April 20, 2009
National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center Cases Examined1 (December 31, 2008)
National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center Cases Examined1
(December 31, 2008)
Year Total Referrals2 Prion Disease Sporadic Familial Iatrogenic vCJD
1996 & earlier 42 32 28 4 0 0
1997 115 68 59 9 0 0
1998 93 53 45 7 1 0
1999 115 69 61 8 0 0
2000 151 103 89 14 0 0
2001 210 118 108 9 0 0
2002 258 147 123 22 2 0
2003 273 176 135 41 0 0
2004 335 184 162 21 0 13
2005 346 193 154 38 1 0
2006 380 192 159 32 0 14
2007 370 212 185 26 0 0
2008 383 228 182 23 0 0
TOTAL 30715 17756 1490 254 4 2
1 Listed based on the year of death or, if not available, on year of referral; 2 Cases with suspected prion disease for which brain tissue and/or blood (in familial cases) were submitted; 3 Disease acquired in the United Kingdom; 4 Disease acquired in Saudi Arabia; 5 Includes 20 cases in which the diagnosis is pending, and 17 inconclusive cases; 6 Includes 25 cases with type determination pending in which the diagnosis of vCJD has been excluded.
Rev 2/13/09 National
http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/pdf/case-table.pdf
http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/resources-casereport.html
http://www.aan.com/news/?event=read&article_id=4397&page=72.45.45
*5 Includes 20 cases in which the diagnosis is pending, and 17 inconclusive cases; *6 Includes 25 cases with type determination pending in which the diagnosis of vCJD has been excluded.
Greetings,
it would be interesting to know what year these atypical cases occurred, as opposed to lumping them in with the totals only.
are they accumulating ?
did they occur in one year, two years, same state, same city ?
location would be very interesting ?
age group ?
sex ?
how was it determined that nvCJD was ruled out ?
from 1997, the year i started dealing with this nightmare, there were 28 cases (per this report), up until 2007 where the total was 185 cases (per this report), and to date 2008 is at 182. a staggering increase in my opinion, for something that just happens spontaneously as some would have us believe. i don't believe it, not in 85%+ of all sporadic CJD cases. actually, i do not believe yet that anyone has proven that any of the sporadic CJD cases have been proven to be a spontaneous misfolding of a protein. there are many potential routes and sources for the sporadic CJD's. ...TSS
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
TSS COMMENT SUBMISSION # 5
Docket ID FDA-2002-N-0031 Docket Title Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed Document ID FDA-2002-N-0031-0132 Document Title Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed Delay of Effective Date
Completely Edited Version
PRION ROUNDTABLE
2003
page 29
Dr. Linda Detwiler
The UK imports into the US.
There were 496 total, and 173 of the UK imports could have entered the US feed system. People don't like to hear this, but it's possible that one of the UK imports in the US entered the animal feed system and was exported to Canada. That's a possibility, because they import 50% of their feed from the US.
From 1994, we imported 11 million head of cattle from Canada. Most of these were feedlot animals for slaughter, but there were about 500,000 breeding animals. A number of Canada's cull cows were slaughtered here and could have introduced infectivity into our system. Even today we have Canadian imports in the country, breeding animals that were brought in prior to the ban and reside here.
We have feed ban exemptions: plate waste, poultry litter. We still allow that if it comes off a human plate, or if it's trimmings, it can be palletized and fed to ruminants. That might be a small amount, but it could allow spinal cord in certain cuts to be fed back to ruminants. Poultry litter or feather meal could be significant. Poultry is getting quite a bit of ruminant material in the US because it cannot go back to ruminants. Poultry and pigs are getting a substantial amount. Poultry litter is not only what passes through the chicken, but think about how chickens eat. They spill a lot on the floor. That stuff is still allowed to be fed back to cattle. That's a direct break in the ban, except that it's legal. Ruminants are getting ruminant material.
Unfiltered tallow: tallow is a lipid material. However, if it's not filtered, there are protein residues. That's meat and bone meal. That's allowed to be fed, so that's another legal exception where you can feed ruminant meat and bone meal through unfiltered tallow. We don't have an SRM ban and the 40 animals are the ones that if you have the agent, they introduce the most infectivity back into the animal food chain when they're rendered.
What's our on-farm compliance? We really don't know. ...
snip...end...Dr. Linda Detwiler
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/04/docket-no-fda2002n0031-formerly-docket.html#comments
Sunday, April 12, 2009
r-calf and the USA mad cow problem, don't look, don't find, and then blame Canada
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/r-calf-and-usa-mad-cow-problem-dont.html
----- Original Message -----
From: TERRY SINGELTARY To: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000126/!x-usc:mailto:CJD-L@LISTS.AEGEE.ORG Cc: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000126/!x-usc:mailto:BSE-L@LISTS.AEGEE.ORG ; mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000126/!x-usc:mailto:cjdvoice@yahoogroups.com ; mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000126/!x-usc:mailto:BLOODCJD@YAHOORGOUPS.COM ; mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000126/!x-usc:mailto:MADcow@lists.iatp.org
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 12:20 PM
Subject: [CJDVoice] r-calf and the USA mad cow problem, don't look, don't find, and then blame Canada
one final appeal;
Greetings cjdvoice, cjd foundation members and lurkers,
don't be fooled cjdvoice. r-calf jumped on the mad cow band wagon only after a federal judge ordered a temporary halt to the shipment of bone-in cuts of meat to the United States. the mad cow was out of the barn in North America, they knew it, and jumped on that to better surve themselves to block Canadian beef. it had nothing to do with consumer safety, and it had everything to do with r-calf closing the Canadian border so USA cattle ranchers would have a closed market here. it's all about money$ r-calf whines about Canada and it's feed ban, and it's mad cows, while the USA has been covering up mad cow disease, this is fact. it took the OIG and an act of congress to finally document that Texas mad cow. this beside the one they did succeed in covering up in Texas. then you had 9,200 suspect mad cows that were ONLY TESTED with the least likely test to detect mad cow disease.
USDA: In 9,200 cases only one type of test could be used
WASHINGTON (AP)--The U.S. Department of Agriculture acknowledged Aug. 17 that its testing options for bovine spongiform encephalopathy were limited in 9,200 cases despite its effort to expand surveillance throughout the U.S. herd.
In those cases, only one type of test was used--one that failed to detect the disease in an infected Texas cow.
The department posted the information on its website because of an inquiry from The Associated Press.
Conducted over the past 14 months, the tests have not been included in the department's running tally of BSE tests since last summer. That total reached 439,126 on Aug. 17.
"There's no secret program," the department's chief veterinarian, John Clifford, said in an interview. "There has been no hiding, I can assure you of that."
Officials intended to report the tests later in an annual report, Clifford said.
These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC.
In the Texas case, officials had declared the cow free of disease in November after an IHC test came back negative. The department's inspector general ordered an additional kind of test, which confirmed the animal was infected.
Veterinarians in remote locations have used the preservative on tissue to keep it from degrading on its way to the department's laboratory in Ames, Iowa. Officials this year asked veterinarians to stop using preservative and send fresh or chilled samples within 48 hours.
The department recently investigated a possible case of BSE that turned up in a preserved sample. Further testing ruled out the disease two weeks ago.
Scientists used two additional tests--rapid screening and Western blot--to help detect BSE in the country's second confirmed case, in a Texas cow in June. They used IHC and Western blot to confirm the first case, in a Washington state cow in December 2003.
"The IHC test is still an excellent test," Clifford said. "These are not simple tests, either."
Clifford pointed out that scientists reran the IHC several times and got conflicting results. That happened, too, with the Western blot test. Both tests are accepted by international animal health officials.
Date: 8/25/05
http://www.hpj.com/archives/2005/aug05/aug29/BSEtestoptionswerelimited.cfm
""These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC."
THIS WAS DONE FOR A REASON!
THE IHC test has been proven to be the LEAST LIKELY to detect BSE/TSE in the bovine, and these were probably from the most high risk cattle pool, the ones the USDA et al, SHOULD have been testing. ...TSS
USDA 2003
We have to be careful that we don't get so set in the way we do things that we forget to look for different emerging variations of disease. We've gotten away from collecting the whole brain in our systems. We're using the brain stem and we're looking in only one area. In Norway, they were doing a project and looking at cases of Scrapie, and they found this where they did not find lesions or PRP in the area of the obex. They found it in the cerebellum and the cerebrum. It's a good lesson for us. Ames had to go back and change the procedure for looking at Scrapie samples. In the USDA, we had routinely looked at all the sections of the brain, and then we got away from it. They've recently gone back. Dr. Keller: Tissues are routinely tested, based on which tissue provides an 'official' test result as recognized by APHIS.
Dr. Detwiler: That's on the slaughter. But on the clinical cases, aren't they still asking for the brain? But even on the slaughter, they're looking only at the brainstem. We may be missing certain things if we confine ourselves to one area.
snip.............
Dr. Detwiler: It seems a good idea, but I'm not aware of it. Another important thing to get across to the public is that the negatives do not guarantee absence of infectivity. The animal could be early in the disease and the incubation period. Even sample collection is so important. If you're not collecting the right area of the brain in sheep, or if collecting lymphoreticular tissue, and you don't get a good biopsy, you could miss the area with the PRP in it and come up with a negative test. There's a new, unusual form of Scrapie that's been detected in Norway. We have to be careful that we don't get so set in the way we do things that we forget to look for different emerging variations of disease. We've gotten away from collecting the whole brain in our systems. We're using the brain stem and we're looking in only one area. In Norway, they were doing a project and looking at cases of Scrapie, and they found this where they did not find lesions or PRP in the area of the obex. They found it in the cerebellum and the cerebrum. It's a good lesson for us. Ames had to go back and change the procedure for looking at Scrapie samples. In the USDA, we had routinely looked at all the sections of the brain, and then we got away from it. They've recently gone back.
Dr. Keller: Tissues are routinely tested, based on which tissue provides an 'official' test result as recognized by APHIS .
Dr. Detwiler: That's on the slaughter. But on the clinical cases, aren't they still asking for the brain? But even on the slaughter, they're looking only at the brainstem. We may be missing certain things if we confine ourselves to one area.
snip...
FULL TEXT;
Completely Edited Version PRION ROUNDTABLE
Accomplished this day, Wednesday, December 11, 2003, Denver, Colorado
2005
=============================
CDC DR. PAUL BROWN TSE EXPERT COMMENTS 2006
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 USDA did before 2005 suspect," Brown said. ...snip...end
http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID=20060315-055557-1284r
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, ...
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/brown.htm
In this context, a word is in order about the US testing program. After the discovery of the first (imported) cow in 2003, the magnitude of testing was much increased, reaching a level of >400,000 tests in 2005 (Figure 4). Neither of the 2 more recently indigenously infected older animals with nonspecific clinical features would have been detected without such testing, and neither would have been identified as atypical without confirmatory Western blots. Despite these facts, surveillance has now been decimated to 40,000 annual tests (USDA news release no. 0255.06, July 20, 2006) and invites the accusation that the United States will never know the true status of its involvement with BSE.
