mrj said:
brightview, didn't Aus. have any cattle that had been imported from Britain?
Many countries had been 'up-grading' the quality of their cattle by importing desireable genetics from Britain. If AUS didn't do so, or successfully found and eliminated all imports, it was fortunate for your cattle producers.
The USA killed ALL living cattle which had been imported from Britain, and that is one reason for extremely few suspects for BSE in the USA.
mrj
:shock: :lol2: :lol: :lol2: :lol2: :liar: :disagree:
i think you are beginning to believe the BSe you write mrj :help:
Annex to the EFSA Scientific Report (2004) 3, 1-17 on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk of USA
2.1 Import of cattle from BSE-Risk2 countries
An overview of the data on live cattle imports is presented in table 1 and is based on data as provided in the country dossier (CD) and corresponding data on relevant exports as available from BSE risk countries that exported to the USA. Only data from risk periods are indicated, i.e. those periods when exports from a BSE risk country already represented an external challenge, according to the SSC opinion on the GBR (SSC July 2000 and updated January 2002).
• According to the country dossier, 323 cattle were imported directly from the UK, all between 1980 and 1989, and 10 via Canada in 90, 91 and 92. According to Eurostat, 327 cattle were imported from UK. Of these cattle 96% were beef breeding cattle, 4% were dairy cattle. After 1989 an import stop for UK cattle was in effect.
• Cattle imported from the UK were traced-back in 1995. This trace back exercise provided the details on which the assessment of the HRS of the import risk assessment is based. The animals still alive in 1995 (117 cattle) have been purchased, diagnostic samples were taken, and the carcasses were incinerated. These animals were not taken into account for the external challenge. All these animals tested negative for BSE (histopathology and IHC). Of these 117 cattle 52 came from UK-herds in which one or more cases of BSE later on developed.
• For 173 cattle imported from the UK in the 80s, information on their final use is, according to the HRS, lacking and it is indicated that it is possible that some of these animals could have been rendered. In the HRS it is also noted that these animals were imported before the peak of the epidemic and none came from a birth cohort in which a BSE case is known to be developed. However, based on realistic worst case assumptions it has to be assumed that they created a risk if rendered for feed.
• EU export data show that from the EU (excluding UK), 1,663 cattle were exported to the USA since 1980; according to the CD only 460 cattle have been imported from the EU.
• According to the CD, 162 cattle were imported from Ireland between 1980 and 1988 (according to Eurostat 233). The trace back of these animals showed that 22 were found as being excluded from rendering in the US system and 4 were born in US quarantine and were therefore not taken into account for the external challenge.
• According to the CD, 6 cattle from Belgium (Eurostat also 6), 46 from Germany (Eurostat 430), 3 from Austria (Eurostat 0) and 8 from Italy (Eurostat 21) have been imported. The 40 breeding-cattle imported from these countries in 1996 and 1997 were all traced back and none of them entered the US system.
• According to Eurostat, 12 cattle from Denmark and 558 cattle from the Netherlands were imported to the USA. These imports were not indicated in the CD.
• Additionally according to the CD, 235 cattle have been imported from France (403 according to Eurostat) and 103 cattle from Switzerland (48 according to other sources).
• The discrepancy in the EU export data and the import data in the CD (See table 1) can in some cases, be explained by the use of the fiscal year data (from October to September) in the CD.
• Between 235.000 and 1.7 Million (CD and Other sources) cattle per year are imported to the USA from Canada. According to the CD, feeder/slaughter cattle represent typically more around 80% of the imported cattle from Canada; therefore, only 20% of the imported cattle have been taken into account.
• From Japan, 242 animals from a special beef breed were imported. These animals were traced, and were mostly excluded from the US rendering system. At most 39 of these animals have been rendered.
2.2 Import of MBM or MBM-containing feedstuffs from BSE-Risk countries
An overview of the data on MBM imports is presented in table 2 and is based on data provided in the country dossier (CD) and corresponding data on relevant exports as available from BSE risk countries that exported to the USA. Only data from risk periods are indicated, i.e. those periods when exports from a BSE risk country already represented an external challenge, according to the SSC opinion on the GBR (SSC, July 2000 and updated January 2002).
