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

Reply to thread

Message

USA BSE GBR RAISED TO BSE GBR III

Working Group Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR
III) of USA 2004 ''extremely/very unstable BSE/cattle system''

USA

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/574/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_annex_en1.pdf>

CANADA

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/563/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_annex_en1.pdf

MEXICO

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/566/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_annex_en1.pdf

Canada and the United States have been raised to level III (presence of BSE likely but not confirmed, or confirmed at a lower level) following a new assessment taking into account the most recent evidence. EFSAs Scientific Expert Working Group on geographic BSE risk assessment also evaluated the status of Mexico and South Africa which were classified as level III.

http://www.efsa.eu.int/press_room/press_release/575_en.html

European Food Safety Authority
20 August 2004
PRESS RELEASE
EFSA publishes Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) assessments for
Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Sweden
and the United States of America
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has issued today seven up-to-date
scientific reports on the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
Risk (GBR) assessments for Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa
Sweden and the United States of America. While Australias GBR level I (i.e.
presence of BSE in domestic cattle is highly unlikely) is maintained, that of Norway
has been raised to level II (presence of BSE unlikely but not excluded), Sweden
remains at GBR level II and those of Canada and the United States have been raised
to level III (presence of BSE likely but not confirmed, or confirmed at a lower level)
following a new assessment taking into account the most recent evidence. EFSAs
Scientific Expert Working Group on geographic BSE risk assessment also evaluated
the status of Mexico and South Africa which were classified as level III.
In 2003 EFSA was requested by the European Commission (EC) to re-assess the
Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) risk (GBR) for 13 countries:
Australia, Botswana, Canada, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Namibia, Norway,
Mexico, Panama, Swaziland, Sweden and the United States. Although the European
Commission did not specifically seek advice from EFSA relating to the appearance of
BSE in South Africa, the working group decided to carry out a risk assessment for this
country under a self-tasking mandate in order to allow for a meaningful evaluation of the
three other countries in the Southern African Region for which a GBR assessment was
requested (i.e. Botswana, Namibia, Swaziland). EFSAs Scientific Expert Working
Group on the Assessment of the GBR has completed to date those assessments relating to
Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and the United States of
America. The GBR assessments for the remaining countries will be finalized by the end
of 2004.
In conducting the GBR assessments, EFSAs GBR working group followed the
methodology developed by the former Scientific Steering Committee of DG Health and
Consumer Safety (DG SANCO) of the European Commission which is described in its
final opinion on GBR assessment1. The risk assessments published today are based on
up-to-date data provided by the countries concerned as well as other sources of data (i.e.
Eurostat and country export data) covering the period of 1980 to 2003.
A detailed analysis for each country is presented in the Scientific Reports which can be
found at:
http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/catindex_en.html

EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA)
Publication date: 20 August 2004

Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083)

* 167 kB Report
* 105 kB Summary

Summary of the Scientific Report

The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in the United States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientific report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle in the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge in the early nineties.

A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90's when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.

EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases.
http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573_en.html

SUMMARY

Summary of Scientific Report
http://www.efsa.eu.int
1 of 1
Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority
on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of
United States of America (USA)
Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083
Adopted July 2004
Summary of scientific report
The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the
Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR)
were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on
the GBR in the United States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more
cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientific
report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period
1980-2003.
The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle in
the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered
in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible
that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads to
an internal challenge in the early nineties.
A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE risk
countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with some
imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90's when
domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of
the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from
BSE risk countries.
EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed
that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as
there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very
unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the
BSE-agent persistently increases.
Key words: BSE, geographical risk assessment, GBR, USA, third countries

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_summary_en1.pdf

REPORT (6 PAGES)

snip...

