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

North Dakota Firm Recalls Whole Beef Head Products BSE

flounder

Well-known member
North Dakota Firm Recalls Whole Beef Head Products That Contain Prohibited Materials

Recall Release CLASS II RECALL FSIS-RC-023-2010 HEALTH RISK: LOW

Congressional and Public Affairs (202) 720-9113 Catherine Cochran

WASHINGTON, April 5, 2010 - North American Bison Co-Op, a New Rockford, N.D., establishment is recalling approximately 25,000 pounds of whole beef heads containing tongues that may not have had the tonsils completely removed, which is not compliant with regulations that require the removal of tonsils from cattle of all ages, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today.

Tonsils are considered a specified risk material (SRM) and must be removed from cattle of all ages in accordance with FSIS regulations. SRMs are tissues that are known to contain the infective agent in cattle infected with Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), as well as materials that are closely associated with these potentially infective tissues. Therefore, FSIS prohibits SRMs from use as human food to minimize potential human exposure to the BSE agent.

The product subject to recall includes: Various weight cases of "Beef Heads KEEP FROZEN." Each case bears the establishment number "EST. 18859" inside the USDA mark of inspection and a case code number "16999." "North Dakota Natural Beef" is printed in the bottom left-hand corner of each label.

The recalled products were produced between June 25, 2009, and February 19, 2010. These products were shipped to distribution centers in Md., Mich., and Minn. for further sale.

The problem was discovered during FSIS inspection activities at the establishment. FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer available to consumers.

Media with questions about the recall should contact Philip Wicke, Vice President of Operations, at (701) 356-7723. Consumers with questions about the recall should contact Jeremy Anderson, Director of Customer Service, at (952) 545-2495.

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov. The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in English and Spanish and can be reached from l0 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday through Friday. Recorded food safety messages are available 24 hours a day. #



http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_023_2010_Release/index.asp



Monday, April 5, 2010

Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE April 5, 2010

March 2010 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE April 5, 2010

To help prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalophathy (BSE) through feed in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) implemented a final rule that prohibits the use of most mammalian protein in feeds for ruminant animals. This rule, Title 21 Part 589.2000 of the Code of Federal Regulations, here called the Ruminant Feed Ban, became effective on August 4, 1997.

A second rule, Title 21 Part 589.2001 of the Code of Federal Regulations, here called the Enhanced Feed Ban, became effective on April 27, 2009. This rule prohibits the use of certain cattle-derived materials in all animal feed. The BSE inspection report form has been revised and is being used for determining compliance with both the ruminant feed ban and the enhanced feed ban. The inspection results summarized below reflect the compliance status for both rules.

The following is an update on FDA enforcement activities regarding the ruminant feed ban. FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) has summarized results of those inspections that have been entered into FDA's inspection database as of March 6, 2010. As of March 6, 2010, FDA had received over 76,000 inspection reports since 1997. Approximately 72% of inspections were conducted by State feed control officials, with the remainder conducted by FDA officials.

Inspections conducted by FDA or State investigators are classified to reflect the compliance status at the time of the inspection based upon the objectionable conditions documented. These inspection conclusions are reported as Official Action Indicated (OAI), Voluntary Action Indicated (VAI), or No Action Indicated (NAI). A firm’s compliance status and whether the firm handles prohibited material is based on its most recent inspection.

An OAI inspection classification occurs when significant objectionable conditions or practices were found and regulatory sanctions are warranted in order to address the establishment's lack of compliance with the regulation. An example of an OAI inspection classification would be findings of manufacturing procedures insufficient to ensure that ruminant feed is not contaminated with prohibited material. Inspections classified with OAI violations will be promptly re-inspected following the regulatory sanctions to determine whether adequate corrective actions have been implemented.

A VAI inspection classification occurs when objectionable conditions or practices were found that do not meet the threshold of regulatory significance, but do warrant advisory actions to inform the establishment of findings that should be voluntarily corrected. Inspections classified with VAI violations are more technical violations of the Ruminant Feed Ban. These include provisions such as minor recordkeeping lapses and conditions involving non-ruminant feeds.

An NAI inspection classification occurs when no objectionable conditions or practices were found during the inspection or the significance of the documented objectionable conditions found does not justify further actions.

The results to date are reported here both by “segment of industry” and “in total”. NOTE – A single firm can operate as more than one firm type. As a result, the categories of the different industry segments are not mutually exclusive.

RENDERERS These firms are the first to handle and process (i.e., render) animal proteins and to send these processed materials to feed mills and/or protein blenders for use as a feed ingredient.

Number of active firms inspected – 270 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 153 (57% of those active firms inspected) Of the 153 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 4 firms (2.6%) were classified as VAI LICENSED FEED MILLS FDA licenses these feed mills to produce medicated feed products. The license is required to manufacture and distribute feed using certain potent drug products, usually those requiring some pre-slaughter withdrawal time. This licensing has nothing to do with handling prohibited materials under the feed ban regulation. A medicated feed license from FDA is not required to handle materials prohibited under the Ruminant Feed Ban.

Number of active firms inspected – 1,041 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 485 (47% of those active firms inspected) Of the 485 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 1 firm (0.2%) was classified as OAI 2 firms (0.4 %) were classified as VAI FEED MILLS NOT LICENSED BY FDA These feed mills are not licensed by the FDA to produce medicated feeds.

Number of active firms inspected – 5,276 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 2,705 (51% of those active firms inspected) Of the 2,705 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 21 firms (0.8%) were classified as VAI PROTEIN BLENDERS These firms blend rendered animal protein for the purpose of producing quality feed ingredients that will be used by feed mills.

