Alberta cow tests positive for mad cow

[cowsense]

RKaiser; Sorry about using your full name but you use it lots in posts so made use of it. Yes I do believe in the feed transmission theory and feel that you only have to look to Europe to see how BSE cases have tapered off to justify the science. I rely on some of the most experienced vets from the WCVM in Saskatoon as to what is believed to be fact and what is supposition! They support the OIE's stance on BSE. While I can't entirely discount everything of Purdey's theories I do have trouble with much of it!I can see a mineral imbalance making an animal more susceptible to disease but not to causing it. As to the US, they were not following the 4D guidelines hardly at all but were basically testing slaughter cows using outdated testing procedures. OIE guidelines suggest that testing one 4D animal is equivalant to testing 100 healthy OTM cows!

 

[Econ101]

R2 -

You got that right R2 - ------- Soil Air and Water samples to identify metal imbalance. That would be action. :wink:

Anybody know if the USDA actually played by international rules and followed the testing regime set for countries with a DOMESTIC CASE OF BSE.

In Canada we had numbers to meet, and these numbers included only 4D cattle. Is the USDA following the same or did they make their own AGAIN.

Although it has been made into one, this BSE issue should be a disease control issue, not an issue between the U.S. and Canada. Unfortunately, the USDA (and Canada agencies) want to control the information about the disease instead of confronting it and treating it like a disease to be traced and eliminated. That strategy is not honest to consumers and producers.

Econ: You continue to amaze me in your unrelenting quest to be seen as an expert on everything. The only thing you have proved is your absolute and total ignorance of the realities of the Canadian Industry! While he is quick to respond and definately has his opinions Randy Kaiser DOES NOT speak for our industry as his ideas are opinion only and often go directly against recognized industry scientific opinion!
As to CFIA's BSE strategy we have been recognized by the OIE as running a model operation for dealing with the problem. We ARE dealing with and testing the most vulnerable part of our cattle population; the 4D's! We are using reliable tests and are testing far more animals than OIE regulations call for; our industry fully expects to find more cases but the few found to date point to the fact that BSE infects only a handful of cattle, a number so small that it is statistically neglible. Our surveilance program, our SRM removal and feed bans go the rest of the way in preventing new exposure. CFIA's protocols DO set the basis for testing and eradication contrary to your naive beliefs :!:

Cowsense, I agree that the number has been small and almost negligable. What is wrong with a company like Creekside to be able to test on their own instead of relying on a USDA that seems to not be influenced too heavily by industry? Why can't this be done in Canada? The BSE outbreak in Brittain happened a long time ago. Both of our countries were slow to put in safeguards. The U.S. is still behind on transparency and real action. If this is not corrected and we do see cases of CJD, meat consumption in the U.S., which you are heavily tied to, will be hurt. Instead the USDA has allowed this issue to be punching boy that dismisses the real issues of captive supply and industy concentration, and industry influence of policy to deal with the situation. The public will stand behind an adminstration that is reacting and working honestly, but dishonesty and no credibility will hurt the industry immensely.

I am sorry you took my post so personal, but I was ranting about both country's response, not just Canada's. I am very concerned with the USA's response to BSE. Why haven't we learned the answers to BSE yet?

BSE is not in the "known" stage. Until then, all you and I both have about the subject is opinions. I don't think I have called my opinions on this issue "fact" or that I speak from some high place on it. I don't know any more about it than you do, but why should that stop you or I in discussing it on a forum like this?

 

[Maple Leaf Angus]

What's the difference between the lost American mad cow and the lost Canadian mad Cow?








The American mad cow was never found...
:nod: :lol2:

 

[rkaiser]

RKaiser; Sorry about using your full name but you use it lots in posts so made use of it. Yes I do believe in the feed transmission theory and feel that you only have to look to Europe to see how BSE cases have tapered off to justify the science. I rely on some of the most experienced vets from the WCVM in Saskatoon as to what is believed to be fact and what is supposition! They support the OIE's stance on BSE. While I can't entirely discount everything of Purdey's theories I do have trouble with much of it!I can see a mineral imbalance making an animal more susceptible to disease but not to causing it. As to the US, they were not following the 4D guidelines hardly at all but were basically testing slaughter cows using outdated testing procedures. OIE guidelines suggest that testing one 4D animal is equivalant to testing 100 healthy OTM cows!