• The CD reports import of 5 tons of MBM from the UK. According to Eurostat, 63 tons have been exported from the UK to the USA between 1980 and 1996; however, according the updated MBM statistics from the UK (August 2001) 24 tons of MBM were exported from the UK to the USA between 1980 and 1996; 39 tons exported in 1989 were not confirmed by the updated UK export statistic and therefore not taken into account. A further 38 tons were exported in 1997-1998 and 39 tons in 1999. As it was illegal to export mammalian meat meal, bone meal and MBM from UK since 27/03/1996, exports indicated after that date should only have included non-mammalian MBM. Therefore, these imports were not taken into account.
• According to the CD, MBM was imported from Denmark, France, Italy and the Netherlands. It was claimed but not substantiated that these imports were not from ruminant origin, and therefore did not contribute to the BSE risk of the USA.
• The Eurostat export statistics indicated additional exports from Belgium, Greece, Ireland and Spain.
• Very large amounts of MBM (CD and other sources) between 18.000 and 44.000 tons annually were imported from Canada.
country imported 2038 (other sources) or 1128 (CD) live cattle from BSE risk countries other than Canada, of which 327 (other sources) or 323 (CD) came from the UK. From Canada the imports were >500,000 animals per year. The numbers shown in table 1 are the raw import figures and are not reflecting the adjusted imports for the assessment of the external challenge. Broken down to 5 year periods the resulting external challenge is as given in table 3. This assessment takes into account the different aspects discussed above that allow to assume that certain imported cattle did not enter the domestic BSE-cattle system, i.e. were not rendered into feed. In the case of the USA, all the animals for which tracing information showed that they were not rendered were excluded from the external challenge. MBM imports:
In total the country imported 689 tons MBM (CD) or 2,230 tons MBM (other sources) from BSE risk countries other than Canada, of which 5 tons (CD) or 101 tons (other sources) were exported from the UK (UK export data). From Canada, the imports were about 30 000 tons per year. The numbers shown in table 2 are the raw import figures and are not reflecting the adjusted imports for the assessment of the external challenge. Broken down to 5 year periods the resulting external challenge is as given in table 3. This assessment takes into account the different aspects discussed above that allow to assume that certain imported MBM did not enter the domestic BSE/cattle system or did not represent an external challenge for other reasons. As it was illegal to export mammalian MBM from UK since 27/03/1996, exports indicated after that date should only have included non-mammalian MBM. In the case of the USA imported MBM from UK in 1989 and between 1997 and 1999 was not taken into account.
Annex to the EFSA Scientific Report (2004) 3, 1-17 on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk of USA
please see full text ;
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/3rax1.pdf
Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk (GBR) of the USA Question number: EFSA-Q-2003-083
Adopted: 1 July 2004
Summary (0.1 Mb)
Report (0.2 Mb)
Annex (0.3 Mb)
Summary
The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in the United States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientific report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.
The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle in the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge in the early nineties.
A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90's when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.
EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases.
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1211902594180.htm
sadly, Australia is already at risk of USA TSE (call it what you want, when and if ever documented)
2. EXTERNAL CHALLENGES
2.1 Import of cattle from BSE-Risk2 countries
An overview of the data on live cattle imports is presented in table 1 and is based on data as provided in the country dossier (CD) and corresponding data on relevant exports as available from BSE risk countries that exported to Australia. Only data from risk periods are indicated, i.e. those periods when exports from a BSE risk country already represented an external challenge, according to the SSC opinion on the GBR (SSC July 2000 and updated January 2002).
• According to the CD, the import of live cattle has been prohibited from the UK and Ireland since 1988 and from all other countries other than New Zealand, New Caledonia, Canada and the USA since 1991. However, consignments of 42 buffalo and 24 buffalo from Denmark were recorded in Australia's import statistics for 1995 and 1996, respectively. The Australian authorities stated that the animals imported in 1995 originated in Italy and that the animals imported in 1996 originated in Bulgaria. Imports from New Caledonia were suspended in 1995.
• The CD states that 204 live cattle were imported for breeding purposes from the UK between 1980 and 1988. According to EUROSTAT, however, 194 cattle were imported during the same period.
• A detailed risk assessment was carried out by the Australian authorities on the cattle that were imported from the United Kingdom. Sixty-two of the imported animals were dairy cattle and nine were dual-purpose animals. Details were provided in the CD in relation to the fate of the imported animals. According to the Australian authorities, 127 of these died and were not rendered. Seven animals remain alive. The remaining seventy animals were slaughtered and presumably entered the food and feed chains.
• In addition to cattle imported from the UK, Australia also imported cattle from other BSE risk countries. According to the CD, Australia imported cattle from Canada (31), Denmark (128), France (185), Ireland (1), Japan (24), and the USA (675). Most of these imports occurred between 1988 and 2003.