Number of active firms inspected – 336 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 155 (46% of those active firms inspected) Of the 155 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI 1 firm (0.6%) was classified as VAI RENDERERS, FEED MILLS, AND PROTEIN BLENDERS MANUFACTURING WITH PROHIBITED MATERIAL This category includes only those firms that actually use prohibited material to manufacture, process, or blend animal feed or feed ingredients.

Total number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders inspected – 6,671 Number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials – 460 (6.9%) Of the 460 active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 1 firm (0.2%) was classified as OAI 9 firms (2.0%) were classified as VAI OTHER FIRMS INSPECTED Examples of such firms include ruminant feeders, on-farm mixers, pet food manufacturers, animal feed salvagers, distributors, retailers, and animal feed transporters.

Number of active firms inspected – 24,675 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 8,285 (34% of those active firms inspected) Of the 8,285 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 1 firm (0%) was classified as OAI 106 firms (1.5%) were classified as VAI TOTAL FIRMS Note that a single firm can be reported under more than one firm category; therefore, the summation of the individual OAI/VAI firm categories will be more than the actual total number of OAI/VAI firms, as presented below.

Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 29,535 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 8,885 (30% of those active firms inspected) Of the 8,885 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 1 firm (0.01%) was classified as OAI 192 firms (2.2%) were classified as VAI

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm207367.htm

Please understand, there are literally 100s and 100s of tonnage of banned mad cow protein in commerce in the USA to 2010. One OAI could contain tonnages of mad cow feed in commerce to many states.

THE August 4, 1997 was a voluntary and partial feed ban.

IT was nothing more than ink on paper. ...TSS

10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. BLOOD LACED MBM IN COMMERCE USA 2007

Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINES -- CLASS II

snip...

for those interested, please see full text here ;


http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/04/update-on-feed-enforcement-activities.html


http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/


To date the OIE/WAHO assumes that the human and animal health standards set out in the BSE chapter for classical BSE (C-Type) applies to all forms of BSE which include the H-type and L-type atypical forms. This assumption is scientifically not completely justified and accumulating evidence suggests that this may in fact not be the case. Molecular characterization and the spatial distribution pattern of histopathologic lesions and immunohistochemistry (IHC) signals are used to identify and characterize atypical BSE. Both the L-type and H-type atypical cases display significant differences in the conformation and spatial accumulation of the disease associated prion protein (PrPSc) in brains of afflicted cattle. Transmission studies in bovine transgenic and wild type mouse models support that the atypical BSE types might be unique strains because they have different incubation times and lesion profiles when compared to C-type BSE. When L-type BSE was inoculated into ovine transgenic mice and Syrian hamster the resulting molecular fingerprint had changed, either in the first or a subsequent passage, from L-type into C-type BSE. In addition, non-human primates are specifically susceptible for atypical BSE as demonstrated by an approximately 50% shortened incubation time for L-type BSE as compared to C-type. Considering the current scientific information available, it cannot be assumed that these different BSE types pose the same human health risks as C-type BSE or that these risks are mitigated by the same protective measures.


http://www.prionetcanada.ca/detail.aspx?menu=5&dt=293380&app=93&cat1=387&tp=20&lk=no&cat2



14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases H-type and L-type Atypical BSE January 2010 (special pre-congress edition)

18.173 page 189

Experimental Challenge of Cattle with H-type and L-type Atypical BSE

A. Buschmann1, U. Ziegler1, M. Keller1, R. Rogers2, B. Hills3, M.H. Groschup1. 1Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany, 2Health Canada, Bureau of Microbial Hazards, Health Products & Food Branch, Ottawa, Canada, 3Health Canada, Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Secretariat, Ottawa, Canada

Background: After the detection of two novel BSE forms designated H-type and L-type atypical BSE the question of the pathogenesis and the agent distribution of these two types in cattle was fully open. From initial studies of the brain pathology, it was already known that the anatomical distribution of L-type BSE differs from that of the classical type where the obex region in the brainstem always displays the highest PrPSc concentrations. In contrast in L-type BSE cases, the thalamus and frontal cortex regions showed the highest levels of the pathological prion protein, while the obex region was only weakly involved.

Methods:We performed intracranial inoculations of cattle (five and six per group) using 10%brainstemhomogenates of the two German H- and L-type atypical BSE isolates. The animals were inoculated under narcosis and then kept in a free-ranging stable under appropriate biosafety conditions.At least one animal per group was killed and sectioned in the preclinical stage and the remaining animals were kept until they developed clinical symptoms. The animals were examined for behavioural changes every four weeks throughout the experiment following a protocol that had been established during earlier BSE pathogenesis studies with classical BSE.

Results and Discussion: All animals of both groups developed clinical symptoms and had to be euthanized within 16 months. The clinical picture differed from that of classical BSE, as the earliest signs of illness were loss of body weight and depression. However, the animals later developed hind limb ataxia and hyperesthesia predominantly and the head. Analysis of brain samples from these animals confirmed the BSE infection and the atypical Western blot profile was maintained in all animals. Samples from these animals are now being examined in order to be able to describe the pathogenesis and agent distribution for these novel BSE types. Conclusions: A pilot study using a commercially avaialble BSE rapid test ELISA revealed an essential restriction of PrPSc to the central nervous system for both atypical BSE forms. A much more detailed analysis for PrPSc and infectivity is still ongoing.


http://www.isid.org/14th_icid/

http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/IMED2009_AbstrAuth.pdf

http://www.isid.org/publications/ICID_Archive.shtml


14th ICID International Scientific Exchange Brochure -

Final Abstract Number: ISE.114

Session: International Scientific Exchange

Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America

update October 2009

T. Singeltary

Bacliff, TX, USA

Background:

An update on atypical BSE and other TSE in North America. Please remember, the typical U.K. c-BSE, the atypical l-BSE (BASE), and h-BSE have all been documented in North America, along with the typical scrapie's, and atypical Nor-98 Scrapie, and to date, 2 different strains of CWD, and also TME. All these TSE in different species have been rendered and fed to food producing animals for humans and animals in North America (TSE in cats and dogs ?), and that the trading of these TSEs via animals and products via the USA and Canada has been immense over the years, decades.

