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

Mad cow testing dispute or cover-up ???

flounder

Well-known member
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 9:40 AM
Subject: Mad cow testing dispute or cover-up ???


Mad cow testing dispute featuressome crazy bureaucratic logic



Last Updated: May 8, 2006, 05:00:10 AM PDT


A ranching and meat-processing company in Kansas wants to test all its cattle for mad cow disease at its own expense.
The Bush administration won't let the firm do it. Oh, but that's not all. If the company tries to buy the $20 testing kits, the feds will treat such a transaction as an illegal purchase of a controlled substance.

We wish we were making this up, but we're not. Talk about mad cow, this is crazy people. It's also an intrusive government abusing an old law.

In 1913, when cholera was decimating hog herds, scam artists were selling fake serums to farmers. Congress responded with the Viruses, Serums, Toxins, Anti-Toxins and Analogous Products Act. It gave the federal government authority to regulate diagnostic testing devices for farm animals.

The Bush administration rediscovered this law when the Kansas company, Creekstone Farms, announced plans to test its entire herd for mad cow disease. The company was willing to go far and beyond the government's test regimen to reassure its customers in places such as Japan.

Private companies make these test kits and there is nothing dangerous about them. Still, the U.S. Department of Agriculture says ranchers such as Creekstone Farms can't buy them.

Creekstone Farms is a victim of a much larger debate over the nation's limited testing of its beef supply. The USDA tests about 1 percent of the nation's beef cattle for mad cow disease. That sampling, the government and large meatpacking companies say, is plenty. Many other nations, especially those that import our beef, test a far greater percentage of their herds. Japan requires 100percent testing.

Creekstone Farms once sold its high-end Angus beef (no growth hormones, no antibiotics) to Japan. Now it can't because of this mad cow disease testing dispute between Japan and the Bush administration. Nor can Creekstone Farms voluntarily test 100percent of its cattle, because the USDA has cut off the supply of thetest kits.

In business, the customer is always right. The Bush administration is wrong to deny Creekstone's customers — whether in Topeka or in Tokyo — access to tested beef. So, Creekstone is suing the USDA.

The administration likes to tout "free market" solutions to big problems. Creekstone came up with a good one. It's crazy not to let the firm pursue it.



http://www.modbee.com/opinion/story/12154788p-12901166c.html





BOTTOM line, the USDA and GW et al know exactly what will happen if they 'test to find' mad cow i.e. BSE in the USA, they will find many many cases. THIS is the only reason why they dug this old 1913 law. THE june 2004 enhanced BSE surveillance program was designed 'not to find' BSE, but they accident found a few cases. i cannot imagine how many cases would actually have been found if they would have used proper BSE testing protocols and used proper testing on the 9,200 they refused to use rapid test or WB. with the terribly flawed IHC test that were used on those 9,200 animals, all 9,200 could very well have been positive BSE. AS the CDC's Prion expert said, all those tests before 2005 are meaningless...

Paul Brown CDC

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 they did before 2005 suspect,' Brown said....



http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID=20060315-055557-1284r



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02n0273/02n-0273-c000490-vol40.pdf



http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?t=132781



TSS
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
In 1913, when cholera was decimating hog herds, scam artists were selling fake serums to farmers. Congress responded with the Viruses, Serums, Toxins, Anti-Toxins and Analogous Products Act. It gave the federal government authority to regulate diagnostic testing devices for farm animals.

The Bush administration rediscovered this law when the Kansas company, Creekstone Farms, announced plans to test its entire herd for mad cow disease. The company was willing to go far and beyond the government's test regimen to reassure its customers in places such as Japan.


This has become a USDA of pick and choose enforcement- special interest treatment......