EFSA Scientific Report (2004) 3, 1-6 on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk of
Conclusions
The European Food Safety Authority concludes:
1. The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic
cattle in the middle of the eighties. This cattle imported in the mid eighties could have
been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early
nineties. It is possible that meat and bone meal (MBM) imported into the USA
reached domestic cattle and lead to an internal challenge in the early nineties.
2. A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE
risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together
with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the
mid 90's when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing.
Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued
imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.
3. The current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed
that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent.
4. This assessment deviates from the previous assessment (SSC opinion, 2000) because
at that time several exporting countries were not considered a potential risk.
5. It is also worth noting that the current GBR conclusions are not dependent on the large
exchange of imports between USA and Canada. External challenge due to exports to
the USA from European countries varied from moderate to high. These challenges
indicate that it was likely that BSE infectivity was introduced into the North American
continent.
6. EFSA and its Scientific Expert Working group on GBR are concerned that the
available information was not confirmed by inspection missions as performed by the
Food and Veterinary office (FVO – DG SANCO) in Member States and other third
countries. They recommend including, as far as feasible, BSE-related aspects in
future inspection missions.
Expected development of the GBR
As long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains
extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically)
infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases.
A table summarising the reasons for the current assessment is given in the table below

snip...

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_v2_en1.pdf

EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of Mexico
Last updated: 08 September 2004

Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083)

* 169 kB Report

http://www.efsa.eu.int
3 of 6
Conclusions
The European Food Safety Authority concludes:
1. The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domestic
cattle. These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internal
EFSA Scientific Report (2004) 4, 1-6 on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk of
challenge in the mid to late 1990's. It is possible that imported MBM into Mexico
reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993.
2. It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported 'at - risk'
MBM (1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live 'at - risk' cattle (mid to late
1990s). The high level of external challenge is maintained throughout the reference
period, and the system has not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity
was recycled and propagated from approximately 1993. The risk has since grown
consistently due to a maintained internal and external challenge and lack of a stable
system.
3. The current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed
that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent.
4. EFSA and its Scientific Expert Working group on GBR are concerned that the
available information was not confirmed by inspection missions as performed by the
Food and Veterinary office (FVO – DG SANCO) in Member States and other third
countries. They recommend including, as far as feasible, BSE-related aspects in
future inspection missions.

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_v2_en1.pdf

* 109 kB Summary

Summary of Scientific Report
http://www.efsa.eu.int
1 of 2
Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority
on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of
MEXICO
Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083
Adopted July 2004
SUMMARY OF SCIENTIFIC REPORT
The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the
Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR)
were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on
the GBR in Mexico, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected
with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Mexico. This scientific report addresses the
GBR of Mexico as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.
The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domestic cattle.
These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internal challenge in
the mid to late 1990s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Mexico
reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993.
It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported 'at - risk' MBM
(1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live 'at - risk' cattle (mid to late 1990s). The
high level of external challenge is maintained throughout the reference period, and the system
has not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity was recycled and propagated
from approximately 1993. The risk has since grown consistently due to a maintained internal
and external challenge and lack of a stable system.
EFSA concludes that the current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely
but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSEagent.
The GBR is likely to increase due to continued internal and external challenge, coupled
with a very unstable system.
Key words: BSE, geographical risk assessment, GBR, Mexico, third countries
Summary of Scientific Report
http://www.efsa.eu.int
2 of 2

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_summary_en1.pdf

Summary of the Scientific Report

The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Mexico, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Mexico. This scientific report addresses the GBR of Mexico as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domestic cattle. These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internal challenge in the mid to late 1990s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Mexico reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993.

It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported 'at - risk' MBM (1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live 'at - risk' cattle (mid to late 1990s). The high level of external challenge is maintained throughout the reference period, and the system has not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity was recycled and propagated from approximately 1993. The risk has since grown consistently due to a maintained internal and external challenge and lack of a stable system.

EFSA concludes that the current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. The GBR is likely to increase due to continued internal and external challenge, coupled with a very unstable system.
http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565_en.html

ONE YEAR PREVIOUSLY ;

From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [flounder@wt.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:03 PM
To: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov
Cc: ggraber@cvm.fda.gov; Linda.Grassie@fda.gov.; BSE-L
Subject: Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION
TO DOCKET 2003N-0312]

Greetings FDA,

snip...

