• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

13th (15th) Canadian Mad Cow Case Found

A

Anonymous

Guest
13th case of mad cow disease found in Canada
Canwest News Service
OTTAWA - The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has confirmed the 13th case of mad cow disease in Canada, but the agency says the case poses no risk to human or animal health.

Dr. George Luterbach, a senior veterinarian with CFIA, said Monday the disease was found in a cow that died on a farm in western British Columbia. However, the exact farm where the animal was from has not been determined.

"At this point in time we're in the early stages of the investigation," said Luterbach. "We have no other suspect animals."

He said that to date, CFIA has not found more than one case on an individual farm.

"The birth farm is often not the farm in which the animal was found to have died," he added.

The agency said the animal was detected as part of its ongoing surveillance program for mad cow disease - or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). It said no part of the animal entered the human or animal food chain.

CFIA did not give the age of the animal in the latest case.

Canada discovered its first case of BSE in 2003.

Luterbach said the birth farm needs to be located in order to focus in on animals born during the same time period and that have consumed the same feed.

"At this point in time, a birth farm has not been confirmed."

He said until the birth farm is located, CFIA cannot determine if or how many other animals have been affected.

http://www.canada.com/topics/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=a0d6eac9-329d-4364-8c80-55a7af11be28
 

flounder

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
13th case of mad cow disease found in Canada
Canwest News Service
OTTAWA - The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has confirmed the 13th case of mad cow disease in Canada, but the agency says the case poses no risk to human or animal health.

Dr. George Luterbach, a senior veterinarian with CFIA, said Monday the disease was found in a cow that died on a farm in western British Columbia. However, the exact farm where the animal was from has not been determined.

"At this point in time we're in the early stages of the investigation," said Luterbach. "We have no other suspect animals."

He said that to date, CFIA has not found more than one case on an individual farm.

"The birth farm is often not the farm in which the animal was found to have died," he added.

The agency said the animal was detected as part of its ongoing surveillance program for mad cow disease - or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). It said no part of the animal entered the human or animal food chain.

CFIA did not give the age of the animal in the latest case.

Canada discovered its first case of BSE in 2003.

Luterbach said the birth farm needs to be located in order to focus in on animals born during the same time period and that have consumed the same feed.

"At this point in time, a birth farm has not been confirmed."

He said until the birth farm is located, CFIA cannot determine if or how many other animals have been affected.

http://www.canada.com/topics/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=a0d6eac9-329d-4364-8c80-55a7af11be28


sounds like the USDA et al now ;


PLEASE NOTE *** UNTRACEABLE


TEXAS MAD COW ATYPICAL BSE


THEY DID FINALLY TEST AFTER SITTING 7+ MONTHS ON A SHELF WHILE GW BORE THE BSE MRR POLICY, i.e. legal trading of all strains of TSE. now understand, i confirmed this case 7 months earlier to the TAHC, and then, only after i contacted the Honorable Phyllis Fong and after an act of Congress, this animal was finally confirmed ;

During the course of the investigation, USDA removed and tested a total of 67 animals of interest from the farm where the index animal's herd originated. All of these animals tested negative for BSE. 200 adult animals of interest were determined to have left the index farm. Of these 200, APHIS officials determined that 143 had gone to slaughter, two were found alive (one was determined not to be of interest because of its age and the other tested negative), 34 are presumed dead, one is known dead

***and 20 have been classified as untraceable. In addition to the adult animals, APHIS was looking for two calves born to the index animal. Due to record keeping and identification issues, APHIS had to trace 213 calves. Of these 213 calves, 208 entered feeding and slaughter channels, four are presumed to have entered feeding and slaughter channels and one calf was untraceable.

http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?contentidonly=true&contentid=2005/08/0336.xml

Executive Summary In June 2005, an inconclusive bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) sample from November 2004, that had originally been classified as negative on the immunohistochemistry test, was confirmed positive on SAF immunoblot (Western blot). The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) identified the herd of origin for the index cow in Texas; that identification was confirmed by DNA analysis. USDA, in close cooperation with the Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC), established an incident command post (ICP) and began response activities according to USDA’s BSE Response Plan of September 2004. Response personnel removed at-risk cattle and cattle of interest (COI) from the index herd, euthanized them, and tested them for BSE; all were negative. USDA and the State extensively traced all at-risk cattle and COI that left the index herd. The majority of these animals entered rendering and/or slaughter channels well before the investigation began. USDA’s response to the Texas finding was thorough and effective.

snip...

