Food inspection 'disaster' looms Expert calls planned deregulation 'unfathomable' Sarah Schmidt, Canwest News Service Published: Friday, July 11, 2008 OTTAWA - A government plan to transfer key parts of food inspection to industry so companies can police themselves will put the health of Canadians at risk, according to leading food safety experts who have reviewed the confidential blueprint.
The plan, drafted by Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz and approved by the Treasury Board details sweeping changes coming to food inspection in Canada.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is also ending funding to producers to test cattle for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE, or Mad Cow Disease) as part of a surveillance program, the document indicates, a move that is expected to save the agency about $24 million over the next three years.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is also ending funding to producers to test cattle for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE, or Mad Cow Disease) as part of a surveillance program. Alexandra Beier/Reuters
Email to a friend
Printer friendly Font:****The new system, part of a push to trim the agency's budget by five per cent, was approved last November, but a public announcement "has been deferred owing to significant communications risks," according to the confidential Treasury Board document obtained by Canwest News Service.
The document, addressed to the president of the agency, details how the inspection of meat and meat products will downgrade agency inspectors to an "oversight role, allowing industry to implement food safety control programs and to manage key risks."
The inspection of animal feed mills will undergo the same changes "to reduce the need for ongoing CFIA inspection and would shift CFIA's role to oversight and verification of industry outcomes."
For the certification of commercial seed, "this means shifting the program delivery of seed certification, including inspection, to an industry-led third party."
Leading food safety experts, who reviewed the document, say the plan is a recipe for disaster.
"They're moving towards the U.S. model, where the inspectors don't actually do the inspection, they just oversee and the companies actually do the inspection. That's a really dangerous thing," said Michael Hansen, a North American authority on BSE and senior scientist with the New York-based Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports.
Hansen, who in the past has been invited by parliamentary committees to testify as an expert on food safety issues, says the end of the BSE reimbursement program is of "highest concern."
A leading Canadian academic specializing in food risk management called these cuts "unfathomable" because Canada continues to find BSE-positive animals and is one of the few countries in the world where BSE is on the increase.
The expert, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there is near unanimous agreement among public health experts that "the greatest risks" of new emerging infectious disease are related to animal products and food.
Avian Influenza, SARS, BSE and Ebola "are just the tip of an iceberg," he said.
"Reducing food safety controls at this time could be disastrous if there is an outbreak of a new food-borne disease. No wonder they suspect they may have some 'communication risks' around these initiatives. They have a huge communications risk."
The proposals are illogical, said University of Guelph professor Ann Clark, a specialist in risk assessment in genetically modified crops, who has testified many times before Parliament's agriculture committee about risk management and the food supply.
"Companies are in business to make profit, pure and simple, and we, as a society, have fully accepted and bought into that, but with the understanding that somebody will be riding herd on them - minding the shop - to safeguard societal interests. Otherwise, history has shown that we are at risk," said Clark, citing industries such as tobacco and asbestos.
"The initiatives outlined in this document suggest government is trying to get out of the business of government, by downloading responsibility for safeguarding human and environmental health to the same industry interests which stand to make money from what is being regulated. This is inherently illogical."
University of Regina marketing professor Sylvain Charlebois, co-author of a recent study that compared Canada's food safety system with other countries, has a different take. He says this "hybrid" approach or "partnership" with industry outlined in the document is good public policy, "but there needs to be a selling job."
"You do need a significant level of monitoring, but the CFIA just doesn't have the capacity, and they never will have the capacity to monitor properly," said Charlebois.
Douglas Powell, scientific director of the International Food Safety Network at Kansas State University, said the underlying principle of the plan is sound. "Industry has a responsibility to produce safe food, from farm to fork. Government is there to verify and enforce."
Powell, however, thinks a fair question is whether "eliminating funding for BSE testing encourages less testing."
The plan was approved by Treasury Board one month before Prime Minister Stephen Harper, along with Ritz and Health Minister Tony Clement, announced last December a new food and consumer action plan to make Canadians safer through "tougher" regulations of food and other consumer products.