PLUS, if the USA continues to flagrantly ignore the _documented_ science to date about the known TSEs in the USA (let alone the undocumented TSEs in cattle), it is my opinion, every other Country that is dealing with BSE/TSE should boycott the USA and demand that the SSC reclassify the USA BSE GBR II risk assessment to BSE/TSE GBR III 'IMMEDIATELY'. for the SSC to _flounder_ any longer on this issue, should also be regarded with great suspicion as well. NOT to leave out the OIE and it's terribly flawed system of disease surveillance. the OIE should make a move on CWD in the USA, and make a risk assessment on this as a threat to human health. the OIE should also change the mathematical formula for testing of disease. this (in my opinion and others) is terribly flawed as well. to think that a sample survey of 400 or so cattle in a population of 100 million, to think this will find anything, especially after seeing how many TSE tests it took Italy and other Countries to find 1 case of BSE (1 million rapid TSE test in less than 2 years, to find 102 BSE cases), should be proof enough to make drastic changes of this system. the OIE criteria for BSE Country classification and it's interpretation is very problematic. a text that is suppose to give guidelines, but is not understandable, cannot be considered satisfactory. the OIE told me 2 years ago that they were concerned with CWD, but said any changes might take years. well, two years have come and gone, and no change in relations with CWD as a human health risk. if we wait for politics and science to finally make this connection, we very well may die before any decisions
or changes are made. this is not acceptable. we must take the politics and the industry out of any final decisions of the Scientific community. this has been the problem from day one with this environmental man made death sentence. some of you may think i am exaggerating, but you only have to see it once, you only have to watch a loved one die from this one time, and you will never forget, OR forgive...yes, i am still very angry... but the transmission studies DO NOT lie, only the politicians and the industry do... and they are still lying to this day...TSS

