• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

FSIS Final Rule Prohibiting Processing of "Downer"

flounder

Well-known member
FSIS Publishes Final Rule Prohibiting Processing of "Downer" Cattle



Congressional and Public Affairs
(202) 720-9113
Steven Cohen

WASHINGTON, July 12, 2007 - The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) today announced a permanent prohibition on the slaughter of cattle that are unable to stand or walk ("downer" cattle) when presented for pre-slaughter inspection. The inability to stand or walk can be a clinical sign of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE).

Under the rule, cattle that are injured after they pass pre-slaughter inspection will be reevaluated to determine their eligibility for slaughter. Veal calves that cannot stand because they are tired or cold may be set apart and held for treatment and re-inspection.

The rule published in the July 13 Federal Register makes permanent what had been an interim final rule prohibiting slaughter of non-ambulatory cattle in the United States. The final rule becomes effective Oct. 1, 2007.

"This final rule further strengthens our public health controls at slaughter plants across the United States," said USDA Under Secretary for Food Safety Dr. Richard Raymond. "Less than three weeks after the December 2003 BSE detection in an imported cow, USDA moved quickly and decisively to put in place interim rules that greatly reduced the risk of human exposure. Experience has borne-out that these interim steps were correct and should be made permanent."

On Jan. 12, 2004, FSIS issued a series of three interim final rules in response to the first BSE diagnosis on Dec. 23, 2003. Those rules had prohibited for human consumption non-ambulatory "downer" cattle and cattle tissue identified as specified risk materials (SRMs); banned the use of high pressure stunning devices that could drive SRM tissue into the meat; and established requirements for Advanced Meat Recovery systems.

The rule requires that spinal cord must be removed from cattle 30 months of age and older at the place of slaughter. It also mandates that records must be maintained when beef products containing SRMs are moved from one federally inspected establishment to another for further processing.

Countries that have received the internationally recognized BSE status of "negligible risk" are not required to remove SRMs because their system controls prevent the introduction and spread of BSE.

FSIS will conduct outreach sessions with industry to ensure that the provisions of the final rule are fully understood by all affected establishments.

Comments on the new information collection requirements must be received by Sept. 11, 2007. For further information, contact: Dr. Daniel Engeljohn, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Policy, Program and Employee Development, FSIS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-3700, or by phone at (202) 205-0495.
#


Last Modified: July 12, 2007



http://www.fsis.usda.gov/news_&_events/NR_071207_01/index.asp


Docket

No. 04-047-l

No. 04-021ANPR

No. 2004N-0264

NEW BSE SAFEGUARDS

Federal Measures to Mitigate BSE Risks: Considerations for Further Action

http://www.fda.gov/cvm/index/updates/bseanprm.htm

Greetings FDA, USDA and APHIS et al,



https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf


From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 6:17 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle


Greetings FSIS,


I would kindly like to submit the following to [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle THE BSE/TSE SUB CLINICAL Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle Broken bones and such may be the first signs of a sub clinical BSE/TSE Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle ; SUB CLINICAL PRION INFECTION MRC-43-00 Issued: Monday, 28 August 2000 NEW EVIDENCE OF SUB-CLINICAL PRION INFECTION: IMPORTANT RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT TO CJD AND BSE A team of researchers led by Professor John Collinge at the Medical Research Council Prion Unit1 report today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, on new evidence for the existence of a ?sub-clinical? form of BSE in mice which was unknown until now. The scientists took a closer look at what is known as the ?species barrier? - the main protective factor which limits the ability of prions2 to jump from one species to infect another. They found the mice had a ?sub-clinical? form of disease where they carried high levels of infectivity but did not develop the clinical disease during their normal lifespan. The idea that individuals can carry a disease and show no clinical symptoms is not new. It is commonly seen in conventional infectious diseases. Researchers tried to infect laboratory mice with hamster prions3 called Sc237 and found that the mice showed no apparent signs of disease. However, on closer inspection they found that the mice had high levels of mouse prions in their brains. This was surprising because it has always been assumed that hamster prions could not cause the disease in mice, even when injected directly into the brain. In addition the researchers showed that this new sub-clinical infection could be easily passed on when injected into healthy mice and hamsters. The height of the species barrier varies widely between different combinations of animals and also varies with the type or strain of prions. While some barriers are quite small (for instance BSE easily infects mice), other combinations of strain and species show a seemingly impenetrable barrier. Traditionally, the particular barrier studied here was assumed to be robust. Professor John Collinge said: "These results have a number of important implications. They suggest that we should re-think how we measure species barriers in the laboratory, and that we should not assume that just because one species appears resistant to a strain of prions they have been exposed to, that they do not silently carry the infection. 9/13/2005