They dig up this old law that hasn't been used in years- but refuse to enforce a 1921 law- the PSA- which has been in operation and use for years.... :( :cry: :mad:
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
If you lose consumer confidence, its gone :(
Ever notice that I never say anything bad about American beef despite baiting from rcalf?
If you screw up your industry down there you will screw it up for Canadian producers as well :(
 

Econ101

Well-known member
RoperAB said:
If you lose consumer confidence, its gone :(
Ever notice that I never say anything bad about American beef despite baiting from rcalf?
If you screw up your industry down there you will screw it up for Canadian producers as well :(

The lack of critics of the current situation will not solve that problem--it may even speed it up. It is not only about consumer confidence or the perception of consumer confidence, it is about the actual safety of the food. If the results of not having a safe food supply show up for consumers, it is too late.
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
For the record I think American beef is safe and consumers are not at risk.
Its perception that could be dangerous.
All we need is for one of these vegitarian, wacko, hollywood TV star types to lead a Mad Cow massive USDA/ Packer cover up campain and the damage is done. Remember the Oprah comments?
There is lots of info <retired or fired USDA and Packer employes>out there but so far it has not seemed to have been picked up by the American media but it has been reported up here in Canada for the last 4 years.
Just my oppinion but I think its in producers best interest to lobby the American government to do some real testing. All downer cows with BSE symtoms should be tested! Packers should be heavily fined or loose their business licence if they dont test every downer animal that has BSE symtoms.
Im not sure what you have for a traceback system but you need some way of traceing that animal back fast to where it came from.
The system we have up here works okay I guess but apparently its a pain for feeders when you have a bunch of animals from different outfits mixed together. I dont work in a feedlot so I dont know if its true or not.
Im still wondering why Japan is testing Cattle younger than 30 months. I hope its because they are over reacting. Another fear is that there is a BSE test out there for young cattle but in North America we have not approved the test because we dont want to test young cattle. Sort of like how the Canadian government does not approve a lot of American drugs and medical procedures because we have socialized health care and they dont want to pay for these new expensive drugs and procedures.
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
You see if the average Joe Six pack out there gets the idea that he has been lied to by the industry or that its a big cover up and that he has been put at risk. Well IMO thats really going to hurt the industry.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
RoperAB said:
You see if the average Joe Six pack out there gets the idea that he has been lied to by the industry or that its a big cover up and that he has been put at risk. Well IMO thats really going to hurt the industry.

You are right about that. It is a no win situation. Unfortunately that is how far some of us believe the industry has gone. It will only change with pressure, however. I hope it changes before the average Joe Six pack can prove your assertion. That is worth preventing. The Creekstone denial is very concerning in regards to the credibilty of the USDA of their policy of self interest over food safety.
 

mrj

Well-known member
RoperAB said:
For the record I think American beef is safe and consumers are not at risk.
Its perception that could be dangerous.
All we need is for one of these vegitarian, wacko, hollywood TV star types to lead a Mad Cow massive USDA/ Packer cover up campain and the damage is done. Remember the Oprah comments?
There is lots of info <retired or fired USDA and Packer employes>out there but so far it has not seemed to have been picked up by the American media but it has been reported up here in Canada for the last 4 years.
Just my oppinion but I think its in producers best interest to lobby the American government to do some real testing. All downer cows with BSE symtoms should be tested! Packers should be heavily fined or loose their business licence if they dont test every downer animal that has BSE symtoms.
Im not sure what you have for a traceback system but you need some way of traceing that animal back fast to where it came from.
The system we have up here works okay I guess but apparently its a pain for feeders when you have a bunch of animals from different outfits mixed together. I dont work in a feedlot so I dont know if its true or not.
Im still wondering why Japan is testing Cattle younger than 30 months. I hope its because they are over reacting. Another fear is that there is a BSE test out there for young cattle but in North America we have not approved the test because we dont want to test young cattle. Sort of like how the Canadian government does not approve a lot of American drugs and medical procedures because we have socialized health care and they dont want to pay for these new expensive drugs and procedures.


Roper, re. your assertion that in the USA "all downer cows with BSE symptoms should be tested" seems weird to me because those are exactly the cows that have been tested! I believe the current numbers are about 900,000 head of cattle most likely to have BSE, including 4-D and some healthy appearing elderly cows. Statistically designed to FIND a BSE case if so few as one per million head of cattle has it, I really don't see how anyone can claim that USDA is trying NOT to find BSE. Truly, if every animal were tested, those who are crying "foul" at every move of USDA would claim they were using the wrong tests! Using accepted science and forgoing the hype, hysteria and manipulation would serve us all better than what some here in the USA are doing in their zeal to trash USDA, IMO. And yes, we do have a long way to go with ID and trace-back. Maybe the marketplace will have to take care of that issue, since politics is not conducive to science based action, let alone good marketing.