Methods:

12 years independent research of available data

Results:

I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2009. With all the science to date refuting it, to continue to validate this old myth, will only spread this TSE agent through a multitude of potential routes and sources i.e. consumption, medical i.e., surgical, blood, dental, endoscopy, optical, nutritional supplements, cosmetics etc.

Conclusion:

I would like to submit a review of past CJD surveillance in the USA, and the urgent need to make all human TSE in the USA a reportable disease, in every state, of every age group, and to make this mandatory immediately without further delay. The ramifications of not doing so will only allow this agent to spread further in the medical, dental, surgical arena's. Restricting the reporting of CJD and or any human TSE is NOT scientific. Iatrogenic CJD knows NO age group, TSE knows no boundaries. I propose as with Aguzzi, Asante, Collinge, Caughey, Deslys, Dormont, Gibbs, Gajdusek, Ironside, Manuelidis, Marsh, et al and many more, that the world of TSE Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy is far from an exact science, but there is enough proven science to date that this myth should be put to rest once and for all, and that we move forward with a new classification for human and animal TSE that would properly identify the infected species, the source species, and then the route.

http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/14th_ICID_ISE_Abstracts.pdf



Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America 14th

ICID International Scientific Exchange Brochure -

http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2010/02/transmissible-spongiform-encephalopathy.html



TSE

http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/



Atypical BSE, BSE, and other human and animal TSE in North America Update October 19, 2009

snip...

I ask Professor Kong ;

Thursday, December 04, 2008 3:37 PM Subject: RE: re--Chronic Wating Disease (CWD) and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathies (BSE): Public Health Risk Assessment

''IS the h-BSE more virulent than typical BSE as well, or the same as cBSE, or less virulent than cBSE? just curious.....''

Professor Kong reply ;

.....snip

''As to the H-BSE, we do not have sufficient data to say one way or another, but we have found that H-BSE can infect humans. I hope we could publish these data once the study is complete.

Thanks for your interest.''

Best regards,

Qingzhong Kong, PhD Associate Professor Department of Pathology Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH 44106 USA

END...TSS

I look forward to further transmission studies, and a true ENHANCED BSE/atypical BSE surveillance program put forth testing all cattle for human and animal consumption for 5 years. a surveillance program that uses the most sensitive TSE testing, and has the personnel that knows how to use them, and can be trusted. I look forward to a stringent mad cow feed ban being put forth, and then strictly enforced. we need a forced, not voluntary feed ban, an enhanced feed ban at that, especially excluding blood. we need some sort of animal traceability. no more excuses about privacy. if somebody is putting out a product that is killing folks and or has the potential to kill you, then everybody needs to know who they are, and where that product came from. same with hospitals, i think medical incidents in all states should be recorded, and made public, when it comes to something like a potential accidental transmission exposure event. so if someone is out there looking at a place to go have surgery done, if you have several hospitals having these type 'accidental exposure events', than you can go some place else. it only makes sense. somewhere along the road, the consumer lost control, and just had to take whatever they were given, and then charged these astronomical prices. some where along the line the consumer just lost interest, especially on a long incubating disease such as mad cow disease i.e. Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy. like i said before, there is much more to the mad cow story than bovines and eating a hamburger, we must start focusing on all TSE in all species. ...TSS

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/10/atypical-bse-bse-and-other-human-and.html



Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Atypical BSE in Cattle

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/03/atypical-bse-in-cattle-position-post.html




kind regads, terry
 

Mike

Well-known member
The rancher could eliminate this problem easily!!!!!!!

Hey guys!!!!!! Quit marketing cattle with their heads intact!!!!!!!!!

Remove the heads before sending them to market.

Short of this, what would you have the rancher do flounder? Please be specific.

:roll: :roll:
 

flounder

Well-known member
Mike said:
The rancher could eliminate this problem easily!!!!!!!

Hey guys!!!!!! Quit marketing cattle with their heads intact!!!!!!!!!

Remove the heads before sending them to market.

Short of this, what would you have the rancher do flounder? Please be specific.

:roll: :roll:



TEST ! TEST ! TEST !

TEST EVERY COW FOR ALL TSE !


Friday, August 29, 2008

CREEKSTONE VS USDA COURT OF APPEALS, BUSH SAYS, NO WAY, NO HOW

http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2008/08/creekstone-vs-usda-court-of-appeals.html


stupid is, as stupid does, and mike, i am beginning to think you can't fix stupid.



Thursday, June 26, 2008

Texas Firm Recalls Cattle Heads That Contain Prohibited Materials

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/06/texas-firm-recalls-cattle-heads-that.html


Tuesday, July 1, 2008

Missouri Firm Recalls Cattle Heads That Contain Prohibited Materials SRMs

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/missouri-firm-recalls-cattle-heads-that.html


Friday, August 8, 2008

Texas Firm Recalls Cattle Heads That Contain Prohibited Materials SRMs 941,271 pounds with tonsils not completely removed

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/08/texas-firm-recalls-cattle-heads-that.html


Saturday, April 5, 2008

SRM MAD COW RECALL 406 THOUSAND POUNDS CATTLE HEADS WITH TONSILS KANSAS

http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/04/srm-mad-cow-recall-406-thousand-pounds.html


Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Consumption of beef tongue: Human BSE risk associated with exposure to lymphoid tissue in bovine tongue in consideration of new research findings

http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/2008/04/consumption-of-beef-tongue-human-bse.html


Sunday, October 18, 2009

Wisconsin Firm Recalls Beef Tongues That Contain Prohibited Materials SRM WASHINGTON, October 17, 2009

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/10/wisconsin-firm-recalls-beef-tongues.html


Thursday, October 15, 2009

Nebraska Firm Recalls Beef Tongues That Contain Prohibited Materials SRM WASHINGTON, Oct 15, 2009

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/10/nebraska-firm-recalls-beef-tongues-that.html


http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/


http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/


The future public health threat of vCJD in the UK, Europe and potentially the rest of the world, is of concern and currently unquantifiable. However, the possibility of a significant and geographically diverse vCJD epidemic occurring over the next few decades cannot be dismissed. ...