The plan, in the hands of senior CFIA staff since May to map out a communications plan to roll out the changes, has already led to the dismissal of an agency scientist.
Luc Pomerleau, who stumbled upon the blueprint on a server where it was posted in error and could be accessed by any agency employee, was dismissed last week because he forwarded it to union officials at the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada. Union president Michele Demers said he was seeking advice on how to deal with the matter because it appeared the plan undermined the health and safety of Canadians.
© Canwest News Service 2008
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=cdb61ee5-5a3e-46bd-a40a-5c18360bce38
(Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 23 May 2006)
11. Information published by the OIE is derived from appropriate declarations made by the official Veterinary Services of Member Countries. The OIE is not responsible for inaccurate publication of country disease status based on inaccurate information or changes in epidemiological status or other significant events that were not promptly reported to the Central Bureau,
http://www.oie.int/eng/Session2007/RF2006.pdf
bought and paid for by your local cattle dealer $$$
IN my opinion the WOAH/OIE is nothing more than a organized bunch of lobbyist for the members Countries in support of there INDUSTRY, bound together as one, with the only purpose of open trade for there precious commodities and futures. Speaking only of BSE, they failed at every corner, and then just said to hell with it, well just trade all strains of TSE globally.
snip...
NOW, ask yourself why not one single mad cow has been documented in the USA since the Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG did the end around Johanns, Dehaven et al ??? found two atypical BSE or BASE cases and they flat shut it down i tell you. IF the OIE gives a favorable rating, IF the OIE gives any other rating but the lowest, poorest possible BSE/TSE rating, the OIE will have sealed there fate once and for all, because most of the world knows the truth about the USA and there mad cows. THE OIE will then be able to stand side by side with the USA, and proudly claim to have sold there soul to the devil, all for a buck, commodities and futures, to hell with human health. A 'CONTROLLED' RATING IS EXACTLY what the OIE will get if that is what they classify the USA as a 'CONTROLLED RATING'. IT will be controlled by Johanns, Dehaven, and GW. IT WILL BE RIGGED in other words. but that is nothing new, it's been rigged for years. ...
snip...SEE FULL TEXT with facts and sources @ ;
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
OIE Recognition of the BSE Status of Members RESOLUTION No. XXI (Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 27 May 2008)
http://usdavskorea.blogspot.com/2008/06/oie-recognition-of-bse-status-of.html
http://organicconsumers.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=1566
Attachment to Singeltary comment
January 28, 2007
Greetings APHIS,
I would kindly like to submit the following to ;
BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01
[Federal Register: January 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 5)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 1101-1129] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ja07-21]
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f8152
BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01 Date: January 9, 2007 at 9:08 am PST
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f3412
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL
IMPORTS FROM CANADA
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
----- Original Message ----- From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. To: [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 9:16 AM Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings Dr. Colgrove and Miss Johnson,
Thank you for taking this submission via email. i have had trouble submitting via the comment page due to the length of my submission. I was not sure that my file attachment that i submitted via the ;
EDOCKET: Go to http://www.epa.gov/feddocket
I submitted yesterday, just did not know if the file reached anyone. so to make sure, I am sending to you to submit for me.
many thanks,
Terry
From: TSS () Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION Date: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PST
August 24, 2005
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings APHIS ET AL,
My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;
PROPOSED RULES Exportation and importation of animals and animal products: Whole cuts of boneless beef from- Japan, 48494-48500 [05-16422]
[Federal Register: August 18, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 159)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 48494-48500] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18au05-7]
========================================================================
snip...
WE MUST ADHERE TO THE BSE GBR RISK ASSESSMENTS, WE MUST WORK TO ENHANCE THOSE BSE GBR RISK ASSESSMENTS TO INCLUDE ALL ANIMAL TSEs, USDA/APHIS/GW ET ALs BSE MRR (Minimal Risk Region) should be REPEALED/DISBANDED/TRASHED/NADA and done away with for good. The BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to trade all strains of TSEs globally...