Well, I guess I do understand why some people make those claims. There are those in this country who want to drastically change how food is produced. They want to destroy the most efficient system in the world for producing, processing, and distributing enormous quantities of the safest, cleanest most wholesome food in the world and replace it with "Eat Locally!", "Slow Food Movement" type systems which sound far more like peasant agriculture and redistribution of people, if not elimination of many people due to food shortages. That is not to say our present systems can not be improved, but eliminating the basic structure certainly is not the way to go, IMO.

MRJ
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
Here is a link and an exerpt
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/04/12/usbse050412.html

Concerns raised about 1997 U.S. mad cow tests
Last Updated Wed, 13 Apr 2005 14:30:53 EDT
CBC News
GENEVA, N.Y. - The United States did not properly analyze two suspected cases of mad cow disease in 1997, years before it showed up in Canada and devastated this country's beef industry, a CBC News investigation suggests.


INDEPTH: Mad Cow Disease


Suspected mad cow, from a USDA video.
Dr. Masuo Doi, the U.S. Department of Agriculture veterinarian who initially investigated both 1997 cases, says he is haunted by fears that the right tests were not done and that his own department did not properly investigate whether the cow had BSE.

Doi is now retired and speaking for the first time about his concerns.

"I don't want to carry on off to my retirement," he told CBC's Investigative Unit. "I want to hand it over to someone to continue, to find out. I think it's very, very important ...

"How many did we miss?"

Doi's concerns are echoed by Dr. Karl Langheindrich, the chief scientist at a U.S. Department of Agriculture lab in Athens, Ga., that ran the early tests on one of the cows.

Documents obtained by CBC show that the samples tested by the department did not contain parts of the animal's brain critical for an accurate diagnosis.

Langheindrich told CBC that the department will never be able to say for sure what was wrong with the cow, though at the time it publicly ruled out bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

"Based on the clinical symptoms and the description given by the veterinarian, you can verify, yes, this animal had CNS, central nervous system disease, but you can't specify it in your findings further than that," he said.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is refusing to talk about the cases, saying the documents provided to CBC speak for themselves.

1997 video from New York shows stricken cow

The scientists' comments raise new questions about how the U.S. industry has been able to essentially escape BSE when Canada's much smaller industry, observing almost identical safety and testing practices, has had four cases in the past two years.

Part of the answer could be in a slaughterhouse in Oriskany Falls, N.Y., which eight years ago may have become the home of the first American case of mad cow.

Bobby Godfrey, who worked at the plant, remembers a cow that arrived one day in May 1997.

"I thought it was a mad dog, to tell you the truth," he told CBC. "Didn't know what the hell it was. Never seen a cow act like that in all the cows I saw go through there. There was definitely something wrong with it."

The suspect cow was recorded on USDA videotape, which has been obtained by CBC News. It shows the animal trembling, hunching its back and charging plant workers.

"Me and my vet, including our inspector, they thought [the cow] was quite different," Doi told CBC. "They thought it was the BSE."

Key areas of brain not tested: documents

Documents obtained by CBC News show that the U.S. government was preparing for the worst. Initial signs pointed to its first case of mad cow disease, which would have immediate impacts on U.S. beef exports to countries around the world.

But further tests on the animal came back negative, the USDA later reported.


Dr. Masuo Doi, a retired USDA veterinarian.
The final conclusion from an independent university lab: The cow had a rare brain disorder never reported in that breed of cattle either before or since – not the dreaded bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

CBC News has now learned that key areas of the brain where signs of BSE would be most noticeable were never tested. The most important samples somehow went missing.

That information was contained in a USDA lab report that was left out of the documents officially released by the department. It proves that the scientist in charge of the case knew his investigation was limited because of the missing brain tissue.