Trace Herd 3 The owner of Trace Herd 3 was identified as possibly having received an animal of interest. The herd was placed under hold order on 7/27/05. The herd inventory was conducted on 7/28/05. The animal of interest was not present within the herd, and the hold order was released on 7/28/05.

***The person who thought he sold the animal to the owner of Trace Herd 3 had no records and could not remember who else he might have sold the cow to. Additionally, a search of GDB for all cattle sold through the markets by that individual did not result in a match to the animal of interest. The animal of interest traced to this herd was classified as untraceable because all leads were exhausted.

Trace Herd 4 The owner of Trace Herd 4 was identified as having received one of the COI through an order buyer. Trace Herd 4 was placed under hold order on 7/29/05. A complete herd inventory was conducted on 8/22/05 and 8/23/05. There were 233 head of cattle that were examined individually by both State and Federal personnel for all man-made identification and brands.

***The animal of interest was not present within the herd. Several animals were reported to have died in the herd sometime after they arrived on the premises in April 2005. A final search of GDB records yielded no further results on the eartag of interest at either subsequent market sale or slaughter. With all leads having been exhausted, this animal of interest has been classified as untraceable. The hold order on Trace Herd 4 was released on 8/23/05.

Trace Herd 5 The owner of Trace Herd 5 was identified as having received two COI and was placed under hold order on 8/1/05. Trace Herd 5 is made up of 67 head of cattle in multiple pastures. During the course of the herd inventory, the owner located records that indicated that one of the COI, a known birth cohort, had been sold to Trace Herd 8 where she was subsequently found alive.

***Upon completion of the herd inventory, the other animal of interest was not found within the herd. A GDB search of all recorded herd tests conducted on Trace Herd 5 and all market sales by the owner failed to locate the identification tag of the animal of interest and she was subsequently classified as untraceable due to all leads having been exhausted. The hold order on Trace Herd 5 was released on 8/8/05.

Trace Herd 6 The owner of Trace Herd 6 was identified as possibly having received an animal of interest and was placed under hold order on 8/1/05. This herd is made up of 58 head of cattle on two pastures. A herd inventory was conducted and the animal of interest was not present within the herd. The owner of Trace Herd 6 had very limited records and was unable to provide further information on where the cow might have gone after he purchased her from the livestock market.

***A search of GDB for all cattle sold through the markets by that individual did not result in a match to the animal of interest. Additionally, many of the animals presented for sale by the owner of the herd had been re-tagged at the market effectually losing the traceability of the history of that animal prior to re-tagging. The animal of interest traced to this herd was classified as untraceable due to all leads having been exhausted. The hold order on Trace Herd 6 was released on 8/3/05.

Trace Herd 7 The owner of Trace Herd 7 was identified as having received an animal of interest and was placed under hold order on 8/1/05. Trace Herd 7 contains 487 head of cattle on multiple pastures in multiple parts of the State, including a unit kept on an island. The island location is a particularly rough place to keep cattle and the owner claimed to have lost 22 head on the island in 2004 due to liver flukes.

***Upon completion of the herd inventory, the animal of interest was not found present within Trace Herd 7. A GDB search of all recorded herd tests conducted on Trace Herd 7 and all market sales by the owner failed to locate the identification tag of the animal of interest. The cow was subsequently classified as untraceable. It is quite possible though that she may have died within the herd, especially if she belonged to the island unit. The hold order on Trace Herd 7 was released on 8/8/05.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/issues/bse/epi-updates/bse_final_epidemiology_report.pdf


TSS CONFIRMS TEXAS MAD COW 7 MONTHS EARLIER


-------- Original Message --------

Director, Public Information Carla Everett [email protected]

Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from TEXAS ??? Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:12:15 -0600 From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." To: Carla Everett References: <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask] us>

Greetings Carla,still hear a rumor;

Texas single beef cow not born in Canada no beef entered the food chain?