03-025IFA
03-025IFA-2
Terry S. Singeltary 2

Page 2 of 17

This research raises the possibility, which has been mentioned before, that apparently healthy cattle could harbour, but never show signs of, BSE. "This is a timely and unexpected result, increasing what we know about prion disease. These new findings have important implications for those researching prion disease, those responsible for preventing infected material getting into the food chain and for those considering how best to safeguard health and reduce the risk that theoretically, prion disease could be contracted through medical and surgical procedures." ISSUED FRIDAY 25 AUGUST UNDER EMBARGO. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE EMBARGO IS SET BY THE JOURNAL. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT THE MRC PRESS OFFICE ON 020 7637 6011 (OFFICE HOURS) OR 07818 428297 OR 0385 774357 (OUT-OF-OFFICE-HOURS) OR PROFESSOR JOHN COLLINGE ON 020 7594 3760. PLEASE NOTE THAT OWING TO TRAVEL COMMITMENTS PROFESSOR COLLINGE WILL ONLY BE AVAILABLE UNTIL 16.30 ON FRIDAY 25 AUGUST AND CONTACTABLE AGAIN ON MONDAY 28 AUGUST VIA THE MRC PRESS OFFICE. DR ANDREW HILL (A CO-AUTHOR ON THE PAPER) FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE WILL BE AVAILABLE ON 00 61 3 8344 3995 (DURING OFFICE HOURS) OR 00 61 3 9443 0009 (OUT-OF-OFFICE HOURS). PLEASE NOTE THAT AUSTRALIA IS TEN HOURS AHEAD OF UK TIME. NOTES FOR EDITORS Professor Collinge is a consultant neurologist and Director of the newly formed MRC Prion Unit based at The Imperial College School of Medicine at St Mary?s Hospital. He is also a member of the UK Government?s Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC). The MRC prion unit is was set up in 1999, and its work includes molecular genetic studies of human prion disease and transgenic modelling of human prion diseases. Prions are unique infectious agents that cause fatal brain diseases such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans and scrapie and BSE (mad cow disease) in animals. In some circumstances prions from one species of animals can infect another and it is clear that BSE has done this to cause the disease variant CJD in the UK and France. It remains unclear how large an epidemic of variant CJD will occur over the years ahead. The strain of prion used here to infect the mice is the Sc237 strain (also known as 263K) which infects hamsters, and until now was assumed not to infect mice. This research was funded by the Medical Research Council and Wellcome Trust. The Medical Research Council (MRC) is a national organisation funded by the UK tax-payer. Its business is medical research aimed at improving human health; everyone stands to benefit from the outputs. The research it supports and the scientists it trains meet the needs of the health services, the pharmaceutical and other health-related industries and the academic world. MRC has funded work which has led to some of the most significant discoveries and achievements in medicine in the UK. About half of the MRC?s expenditure of £345 million is invested in over 50 of its Institutes and Units, where it employs its own research staff. The remaining half goes in the form of grant support and training awards to individuals and teams in universities and medical schools. The Wellcome Trust is the world's largest medical research charity with a spend of some £600 million in the current financial year 1999/2000. The Wellcome Trust supports more than 5,000 researchers, at 400 locations, in 42 different countries to promote and foster research with the aim of improving human and animal health. As well as funding major initiatives in the public understanding of science, the Wellcome Trust is the country's leading supporter of research into the history of medicine. http://www.mrc.ac.uk/index/public_interest/public-press_office/public-press_releases_2000/public-mrc-43-00.htm SNIP...FULL TEXT; 9/13/2005
Page 3 of 17 https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/0/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/03-025IFA/03-025IFA-2.pdf



Non-Ambulatory

Cattle and Calves

Released May 5, 2005, by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Agricultural Statistics Board, U.S. Department
of Agriculture. For information on Non-ambulatory Cattle and Calves call Mike Miller at 720-3040, office hours 7:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. ET.