Second suspected case surfaces at same plant

With questions about the first cow still lingering, a second American cow showed up at the same plant three months later with suspicious symptoms. Videotape of that animal shows its head was bobbing and it was unable to rise to its feet, setting off warning bells for mad cow disease.

The second cow's brain was also sent for testing. Officials were later told verbally that the samples had tested negative for BSE.

Doi made repeated requests for documentary proof of the negative tests. To this day, he has seen nothing.

"How many are buried?" he wonders of other possible cases of BSE in the United States. "Can you really trust our inspection [system]?"

For weeks, the USDA told CBC that it had no records for the second cow suspected of having BSE in 1997. Then just a few days ago, it suddenly produced documents that it says proves that a cow was tested and that the tests were negative for mad cow disease.

But the documents also prove, once again, that there were problems with the testing. This time, so much brain tissue was missing that it compromised the examination.


2nd suspected mad cow, from a USDA video.
The problems were so severe that one USDA scientist wrote that his own examination was of "questionable validity" because he couldn't tell what part of the cow's brain he was looking at.

Felicia Nestor, a lawyer who represents U.S. government whistle-blowers, says she isn't surprised by what this CBC News investigation uncovered.

"There have been too many times where information or tissues or other evidence has just sort of disappeared, fallen through the cracks," said Nestor, who has been handling USDA-related cases for nearly 10 years.

"There are a lot of holes. There are a lot of holes."

Commons committee hears coverup allegations

The results of the CBC investigation were broadcast on the same day that a former U.S. agriculture inspector, during testimony at a House of Commons committee, accused his own government of covering up suspected cases of BSE.

On Tuesday, Lester Friedlander repeated a claim he has made before – that cases of BSE surfaced in the U.S. long before the disease showed up in Canada.