• The Eurostat figures are reasonably consistent with those of the CD for Denmark, France and Ireland. However, they indicate that cattle were also imported from Austria (33), Cyprus (1), Germany (86), Hungary (35), Netherlands (124) and Switzerland (9) between 1986 and 2002.
• A detailed risk assessment was carried out by Australian authorities on the imports from European countries other than the UK. This assessment indicates lower numbers of imports from European countries than indicated in the Eurostat data, which are currently being cross-checked by the Australian authorities.
• Information from the Austrian authorities indicated that the export of 33 cattle to Australia from Austria did not, in fact, occur; the country of destination was wrongly coded as AU (Australia) rather than UA (Ukraine), the actual destination of the cattle.
• According to the CD, imports from the Netherlands and Hungary did not occur. However, evidence could not be provided.
• The official USA export figures indicate that a total of 1,441 cattle were exported to Australia from the USA during the period 1993 and 2001. However,
information subsequently provided by the only pre-USA export quarantine station that was approved during the time period in question indicated that only 493 cattle were exported to the Australia from the USA during that period. According to the Australian authorities, 190 of the animals imported into Australia between 1996 and 2003 were still alive in early 2004. A further 11 of these animals had died but did not enter the rendering system.
• Official export data were not available for Canada. According to the Australian authorities, 16 of the 21 animals imported from Canada between 1996 and 2003 were still alive in early 2004.
• Official export data were not available for Japan. According to the Australian authorities, 22 of the 24 animals imported from Japan in 1988 were still alive in early 2001 and placed in lifetime quarantine and 2 died on farm and did not enter the rendering system.
2.2 Import of MBM or MBM-containing feedstuffs from BSE-Risk countries An overview of the data on MBM imports is presented in table 2 and is based on data provided in the country dossier (CD) and corresponding data on relevant exports as available from BSE risk countries that exported to Australia. Only data from risk periods are indicated, i.e. those periods when exports from a BSE risk country already represented an external challenge, according to the SSC opinion on the GBR (SSC, July 2000 and updated January 2002).
• According to the CD, Australia has imported no MBM from any BSE risk country between 1980 to 2001, as the import of MBM from all countries except New Zealand has been prohibited since 1966. The official import records show that 18 tons of MBM material was imported into Australia from the UK in 1988 and 3 tons in 1994 under the customs code 230110. An investigation by the Australian authorities showed that these imports were fishmeal and packaged dog food. The official import records also show that 7 tons of MBM material was imported into Australia from the USA in 1999 and 9 tons in 2001 under the customs code 230110. An investigation by the Australian authorities showed that the figure for 1999 referred to dried bio-flavour and that the figure for 2001 referred to prepared and packaged dog food for market testing.
• According to Eurostat and other data, Australia has imported no MBM from the UK but has imported 1,824 tons of similar material from other BSE risk countries in Europe. Of these, 43 tons were imported from Denmark in 1996 and 1997, 1,615 tons were imported from France between 1983 and 1985, 22 tons were imported from Germany in 2002, 143 tons were imported from Ireland in 1994 and 1 ton was imported from Italy in 1995.
• The official export figures from the USA showed that 857 tons of MBM was exported to Australia between 1996 and 2001. The official export figures from Canada showed that 163 tons of MBM was exported to Australia in 1998.
• According to the CD, the imports of MBM from Denmark did not take place; however, conclusive evidence was not provided.
• The Australian authorities indicated that coding errors were the most likely reason for these discrepancies. This conclusion was supported by information received from the countries of origin. Such coding errors could include misrepresenting Austria (AUT) as Australia (AUS) or misrepresenting fishmeal and pet food flavourings as meat and bone meal. They pointed out that custom code 230110 may also have been mistakenly used instead of custom code 230910; the latter refers to "dog/cat food put up for retail sale". Another possibility is that the consignments were refused entry into Australia and were therefore diverted to other markets.
2.3 Overall assessment of the external challenge
The level of the external challenge that has to be met by the BSE/cattle system is estimated according to the guidance given by the SSC in its final opinion on the GBR of July 2000 (as updated in January 2002).
