3/7/2008 8:33:00 AM
Jolley: Five Minutes With Dennis Laycraft, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association
It’s the tail end of winter so I don’t know why I’m staying north of Buffalo with this series. Maybe the current situation in Canada is being under-reported - there’s that incident at Hallmark that seems to be occupying the babbling press, lately – and what goes on in Ottawa, Winnipeg and Calgary will have at least as much long term impact on the U.S. market.
OK, maybe those folks in Brazil will have more to say about how well the U.S. cattle business will or won’t do. I know I’m brushing up on my Portuguese. Probably drop by one of those Rosetta Stone Kiosks next time I’m running through some airport and pick up one of those CD’s that I can transfer to my iPod.
Back to Canada. One of the more interesting voices in the cattle industry is that of Dennis Laycraft. His position with CCA causes him to look more inward than Ted Haney, president of the Canada Beef Export Federation, the subject of last week’s interview. Ted looks around the world for opportunity. Dennis looks at North America. Both are concerned, though, about the health and well-being of the Canadian Cattle industry.
I thought it might be interesting to pose similar questions to both men and then, like my old high school English teacher kept saying, “Compare and contrast” their responses. Here’s what Dennis had to say for himself.
Q. Dennis, how did you get into the cattle business?
A. The cattle industry has always been part of my life. I grew up on a ranch in the foothills in southern Alberta. I first became involved in working with the industry organizations’ work in 1981 with the Alberta Cattle Commission and moved to the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association in 1990.
Q. The new found parity between the greenback and the loonie has changed all the rules in the way the animal agriculture is handled between the U.S. and Canada. How has it affected Canadian cattlemen??
A. The rapid appreciation of the Canadian dollar came at the worst possible time, coinciding with the rapid escalation in feed grain and fuel costs. Our prices are essentially determined by the U.S. market due its dominant size. When our dollar goes up, our prices go down. On the other side of the equation, our costs should decline. Unfortunately the combination of a labor shortage in the western provinces and escalating fuel and feed costs has worked against this.
Q. Let's clear up some confusion about the Canadian industry. After the "alpha" cow, discovered in Washington five years ago, effectively shut down the border between the U.S. and Canada, the North American cattle business faced possibly the greatest upheaval in its history. Canada was forced to rethink its relationships with U.S. and world markets and take a new look at its existing infrastructure. What's the current sense of the industry in places like Ottawa and Calgary?
A. There is a clear recognition that when BSE hit we had become too dependent on U.S. slaughter plants. Our BSE crisis was largely the result of inadequate capacity to handle the volume of cattle that were ready for market. Canadian consumer confidence remained very strong and rules around the world changed to respond more rationally to BSE and to reward countries with effective controls and surveillance programs. We are exporting to over 100 counties again and appreciate the leadership shown by your country and followed by the OIE in 2006.
Capacity has grown and our beef exports recovered quickly as soon as markers re-opened. Today we are moving ahead with an advanced traceability system built upon our industry-led national identification system.
Q. R-CALF is fighting a protracted court battle to prevent Canadian cattle of a certain age from entering the U.S. If you had a chance to sit down and talk face-to-face with their C.E.O., Bill Bullard, what would you say?
A. The OIE and the rest of the world have recognized Canada and the United States as the same BSE status under the new guidelines adopted in 2006. The purpose of the new OIE rules is to establish a rational and science-based system to evaluate risk and to re-establish trade follow the discovery of BSE. Undermining the adoption of these new guidelines not only serves no useful purpose but is damaging to the re-opening of markets to both of us.
We are not the enemy. The competition facing the North American beef industry is from poultry and from South America. World demand for high quality beef is growing but if we keep putting in place barriers and expensive rules and regulations that add wasteful cost we will lose North America’s advantage in the production of grain-fed beef. Obstructing trade has never helped satisfy the needs of any of our customers. We have the largest two way trade in agriculture products in the world with the average Canadian buying almost 9 times the volume of U.S. products that the average American does. No one else in the world comes close. Our industries have a lot more to gain by collaborating than fighting.
Q. COOL is a hot-button issue that seems to be gaining even more heat in a few influential circles in the U.S. Some argue that it's merely a hidden and possibly illegal tariff in the eyes of the W.T.O.; others claim it may backfire and make easily identifiable beef imported into the U.S. more desirable. U.S. proponents strongly state that "American beef is the best in the world" and labeling it will help consumers make better informed buying decisions. All rhetoric aside, how does the issue strike you?
A. Every credible study I have looked at indicates that the proposed requirements will be costly and there will be negligible consumer benefits. Our legal experts have advised us that the proposed rules will violate both NAFTA and the WTO. We believe that market driven quality based branded programs will provide much greater consumer benefit than any elaborate government imposed regulations.
Q. The U.S. is struggling with developing a controversial National Animal Identification System. Yours seems to be in place and was a relatively painless process. Why was it easer to achieve and what advantages does it offer?
A. I wish I could say it was painless but we also had intense debate about putting in place a mandatory program. The fact that it was industry-led and managed under an industry agency provided greater confidence to cattle producers. When the UK had their FMD outbreak in 2001, any remaining opposition dissipated. It has proven very valuable in trace-back and trace-out work for animal health purposes and is being used to carry more information such as age records. We have been told directly that it was an important factor in the reopening of a number of markets following the discovery of BSE in 2003. Many view it as a very important part of our country’s overall veterinary infrastructure capability to manage reportable animal diseases.
Q. Thousands of people read Cattlenetwork.com. What would you like to say to them?
A. We share the same hardships, challenges, and aspirations. We need to overcome differences and focus on building greater demand for what we both do best – the production of the high quality beef.
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?ContentId=203626
USDA Q & A: How Does USDA Monitor U.S. Cattle Population For BSE?
A. USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) continues to conduct BSE surveillance activities throughout the United States. The target number for testing is 40,000 animals each year. This level of testing exceeds the testing number recommended by the World Animal Health Organization (OIE) for BSE surveillance.