Friedlander, who was fired from his job as head of inspections at a meat-packing plant in Philadelphia in 1995 after criticizing what he called unsafe practices, says he is willing to take a lie detector test to prove he is telling the truth.
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
Link and an exerpt
CBC - The National - Nov. 9, 2004http://fourcounties.onlinedemocracy.ca/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=401&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
> > CBC News
Shoot, shovel, and shut up.
> >
> > Canadian ranchers have been taking it in the neck and taking it in the
> > pocketbook ever since that first sick cow was discovered back in
> > Alberta. But the Americans have problems of their own. Big problems
> > starting right here in Washington State. You might say this is their
> > Ground Zero when it comes to BSE, or mad cow disease. Moses Lake.
> > Christmas turned out to be a bit of a downer last year. This is where
> > American officials found what they said was their first case of mad cow
> > disease.
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : This is a clear indication
> > that our surveillance and detection program is working. I plan to serve
> > beef for my Christmas dinner.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : But it didn't take long for Secretary
> > Veneman's claims to be countered by whispers, even accusations, that the
> > discovery was more dumb luck than design.
> >
> > UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN : At the other end of the town.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Other end of town. So we go out this way?
> >
> > UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN : Exactly.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : And there's one guy who knows exactly what
> > happened. The man who killed the cow.
> >
> > Hi. I'm Reg. How are you doing? Good to meet you. I'd like to spend a
> > few minutes to talk to you about what happened over at Vern's Meat.
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : Go for a ride in this truck. Ever meet
> > Red Green?
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : I have, actually.
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : He's my favourite.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Dave spent four years on the kill floor at
> > Vern's Meats. Not all cows arrive healthy. The sick ones, known as
> > downers, are supposed to be tested for mad cow disease. According to the
> > U.S. Department of Agriculture, they are the only cows that need to be
> > tested for BSE. And the USDA maintains the cow that tested positive in
> > Moses Lake wasn't well. It was a downer. And that's why the surveillance
> > system caught it. I don't think so, says Dave. But let's be clear about
> > this: was this cow a downer?
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : Oh, no. That was a good-walking cow. That
> > cow could outrun anybody here.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : When the truckload of cattle backed up to
> > Vern's Meats that day, the cow in this question got mixed in with some
> > downers. But Dave insists the cow was healthy, showing no signs of a
> > central nervous system disorder, an indicator of BSE. But it got tested
> > anyway.
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : It was a fluke. A technical mistake.
> > Because I killed her on the trailer. That made her a back-door cow. She
> > went in right along with the downers. And because she went in with the
> > downers, she got tested. If I had put her in the pens, that cow would
> > have never been tested, and nobody would have ever known that that was a
> > BSE cow.
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : From an animal like this
> > one, a downer animal...
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Then Dave saw Secretary of Agriculture Ann
> > Veneman step before the cameras and declare to the world that the cow he
> > killed wasn't well, a downer.
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : I told the USDA, and the FDA guys that
> > were following me around, I said, hold it, I don't work for the
> > government. I ain't going to be part of no government cover-up. That's
> > when I went up to the front, and I saw the news crew out there. And my
> > head was just pounding. I thought, something just has to be done here.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : The last straw, says Dave, came when he
> > realized that the meat from the cow was probably already on store
> > shelves. Or had been eaten. And the government didn't seem to be warning
> > anybody.
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : I took my knives off. I hung them up. I
> > walked down the hallway, passed my bosses, walked out the front door. I
> > heard them pucker, oh, ****, he's going outside. And I walked straight
> > up to the news crew. I said, I'm Dave. I killed that cow. What do you
> > want to know?
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : The USDA is telling us we don't have to worry
> > it's not in our food supply. What--
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : It's meat. If it wasn't in the food
> > supply. Where would it be? It's meat.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Dave went public and Dave lost his job. But it
> > didn't shut him up. He got himself a computer and e-mailed every
> > government inspector he could find, telling them how the mad cow
> > surveillance system really works.
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : They wanted me quiet and this thing
> > forgotten as quick as possible and business as usual. But I kept
> > shooting my mouth off. I started seeing these guys following me around
> > when I was here in town. They would park across the street. I would go
> > uptown, they would follow me uptown. And I'd come home and they'd park
> > across the street. My sweetheart said: take your federal agents and your
> > mad cows and your reporters and get the hell out.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Dave didn't stop there. He testified before
> > state hearings twice. The inspector general of the Department of
> > Agriculture investigated. It found five people that backed up Dave's
> > contention that the animal wasn't a downer, it looked healthy. But the
> > Department of Agriculture still maintains, publicly at least, that the
> > cow was unhealthy, a downer, and that their system worked just fine.
> > There's been a number of investigations, and a lot of this stuff has
> > come out. Do you feel vindicated?
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : No.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Why not?
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : Nothing changed. All that work, and
> > nothing changed. The whole thing was, I wanted to sit down to a
> > cheeseburger and eat it and just worry about the cholesterol.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : What in your opinion is the solution to this?
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : Simple. It's so easy. Test every cow.
> >
> > ONSCREEN: Publicly, the USDA continues to claim the Moses Lake cow was
> > a downer. Internal USDA emails tell a different story. "The term
> > 'downer' was used loosely in this case," writes one official. "If (the
> > cow) had arrived by herself," writes another. "It's very likely she
> > would not have been tested."
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : In this country, it's the United States
> > Department of Agriculture's job to keep the eye on the beef. Just how
> > good is their surveillance program? To find out, I've come here to
> > Colorado to talk to a man who worked inside the system. More cows than
> > people live in Fort Morgan, Colorado. Or more precisely, they die in
> > Fort Morgan. This gigantic slaughter plant kills thousands in a single
> > shift. This is also where thousands of veterinarians and inspectors
> > across the country are supposed to carry out mad cow surveillance orders
> > every day. If you ask Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman, it's a
> > system that's been honed to perfection.
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : We have been taking steps