and i see the TEXAS department of animal health is ramping up forsomething, but they forgot a url for update?I HAVE NO ACTUAL CONFIRMATION YET...can you confirm???terry

==============================

-------- Original Message --------

Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from TEXAS ??? Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:38:21 -0600 From: Carla Everett To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." References: <[log in to unmask]>

The USDA has made a statement, and we are referring all callers to the USDA web site. We have no informationabout the animal being in Texas. CarlaAt 09:44 AM 11/19/2004, you wrote:>Greetings Carla,>>i am getting unsubstantiated claims of this BSE 'inconclusive' cow is from>TEXAS. can you comment on this either way please?>>thank you,>Terry S. Singeltary Sr.>>

===================

-------- Original Message --------

Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from TEXAS ??? Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:33:20 -0600 From: Carla Everett To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." References: <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask] us> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask] us> <[log in to unmask]>

our computer department was working on a place holder we could postUSDA's announcement of any results. There are no results to be announced tonightby NVSL, so we are back in a waiting mode and will post the USDA announcementwhen we hear something.At 06:05 PM 11/22/2004, you wrote:>why was the announcement on your TAHC site removed?>>Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy:>November 22: Press Release title here >>star image More BSE information>>>>terry>>Carla Everett wrote:>>>no confirmation on the U.S.' inconclusive test...>>no confirmation on location of animal.>>>>>>========================== ==========================

THEN, 7+ MONTHS OF COVER-UP BY JOHANN ET AL! no doubt about it now $$$

NO, it's not pretty, hell, im not pretty, but these are the facts, take em or leave em, however, you cannot change them.

with kindest regards,

I am still sincerely disgusted and tired in sunny Bacliff, Texas USA 77518

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. ===============

http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0701&L=sanet-mg&P=16195


THE OTHER TEXAS MAD COW THEY DID SUCCEED IN COVERING UP ;

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


ALABAMA MAD COW

Summary:

***Despite a thorough investigation of two farms that were known to contain the index cow, and 35 other farms that might have supplied the index cow to the farms where the index case was known to have resided, the investigators were unable to locate the herd of origin. The index case did not have unique or permanent identification, plus, the size and color of the cow being traced is very common in the Southern United States. Due to the unremarkable appearance of solid red cows, it is not easy for owners to remember individual animals. In the Southern United States, it is common business practice to buy breeding age cows and keep them for several years while they produce calves. Most calves produced are sold the year they are born, whereas breeding cows are sold when there is a lapse in breeding, which can occur multiple times in cows’ lives. For all of these reasons, USDA was unable to locate the herd of origin.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/content/printable_version/EPI_Final.pdf

WASHINGTON MAD COW

Fifty-seven (57) animals were born into the birth herd from April 1996 to April 1998. Twenty-seven (27) of these animals were traced and confirmed dead, 25 animals (including the index case) were exported to the US,

***two animals were untraceable, ..........

The 48 animals were determined to be among 86 head sold to numerous buyers. Eighty (80) of these were traced and confirmed slaughtered,

***2 were untraceable .......

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/heasan/disemala/bseesb/americ/amerinveste.shtml

WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU BUY MAD COW TAINTED PRODUCTS, is there a need to know

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Wednesday, March 31, 2004

FOR MORE INFORMATION: Elisa Odabashian – 415-431-6747

BILL WOULD PREVENT CALIFORNIA FROM KEEPING INFORMATION ABOUT HAZARDOUS FOOD RECALLS SECRET

Legislation Targets State’s Secrecy Agreement With USDA That Kept Consumers In the Dark About Mad Cow Disease Infected Beef

(SACRAMENTO, CA) – Earlier this year, news accounts indicated that California was one of seven states that received a shipment of beef products subject to a USDA recall because it included meat and bones from a cow that tested positive for mad cow disease. But California consumers had no way of knowing whether their local grocery store or restaurant received any of these tainted products because the state had agreed to keep that information secret. To prevent this from happening in the future, two state lawmakers have introduced legislation that would ensure consumers are notified of any retail outlets in their community that have received recalled beef or poultry.