In short, a great deal of further work will need to be done before the phenotypic features and prevalence of atypical BSE are understood. More than a single strain may have been present from the beginning of the epidemic, but this possibility has been overlooked by virtue of the absence of widespread Western blot confirmatory testing of positive screening test results; or these new phenotypes may be found, at least in part, to result from infections at an older age by a typical BSE agent, rather than neonatal infections with new "strains" of BSE. Neither alternative has yet been investigated.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/02/report-on-testing-ruminants-for-tses-in.html
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://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/r-calf-and-usa-mad-cow-problem-dont.html#comments
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/cjd-foundation-sides-with-r-calfers-no.html
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/cjd-foundation-sides-with-r-calfers-no.html#comments
Greetings,
THE UKBSEnvCJD only theory, is a similar theory put forth now by R-CALF and the CJD Foundation, in terms of the CANADABSE only theory, which in my opinion would be virtually impossible. To believe in this masquerade, will only enhance the spreading of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy of all strains in the North American Bovine, and human TSEs there from, over the next decades to come, from a multitude of proven and potential routes and sources. This masquerade that R-CALF and the CJD Foundation has put forth, has put all of us in the USA at risk, just by their udder denial of the BSE (typical and atypical) problem in the U.S.A., which has been completely ignored and covered up. ...TSS
rare atypical strain of sporadic cjd ??? seems these rare strains are increasing ???
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease presenting as severe depression: a case report
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2009/02/creutzfeldt-jacob-disease-presenting-as.html
A case-control study of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in Switzerland: analysis of potential risk factors with regard to an increased CJD incidence in the years 2001-2004
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2009/02/case-control-study-of-sporadic.html
Thursday, July 10, 2008
A New Prionopathy update July 10, 2008
snip...
DOES ANYONE BESIDES ME SEE A PATTERN YET ???
Vickey Rimmer, 16, DID NOT DIE FROM nvCJD, she died from a form of sporadic CJD, whatever the hell that is. and there have been 16 year old die from sporadic CJD in the USA as well.
SIMPLY PUT, the ukbsenvcjd only theory was wrong from day one. the elderly are expendable, pets and kids are not.
Science was dictated by 'big buisness' after the Vickey Rimmer case with the ukbsenvcjd only myth.
snip...
Sporadic creutzfeldt-jakob disease in two adolescents
http://jnnp.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/jnnp.2006.104570v1
see full text sporadic CJD the big lie;
snip...
IT seems we have come full circle from the 'ORIGINAL 10' i.e. the 1st 10 adolescents in the UKBSEnvCJD only theory. and now we find us at the 1st 10 in USA, or is it the first 10, or the tip of the iceburg, many that went undocumented ???
lets look at the full circle, to date ;
http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/07/new-prionopathy-update-july-10-2008.html
Sunday, August 10, 2008
A New Prionopathy OR more of the same old BSe and sporadic CJD
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2008/08/new-prionopathy-or-more-of-same-old-bse.html
HUMAN and ANIMAL TSE Classifications i.e. mad cow disease and the UKBSEnvCJD only theory JUNE 2008
snip...
Tissue infectivity and strain typing of the many variants Manuscript of the human and animal TSEs are paramount in all variants of all TSE. There must be a proper classification that will differentiate between all these human TSE in order to do this. With the CDI and other more sensitive testing coming about, I only hope that my proposal will some day be taken seriously. ...
snip...
http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/06/human-and-animal-tse-classifications-ie.html
Elsevier Editorial System(tm) for The Lancet Infectious Diseases Manuscript Draft Manuscript Number: Title: HUMAN and ANIMAL TSE Classifications i.e. mad cow disease and the UKBSEnvCJD only theory Article Type: Personal View Corresponding Author: Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Corresponding Author's Institution: na First Author: Terry S Singeltary, none Order of Authors: Terry S Singeltary, none; Terry S. Singeltary
Abstract:
TSEs have been rampant in the USA for decades in many species, and they all have been rendered and fed back to animals for human/animal consumption. I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2007. snip...
see full text 31 pages ;
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
Saturday, April 04, 2009
An unusually presenting case of sCJD-The VV1 subtype
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2009/04/unusually-presenting-case-of-scjdthe.html
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy h-BSE ATYPICAL USA 2008 Annual Report Research Project: Study of Atypical Bse
Location: Virus and Prion Diseases of Livestock
2008 Annual Report
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/01/bovine-spongiform-encephalopathy-h-bse.html
Thursday, December 04, 2008 2:37 PM
"we have found that H-BSE can infect humans."
personal communication with Professor Kong. ...TSS
see full text ;
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/02/atypical-bse-north-america-update.html
Friday, November 30, 2007
CJD QUESTIONNAIRE USA CWRU AND CJD FOUNDATION
http://cjdquestionnaire.blogspot.com/
Sunday, April 12, 2009 BSE MAD COW TESTING USA 2009 FIGURES Month Number of Tests
Feb 2009 -- 1,891
Jan 2009 -- 4,620
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/surveillance/ongoing_surv_results.shtml
see full text ;
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/04/bse-mad-cow-testing-usa-2009-figures.html
Friday, April 17, 2009
REPORT ON THE INVESTIGATION OF THE FIFTEENTH CASE OF BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY (BSE) IN CANADA
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/04/report-on-investigation-of-fifteenth.html
Thursday, October 18, 2007
BSE BASE MAD COW TESTING TEXAS, USA, AND CANADA, A REVIEW OF SORTS
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2007/10/bse-base-mad-cow-testing-texas-usa-and.html
P.S. SEE CANADA CJD STATISTICS ;
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/hcai-iamss/cjd-mcj/cjdss-ssmcj/stats-eng.php
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 Views Add Comments
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f8152&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f8152
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f8152&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [flounder9@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 1:09 PM
To: FSIS RegulationsComments
Subject: [Docket No. FSIS-2006-0011] FSIS Harvard Risk Assessment of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf
From:Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [flounder9@verizon.net]
Sent:Thursday, September 08, 2005 6:17 PM
To:fsis.regulationscomments@fsis.usda.gov
Subject: [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle
Greetings FSIS,
I would kindly like to submit the following to [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/03-025IFA/03-025IFA-2.pdf
APHIS-2007-0033-0002.1
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 Views
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648027c28e
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f3413&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu5HPsehJxqcAHHZXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTBybnZlZnRlBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkAw--/SIG=14fvnkcvd/EXP=1240073039/**http%3a//www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer%3fobjectId=09000064801f3413%26disposition=attachment%26contentType=msw8
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu8CGsuhJVHUBgUFXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTBzaDVoc25xBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMTEEY29sbwNhYzIEdnRpZAM-/SIG=14fcobjm6/EXP=1240073222/**http%3a//www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer%3fobjectId=09000064801f8152%26disposition=attachment%26contentType=msw8
http//www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Mar03/031403/96N-0417-EC-2.htm
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648027c28e
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&d=APHIS-2006-0041-0006
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
RTF] 155 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ...File Format: Rich Text Format - View as HTML Mar 18, 2005 ... D. FDA Perspective and Questions for Committee 173 ..... Agenda Item: Committee Updates - Summary of the TSEAC Meeting - David Asher, MD, OBRR, FDA ...... They are from Mr. Terry Singletary and Dr. Gary Haynes. ...... We also have started opening dockets for comments to the dockets. ...
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/AC/05/transcripts/2005-4096t1.rtf
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/slides/3923s1_OPH.pdf
http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/ac/04/minutes/2004-4075M1_Summary%20minutes.pdf
http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/AC/05/slides/2005-4189oph_1.pdf
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/DOCKETS/dockets/02n0276/02N-0276-EC-254.htm
Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Date: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PST
August 24, 2005
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings APHIS ET AL,
My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;
PROPOSED RULES
Exportation and importation of animals and animal products:
Whole cuts of boneless beef from-
Japan,
48494-48500 [05-16422]
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=0900006480086ebc&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw6
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed
PLEASE SEE FULL TEXT HERE ;
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-no-03-080-1-usda-issues-proposed.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, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???
go figure. ...
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 No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION]
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt
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
PDF]Freas, William TSS SUBMISSION
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat -
Page 1. J Freas, William From: Sent: To: Subject: Terry S. Singeltary
Sr. [flounder@wt.net] Monday, January 08,200l 3:03 PM freas ...
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3681s2_09.pdf
Asante/Collinge et al, that BSE transmission to the 129-methionine
genotype can lead to an alternate phenotype that is indistinguishable
from type 2 PrPSc, the commonest _sporadic_ CJD;
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/slides/3923s1_OPH.htm
Docket Management Docket: 96N-0417 - Current Good Manufacturing Practice in Manufacturing, Packing, or Holding Dietary Ingredients a Comment Number: EC -2 Accepted - Volume 7
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Mar03/031403/96N-0417-EC-2.htm
Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION TO DOCKET 2003N-0312]
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt
# Docket No: 02-088-1 RE-Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; [TSS SUBMISSION ON POTENTIAL FOR BSE/TSE & FMD 'SUITCASE BOMBS'] - TSS 1/27/03 (0)
Docket Management
Docket: 02N-0276 - Bioterrorism Preparedness; Registration of Food Facilities, Section 305 Comment Number: EC-254 [TSS SUBMISSION]
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02n0276/02N-0276-EC-254.htm
Dockets Entered On October 2, 2003 Table of Contents, Docket #, Title, 1978N-0301,
OTC External Analgesic Drug Products, ... EMC 7, Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol #: 1, ...
www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/oct03/100203/100203.htm
Daily Dockets Entered on 02/05/03
DOCKETS ENTERED on 2/5/03. ... EMC 4 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol#: 2. ... Vol#: 1.
03N-0009 Federal Preemption of State & Local Medical Device Requireme. ...
www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Feb03/020503/020503.htm
Docket Management
Docket: 02N-0370 - Neurological Devices; Classification of Human Dura Mater
Comment Number: EC -1
Accepted - Volume 1
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be11.html
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004bdfe.html
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004bdfc.html
Daily Dockets - 04/10/03
00D-1662 Use of Xenotransplantation Products in Humans. EMC 98 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol#: 3. 01F ... www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Apr03/041003/041003.htm - 05-20-2003 - Cached
DOCKET-- 03D-0186 -- FDA Issues Draft Guidance on Use of Material From Deer and Elk in Animal Feed; Availability
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:47:37 -0500
EMC 1 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol #: 1
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jun03/060903/060903.htm
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/oct03/100203/100203.htm
PLEASE SEE FULL TEXT SUBMISSION ;
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-03d-0186-fda-issues-draft.html
01N-0423 Substances Prohibited from use in animal food/Feed Ruminant
APE 5 National Renderers Association, Inc. Vol#: 2
APE 6 Animal Protein Producers Industry Vol#: 2
APE 7 Darling International Inc. Vol#: 2
EMC 1 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol#: 3
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/01/Oct01/101501/101501.htm
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Mad Cow Disease typical and atypical strains, was there a cover-up ?
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/08/bovine-spongiform-encephalopathy-mad.html
In this context, a word is in order about the US testing program. After the discovery of the first (imported) cow in 2003, the magnitude of testing was much increased, reaching a level of >400,000 tests in 2005 (Figure 4). Neither of the 2 more recently indigenously infected older animals with nonspecific clinical features would have been detected without such testing, and neither would have been identified as atypical without confirmatory Western blots. Despite these facts, surveillance has now been decimated to 40,000 annual tests (USDA news release no. 0255.06, July 20, 2006) and invites the accusation that the United States will never know the true status of its involvement with BSE.
In short, a great deal of further work will need to be done before the phenotypic features and prevalence of atypical BSE are understood. More than a single strain may have been present from the beginning of the epidemic, but this possibility has been overlooked by virtue of the absence of widespread Western blot confirmatory testing of positive screening test results; or these new phenotypes may be found, at least in part, to result from infections at an older age by a typical BSE agent, rather than neonatal infections with new "strains" of BSE. Neither alternative has yet been investigated.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm
CDC DR. PAUL BROWN TSE EXPERT COMMENTS 2006
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 USDA did before 2005 suspect," Brown said. ...snip...end
http://www.upi.com/
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, ...
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/brown.htm
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."