> > since 1990 to protect our beef supply from this disease. In the last
> > year, we have tested 20,526 head of cattle for BSE.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : I'm looking for a second opinion. But people
> > on the inside rarely speak out. The government likes to keep a tight lid
> > on controversy. Most of the inspectors and veterinarians we contacted
> > were afraid to talk to us. You Mike?
> >
> > MICHAEL SCHWOCHERT (VETERINARIAN) : Yes I am.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Nice to meet you. I'm Reg. But not this man.
> > Michael Schwochert is a career veterinarian, who worked for the USDA for
> > seven years. Listen, what can we catch in here?
> >
> > MICHAEL SCHWOCHERT (VETERINARIAN) : Bass. And...
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Medical issues forced Michael's retirement.
> > Not that he ever felt comfortable working for the Agriculture
> > Department.
> >
> > MICHAEL SCHWOCHERT (VETERINARIAN) : I never felt like I was on solid
> > ground. When I was in private industry, I was given the tools that I
> > needed to do my job. I didn't feel like I was on loose footing. The
> > whole time I worked for the USDA, I felt like I was on gravel.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Even so, he was happy when an order was issued
> > to test every cow showing possible BSE symptoms. And a year and a half
> > later, he discovered an animal doing exactly that.
> >
> > MICHAEL SCHWOCHERT (VETERINARIAN) : I notified them that we had this
> > animal, and that they needed to come and pick up the sample. Well, the
> > veterinarian that was in this area was substituting in another area, and
> > they didn't have anybody available, and they made the determination that
> > this was not a high-risk animal, and no sample was taken.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : You found one, and in a low-risk plant. So
> > what does that say to you?
> >
> > MICHAEL SCHWOCHERT (VETERINARIAN) : Well, where there's one skunk,
> > there's usually a den.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : We did some checking. And as it turn out,
> > Michael's case wasn't the only one not tested. According to the USDA's
> > own internal records, the department failed to test another suspected
> > case of BSE in California in July of 2002, and another in Georgia in the
> > same month. And then in Wisconsin, and then in Washington State. You get
> > the picture. In total, during 2002 and 2003, the USDA failed to test
> > nearly 500 suspected cows. Michael says it often left him wondering
> > whether the government really wants to find mad cow disease.
> >
> > MICHAEL SCHWOCHERT (VETERINARIAN) : Those inspectors do a hard job.
> > They're looking for the needle in the haystack all day long. And that's
> > a hard, hard job. Then if you find the needle and nobody looks at the
> > needle, then you really begin to question what you're doing there.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : And, he says, the industry quickly gets the
> > message. So if it's got a central nervous system problem, get rid of
> > it?
> >
> > MICHAEL SCHWOCHERT (VETERINARIAN) : Bury it. Burn it.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Shoot, shovel and shut up.
> >
> > MICHAEL SCHWOCHERT (VETERINARIAN) : Yep.
> >
> > ONSCREEN: In August 2004, the USDA's own Inspector General issued a
> > 78-page scathing review of the US mad cow surveillance system. The USDA
> > failed to test hundreds of high-risk cows because of "confusion" and
> > "lack of coordination." "The problems... impact the credibility of any
> > assertion regarding the prevalence of BSE in the United States."
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : It was election time in California.
> > Handshaking was in high gear. So were negotiations for an interview with
> > Secretary of Agriculture, Ann Veneman. But after weeks of requests, I
> > was told she's just too busy. But I also know she's scheduled to do a
> > little barbecuing with a California Senator. The Senator was happy to
> > invite us. My name is Reg Sherren, I'm with the Canadian Broadcasting
> > Corporation.
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : Oh, how are you?
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Not too bad, how are you?
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : What are you doing down
> > here?
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : I came down to ask you a few questions. But
> > Ann Veneman's people didn't seem that happy to see us.
> >
> > UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN : This is not an official event.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : No. Well, we're here at the invitation of the
> > Senator, and we're very interested in hearing what she has to say and
> > speaking with her for a few minutes.
> >
> > UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN : That's fine. But I just want you to understand
> > that this is not an official event.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : No. And fair enough. Thank you.
> >
> > UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN : Excuse me. Could you all give us just a couple of
> > minutes?
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : Well, I am delighted to be
> > here with Roy Ashburn. And supporting his bid for the United States
> > Congress.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Secretary Veneman, how do you justify keeping
> > the border closed to Canadian cattle?
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : Well, we are going through a
> > regulatory process. As you know, we proposed legislation or regulations,
> > I should say, to open up the Canadian border, and we expect that we will
> > complete that process in the near future.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : In the meantime, what do you say to Canadian
> > ranchers and there are thousands of them, that are going broke right
> > now? The losses are $2 billion and climbing.
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : Well, just what I said, we
> > are working very hard on the process. I understand what's going on in
> > Canada.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : Are you satisfied that your own surveillance
> > program is functioning the way it should?
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : I am. I think our
> > surveillance program is going very well. We've tested over 70,000
> > animals. We haven't found another case. That doesn't mean we won't find
> > another case.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : So what do you say to the Inspector General's
> > report that suggests that there are many holes in the system? That
> > finding this cow was luck?
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : That Inspector General's
> > report was based upon the surveillance program before we implemented the
> > June 1st program. The Inspector General has signed off on the way we are
> > now running the program. The report looks backward, with what was wrong
> > with it before.
> >
> > UNIDENTIFIED MAN : That's the last Canadian question.
> >
> > ANN VENEMAN (U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY) : Thank you, all. Thank you.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : And that was that. No handshake. Very few
> > answers.
> >
> > ONSCREEN: Remember Dave Louthan?
> >
> > DAVE LOUTHAN (VERN'S MEATS) : It's meat. If it wasn't in the food
> > supply, where would it be? It's meat.
> >
> > ONSCREEN: Beef processed on the day the Moses Lake mad cow was killed
> > did make it into the food supply. Three California restaurants served
> > the recalled beef to customers. Customers who ate the recalled beef in
> > Washington State are suing the grocery store chain that sold it to
> > them.
> >
> > REG SHERREN (REPORTER) : As for the border, well, the border remains
> > closed. For The national, I'm Reg Sherren, near Fresno, California.
> >
> > PETER MANSBRIDGE (HOST) : The CBC will have more on mad cow disease in
> > the weeks ahead, starting next week, a story of negligence, financial
> > ruin, and lost lives. Part 1 of a special Nature of Things presentation
> > next Thursday night.
> >
 