“Consumers have a right to know whether the food they are buying could be hazardous to their health,” said Elisa Odabashian, Senior Policy Analyst with Consumers Union’s West Coast Regional Office. “The state’s secrecy agreement with the USDA protects the beef and poultry industry while putting California consumers at risk.”

In 2002, the California Department of Health Services (DHS) signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the USDA agreeing to keep secret the names of the retail outlets selling food subject to beef and poultry recalls. The USDA shares information about retailers that have received tainted beef and poultry only with states that sign such agreements. The agency maintains that secrecy is necessary in order to protect the proprietary interests of the beef and poultry industries. But this policy leaves consumers in the dark about which retail outlets may be selling these hazardous products. The Memorandum of Understanding requiring secrecy covers all recalls of unsafe beef and poultry – not just the recent recall of beef that tested positive for mad cow disease. Recalls of beef and poultry products tainted with other hazards, such as E.coli, Listeria, and Salmonella, also would be covered by the secrecy agreement.

SB 1585, introduced by Senators Jackie Speier and Mike Machado, would require all beef and poultry product suppliers, distributors and processors who sell meat in California subject to a USDA recall to immediately identify to the state the names and locations of retailers that received these contaminated products. The bill requires the California Department of Health Services to provide this information within 24 hours to local health officials so that they can alert the public. The bill also requires the agency to submit copies of all Memorandum of Understanding pertaining to food and food-related products to the Legislature for review by January 1, 2005.

“The USDA should not be coercing states to abide by secrecy agreements about tainted beef and poultry and California officials should not be withholding information about these hazards from consumers,” said Odabashian. “This bill will ensure that the state receives the information it needs to respond to such food recalls and that consumers are properly alerted so they can take steps to protect their health.”

Last week, Senators Machado and Speier introduced another bill that would make California the first state in the nation to require all cattle slaughtered or sold to be certified as testing negative for mad cow disease. SB 1425 requires licensed slaughterers in California to test all cattle carcasses for the deadly brain wasting disease. Under the bill, these carcasses must be embargoed for sale until the slaughterhouse receives test results certifying that the cow was negative for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). The slaughterhouse would be required to report every positive test result to the State Veterinarian and the USDA. In addition, the bill requires all importers of beef into the state for re-sale to be able to certify that the beef is BSE-negative.

Consumers Union has urged the federal government to vastly expand its testing program, fully ban the feeding of any animal remains to cows, and immediately disclose to states and the public, all retail outlets and restaurants from which meat was recalled because it came from an infected cow.

http://www.consumersunion.org/pub/core_food_safety/000954.html


Congress proposes USDA purchase school meat from NAIS registered premises

(6/19/2008) Sally Schuff

Under a provision announced Thursday, the USDA's national school lunch program could be required to buy meat from animals that can be traced back to premises registered in the National Animal Identification System. That was revealed as the House version of the 2009 annual agricultural appropriations bill was unveiled by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, chairwoman of the House agricultural appropriations subcommittee. The provision would go into effect in July 2010 if it becomes law. But, the bill must still be passed by the full House appropriations committee and go to the House floor, likely combined with other appropriations bills, later this year.

DeLauro hinted at linking USDA school purchases to the NAIS premises registrations during a hearing earlier this year. She said she DeLauro had suggested earlier this year during a hearing that she was considering such a requirement. During a subcommittee session to mark-up the bill Thursday, she said that the historic beef recall triggered by animal abuses at the Westland-Hallmark plant make it imperative to tighten the traceability of meat in the school lunch supply. USDA recalled 141 million pounds of beef and beef products, much of which had gone to schools, after it was discovered that some animals had gone into the slaughter plant without USDA re-inspection as required when an animal falls.


http://www.feedstuffs.com/


March 28, 2008, 12:10AM

USDA CERTIFIED DEAD STOCK DOWNER COW SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM LIST OF SCHOOLS
AFFECTED STATE BY STATE (dead stock downers i.e. non-ambulatory, the most
high risk for mad cow
disease)

http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2008/03/usda-certified-dead-stock-downer-cow.html


SEE HISTORY OF USDA CERTIFIED DEAD STOCK DOWNER COW SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM
long term case study of CJD in school children ;

http://downercattle.blogspot.com/


FDA lists school districts that got recalled meat
Lawmakers had demanded info be released