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2003/9241545887.pdf


KEY WORK HERE IS 'DIVERSE'.

what does diverse mean ?

adjective

1.of a different kind, form, character, etc.; unlike: a wide range of diverse opinions.

2. of various kinds or forms; multiform.

1 : differing from one another : unlike

2 : composed of distinct or unlike elements or qualities

URGENT DATA ON ATYPICAL BSE RISK FACTORS TO HUMANS AND ANIMALS OIE REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE $

position: Post Doctoral Fellow | Atypical BSE in Cattle

Closing date: December 24, 2009

Anticipated start date: January/February 2010

Employer: Canadian and OIE Reference Laboratories for BSE CFIA Lethbridge Laboratory, Lethbridge/Alberta

snip...

To date the OIE/WAHO assumes that the human and animal health standards set out in the BSE chapter for classical BSE (C-Type) applies to all forms of BSE which include the H-type and L-type atypical forms. This assumption is scientifically not completely justified and accumulating evidence suggests that this may in fact not be the case. Molecular characterization and the spatial distribution pattern of histopathologic lesions and immunohistochemistry (IHC) signals are used to identify and characterize atypical BSE. Both the L-type and H-type atypical cases display significant differences in the conformation and spatial accumulation of the disease associated prion protein (PrPSc) in brains of afflicted cattle. Transmission studies in bovine transgenic and wild type mouse models support that the atypical BSE types might be unique strains because they have different incubation times and lesion profiles when compared to C-type BSE. When L-type BSE was inoculated into ovine transgenic mice and Syrian hamster the resulting molecular fingerprint had changed, either in the first or a subsequent passage, from L-type into C-type BSE. In addition, non-human primates are specifically susceptible for atypical BSE as demonstrated by an approximately 50% shortened incubation time for L-type BSE as compared to C-type. Considering the current scientific information available, it cannot be assumed that these different BSE types pose the same human health risks as C-type BSE or that these risks are mitigated by the same protective measures.

snip...

http://www.prionetcanada.ca/detail.aspx?menu=5&dt=293380&app=93&cat1=387&tp=20&lk=no&cat2


please see full text ;

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Atypical BSE in Cattle

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/03/atypical-bse-in-cattle-position-post.html


http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/


TSS
 

flounder

Well-known member
Mike said:
:roll:

We cannot test. Try again..................................... :roll:



mike old buddy, your gonna keep rolling them eyes of yours until you get dizzy. roll them all you want, it's not gonna change the facts.


you reap what you sow. ...TSS



No more US beef for Japanese meat eaters


Britain News.Net Tuesday 6th April, 2010

Japan has decided to continue to restrict US beef.

The country’s Agriculture Ministry has decided to continue restrictions that were placed on US beef during the mad cow disease scare.

US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack is in Japan to try to attempt to settle the long-running ban that has already created friction between the allies.

Japan used to be the largest importer of US beef, but stopped most imports after mad cow disease was found on American beef farms in late 2003.

US farm state senators have been seeking sanctions ever since the ban was raised by Japan.

Tokyo agreed in 2006 to resume US imports of cattle under20 months, but even now the imports are only around 10 percent of what they were at their former peak.



http://www.britainnews.net/story/620666




Japan says it has no plans to ease U.S. beef restrictions

Agence France-Presse Page 16 2010-04-07 12:00 AM

Japan said yesterday it has no plans to ease long-standing trade restrictions on US beef imposed over mad cow disease, two days before talks in Tokyo between the two on the issue. US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack was travelling to Japan Tuesday for a four-day visit in a renewed attempt to settle the long-running dispute that has created friction between the allies. But Japan's Agriculture Minister Hirotaka Akamatsu said he "has no plan to ask the government's food safety commission to review U.S. beef," even if Vilsack demands it during their meeting scheduled for Thursday.

"Asking for a review by the food safety panel would mean Japan was heading in the direction of changing its trade restriction," Akamatsu told a news conference. "Honestly speaking, I don't expect to do so."


http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=1220858&lang=eng_news



Friday, April 02, 2010

Mad cow march on parliament Australia, JUST SAY NO TO USDA AND OIE


http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/04/mad-cow-march-on-parliament-australia.html




Tuesday, March 16, 2010

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Hansard Import restrictions on beef FRIDAY, 5 FEBRUARY 2010 AUSTRALIA

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Proof Committee Hansard

snip...see full text 110 pages ;

http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/S12742.pdf



for those interested, please see much more here ;


http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2010/03/commonwealth-of-australia-hansard.html



Monday, April 5, 2010

Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE April 5, 2010



http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/04/update-on-feed-enforcement-activities.html



North Dakota Firm Recalls Whole Beef Head Products That Contain Prohibited Materials

Recall Release CLASS II RECALL FSIS-RC-023-2010 HEALTH RISK: LOW

Congressional and Public Affairs (202) 720-9113 Catherine Cochran

WASHINGTON, April 5, 2010 - North American Bison Co-Op, a New Rockford, N.D., establishment is recalling approximately 25,000 pounds of whole beef heads containing tongues that may not have had the tonsils completely removed, which is not compliant with regulations that require the removal of tonsils from cattle of all ages, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today.