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

Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL
IMPORTS FROM CANADA

https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed

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

<blockquote data-quote="flounder" data-source="post: 40696" data-attributes="member: 650">USA BSE GBR RAISED TO BSE GBR IIIWorking Group Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBRIII) of USA 2004 &#039;&#039;extremely/very unstable BSE/cattle system&#039;&#039;USAhttp://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/574/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_annex_en1.pdf&gt;CANADAhttp://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/563/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_annex_en1.pdfMEXICOhttp://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/566/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_annex_en1.pdfCanada and the United States have been raised to level III (presence of BSE likely but not confirmed, or confirmed at a lower level) following a new assessment taking into account the most recent evidence. EFSAs Scientific Expert Working Group on geographic BSE risk assessment also evaluated the status of Mexico and South Africa which were classified as level III.http://www.efsa.eu.int/press_room/press_release/575_en.htmlEuropean Food Safety Authority20 August 2004PRESS RELEASEEFSA publishes Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) assessments forAustralia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Swedenand the United States of AmericaThe European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has issued today seven up-to-datescientific reports on the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)Risk (GBR) assessments for Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South AfricaSweden and the United States of America. While Australias GBR level I (i.e.presence of BSE in domestic cattle is highly unlikely) is maintained, that of Norwayhas been raised to level II (presence of BSE unlikely but not excluded), Swedenremains at GBR level II and those of Canada and the United States have been raisedto level III (presence of BSE likely but not confirmed, or confirmed at a lower level)following a new assessment taking into account the most recent evidence. EFSAsScientific Expert Working Group on geographic BSE risk assessment also evaluatedthe status of Mexico and South Africa which were classified as level III.In 2003 EFSA was requested by the European Commission (EC) to re-assess theGeographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) risk (GBR) for 13 countries:Australia, Botswana, Canada, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Namibia, Norway,Mexico, Panama, Swaziland, Sweden and the United States. Although the EuropeanCommission did not specifically seek advice from EFSA relating to the appearance ofBSE in South Africa, the working group decided to carry out a risk assessment for thiscountry under a self-tasking mandate in order to allow for a meaningful evaluation of thethree other countries in the Southern African Region for which a GBR assessment wasrequested (i.e. Botswana, Namibia, Swaziland). EFSAs Scientific Expert WorkingGroup on the Assessment of the GBR has completed to date those assessments relating toAustralia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and the United States ofAmerica. The GBR assessments for the remaining countries will be finalized by the endof 2004.In conducting the GBR assessments, EFSAs GBR working group followed themethodology developed by the former Scientific Steering Committee of DG Health andConsumer Safety (DG SANCO) of the European Commission which is described in itsfinal opinion on GBR assessment1. The risk assessments published today are based onup-to-date data provided by the countries concerned as well as other sources of data (i.e.Eurostat and country export data) covering the period of 1980 to 2003.A detailed analysis for each country is presented in the Scientific Reports which can befound at:http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/catindex_en.html&nbsp;EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA)Publication date: 20 August 2004&nbsp;&nbsp; Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083)&nbsp; &nbsp; * 167 kB Report &nbsp; &nbsp; * 105 kB SummarySummary of the Scientific ReportThe European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in the United States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientific report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle in the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge in the early nineties.A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90&#039;s when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases.http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573_en.htmlSUMMARYSummary of Scientific Reporthttp://www.efsa.eu.int1 of 1Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authorityon the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) ofUnited States of America (USA)Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083Adopted July 2004Summary of scientific reportThe European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on theAssessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR)were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report onthe GBR in the United States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or morecattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientificreport addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period1980-2003.The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle inthe middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been renderedin the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possiblethat imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads toan internal challenge in the early nineties.A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE riskcountries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with someimports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90&#039;s whendomestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability ofthe system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM fromBSE risk countries.EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmedthat domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long asthere are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/veryunstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with theBSE-agent persistently increases.Key words: BSE, geographical risk assessment, GBR, USA, third countrieshttp://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_summary_en1.pdfREPORT (6 PAGES)snip...EFSA Scientific Report (2004) 3, 1-6 on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk ofConclusionsThe European Food Safety Authority concludes:1. The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domesticcattle in the middle of the eighties. This cattle imported in the mid eighties could havebeen rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the earlynineties. It is possible that meat and bone meal (MBM) imported into the USAreached domestic cattle and lead to an internal challenge in the early nineties.2. A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSErisk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, togetherwith some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in themid 90&#039;s when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing.Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continuedimports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.3. The current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmedthat domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent.4. This assessment deviates from the previous assessment (SSC opinion, 2000) becauseat that time several exporting countries were not considered a potential risk.5. It is also worth noting that the current GBR conclusions are not dependent on the largeexchange of imports between USA and Canada. External challenge due to exports tothe USA from European countries varied from moderate to high. These challengesindicate that it was likely that BSE infectivity was introduced into the North Americancontinent.6. EFSA and its Scientific Expert Working group on GBR are concerned that theavailable information was not confirmed by inspection missions as performed by theFood and Veterinary office (FVO – DG SANCO) in Member States and other thirdcountries. They recommend including, as far as feasible, BSE-related aspects infuture inspection missions.Expected development of the GBRAs long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remainsextremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically)infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases.A table summarising the reasons for the current assessment is given in the table belowsnip...http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_v2_en1.pdfEFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of MexicoLast updated: 08 September 2004&nbsp;&nbsp; Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083)&nbsp; &nbsp; * 169 kB Reporthttp://www.efsa.eu.int3 of 6ConclusionsThe European Food Safety Authority concludes:1. The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domesticcattle. These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internalEFSA Scientific Report (2004) 4, 1-6 on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk ofchallenge in the mid to late 1990&#039;s. It is possible that imported MBM into Mexicoreached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993.2. It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported &#039;at - risk&#039;MBM (1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live &#039;at - risk&#039; cattle (mid to late1990s). The high level of external challenge is maintained throughout the referenceperiod, and the system has not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivitywas recycled and propagated from approximately 1993. The risk has since grownconsistently due to a maintained internal and external challenge and lack of a stablesystem.3. The current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmedthat domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent.4. EFSA and its Scientific Expert Working group on GBR are concerned that theavailable information was not confirmed by inspection missions as performed by theFood and Veterinary office (FVO – DG SANCO) in Member States and other thirdcountries. They recommend including, as far as feasible, BSE-related aspects infuture inspection missions.http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_v2_en1.pdf&nbsp; &nbsp; * 109 kB SummarySummary of Scientific Reporthttp://www.efsa.eu.int1 of 2Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authorityon the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) ofMEXICOQuestion N° EFSA-Q-2003-083Adopted July 2004SUMMARY OF SCIENTIFIC REPORTThe European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on theAssessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR)were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report onthe GBR in Mexico, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infectedwith BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Mexico. This scientific report addresses theGBR of Mexico as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domestic cattle.These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internal challenge inthe mid to late 1990s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Mexicoreached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993.It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported &#039;at - risk&#039; MBM(1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live &#039;at - risk&#039; cattle (mid to late 1990s). Thehigh level of external challenge is maintained throughout the reference period, and the systemhas not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity was recycled and propagatedfrom approximately 1993. The risk has since grown consistently due to a maintained internaland external challenge and lack of a stable system.EFSA concludes that the current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likelybut not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSEagent.The GBR is likely to increase due to continued internal and external challenge, coupledwith a very unstable system.Key words: BSE, geographical risk assessment, GBR, Mexico, third countriesSummary of Scientific Reporthttp://www.efsa.eu.int2 of 2http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_summary_en1.pdfSummary of the Scientific ReportThe European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Mexico, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Mexico. This scientific report addresses the GBR of Mexico as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domestic cattle. These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internal challenge in the mid to late 1990s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Mexico reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993.It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported &#039;at - risk&#039; MBM (1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live &#039;at - risk&#039; cattle (mid to late 1990s). The high level of external challenge is maintained throughout the reference period, and the system has not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity was recycled and propagated from approximately 1993. The risk has since grown consistently due to a maintained internal and external challenge and lack of a stable system.EFSA concludes that the current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. The GBR is likely to increase due to continued internal and external challenge, coupled with a very unstable system.http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565_en.htmlONE YEAR PREVIOUSLY ;From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [flounder@wt.net]Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:03 PMTo: fdadockets@oc.fda.govCc: ggraber@cvm.fda.gov; Linda.Grassie@fda.gov.; BSE-LSubject: Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSIONTO DOCKET 2003N-0312]Greetings FDA,snip...PLUS, if the USA continues to flagrantly ignore the _documented_ science to date about the known TSEs in the USA (let alone the undocumented TSEs in cattle), it is my opinion, every other Country that is dealing with BSE/TSE should boycott the USA and demand that the SSC reclassify the USA BSE GBR II risk assessment to BSE/TSE GBR III &#039;IMMEDIATELY&#039;. for the SSC to _flounder_ any longer on this issue, should also be regarded with great suspicion as well. NOT to leave out the OIE and it&#039;s terribly flawed system of disease surveillance. the OIE should make a move on CWD in the USA, and make a risk assessment on this as a threat to human health. the OIE should also change the mathematical formula for testing of disease. this (in my opinion and others) is terribly flawed as well. to think that a sample survey of 400 or so cattle in a population of 100 million, to think this will find anything, especially after seeing how many TSE tests it took Italy and other Countries to find 1 case of BSE (1 million rapid