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0703&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=8125
A New Prionopathy OR more of the same old BSe and sporadic CJD
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2008/08/new-prionopathy-or-more-of-same-old-bse.html
Communicated by: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
[In submitting these data, Terry S. Singeltary Sr. draws attention to the steady increase in the "type unknown" category, which, according to their definition, comprises cases in which vCJD could be excluded. The total of 26 cases for the current year (2007) is disturbing, possibly symptomatic of the circulation of novel agents. Characterization of these agents should be given a high priority. - Mod.CP]
http://pro-med.blogspot.com/2007/11/proahedr-prion-disease-update-2007-07.html
http://www.promedmail.org/pls/askus/f?p=2400:1001:6833194127530602005::NO::F2400_P1001_BACK_PAGE,F2400_P1001_PUB_MAIL_ID:1010,39963
There is a growing number of human CJD cases, and they were presented last week in San Francisco by Luigi Gambatti(?) from his CJD surveillance collection.
He estimates that it may be up to 14 or 15 persons which display selectively SPRPSC and practically no detected RPRPSC proteins.
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/1006-4240t1.htm
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/2006-4240t1.pdf
sporadic Fatal Familial Insomnia
http://sporadicffi.blogspot.com/
THE PATHOLOGICAL PROTEIN
Hardcover, 304 pages plus photos and illustrations. ISBN 0-387-95508-9
June 2003
BY Philip Yam
CHAPTER 14 LAYING ODDS
Answering critics like Terry Singeltary, who feels that the U.S. under- counts CJD, Schonberger conceded that the current surveillance system has errors but stated that most of the errors will be confined to the older population.
http://www.thepathologicalprotein.com/
The Lancet Infectious Diseases, Volume 3, Issue 8, Page 463, August 2003
doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(03)00715-1Cite or Link Using DOI
Tracking spongiform encephalopathies in North America
Original TextXavier Bosch
"My name is Terry S Singeltary Sr, and I live in Bacliff, Texas. I lost my mom to hvCJD (Heidenhain variant CJD) and have been searching for answers ever since. What I have found is that we have not been told the truth. CWD in deer and elk is a small portion of a much bigger problem."
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(03)00715-1/fulltext
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473309903007151/%20fulltext
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12906010
http://infection.thelancet.com/journal/journal.isa
JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
MARCH 26, 2003
RE-Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease in the United States
Email Terry S. Singeltary:
mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000126/!x-usc:mailto:flounder@wt.net
I lost my mother to hvCJD (Heidenhain Variant CJD). I would like to comment on the CDC's attempts to monitor the occurrence of emerging forms of CJD. Asante, Collinge et al [1] have reported that BSE transmission to the 129-methionine genotype can lead to an alternate phenotype that is indistinguishable from type 2 PrPSc, the commonest sporadic CJD. However, CJD and all human TSEs are not reportable nationally. CJD and all human TSEs must be made reportable in every state and internationally. I hope that the CDC does not continue to expect us to still believe that the 85%+ of all CJD cases which are sporadic are all spontaneous, without route/source. We have many TSEs in the USA in both animal and man. CWD in deer/elk is spreading rapidly and CWD does transmit to mink, ferret, cattle, and squirrel monkey by intracerebral inoculation. With the known incubation periods in other TSEs, oral transmission studies of CWD may take much longer. Every victim/family of CJD/TSEs should be asked about route and source of this agent. To prolong this will only spread the agent and needlessly expose others. In light of the findings of Asante and Collinge et al, there should be drastic measures to safeguard the medical and surgical arena from sporadic CJDs and all human TSEs. I only ponder how many sporadic CJDs in the USA are type 2 PrPSc?
http://www.neurology.org/cgi/eletters/60/2/176#535
Diagnosis and Reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Singeltary, Sr et al. JAMA.2001; 285: 733-734. Vol. 285 No. 6, February 14, 2001 JAMA
Diagnosis and Reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease
To the Editor: In their Research Letter, Dr Gibbons and colleagues1 reported that the annual US death rate due to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) has been stable since 1985. These estimates, however, are based only on reported cases, and do not include misdiagnosed or preclinical cases. It seems to me that misdiagnosis alone would drastically change these figures. An unknown number of persons with a diagnosis of Alzheimer disease in fact may have CJD, although only a small number of these patients receive the postmortem examination necessary to make this diagnosis. Furthermore, only a few states have made CJD reportable. Human and animal transmissible spongiform encephalopathies should be reportable nationwide and internationally.
Terry S. Singeltary, Sr Bacliff, Tex
1. Gibbons RV, Holman RC, Belay ED, Schonberger LB. Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in the United States: 1979-1998. JAMA. 2000;284:2322-2323. FREE FULL TEXT
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/285/6/733?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=singeltary&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/285/6/733?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=singeltary&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT
2 January 2000
British Medical Journal U.S. Scientist should be concerned with a CJD epidemic in the U.S., as well
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/320/7226/8/b#6117
15 November 1999
British Medical Journal vCJD in the USA * BSE in U.S.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/319/7220/1312/b#5406
Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/
***Atypical forms of BSE have emerged which, although rare, appear to be more virulent than the classical BSE that causes vCJD.***
Progress Report from the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center
An Update from Stephen M. Sergay, MB, BCh & Pierluigi Gambetti, MD
April 3, 2008
http://www.aan.com/news/?event=read&article_id=4397&page=72.45.45
USA PRION UNIT BLOG
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/
Sunday, April 20, 2008 Progress Report from the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center April 3, 2008
Atypical forms of BSE have emerged which, although rare, appear to be more virulent than the classical BSE that causes vCJD.
see full text ;
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2008/04/progress-report-from-national-prion.html
CJD TEXAS (cjd clusters)
http://cjdtexas.blogspot.com/
USA WRITTEN CJD QUESTIONNAIRE ???
http://cjdquestionnaire.blogspot.com/
The statistical incidence of CJD cases in the United States has been revised to reflect that there is one case per 9000 in adults age 55 and older. Eighty-five percent of the cases are sporadic, meaning there is no known cause at present.
http://www.cjdfoundation.org/fact.html
Attending Dr.: Date / Time Admitted : 12/14/97 1228
UTMB University of Texas Medical Branch Galveston, Texas 77555-0543 (409) 772-1238 Fax (409) 772-5683 Pathology Report
FINAL AUTOPSY DIAGNOSIS Autopsy' Office (409)772-2858
FINAL AUTOPSY DIAGNOSIS
I. Brain: Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Heidenhain variant.
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2008/07/heidenhain-variant-creutzfeldt-jakob.html
Thursday, February 26, 2009
'Harmless' prion protein linked to Alzheimer's disease Non-infectious form of prion protein could cause brain degeneration ???
http://betaamyloidcjd.blogspot.com/2009/02/harmless-prion-protein-linked-to.html
CJD1/9 0185
Ref: 1M51A
IN STRICT CONFIDENCE
TRANSMISSION OF ALZHEIMER-TYPE PLAQUES TO PRIMATES
1. CMO will wish to be aware that a meeting was held at DH yesterday, 4 January, to discuss the above findings. It was chaired by Professor Murray (Chairman of the MRC Co-ordinating Committee on Research in the Spongiform Encephalopathies in Man), and attended by relevant experts in the fields of Neurology, Neuropathology, molecular biology, amyloid biochemistry, and the spongiform encephalopathies, and by representatives of the MRC and AFRC.
2. Briefly, the meeting agreed that:
i) Dr Ridley et als findings of experimental induction of p amyloid in primates were valid, interesting and a significant advance in the understanding of neurodegeneradve disorders;
ii) there were no immediate implications for the public health, and no further safeguards were thought to be necessary at present; and
iii) additional research was desirable, both epidemiological and at the molecular level. Possible avenues are being followed up by DH and the MRC, but the details will require further discussion.
93/01.05/4.1tss
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1993/01/05004001.pdf
Regarding Alzheimer's disease
(note the substantial increase on a yearly basis)
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/07/08014001.pdf
snip...
The pathogenesis of these diseases was compared to Alzheimer's disease at a molecular level...
snip...
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1990/03/12003001.pdf
And NONE of this is relevant to BSE?
There is also the matter whether the spectrum of ''prion disease'' is wider than that recognized at present.
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1990/07/06005001.pdf
???
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1990/07/09001001.pdf
BSE101/1 0136
IN CONFIDENCE
5 NOV 1992
CMO From: Dr J S Metters DCMO 4 November 1992
TRANSMISSION OF ALZHEIMER TYPE PLAQUES TO PRIMATES
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1992/11/04001001.pdf
also, see the increase of Alzheimer's from 1981 to 1986
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/07/08014001.pdf
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Alzheimer's Transmission of AA-amyloidosis: Similarities with Prion Disorders NEUROPRION 2007 FC4.3
http://betaamyloidcjd.blogspot.com/2008/08/alzheimers-transmission-of-aa.html
see full text ;
http://betaamyloidcjd.blogspot.com/2009/02/harmless-prion-protein-linked-to.html
Alzheimer's and CJD
http://betaamyloidcjd.blogspot.com/
Saturday, March 22, 2008
10 Million Baby Boomers to have Alzheimer's in the coming decades 2008 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures
http://betaamyloidcjd.blogspot.com/2008/03/association-between-deposition-of-beta.html
re-Association between Deposition of Beta-Amyloid and Pathological Prion Protein in Sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease
http://betaamyloidcjd.blogspot.com/2008/04/re-association-between-deposition-of.html
Thursday, December 04, 2008 2:37 PM
"we have found that H-BSE can infect humans."
personal communication with Professor Kong. ...TSS
see full text ;
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/02/atypical-bse-north-america-update.html
Sunday, December 28, 2008
MAD COW DISEASE USA DECEMBER 28, 2008 an 8 year review of a failed and flawed policy
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/12/mad-cow-disease-usa-december-28-2008-8.html
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Monday, April 20, 2009
Sunday, April 12, 2009
r-calf and the USA mad cow problem, don't look, don't find, and then blame Canada
Greetings cjdvoice,
don't be fooled cjdvoice. r-calf jumped on the mad cow band wagon only after a federal judge ordered a temporary halt to the shipment of bone-in cuts of meat to the United States. the mad cow was out of the barn in North America, they knew it, and jumped on that to better surve themselves to block Canadian beef. it had nothing to do with consumer safety, and it had everything to do with r-calf closing the Canadian border so USA cattle ranchers would have a closed market here. it's all about money$ r-calf whines about Canada and it's feed ban, and it's mad cows, while the USA has been covering up mad cow disease, this is fact. it took the OIG and an act of congress to finally document that Texas mad cow. this beside the one they did succeed in covering up in Texas. then you had 9,200 suspect mad cows that were ONLY TESTED with the least likely test to detect mad cow disease.
USDA: In 9,200 cases only one type of test could be used
WASHINGTON (AP)--The U.S. Department of Agriculture acknowledged Aug. 17 that its testing options for bovine spongiform encephalopathy were limited in 9,200 cases despite its effort to expand surveillance throughout the U.S. herd.
In those cases, only one type of test was used--one that failed to detect the disease in an infected Texas cow.
The department posted the information on its website because of an inquiry from The Associated Press.
Conducted over the past 14 months, the tests have not been included in the department's running tally of BSE tests since last summer. That total reached 439,126 on Aug. 17.
"There's no secret program," the department's chief veterinarian, John Clifford, said in an interview. "There has been no hiding, I can assure you of that."
Officials intended to report the tests later in an annual report, Clifford said.
These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC.
In the Texas case, officials had declared the cow free of disease in November after an IHC test came back negative. The department's inspector general ordered an additional kind of test, which confirmed the animal was infected.
Veterinarians in remote locations have used the preservative on tissue to keep it from degrading on its way to the department's laboratory in Ames, Iowa. Officials this year asked veterinarians to stop using preservative and send fresh or chilled samples within 48 hours.