Tonsils are considered a specified risk material (SRM) and must be removed from cattle of all ages in accordance with FSIS regulations. SRMs are tissues that are known to contain the infective agent in cattle infected with Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), as well as materials that are closely associated with these potentially infective tissues. Therefore, FSIS prohibits SRMs from use as human food to minimize potential human exposure to the BSE agent.


snip...


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_023_2010_Release/index.asp



see full text ;



http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/04/update-on-feed-enforcement-activities.html






Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Atypical BSE in Cattle


http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/03/atypical-bse-in-cattle-position-post.html



TSS
 

PORKER

Well-known member
1st Quarter Recalls Top 9.1 Million Pounds
by Dan Flynn | Apr 06, 2010
About 4,595 tons of meat and meat products were recalled during the first quarter of 2010, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).

Twenty-one recalls were recorded during the quarter. The largest recall for over 5.7 million pounds of beef and veal came in two stages by Montebello, CA-based Huntington Meat Packing. The first 864,000 pounds of beef was recalled Jan. 18 for possible E. coli O157:H7 contamination.

It was expanded to include another 4.9 million pounds of beef and veal on Feb. 12 because FSIS came to the conclusion that Huntington's output between Jan. 4 and 12 was made "under insanitary conditions."

The second largest meat recall was by Windsor Foods, which had to call back 1.7 million pounds of ready-to-eat beef taquitos and chicken quesadillas because they contained Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein from Nevada's Basic Food Flavors, which was contaminated with Salmonella.

The only other recall involving more than a million pounds was by Rhode Island-based Daniele International Inc., which announced recalls on three occasions that totaled 1.4 million pounds. Daniele's ready-to-eat meats, including Italian-style salami made under its own brand was coated with pepper that proved to be contaminated with Salmonella.

And while there are no known illnesses associated with yet with either Huntington or Windsor, the outbreak of Salmonella Montevideo linked to the pepper problem is the same strain that has made 252 people sick in 44 states and the District of Columbia.

Salmonella, either directly or though the HVP recall, accounted for more meat and meat products recalled than any other pathogen during the quarter. About 3.22 million pounds can be considered Salmonella-related recalls.

If only the first 864,000 pounds of Huntington's beef is counted as E. coli-related, the total that is O157-related is less than one million pounds for the quarter. FSIS lists the added 4.9 million pounds recalled by Huntington as "adulterated," not necessarily E. coli-contaminated.

Clearly there are additional shoes to drop from the giant Huntington recall. When the expanded recall was announced, FSIS announced there was an ongoing criminal investigation underway.

"The investigation has uncovered evidence to show that the food safety records of the establishment cannot be relied upon to document compliance with the requirements," FSIS said.

The criminal probe is being conducted by USDA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) with assistance from FSIS.

Huntington makes diced beef, beef burrito filling, ground beef, and veal patties under the Huntington, Imperial Meat Co., and El Rancho brands.

The first quarter included 14 Class I, High Health Risk recalls. The other seven were Class II recalls with the health risk is not imminent.

Under a policy adopted in 2008, FSIS made public the lists of the retailers who were most likely to have received recalled meat seven times. It is not required to do so for Class II recalls nor when retail lists are not available.
 

Mike

Well-known member
mike old buddy, your gonna keep rolling them eyes of yours until you get dizzy. roll them all you want, it's not gonna change the facts.

All I want is an explanattion of how the rancher should be held hostage to these situations and what he could do to prevent them in the future.

What's wrong? Can't answer the challenge?

Your nothing but a fearmonger intent on ruining our livelihood.

That much is obvious................................ :roll: :roll:
 

flounder

Well-known member
Mike said:
mike old buddy, your gonna keep rolling them eyes of yours until you get dizzy. roll them all you want, it's not gonna change the facts.

All I want is an explanattion of how the rancher should be held hostage to these situations and what he could do to prevent them in the future.

What's wrong? Can't answer the challenge?

Your nothing but a fearmonger intent on ruining our livelihood.

That much is obvious................................ :roll: :roll:



mike, my intentions are just the opposite. i am here to help your 'livelihood'. it is you that is destroying your own 'livelihood'.


i have answered the challenge many times here. stop feeding cows to cows, test all cattle, stop going by guidelines by the OIE that spread all this BSE in the first place, traceability, stop going by industry fed junk science.

you just don't get it mike, and i told you already, stupid is, as stupid does, and some times you just can't fix stupid. and this is your case. as i said above, you reap what you sow mike;



Taiwan Bans Some U.S. Beef Imports

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: January 5, 2010

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) — Taiwan lawmakers voted Tuesday to ban imports of some kinds of beef from the United States, reversing a deal the government had negotiated with Washington.

The lawmakers’ move to reinstate a ban on American ground beef and offal reflected public concern that Taiwanese health officials lack sufficient safeguards to prevent mad cow disease, a brain-wasting disease in cattle that in humans can cause a variant form, Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease.

While the United States voiced its disappointment with the Taiwanese move after it was set in motion last week, it is unlikely to have adverse consequences on relations — including American arms sales to the island.

Taiwan bought $128 million in beef products from the United States in 2008.

Long-running negotiations between the sides to drop the partial beef ban were concluded in October. Influential Congressional representatives from beef-producing states had pressed Taiwan to allow all kinds of United States beef to be imported.

But after the ban was reversed, protesters held rallies to denounce the move, and the main opposition party, the Democratic Progressives, exploited fear of mad cow disease to undermine support for the government of President Ma Ying-jeou during local elections in December.