USDA's ongoing BSE surveillance program is not for the purposes of determining food safety. Rather, it is an animal health surveillance program designed to assess any change in the BSE status of U.S. cattle, and identify any rise in BSE prevalence in this country.
This ongoing BSE surveillance program allows USDA not only to detect the disease if it exists at very low levels in the U.S. cattle population, but also provide assurances to consumers and our international trading partners that the interlocking system of safeguards in place to prevent BSE are working. USDA will continually analyze the ongoing surveillance strategy and make adjustments as needed to ensure that the most robust surveillance program that provides the foundation for market confidence in the health of U.S. cattle is maintained.
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/bi_content.asp?contentid=203789
THE june 2004 enhanced bse surveillance program was flawed from the beginning, and proven so later by OIG and GAO. also, even cdc's top prion God says he does not trust them ;
In this context, a word is in order about the US testing program. After the discovery of the first (imported) cow in 2003, the magnitude of testing was much increased, reaching a level of >400,000 tests in 2005 (Figure 4).
Neither of the 2 more recently indigenously infected older animals with
nonspecific clinical features would have been detected without such testing,
and neither would have been identified as atypical without confirmatory
Western blots. Despite these facts, surveillance has now been decimated to
40,000 annual tests (USDA news release no. 0255.06, July 20, 2006) and
invites the accusation that the United States will never know the true
status of its involvement with BSE.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm
PAUL BROWN COMMENT TO ME ON THIS ISSUE
Tuesday, September 12, 2006 11:10 AM
"Actually, Terry, I have been critical of the USDA handling of the mad cow
issue for some years, and with Linda Detwiler and others sent lengthy
detailed critiques and recommendations to both the USDA and the Canadian Food
Agency."
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0703&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=8125
CDC DR. PAUL BROWN TSE EXPERT COMMENTS 2006
The U.S. Department of Agriculture was quick to assure the public earlier
this week that the third case of mad cow disease did not pose a risk to
them, but what federal officials have not acknowledged is that this latest
case indicates the deadly disease has been circulating in U.S. herds for at
least a decade.
The second case, which was detected last year in a Texas cow and which USDA
officials were reluctant to verify, was approximately 12 years old.
These two cases (the latest was detected in an Alabama cow) present a
picture of the disease having been here for 10 years or so, since it is
thought that cows usually contract the disease from contaminated feed they
consume as calves. The concern is that humans can contract a fatal,
incurable, brain-wasting illness from consuming beef products contaminated
with the mad cow pathogen.
"The fact the Texas cow showed up fairly clearly implied the existence of
other undetected cases," Dr. Paul Brown, former medical director of the
National Institutes of Health's Laboratory for Central Nervous System
Studies and an expert on mad cow-like diseases, told United Press
International. "The question was, 'How many?' and we still can't answer
that."
Brown, who is preparing a scientific paper based on the latest two mad cow
cases to estimate the maximum number of infected cows that occurred in the
United States, said he has "absolutely no confidence in USDA tests before
one year ago" because of the agency's reluctance to retest the Texas cow
that initially tested positive.
USDA officials finally retested the cow and confirmed it was infected seven
months later, but only at the insistence of the agency's inspector general.
"Everything they did on the Texas cow makes everything USDA did before 2005
suspect," Brown said. ...snip...end
http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID=20060315-055557-1284r
CDC - Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Variant Creutzfeldt ...
Dr. Paul Brown is Senior Research Scientist in the Laboratory of Central
Nervous System ... Address for correspondence: Paul Brown, Building 36, Room
4A-05, ...
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/brown.htm
Geographical BSE Risk (GBR) assessments covering 2000-2006
Date : 01.08.2006
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/Scientific_Document/GBR_assessments_table_Overview_assessed_countries_2002-2006.pdf
Audit Report
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program - Phase II
and
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Controls Over BSE Sampling, Specified Risk Materials, and Advanced Meat
Recovery Products - Phase III
Report No. 50601-10-KC January 2006
Finding 2 Inherent Challenges in Identifying and Testing High-Risk Cattle
Still Remain
Our prior report identified a number of inherent problems in identifying and
testing high-risk cattle. We reported that the challenges in identifying the
universe of high-risk cattle, as well as the need to design procedures to
obtain an appropriate representation of samples, was critical to the success
of the BSE surveillance program. The surveillance program was designed to
target nonambulatory cattle, cattle showing signs of CNS disease (including
cattle testing negative for rabies), cattle showing signs not inconsistent
with BSE, and dead cattle. Although APHIS designed procedures to ensure FSIS
condemned cattle were sampled and made a concerted effort for outreach to
obtain targeted samples, industry practices not considered in the design of
the surveillance program reduced assurance that targeted animals were tested
for BSE.
USDA/OIG-A/50601-10-KC Page 27
observe these animals ante mortem when possible to assure the animals from
the target population are ultimately sampled and the clinical signs
evaluated.
snip...
http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-10-KC.pdf
GAO-05-51 October 2004 FOOD SAFETY
over 500 customers receiving potentially BSE contaminated beef .....
* GAO-05-51 October 2004 FOOD SAFETY (over 500 customers receiving
potentially BSE contaminated beef) - TSS 10/20/04
October 2004 FOOD SAFETY
USDA and FDA Need
to Better Ensure
Prompt and Complete
Recalls of Potentially
Unsafe Food
snip...
REPORTS
1. Food Safety: USDA and FDA Need to Better Ensure Prompt and Complete
Recalls of Potentially Unsafe Food. GAO-05-51, October 7.tss
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0551.pdf
Highlights -
http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d0551high.pdf
3. Mad Cow Disease: FDA's Management of the Feed Ban Has Improved,
but Oversight Weaknesses Continue to Limit Program Effectiveness.