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Your Comment with Title "[Docket
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffItemDetailView?objectId=090007d480993808
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffAttachDownloadPDF?objectId=090007d480993808
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffCollectionDetailView?objectId=0b0007d48096b40d
Subject: BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01 Date: January 9, 2007 at 9:08 am PST
[Federal Register: January 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 5)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 1101-1129] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ja07-21]
[[Page 1101]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
snip...
EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA)
Summary of the Scientific Report
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/en/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/573.html
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/etc/medialib/efsa/science/tse_assessments/gb
r_assessments/573.Par.0004.File.dat/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_v2_en1.p
df
EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of Canada
Summary of the Scientific Report
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 to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Canada, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Canada. This scientific report addresses the GBR of Canada as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.
The BSE agent was probably imported into the country middle of the eighties and could have reached domestic cattle in the early nineties. 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 90s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Canada reached domestic cattle and led to an internal challenge in the early 90s.
A certain risk that BSE-infected cattle entered processing in Canada, and were at least partly rendered for feed, occurred in the early 1990s when cattle imported from UK in the mid 80s could have been slaughtered. 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 Canada is III, i.e. it is confirmed at a lower level that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as the system remains unstable, it is expected that the GBR continues to grow, even if no additional external challenges occur.
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/564.html
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/etc/medialib/efsa/science/tse_assessments/gb
r_assessments/564.Par.0001.File.dat/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_v2_e
n1.pdf
snip...
MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???
go figure....
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Comment Submitted Comment Receipt
Thank you. Your comment on Document ID: APHIS-2006-0041-0001 has been sent. Comment Tracking Number: APHIS-2006-0041-DRAFT-0028
Attachments: C:\My Music\My Documents\APHIS-2006-0041_January 28.doc
If you wish to retain a copy of the receipt, use the following link to print a copy for your files. Print
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0701&L=sanet-mg&T=0&F=&S=&P=3854
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffItemDetailView?objectId=090007d480993808
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffAttachDownloadPDF?objectId=090007d480993808
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffCollectionDetailView?objectId=0b0007d48096b40d
PLEASE see full USA MAD COW FEED PROGRAM ;
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/
TSS
The plan, drafted by Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz and approved by the Treasury Board details sweeping changes coming to food inspection in Canada.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is also ending funding to producers to test cattle for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE, or Mad Cow Disease) as part of a surveillance program, the document indicates, a move that is expected to save the agency about $24 million over the next three years.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is also ending funding to producers to test cattle for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE, or Mad Cow Disease) as part of a surveillance program. Alexandra Beier/Reuters
Email to a friend
Printer friendly Font:****The new system, part of a push to trim the agency's budget by five per cent, was approved last November, but a public announcement "has been deferred owing to significant communications risks," according to the confidential Treasury Board document obtained by Canwest News Service.
The document, addressed to the president of the agency, details how the inspection of meat and meat products will downgrade agency inspectors to an "oversight role, allowing industry to implement food safety control programs and to manage key risks."
The inspection of animal feed mills will undergo the same changes "to reduce the need for ongoing CFIA inspection and would shift CFIA's role to oversight and verification of industry outcomes."
For the certification of commercial seed, "this means shifting the program delivery of seed certification, including inspection, to an industry-led third party."
Leading food safety experts, who reviewed the document, say the plan is a recipe for disaster.
"They're moving towards the U.S. model, where the inspectors don't actually do the inspection, they just oversee and the companies actually do the inspection. That's a really dangerous thing," said Michael Hansen, a North American authority on BSE and senior scientist with the New York-based Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports.
Hansen, who in the past has been invited by parliamentary committees to testify as an expert on food safety issues, says the end of the BSE reimbursement program is of "highest concern."
A leading Canadian academic specializing in food risk management called these cuts "unfathomable" because Canada continues to find BSE-positive animals and is one of the few countries in the world where BSE is on the increase.
The expert, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there is near unanimous agreement among public health experts that "the greatest risks" of new emerging infectious disease are related to animal products and food.
