CFIA tightens BSE screening
Two new initiatives have been implemented to improve the quality of the BSE surveillance program in Canada.
John B. Spigott
Monday July 10, 2006
Lloydminster Meridian Booster — Two new initiatives have been implemented to improve the quality of the BSE surveillance program in Canada.
The first change involves the refining of animal eligibility criteria to reflect changes in international guidelines for BSE surveillance. The most significant change in the criteria Alberta veterinarians look for when examining cattle considered for BSE testing is that those with a body score of ‘1’ or less will no longer be eligible for sampling unless they show clinical signs of an abnormality. A system implemented by the World Animal Health Organization (OIE) has changed the focus from the number of cattle tested for BSE to the degree of risk the animals pose for BSE, according to Dr. Gerald Ollis, chief provincial veterinarian for Alberta.
“Testing millions of healthy animals is viewed by the international community as much less effective than testing a few thousand high-risk animals,” said Ollis in a prepared statement. “So we’re tightening up our criteria so that we can ensure our efforts are getting the highest value and recognition for the available resources.
“Our BSE program is not a cull program and we must not test animals that aren’t high risk for BSE.”
Gerry Ritz, Battlefords-Lloydminster Conservative MP, says narrowing the focus to specific groups will make the system more efficient, and ultimately, more effective.
“It makes sense to have a target group to go after instead of taking an ad-hoc approach,” said Ritz, who also serves as the chair of the Federal Committee on Agriculture. “There will always be people who want to test every available animal, but there’s no sound science anywhere on the globe that says you should be testing more than the animals that are at risk.
“Now rather than doing just the broad strokes, you’re filling in the picture that needs to be filled in.”
Ritz said continued modification of the BSE program shows the government is committed to making the system work, and cited the recent case of a potential positive case of BSE in Manitoba as proof.
“The message is our testing is working,” said Ritz. “We’re bound to find more, there’s no doubt in my mind. We’re allowed a dozen positive tests within an annual basis, and we’re still within the contained minimal outbreak category.”
The second change strengthens feed controls by removing specified risk materials (SRM) from all animal feed, pet food and fertilizers. SRM are tissues that have been shown in infected cattle to contain concentrated levels of the BSE agent. Canada has already applied the same protection to the food system, where SRM are removed from all cattle slaughtered for human consumption.
“This ban tightens already strong, internationally recognized feed controls and shortens the path we must follow to move beyond BSE,” said Chuck Strahl, minister of agriculture and agri-food, in a prepared release. “Preventing all these materials from entering the animal feed chain minimizes risks and demonstrates the commitment ... to address BSE.”
SRM are defined as the skull, brain, trigeminal ganglia (nerves attached to the brain), eyes, tonsils, spinal cord, and dorsal root ganglia (nerves attached to the spinal cord) on cattle aged 30 months or older and the distal ileum (portion of the small intestine) on cattle of all ages. Removing SRM from pet food and fertilizers is intended to mitigate the risk associated with the potential exposure of cattle and other susceptible animals to BSE through the misuse of these products.
“The idea behind it is to make sure there is absolutely no chance of cross-contamination,” said Ritz. “I think it’s gotten a good reception for the most part. I’m not that concerned about a can of dog food, but things like pig feed, chicken feed, things like that where there can be cross-contamination.
“Until we do something different with those SRM’s – you can’t just keep throwing them out in the dump. We need to start realizing how to get value from them, whether it is rendering them down and going into the biofuel industry, or being run through a burner and a scrubber to create gas to power a turbine. The dead loss of value is going to be reflected right back to the farmgate.”