Non-Ambulatory Cattle and Calves


Non-ambulatory cattle and calves in the United States totaled 465,000 head during 2003 and
450,000 head during 2004. The number of non-ambulatory cattle 500 pounds or greater totaled
280,000 head in 2003 and 270,000 head in 2004. The number of calves under 500 pounds reported
as non-ambulatory totaled 185,000 head in 2003 and 180,000 head in 2004.

The number of operations that reported non-ambulatory cattle and calves was 103,000 in 2003 and
81,000 in 2004. In 2003, there were 66,800 beef cow operations reporting non-ambulatory cattle
and calves compared to 49,700 in 2004. There were 22,800 dairy operations reporting nonambulatory
cattle and calves in 2003 compared to 23,000 in 2004.

This report is released as a cooperative effort between the National Agricultural Statistics Service
and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service - Veterinary Services. Data for this report were
collected on the January 1, 2004 and 2005 Cattle Surveys.


SNIP....



http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/livestock/non-amb-catt/naccan05.pdf


Subject: COW SENSE: THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION’S BROKEN RECORD ON MAD COW DISEASE
Date: May 2, 2006 at 6:50 pm PST


http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1000675.html

TSS
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
Wow now downers (animals exhibiting clinical signs of BSE) are finally banned from the human foodchain in the US . Boy that took, long enough. Maybe you guys can start testing high risk cattle insteat of UTM cattle. :roll:
 

mrj

Well-known member
Does anyone know if Questions' description of a "downer bovine" as one with clinical signs of BSE is accurate?

Isn't a "Downer" simply an animal that cannot stand up and walk, whether from disease or accident or injury?

Is there an official veterinary or medical description for the term?

If not, shouldn't there be one, with at least suggestions as to how those with different reasons for non-mobility are treated?

For the record, there has not been a "Downer" taken to market off this ranch for years, and probably never has been an actual down critter marketed. Any we have had have been attributable to accident, calving problem, stuck in mud for too long, etc. There are few such problems, barring accidents, when one culls the herd strictly.

MRJ
 

Mike

Well-known member
Is there an official veterinary or medical description for the term?

Non-ambulatory.

It's been a rule for years down here that these animals cannot go to slaughter for human food. Some folks just make up crap as they go along.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
QUESTION said:
Wow now downers (animals exhibiting clinical signs of BSE) are finally banned from the human foodchain in the US . Boy that took, long enough. Maybe you guys can start testing high risk cattle insteat of UTM cattle. :roll:

Downers are not being "finally banned". Read the article again. Downers were banned via an interim rule - that rule was just made permanent.

Were you and Bill classmates?
 

Bill

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
QUESTION said:
Wow now downers (animals exhibiting clinical signs of BSE) are finally banned from the human foodchain in the US . Boy that took, long enough. Maybe you guys can start testing high risk cattle insteat of UTM cattle. :roll:

Downers are not being "finally banned". Read the article again. Downers were banned via an interim rule - that rule was just made permanent.

Were you and Bill classmates?

Too bad the interim rule was implemented over a month AFTER your Washington State cow entered the food supply.

Any idea why its only taken y'all 3-1/2 years to make it a so called permanent rule? :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Bill said:
Sandhusker said:
QUESTION said:
Wow now downers (animals exhibiting clinical signs of BSE) are finally banned from the human foodchain in the US . Boy that took, long enough. Maybe you guys can start testing high risk cattle insteat of UTM cattle. :roll:

Downers are not being "finally banned". Read the article again. Downers were banned via an interim rule - that rule was just made permanent.