No problemo on the name thing cowsense. Randy Kaiser is a lot better name than any that the old Gopher Trapper has for me. Besides, how the hell are you gonna know where to buy my bulls if you don't know my name! :wink:

Just as you have had trouble with Purdey's theory, I have had touble with one that talks of an indetructable misfolded prion somehow finding it's way from the gut to the CNS and then through the blood brain barrier. Had a good visit with one of the Vets from WCVM while testing (semen) our bulls the other day. Looking forward to more.

Funny thing those OIE rules and USDA rules eh!

 

[fedup2]

Dunkin writes{ "Canada needs to start doing what Klein suggested.
Shoot, shovel and shut up.
The americans have had cases of BSE too, they have to have...but they are just covering it up."}

What is it that you hope to accomplish with posts like this? When I saw the title of this thread, my first thoughts were, oh $hit! Those poor guys are going to get it again. When I read this post of yours, my (immediate and temporary) thoughts changed to, lock the damn gate and throw away the key! That's what posts like this accomplish. Just wondering if that is what your goal is? Seems every time anything happens, there are fingers pointing across the border. Yes, both ways! What good does it do?

To any other Canadians: As always, I have more questions than answers. Do you have any way to hedge your cattle? I know the US markets would do you no good in a case like this, as last time, when your cattle went down ours went up. Are there any Canadian exchanges where you can buy options or somehow insure a bottom line? Wouldn't discussing ways of how one can protect themselves from price drops be a better discussion than the 'yo momma' type posts? I am asking about the hedging because I don't have a clue of what your options are, if any.

I really do wish you the best of luck with this as I have helped my relatives line up equipment at auctions to many times. Anyone who takes pleasure in watching someone lose what they have worked for all their lives, has to be a cold hearted s.o.b!

 

[Soapweed]

"If confirmed by the CFIA, it will be a devastating blow for the Canadian cattle industry, which had just rebounded from a previous case of BSE in Alberta in 2003."

I doubt this statement. The US is Canada's largest customer by far, and the USDA/AMI doesn't care how many cases are found up there.

Ah, but for a very thin barbed wire fence go we. Maybe living in this big old glass house called the USA, we shouldn't throw our rocks too hard. :?

 

[Maple Leaf Angus]

"If confirmed by the CFIA, it will be a devastating blow for the Canadian cattle industry, which had just rebounded from a previous case of BSE in Alberta in 2003."

I doubt this statement. The US is Canada's largest customer by far, and the USDA/AMI doesn't care how many cases are found up there.

Ah, but for a very thin barbed wire fence go we. Maybe living in this big old glass house called the USA, we shouldn't throw our rocks too hard. :?

Soapweed, it is because of people like you that I can still say "God Bless America".

 

[cowsense]

Econ; You think I jumped you a little hard; maybe or maybe not? My whole point was that you should do more research before you make allegations about our Canadian industry. You are just a little too prone to accept RKaiser's point of view as being gospel even when he is stating just his own opinion. There definately is another side to the story!
I have to go vote so will make this short. Our industry looked at testing as a marketing tool but backed off. This is a short-sighted unnecessary procedure that would probably pull resources from the surveillance programs. Advocates of using BSE testing as a maarketing tool have not done due diligance into the recquirements of testing! There was no liability insurance coverage available anywhere (world wide) and any private labs up here had to discontinue any and all BSE testing. The process is only handled now by CFIA labs with the taxpayer holding any liability issues. There is not enough capacity available to even begin to start any unneccessary testing. Try to finance a business plan without liability insurance and see how far you will get!

 

[Sandhusker]

"If confirmed by the CFIA, it will be a devastating blow for the Canadian cattle industry, which had just rebounded from a previous case of BSE in Alberta in 2003."

I doubt this statement. The US is Canada's largest customer by far, and the USDA/AMI doesn't care how many cases are found up there.

Ah, but for a very thin barbed wire fence go we. Maybe living in this big old glass house called the USA, we shouldn't throw our rocks too hard. :?

Soap, the rock thrown was at our own house! (or just the wing the USDA lives in). :wink:

My aim is to the East, not the North.