The department recently investigated a possible case of BSE that turned up in a preserved sample. Further testing ruled out the disease two weeks ago.
Scientists used two additional tests--rapid screening and Western blot--to help detect BSE in the country's second confirmed case, in a Texas cow in June. They used IHC and Western blot to confirm the first case, in a Washington state cow in December 2003.
"The IHC test is still an excellent test," Clifford said. "These are not simple tests, either."
Clifford pointed out that scientists reran the IHC several times and got conflicting results. That happened, too, with the Western blot test. Both tests are accepted by international animal health officials.
Date: 8/25/05
http://www.hpj.com/archives/2005/aug05/aug29/BSEtestoptionswerelimited.cfm
""These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC."
THIS WAS DONE FOR A REASON!
THE IHC test has been proven to be the LEAST LIKELY to detect BSE/TSE in the bovine, and these were probably from the most high risk cattle pool, the ones the USDA et al, SHOULD have been testing. ...TSS
USDA 2003
We have to be careful that we don't get so set in the way we do things that we forget to look for different emerging variations of disease. We've gotten away from collecting the whole brain in our systems. We're using the brain stem and we're looking in only one area. In Norway, they were doing a project and looking at cases of Scrapie, and they found this where they did not find lesions or PRP in the area of the obex. They found it in the cerebellum and the cerebrum. It's a good lesson for us. Ames had to go back and change the procedure for looking at Scrapie samples. In the USDA, we had routinely looked at all the sections of the brain, and then we got away from it. They've recently gone back. Dr. Keller: Tissues are routinely tested, based on which tissue provides an 'official' test result as recognized by APHIS.
Dr. Detwiler: That's on the slaughter. But on the clinical cases, aren't they still asking for the brain? But even on the slaughter, they're looking only at the brainstem. We may be missing certain things if we confine ourselves to one area.
snip.............
Dr. Detwiler: It seems a good idea, but I'm not aware of it. Another important thing to get across to the public is that the negatives do not guarantee absence of infectivity. The animal could be early in the disease and the incubation period. Even sample collection is so important. If you're not collecting the right area of the brain in sheep, or if collecting lymphoreticular tissue, and you don't get a good biopsy, you could miss the area with the PRP in it and come up with a negative test. There's a new, unusual form of Scrapie that's been detected in Norway. We have to be careful that we don't get so set in the way we do things that we forget to look for different emerging variations of disease. We've gotten away from collecting the whole brain in our systems. We're using the brain stem and we're looking in only one area. In Norway, they were doing a project and looking at cases of Scrapie, and they found this where they did not find lesions or PRP in the area of the obex. They found it in the cerebellum and the cerebrum. It's a good lesson for us. Ames had to go back and change the procedure for looking at Scrapie samples. In the USDA, we had routinely looked at all the sections of the brain, and then we got away from it. They've recently gone back.
Dr. Keller: Tissues are routinely tested, based on which tissue provides an 'official' test result as recognized by APHIS .
Dr. Detwiler: That's on the slaughter. But on the clinical cases, aren't they still asking for the brain? But even on the slaughter, they're looking only at the brainstem. We may be missing certain things if we confine ourselves to one area.
snip...
FULL TEXT;
Completely Edited Version PRION ROUNDTABLE
Accomplished this day, Wednesday, December 11, 2003, Denver, Colorado
2005
=============================
CDC DR. PAUL BROWN TSE EXPERT COMMENTS 2006
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 USDA did before 2005 suspect," Brown said. ...snip...end
http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID=20060315-055557-1284r
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, ...
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/brown.htm
In this context, a word is in order about the US testing program. After the discovery of the first (imported) cow in 2003, the magnitude of testing was much increased, reaching a level of >400,000 tests in 2005 (Figure 4). Neither of the 2 more recently indigenously infected older animals with nonspecific clinical features would have been detected without such testing, and neither would have been identified as atypical without confirmatory Western blots. Despite these facts, surveillance has now been decimated to 40,000 annual tests (USDA news release no. 0255.06, July 20, 2006) and invites the accusation that the United States will never know the true status of its involvement with BSE.
In short, a great deal of further work will need to be done before the phenotypic features and prevalence of atypical BSE are understood. More than a single strain may have been present from the beginning of the epidemic, but this possibility has been overlooked by virtue of the absence of widespread Western blot confirmatory testing of positive screening test results; or these new phenotypes may be found, at least in part, to result from infections at an older age by a typical BSE agent, rather than neonatal infections with new "strains" of BSE. Neither alternative has yet been investigated.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/02/report-on-testing-ruminants-for-tses-in.html
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
USDA: In 9,200 cases only one type of test could be used
WASHINGTON (AP)--The U.S. Department of Agriculture acknowledged Aug. 17 that its testing options for bovine spongiform encephalopathy were limited in 9,200 cases despite its effort to expand surveillance throughout the U.S. herd.
In those cases, only one type of test was used--one that failed to detect the disease in an infected Texas cow.
The department posted the information on its website because of an inquiry from The Associated Press.
Conducted over the past 14 months, the tests have not been included in the department's running tally of BSE tests since last summer. That total reached 439,126 on Aug. 17.
"There's no secret program," the department's chief veterinarian, John Clifford, said in an interview. "There has been no hiding, I can assure you of that."
Officials intended to report the tests later in an annual report, Clifford said.
These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC.
In the Texas case, officials had declared the cow free of disease in November after an IHC test came back negative. The department's inspector general ordered an additional kind of test, which confirmed the animal was infected.
Veterinarians in remote locations have used the preservative on tissue to keep it from degrading on its way to the department's laboratory in Ames, Iowa. Officials this year asked veterinarians to stop using preservative and send fresh or chilled samples within 48 hours.
The department recently investigated a possible case of BSE that turned up in a preserved sample. Further testing ruled out the disease two weeks ago.
Scientists used two additional tests--rapid screening and Western blot--to help detect BSE in the country's second confirmed case, in a Texas cow in June. They used IHC and Western blot to confirm the first case, in a Washington state cow in December 2003.
"The IHC test is still an excellent test," Clifford said. "These are not simple tests, either."
Clifford pointed out that scientists reran the IHC several times and got conflicting results. That happened, too, with the Western blot test. Both tests are accepted by international animal health officials.
Date: 8/25/05
http://www.hpj.com/archives/2005/aug05/aug29/BSEtestoptionswerelimited.cfm
""These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC."
THIS WAS DONE FOR A REASON!
As for lowering standards, R-CALF has referenced the OIE (World Organization for Animal Health) as the authority on animal health issues. That's fine, as far as it goes. Trouble is, the OIE does not set standards, as R-CALF has claimed. Further, the OIE does not recommend countries ban meat imported - with SRMs removed - from countries with low or high BSE risk, contrary to R-CALF's implication.
In addition, there are no standards recognized for importing meat from minimal- or low-risk BSE countries. The U.S. is trying to set standards as precedent for trade, based on nearly 20 years of science. R-CALF wants trade only with countries who have never had a BSE case. They have not explained how many years they want the rest of the world to sit around and wait until it's okay to trust science and begin trading. Or how they would justify keeping imports out if ever a BSE case was discovered in the U.S. or export again ever.
http://www.mad-cow-facts.com/News-Commentary/r-calf-bullard-4-4-05.htm
JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTRY THAT WENT BY THOSE FAILED OIE BSE GUIDELINES WENT DOWN WITH BSE. ...TSS
OH, NOT TO FOGET ;
Owner and Corporation Plead Guilty to Defrauding Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program
An Arizona meat processing company and its owner pled guilty in February 2007 to charges of theft of Government funds, mail fraud, and wire fraud. The owner and his company defrauded the BSE Surveillance Program when they falsified BSE Surveillance Data Collection Forms and then submitted payment requests to USDA for the services. In addition to the targeted sample population (those cattle that were more than 30 months old or had other risk factors for BSE), the owner submitted to USDA, or caused to be submitted, BSE obex (brain stem) samples from healthy USDA-inspected cattle. As a result, the owner fraudulently received approximately $390,000. Sentencing is scheduled for May 2007.
snip...
4 USDA OIG SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS FY 2007 1st Half
http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf
AND WHILE R-CALF PREACHES THE MAD COW FEED GOSPEL ABOUT CANADA, WHAT'S R-CALFERS BEEN FEEDING USA HERDS ???
In 2007, in one weekly enforcement report, the fda recalled 10,000,000+ pounds of BANNED MAD COW FEED, 'in commerce', and i can tell you that most of it was fed out ;
10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. MBM IN COMMERCE USA 2007
Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST 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
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
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL USA SEPT 6, 2006 1961.72 TONS IN COMMERCE AL, TN, AND WV Date: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST
snip...
see listings and references of enormous amounts of banned mad cow protein 'in commerce' in 2006 and 2005 ;
see full text ;
Friday, April 25, 2008 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed [Docket No. 2002N-0273] (Formerly Docket No. 02N-0273) RIN 0910-AF46
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/04/substances-prohibited-from-use-in.html
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIALS
http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2008/02/specified-risk-materials-srm.html
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
DO YOU SEE A PATTERN YET $$$
R-CALF, consumer groups demand public BSE hearings
The battle between the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the upstart Rancher's Cattlemen's Action Legal Fund intensified this week as differences over trade issues and consumer safety were brought to a boil. Specifically, R-CALF joined three consumer activist groups in a press conference denouncing the USDA's handling of BSE prevention and detection policies, implying that American consumers are at risk from the disease. The groups joining R-CALF were Public Citizen, Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union. R-CALF and the consumer groups called on the USDA to "maintain the current ban on Canadian beef and cattle imports until a scientific analysis can be conducted by a balanced panel of experts under the auspices of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences." NCBA president Jan Lyons called R-CALF's actions "shocking," and said "These groups are apparently willing to destroy consumer confidence in our products to achieve their partisan political gains, such as damaging the reputation of the Bush Administration and blocking international trade."
"It is inexcusable for cattle producers to align themselves with consumer activist groups that have for decades tried to destroy the favorability of beef in the American diet. NCBA and its members are committed to building consumer demand for beef and ensuring that our consumers have the safest product in the world for their families," Lyons said. To read more, click here.
INCREDIBLE! Just three weeks ago, R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard rocked the beef industry by saying "USDA was playing fast and loose with the safety and health of U.S. consumers," after a federal judge ordered a temporary halt to the shipment of bone-in cuts of meat to the United States. Now, the organization that claims to represent independent cattle ranchers and feeders saddles up with three anti-beef activist groups to prevent the USDA from continuing trade with Canada. R-CALF has now lost all claim to the "independent" flag they so proudly wave. And this week's actions prove they will use any tactic to further their isolationist , anti-trade policies. -Greg Henderson, Drovers editor-Drovers Alert Thursday, May 27, 2004, Vol. 4, Issue 21
R-CALF USA offers the following proposed framework that will (A) strengthen our resistance to BSE, (B) maintain long-term consumer confidence in our U.S. beef supply, and (C) conform to existing law, without necessitating new legislation. Immediately following our suggested framework is a narrative demonstrating the seriousness of this specific BSE threat as well as identifying the weaknesses associated with both the United States? and Canada?s initial response. Specifically, the narrative following our proposed framework will demonstrate: 1. The World Organization for Animal Health established a seven-year waiting period following a confirmed BSE case in native cattle before a BSE Free status is reinstated. 2. Past experience shows that the finding of only a single case of BSE within a year?s time provides little assurance that the disease is contained. 3. The frequency of BSE outbreaks outside the United Kingdom has increased significantly and BSE has spread to 12 new countries, including Canada, since 2000. 4. The USDA has maintained public confidence in its ability to protect its citizens from BSE by assuring the public that it has prohibited the importation of ruminant animals from countries where BSE is known to exist in native cattle since 1989. 5. The United States does not now have the ability to identify all foreign livestock within the United States or to recall or otherwise segregate foreign meat products should the need arise to do so. 6. The current BSE detection and notification procedures of our trading partners need to be tightened. Our proposed framework recognizes the foregoing facts and weakness in our current system and is designed to bolster our logistical ability to resist BSE.
snip...