Were you and Bill classmates?

Too bad the interim rule was implemented over a month AFTER your Washington State cow entered the food supply.

Any idea why its only taken y'all 3-1/2 years to make it a so called permanent rule? :roll:

Because all of our time is dedicated towards finding a way to bankrupt Canadian producers. You seem to forget that we hate you guys.
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
Hi sandH just in for a bite to eat, haying is going well the hay i was baling this afternoon was going 4 bales per acre 5X6 soft core. Any ways the comment was made to express a point any animal down cannnot be unloaded at a slaughter facility up here instead the trucker is fined if he.she loaded a down animal, the animal is condemmed and automatically tested for BSE. But an animal showing neurological signs such as lack of coorindation and an inability to rise are considered suspect for BSE everywhere in the world that has BSE except the US. WHY? To be fair there are other neurological and metabollic diseases that cause an animal to be unable to rise. And although the interm rule was in effect it was being broken frequently as explained in a report from the USDA inspectors earlier this spring. So hopefully all processors will get a dictionary and read the definition of banned. Maybe don't fine a processor that breaks the rules they seem to have enought money that it doesn't scare them, another idea is to close a plant caught breaking the rule for 6 mo. on 1st offense. 1 yr for 2nd offense and siezure and sale for a 3rd. If something like this happened rules would only be broken for so long.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
QUESTION said:
Hi sandH just in for a bite to eat, haying is going well the hay i was baling this afternoon was going 4 bales per acre 5X6 soft core. Any ways the comment was made to express a point any animal down cannnot be unloaded at a slaughter facility up here instead the trucker is fined if he.she loaded a down animal, the animal is condemmed and automatically tested for BSE. But an animal showing neurological signs such as lack of coorindation and an inability to rise are considered suspect for BSE everywhere in the world that has BSE except the US. WHY? To be fair there are other neurological and metabollic diseases that cause an animal to be unable to rise. And although the interm rule was in effect it was being broken frequently as explained in a report from the USDA inspectors earlier this spring. So hopefully all processors will get a dictionary and read the definition of banned. Maybe don't fine a processor that breaks the rules they seem to have enought money that it doesn't scare them, another idea is to close a plant caught breaking the rule for 6 mo. on 1st offense. 1 yr for 2nd offense and siezure and sale for a 3rd. If something like this happened rules would only be broken for so long.

I've got no problem with that.
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
Just got in it is getting too wet to keep making bales. It seems reasonable and general common sense to do something like i suggested. But when it comes to government officials common sense is not so common. But hopefully the stance is taken that a downer could be a BSE suspect animal and should be treated and tested accordingly. The reasoning is that showing clinical signs that could be for BSE should treated with caution and on the side of safety. At least you are reasonable , some on this are not.
 

Bill

Well-known member
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government said Thursday it will permanently ban the slaughter of cattle for human food if they cannot stand or walk, a possible sign of mad cow disease, but is exempting some animals in that condition.

The Agriculture Department said the ban will be effective Oct. 1. The regulation does allow cows to be processed if they become unable to stand or walk after their initial inspection at a plant.

The Humane Society of the United States objects to this exception.

Allowing such animals to be processed is "cruel and does not establish the food safety standards USDA should strive to meet," said the group's president and chief executive, Wayne Pacelle.

The department put interim rules in place less than three weeks after the detection of mad cow disease, known as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, in an imported cow at a Washington state ranch in December 2003.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

Let's leave a few loopholes to work around! :roll:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Bill said:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government said Thursday it will permanently ban the slaughter of cattle for human food if they cannot stand or walk, a possible sign of mad cow disease, but is exempting some animals in that condition.

The Agriculture Department said the ban will be effective Oct. 1. The regulation does allow cows to be processed if they become unable to stand or walk after their initial inspection at a plant.

The Humane Society of the United States objects to this exception.

Allowing such animals to be processed is "cruel and does not establish the food safety standards USDA should strive to meet," said the group's president and chief executive, Wayne Pacelle.