GAO-05-101, Feb. 25.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-101
Highlights -
www.gao.gov/highlights/d05101high.pdf
SADLY, DEC 2005 SHOWS THAT WE STILL HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH BSE/TSE MAD COW DISEASE FEED
GAO
GAO-06-157R FDA Feed Testing Program
October 11, 2005
SNIP...FULL TEXT 29 PAGES ;
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06157r.pdf
Mad Cow Disease: An Evaluation of a Small Feed Testing Program FDA Implemented in 2003 With Recommendations for Making the Program a Better Oversight Tool. GAO-06-157R, October 11
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-157R
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
BEEF RECALL NATIONWIDE - SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM UPDATE
http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2008/02/beef-recall-nationwide-school-lunch.html
THE USDA knows PERFECTLY WELL that no
one would get sick right off the bat from mad cow disease. Every parent out
there should be demanding answers, not these same lies. THE USDA should
follow every single child that consumed any of these products for the rest
of there lives. there is no way out of it now. the product is gone,
consumed, and these kids, the elderly, and most everybody in between have
been exposed. non-ambulatory i.e. DOWNERS are the most likely to have a
Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy. WE know it's here, we know why the
USDA et al shut down the testing, they did not want to document any more. ...TSS
Science 23 November 2001:
Vol. 294. no. 5547, pp. 1726 - 1728
DOI: 10.1126/science.1066838
Reports
Estimation of Epidemic Size and Incubation Time Based on Age Characteristics
of vCJD in the United Kingdom
Alain-Jacques Valleron,1 Pierre-Yves Boelle,1 Robert Will,2 Jean-Yves
Cesbron3
SNIP...
The distribution of the vCJD incubation period that best fits the data
within the framework of our model has a mean of 16.7 years, with a standard
deviation of 2.6 years. The 95% upper percentile of this distribution is
21.4 years. The 95% confidence interval (CI) of the estimates of the mean
and standard deviation is relatively narrow: The 95% CI for the estimate of
the mean incubation period is 12.4 to 23.2 years, and the 95% CI of the
standard deviation is 0.9 to 8 years (10). The decrease in susceptibility to
infection in exposed subjects older than 15 years, as estimated from the
parameter , was found to be very sharp: 16% per year of age (CI: 12 to 23%).
This means that, under the best fitting hypothesis, an individual aged 20
years in 1981 had 55% less risk of becoming infected than a child aged 15
years (99.9% for an individual aged 70).
http://www.sciencemag.org/
NOW, the price of poker in the USA may be shorter, due to the fact the
strain of mad cow disease in the USA is more virulent to humans,
thus, the incubation period, for the same titre log of infectivity, via same
route and source, might be faster. ...TSS
Communicated by:
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
[In submitting these data, Terry S. Singeltary Sr. draws attention to
the steady increase in the "type unknown" category, which, according
to their definition, comprises cases in which vCJD could be excluded.
The total of 26 cases for the current year (2007) is disturbing,
possibly symptomatic of the circulation of novel agents.
Characterization of these agents should be given a high priority. - Mod.CP]
[see also:
snip...
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at .
http://pro-med.blogspot.com/2007/11/proahedr-prion-disease-update-2007-07.html
SEE STEADY INCREASE IN SPORADIC CJD IN THE USA FROM
1997 TO 2006. SPORADIC CJD CASES TRIPLED, with phenotype
of 'UNKNOWN' strain growing. ...
http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/resources-casereport.html
There is a growing number of human CJD cases, and they were presented last
week in San Francisco by Luigi Gambatti(?) from his CJD surveillance
collection.
He estimates that it may be up to 14 or 15 persons which display selectively
SPRPSC and practically no detected RPRPSC proteins.
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/1006-4240t1.htm
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/2006-4240t1.pdf
PLEASE SEE !
P02.35 Molecular Features of the Protease-resistant Prion Protein (PrPres)
in H- type BSE
Biacabe, A-G1; Jacobs, JG2; Gavier-Widén, D3; Vulin, J1; Langeveld, JPM2;
Baron, TGM1 1AFSSA, France; 2CIDC-Lelystad, Netherlands; 3SVA, Sweden
Western blot analyses of PrPres accumulating in the brain of BSE- infected
cattle have demonstrated 3 different molecular phenotypes regarding to the
apparent molecular masses and glycoform ratios of PrPres bands. We initially
described isolates (H-type BSE) essentially characterized by higher PrPres
molecular mass and decreased levels of the diglycosylated PrPres band, in
contrast to the classical type of BSE. This type is also distinct from
another BSE phenotype named L-type BSE, or also BASE (for Bovine Amyloid
Spongiform Encephalopathy), mainly characterized by a low representation of
the diglycosylated PrPres band as well as a lower PrPres molecular mass.
Retrospective molecular studies in France of all available BSE cases older
than 8 years old and of part of the other cases identified since the
beginning of the exhaustive surveillance of the disease in 20001 allowed to
identify 7 H- type BSE cases, among 594 BSE cases that could be classified
as classical, L- or H-type BSE. By Western blot analysis of H-type PrPres,
we described a remarkable specific feature with antibodies raised against
the C-terminal region of PrP that demonstrated the existence of a more
C-terminal cleaved form of PrPres (named PrPres#2 ), in addition to the
usual PrPres form (PrPres #1). In the unglycosylated form, PrPres #2
migrates at about 14 kDa, compared to 20 kDa for PrPres #1. The proportion
of the PrPres#2 in cattle seems to by higher compared to the PrPres#1.
Furthermore another PK–resistant fragment at about 7 kDa was detected by
some more N-terminal antibodies and presumed to be the result of cleavages
of both N- and C- terminal parts of PrP. These singular features were
maintained after transmission of the disease to C57Bl/6 mice. The
identification of these two additional PrPres fragments (PrPres #2 and 7kDa
band)
*** reminds features reported respectively in sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease and in Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker (GSS) syndrome in humans.
FC5.5.1 BASE Transmitted to Primates and MV2 sCJD Subtype Share PrP27-30 and
PrPSc C-terminal Truncated Fragments
Zanusso, G1; Commoy, E2; Fasoli, E3; Fiorini, M3; Lescoutra, N4; Ruchoux,
MM4; Casalone, C5; Caramelli, M5; Ferrari, S3; Lasmezas, C6; Deslys, J-P4;
Monaco, S3 1University of Verona, of Neurological and Visual Sciences,
Italy; 2CEA, IMETI/SEPIA, France; 3University of Verona, Neurological and
Visual Sciences, Italy; 4IMETI/SEPIA, France; 5IZSPLVA, Italy; 6The Scripps
Research Insitute, USA
The etiology of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJD), the most frequent
human prion disease, remains still unknown. The marked disease phenotype
heterogeneity observed in sCJD is thought to be influenced by the type of
proteinase K- resistant prion protein, or PrPSc (type 1 or type 2 according
to the electrophoretic mobility of the unglycosylated backbone), and by the
host polymorphic Methionine/Valine (M/V) codon 129 of the PRNP. By using a
two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2D-PAGE) and imunoblotting we
previously showed that in sCJD, in addition to the PrPSc type, distinct
PrPSc C-terminal truncated fragments (CTFs) correlated with different sCJD
subtypes. Based on the combination of CTFs and PrPSc type, we distinguished
three PrPSc patterns: (i) the first was observed in sCJD with PrPSc type 1
of all genotypes,;
(ii) the second was found in M/M-2 (cortical form); (iii) the third in
amyloidogenic M/V- 2 and V/V-2 subtypes (Zanusso et al., JBC 2004) .
Recently, we showed that sCJD subtype M/V-2 shared molecular and
pathological features with an atypical form of BSE, named BASE, thus
suggesting a potential link between the two conditions. This connection was
further confirmed after 2D-PAGE analysis, which showed an identical PrPSc
signature, including the biochemical pattern of CTFs. To pursue this issue,
we obtained brain homogenates from Cynomolgus macaques intracerebrally
inoculated with brain homogenates from BASE. Samples were separated by using
a twodimensional electrophoresis (2D-PAGE) followed by immunoblotting. We
here show that the PrPSc pattern obtained in infected primates is identical
to BASE and sCJD MV-2 subtype.
*** These data strongly support the link, or at least a common ancestry,
between a sCJD subtype and BASE.
This work was supported by Neuroprion (FOOD-CT-2004-506579)
************************************************** *****
USA MAD COW CASES IN ALABAMA AND TEXAS
***PLEASE NOTE***
USA BASE CASE, (ATYPICAL BSE), AND OR TSE (whatever they are calling it
today), please note that both the ALABAMA COW, AND THE TEXAS COW,both were
''H-TYPE'', personal communication Detwiler et al Wednesday, August 22, 2007
11:52 PM. ...TSS
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0708&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=19779
Witness testifies some ill cattle sent to rendering plant
By CHIP CHANDLER
Globe-News Staff Writer
snip...
Mike Engler -- son of Paul Engler, the original plaintiff and owner of
Cactus Feeders Inc. -- agreed that more than 10 cows with some sort of
central nervous system disorder were sent to Hereford By-Products.
The younger Engler, who has a doctorate in biochemistry from Johns
Hopkins University, was the only witness jurors heard Thursday in the
Oprah Winfrey defamation trial. His testimony will resume this morning.
According to a U.S. Department of Agriculture report from which Winfrey
attorney Charles Babcock quoted, encephalitis caused by unknown reasons
could be a warning sign for bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow
disease.
Encephalitis was indicated on the death certificates -- or ``dead
slips'' -- of three Cactus Feeders cows discussed in court. The slips
then were stamped, ``Picked up by your local used cattle dealer'' before
the carcasses were taken to the rendering plant.
snip...
http://www.amarillonet.com/
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Statement
May 4, 2004
Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242
Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA
Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms
On Friday, April 30 th , the Food and Drug Administration learned that a cow with central nervous system symptoms had been killed and shipped to a processor for rendering into animal protein for use in animal feed.
FDA, which is responsible for the safety of animal feed, immediately began an investigation. On Friday and throughout the weekend, FDA investigators inspected the slaughterhouse, the rendering facility, the farm where the animal came from, and the processor that initially received the cow from the slaughterhouse.
FDA's investigation showed that the animal in question had already been rendered into "meat and bone meal" (a type of protein animal feed). Over the weekend FDA was able to track down all the implicated material. That material is being held by the firm, which is cooperating fully with FDA.
Cattle with central nervous system symptoms are of particular interest because cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, also known as "mad cow disease," can exhibit such symptoms. In this case, there is no way now to test for BSE. But even if the cow had BSE, FDA's animal feed rule would prohibit the feeding of its rendered protein to other ruminant animals (e.g., cows, goats, sheep, bison).
FDA is sending a letter to the firm summarizing its findings and informing the firm that FDA will not object to use of this material in swine feed only. If it is not used in swine feed, this material will be destroyed. Pigs have been shown not to be susceptible to BSE. If the firm agrees to use the material for swine feed only, FDA will track the material all the way through the supply chain from the processor to the farm to ensure that the feed is properly monitored and used only as feed for pigs.
To protect the U.S. against BSE, FDA works to keep certain mammalian protein out of animal feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. FDA established its animal feed rule in 1997 after the BSE epidemic in the U.K. showed that the disease spreads by feeding infected ruminant protein to cattle.
Under the current regulation, the material from this Texas cow is not allowed in feed for cattle or other ruminant animals. FDA's action specifying that the material go only into swine feed means also that it will not be fed to poultry.
FDA is committed to protecting the U.S. from BSE and collaborates closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on all BSE issues. The animal feed rule provides crucial protection against the spread of BSE, but it is only one of several such firewalls. FDA will soon be improving the animal feed rule, to make this strong system even stronger.
####
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html
http://downercattle.blogspot.com/
Specified Risk Material SRM
http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2008/02/specified-risk-materials-srm.html
TSS
Jolley: Five Minutes With Dennis Laycraft, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association
It’s the tail end of winter so I don’t know why I’m staying north of Buffalo with this series. Maybe the current situation in Canada is being under-reported - there’s that incident at Hallmark that seems to be occupying the babbling press, lately – and what goes on in Ottawa, Winnipeg and Calgary will have at least as much long term impact on the U.S. market.
OK, maybe those folks in Brazil will have more to say about how well the U.S. cattle business will or won’t do. I know I’m brushing up on my Portuguese. Probably drop by one of those Rosetta Stone Kiosks next time I’m running through some airport and pick up one of those CD’s that I can transfer to my iPod.
Back to Canada. One of the more interesting voices in the cattle industry is that of Dennis Laycraft. His position with CCA causes him to look more inward than Ted Haney, president of the Canada Beef Export Federation, the subject of last week’s interview. Ted looks around the world for opportunity. Dennis looks at North America. Both are concerned, though, about the health and well-being of the Canadian Cattle industry.
I thought it might be interesting to pose similar questions to both men and then, like my old high school English teacher kept saying, “Compare and contrast” their responses. Here’s what Dennis had to say for himself.
Q. Dennis, how did you get into the cattle business?
A. The cattle industry has always been part of my life. I grew up on a ranch in the foothills in southern Alberta. I first became involved in working with the industry organizations’ work in 1981 with the Alberta Cattle Commission and moved to the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association in 1990.
Q. The new found parity between the greenback and the loonie has changed all the rules in the way the animal agriculture is handled between the U.S. and Canada. How has it affected Canadian cattlemen??
A. The rapid appreciation of the Canadian dollar came at the worst possible time, coinciding with the rapid escalation in feed grain and fuel costs. Our prices are essentially determined by the U.S. market due its dominant size. When our dollar goes up, our prices go down. On the other side of the equation, our costs should decline. Unfortunately the combination of a labor shortage in the western provinces and escalating fuel and feed costs has worked against this.
Q. Let's clear up some confusion about the Canadian industry. After the "alpha" cow, discovered in Washington five years ago, effectively shut down the border between the U.S. and Canada, the North American cattle business faced possibly the greatest upheaval in its history. Canada was forced to rethink its relationships with U.S. and world markets and take a new look at its existing infrastructure. What's the current sense of the industry in places like Ottawa and Calgary?
A. There is a clear recognition that when BSE hit we had become too dependent on U.S. slaughter plants. Our BSE crisis was largely the result of inadequate capacity to handle the volume of cattle that were ready for market. Canadian consumer confidence remained very strong and rules around the world changed to respond more rationally to BSE and to reward countries with effective controls and surveillance programs. We are exporting to over 100 counties again and appreciate the leadership shown by your country and followed by the OIE in 2006.
Capacity has grown and our beef exports recovered quickly as soon as markers re-opened. Today we are moving ahead with an advanced traceability system built upon our industry-led national identification system.
Q. R-CALF is fighting a protracted court battle to prevent Canadian cattle of a certain age from entering the U.S. If you had a chance to sit down and talk face-to-face with their C.E.O., Bill Bullard, what would you say?
A. The OIE and the rest of the world have recognized Canada and the United States as the same BSE status under the new guidelines adopted in 2006. The purpose of the new OIE rules is to establish a rational and science-based system to evaluate risk and to re-establish trade follow the discovery of BSE. Undermining the adoption of these new guidelines not only serves no useful purpose but is damaging to the re-opening of markets to both of us.
We are not the enemy. The competition facing the North American beef industry is from poultry and from South America. World demand for high quality beef is growing but if we keep putting in place barriers and expensive rules and regulations that add wasteful cost we will lose North America’s advantage in the production of grain-fed beef. Obstructing trade has never helped satisfy the needs of any of our customers. We have the largest two way trade in agriculture products in the world with the average Canadian buying almost 9 times the volume of U.S. products that the average American does. No one else in the world comes close. Our industries have a lot more to gain by collaborating than fighting.
Q. COOL is a hot-button issue that seems to be gaining even more heat in a few influential circles in the U.S. Some argue that it's merely a hidden and possibly illegal tariff in the eyes of the W.T.O.; others claim it may backfire and make easily identifiable beef imported into the U.S. more desirable. U.S. proponents strongly state that "American beef is the best in the world" and labeling it will help consumers make better informed buying decisions. All rhetoric aside, how does the issue strike you?
A. Every credible study I have looked at indicates that the proposed requirements will be costly and there will be negligible consumer benefits. Our legal experts have advised us that the proposed rules will violate both NAFTA and the WTO. We believe that market driven quality based branded programs will provide much greater consumer benefit than any elaborate government imposed regulations.
Q. The U.S. is struggling with developing a controversial National Animal Identification System. Yours seems to be in place and was a relatively painless process. Why was it easer to achieve and what advantages does it offer?
A. I wish I could say it was painless but we also had intense debate about putting in place a mandatory program. The fact that it was industry-led and managed under an industry agency provided greater confidence to cattle producers. When the UK had their FMD outbreak in 2001, any remaining opposition dissipated. It has proven very valuable in trace-back and trace-out work for animal health purposes and is being used to carry more information such as age records. We have been told directly that it was an important factor in the reopening of a number of markets following the discovery of BSE in 2003. Many view it as a very important part of our country’s overall veterinary infrastructure capability to manage reportable animal diseases.
Q. Thousands of people read Cattlenetwork.com. What would you like to say to them?
A. We share the same hardships, challenges, and aspirations. We need to overcome differences and focus on building greater demand for what we both do best – the production of the high quality beef.
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?ContentId=203626
USDA Q & A: How Does USDA Monitor U.S. Cattle Population For BSE?
A. USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) continues to conduct BSE surveillance activities throughout the United States. The target number for testing is 40,000 animals each year. This level of testing exceeds the testing number recommended by the World Animal Health Organization (OIE) for BSE surveillance.
USDA's ongoing BSE surveillance program is not for the purposes of determining food safety. Rather, it is an animal health surveillance program designed to assess any change in the BSE status of U.S. cattle, and identify any rise in BSE prevalence in this country.
This ongoing BSE surveillance program allows USDA not only to detect the disease if it exists at very low levels in the U.S. cattle population, but also provide assurances to consumers and our international trading partners that the interlocking system of safeguards in place to prevent BSE are working. USDA will continually analyze the ongoing surveillance strategy and make adjustments as needed to ensure that the most robust surveillance program that provides the foundation for market confidence in the health of U.S. cattle is maintained.
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/bi_content.asp?contentid=203789
THE june 2004 enhanced bse surveillance program was flawed from the beginning, and proven so later by OIG and GAO. also, even cdc's top prion God says he does not trust them ;
In this context, a word is in order about the US testing program. After the discovery of the first (imported) cow in 2003, the magnitude of testing was much increased, reaching a level of >400,000 tests in 2005 (Figure 4).
Neither of the 2 more recently indigenously infected older animals with
nonspecific clinical features would have been detected without such testing,
and neither would have been identified as atypical without confirmatory
Western blots. Despite these facts, surveillance has now been decimated to
40,000 annual tests (USDA news release no. 0255.06, July 20, 2006) and
invites the accusation that the United States will never know the true
status of its involvement with BSE.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm
PAUL BROWN COMMENT TO ME ON THIS ISSUE
Tuesday, September 12, 2006 11:10 AM
"Actually, Terry, I have been critical of the USDA handling of the mad cow
issue for some years, and with Linda Detwiler and others sent lengthy
detailed critiques and recommendations to both the USDA and the Canadian Food
Agency."
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0703&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=8125
CDC DR. PAUL BROWN TSE EXPERT COMMENTS 2006
The U.S. Department of Agriculture was quick to assure the public earlier
this week that the third case of mad cow disease did not pose a risk to
them, but what federal officials have not acknowledged is that this latest
case indicates the deadly disease has been circulating in U.S. herds for at
least a decade.
The second case, which was detected last year in a Texas cow and which USDA
officials were reluctant to verify, was approximately 12 years old.
These two cases (the latest was detected in an Alabama cow) present a
picture of the disease having been here for 10 years or so, since it is
thought that cows usually contract the disease from contaminated feed they
consume as calves. The concern is that humans can contract a fatal,
incurable, brain-wasting illness from consuming beef products contaminated
with the mad cow pathogen.
"The fact the Texas cow showed up fairly clearly implied the existence of
other undetected cases," Dr. Paul Brown, former medical director of the
National Institutes of Health's Laboratory for Central Nervous System
Studies and an expert on mad cow-like diseases, told United Press
International. "The question was, 'How many?' and we still can't answer
that."
Brown, who is preparing a scientific paper based on the latest two mad cow
cases to estimate the maximum number of infected cows that occurred in the
United States, said he has "absolutely no confidence in USDA tests before
one year ago" because of the agency's reluctance to retest the Texas cow
that initially tested positive.
USDA officials finally retested the cow and confirmed it was infected seven
months later, but only at the insistence of the agency's inspector general.
"Everything they did on the Texas cow makes everything USDA did before 2005
suspect," Brown said. ...snip...end
http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID=20060315-055557-1284r
CDC - Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Variant Creutzfeldt ...
Dr. Paul Brown is Senior Research Scientist in the Laboratory of Central
Nervous System ... Address for correspondence: Paul Brown, Building 36, Room
4A-05, ...
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/brown.htm
Geographical BSE Risk (GBR) assessments covering 2000-2006
Date : 01.08.2006
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/Scientific_Document/GBR_assessments_table_Overview_assessed_countries_2002-2006.pdf
Audit Report
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program - Phase II
and
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Controls Over BSE Sampling, Specified Risk Materials, and Advanced Meat
Recovery Products - Phase III
Report No. 50601-10-KC January 2006
Finding 2 Inherent Challenges in Identifying and Testing High-Risk Cattle
Still Remain
Our prior report identified a number of inherent problems in identifying and
testing high-risk cattle. We reported that the challenges in identifying the
universe of high-risk cattle, as well as the need to design procedures to
obtain an appropriate representation of samples, was critical to the success
of the BSE surveillance program. The surveillance program was designed to
target nonambulatory cattle, cattle showing signs of CNS disease (including
cattle testing negative for rabies), cattle showing signs not inconsistent
with BSE, and dead cattle. Although APHIS designed procedures to ensure FSIS
condemned cattle were sampled and made a concerted effort for outreach to
obtain targeted samples, industry practices not considered in the design of
the surveillance program reduced assurance that targeted animals were tested
for BSE.
USDA/OIG-A/50601-10-KC Page 27
observe these animals ante mortem when possible to assure the animals from
the target population are ultimately sampled and the clinical signs
evaluated.
snip...
http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-10-KC.pdf
GAO-05-51 October 2004 FOOD SAFETY
over 500 customers receiving potentially BSE contaminated beef .....
* GAO-05-51 October 2004 FOOD SAFETY (over 500 customers receiving
potentially BSE contaminated beef) - TSS 10/20/04
October 2004 FOOD SAFETY
USDA and FDA Need
to Better Ensure
Prompt and Complete
Recalls of Potentially
Unsafe Food
snip...
REPORTS
1. Food Safety: USDA and FDA Need to Better Ensure Prompt and Complete
Recalls of Potentially Unsafe Food. GAO-05-51, October 7.tss
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0551.pdf
Highlights -
http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d0551high.pdf
3. Mad Cow Disease: FDA's Management of the Feed Ban Has Improved,
but Oversight Weaknesses Continue to Limit Program Effectiveness.
GAO-05-101, Feb. 25.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-101
Highlights -
www.gao.gov/highlights/d05101high.pdf
SADLY, DEC 2005 SHOWS THAT WE STILL HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH BSE/TSE MAD COW DISEASE FEED
GAO
GAO-06-157R FDA Feed Testing Program
October 11, 2005
SNIP...FULL TEXT 29 PAGES ;
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06157r.pdf
Mad Cow Disease: An Evaluation of a Small Feed Testing Program FDA Implemented in 2003 With Recommendations for Making the Program a Better Oversight Tool. GAO-06-157R, October 11
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-157R
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
BEEF RECALL NATIONWIDE - SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM UPDATE
http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2008/02/beef-recall-nationwide-school-lunch.html
THE USDA knows PERFECTLY WELL that no
one would get sick right off the bat from mad cow disease. Every parent out
there should be demanding answers, not these same lies. THE USDA should
follow every single child that consumed any of these products for the rest
of there lives. there is no way out of it now. the product is gone,
consumed, and these kids, the elderly, and most everybody in between have
been exposed. non-ambulatory i.e. DOWNERS are the most likely to have a
Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy. WE know it's here, we know why the
USDA et al shut down the testing, they did not want to document any more. ...TSS
Science 23 November 2001:
Vol. 294. no. 5547, pp. 1726 - 1728
DOI: 10.1126/science.1066838
Reports
Estimation of Epidemic Size and Incubation Time Based on Age Characteristics
of vCJD in the United Kingdom
Alain-Jacques Valleron,1 Pierre-Yves Boelle,1 Robert Will,2 Jean-Yves
Cesbron3
SNIP...
The distribution of the vCJD incubation period that best fits the data
within the framework of our model has a mean of 16.7 years, with a standard
deviation of 2.6 years. The 95% upper percentile of this distribution is
21.4 years. The 95% confidence interval (CI) of the estimates of the mean
and standard deviation is relatively narrow: The 95% CI for the estimate of
the mean incubation period is 12.4 to 23.2 years, and the 95% CI of the
standard deviation is 0.9 to 8 years (10). The decrease in susceptibility to
infection in exposed subjects older than 15 years, as estimated from the
parameter , was found to be very sharp: 16% per year of age (CI: 12 to 23%).
This means that, under the best fitting hypothesis, an individual aged 20
years in 1981 had 55% less risk of becoming infected than a child aged 15
years (99.9% for an individual aged 70).
http://www.sciencemag.org/
NOW, the price of poker in the USA may be shorter, due to the fact the
strain of mad cow disease in the USA is more virulent to humans,
thus, the incubation period, for the same titre log of infectivity, via same
route and source, might be faster. ...TSS
Communicated by:
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
[In submitting these data, Terry S. Singeltary Sr. draws attention to
the steady increase in the "type unknown" category, which, according
to their definition, comprises cases in which vCJD could be excluded.
The total of 26 cases for the current year (2007) is disturbing,
possibly symptomatic of the circulation of novel agents.
Characterization of these agents should be given a high priority. - Mod.CP]
[see also:
snip...
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at .
http://pro-med.blogspot.com/2007/11/proahedr-prion-disease-update-2007-07.html
SEE STEADY INCREASE IN SPORADIC CJD IN THE USA FROM
1997 TO 2006. SPORADIC CJD CASES TRIPLED, with phenotype
of 'UNKNOWN' strain growing. ...
http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/resources-casereport.html
There is a growing number of human CJD cases, and they were presented last
week in San Francisco by Luigi Gambatti(?) from his CJD surveillance
collection.
He estimates that it may be up to 14 or 15 persons which display selectively
SPRPSC and practically no detected RPRPSC proteins.
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/1006-4240t1.htm
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/2006-4240t1.pdf
PLEASE SEE !
P02.35 Molecular Features of the Protease-resistant Prion Protein (PrPres)
in H- type BSE
Biacabe, A-G1; Jacobs, JG2; Gavier-Widén, D3; Vulin, J1; Langeveld, JPM2;
Baron, TGM1 1AFSSA, France; 2CIDC-Lelystad, Netherlands; 3SVA, Sweden
Western blot analyses of PrPres accumulating in the brain of BSE- infected
cattle have demonstrated 3 different molecular phenotypes regarding to the
apparent molecular masses and glycoform ratios of PrPres bands. We initially
described isolates (H-type BSE) essentially characterized by higher PrPres
molecular mass and decreased levels of the diglycosylated PrPres band, in
contrast to the classical type of BSE. This type is also distinct from
another BSE phenotype named L-type BSE, or also BASE (for Bovine Amyloid
Spongiform Encephalopathy), mainly characterized by a low representation of
the diglycosylated PrPres band as well as a lower PrPres molecular mass.
Retrospective molecular studies in France of all available BSE cases older
than 8 years old and of part of the other cases identified since the
beginning of the exhaustive surveillance of the disease in 20001 allowed to
identify 7 H- type BSE cases, among 594 BSE cases that could be classified
as classical, L- or H-type BSE. By Western blot analysis of H-type PrPres,
we described a remarkable specific feature with antibodies raised against
the C-terminal region of PrP that demonstrated the existence of a more
C-terminal cleaved form of PrPres (named PrPres#2 ), in addition to the
usual PrPres form (PrPres #1). In the unglycosylated form, PrPres #2
migrates at about 14 kDa, compared to 20 kDa for PrPres #1. The proportion
of the PrPres#2 in cattle seems to by higher compared to the PrPres#1.
Furthermore another PK–resistant fragment at about 7 kDa was detected by
some more N-terminal antibodies and presumed to be the result of cleavages
of both N- and C- terminal parts of PrP. These singular features were
maintained after transmission of the disease to C57Bl/6 mice. The
identification of these two additional PrPres fragments (PrPres #2 and 7kDa
band)
*** reminds features reported respectively in sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease and in Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker (GSS) syndrome in humans.
FC5.5.1 BASE Transmitted to Primates and MV2 sCJD Subtype Share PrP27-30 and
PrPSc C-terminal Truncated Fragments
Zanusso, G1; Commoy, E2; Fasoli, E3; Fiorini, M3; Lescoutra, N4; Ruchoux,
MM4; Casalone, C5; Caramelli, M5; Ferrari, S3; Lasmezas, C6; Deslys, J-P4;
Monaco, S3 1University of Verona, of Neurological and Visual Sciences,
Italy; 2CEA, IMETI/SEPIA, France; 3University of Verona, Neurological and
Visual Sciences, Italy; 4IMETI/SEPIA, France; 5IZSPLVA, Italy; 6The Scripps
Research Insitute, USA
The etiology of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJD), the most frequent
human prion disease, remains still unknown. The marked disease phenotype
heterogeneity observed in sCJD is thought to be influenced by the type of
proteinase K- resistant prion protein, or PrPSc (type 1 or type 2 according
to the electrophoretic mobility of the unglycosylated backbone), and by the
host polymorphic Methionine/Valine (M/V) codon 129 of the PRNP. By using a
two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2D-PAGE) and imunoblotting we
previously showed that in sCJD, in addition to the PrPSc type, distinct
PrPSc C-terminal truncated fragments (CTFs) correlated with different sCJD
subtypes. Based on the combination of CTFs and PrPSc type, we distinguished
three PrPSc patterns: (i) the first was observed in sCJD with PrPSc type 1
of all genotypes,;
(ii) the second was found in M/M-2 (cortical form); (iii) the third in
amyloidogenic M/V- 2 and V/V-2 subtypes (Zanusso et al., JBC 2004) .
Recently, we showed that sCJD subtype M/V-2 shared molecular and
pathological features with an atypical form of BSE, named BASE, thus
suggesting a potential link between the two conditions. This connection was
further confirmed after 2D-PAGE analysis, which showed an identical PrPSc
signature, including the biochemical pattern of CTFs. To pursue this issue,
we obtained brain homogenates from Cynomolgus macaques intracerebrally
inoculated with brain homogenates from BASE. Samples were separated by using
a twodimensional electrophoresis (2D-PAGE) followed by immunoblotting. We
here show that the PrPSc pattern obtained in infected primates is identical
to BASE and sCJD MV-2 subtype.
*** These data strongly support the link, or at least a common ancestry,
between a sCJD subtype and BASE.
This work was supported by Neuroprion (FOOD-CT-2004-506579)
************************************************** *****
USA MAD COW CASES IN ALABAMA AND TEXAS
***PLEASE NOTE***
USA BASE CASE, (ATYPICAL BSE), AND OR TSE (whatever they are calling it
today), please note that both the ALABAMA COW, AND THE TEXAS COW,both were
''H-TYPE'', personal communication Detwiler et al Wednesday, August 22, 2007
11:52 PM. ...TSS
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0708&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=19779
Witness testifies some ill cattle sent to rendering plant
By CHIP CHANDLER
Globe-News Staff Writer
snip...
Mike Engler -- son of Paul Engler, the original plaintiff and owner of
Cactus Feeders Inc. -- agreed that more than 10 cows with some sort of
central nervous system disorder were sent to Hereford By-Products.
The younger Engler, who has a doctorate in biochemistry from Johns
Hopkins University, was the only witness jurors heard Thursday in the
Oprah Winfrey defamation trial. His testimony will resume this morning.
According to a U.S. Department of Agriculture report from which Winfrey
attorney Charles Babcock quoted, encephalitis caused by unknown reasons
could be a warning sign for bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow
disease.
Encephalitis was indicated on the death certificates -- or ``dead
slips'' -- of three Cactus Feeders cows discussed in court. The slips
then were stamped, ``Picked up by your local used cattle dealer'' before
the carcasses were taken to the rendering plant.
snip...
http://www.amarillonet.com/
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Statement
May 4, 2004
Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242
Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA
Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms
On Friday, April 30 th , the Food and Drug Administration learned that a cow with central nervous system symptoms had been killed and shipped to a processor for rendering into animal protein for use in animal feed.
FDA, which is responsible for the safety of animal feed, immediately began an investigation. On Friday and throughout the weekend, FDA investigators inspected the slaughterhouse, the rendering facility, the farm where the animal came from, and the processor that initially received the cow from the slaughterhouse.
FDA's investigation showed that the animal in question had already been rendered into "meat and bone meal" (a type of protein animal feed). Over the weekend FDA was able to track down all the implicated material. That material is being held by the firm, which is cooperating fully with FDA.
Cattle with central nervous system symptoms are of particular interest because cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, also known as "mad cow disease," can exhibit such symptoms. In this case, there is no way now to test for BSE. But even if the cow had BSE, FDA's animal feed rule would prohibit the feeding of its rendered protein to other ruminant animals (e.g., cows, goats, sheep, bison).
FDA is sending a letter to the firm summarizing its findings and informing the firm that FDA will not object to use of this material in swine feed only. If it is not used in swine feed, this material will be destroyed. Pigs have been shown not to be susceptible to BSE. If the firm agrees to use the material for swine feed only, FDA will track the material all the way through the supply chain from the processor to the farm to ensure that the feed is properly monitored and used only as feed for pigs.
To protect the U.S. against BSE, FDA works to keep certain mammalian protein out of animal feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. FDA established its animal feed rule in 1997 after the BSE epidemic in the U.K. showed that the disease spreads by feeding infected ruminant protein to cattle.
Under the current regulation, the material from this Texas cow is not allowed in feed for cattle or other ruminant animals. FDA's action specifying that the material go only into swine feed means also that it will not be fed to poultry.
FDA is committed to protecting the U.S. from BSE and collaborates closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on all BSE issues. The animal feed rule provides crucial protection against the spread of BSE, but it is only one of several such firewalls. FDA will soon be improving the animal feed rule, to make this strong system even stronger.
####
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html
http://downercattle.blogspot.com/
Specified Risk Material SRM
http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2008/02/specified-risk-materials-srm.html
TSS