Narrative in Support of R-CALF USA?s Proposed Framework R-CALF USA?s proposed framework is a measured response to the following facts, concerns, and questions arising from the single case of BSE discovered in Canada on or before May 20, 2003. The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) sets international standards for managing the human and animal health risks associated with BSE. The OIE uses seven years as the period in which a country or zone must have no case of BSE in indigenous cattle in order to achieve a BSE Free status, representing the lowest level of risk.9 The OIE defines a zone as a ?clearly defined part of the territory of a country with a distinct animal health statues. The following types of zones are recognized: free zone, infected zone, surveillance zone and buffer zone.?10
snip...
Strengthening the United State?s Resistance to BSE 6 May 30, 2003 Moreover, BSE has been rapidly spreading to new countries since 2000. In 1999 only 12 countries in addition to the U.K. had reported one or more cases of BSE. By end of year 2002, there were 22 countries in addition to the U.K. reporting one or more cases of BSE, representing an 80 percent increase in the geographical distribution of the disease.13 While the United States acted properly to ban the feeding of meat and bone meal to ruminants in 199714, thus ensuring that BSE would not spread within the U.S. cattle herd, the concern remains that BSE could be introduced into the U.S. from imported cattle or beef. The worldwide spread of BSE is not yet contained. Just since 2000, the countries of Austria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain have all had one or more confirmed cases of BSE originating from native cattle.15
http://www.r-calfusa.com/BSE/2004-06/030530-LetterToCongressBSEPlan.pdf
R-CALF, consumer groups demand public BSE hearings
The battle between the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the upstart Rancher's Cattlemen's Action Legal Fund intensified this week as differences over trade issues and consumer safety were brought to a boil. Specifically, R-CALF joined three consumer activist groups in a press conference denouncing the USDA's handling of BSE prevention and detection policies, implying that American consumers are at risk from the disease. The groups joining R-CALF were Public Citizen, Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union. R-CALF and the consumer groups called on the USDA to "maintain the current ban on Canadian beef and cattle imports until a scientific analysis can be conducted by a balanced panel of experts under the auspices of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences." NCBA president Jan Lyons called R-CALF's actions "shocking," and said "These groups are apparently willing to destroy consumer confidence in our products to achieve their partisan political gains, such as damaging the reputation of the Bush Administration and blocking international trade."
"It is inexcusable for cattle producers to align themselves with consumer activist groups that have for decades tried to destroy the favorability of beef in the American diet. NCBA and its members are committed to building consumer demand for beef and ensuring that our consumers have the safest product in the world for their families," Lyons said. To read more, click here.
INCREDIBLE! Just three weeks ago, R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard rocked the beef industry by saying "USDA was playing fast and loose with the safety and health of U.S. consumers," after a federal judge ordered a temporary halt to the shipment of bone-in cuts of meat to the United States. Now, the organization that claims to represent independent cattle ranchers and feeders saddles up with three anti-beef activist groups to prevent the USDA from continuing trade with Canada. R-CALF has now lost all claim to the "independent" flag they so proudly wave. And this week's actions prove they will use any tactic to further their isolationist , anti-trade policies. -Greg Henderson, Drovers editor-Drovers Alert Thursday, May 27, 2004, Vol. 4, Issue 21
http://sfbfp.ifas.ufl.edu/nlDS6-04.html
R-CALF, founded about a decade ago, has feuded with American meat-packing giants who back the integration of the Canadian and U.S. beef industries.
It's a group that's appealed to a certain element down there that are highly protectionist,? said Mr. Laycraft.
R-CALF sued U.S. packers to force up prices and fought unsuccessfully to impose anti-dumping and countervailing duties on Canadian beef.
They've been promoting a whole range of policies to obstruct trade with Canada,? said Mr. Laycraft.
The BSE-spurred ban on Canadian beef was a godsend to American producers, driving up domestic cattle prices as the free flow of Canadian animals to U.S. packing plants stopped.
The border has reopened to processed Canadian-packed products ? know as boxed beef ? but not to live animals.
No one from R-CALF was available to comment but the group contends in its legal submissions there's no evidence Canadian screening procedures and rules regarding contamination of cattle feed will eliminate the BSE risk.
It claims the number of Canadian cases found so far suggest there are still undiscovered BSE-infected animals in the Canadian herd. It has also proffered scientific experts who argue young cattle still present a risk.
R-CALF's argument may have been sideswiped by the recent discovery of BSE in an older Texas animal, says Darcy Davis, president of the Alberta beef producers.
All R-CALF's arguments about different levels of risk all fall away with the finding of that cow,? he says, noting Canada has not closed its border in reaction to the Texas case.
The trade position of the U.S. government that they're provisionally free (of BSE), that falls away. Now we need to discuss how best to go back to trading all different kinds of cattle.?
The impasse concerns the U.S. agriculture secretary, Mr. Lloyd said.
It sends an inconsistent signal to our trading partners when we're asking Japan and other trading nations to open their markets to us, yet we're not opening our market to Canada for the same reason,? he said.
Mr. Lloyd said he sees R-CALF's position as hypocritical and self-defeating.
http://www.madcowblog.com/2005/07/articles/mad-cow-updates/mad-cow-dispute-before-the-courts/
Also concerning the effectiveness of the U.S. feed ban, the Complaint points out that without prohibiting the current use of cattle protein in poultry feed, and without prohibiting the use of poultry litter in cattle feed, the Final Rule creates a risk of transmission of BSE from Canadian cattle imported into the U.S. to domestic cattle, USDA improperly moved forward with lifting the ban on importing Canadian cattle while still considering the necessary measures to address poultry feed and wastes.
http://www.southdakotastockgrowers.org/r-calf%20lawsuit%201-11-05.htm
r-calf talks the talk NOW, but they need to practice what they preach at home. clean up their own backyards, stop worrying about Canada. the USA and Canadian cattle market, feed market, import and export between the two, were so intertwined, it was one market. Canada is just being honest, they are testing to find, and finding. the USDA et al did just the opposite, and or years and years that was o.k. with R-CALF. Canada's feed ban is stronger that the USA's feed ban. the only reason the USA is not finding mad cow cases of any phenotype is because of the SSS policy of shoot, shovel, and shut the hell up. ...
BSE MRR TSS, R-CALF ON CANADA VS USA
Bill Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 1418 Location: GWN Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:49 am Post subject:
Texan wrote:
Hey Terry, I'd like to get a little further clarification on something if/when you have time. I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly....
flounder wrote:
This is what sank my battleship in regards to testifying for r-calf. they actually appoached me about it, but i told them i would be glad to testify, but i was not stopping at the Canadian border, my testimony was to come south as well if given the opportunity. and that ended that, but i did supply them with a load of data, for whatever that was worth.
I highlighted the parts that confuse me. This almost makes it seem as if R-CALF was asking you to testify for them, but changed their mind when they found out that you were going to tell the WHOLE truth, instead of just the truth as regards Canadian imports.
I thought that R-CALF was only interested in the WHOLE truth - not just the selected parts of the truth that fit their protectionist agenda? After reading your post, it makes a person wonder. Maybe I read it wrong...
Am I reading this correctly, Terry? That can't be right, can it? Thanks.
I was wondering exactly the same thing Texan.
_________________
Canadian Beef....A cut above the rest!
my answer to big muddy from canada ;
hello there Texan,
yep, you read it right. don't know what ya'll gonna do without me. you know i plan on retiring from this mess soon. the pay is simply too excessive ;-( i fed them all i had at the time, and they shot the teacher. then hired old stanley i heard, go figure, must have been all those PhDs i had ;-)
as with the fuji-tv, when they came here and interviewed me for a BSE show, that i don't know what happened too, or the madcowboy documentary i was asked to proofread, and did, assured i would get some credit for, to never hear from again, to the speech in south Korea i was to make Nov. 23, but was shipwrecked somehow there too, and that might have been a good thing considering all the riots, and they did get the information anyway, to the TSS documentary, that too fell apart for good reasons i suppose, to helping creekstone, and finally to the NIH attempted destruction of an historical bank of donated tissue from CJD victims, and that one i think i did manage to stop, and that thanks to a Republican John Cornyn, i simply think it's time to let you fellars and gals clear this mess up. i have wasted enough time. it will be a decade next Christmas. i just would hate to keep kicking the same old mad cow. i know what happened for the most part, and the ones that don't get it now, never will.
now there Texan, as far as your question, and confusion ;-) i bet you thought i was not going to answer it, or, maybe hoping i would ;
flounder wrote:
This is what sank my battleship in regards to testifying for r-calf. they actually appoached me about it, but i told them i would be glad to testify, but i was not stopping at the Canadian border, my testimony was to come south as well if given the opportunity. and that ended that, but i did supply them with a load of data, for whatever that was worth.
I highlighted the parts that confuse me. This almost makes it seem as if R-CALF was asking you to testify for them, but changed their mind when they found out that you were going to tell the WHOLE truth, instead of just the truth as regards Canadian imports.
I thought that R-CALF was only interested in the WHOLE truth - not just the selected parts of the truth that fit their protectionist agenda? After reading your post, it makes a person wonder. Maybe I read it wrong...
Am I reading this correctly, Terry? That can't be right, can it? Thanks.
=========================================================
hello again there Texan,
i don't guess it matters anymore, i don't think ill be testifying for anyone, unless it is my own execution.
i was willing to participate in good faith, and sound science, that is why i think i was never sent to testify,
because in my opinion, R-Calf only wanted to cherry-pick the science, to use to there advantage, to try and
claim that Canada had a worse BSE problem than the USA, and i could not conceed to that. the science did
not confirm this. all one has to do is read the BSE GBR risk assessments, and that is why GW/OIE et al revised
there own risk assessments ;-) the BSE MRR policy.
i don't know, maybe i misinterpreted it all, maybe not, you can be the judge ;
oh what tangled webs we weave, when all we do is practice to deceive. ...TSS
SNIP...END... SEE FULL TEXT ;
*** http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=12
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=24
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=36
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=48
Saturday, April 11, 2009 CJD FOUNDATION SIDES WITH R-CALFERS NO BSE OR HUMAN TSE THERE OF IN USA 'don't be fooled'
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/cjd-foundation-sides-with-r-calfers-no.html
FOR all these reasons, is why i oppose the CJD Foundation decission to side with a cattle company that over the years, was as responsible for exposing the USA consumer to mad cow disease as was Canada, and then submit a letter that was written and in support of blaming only Canada. This letter the CJD Foundation supports and ask you to write, is only in support of R-CALF and a closed market to Canada beef, ALL THE WHILE IGNORING AND NOT SAYING A WORD OF PAST AND PRESENT FAILLURES OF THE SAME THING HERE IN THE USA. don't be fooled CJDVOICE. if you support this letter the way it was written, you are only fooling yourselves. you are being played like a pawn. write your own letter/comment, tell them the rest of the story. THIS IS NOT ABOUT CANADA ! the only reason we don't find mad cow disease in the USA, is because they did everything they could do in NOT finding BSE in those some 800,000 cattle that were tested. even Paul Brown called it flawed. dont be fooled cjdvoice and cjd foundation members, don't be fooled. ...