The department put interim rules in place less than three weeks after the detection of mad cow disease, known as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, in an imported cow at a Washington state ranch in December 2003.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

Let's leave a few loopholes to work around! :roll:

This is a blatant and obvious attempt to lessen any losses for packers.

Once the animal is inspected, the producer/seller will be paid. It is then the property of the packer.

If the animal gets hurt on farm or in route, the producer loses, but if it gets hurt while at the packer yard the packer does not.

Just follow the money...............................................................The big money.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Bill said:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government said Thursday it will permanently ban the slaughter of cattle for human food if they cannot stand or walk, a possible sign of mad cow disease, but is exempting some animals in that condition.

The Agriculture Department said the ban will be effective Oct. 1. The regulation does allow cows to be processed if they become unable to stand or walk after their initial inspection at a plant.

The Humane Society of the United States objects to this exception.

Allowing such animals to be processed is "cruel and does not establish the food safety standards USDA should strive to meet," said the group's president and chief executive, Wayne Pacelle.

The department put interim rules in place less than three weeks after the detection of mad cow disease, known as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, in an imported cow at a Washington state ranch in December 2003.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

Let's leave a few loopholes to work around! :roll:

So you think a 15 month old steer with a broken leg should be treated the same as a 10 year old cow that's stumbling around and acting looney?
 

flounder

Well-known member
quote]

So you think a 15 month old steer with a broken leg should be treated the same as a 10 year old cow that's stumbling around and acting looney?[/quote]


YEP, if that old steer fell and broke a leg due to it stumbling and staggering around with a TSE. course, there's an easy way to solve that problem, test all cattle. but you can't have your cake and eat it too. also, as stated from the MRC, sub-clinical TSE. you must worry about sub-clinical TSE. ...TSS
 

flounder

Well-known member
Subject: Re: FSIS Publishes Final Rule Prohibiting Processing of "Downer" Cattle
Date: July 13, 2007 at 7:49 am PST

[Federal Register: July 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 134)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 38699-38730]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13jy07-19]


Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and
Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle;
Prohibition of the Use of Certain Stunning Devices Used To Immobilize
Cattle During Slaughter; Rule


[[Page 38700]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 309, 310, and 318

[Docket No. 03-025F]
RIN 0583-AC88


Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food
and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle;
Prohibition of the Use of Certain Stunning Devices Used To Immobilize
Cattle During Slaughter

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Affirmation of interim final rules with amendments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is affirming,
with changes, the interim final rule ``Prohibition of the Use of
Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the
Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Cattle,'' which was published in the
Federal Register on January 12, 2004. The Agency is also affirming the
interim final rule ``Prohibition of the Use of Certain Stunning Devices
Used to Immobilize Cattle During Slaughter,'' also published on January
12, 2004. FSIS issued these interim final rules in response to the
confirmation on December 23, 2003, of bovine spongiform encephalopathy
(BSE) in an imported dairy cow in Washington State. FSIS is taking this
action to make permanent interim measures implemented by the Agency to
minimize human exposure to cattle materials that could potentially
contain the BSE agent.

DATES: This final rule is effective October 1, 2007. Comments on the
information presented under ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' must be
received by September 11, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Daniel Engeljohn, Deputy Assistant
Administrator, Office of Policy, Program, and Employee Development,
FSIS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250-3700, (202) 205-0495.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

snip...FULL TEXT ;


http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-3350.htm


Two rules were issued July 13, 2007: (1) Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle; Prohibition of the Use of Certain Stunning Devices Used To Immobilize Cattle During Slaughter; and (2) Designation of the State of New Mexico Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act and Poultry Products Inspection Act.


http://service.govdelivery.com/service/edition.html?code=USFSIS_86&format=Web&email_type=bulletin


TSS



flounder said:
FSIS Publishes Final Rule Prohibiting Processing of "Downer" Cattle



Congressional and Public Affairs
(202) 720-9113
Steven Cohen

WASHINGTON, July 12, 2007 - The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) today announced a permanent prohibition on the slaughter of cattle that are unable to stand or walk ("downer" cattle) when presented for pre-slaughter inspection. The inability to stand or walk can be a clinical sign of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE).