Live cattle imports:
In total, the country imported over the period 1980 to 2003, 1,248 live cattle from BSE-risk countries, of which 204 came from the UK according to the CD or 2,238 live cattle from BSE-risk countries, of which 194 came from the UK according to other sources. The numbers shown in table 1 are the raw import figures and are not reflecting the adjusted imports for the assessment of the external challenge. Broken down to 5-years periods the resulting external challenge is as given in table 3. This assessment takes into account the different aspects discussed above that allow us to assume that certain imported cattle did not enter the domestic BSE/cattle system, i.e. were not rendered into feed. Following a review of the Australian data, it was decided to exclude all animals imported from the UK that were born before June 1976 or were still alive. Imported animals that died on farm were also excluded on the basis of an assurance from the Australian authorities that these animals were placed in lifetime quarantine and, consequently, did not enter the feed chain. A trace back by the Australian authorities showed that some of the animals that were imported from the UK were over 10 years of age at the time of slaughter or death. The Australians considered that the likelihood of these animals contaminating the feed chain with the BSE agent was very low. However, such animals were not excluded from the current assessment because of the fact that many BSE cases have been confirmed in animals over ten years of age in Europe. The Australian risk analysis also took into account the history of the UK farm of origin. Animals from herds of origin in which no cases of BSE were recorded were considered to present no risk. For many of the animals from farms in the UK that did subsequently disclose cases of BSE, the Australian authorities considered that the risk was low because there was a long interval between the data of birth of the imported animals and the date of birth of the cases in the herds of origin. However, such animals were not excluded from the current risk assessment, as per the general procedure of this process, because of the possibility of unreported cases in the herds of origin and the fact that the imported animals could have been the only animals infected with the BSE agent in the herd of origin.
The level of the external challenge as a result of animals imported to Australia from the USA was changed from 1,441 to 493 on the basis of data received from the pre- US export quarantine station. In addition, animals that were still alive or that had been slaughtered but not rendered were removed from the external challenge. Sixteen of the twenty-one animals imported from Canada in 1996 to 2001 were excluded from the external challenge on the basis of information received from the Australian authorities that they were still alive in early 2004. Likewise, the animals imported from Austria in 2001 were excluded from the external challenge on the basis of the explanation from the Austrian authorities that these animals were, in fact, exported to the Ukraine rather than Australia.
snip...
MBM imports:
In total the country imported, over the period 1980-2003, 37 tons under the import code 230110 from BSE-risk countries, of which 21 tons came from the UK according to the CD. Other sources, such as EUROSTAT, indicate that the total import of MBM was 2,844 tons none of which came from the UK. The numbers shown in table 2 are the raw import figures and are not reflecting the adjusted imports for the assessment of the external challenge. Broken down to 5-year periods the resulting external challenge is as given in table 3. This assessment takes into account the different aspects discussed above that allow us to assume that certain imported MBM did not enter the domestic BSE/cattle system or did not represent an external challenge for other reasons. Following a review of the Australian data, the 22 tons said to have been exported from Germany in 2002 was excluded from the external challenge because the export of processed animal proteins was prohibited from European Union countries from 2001 unless a letter agreement was signed by both countries and the Australians claim (letter dated 21 April 2004) that this was not the case. The 21 tons said to have been exported from the UK in 1988 and 1994 were excluded from the external challenge on the basis of evidence from the Australian authorities that these consignments consisted of fishmeal or dog food. The 143 tons said to have been exported from Ireland in 1994 were excluded from the external challenge on the basis of an assurance from the Irish Chief Veterinary Officer that there was no trade of MBM between Ireland and Australia during the relevant period. All of the imports from Canada, France and the USA were also excluded on the basis of similar assurances from the Chief Veterinary Officer from those countries.
snip...please see full text ;
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/37rax1.pdf
please see full text here ;
http://efsaopinionbseanimalprotein.blogspot.com/2010/04/scientific-report-of-european-food.html
Thursday, April 8, 2010 Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of AUSTRALIA Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk (GBR) of Australia Question number: EFSA-Q-2003-083
Adopted: 1 July 2004
http://efsaopinionbseanimalprotein.blogspot.com/2010/04/scientific-report-of-european-food.html
don't anyone kid yourselves (accept mike and mrj), BSE aka mad cow disease was here before 1985. ...TSS
what is R Bradley speaking of in 1983 ??? what is this BSE CONSULTANT in 1983???
i am confused, i thought the first cow documented was 1985, first discovered in 1984, and the diagnosis was rabies or something else besides BSE at first, then later discovered to be BSE, a new strain of TSE in the bovine. ...