Avian Influenza, SARS, BSE and Ebola "are just the tip of an iceberg," he said.
"Reducing food safety controls at this time could be disastrous if there is an outbreak of a new food-borne disease. No wonder they suspect they may have some 'communication risks' around these initiatives. They have a huge communications risk."
The proposals are illogical, said University of Guelph professor Ann Clark, a specialist in risk assessment in genetically modified crops, who has testified many times before Parliament's agriculture committee about risk management and the food supply.
"Companies are in business to make profit, pure and simple, and we, as a society, have fully accepted and bought into that, but with the understanding that somebody will be riding herd on them - minding the shop - to safeguard societal interests. Otherwise, history has shown that we are at risk," said Clark, citing industries such as tobacco and asbestos.
"The initiatives outlined in this document suggest government is trying to get out of the business of government, by downloading responsibility for safeguarding human and environmental health to the same industry interests which stand to make money from what is being regulated. This is inherently illogical."
University of Regina marketing professor Sylvain Charlebois, co-author of a recent study that compared Canada's food safety system with other countries, has a different take. He says this "hybrid" approach or "partnership" with industry outlined in the document is good public policy, "but there needs to be a selling job."
"You do need a significant level of monitoring, but the CFIA just doesn't have the capacity, and they never will have the capacity to monitor properly," said Charlebois.
Douglas Powell, scientific director of the International Food Safety Network at Kansas State University, said the underlying principle of the plan is sound. "Industry has a responsibility to produce safe food, from farm to fork. Government is there to verify and enforce."
Powell, however, thinks a fair question is whether "eliminating funding for BSE testing encourages less testing."
The plan was approved by Treasury Board one month before Prime Minister Stephen Harper, along with Ritz and Health Minister Tony Clement, announced last December a new food and consumer action plan to make Canadians safer through "tougher" regulations of food and other consumer products.
The plan, in the hands of senior CFIA staff since May to map out a communications plan to roll out the changes, has already led to the dismissal of an agency scientist.
Luc Pomerleau, who stumbled upon the blueprint on a server where it was posted in error and could be accessed by any agency employee, was dismissed last week because he forwarded it to union officials at the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada. Union president Michele Demers said he was seeking advice on how to deal with the matter because it appeared the plan undermined the health and safety of Canadians.
© Canwest News Service 2008
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=cdb61ee5-5a3e-46bd-a40a-5c18360bce38
(Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 23 May 2006)
11. Information published by the OIE is derived from appropriate declarations made by the official Veterinary Services of Member Countries. The OIE is not responsible for inaccurate publication of country disease status based on inaccurate information or changes in epidemiological status or other significant events that were not promptly reported to the Central Bureau,
http://www.oie.int/eng/Session2007/RF2006.pdf
bought and paid for by your local cattle dealer $$$
IN my opinion the WOAH/OIE is nothing more than a organized bunch of lobbyist for the members Countries in support of there INDUSTRY, bound together as one, with the only purpose of open trade for there precious commodities and futures. Speaking only of BSE, they failed at every corner, and then just said to hell with it, well just trade all strains of TSE globally.
snip...
NOW, ask yourself why not one single mad cow has been documented in the USA since the Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG did the end around Johanns, Dehaven et al ??? found two atypical BSE or BASE cases and they flat shut it down i tell you. IF the OIE gives a favorable rating, IF the OIE gives any other rating but the lowest, poorest possible BSE/TSE rating, the OIE will have sealed there fate once and for all, because most of the world knows the truth about the USA and there mad cows. THE OIE will then be able to stand side by side with the USA, and proudly claim to have sold there soul to the devil, all for a buck, commodities and futures, to hell with human health. A 'CONTROLLED' RATING IS EXACTLY what the OIE will get if that is what they classify the USA as a 'CONTROLLED RATING'. IT will be controlled by Johanns, Dehaven, and GW. IT WILL BE RIGGED in other words. but that is nothing new, it's been rigged for years. ...