(see schools listed state by state)

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fns/safety/Hallmark-Westland_byState.pdf


Monday, June 23, 2008

BSE CASE CONFIRMED IN BRITISH COLUMBIA OTTAWA Monday, June 23, 2008 2:20 PM

http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2008/06/bse-case-confirmed-in-british-columbia.html

http://organicconsumers.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=1625


Portsmouth woman did not die of mad cow-related condition, USDA says UPDATE Updated Jun.17, 2008 08:34 KST

U.K. BSE nvCJD ONLY theory invoked again. it's like still believing the world is flat for pete's sake i.e. the one strain, one country, one age group, one species, one route, only theory. it's pure BSe, and the stench is horrendous. it's the smell of death, for profit only.

THE UKBSEnvCJD _only_ theory is incorrect. there are more strains of mad cow than the UK BSE in beef to nvCJD in humans in the UK. The deception by the USDA, FDA, and the Bush administration about mad cow disease, CJD, and all Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy over the past 8 years have been outrageous, to a point of being criminal. I am vested in nothing, but the truth.

snip...

Please remember, the last two mad cows documented in the USA i.e. Alabama and Texas, both were of the 'atypical' BSE strain, and immediately after that, the USDA shut down the testing from 470,000 to 40,000 in the U.S. in 2007 out of about 35 million cattle slaughtered. also, science is showing that some of these atypical cases are more virulent to humans than the typical UK BSE strain ;

***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

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

IF BSE is not in the USA (just not documented for many different reasons), and only atypical BSE is in the USA (plus CWD, plus, many strains of Scrapie, and Now the Nor-98 documented in 5 different states, plus TME, then why would human mad cow in the USA look like the UK nvCJD from UK BSE cows ? it was shown long ago in studies at Mission Texas that experimental transmission of USA Scrapie to USA Bovine, DID NOT LOOK LIKE UK BSE. so again, in short, why would human mad cow in the USA look like human mad cow in the UK i.e. the (nvCJD). however, I believe that BSE has been in the USA untested and undocumented for years. why on earth then does the USDA refuse to allow creekstone or anyone else test their product? simple, if you don't look/test, you don't find.

snip...

He added that because the CDC only provide information on diseases, they have no plans

to make a separate press release on the issue including the result of the investigation.

and that is the way they plan to keep it, all spontaneous, sporadic, no route, no source $$$

USDA, CDC, NIH, ET AL INVOKE THE UKBSEnvCJD ONLY RULE $$$

Virginia Woman Did not Die of vCJD

Updated Jun.17,2008 08:34 KST

The MBC news program "PD Diary" reported that Aretha Vinson died of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) in early April when in an interview, Vinson's mother actually said, "The results had come in from the MRI and it appeared that our daughter could possibly have CJD," not vCJD.

please see full text ;

http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/06/portsmouth-woman-did-not-die-of-mad-cow.html

A novel human disease with abnormal prion protein sensitive to protease (prionopathy)

http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/06/novel-human-disease-with-abnormal-prion.html

HUMAN and ANIMAL TSE Classifications i.e. mad cow disease and the UKBSEnvCJD only theory JUNE 2008

http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/06/human-and-animal-tse-classifications-ie.html

PLEASE NOTE, typical and atypical BSE have been _documented_ in North America, along with typical and atypical Scrapie, and CWD in deer and Elk, along with TME in mink. what CJD from any of these source would look like, if transmitted to humans, either by consumption, or 2nd, 3rd, 4th passage etc by any friendly fire, what this would look like in humans is anyones guess, but could include sporadic CJDs. ...TSS
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
OT maybe you could try posting the whole article one time. :roll: By all means be vocal about how Canada finding BSE it just proves how intense and effective our surveilence program. :p
Flounder it is the begining of the investigation, these cannot be done over night. It is not like the CFIA is held this back for 7 months. Let us wait and see how old she was and what kind of cow she was. From the location and previous cases one would expect this positive to be a dairy cow born prior to 2001. Amazing what you find when look for something in the right place. Kinda like looking ice when going to the north pole.
 