BSE CONSULTANT
APPROVAL OF MATERIAL FOR PUBLICATION
All material for publication including written works to be published in scientific journals, books, proceedings of scientific meetings, abstracts of verbally delivered papers and the like should be scrutinized for risk to the Ministry before dispatch to the publisher. ...
snip...
R Bradly
Pathology
12 October 1983
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1983/10/12001001.pdf
http://web.archive.org/web/20030516141431/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1983/10/12001001.pdf
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1984/12/28001001.pdf
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102183314/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1984/12/28001001.pdf
Thursday, April 8, 2010
FINAL REPORT OF A MISSION CARRIED OUT IN THE UNITED KINGDOM FROM 19 TO 29
JANUARY 2010 IN ORDER TO EVALUATE MEASURES CONCERNING BSE DG(SANCO)
2010-8344 - MR FINAL
http://efsaopinionbseanimalprotein.blogspot.com/2010/04/final-report-of-mission-carried-out-in.html
1994 UK EXPORTS BEEF VEAL USA , MEXICO $ CANADA ONLY
other Countries list in PDF file)
USA -------- TOTALS ''8'' TONS
CANADA -- TOTALS ''29'' TONS
1995 UK EXPORT BEEF AND VEAL TO USA AND CANADA
USA ------- TOTALS ''358'' TONS
CANADA --TOTALS ''24'' TONS
BONE-IN BEEF AND VEAL
USA-------- TOTALS ''10'' TONS (i think this is part of the 358 tons
above?)
UK EXPORT OF LIKE CATTLE TO USA AND CANADA
1986 TO 1996 USA TOTAL = 1297
1986 TO 1996 CAN TOTAL = 299
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab10.pdf
UK EXPORT MEAT OR OFFAL OF BOVINE ANIMALS DEC 1987
CANADA -- 64,526 KG
UK EXPORT OFFALS OF BOVINE ANIMALS FRESH CHILLED
OR FROZEN OTHER THAN LIVER DEC 1987 YTD
USA -- 45,943 KG
UK EXPORT MEAT OF BOVINE ANIMAL WITH BONE IN 1988
CANADA -- 4,163 KG
PREP OR PRES MEAT OR OFFAL OF BOVINE ANIMALS CUMULATIVE
TO DEC 1988
USA -------- 28,609 KG
CANADA -- 22,044 KG
MEAT OF BOVINE ANIMALS WITH BONE IN CUMULATIVE TO ANUAL 1989
USA -------- 17,880 KG
MEXICO---- 33,444 KG
BONELESS MEAT OF BOVINE 1989
USA --------111,953 KG
CANADA---1,800 KG
MEXICO --- 1,143,387 KG
EDIBLE OFFAL OF BOVINE ANIMALS 1989
USA -------- 19,980 KG
MEXICO--- 31,244 KG
MORE........
MEAT OF BOVINE ANIMALS BONELESS 1990
USA 146,443
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11g/tab05.pdf
UK Exports of Live Cattle by Value 1986-96
USA 697 LIVE CATTLE
CANADA 299 LIVE CATTLE
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab11.pdf
UK TABLE of Exports of meal of meat and meat offal; greaves 1979 - 1995
USA 24 TONS
CANADA 83 TONS
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m12/tab12.pdf
HOWEVER, my files show 44 tons of greaves for USA. ...TSS
Subject: Re: exports from the U.K. of it's MBM to U.S.???
From:
[email protected].
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:03:16 +0000
To:
[email protected] (Receipt Notification Requested) (Non Receipt
Notification Requested)
Terry Meat and bonemeal is not specifically classified for overseas trade
purposes. The nearest equivalent
is listed as flours and meals of meat or offals (including tankage), unfit
for human consumption; greaves.
UK exports of this to the US are listed below:
Country Tonnes
1980
1981 12
1982
1983
1984 10
1985 2
1986
1987
1988
1989 20
1990
Data for exports between 1975 and 1979 are not readily available. These can
be obtained (at a charge)
from data retailers appointed by HM Customs and Excise: BTSL (Tel: 01372
463121) or Abacus (01245 252222).
Best wishes Simon Pearsall Overseas trade statistics Stats (C&F)C
====================================== END...TSS
You want clean beef, we got it. Our politicians - city-bred and city-raised - have no real hold on the subject, except to try to gain political points and cuddle an ally who can't feed its millions with its own produce. Our farmers and their organisations went for the throat on this one and we "gently" persuaded our representatives in Canberra that it was not on.