TSE test in less than 2 years, to find 102 BSE cases), should be proof enough to make drastic changes of this system. the OIE criteria for BSE Country classification and it&#039;s interpretation is very problematic. a text that is suppose to give guidelines, but is not understandable, cannot be considered satisfactory. the OIE told me 2 years ago that they were concerned with CWD, but said any changes might take years. well, two years have come and gone, and no change in relations with CWD as a human health risk. if we wait for politics and science to finally make this connection, we very well may die before any decisionsor changes are made. this is not acceptable. we must take the politics and the industry out of any final decisions of the Scientific community. this has been the problem from day one with this environmental man made death sentence. some of you may think i am exaggerating, but you only have to see it once, you only have to watch a loved one die from this one time, and you will never forget, OR forgive...yes, i am still very angry... but the transmission studies DO NOT lie, only the politicians and the industry do... and they are still lying to this day...TSShttp://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txtDocket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMALIMPORTS FROM CANADA https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&amp;AutoFramedTerry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. BOX 42 Bacliff, TEXAS USA <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f621.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":mad:" title="Mad&nbsp; &nbsp; :mad:"&nbsp; data-smilie="4"data-shortname=":mad:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="flounder, post: 40696, member: 650"] USA BSE GBR RAISED TO BSE GBR III Working Group Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR III) of USA 2004 ''extremely/very unstable BSE/cattle system'' USA http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/574/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_annex_en1.pdf> CANADA http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/563/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_annex_en1.pdf MEXICO http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/566/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_annex_en1.pdf Canada and the United States have been raised to level III (presence of BSE likely but not confirmed, or confirmed at a lower level) following a new assessment taking into account the most recent evidence. EFSAs Scientific Expert Working Group on geographic BSE risk assessment also evaluated the status of Mexico and South Africa which were classified as level III. http://www.efsa.eu.int/press_room/press_release/575_en.html European Food Safety Authority 20 August 2004 PRESS RELEASE EFSA publishes Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) assessments for Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and the United States of America The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has issued today seven up-to-date scientific reports on the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) assessments for Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa Sweden and the United States of America. While Australias GBR level I (i.e. presence of BSE in domestic cattle is highly unlikely) is maintained, that of Norway has been raised to level II (presence of BSE unlikely but not excluded), Sweden remains at GBR level II and those of Canada and the United States have been raised to level III (presence of BSE likely but not confirmed, or confirmed at a lower level) following a new assessment taking into account the most recent evidence. EFSAs Scientific Expert Working Group on geographic BSE risk assessment also evaluated the status of Mexico and South Africa which were classified as level III. In 2003 EFSA was requested by the European Commission (EC) to re-assess the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) risk (GBR) for 13 countries: Australia, Botswana, Canada, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Namibia, Norway, Mexico, Panama, Swaziland, Sweden and the United States. Although the European Commission did not specifically seek advice from EFSA relating to the appearance of BSE in South Africa, the working group decided to carry out a risk assessment for this country under a self-tasking mandate in order to allow for a meaningful evaluation of the three other countries in the Southern African Region for which a GBR assessment was requested (i.e. Botswana, Namibia, Swaziland). EFSAs Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the GBR has completed to date those assessments relating to Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and the United States of America. The GBR assessments for the remaining countries will be finalized by the end of 2004. In conducting the GBR assessments, EFSAs GBR working group followed the methodology developed by the former Scientific Steering Committee of DG Health and Consumer Safety (DG SANCO) of the European Commission which is described in its final opinion on GBR assessment1. The risk assessments published today are based on up-to-date data provided by the countries concerned as well as other sources of data (i.e. Eurostat and country export data) covering the period of 1980 to 2003. A detailed analysis for each country is presented in the Scientific Reports which can be found at: http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/catindex_en.html EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA) Publication date: 20 August 2004 Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083) * 167 kB Report * 105 kB Summary Summary of the Scientific Report The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in the United States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientific report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003. The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle in the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge in the early nineties. A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90’s when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries. EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases. http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573_en.html SUMMARY Summary of Scientific Report http://www.efsa.eu.int 1 of 1 Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of United States of America (USA) Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083 Adopted July 2004 Summary of scientific report The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in the United States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientific report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003. The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle in the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge in the early nineties. A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90’s when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries. EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases. Key words: BSE, geographical risk assessment, GBR, USA, third countries http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_summary_en1.pdf REPORT (6 PAGES) snip... EFSA Scientific Report (2004) 3, 1-6 on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk of Conclusions The European Food Safety Authority concludes: 1. The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle in the middle of the eighties. This cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible that meat and bone meal (MBM) imported into the USA reached domestic cattle and lead to an internal challenge in the early nineties. 