Tex, my point re. Anthrax was to re-inforce yours about environmental conditions, AND i intended, but forgot to add that while some people are severely affected if they don't catch it in their herd soon enough, it is not the terribly quick spreading disease that F& M is with severe financial consequences to large numbers of cattle producers and little to no harm to humans.
Re. SRM removal: my point is that whether one chooses to believe it or not, the system of removal is generally accepted by the world science community as leaving beef from non-symptomatic (maybe not quite the right term, sorry.) animals as safe to eat even if they did have BSE, isn't it? Not saying it "proves" the meat safe.
Is that type of staph formerly 'caught' only in hospitals? Or is this different? Anyway, any staph problem seems to fuel the myth that antibiotics used appropriately and properly for health problems in cattle are causing resistant bacteria. I believe that is not correct, and that improper and over-dosage of humans by our doctors is more likely to be the culprit.
Was it "economic interests", or was it following protocols set by computer models (with which I don't always agree, but seems like there isn't much else to use in the BSE situation, having no real history of it until quite recently) developed by top minds in top universities in the USA that was the reasoning behind stopping the testing here? How, specifically, was that testing "flawed", given the knowledge and available information about BSE at that time? There simply is too much that is not known. How do we know it is not a rather common anomally in protein bearing, cloven hooved animals, for instance?
I still feel it is reasonable to ask the person who repeats that at least 2000 some head of BSE riddled cattle have been consumed in the USA should offer some verification or reasoning for that conclusion. Is it odds given our numbers of cattle, reading palms, moon sign, or what that gives that figure????
I have to disagree with you on keeping the RUMORs of serious, highly contagious disease in animals quiet until verification and a plan of action is in place, not ONLY due to economic damage, but so that, if true, the infection can be controlled and contained as quickly as possible. People being imperfect beings, there would be no small number who would try to cheat the system for their own benefit and as in so many situations, we would probably all be surprised and disappointed to know who some of them are.
mrj
Re. SRM removal: my point is that whether one chooses to believe it or not, the system of removal is generally accepted by the world science community as leaving beef from non-symptomatic (maybe not quite the right term, sorry.) animals as safe to eat even if they did have BSE, isn't it? Not saying it "proves" the meat safe.
Is that type of staph formerly 'caught' only in hospitals? Or is this different? Anyway, any staph problem seems to fuel the myth that antibiotics used appropriately and properly for health problems in cattle are causing resistant bacteria. I believe that is not correct, and that improper and over-dosage of humans by our doctors is more likely to be the culprit.
Was it "economic interests", or was it following protocols set by computer models (with which I don't always agree, but seems like there isn't much else to use in the BSE situation, having no real history of it until quite recently) developed by top minds in top universities in the USA that was the reasoning behind stopping the testing here? How, specifically, was that testing "flawed", given the knowledge and available information about BSE at that time? There simply is too much that is not known. How do we know it is not a rather common anomally in protein bearing, cloven hooved animals, for instance?
I still feel it is reasonable to ask the person who repeats that at least 2000 some head of BSE riddled cattle have been consumed in the USA should offer some verification or reasoning for that conclusion. Is it odds given our numbers of cattle, reading palms, moon sign, or what that gives that figure????
I have to disagree with you on keeping the RUMORs of serious, highly contagious disease in animals quiet until verification and a plan of action is in place, not ONLY due to economic damage, but so that, if true, the infection can be controlled and contained as quickly as possible. People being imperfect beings, there would be no small number who would try to cheat the system for their own benefit and as in so many situations, we would probably all be surprised and disappointed to know who some of them are.
mrj