CJD FOUNDATION AND R-CALF LETTER
Sample Comment Letter for Your Use (You are free to use all or part of this letter):
April 9, 2009 Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061Rockville, MD 20852
Re: Docket Number: FDA-2002-N-0031 (formerly Docket No. 2002N-0273)
Dear Administrator,
As the family member of a loved one who has died of a Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD), one form of which can be acquired by ingesting BSE contaminated beef, I want to express my outrage at the recent announcement of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) delay of its April 17, 2009 scheduled implementation of the final rule titled “Substances Prohibited from Use in Animal Food or Feed,” commonly referred to as the 2008 BSE final rule. They have made this announcement with full knowledge that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) continues to subject U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd to a heighted risk of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) from imports of live Canadian cattle, particularly imports of Canadian cattle over 30 months (OTM) of age.
In Canada the disease occurrence is between three cases per million to eight cases per million cattle. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states the level of BSE prevalence in the Canadian cattle herd is 18-fold to 48-fold higher than the prevalence estimated in the U.S. cattle herd. Just in 2008, nearly 1.6 million Canadian cattle were imported into the United States. By delaying the implementation of the Feed Ban the FDA risks yet another break in an already severely compromised food safety firewall.
When USDA reopened the U.S. border in 2007 to Canada’s highest-risk cattle population – OTM cattle – its risk modeling based on a Canadian BSE prevalence of fewer than 4 cases per million predicted that the U.S. would import over 100 head of BSE-infected cattle from Canada over the next 20 years. In addition, the risk modeling showed that human exposure to BSE would increase. However, as the CDC explained, the BSE prevalence in Canada could well be 8 cases per million, meaning that USDA likely has grossly underestimated the risk of introducing BSE-infected cattle into the U.S. as a result of allowing OTM Canadian cattle imports. Canada already has detected 16 native cases of BSE in its OTM cattle herd, 10 of which were born after the 1997 feed ban. The most recent of these cases was detected just last November. Nine of Canada’s BSE-infected cattle met USDA’s age requirements to be exported to the United States, as they were born after March 1, 1999, the date after which USDA erroneously claims BSE-infectivity was no longer circulating in Canada.
The current U.S. feed ban implemented in 1997 is comparable to the initial Canadian feed ban also implemented in 1997. Canada’s feed ban proved ineffective at preventing the spread of BSE in Canada. Despite the repeated urging of international scientists, Canada resisted any upgrades to its feed ban until after it detected multiple BSE cases in cattle born years after its 1997 feed ban. Canada’s July 2007 upgraded feed ban now protects Canadian consumers against the spread of BSE from Canadian cattle by closing known transmission routes, including cross-contamination and inadvertent feeding of contaminated cattle parts. It is unthinkable that the FDA would not afford U.S. consumers the same level of protection against these same Canadian cattle that are imported into the United States.
The FDA cannot legitimately argue that its current feed ban implemented in 1997, which is nearly identical to Canada’s original feed ban also implemented in 1997, is any more effective at mitigating Canada’s heightened BSE risk within U.S. borders than it was in mitigating Canada’s heightened BSE risk in Canada. Nor can FDA ignore the scientific evidence that overwhelmingly shows that the current U.S. feed ban is insufficient to mitigate the heightened BSE risk associated with OTM cattle imported from Canada. These higher-risk OTM Canadian cattle are entering the U.S. at the rate of several thousand per week, are being commingled in the U.S. cattle herd where some would be expected to die, and are entering both the U.S. food system as well as the U.S. animal feed system. The U.S. already is accepting Canada’s higher BSE risk without the protections necessary to mitigate that higher risk.
The FDA cannot bury its head in the sand and pretend the upgraded feed ban contained in the 2008 BSE final rule is not urgently needed to mitigate the increased BSE risk associated with the importation of millions of Canadian cattle. In fact, the FDA already has failed to timely implement an upgraded feed ban, which should have been implemented before USDA began to expose U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd to Canada’s heightened BSE risk.
The FDA has an absolute responsibility to protect the health and safety of U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd against this foreign animal disease which is always 100% fatal, and has been known to cross the species barrier infecting humans with variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD), the human form of BSE. We need only look to the United Kingdom’s recent tragic experience when it was discovered that BSE had crossed the species barrier to humans. Thus far this preventable disease has caused the deaths of 168 young adults. The long incubation period (which can be up to 40 years), means that tragically, there could be many more cases in the future. The FDA must break away from the manipulative actions by corporate-controlled, self-serving trade associations that have caused both FDA and USDA to endanger the health and safety of U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd by exposing them to an unnecessary and avoidable risk of BSE.
The USDA must immediately eliminate the source of this heightened BSE risk by prohibiting the importation of OTM Canadian cattle, and the FDA must immediately implement the 2008 BSE final rule to mitigate this heightened risk. There are no responsible alternatives.
http://cjdadvocacy.blogspot.com/2009/04/fda-food-ban.html
http://www.cjdfoundation.org/
CANADA DID NOT KILL MY MOTHER, AND HER DEATH WAS NO SPONTANEOUS EVENT, OR HAPPENSTANCE OF BAD LUCK. ...
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
TSS
don't be fooled cjdvoice. r-calf jumped on the mad cow band wagon only after a federal judge ordered a temporary halt to the shipment of bone-in cuts of meat to the United States. the mad cow was out of the barn in North America, they knew it, and jumped on that to better surve themselves to block Canadian beef. it had nothing to do with consumer safety, and it had everything to do with r-calf closing the Canadian border so USA cattle ranchers would have a closed market here. it's all about money$ r-calf whines about Canada and it's feed ban, and it's mad cows, while the USA has been covering up mad cow disease, this is fact. it took the OIG and an act of congress to finally document that Texas mad cow. this beside the one they did succeed in covering up in Texas. then you had 9,200 suspect mad cows that were ONLY TESTED with the least likely test to detect mad cow disease.
USDA: In 9,200 cases only one type of test could be used
WASHINGTON (AP)--The U.S. Department of Agriculture acknowledged Aug. 17 that its testing options for bovine spongiform encephalopathy were limited in 9,200 cases despite its effort to expand surveillance throughout the U.S. herd.
In those cases, only one type of test was used--one that failed to detect the disease in an infected Texas cow.
The department posted the information on its website because of an inquiry from The Associated Press.
Conducted over the past 14 months, the tests have not been included in the department's running tally of BSE tests since last summer. That total reached 439,126 on Aug. 17.
"There's no secret program," the department's chief veterinarian, John Clifford, said in an interview. "There has been no hiding, I can assure you of that."
Officials intended to report the tests later in an annual report, Clifford said.
These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC.
In the Texas case, officials had declared the cow free of disease in November after an IHC test came back negative. The department's inspector general ordered an additional kind of test, which confirmed the animal was infected.
Veterinarians in remote locations have used the preservative on tissue to keep it from degrading on its way to the department's laboratory in Ames, Iowa. Officials this year asked veterinarians to stop using preservative and send fresh or chilled samples within 48 hours.
The department recently investigated a possible case of BSE that turned up in a preserved sample. Further testing ruled out the disease two weeks ago.
Scientists used two additional tests--rapid screening and Western blot--to help detect BSE in the country's second confirmed case, in a Texas cow in June. They used IHC and Western blot to confirm the first case, in a Washington state cow in December 2003.
"The IHC test is still an excellent test," Clifford said. "These are not simple tests, either."
Clifford pointed out that scientists reran the IHC several times and got conflicting results. That happened, too, with the Western blot test. Both tests are accepted by international animal health officials.
Date: 8/25/05
http://www.hpj.com/archives/2005/aug05/aug29/BSEtestoptionswerelimited.cfm
""These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC."
THIS WAS DONE FOR A REASON!
THE IHC test has been proven to be the LEAST LIKELY to detect BSE/TSE in the bovine, and these were probably from the most high risk cattle pool, the ones the USDA et al, SHOULD have been testing. ...TSS
USDA 2003
We have to be careful that we don't get so set in the way we do things that we forget to look for different emerging variations of disease. We've gotten away from collecting the whole brain in our systems. We're using the brain stem and we're looking in only one area. In Norway, they were doing a project and looking at cases of Scrapie, and they found this where they did not find lesions or PRP in the area of the obex. They found it in the cerebellum and the cerebrum. It's a good lesson for us. Ames had to go back and change the procedure for looking at Scrapie samples. In the USDA, we had routinely looked at all the sections of the brain, and then we got away from it. They've recently gone back. Dr. Keller: Tissues are routinely tested, based on which tissue provides an 'official' test result as recognized by APHIS.
Dr. Detwiler: That's on the slaughter. But on the clinical cases, aren't they still asking for the brain? But even on the slaughter, they're looking only at the brainstem. We may be missing certain things if we confine ourselves to one area.
snip.............
Dr. Detwiler: It seems a good idea, but I'm not aware of it. Another important thing to get across to the public is that the negatives do not guarantee absence of infectivity. The animal could be early in the disease and the incubation period. Even sample collection is so important. If you're not collecting the right area of the brain in sheep, or if collecting lymphoreticular tissue, and you don't get a good biopsy, you could miss the area with the PRP in it and come up with a negative test. There's a new, unusual form of Scrapie that's been detected in Norway. We have to be careful that we don't get so set in the way we do things that we forget to look for different emerging variations of disease. We've gotten away from collecting the whole brain in our systems. We're using the brain stem and we're looking in only one area. In Norway, they were doing a project and looking at cases of Scrapie, and they found this where they did not find lesions or PRP in the area of the obex. They found it in the cerebellum and the cerebrum. It's a good lesson for us. Ames had to go back and change the procedure for looking at Scrapie samples. In the USDA, we had routinely looked at all the sections of the brain, and then we got away from it. They've recently gone back.
Dr. Keller: Tissues are routinely tested, based on which tissue provides an 'official' test result as recognized by APHIS .
Dr. Detwiler: That's on the slaughter. But on the clinical cases, aren't they still asking for the brain? But even on the slaughter, they're looking only at the brainstem. We may be missing certain things if we confine ourselves to one area.
snip...
FULL TEXT;
Completely Edited Version PRION ROUNDTABLE
Accomplished this day, Wednesday, December 11, 2003, Denver, Colorado
2005
=============================
CDC DR. PAUL BROWN TSE EXPERT COMMENTS 2006
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 USDA did before 2005 suspect," Brown said. ...snip...end
http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID=20060315-055557-1284r
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, ...
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/brown.htm
In this context, a word is in order about the US testing program. After the discovery of the first (imported) cow in 2003, the magnitude of testing was much increased, reaching a level of >400,000 tests in 2005 (Figure 4). Neither of the 2 more recently indigenously infected older animals with nonspecific clinical features would have been detected without such testing, and neither would have been identified as atypical without confirmatory Western blots. Despite these facts, surveillance has now been decimated to 40,000 annual tests (USDA news release no. 0255.06, July 20, 2006) and invites the accusation that the United States will never know the true status of its involvement with BSE.
In short, a great deal of further work will need to be done before the phenotypic features and prevalence of atypical BSE are understood. More than a single strain may have been present from the beginning of the epidemic, but this possibility has been overlooked by virtue of the absence of widespread Western blot confirmatory testing of positive screening test results; or these new phenotypes may be found, at least in part, to result from infections at an older age by a typical BSE agent, rather than neonatal infections with new "strains" of BSE. Neither alternative has yet been investigated.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/02/report-on-testing-ruminants-for-tses-in.html
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
USDA: In 9,200 cases only one type of test could be used
WASHINGTON (AP)--The U.S. Department of Agriculture acknowledged Aug. 17 that its testing options for bovine spongiform encephalopathy were limited in 9,200 cases despite its effort to expand surveillance throughout the U.S. herd.
In those cases, only one type of test was used--one that failed to detect the disease in an infected Texas cow.
The department posted the information on its website because of an inquiry from The Associated Press.
