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Attachment WORD FILE ;
Sunday, March 11, 2012
APHIS Proposes New Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Import Regulations in Line with International Animal Health Standards Proposal Aims to Ensure Health of the U.S. Beef Herd, Assist in Negotiations
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
TSS