Under the rule, cattle that are injured after they pass pre-slaughter inspection will be reevaluated to determine their eligibility for slaughter. Veal calves that cannot stand because they are tired or cold may be set apart and held for treatment and re-inspection.

The rule published in the July 13 Federal Register makes permanent what had been an interim final rule prohibiting slaughter of non-ambulatory cattle in the United States. The final rule becomes effective Oct. 1, 2007.

"This final rule further strengthens our public health controls at slaughter plants across the United States," said USDA Under Secretary for Food Safety Dr. Richard Raymond. "Less than three weeks after the December 2003 BSE detection in an imported cow, USDA moved quickly and decisively to put in place interim rules that greatly reduced the risk of human exposure. Experience has borne-out that these interim steps were correct and should be made permanent."

On Jan. 12, 2004, FSIS issued a series of three interim final rules in response to the first BSE diagnosis on Dec. 23, 2003. Those rules had prohibited for human consumption non-ambulatory "downer" cattle and cattle tissue identified as specified risk materials (SRMs); banned the use of high pressure stunning devices that could drive SRM tissue into the meat; and established requirements for Advanced Meat Recovery systems.

The rule requires that spinal cord must be removed from cattle 30 months of age and older at the place of slaughter. It also mandates that records must be maintained when beef products containing SRMs are moved from one federally inspected establishment to another for further processing.

Countries that have received the internationally recognized BSE status of "negligible risk" are not required to remove SRMs because their system controls prevent the introduction and spread of BSE.

FSIS will conduct outreach sessions with industry to ensure that the provisions of the final rule are fully understood by all affected establishments.

Comments on the new information collection requirements must be received by Sept. 11, 2007. For further information, contact: Dr. Daniel Engeljohn, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Policy, Program and Employee Development, FSIS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-3700, or by phone at (202) 205-0495.
#


Last Modified: July 12, 2007



http://www.fsis.usda.gov/news_&_events/NR_071207_01/index.asp


Docket

No. 04-047-l

No. 04-021ANPR

No. 2004N-0264

NEW BSE SAFEGUARDS

Federal Measures to Mitigate BSE Risks: Considerations for Further Action

http://www.fda.gov/cvm/index/updates/bseanprm.htm

Greetings FDA, USDA and APHIS et al,



https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf


From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 6:17 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle


Greetings FSIS,


I would kindly like to submit the following to [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle THE BSE/TSE SUB CLINICAL Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle Broken bones and such may be the first signs of a sub clinical BSE/TSE Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle ; SUB CLINICAL PRION INFECTION MRC-43-00 Issued: Monday, 28 August 2000 NEW EVIDENCE OF SUB-CLINICAL PRION INFECTION: IMPORTANT RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT TO CJD AND BSE A team of researchers led by Professor John Collinge at the Medical Research Council Prion Unit1 report today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, on new evidence for the existence of a ?sub-clinical? form of BSE in mice which was unknown until now. The scientists took a closer look at what is known as the ?species barrier? - the main protective factor which limits the ability of prions2 to jump from one species to infect another. They found the mice had a ?sub-clinical? form of disease where they carried high levels of infectivity but did not develop the clinical disease during their normal lifespan. The idea that individuals can carry a disease and show no clinical symptoms is not new. It is commonly seen in conventional infectious diseases. Researchers tried to infect laboratory mice with hamster prions3 called Sc237 and found that the mice showed no apparent signs of disease. However, on closer inspection they found that the mice had high levels of mouse prions in their brains. This was surprising because it has always been assumed that hamster prions could not cause the disease in mice, even when injected directly into the brain. In addition the researchers showed that this new sub-clinical infection could be easily passed on when injected into healthy mice and hamsters. The height of the species barrier varies widely between different combinations of animals and also varies with the type or strain of prions. While some barriers are quite small (for instance BSE easily infects mice), other combinations of strain and species show a seemingly impenetrable barrier. Traditionally, the particular barrier studied here was assumed to be robust. Professor John Collinge said: "These results have a number of important implications. They suggest that we should re-think how we measure species barriers in the laboratory, and that we should not assume that just because one species appears resistant to a strain of prions they have been exposed to, that they do not silently carry the infection. 9/13/2005