The United States has consistently argued that its beef exports are safe. After the Democratic Progressive Party and the Nationalists announced last week that they had agreed on legislation to reinstate the partial beef ban, a deputy United States trade representative, Demetrios Marantis, and an under secretary of agriculture, Jim Miller, issued a joint statement criticizing the Taiwanese position. They said that Taiwan should carefully consider the impact that the move would have on its“reputation as a reliable trading partner and responsible member of the international community.”

Despite the American reaction, relations between the sides are not expected to be damaged. While Washington switched its recognition of China from Taipei to Beijing in 1979, it remains Taiwan’s most important foreign partner, providing it with crucial weapons systems to help it defend itself.

The Obama administration is widely expected to notify Congress over the next several months about the sale of arms promised by the Bush administration, including military helicopters, parts of a missile defense package and an initial design study for diesel submarines.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/business/global/06taiwan.html?fta=y


Sunday, April 4, 2010

USDA AND OIE OUT OF TOUCH WITH RISK FACTOR ON ATYPICAL TSE

position: Post Doctoral Fellow | Atypical BSE in Cattle

Closing date: December 24, 2009

Anticipated start date: January/February 2010

Employer: Canadian and OIE Reference Laboratories for BSE CFIA Lethbridge Laboratory, Lethbridge/Alberta

snip...

To date the OIE/WAHO assumes that the human and animal health standards set out in the BSE chapter for classical BSE (C-Type) applies to all forms of BSE which include the H-type and L-type atypical forms. This assumption is scientifically not completely justified and accumulating evidence suggests that this may in fact not be the case. Molecular characterization and the spatial distribution pattern of histopathologic lesions and immunohistochemistry (IHC) signals are used to identify and characterize atypical BSE. Both the L-type and H-type atypical cases display significant differences in the conformation and spatial accumulation of the disease associated prion protein (PrPSc) in brains of afflicted cattle. Transmission studies in bovine transgenic and wild type mouse models support that the atypical BSE types might be unique strains because they have different incubation times and lesion profiles when compared to C-type BSE. When L-type BSE was inoculated into ovine transgenic mice and Syrian hamster the resulting molecular fingerprint had changed, either in the first or a subsequent passage, from L-type into C-type BSE. In addition, non-human primates are specifically susceptible for atypical BSE as demonstrated by an approximately 50% shortened incubation time for L-type BSE as compared to C-type. Considering the current scientific information available, it cannot be assumed that these different BSE types pose the same human health risks as C-type BSE or that these risks are mitigated by the same protective measures.

snip...

http://www.prionetcanada.ca/detail.aspx?menu=5&dt=293380&app=93&cat1=387&tp=20&lk=no&cat2

http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2010/04/usda-and-oie-out-of-touch-with-risk.html

Monday, March 29, 2010

Irma Linda Andablo CJD Victim, she died at 38 years old on February 6, 2010 in Mesquite Texas


http://www.recordandoalinda.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19:cjd-english-info&catid=9:cjd-ingles&Itemid=8


>>> Up until about 6 years ago, the pt worked at Tyson foods where she

worked on the assembly line, slaughtering cattle and preparing them for

packaging. She was exposed to brain and spinal cord matter when she

would euthanize the cattle. <<<


http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2010/03/irma-linda-andablo-cjd-victim-she-died.html


http://cjdtexas.blogspot.com/2010/03/cjd-texas-38-year-old-female-worked.html


The future public health threat of vCJD in the UK, Europe and potentially the rest of the world, is of concern and currently unquantifiable. However, the possibility of a significant and geographically diverse vCJD epidemic occurring over the next few decades cannot be dismissed. ...

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2003/9241545887.pdf

KEY WORK HERE IS 'DIVERSE'.

what does diverse mean ?

adjective

1.of a different kind, form, character, etc.; unlike: a wide range of diverse opinions.

2. of various kinds or forms; multiform.

1 : differing from one another : unlike <people with diverse interests>

2 : composed of distinct or unlike elements or qualities <a diverse population>


Monday, April 5, 2010

Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE April 5, 2010

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/04/update-on-feed-enforcement-activities.html



TSS
 

flounder

Well-known member
mrj said:
Terry, where in the USA, are "cows being fed to cows"?

mrj





AS i said before, but apparently mike OR mrj are still not paying attention, one OAI can result in tons of banned suspect mad cow feed into commerce. plus, in my opinion, a VAI could lead to the same as an OAI if regulations were not followed, as not labeling pet food, and selling pet food as feed for ruminants (remember what the word ruminant means).




Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed & Cattle Materials Prohibited in All Animal Feed



Table 1

Nonprohibited Materials: These feed materials CAN be fed to ruminants.

A. The following protein products derived from mammals, including ruminants, are exempt from the Ruminant Feed Ban rule and CAN be fed to ruminants:
Blood and blood products
Milk products (milk and milk protein)
Pure porcine (pork) protein
Pure equine (horse) protein
Gelatin
Inspected meat products, such as plate waste, which have been cooked and offered for human food and further heat processed for animal feed.