flounder

Well-known member
QUESTION said:
snip... Flounder it is the begining of the investigation, these cannot be done over night. It is not like the CFIA is held this back for 7 months. Let us wait and see how old she was and what kind of cow she was. From the location and previous cases one would expect this positive to be a dairy cow born prior to 2001. Amazing what you find when look for something in the right place. Kinda like looking ice when going to the north pole.


roger that there question, i totally understand. could not agree with you more. that is why i was pointing out the U.S. ineptness i.e. the untouchable's i.e. 'the *** UNTRACEABLE'. was just keeping OT honest :wink:

flounder
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
I thought Canada had a quick trace-back system. Good thing this cow had BSE and not FMD. It only took Montana and South Dakota less than 24 hours to track a bunch of bulls. Maybe BC needs a brand system...
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
What tangent are you babbling about SandH ? :roll: Are you saying there are canadian born and bred bulls that have been found in montana and South dakota with FAM or BSE positive? Or are you talking about the bucking bulls that went across the line when the border were close and were caught 3 years ago? Or are you saying sheik Snuf al Upagus is at it again hiding bse positives in canada? :oops: Remember the CFIA just confirmed the case on monday how long did it take to find the home farm, contemporaries, calves and age of the alabama cow. :p Oh wait her age was just an estimate and the farm where she died could only find one calf and NEVER found out where she came from originally or any contemporaries. So don't start throwing stones from the top of your glass topped ivory tower!!
 

ranch hand

Well-known member
No, he was talking about the bulls that traced back to your BSE cow. The Alabama cow wasn't branded if I remember right.

Here some reading to keep you up to date before your tongue engages before your brain.

DR. DeHAVEN: We appreciate you all being on at such short notice. This is a follow-up on our report from yesterday regarding the five Canadian bulls from the probable source herd in Canada. This is the part of the ongoing investigation in Canada with regard to the one cow that has been found positive for BSE in Canada. They reported to us on Tuesday of this week that from one of the probable source herds for the infected cow, five animals had moved into Montana, into a ranch there.

As follow-up to that information that we provided yesterday, the initial review of brand inspection records and based on interviews with the Montana rancher, our investigators have determined that 24 bulls were moved off of this farm between 1999 and 2002. Originally this number was actually reported as 11, but further investigation today has revealed that there were actually 24 bulls from this ranch in Montana that moved off of the farm.

Of the 24, 23 were moved from the farm to stockyards--one stockyard in Montana and two stockyards in South Dakota. And then the 24th one was slaughtered for personal consumption. So this would be custom slaughter for home consumption, presumably by the rancher.

It's assumed that the five bulls in question, the five that came from Canada, are included in those 24 animals that have left the farm during that 1999 to 2002 time frame. As of today, our preliminary trace-back on those 24 animals has been made available by animal health officials in Montana. The initial results show that between those three years, 1997 and 2002, three bulls were purchased by slaughter facilities in Nebraska; five bulls in Minnesota; two bulls to Texas; and 11 in South Dakota. One bull went to Wyoming, and trace-outs on that particular animal are still under way. And of course the 24th one, then, would be the one that was slaughtered for personal consumption.
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
Yeah brands only to run down that wild goose :roll: . The bulls that were exported had registration papers , export permits, H of A tags, Manifests to the border as well as receipts at the border as well as mainfests all showing where they went into to the US. So your officals had to call them pick up the trail, too bad they didn't use it to find the bulls in question who were part of a witch burning. As for ol'Sanh, You never know where is is going when he makes vague statements. A general rule is to ask the same question at least 5 times to get a reply to your inital question even though he replys to some post.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
QUESTION said:
Yeah brands only to run down that wild goose :roll: . The bulls that were exported had registration papers , export permits, H of A tags, Manifests to the border as well as receipts at the border as well as mainfests all showing where they went into to the US. So your officals had to call them pick up the trail, too bad they didn't use it to find the bulls in question who were part of a witch burning. As for ol'Sanh, You never know where is is going when he makes vague statements. A general rule is to ask the same question at least 5 times to get a reply to your inital question even though he replys to some post.