 

[greg]

Soapweed ,thx for your input,nice to hear!!!.As for the shoot ,shovel,shut-up statement,chuckled when Ralph said it BUT in reality its the LAST thing Alberta should do.I'm Damn proad that our I'D systems workin and give the rancher in this latest case my upmost respect, musta been a hard desision to call the vet,come on he knew what he was prob.lookin at!!Felt like I'd been kicked in stomach when heard about latest case,all we're trying to do is a job we love,raise the best cattle we can and make a little money at it.

 

[Econ101]

Econ; You think I jumped you a little hard; maybe or maybe not? My whole point was that you should do more research before you make allegations about our Canadian industry. You are just a little too prone to accept RKaiser's point of view as being gospel even when he is stating just his own opinion. There definately is another side to the story!
I have to go vote so will make this short. Our industry looked at testing as a marketing tool but backed off. This is a short-sighted unnecessary procedure that would probably pull resources from the surveillance programs. Advocates of using BSE testing as a maarketing tool have not done due diligance into the recquirements of testing! There was no liability insurance coverage available anywhere (world wide) and any private labs up here had to discontinue any and all BSE testing. The process is only handled now by CFIA labs with the taxpayer holding any liability issues. There is not enough capacity available to even begin to start any unneccessary testing. Try to finance a business plan without liability insurance and see how far you will get!

I don't know the particulars about the Creekstone deal, but wouldn't the Japanese be the ones involved in the testing? Wouldn't have been their liability? I admit I do not know the particulars of the Creekstone deal and maybe the articles could have been more educational in that respect as they were my only source, but I don't believe their deal has any of the BSE pitfalls you describe.

BSE has pushed Canada into the manditory ID. I know some of the pitfalls of having a M-ID program from a market knowledge perspective. Other than the obvious of BSE prevention, that is where I have most of my reservations for producers. Now Canada has M-ID, and the solution being pushed on US producers is the same system.

The fact is that during the trade negotiations, the negotiators on both sides of our border left out the protections of the PSA in regards to Canadian cattle trade. During the "salmon run" it hurt Canadian producers to the benefit of the Canadian packers who took money from both sides--Canadian producers and taxpayer relief. It allowed the companies playing the concentration game to come out winners. Without PSA protections, that cattle trade can be "international" supplies that don't come with PSA protections (little as they are at this particular point in time) for U.S. producers, but are being used by the same players that use them to manipulate the markets in the USA. The fact is that your trade negotiators put you in this position. I don't call that helping out the Canadian cattle industry, I call that helping out Canadian and U.S. packers against the interests of producers. Your govt. did not help out the situation one bit, and it hasn't changed yet. Most of the Canadians on this board (with a few exceptions) don't even recognize this problem and speak out to fix it. Why do you think r-calf has had so much success? Solve this problem and much of the hate towards the Canadian supplies will be gone.

 

[greg]

Thx reader,much appreciated!!!

 

[rkaiser]

R2 - excellent post

- from an admirer in the South




Watch her Greg. She's after a Good Canadian MAN I hear.

cowsense -

I have to go vote so will make this short. Our industry looked at testing as a marketing tool but backed off. This is a short-sighted unnecessary procedure that would probably pull resources from the surveillance programs. Advocates of using BSE testing as a maarketing tool have not done due diligance into the recquirements of testing! There was no liability insurance coverage available anywhere (world wide) and any private labs up here had to discontinue any and all BSE testing. The process is only handled now by CFIA labs with the taxpayer holding any liability issues. There is not enough capacity available to even begin to start any unneccessary testing. Try to finance a business plan without liability insurance and see how far you will get!

Never heard of this liability argument before cowsense. Has old Lynch Staughnton been diggin a bit deeper lately. I guess that the only thing I would have to say about liability is that under the current CCA policy, the producers of Canada are truely the ones held liable. Government hasn't paid anywhere near what the producers have lost (and I'm not asking for any Scott), and good chunk of the government money has found it's way into packers pockets. (in a number of ways). Therefore the insurance payout for not allowing private enterprise to test has come from producers; mostly Canadian.

Due diligence alright. The only due diligence that CCA has done has been duediligencing whatever the USDA says.

 

[rkaiser]

Okay R2, liable for what?

Should a company say that they are going to test for BSE and they find one, are they liable???