Mike

Well-known member
Thanks for that last one Roper. I had not seen that, it's a real
Eye-Opener".

This USDA bunch is doing their damndest to kill our reputation.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Kind of par for the course. They are no longer the watchdog for the consumer - that went out the window long ago. They are the watchdog for the economics of big business - protecting that holy cash flow.
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
Honestly :shock: none of you have heard of any of this stuff before?????
This isnt dirt that I dug for either. This has been all over the TV up here its been talked about on the radio,etc.
Im betting there is not a Canadian member of this forum that has not heard this stuff either on TV , in print or on the radio.
That wasnt stuff from wacko websites either. Those are both CBC links. This stuff was all on the news up here on the regular national news and on ag shows.
Anyway im not trying to bash American producers. If it hurts you, it hurts all producers north or south of the border.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
I knew that the individual who slaughtered the cow was telling a different story than the USDA was, but that's about it.

And this is the outfit the Ninth Circuit said should be given deference. :roll: :mad: :mad: :mad:
 

IL Rancher

Well-known member
The information that it wasn't a true downer cow in Washington was reported shortly after the discovery of the cow. I remember it real well, it was never reported as fact or acknowledged as such by the USDA or the plant but it was surely mentioned..

I remember those weeks quite well, the highs and lows just as I have remembered each new announcment of one found... Think I will always remember it like it was yesterday.
 

flounder

Well-known member
Dave Louthan Testimony

http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/louthan.html


STAN THE MAN 'they dont want to know, they dont even ask'

http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/08snip.ram


Stanley Prusiner - Discoverer of Prions

http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/prusiner.html


Steven DeArmond - Professor of Neuropathology

http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/dearmond.html



TSS
 

Econ101

Well-known member
With the new rules the Bush administration is pushing for federal rules on food safety not being able to be altered by state policies, the federalization of our safety system in the control of packer lackeys is very concerning.

Reader2, you questioned me on my talking about bse being used as a limit to age in the U.S. a possible planned event. With the ethical conduct coming out of this white house and the republicans, I wouldn't put anything past them. All the elements from oversizing the budget deficits to the policies that will allow such a move through federal control of our food safety are being put into place. Whether the event is planned or happens through incompetence by the current government, the result is the same.

McDonalds has a right to be concerned, but so do the rest of us.
 
Top