snip...SEE FULL TEXT with facts and sources @ ;
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
OIE Recognition of the BSE Status of Members RESOLUTION No. XXI (Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 27 May 2008)
http://usdavskorea.blogspot.com/2008/06/oie-recognition-of-bse-status-of.html
http://organicconsumers.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=1566
Attachment to Singeltary comment
January 28, 2007
Greetings APHIS,
I would kindly like to submit the following to ;
BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01
[Federal Register: January 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 5)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 1101-1129] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ja07-21]
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f8152
BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01 Date: January 9, 2007 at 9:08 am PST
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f3412
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL
IMPORTS FROM CANADA
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
----- Original Message ----- From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. To: [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 9:16 AM Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings Dr. Colgrove and Miss Johnson,
Thank you for taking this submission via email. i have had trouble submitting via the comment page due to the length of my submission. I was not sure that my file attachment that i submitted via the ;
EDOCKET: Go to http://www.epa.gov/feddocket
I submitted yesterday, just did not know if the file reached anyone. so to make sure, I am sending to you to submit for me.
many thanks,
Terry
From: TSS () Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION Date: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PST
August 24, 2005
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings APHIS ET AL,
My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;
PROPOSED RULES Exportation and importation of animals and animal products: Whole cuts of boneless beef from- Japan, 48494-48500 [05-16422]
[Federal Register: August 18, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 159)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 48494-48500] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18au05-7]
========================================================================
snip...
WE MUST ADHERE TO THE BSE GBR RISK ASSESSMENTS, WE MUST WORK TO ENHANCE THOSE BSE GBR RISK ASSESSMENTS TO INCLUDE ALL ANIMAL TSEs, USDA/APHIS/GW ET ALs BSE MRR (Minimal Risk Region) should be REPEALED/DISBANDED/TRASHED/NADA and done away with for good. The BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to trade all strains of TSEs globally...
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Your Comment with Title "[Docket
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffItemDetailView?objectId=090007d480993808
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffAttachDownloadPDF?objectId=090007d480993808
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffCollectionDetailView?objectId=0b0007d48096b40d
Subject: BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01 Date: January 9, 2007 at 9:08 am PST
[Federal Register: January 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 5)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 1101-1129] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ja07-21]
[[Page 1101]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
snip...
EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA)
Summary of the Scientific Report
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/en/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/573.html
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/etc/medialib/efsa/science/tse_assessments/gb
r_assessments/573.Par.0004.File.dat/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_v2_en1.p
df
EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of Canada
Summary of the Scientific Report
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 to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Canada, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Canada. This scientific report addresses the GBR of Canada as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.
The BSE agent was probably imported into the country middle of the eighties and could have reached domestic cattle in the early nineties. 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 90s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Canada reached domestic cattle and led to an internal challenge in the early 90s.
A certain risk that BSE-infected cattle entered processing in Canada, and were at least partly rendered for feed, occurred in the early 1990s when cattle imported from UK in the mid 80s could have been slaughtered. 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 Canada is III, i.e. it is confirmed at a lower level that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as the system remains unstable, it is expected that the GBR continues to grow, even if no additional external challenges occur.
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/564.html
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/etc/medialib/efsa/science/tse_assessments/gb
r_assessments/564.Par.0001.File.dat/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_v2_e
n1.pdf
snip...
MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???
go figure....
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Comment Submitted Comment Receipt
Thank you. Your comment on Document ID: APHIS-2006-0041-0001 has been sent. Comment Tracking Number: APHIS-2006-0041-DRAFT-0028
Attachments: C:\My Music\My Documents\APHIS-2006-0041_January 28.doc
If you wish to retain a copy of the receipt, use the following link to print a copy for your files. Print
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0701&L=sanet-mg&T=0&F=&S=&P=3854
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffItemDetailView?objectId=090007d480993808
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffAttachDownloadPDF?objectId=090007d480993808
http://docket.epa.gov/edkfed/do/EDKStaffCollectionDetailView?objectId=0b0007d48096b40d
PLEASE see full USA MAD COW FEED PROGRAM ;
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/
TSS