B. The following non-mammalian protein products are not included in from the Ruminant Feed Ban rule and CAN be fed to ruminants:
Poultry protein
Vegetable protein
Marine (fish) protein

C. The following materials CAN be fed to ruminants because they are not protein or tissue:
Oil
Recovered cooking oils from restaurants and food processors
Amino Acids
**Tallow ** and Tallow Derivatives
Dicalcium Phosphate

** SEE Table 3 TALLOW STANDARDS**

Table 2

Prohibited Materials: The products listed below, unless from the materials in Table 1, CANNOT be fed to ruminants because they may carry the BSE infective agent. *(See exceptions on page 3)

Animal By-Product Meal
Hydrolyzed Leather Meal
Animal Digest
Leather Hydrolysate
Animal Liver
Meat
Bone Meal, Cooked
Meat and Bone Meal
Bone Meal, Steamed
Meat and Bone Meal Tankage
Chondroitin Sulfate
Meat By-Products
Cooked Bone Marrow
Meat Meal
Dehydrated Food Waste
Meat Meal Tankage
Dehydrated Garbage
Meat Protein Isolate
Distressed Pet Food
Mechanically Separated Bone Marrow
Dried Meat Solubles
Restaurant Food Waste
Fleshings Hydrolysate
Salvage Pet Food
Food Processing Waste
Stock / Broth
Glandular Meal and Extracted Glandular Meal
Tallow exceeding 0.15% Insoluble Impurities
Hydrolyzed Hair
Unborn calf Carcasses

AGR PUB 631-282 (N/10/09) Page 1 of 8
21 CFR 589.2000 21 CFR 589.2001

**Table 3**

TALLOW STANDARDS

Tallow with Insoluble Impurities level of 0.15% or LESS
CAN be used in Ruminant and Non-Ruminant Feed

Tallow with MORE than 0.15% Insoluble Impurities
AND
labeled “Do Not Feed To Cattle Or Other Ruminants”.
CANNOT be used in Ruminant Feed
but
Can be used in Non-Ruminant Feed
Tallow with MORE than 0.15% Insoluble Impurities
AND
labeled “Do Not Feed To Animals”.
CANNOT be used in any animal feed.

Table 4

Cattle Materials Prohibited in Animal Feed (CMPAF)

1. The entire carcass of BSE-positive cattle.

2. The brains and spinal cords of cattle 30 months of age and older.

3. The entire carcass of cattle that are 30 months of age or older from which brains and spinal
cords were not effectively removed or excluded from animal feed.

4. Mechanically separated beef derived from materials described in 2 and 3 above.

5. Tallow that exceeds 0.15% insoluble impurities derived from materials described in 2 and 3
above.

Rule Overview:

Title 21 CFR 589.2000 BSE - Feed Rule prohibits feeding most mammalian protein to all ruminants.
Title 21 CFR 589.2001 - Enhanced BSE Feed Rule prohibits feeding certain materials from cattle (CMPAF) to all animals.
LABELING – Cautionary Statement:
Non-Prohibited Materials: No cautionary label requirements.
Prohibited Materials: Must be labeled “Do Not Feed To Cattle Or Other Ruminants”.
CMPAF: Must be labeled “Do Not Feed To Animals”.
MARKING
CMPAF: In addition to labeling, CMPAF must be marked with an agent that can be readily detected on visual inspection.
AGR PUB 631-282 (N/10/09) Page 2 of


snip... MIKE, SEE THE DEFINITIONS REFERENCES HERE, they will help you out.


http://agr.wa.gov/Foodanimal/AnimalFeed/Publications/ProhibMatDefs.pdf



for your files, here is the definition of RUMINANT ;


Physiologically, a ruminant is a mammal of the order Artiodactyla that digests plant-based food by initially softening it within the animal's first stomach, then regurgitating the semi-digested mass, now known as cud, and chewing it again. The process of rechewing the cud to further break down plant matter and stimulate digestion is called "ruminating". Ruminating mammals include cattle, goats, sheep, giraffes, bison, yaks, water buffalo, deer, camels, alpacas, llamas, wildebeest, antelope, pronghorn, and nilgai. Taxonomically, the suborder Ruminantia includes all those species except the camels, llamas, and alpacas, which are Tylopoda. Therefore, the term 'ruminant' is not synonymous with Ruminantia. The word "ruminant" comes from the Latin ruminare, which means "to chew over again".


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruminant



we also feed cattle cervids with CWD. cervid are ;



cervid (sûrvd) Any of various hoofed mammals of the family Cervidae, which includes the deer and elk. Male cervids typically grow antlers that are shed yearly.


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cervid



Mammals, mike you can see a full list here, and what the word mammal means ;


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_placental_mammals



M A M M A L I A N P R O T E I N F E E D I N G B A N


(this is not and has not taken place in the USA...TSS)


http://aafco.org/Portals/0/Public/BSE_aafco_brochure.pdf





IN my opinion, I believe a total mammalian feed ban (NOT PARTIAL), is warranted, especially here in the USA. we have CWD in cervid (two documented strains to date), we have atypical and typical Scrapie in sheep and Scrapie in goats, BSE and atypical BSE here in the USA (you can kid yourself, and roll your eyes all you want on the documented home grown c-BSE issue i.e. the stumbling and staggering first Tejas highly probably was mad cow). WE have TME in mink (two documented strains to date), and nobody is looking at TSE in the feline and or canine species, and you know why. because all this is fed back to livestock for human and animal consumption over the years, decades. we also have many TSE strains in humans. daaaaaaaaaa.



SO, back to my post, and i am sure you can see where 'cows are still being fed to cows'.





>>> An OAI inspection classification occurs when significant objectionable conditions or practices were found and regulatory sanctions are warranted in order to address the establishment's lack of compliance with the regulation. An example of an OAI inspection classification would be findings of manufacturing procedures insufficient to ensure that ruminant feed is not contaminated with prohibited material. Inspections classified with OAI violations will be promptly re-inspected following the regulatory sanctions to determine whether adequate corrective actions have been implemented. <<<



snip...


Number of active firms inspected – 1,041 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 485 (47% of those active firms inspected) Of the 485 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 1 firm (0.2%) was classified as OAI


snip...