03-025IFA
03-025IFA-2
Terry S. Singeltary 2

Page 2 of 17

This research raises the possibility, which has been mentioned before, that apparently healthy cattle could harbour, but never show signs of, BSE. "This is a timely and unexpected result, increasing what we know about prion disease. These new findings have important implications for those researching prion disease, those responsible for preventing infected material getting into the food chain and for those considering how best to safeguard health and reduce the risk that theoretically, prion disease could be contracted through medical and surgical procedures." ISSUED FRIDAY 25 AUGUST UNDER EMBARGO. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE EMBARGO IS SET BY THE JOURNAL. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT THE MRC PRESS OFFICE ON 020 7637 6011 (OFFICE HOURS) OR 07818 428297 OR 0385 774357 (OUT-OF-OFFICE-HOURS) OR PROFESSOR JOHN COLLINGE ON 020 7594 3760. PLEASE NOTE THAT OWING TO TRAVEL COMMITMENTS PROFESSOR COLLINGE WILL ONLY BE AVAILABLE UNTIL 16.30 ON FRIDAY 25 AUGUST AND CONTACTABLE AGAIN ON MONDAY 28 AUGUST VIA THE MRC PRESS OFFICE. DR ANDREW HILL (A CO-AUTHOR ON THE PAPER) FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE WILL BE AVAILABLE ON 00 61 3 8344 3995 (DURING OFFICE HOURS) OR 00 61 3 9443 0009 (OUT-OF-OFFICE HOURS). PLEASE NOTE THAT AUSTRALIA IS TEN HOURS AHEAD OF UK TIME. NOTES FOR EDITORS Professor Collinge is a consultant neurologist and Director of the newly formed MRC Prion Unit based at The Imperial College School of Medicine at St Mary?s Hospital. He is also a member of the UK Government?s Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC). The MRC prion unit is was set up in 1999, and its work includes molecular genetic studies of human prion disease and transgenic modelling of human prion diseases. Prions are unique infectious agents that cause fatal brain diseases such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans and scrapie and BSE (mad cow disease) in animals. In some circumstances prions from one species of animals can infect another and it is clear that BSE has done this to cause the disease variant CJD in the UK and France. It remains unclear how large an epidemic of variant CJD will occur over the years ahead. The strain of prion used here to infect the mice is the Sc237 strain (also known as 263K) which infects hamsters, and until now was assumed not to infect mice. This research was funded by the Medical Research Council and Wellcome Trust. The Medical Research Council (MRC) is a national organisation funded by the UK tax-payer. Its business is medical research aimed at improving human health; everyone stands to benefit from the outputs. The research it supports and the scientists it trains meet the needs of the health services, the pharmaceutical and other health-related industries and the academic world. MRC has funded work which has led to some of the most significant discoveries and achievements in medicine in the UK. About half of the MRC?s expenditure of £345 million is invested in over 50 of its Institutes and Units, where it employs its own research staff. The remaining half goes in the form of grant support and training awards to individuals and teams in universities and medical schools. The Wellcome Trust is the world's largest medical research charity with a spend of some £600 million in the current financial year 1999/2000. The Wellcome Trust supports more than 5,000 researchers, at 400 locations, in 42 different countries to promote and foster research with the aim of improving human and animal health. As well as funding major initiatives in the public understanding of science, the Wellcome Trust is the country's leading supporter of research into the history of medicine. http://www.mrc.ac.uk/index/public_interest/public-press_office/public-press_releases_2000/public-mrc-43-00.htm SNIP...FULL TEXT; 9/13/2005
Page 3 of 17 https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/0/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/03-025IFA/03-025IFA-2.pdf



Non-Ambulatory

Cattle and Calves

Released May 5, 2005, by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Agricultural Statistics Board, U.S. Department
of Agriculture. For information on Non-ambulatory Cattle and Calves call Mike Miller at 720-3040, office hours 7:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. ET.