Conducted over the past 14 months, the tests have not been included in the department's running tally of BSE tests since last summer. That total reached 439,126 on Aug. 17.
"There's no secret program," the department's chief veterinarian, John Clifford, said in an interview. "There has been no hiding, I can assure you of that."
Officials intended to report the tests later in an annual report, Clifford said.
These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC.
In the Texas case, officials had declared the cow free of disease in November after an IHC test came back negative. The department's inspector general ordered an additional kind of test, which confirmed the animal was infected.
Veterinarians in remote locations have used the preservative on tissue to keep it from degrading on its way to the department's laboratory in Ames, Iowa. Officials this year asked veterinarians to stop using preservative and send fresh or chilled samples within 48 hours.
The department recently investigated a possible case of BSE that turned up in a preserved sample. Further testing ruled out the disease two weeks ago.
Scientists used two additional tests--rapid screening and Western blot--to help detect BSE in the country's second confirmed case, in a Texas cow in June. They used IHC and Western blot to confirm the first case, in a Washington state cow in December 2003.
"The IHC test is still an excellent test," Clifford said. "These are not simple tests, either."
Clifford pointed out that scientists reran the IHC several times and got conflicting results. That happened, too, with the Western blot test. Both tests are accepted by international animal health officials.
Date: 8/25/05
http://www.hpj.com/archives/2005/aug05/aug29/BSEtestoptionswerelimited.cfm
""These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC."
THIS WAS DONE FOR A REASON!
As for lowering standards, R-CALF has referenced the OIE (World Organization for Animal Health) as the authority on animal health issues. That's fine, as far as it goes. Trouble is, the OIE does not set standards, as R-CALF has claimed. Further, the OIE does not recommend countries ban meat imported - with SRMs removed - from countries with low or high BSE risk, contrary to R-CALF's implication.
In addition, there are no standards recognized for importing meat from minimal- or low-risk BSE countries. The U.S. is trying to set standards as precedent for trade, based on nearly 20 years of science. R-CALF wants trade only with countries who have never had a BSE case. They have not explained how many years they want the rest of the world to sit around and wait until it's okay to trust science and begin trading. Or how they would justify keeping imports out if ever a BSE case was discovered in the U.S. or export again ever.
http://www.mad-cow-facts.com/News-Commentary/r-calf-bullard-4-4-05.htm
JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTRY THAT WENT BY THOSE FAILED OIE BSE GUIDELINES WENT DOWN WITH BSE. ...TSS
OH, NOT TO FOGET ;
Owner and Corporation Plead Guilty to Defrauding Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program
An Arizona meat processing company and its owner pled guilty in February 2007 to charges of theft of Government funds, mail fraud, and wire fraud. The owner and his company defrauded the BSE Surveillance Program when they falsified BSE Surveillance Data Collection Forms and then submitted payment requests to USDA for the services. In addition to the targeted sample population (those cattle that were more than 30 months old or had other risk factors for BSE), the owner submitted to USDA, or caused to be submitted, BSE obex (brain stem) samples from healthy USDA-inspected cattle. As a result, the owner fraudulently received approximately $390,000. Sentencing is scheduled for May 2007.
snip...
4 USDA OIG SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS FY 2007 1st Half
http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf
AND WHILE R-CALF PREACHES THE MAD COW FEED GOSPEL ABOUT CANADA, WHAT'S R-CALFERS BEEN FEEDING USA HERDS ???
In 2007, in one weekly enforcement report, the fda recalled 10,000,000+ pounds of BANNED MAD COW FEED, 'in commerce', and i can tell you that most of it was fed out ;
10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. MBM IN COMMERCE USA 2007
Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST 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
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
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL USA SEPT 6, 2006 1961.72 TONS IN COMMERCE AL, TN, AND WV Date: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST
snip...
see listings and references of enormous amounts of banned mad cow protein 'in commerce' in 2006 and 2005 ;
see full text ;
Friday, April 25, 2008 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed [Docket No. 2002N-0273] (Formerly Docket No. 02N-0273) RIN 0910-AF46
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/04/substances-prohibited-from-use-in.html
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIALS
http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2008/02/specified-risk-materials-srm.html
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
DO YOU SEE A PATTERN YET $$$
R-CALF, consumer groups demand public BSE hearings
The battle between the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the upstart Rancher's Cattlemen's Action Legal Fund intensified this week as differences over trade issues and consumer safety were brought to a boil. Specifically, R-CALF joined three consumer activist groups in a press conference denouncing the USDA's handling of BSE prevention and detection policies, implying that American consumers are at risk from the disease. The groups joining R-CALF were Public Citizen, Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union. R-CALF and the consumer groups called on the USDA to "maintain the current ban on Canadian beef and cattle imports until a scientific analysis can be conducted by a balanced panel of experts under the auspices of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences." NCBA president Jan Lyons called R-CALF's actions "shocking," and said "These groups are apparently willing to destroy consumer confidence in our products to achieve their partisan political gains, such as damaging the reputation of the Bush Administration and blocking international trade."
"It is inexcusable for cattle producers to align themselves with consumer activist groups that have for decades tried to destroy the favorability of beef in the American diet. NCBA and its members are committed to building consumer demand for beef and ensuring that our consumers have the safest product in the world for their families," Lyons said. To read more, click here.
INCREDIBLE! Just three weeks ago, R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard rocked the beef industry by saying "USDA was playing fast and loose with the safety and health of U.S. consumers," after a federal judge ordered a temporary halt to the shipment of bone-in cuts of meat to the United States. Now, the organization that claims to represent independent cattle ranchers and feeders saddles up with three anti-beef activist groups to prevent the USDA from continuing trade with Canada. R-CALF has now lost all claim to the "independent" flag they so proudly wave. And this week's actions prove they will use any tactic to further their isolationist , anti-trade policies. -Greg Henderson, Drovers editor-Drovers Alert Thursday, May 27, 2004, Vol. 4, Issue 21
R-CALF USA offers the following proposed framework that will (A) strengthen our resistance to BSE, (B) maintain long-term consumer confidence in our U.S. beef supply, and (C) conform to existing law, without necessitating new legislation. Immediately following our suggested framework is a narrative demonstrating the seriousness of this specific BSE threat as well as identifying the weaknesses associated with both the United States? and Canada?s initial response. Specifically, the narrative following our proposed framework will demonstrate: 1. The World Organization for Animal Health established a seven-year waiting period following a confirmed BSE case in native cattle before a BSE Free status is reinstated. 2. Past experience shows that the finding of only a single case of BSE within a year?s time provides little assurance that the disease is contained. 3. The frequency of BSE outbreaks outside the United Kingdom has increased significantly and BSE has spread to 12 new countries, including Canada, since 2000. 4. The USDA has maintained public confidence in its ability to protect its citizens from BSE by assuring the public that it has prohibited the importation of ruminant animals from countries where BSE is known to exist in native cattle since 1989. 5. The United States does not now have the ability to identify all foreign livestock within the United States or to recall or otherwise segregate foreign meat products should the need arise to do so. 6. The current BSE detection and notification procedures of our trading partners need to be tightened. Our proposed framework recognizes the foregoing facts and weakness in our current system and is designed to bolster our logistical ability to resist BSE.
snip...
Narrative in Support of R-CALF USA?s Proposed Framework R-CALF USA?s proposed framework is a measured response to the following facts, concerns, and questions arising from the single case of BSE discovered in Canada on or before May 20, 2003. The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) sets international standards for managing the human and animal health risks associated with BSE. The OIE uses seven years as the period in which a country or zone must have no case of BSE in indigenous cattle in order to achieve a BSE Free status, representing the lowest level of risk.9 The OIE defines a zone as a ?clearly defined part of the territory of a country with a distinct animal health statues. The following types of zones are recognized: free zone, infected zone, surveillance zone and buffer zone.?10
snip...
Strengthening the United State?s Resistance to BSE 6 May 30, 2003 Moreover, BSE has been rapidly spreading to new countries since 2000. In 1999 only 12 countries in addition to the U.K. had reported one or more cases of BSE. By end of year 2002, there were 22 countries in addition to the U.K. reporting one or more cases of BSE, representing an 80 percent increase in the geographical distribution of the disease.13 While the United States acted properly to ban the feeding of meat and bone meal to ruminants in 199714, thus ensuring that BSE would not spread within the U.S. cattle herd, the concern remains that BSE could be introduced into the U.S. from imported cattle or beef. The worldwide spread of BSE is not yet contained. Just since 2000, the countries of Austria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain have all had one or more confirmed cases of BSE originating from native cattle.15
http://www.r-calfusa.com/BSE/2004-06/030530-LetterToCongressBSEPlan.pdf
R-CALF, consumer groups demand public BSE hearings
The battle between the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the upstart Rancher's Cattlemen's Action Legal Fund intensified this week as differences over trade issues and consumer safety were brought to a boil. Specifically, R-CALF joined three consumer activist groups in a press conference denouncing the USDA's handling of BSE prevention and detection policies, implying that American consumers are at risk from the disease. The groups joining R-CALF were Public Citizen, Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union. R-CALF and the consumer groups called on the USDA to "maintain the current ban on Canadian beef and cattle imports until a scientific analysis can be conducted by a balanced panel of experts under the auspices of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences." NCBA president Jan Lyons called R-CALF's actions "shocking," and said "These groups are apparently willing to destroy consumer confidence in our products to achieve their partisan political gains, such as damaging the reputation of the Bush Administration and blocking international trade."
"It is inexcusable for cattle producers to align themselves with consumer activist groups that have for decades tried to destroy the favorability of beef in the American diet. NCBA and its members are committed to building consumer demand for beef and ensuring that our consumers have the safest product in the world for their families," Lyons said. To read more, click here.
INCREDIBLE! Just three weeks ago, R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard rocked the beef industry by saying "USDA was playing fast and loose with the safety and health of U.S. consumers," after a federal judge ordered a temporary halt to the shipment of bone-in cuts of meat to the United States. Now, the organization that claims to represent independent cattle ranchers and feeders saddles up with three anti-beef activist groups to prevent the USDA from continuing trade with Canada. R-CALF has now lost all claim to the "independent" flag they so proudly wave. And this week's actions prove they will use any tactic to further their isolationist , anti-trade policies. -Greg Henderson, Drovers editor-Drovers Alert Thursday, May 27, 2004, Vol. 4, Issue 21
http://sfbfp.ifas.ufl.edu/nlDS6-04.html
R-CALF, founded about a decade ago, has feuded with American meat-packing giants who back the integration of the Canadian and U.S. beef industries.
It's a group that's appealed to a certain element down there that are highly protectionist,? said Mr. Laycraft.
R-CALF sued U.S. packers to force up prices and fought unsuccessfully to impose anti-dumping and countervailing duties on Canadian beef.
They've been promoting a whole range of policies to obstruct trade with Canada,? said Mr. Laycraft.
The BSE-spurred ban on Canadian beef was a godsend to American producers, driving up domestic cattle prices as the free flow of Canadian animals to U.S. packing plants stopped.
The border has reopened to processed Canadian-packed products ? know as boxed beef ? but not to live animals.
No one from R-CALF was available to comment but the group contends in its legal submissions there's no evidence Canadian screening procedures and rules regarding contamination of cattle feed will eliminate the BSE risk.
It claims the number of Canadian cases found so far suggest there are still undiscovered BSE-infected animals in the Canadian herd. It has also proffered scientific experts who argue young cattle still present a risk.
R-CALF's argument may have been sideswiped by the recent discovery of BSE in an older Texas animal, says Darcy Davis, president of the Alberta beef producers.
All R-CALF's arguments about different levels of risk all fall away with the finding of that cow,? he says, noting Canada has not closed its border in reaction to the Texas case.