Total number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders inspected – 6,671 Number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials – 460 (6.9%) Of the 460 active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 1 firm (0.2%) was classified as OAI

snip...

Number of active firms inspected – 24,675 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 8,285 (34% of those active firms inspected) Of the 8,285 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 1 firm (0%) was classified as OAI

snip...

Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 29,535 Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 8,885 (30% of those active firms inspected) Of the 8,885 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that: 1 firm (0.01%) was classified as OAI



http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm207367.htm




SRMS to humans too still ;



North Dakota Firm Recalls Whole Beef Head Products That Contain Prohibited Materials

Recall Release CLASS II RECALL FSIS-RC-023-2010 HEALTH RISK: LOW

Congressional and Public Affairs (202) 720-9113 Catherine Cochran

WASHINGTON, April 5, 2010 - North American Bison Co-Op, a New Rockford, N.D., establishment is recalling approximately 25,000 pounds of whole beef heads containing tongues that may not have had the tonsils completely removed, which is not compliant with regulations that require the removal of tonsils from cattle of all ages, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today.

Tonsils are considered a specified risk material (SRM) and must be removed from cattle of all ages in accordance with FSIS regulations. SRMs are tissues that are known to contain the infective agent in cattle infected with Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), as well as materials that are closely associated with these potentially infective tissues. Therefore, FSIS prohibits SRMs from use as human food to minimize potential human exposure to the BSE agent.



snip...




http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_023_2010_Release/index.asp



Monday, April 5, 2010

Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE April 5, 2010



http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm207367.htm



please see full text ;



http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm207367.htm



http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/04/update-on-feed-enforcement-activities.html



for example, one bad apple equals how much banned potential mad cow protein in commerce, and this is what i am talking about, where simply a mislabeling i.e. VAI could lead too, much less a OAI. ...


Friday, September 4, 2009

FOIA REQUEST ON FEED RECALL PRODUCT 429,128 lbs. feed for ruminant animals may have been contaminated with prohibited material Recall # V-258-2009

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/09/foia-request-on-feed-recall-product.html



and all this was confirmed here ;


C O N F I R M E D

----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." To: Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 9:25 PM Subject: [BSE-L] re-FOIA REQUEST ON FEED RECALL PRODUCT contaminated with prohibited material Recall # V-258-2009 and Recall # V-256-2009

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/11/re-foia-request-on-feed-recall-product.html



more VAI ?


Thursday, November 12, 2009

BSE FEED RECALL Misbranding of product by partial label removal to hide original source of materials 2009

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/11/bse-feed-recall-misbranding-of-product.html





Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed/Adulterated/Misbranded Rangen Inc 2/11/10 USA


http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/03/animal-proteins-prohibited-in-ruminant.html



Monday, March 1, 2010

ANIMAL PROTEIN I.E. MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE A REVIEW 2010

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/03/animal-protien-ie-mad-cow-feed-in.html



10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. BLOOD LACED MBM IN COMMERCE USA 2007

Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINES -- CLASS II

___________________________________

PRODUCT

Bulk cattle feed made with recalled Darling's 85% Blood Meal, Flash Dried, Recall # V-024-2007

CODE

Cattle feed delivered between 01/12/2007 and 01/26/2007

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Pfeiffer, Arno, Inc, Greenbush, WI. by conversation on February 5, 2007.

Firm initiated recall is ongoing.

REASON

Blood meal used to make cattle feed was recalled because it was cross- contaminated with prohibited bovine meat and bone meal that had been manufactured on common equipment and labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

42,090 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

WI

___________________________________

PRODUCT

Custom dairy premix products: MNM ALL PURPOSE Pellet, HILLSIDE/CDL Prot- Buffer Meal, LEE, M.-CLOSE UP PX Pellet, HIGH DESERT/ GHC LACT Meal, TATARKA, M CUST PROT Meal, SUNRIDGE/CDL PROTEIN Blend, LOURENZO, K PVM DAIRY Meal, DOUBLE B DAIRY/GHC LAC Mineral, WEST PIONT/GHC CLOSEUP Mineral, WEST POINT/GHC LACT Meal, JENKS, J/COMPASS PROTEIN Meal, COPPINI - 8# SPECIAL DAIRY Mix, GULICK, L-LACT Meal (Bulk), TRIPLE J - PROTEIN/LACTATION, ROCK CREEK/GHC MILK Mineral, BETTENCOURT/GHC S.SIDE MK-MN, BETTENCOURT #1/GHC MILK MINR, V&C DAIRY/GHC LACT Meal, VEENSTRA, F/GHC LACT Meal, SMUTNY, A- BYPASS ML W/SMARTA, Recall # V-025-2007

CODE

The firm does not utilize a code - only shipping documentation with commodity and weights identified.

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Rangen, Inc, Buhl, ID, by letters on February 13 and 14, 2007. Firm initiated recall is complete.

REASON

Products manufactured from bulk feed containing blood meal that was cross contaminated with prohibited meat and bone meal and the labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

9,997,976 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

ID and NV

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR MARCH 21, 2007

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2007/ENF00996.html

NEW URL

http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/EnforcementReports/2007/ucm120446.htm



THIS IS A NO BRAINER, BUT FEEDING BLOOD MEAL TO CATTLE IS ABOUT AS STUPID AS FEEDING MEAT AND BONE MEAL TO CATTLE (RUMINANTS AND MAMMALS) if you want to stop all TSE. ...TSS


Thursday, March 19, 2009

MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF POUNDS OF MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE USA WITH ONGOING 12 YEARS OF DENIAL

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/03/millions-and-millions-of-pounds-of-mad.html





TSS
 

Kato

Well-known member
Who would eat the head of a bison? That just doesn't make sense.

Has anyone thought that they might be marketing them to taxidermists?
 
Top