Non-Ambulatory Cattle and Calves


Non-ambulatory cattle and calves in the United States totaled 465,000 head during 2003 and
450,000 head during 2004. The number of non-ambulatory cattle 500 pounds or greater totaled
280,000 head in 2003 and 270,000 head in 2004. The number of calves under 500 pounds reported
as non-ambulatory totaled 185,000 head in 2003 and 180,000 head in 2004.

The number of operations that reported non-ambulatory cattle and calves was 103,000 in 2003 and
81,000 in 2004. In 2003, there were 66,800 beef cow operations reporting non-ambulatory cattle
and calves compared to 49,700 in 2004. There were 22,800 dairy operations reporting nonambulatory
cattle and calves in 2003 compared to 23,000 in 2004.

This report is released as a cooperative effort between the National Agricultural Statistics Service
and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service - Veterinary Services. Data for this report were
collected on the January 1, 2004 and 2005 Cattle Surveys.


SNIP....



http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/livestock/non-amb-catt/naccan05.pdf


Subject: COW SENSE: THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION’S BROKEN RECORD ON MAD COW DISEASE
Date: May 2, 2006 at 6:50 pm PST


http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1000675.html

TSS
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
SandH just back for lunch again a bit early need to do some fixing and get back out in the heat. And this comes up. It really makes me question what is going on down there a ban is a ban - no exceptions. But a loophole is put in. And pushing back implementation to Oct.1 That is what gets one in trouble special treatment. As for the comment on broken legs in young stock i have mangaed a feedlot and seen my share of broken legs and they still get up. A neurological or metabolic problem is different and is plain to see. If your officials keep this up more countries will close their borders to US beef. All i can say is that it is really disturbing to see that a simple rule that is meant to prevent the spread of a potentially dangerous pathogen is being bypassed for convenience when it could do so much good. Loss of control of motor control function is a symtom of many diseases including bse, what is the thinking in allowing an animal carrying such a dangerouse pathogen into the human food chain ? I see people going to jail in the future for a negligent decision. What conselation will that be to someone dying of vCJD.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
QUESTION said:
SandH just back for lunch again a bit early need to do some fixing and get back out in the heat. And this comes up. It really makes me question what is going on down there a ban is a ban - no exceptions. But a loophole is put in. And pushing back implementation to Oct.1 That is what gets one in trouble special treatment. As for the comment on broken legs in young stock i have mangaed a feedlot and seen my share of broken legs and they still get up. A neurological or metabolic problem is different and is plain to see. If your officials keep this up more countries will close their borders to US beef. All i can say is that it is really disturbing to see that a simple rule that is meant to prevent the spread of a potentially dangerous pathogen is being bypassed for convenience when it could do so much good. Loss of control of motor control function is a symtom of many diseases including bse, what is the thinking in allowing an animal carrying such a dangerouse pathogen into the human food chain ? I see people going to jail in the future for a negligent decision. What conselation will that be to someone dying of vCJD.

I hear what you're saying, but I think one needs to consider the intent of the rule - which is to identify, isolate and test possible BSE carriers. If you've got a young animal that is clearly a downer because of outside physical trauma and you've got no reason to suspect BSE, why treat them the same as a BSE candidate? How would that apply to the spirit of the rule?
 

Kato

Well-known member
A young injured animal is not a candidate for testing here. It's also not a candidate for hauling to slaughter here either.

I can't speak for other provinces, but in Manitoba, if you have a fat steer with a broken leg, you call a vet and have it inspected to make sure it's fit to slaughter. For example, if it's got a fever, it's no good. Then you arrange for a local abbatoir to take it, have the vet euthanize it, and then haul it to the abbatoir. You also need all the appropriate permits for transport since the steer contains SRMs.

Even if an animal goes down in a trailer, it's not used. If an animal goes down in a commercial truck, the vet is called on arrival, the animal is euthanized, and an insurance claim goes in. If it's old enough, it's tested for BSE.

Basically if it's not healthy, it goes nowhere. That's the way it should be.
 
Top