Ranch Hand knew exactly what I was talking about, so I don't know how vague I was. Do you really think the manifests, border receipts, etc... followed them after they got over here? Why then were the BRAND commissions brought into the search?
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
Go off on your tangent SandH you won't be missed. The reality is that this is early in the invesitigation and more imformation will come out as the investigation gets done.
Rh i'm not even going to start. Rather i'll ask you a question can you show me the definative supported proof that case one came saskatchewan. Hint - DNA can be used to confirm . Sorry to burst you bubble :D
 

gcreekrch

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
I thought Canada had a quick trace-back system. Good thing this cow had BSE and not FMD. It only took Montana and South Dakota less than 24 hours to track a bunch of bulls. Maybe BC needs a brand system...

Actually BC does have a very good privately run Brand Inspection system. With the CCIA tags in conjunction it doesn't take long to track down any cattle.
Although we hear that when our feeders go south of the border there were some feedlots that used to remove our ID tags to "naturalize" our cattle. That probably doesn't happen now that we have to brand our export cattle with the CAN.
 

Kathy

Well-known member
CFIA informed me, via email, that this latest case was discovered in an animal (sample) taken from a "dead stock" facility. I note, that no animal can be picked up from a farm by the dead stock truck unless it has a CFIA tag in its ear.

If it is branded as a calf, then the source of the birth farm would be self-evident.

Please remember this is Ottawa doing the talking for an incidence in BC.
The same Ottawa CFIA that hauled water buffalo from Fairburn Farm on Victoria Island all the way to Lethbridge Alberta to destroy them and test for BSE.

I'd like to know the date the sample was collected, to determine how long it took to test.
 

ranch hand

Well-known member
QUESTION said:
Go off on your tangent SandH you won't be missed. The reality is that this is early in the invesitigation and more imformation will come out as the investigation gets done.
Rh i'm not even going to start. Rather i'll ask you a question can you show me the definative supported proof that case one came saskatchewan. Hint - DNA can be used to confirm . Sorry to burst you bubble :D

Why am I showing you where the first case of BSE was found? What bubble? I was showing you that the bulls were tracked by brand inspections.

I must be having a bad day as I am having a hard time making sense of your post today. Then again I usually have trouble making sense of your posts any day. :oops: What does definative mean?
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
Ok i'll lead you thru this the wanham cow known as case one was DNA tested and she could not be definatively matched to the PB herd from Saskatchewan that supplied the imfo. for those bull you guys are so proud of being able to trace in 24 hours. It was a witch hunt a PB producer that had some of the best angus in the area lost 30 years of selection and work. Don't get me wrong i like the concept but the CFIA should have DNAed the herd first and killed after it was proven she was from the appropriate herd. This is what happens when a rush to judgement is made to calm fears. The CFIA has learned and now takes time to get it right before releasing imformation. And some south of the border still want things rushed this thread is a prime example.
As for the tracking of the cattle thru brand inspection it helps but a ID program like the CCIA runs definatively makes things alot more efficient. I do understand that in the US there is a culture of fear. And that is why so many are fighting NAIS. Fear of the unknown
As for being difficult to follow if you don't get it just ask. This is all a tangent the thread is about a BSE positive cow and the CFIA finding her and taking their time to do a proper investigation and sand is is bring up that the US can trace cattle in 24 hrs. :roll: Can we say tangent.
But you seem to want to make personal attacks as well. Too bad. I thought this forum was for discussion and exchange of ideas. Not only 1 way of thinking. Lets wait and see if my prediction comes true a that this last cow is a dairy cow.
 

ranch hand

Well-known member
But you seem to want to make personal attacks as well. Too bad. I thought this forum was for discussion and exchange of ideas. Not only 1 way of thinking. Lets wait and see if my prediction comes true a that this last cow is a dairy cow.