The trade position of the U.S. government that they're provisionally free (of BSE), that falls away. Now we need to discuss how best to go back to trading all different kinds of cattle.?
The impasse concerns the U.S. agriculture secretary, Mr. Lloyd said.
It sends an inconsistent signal to our trading partners when we're asking Japan and other trading nations to open their markets to us, yet we're not opening our market to Canada for the same reason,? he said.
Mr. Lloyd said he sees R-CALF's position as hypocritical and self-defeating.
http://www.madcowblog.com/2005/07/articles/mad-cow-updates/mad-cow-dispute-before-the-courts/
Also concerning the effectiveness of the U.S. feed ban, the Complaint points out that without prohibiting the current use of cattle protein in poultry feed, and without prohibiting the use of poultry litter in cattle feed, the Final Rule creates a risk of transmission of BSE from Canadian cattle imported into the U.S. to domestic cattle, USDA improperly moved forward with lifting the ban on importing Canadian cattle while still considering the necessary measures to address poultry feed and wastes.
http://www.southdakotastockgrowers.org/r-calf%20lawsuit%201-11-05.htm
r-calf talks the talk NOW, but they need to practice what they preach at home. clean up their own backyards, stop worrying about Canada. the USA and Canadian cattle market, feed market, import and export between the two, were so intertwined, it was one market. Canada is just being honest, they are testing to find, and finding. the USDA et al did just the opposite, and or years and years that was o.k. with R-CALF. Canada's feed ban is stronger that the USA's feed ban. the only reason the USA is not finding mad cow cases of any phenotype is because of the SSS policy of shoot, shovel, and shut the hell up. ...
BSE MRR TSS, R-CALF ON CANADA VS USA
Bill Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 1418 Location: GWN Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:49 am Post subject:
Texan wrote:
Hey Terry, I'd like to get a little further clarification on something if/when you have time. I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly....
flounder wrote:
This is what sank my battleship in regards to testifying for r-calf. they actually appoached me about it, but i told them i would be glad to testify, but i was not stopping at the Canadian border, my testimony was to come south as well if given the opportunity. and that ended that, but i did supply them with a load of data, for whatever that was worth.
I highlighted the parts that confuse me. This almost makes it seem as if R-CALF was asking you to testify for them, but changed their mind when they found out that you were going to tell the WHOLE truth, instead of just the truth as regards Canadian imports.
I thought that R-CALF was only interested in the WHOLE truth - not just the selected parts of the truth that fit their protectionist agenda? After reading your post, it makes a person wonder. Maybe I read it wrong...
Am I reading this correctly, Terry? That can't be right, can it? Thanks.
I was wondering exactly the same thing Texan.
_________________
Canadian Beef....A cut above the rest!
my answer to big muddy from canada ;
hello there Texan,
yep, you read it right. don't know what ya'll gonna do without me. you know i plan on retiring from this mess soon. the pay is simply too excessive ;-( i fed them all i had at the time, and they shot the teacher. then hired old stanley i heard, go figure, must have been all those PhDs i had ;-)
as with the fuji-tv, when they came here and interviewed me for a BSE show, that i don't know what happened too, or the madcowboy documentary i was asked to proofread, and did, assured i would get some credit for, to never hear from again, to the speech in south Korea i was to make Nov. 23, but was shipwrecked somehow there too, and that might have been a good thing considering all the riots, and they did get the information anyway, to the TSS documentary, that too fell apart for good reasons i suppose, to helping creekstone, and finally to the NIH attempted destruction of an historical bank of donated tissue from CJD victims, and that one i think i did manage to stop, and that thanks to a Republican John Cornyn, i simply think it's time to let you fellars and gals clear this mess up. i have wasted enough time. it will be a decade next Christmas. i just would hate to keep kicking the same old mad cow. i know what happened for the most part, and the ones that don't get it now, never will.
now there Texan, as far as your question, and confusion ;-) i bet you thought i was not going to answer it, or, maybe hoping i would ;
flounder wrote:
This is what sank my battleship in regards to testifying for r-calf. they actually appoached me about it, but i told them i would be glad to testify, but i was not stopping at the Canadian border, my testimony was to come south as well if given the opportunity. and that ended that, but i did supply them with a load of data, for whatever that was worth.
I highlighted the parts that confuse me. This almost makes it seem as if R-CALF was asking you to testify for them, but changed their mind when they found out that you were going to tell the WHOLE truth, instead of just the truth as regards Canadian imports.
I thought that R-CALF was only interested in the WHOLE truth - not just the selected parts of the truth that fit their protectionist agenda? After reading your post, it makes a person wonder. Maybe I read it wrong...
Am I reading this correctly, Terry? That can't be right, can it? Thanks.
=========================================================
hello again there Texan,
i don't guess it matters anymore, i don't think ill be testifying for anyone, unless it is my own execution.
i was willing to participate in good faith, and sound science, that is why i think i was never sent to testify,
because in my opinion, R-Calf only wanted to cherry-pick the science, to use to there advantage, to try and
claim that Canada had a worse BSE problem than the USA, and i could not conceed to that. the science did
not confirm this. all one has to do is read the BSE GBR risk assessments, and that is why GW/OIE et al revised
there own risk assessments ;-) the BSE MRR policy.
i don't know, maybe i misinterpreted it all, maybe not, you can be the judge ;
oh what tangled webs we weave, when all we do is practice to deceive. ...TSS
SNIP...END... SEE FULL TEXT ;
*** http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=12
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=24
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=36
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=48
Saturday, April 11, 2009 CJD FOUNDATION SIDES WITH R-CALFERS NO BSE OR HUMAN TSE THERE OF IN USA 'don't be fooled'
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/cjd-foundation-sides-with-r-calfers-no.html
FOR all these reasons, is why i oppose the CJD Foundation decission to side with a cattle company that over the years, was as responsible for exposing the USA consumer to mad cow disease as was Canada, and then submit a letter that was written and in support of blaming only Canada. This letter the CJD Foundation supports and ask you to write, is only in support of R-CALF and a closed market to Canada beef, ALL THE WHILE IGNORING AND NOT SAYING A WORD OF PAST AND PRESENT FAILLURES OF THE SAME THING HERE IN THE USA. don't be fooled CJDVOICE. if you support this letter the way it was written, you are only fooling yourselves. you are being played like a pawn. write your own letter/comment, tell them the rest of the story. THIS IS NOT ABOUT CANADA ! the only reason we don't find mad cow disease in the USA, is because they did everything they could do in NOT finding BSE in those some 800,000 cattle that were tested. even Paul Brown called it flawed. dont be fooled cjdvoice and cjd foundation members, don't be fooled. ...
CJD FOUNDATION AND R-CALF LETTER
Sample Comment Letter for Your Use (You are free to use all or part of this letter):
April 9, 2009 Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061Rockville, MD 20852
Re: Docket Number: FDA-2002-N-0031 (formerly Docket No. 2002N-0273)
Dear Administrator,
As the family member of a loved one who has died of a Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD), one form of which can be acquired by ingesting BSE contaminated beef, I want to express my outrage at the recent announcement of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) delay of its April 17, 2009 scheduled implementation of the final rule titled “Substances Prohibited from Use in Animal Food or Feed,” commonly referred to as the 2008 BSE final rule. They have made this announcement with full knowledge that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) continues to subject U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd to a heighted risk of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) from imports of live Canadian cattle, particularly imports of Canadian cattle over 30 months (OTM) of age.
In Canada the disease occurrence is between three cases per million to eight cases per million cattle. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states the level of BSE prevalence in the Canadian cattle herd is 18-fold to 48-fold higher than the prevalence estimated in the U.S. cattle herd. Just in 2008, nearly 1.6 million Canadian cattle were imported into the United States. By delaying the implementation of the Feed Ban the FDA risks yet another break in an already severely compromised food safety firewall.
When USDA reopened the U.S. border in 2007 to Canada’s highest-risk cattle population – OTM cattle – its risk modeling based on a Canadian BSE prevalence of fewer than 4 cases per million predicted that the U.S. would import over 100 head of BSE-infected cattle from Canada over the next 20 years. In addition, the risk modeling showed that human exposure to BSE would increase. However, as the CDC explained, the BSE prevalence in Canada could well be 8 cases per million, meaning that USDA likely has grossly underestimated the risk of introducing BSE-infected cattle into the U.S. as a result of allowing OTM Canadian cattle imports. Canada already has detected 16 native cases of BSE in its OTM cattle herd, 10 of which were born after the 1997 feed ban. The most recent of these cases was detected just last November. Nine of Canada’s BSE-infected cattle met USDA’s age requirements to be exported to the United States, as they were born after March 1, 1999, the date after which USDA erroneously claims BSE-infectivity was no longer circulating in Canada.
The current U.S. feed ban implemented in 1997 is comparable to the initial Canadian feed ban also implemented in 1997. Canada’s feed ban proved ineffective at preventing the spread of BSE in Canada. Despite the repeated urging of international scientists, Canada resisted any upgrades to its feed ban until after it detected multiple BSE cases in cattle born years after its 1997 feed ban. Canada’s July 2007 upgraded feed ban now protects Canadian consumers against the spread of BSE from Canadian cattle by closing known transmission routes, including cross-contamination and inadvertent feeding of contaminated cattle parts. It is unthinkable that the FDA would not afford U.S. consumers the same level of protection against these same Canadian cattle that are imported into the United States.
The FDA cannot legitimately argue that its current feed ban implemented in 1997, which is nearly identical to Canada’s original feed ban also implemented in 1997, is any more effective at mitigating Canada’s heightened BSE risk within U.S. borders than it was in mitigating Canada’s heightened BSE risk in Canada. Nor can FDA ignore the scientific evidence that overwhelmingly shows that the current U.S. feed ban is insufficient to mitigate the heightened BSE risk associated with OTM cattle imported from Canada. These higher-risk OTM Canadian cattle are entering the U.S. at the rate of several thousand per week, are being commingled in the U.S. cattle herd where some would be expected to die, and are entering both the U.S. food system as well as the U.S. animal feed system. The U.S. already is accepting Canada’s higher BSE risk without the protections necessary to mitigate that higher risk.
The FDA cannot bury its head in the sand and pretend the upgraded feed ban contained in the 2008 BSE final rule is not urgently needed to mitigate the increased BSE risk associated with the importation of millions of Canadian cattle. In fact, the FDA already has failed to timely implement an upgraded feed ban, which should have been implemented before USDA began to expose U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd to Canada’s heightened BSE risk.
The FDA has an absolute responsibility to protect the health and safety of U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd against this foreign animal disease which is always 100% fatal, and has been known to cross the species barrier infecting humans with variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD), the human form of BSE. We need only look to the United Kingdom’s recent tragic experience when it was discovered that BSE had crossed the species barrier to humans. Thus far this preventable disease has caused the deaths of 168 young adults. The long incubation period (which can be up to 40 years), means that tragically, there could be many more cases in the future. The FDA must break away from the manipulative actions by corporate-controlled, self-serving trade associations that have caused both FDA and USDA to endanger the health and safety of U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd by exposing them to an unnecessary and avoidable risk of BSE.
The USDA must immediately eliminate the source of this heightened BSE risk by prohibiting the importation of OTM Canadian cattle, and the FDA must immediately implement the 2008 BSE final rule to mitigate this heightened risk. There are no responsible alternatives.
http://cjdadvocacy.blogspot.com/2009/04/fda-food-ban.html
http://www.cjdfoundation.org/
CANADA DID NOT KILL MY MOTHER, AND HER DEATH WAS NO SPONTANEOUS EVENT, OR HAPPENSTANCE OF BAD LUCK. ...
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
TSS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
