Canada exceeds BSE testing by 800%

[frenchie]

He "isn't" saying it ... now. That post you made about what Dunn said was from a media release (August 2004) which was 'part and partial' from a 119 page report released at an earlier date. A report, no doubt, he initiated (started) at even a much earlier time. No, I can't give a date as the pdf file of it would have taken over 2 hours to download.

Taken in context of a warning call for action .... seems similar to a post you made the other day OT. You posted (radio?) advs by the USDA calling for on farm sample submissions for BSE testing - which I believe you said you had not heard before.
As a United States producer you (and fellow producers) also have the opportunity to exceed your test quota by 294% ..... like Canada, will you seize that opportunity ? 8)

Heres the entire article: editorial dated May 1, 2005
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/Business/2005/05/01/1020759-sun.html

RE:Heres the entire article: editorial dated May 1, 2005
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/Business/2005/05/01/1020759-sun.html
...... Looks to me like the parties are "jousting" for position and like a few others are referencing archived data without a thorough follow-up to what has changed in the meantime.

Keyword being "last report" - this "last report" is here (Auditor General web site)
http://www.oag.ab.ca/
Titled: # Report of the Auditor General on the Alberta government's BSE-related assistance programs - July 27, 2004 (Adobe Acrobat)
NOTE: July 27, 2004 ... which I stated earlier would have been initiated at an even earlier date - July 27, 2004 being the date he released his auditors report.

Old and outdated ( :roll: up to date and on the spot reporting by NEIL WAUGH, EDMONTON SUN ) - where have we seen that before!

Here's Dunn's warning message summarized when his report was released
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1091665679425_32?hub=TopStories
(which could have been outdated even at that time that his report was completed and released to the public )
1. as Canada had 5003 of 8000 already tested as of July 31, 2004
2. as Alberta had (approx.) 1,000 animals of 2780 tested as of August 27, 2004

Yep old and outdated ... Ot s favorite trick.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker: "They tested more and they also found more."

They found more because they tested more.

This is testimony to Canada's integrity in doing the right thing despite the inevitable R-CULT feeding frenzy finding positive animals would create.



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker: "They tested more and they also found more."

They found more because they tested more.

This is testimony to Canada's integrity in doing the right thing despite the inevitable R-CULT feeding frenzy finding positive animals would create.



~SH~

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:roll: :? :roll:

 

[Silver]

SSAP, you may as well give up arguing with OT. He will continue to dredge up any material he can find to discredit Canadian beef and the Canadian system in any way he can. If there was proof in front of him he would deny that what he was seeing was real. Unfortunately there are people of his weak moral fibre on both sides of the border. It's best just dismiss their ignorance, giving them credence only justifies their narrow minded little existances. If they feel better running around saying the sky is falling, well, good for them.

 

[Manitoba_Rancher]

OT, Why the hell do you like picking on us Canadians? I sure hope the border opens to everything so we can show you up. Word has it that the president may kick every R-calfer out of the US and send them to some foreign country where they can lie all they want. Your a bunch of crooked wannabe ranchers!!!! If Leo ever did tell the truth Im sure the sky would fall!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[pharmer]

OT says:
"Historically for years with cattle disease the plan has been to isolate, test to find the extent and the source, innoculate and eradicate......As the disease is controlled or found the quarantine area is lessened or widened- with the heaviest testing in the high incidence area....Wasn't too many years ago with brucellosis EVERY cow was tested- until it has been pretty much eradicated....I would think that even Canadians would want every cow, especially in Alberta, tested- until its proven the disease is eradicated-or live with a cloud and a question hanging over their cattle and beef for years..... "

OT, I have no quarrel with this logic, as it applies to an infective agent that can be detected with a reliable anti-mortem test. And yes, it would be a comfort to know that all animals killed were 'free' of misformed prions.

However, firstly, prions have not been shown to be classically defined as an infections agent, like bacteria or viruses are.

Secondly, the test that is available at this time is post-mortem and only capable of finding abnormal prions in animals over 30 months (for the most part). As has been repeated ad nauseum, there is little point testing animals which are highly unlikely to show a positive response.

Thirdly, regarding a statistical approach to the determination of the rate of infection, or epidemiology. This has been a standard of current medicine for the past 100 years. One doesn't draw out all a patients blood to count the exact number of abnormal white cells to determine whether a patient has leukemia. A sample is taken, cells counted, and that number is extrapolated to predict the level in the entire patient. When an agrologist checks your pasture species, he counts the species in a specified area and then extrapolates to predict the field levels. Yes, it must be done with care and common sense, but it has been shown over the years to be reasonable accurate.

Forthly, if you are looking for a specific problem, statiscally, it would make sense to evaluate the highest risk population. As has also been said before, if you don't want to find a problem, look in the places you are least likely to find it.

As you are an intelligent man OT, I suspect you already know all this.