I trueuly do not know where cowsense is coming from with this one.

 

[Mike]

Creekstone offered to pay the USDA to oversee their testing facility to assist in relieving themselves of liability.

Of course some have taken his statement out of context, but Fielding told the Japs out front that their were no guarantees and the Japs obviously agreed. The Japs then wanted a brain sample to be tagged and accompany the exported meat for oversight.

It was all about building consumer confidence in Japan.

What is the liability NOW if someone comes down with vCJD and accuses the USDA of a coverup, which could possibly be proven.

Would the producer, packer, wholesaler, and the USDA be held liable? Probably.

It's just as Randy says, BSEconomics.

 

[katrina]

I'm wondering what will happen to my Canadian friends now??? Will this throw their market into a tail spin or will it not effect it so much??? I look at this as not a US-Canada issue, but as a problem hopfully not a disaster to my friends.

 

[Mike]

Okay R2, liable for what?

Should a company say that they are going to test for BSE and they find one, are they liable???

I trueuly do not know where cowsense is coming from with this one.

Company says they will test.
Ten years later someone comes down with vCJD and sues company.
Or sues Government for allowing company to certify that the meat is BSE free.

Believe me, I don't want this to be the case, but I thought that cowsense actually pointed to a new angle that no one had explored and since liability is QUITE an issue right now with Government certification in things like chemradbio terrorism detection / prevention products, this made some (cow)sense to me.

Makes none to me. No company could possibly certify that meat is "BSE FREE". Because if someone came down with vCJD 10 years later they couldn't prove that they ate tainted meat!

They don't certify it to be ECOLI free or Listeria free either.

 

[Tam]

Econ; You think I jumped you a little hard; maybe or maybe not? My whole point was that you should do more research before you make allegations about our Canadian industry. You are just a little too prone to accept RKaiser's point of view as being gospel even when he is stating just his own opinion. There definately is another side to the story!
I have to go vote so will make this short. Our industry looked at testing as a marketing tool but backed off. This is a short-sighted unnecessary procedure that would probably pull resources from the surveillance programs. Advocates of using BSE testing as a maarketing tool have not done due diligance into the recquirements of testing! There was no liability insurance coverage available anywhere (world wide) and any private labs up here had to discontinue any and all BSE testing. The process is only handled now by CFIA labs with the taxpayer holding any liability issues. There is not enough capacity available to even begin to start any unneccessary testing. Try to finance a business plan without liability insurance and see how far you will get!

BSE has pushed Canada into the manditory ID. I know some of the pitfalls of having a M-ID program from a market knowledge perspective. Other than the obvious of BSE prevention, that is where I have most of my reservations for producers. Now Canada has M-ID, and the solution being pushed on US producers is the same system.
.

Again you prove just how little you know about our industy. BSE did not force M:ID" on us. :roll: We had it as a PROACTIVE measure designed and implemented by the Canadian beef industry PRE BSE as in 2000 . The only Pitfall would have been if we hadn't had M"ID". It was M"ID" that pulled our butts out of the fire and I believe most producers in Canada will admit to that even those that fought it tooth and nail. . Unlike some in the US that don't care to be burdened with M"ID" we felt it was needed and started implementing it long before we knew we had a problem. PLEASE get your facts right once in a while. And M'ID doesn't prevent BSE it just helps speed up the investigation when all reportable disease are found.

 

[Sandhusker]

Okay R2, liable for what?

Should a company say that they are going to test for BSE and they find one, are they liable???

I trueuly do not know where cowsense is coming from with this one.

Company says they will test.
Ten years later someone comes down with vCJD and sues company.
Or sues Government for allowing company to certify that the meat is BSE free.

Believe me, I don't want this to be the case, but I thought that cowsense actually pointed to a new angle that no one had explored and since liability is QUITE an issue right now with Government certification in things like chemradbio terrorism detection / prevention products, this made some (cow)sense to me.

They would have to be able to prove they contracted the disease from the tested product that they ate 10 years ago. I don't think there is much worry there.

 

[Mike]

They would have to be able to prove they contracted the disease from the tested product that they ate 10 years ago. I don't think there is much worry there.

They would probably have to prove "Negligence" also.

Well..........there goes the USDA case! :wink: