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

Looking for info.

Tam

Well-known member
I'm look for some information and would apprecate any help I can in finding it. I did a google search and looked on the OIE web site but I either missed it or it is not there. So here is what I would like to know If a country has not detected any BSE in their native herd how many cattle does the OIE recommend they test to find out wheither or not they have a problem? is there a set number no matter what size the herd or is there a precentage of the herd that should be tested? Thanks for any help and no thanks to those that just have smart remarks.
 

Tam

Well-known member
can't anyone tell me if there is a set number that a country is to test or a percentage of the herd?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Tam said:
can't anyone tell me if there is a set number that a country is to test or a percentage of the herd?

With all due respect. I'm not sure anyone CARES what the OIE recommendations are.

They are joined at the hip with the WTO and the USDA and care very little about food safety.

It's trade they are concerned with.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Mike said:
Tam said:
can't anyone tell me if there is a set number that a country is to test or a percentage of the herd?

With all due respect. I'm not sure anyone CARES what the OIE recommendations are.

They are joined at the hip with the WTO and the USDA and care very little about food safety.

It's trade they are concerned with.

Mike is it no body cares in respects to any country or just the US? I read this and I was just wonder if it can be verified
"The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) recommends that nations that have not yet identified any cases of BSE should test at least 187,000 cattle consecutively just to determine if they have the disease, regardless of the size of that country's cattle herd
Now we have been told all along that the US far exceeded the OIE recommended testing but before BSE was found in the US herd the US had only tested a bit over 57,000 head in over a decade . Claims were made that the US had met the OIE recommendations for testing but how could this be if countries that have not yet identified cases of BSE were to test 187,000 head consecutively ? Can anyone verify this number? and it doesn't matter to me if you care I'm looking for what is recommended I know what is being done and it does not exceed this number.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Tam, The OIE Guidelines Change with the wind, Here's the last one I know about:

OIE CHANGES TO BSE GUIDANCE
CATTLE HEALTH - BSE - TALKING POINTS
Monday, April 10, 2006

Summary

At the 73rd annual Office of International Epizootics (OIE) general session meeting in May 2005, member countries reviewed and approved changes to the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) chapter of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code that may affect how countries with BSE trade. The meeting drew 700 participants representing the 167 OIE member countries, inter-governmental organizations and non-governmental organizations.



Background

The Office of International Epizootics or OIE was created in January 1924 when 28 countries agreed to form an inter-governmental organization to provide guidance on animal health issues. There are now 167 member countries of the Paris-based organization.



OIE publishes health standards for international trade in animals and animal products in the form of two animal health codes, one for terrestrial animals and one for aquatic animals. The standards within both animal health codes are developed by OIE’s Specialist Commissions and then adopted by OIE member countries during the organization’s General Session each May.



The BSE chapter recommendations are intended to manage the human and animal health risks associated with the presence of BSE. During the May 22-27, 2005 annual OIE meeting, special attention was given to updating this chapter in the Terrestrial Animal Health Code and the changes may affect how trade proceeds between countries with BSE.



Simplifying Country BSE Risk Categories

Previously the BSE-related recommendations, found in Chapter 2.3.13 of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code (available on OIE’s Web site, www.oie.int), recognized five categories of BSE risk:

1) BSE-free

2) BSE provisionally free

3) minimal risk

4) moderate risk

5) high risk.



At the May meeting the Commission recommended, and member countries approved, a three-category system that simplifies the risk classification process. Now, the categories are:

1) negligible risk

2) controlled risk

3) undetermined risk.



Negligible Risk: The “Negligible BSE Risk” distinction will apply to commodities from countries or zones that pose a negligible risk of transmitting the BSE agent as demonstrated by a risk assessment, the appropriate level of BSE surveillance and either: no cases, or only imported cases or cases no more recent than 7 years, of BSE; an existing education and reporting program; and a feed ban has been in place for at least eight years if an indigenous case or other risk factors exist.



Controlled Risk: The “Controlled BSE Risk” category describes commodities from a country or zones that pose a negligible risk of transmitting the BSE agent due to commodity-specific risk mitigation measures. The conditions for this category are similar except that controlled risk countries with indigenous BSE cases must demonstrate an education and reporting program, an effective feed ban and identify, track and destroy certain progeny and herd mates of the BSE-infected animal.



Undetermined Risk: The cattle population of a country or zone poses an “Undetermined BSE Risk” if it cannot be demonstrated that it meets the requirements of another category.



Based on these changes, Canada and the United States most fall in the “Controlled BSE Risk” category. The OIE code recommends imports from Controlled BSE Risk countries resume under the condition that: it meets the requirements for controlled risk, cattle selected for export are identified by a permanent identification system and the cattle selected for export are born after a feed ban was implemented (if the country has indigenous BSE cases).



In regards to products from controlled risk countries, OIE recommends the importing countries require: anti- and post-mortem inspections, the meat come from cattle that were not subject to air-injection stunning and that fresh meat and meat products not contain prohibited tissues or mechanically separated meat from the skull and vertebral column from cattle older than 30 months.



Low BSE-risk Products List Expanded

The BSE chapter starts with a list of commodities that do not require BSE-specific measures regardless of an exporting country’s BSE status. Before the May meeting, this list included: milk and milk products, bovine semen, hides and skins (excluding those from the head), protein-free tallow, de-boned skeletal muscle meat from cattle younger than 30 months and blood and blood by-products.



Importantly this list of low-risk products, which may be traded without BSE-related regulations, now includes boneless beef from cattle under 30 months of age. In addition, all hides and skins and de-boned skeletal muscle meat from all cattle now fall into the low-risk product category. Specifically, the low-risk nature of blood and blood products was reaffirmed at the meeting, where it was concluded, based on science, that blood and blood products do not represent a risk of spreading BSE.



Further Guidance for BSE Testing

Another important change to the code involves BSE surveillance. OIE has always made recommendations for BSE surveillance based on a country’s risk, the intended purpose for surveillance and the size of its cattle population. Changes from the May OIE meeting provide more detail for the reduced testing category of maintenance-level surveillance. But the OIE code continues to encourage active surveillance, and now provides a statistical sampling protocol for estimating prevalence.



The U.S. Department of Agriculture continues to test a significant number of the cattle at highest risk for BSE as part of the government’s expanded surveillance program initiated on June 1, 2004. As of mid-summer 2005, the United States has tested more than 400,000 targeted, higher-risk cattle. The OIE code changes approved in May do not change the fact that the United States continues to exceed OIE standards for BSE surveillance.



OIE Code Continues to Support Trade

According to OIE, its animal health codes were created to provide guidance for the safe international trade of animals and animal products, not to be used as a reason for blocking trade between countries. The changes suggested and approved at the annual general session reflect current science and streamline the code, potentially making it easier for countries with BSE to resume trade.



Under the revised code, the United States should be considered controlled-risk by importing countries and therefore, trade should resume smoothly under the recommendations set forth by the OIE.



Key Points

· At the 73rd annual OIE general session meeting in May, member countries reviewed and approved changes to the BSE chapter of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code that may affect how countries with BSE trade.

· The code changes approved reduce the number of risk categories to three in favor of the previous five, expand the list of low-risk products not requiring BSE-specific trade regulations and provide additional guidance for determining prevalence through BSE surveillance.

· Given the revised code, the United States would be considered a “Controlled BSE Risk” country and trade with international customers should resume based on the new OIE recommendations.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Controlled Risk: The “Controlled BSE Risk” category describes commodities from a country or zones that pose a negligible risk of transmitting the BSE agent due to commodity-specific risk mitigation measures. The conditions for this category are similar except that controlled risk countries with indigenous BSE cases must demonstrate an education and reporting program, an effective feed ban and identify, track and destroy certain progeny and herd mates of the BSE-infected animal.



Undetermined Risk: The cattle population of a country or zone poses an “Undetermined BSE Risk” if it cannot be demonstrated that it meets the requirements of another category.

Under this- Both the US and Canada should qualify as Undetermined Risk- with the Alabama cows untraceability and Canada's 3 POST feedban cattle....

But I'm sure "sound science" has a way of interpreting this differently too..
 

flounder

Well-known member
tam, the sample survey via oie for bse is about 400 test via 100 million cattle, if i am not mistaken. MOST countries that went by these OIE guidelines all eventually went down with BSE. :roll: ...TSS


http://www.oie.int/downld/SC/2005/bse_2005.pdf



THE OIE has now shown they are nothing more than a National Trading Brokerage for all strains of animal TSE.
AS i said before, OIE should hang up there jock strap now, since it appears they will buckle every time a country makes some political hay about trade protocol, commodities and futures. IF they are not going to be science based, they should do everyone a favor and dissolve there organization. With Science like this, Japan would be fully justified in declining to be a member. ...


Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. BOX 42 Bacliff, TEXAS USA


a.. BSE OIE :lol2: :help:

see full text ;

http://p079.ezboard.com/fwolftracksproductionsfrm2.showMessage?topicID=470.topic


TSS
 

Tam

Well-known member
Thank you Mike for posting this little statement
OIE has always made recommendations for BSE surveillance based on a country’s risk, the intended purpose for surveillance and the size of its cattle population.
Some of you may not care what the recommendations are but can we agree that what Mike posted is true that the size of the herd does matter. and by what flounder posted that number is 400 per 100 million cattle?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Gee I almost let this slip away without telling you who made the statement I was researching. Thank you for your help in proving what I already thought!!!!

And Mike you might have hestitated if you had known.

R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard said Canada has not tested enough animals to comply with international rules. "The World Organization for Animal Health(OIE) recommends that nations that have not yet identified any cases of BSE should test at least 187,000 cattle consecutively just to determine if they have the disease, regardless of the size of the country's cattle herd.
"the U.S. meets this recommendation, while Canada does not" said Bullard.

Taken from an article that was dated Jan. 24, 2006 titled Canada Finds Fifth Mad Cow, Japan bans U.S. Beef Again.


Since none of you could vertify this statement to be true then I would have to say Bill Did It Again!!!!!!!! The truth doesn't enter the picture when Bill speaks to the media.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Tam said:
Gee I almost let this slip away without telling you who made the statement I was researching. Thank you for your help in proving what I already thought!!!!

And Mike you might have hestitated if you had known.

R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard said Canada has not tested enough animals to comply with international rules. "The World Organization for Animal Health(OIE) recommends that nations that have not yet identified any cases of BSE should test at least 187,000 cattle consecutively just to determine if they have the disease, regardless of the size of the country's cattle herd.
"the U.S. meets this recommendation, while Canada does not" said Bullard.

Taken from an article that was dated Jan. 24, 2006 titled Canada Finds Fifth Mad Cow, Japan bans U.S. Beef Again.


Since none of you could vertify this statement to be true then I would have to say Bill Did It Again!!!!!!!! The truth doesn't enter the picture when Bill speaks to the media.

Actually, Tam, I don't think common sense enters the picture when you comment on R -CALF. I'm sure Mike appreciates you holding him up in a judge's position, but don't you think if you're going to call Bill not with the truth on OIE policies, your proof should come from the OIE itself?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Tam said:
Gee I almost let this slip away without telling you who made the statement I was researching. Thank you for your help in proving what I already thought!!!!

And Mike you might have hestitated if you had known.

R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard said Canada has not tested enough animals to comply with international rules. "The World Organization for Animal Health(OIE) recommends that nations that have not yet identified any cases of BSE should test at least 187,000 cattle consecutively just to determine if they have the disease, regardless of the size of the country's cattle herd.
"the U.S. meets this recommendation, while Canada does not" said Bullard.

Taken from an article that was dated Jan. 24, 2006 titled Canada Finds Fifth Mad Cow, Japan bans U.S. Beef Again.


Since none of you could vertify this statement to be true then I would have to say Bill Did It Again!!!!!!!! The truth doesn't enter the picture when Bill speaks to the media.

Actually, Tam, I don't think common sense enters the picture when you comment on R -CALF. I'm sure Mike appreciates you holding him up in a judge's position, but don't you think if you're going to call Bill not with the truth on OIE policies, your proof should come from the OIE itself?

How did I hold him in a judge's position Sandhusker all I asked for was information. If this requirement exsists why didn't you bring it from the OIE? I tried to find it but all I could find was requirements that had to do with herd size and risk catagories. That is why I asked if anyone else knew of the so called OIE requirement. which by the looks of the response nobody else had either. You are just upset and insulting me because as usual your leader was caught in a lie.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
You say Bullard is lying because you can't find the information to prove him right? :roll: Good grief, Tam, it seems to me that you should prove him wrong before calling him a liar. Maybe you forgot about "Innocent before being proven guilty"? Nobody else brought forward any information because nobody else is looking! :lol:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
You say Bullard is lying because you can't find the information to prove him right? :roll: Good grief, Tam, it seems to me that you should prove him wrong before calling him a liar. Maybe you forgot about "Innocent before being proven guilty"? Nobody else brought forward any information because nobody else is looking! :lol:
MAYBE BECAUSE IT DOESN"T EXSIST

Sandhusker Mike posted this
OIE has always made recommendations for BSE surveillance based on a country’s risk, the intended purpose for surveillance and the size of its cattle population.
the requirements are based on HERD SIZE and RISK
Flounder posted this
the sample survey via oie for bse is about 400 test via 100 million cattle, if i am not mistaken.
Again bases on HERD SIZE. I read the testing requirement section the OIE website but found NO SET NUMBER and that it was based on HERD SIZE and RISK which matches what Mike posted. Bill said 187,000 regardless of herd size . Three out of three say based on herd size which contradict what Bill claimed. The number Flounder posted isn't even close to what Bill claimed 400 verse 187,000.

Bill claimed these were number to be tested consecutively if the country had never detected ANY BSE. He also claimed the US met those requirements. Now let's look at the USDA test number that have been posted in this site MANY TIMES
Year U.S. numbers

1992 ----- 251
1993 ----- 736
1994 ----- 692
1995 ----- 744
1996 ----- 1,143
1997 ----- 2,713
1998 ----- 1,080
1999 ----- 1,302
2000 ----- 2,681
2001 ----- 5,272
2002 ----- 19,990
2003 ----- 20,543
total ----- 57,147 head were tested in the US prior to finding ANY BSE.

Now Mike and Flounder brought information that contradicted the regardless of herd size part which matched the information I read on the OIE web site. AND The actual USDA test numbers prove the US didn't test 187,000 head consecutively prior to finding ANY BSE. So Bills claims of the US meeting the requirements seems to be contradicted by the USDA own testing numbers. How much more PROOF DO YOU NEED. DEFEND TO THE DEATH SANDHUSKER. :roll:

If you want to defend Bill why don't you take a minute and visit the OIE website and post the requirements yourself that would contradict what we have posted here. Wouldn't that be the smart thing to do to defend his claims. I asked anyone to post something that could prove it one way or the other and you post stupid remarks instead of actual proof. :roll: TYPICAL SANDHUSKER DEFENSE. :roll: :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
You wondered why I said you put Mike in a judges position? Here you are calling Bullard a liar because "Mike said". :roll:

If you were truly interested in the truth, you would get your info from the OIE, since that is what Bullard was talking about. Just because you can't find it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The problem is, you're not interested in facts, you're just wanting to lamblast R-CALF whether it is justified or not. That little episode where you refused a Webster's definition so you could call Leo wrong showed your intentions as if we didn't already know. You're becoming just as big a R-CALF recruiter as SH!
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
You wondered why I said you put Mike in a judges position? Here you are calling Bullard a liar because "Mike said". :roll:

If you were truly interested in the truth, you would get your info from the OIE, since that is what Bullard was talking about. Just because you can't find it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The problem is, you're not interested in facts, you're just wanting to lamblast R-CALF whether it is justified or not. That little episode where you refused a Webster's definition so you could call Leo wrong showed your intentions as if we didn't already know. You're becoming just as big a R-CALF recruiter as SH!

If you want to defend Bill and his claimed recommadation exsists why don't you bring it instead of the what you have posted here? Wouldn't that clear this all up?
While I go search the hundreds of pages on OIE again to find that it isn't there. I thought I would post what the USDA says.
BSE Surveillance
An active BSE surveillance program has existed in the United States since May 1990, in order to safeguard the American cattle population. The U.S. surveillance program is an interagency effort coordinated by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and includes both active and passive surveillance. It is designed to prevent infection and transmission of foreign animal diseases like BSE, or any TSE, from infecting U.S. cattle. In addition, measures are in place to quickly detect and respond to an outbreak. The BSE surveillance program was enhanced when the first BSE outbreak occurred in the United States in 2003. 6
Surveillance tests are not food safety tests and can only be used for the purpose of statistical analysis. Current detection methodology is limited and OIE suggest that the likelihood of detecting BSE in cattle varies depending on the characteristics of the subpopulation. The closer the animal is to exhibiting clinical BSE symptoms, the better the likelihood of detection. Currently, positive cases have been detected three months prior to clinical signs; however, given that the incubation period is about 4 years long much time exists when infected cattle are tested and false negatives result. According to European data, it is 100 times more likely that BSE will be detected in cattle exhibiting clinical signs of BSE, than in downers on farms; and is 5,000 to 10,000 more times than in healthy 30 month old cattle at slaughter. Another estimate is that the current test methodology has a false negative test rate of 92%, meaning in a population of 100 clinically normal BSE infected adult cattle, 92 would test negative even though infected. 6
The U.S. surveillance strategy is to regionally represent the distribution of adult cattle across the nation. The regions are based on the movement of cattle going to slaughter. Each region has different surveillance goals and is treated as an individual country. A scientific approach allows for uniform surveillance across the nation while representing regional differences. Nationally, 12, 500 samples are tested in order to detect one BSE-infected cattle per million. This approach is widely accepted around the world. The U.S. has an adult cattle population of 45 million so if it is assumed that one per million is BSE-infected, than forty-five U.S. cattle would be infected. However, in the accuracy of random sampling of adult animals, three million cattle would need to be tested in order to obtain a 95 percent confidence level. 6

The U.S. has an active targeted surveillance plan rather than a random sampling strategy in order to establish a more efficient and effective survey. APHIS focuses on the higher risk population of cattle, which are not going to slaughter. BSE-infected cattle have never been detected under the age of 20 months and 88% of the U.S. slaughter population is under this age. The higher risk population is those most likely to have been exposed to the BSE and it is this population where the disease will more likely be detected. European surveillance testing has defined non-ambulatory cattle as high risk. A survey conducted by the American Association of Bovine Practitioners estimated that 195,000 non-ambulatory cattle exist in the U.S. If it is assumed that 45 BSE-infected cattle can potentially be detected in a high risk population of 195,000, the level of disease that is detected is 0.023 percent. According to a statistical analysis formulation by Cannon and Roe, a sample size of 12,500 is necessary to detect BSE at a prevalence of 0.023 percent. The national sample size of 12,500 established to detect one BSE-infected cattle per million is based upon scientific risk analysis methods. In addition, the OIE has established international surveillance standards for the number of samples to be tested each year within a country. In the last five years, the U.S. has exceeded the OIE recommendation of 433 samples per year.6
The first part I highlighted was for anyone that doen't know why the US and Canada don't use BSE testing for food safety. The second highlighted part is for you Sandhusker now where does it say that the USDA has tested 187,000 head consecutively. The USDA SAID the US has exceeded the OIE recommendations of 433 samples in the last five years but Bill said the OIE required 187000 head consecutively regardless of herd size. Now the test numbers do back up the USDA claims but are far from backing Bills. So come on Sandhusker discredit me some more in your attempts to distract attention away from Bills little story. :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

Tommy

Well-known member
Sandhusker...Tam, www.r-calfusa.com. Ask for Bill.

Too much to ask for Sandhusker, she had rather bitch about Bill and R-CALF than to go to the source.
 
Top