You are the king of unsults. If someone goes against you then the insults sure come on fast. Don't they? Show me one post where it wasn't just your way of thinking, that you had a discussion. :lol: Can you prove all your ranting about the above cow and the bulls. Let see some proof or your tangent you call it. I thought tangent used as a noun was a math term. Maybe be wrong tho.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
QUESTION said:
Ok i'll lead you thru this the wanham cow known as case one was DNA tested and she could not be definatively matched to the PB herd from Saskatchewan that supplied the imfo. for those bull you guys are so proud of being able to trace in 24 hours. It was a witch hunt a PB producer that had some of the best angus in the area lost 30 years of selection and work. Don't get me wrong i like the concept but the CFIA should have DNAed the herd first and killed after it was proven she was from the appropriate herd. This is what happens when a rush to judgement is made to calm fears. The CFIA has learned and now takes time to get it right before releasing imformation. And some south of the border still want things rushed this thread is a prime example.
As for the tracking of the cattle thru brand inspection it helps but a ID program like the CCIA runs definatively makes things alot more efficient. I do understand that in the US there is a culture of fear. And that is why so many are fighting NAIS. Fear of the unknown
As for being difficult to follow if you don't get it just ask. This is all a tangent the thread is about a BSE positive cow and the CFIA finding her and taking their time to do a proper investigation and sand is is bring up that the US can trace cattle in 24 hrs. :roll: Can we say tangent.
But you seem to want to make personal attacks as well. Too bad. I thought this forum was for discussion and exchange of ideas. Not only 1 way of thinking. Lets wait and see if my prediction comes true a that this last cow is a dairy cow.

I was just pointing out the irony that a few of the Canadians here are ridiculing the brand system some states have and telling how we need a system like Canada has and here the CFIA can't tell yet what place the cow came from while Montana and SD with that silly brand system could track a whole bunch of cattle that went seperate ways in less than 24 hours. I think it's kind of funny.
 

Silver

Well-known member
Hmmm..... SH, do you suppose the brand system in SD or MT is any different than that in BC? Are brands mandatory there? There must be more to this story, methinks.
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
I'll indulge you - go to my posts on sports and hunting. You will find that i am more than willing to admit when i am wrong or have a disagrrement and see anothers point of view. Or maybe go read some of my old posts supporting the ideas of doing what is needed to eliminate BSE in the world ie) a mass cull of cattle. As for the insults you claim i always make i try awfully hard not to make it personal even when attacked. All i do is point out another viewpoint contrary to others or question a concept that lacks logic. Please show me where i constantly insult others. As for my comments on case 1 just go to APHIS dockets, FDA reports or lastly to Dr. Chris Clarks overview of case 1. Put simply i am providing imfo that some choose to ignore. That should end that. Look it up.
As for my refernce to going off on tangents. i am refering not to math specifically but the diversion of a thread to another direction other than originally intended. This thread is about the 12th case of BSE found in Canada and the fact that the investigation is in progress. When the CFIA releases more we will know more. I am not part of the investigation so i do not know every detail. If you know more about the investigation please tell me.
Maybe you can tell me if brand inspection in SD is so great what happened in the Van Dyke case. Such a speedy and accurate system surely could not confuse cattle with CAN brand with SD cattle? What is your interpretation on what happened there PM your answer as it would be taking this thread off on a differnet direction yet again.
I am not saying brands are ineffective but when it isn't manditory for every state or producer it leaves room for error in trace outs when needed. Thus having another method of tracking cattle like the CCIA system seems like a good idea. If it isn't show me why. :D
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
I was just pointing out the irony that a few of the Canadians here are ridiculing the brand system some states have and telling how we need a system like Canada has and here the CFIA can't tell yet what place the cow came from while Montana and SD with that silly brand system could track a whole bunch of cattle that went seperate ways in less than 24 hours. I think it's kind of funny.

:roll: Now we're just getting plain silly. If this cow pre-dated the tracing system, she won't have a herd of origin listed and THATS TO BE EXPECTED! How would an animal have a tag if she was older than the traceback system and sold before the traceback system was even a glimmer in the CCIA's eye? Perhaps the original owners should go looking for every cow they ever sold and stuff a tag in its ear?

What if the original owner of an animal in the US didn't brand, nor did the next 2 owners? Should they be chasing down all their animals and putting brands on them too?

Our traceback system is not even remotely perfect, but one thing I can say with absolute confidence is that its 10x better than any branding system in the world. I've already run through the advantages of tagging/boluses versus brands a few times, do I need to again?

Rod
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Whatever, the facts remain. Montana and SD tracked a bunch of animals via brands in less than 24 hours and the CFIA isn't.

I apologize for the tangent, Q. I realize that's something you've never done.
 
Top