2. A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90’s when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries. 3. The current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. 4. This assessment deviates from the previous assessment (SSC opinion, 2000) because at that time several exporting countries were not considered a potential risk. 5. It is also worth noting that the current GBR conclusions are not dependent on the large exchange of imports between USA and Canada. External challenge due to exports to the USA from European countries varied from moderate to high. These challenges indicate that it was likely that BSE infectivity was introduced into the North American continent. 6. EFSA and its Scientific Expert Working group on GBR are concerned that the available information was not confirmed by inspection missions as performed by the Food and Veterinary office (FVO – DG SANCO) in Member States and other third countries. They recommend including, as far as feasible, BSE-related aspects in future inspection missions. Expected development of the GBR As long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases. A table summarising the reasons for the current assessment is given in the table below snip... http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_v2_en1.pdf EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of Mexico Last updated: 08 September 2004 Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083) * 169 kB Report http://www.efsa.eu.int 3 of 6 Conclusions The European Food Safety Authority concludes: 1. The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domestic cattle. These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internal EFSA Scientific Report (2004) 4, 1-6 on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk of challenge in the mid to late 1990’s. It is possible that imported MBM into Mexico reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993. 2. It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported ‘at - risk’ MBM (1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live ‘at - risk’ cattle (mid to late 1990s). The high level of external challenge is maintained throughout the reference period, and the system has not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity was recycled and propagated from approximately 1993. The risk has since grown consistently due to a maintained internal and external challenge and lack of a stable system. 3. The current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. 4. EFSA and its Scientific Expert Working group on GBR are concerned that the available information was not confirmed by inspection missions as performed by the Food and Veterinary office (FVO – DG SANCO) in Member States and other third countries. They recommend including, as far as feasible, BSE-related aspects in future inspection missions. http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_v2_en1.pdf * 109 kB Summary Summary of Scientific Report http://www.efsa.eu.int 1 of 2 Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of MEXICO Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083 Adopted July 2004 SUMMARY OF SCIENTIFIC REPORT The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Mexico, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Mexico. This scientific report addresses the GBR of Mexico as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003. The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domestic cattle. These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internal challenge in the mid to late 1990s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Mexico reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993. It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported ‘at - risk’ MBM (1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live ‘at - risk’ cattle (mid to late 1990s). The high level of external challenge is maintained throughout the reference period, and the system has not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity was recycled and propagated from approximately 1993. The risk has since grown consistently due to a maintained internal and external challenge and lack of a stable system. EFSA concludes that the current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSEagent. The GBR is likely to increase due to continued internal and external challenge, coupled with a very unstable system. Key words: BSE, geographical risk assessment, GBR, Mexico, third countries Summary of Scientific Report http://www.efsa.eu.int 2 of 2 http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_summary_en1.pdf Summary of the Scientific Report The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Mexico, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Mexico. This scientific report addresses the GBR of Mexico as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003. The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached domestic cattle. These cattle imported could have been rendered and therefore led to an internal challenge in the mid to late 1990s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Mexico reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993. It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported ‘at - risk’ MBM (1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live ‘at - risk’ cattle (mid to late 1990s). The high level of external challenge is maintained throughout the reference period, and the system has not been made stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity was recycled and propagated from approximately 1993. The risk has since grown consistently due to a maintained internal and external challenge and lack of a stable system. EFSA concludes that the current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. The GBR is likely to increase due to continued internal and external challenge, coupled with a very unstable system. http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/565_en.html ONE YEAR PREVIOUSLY ; From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [flounder@wt.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:03 PM To: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov Cc: ggraber@cvm.fda.gov; Linda.Grassie@fda.gov.; BSE-L Subject: Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION TO DOCKET 2003N-0312] Greetings FDA, snip... PLUS, if the USA continues to flagrantly ignore the _documented_ science to date about the known TSEs in the USA (let alone the undocumented TSEs in cattle), it is my opinion, every other Country that is dealing with BSE/TSE should boycott the USA and demand that the SSC reclassify the USA BSE GBR II risk assessment to BSE/TSE GBR III 'IMMEDIATELY'. for the SSC to _flounder_ any longer on this issue, should also be regarded with great suspicion as well. NOT to leave out the OIE and it's terribly flawed system of disease surveillance. the OIE should make a move on CWD in the USA, and make a risk assessment on this as a threat to human health. the OIE should also change the mathematical formula for testing of disease. this (in my opinion and others) is terribly flawed as well. to think that a sample survey of 400 or so cattle in a population of 100 million, to think this will find anything, especially after seeing how many TSE tests it took Italy and other Countries to find 1 case of BSE (1 million rapid TSE test in less than 2 years, to find 102 BSE cases), should be proof enough to make drastic changes of this system. the OIE criteria for BSE Country classification and it's interpretation is very problematic. a text that is suppose to give guidelines, but is not understandable, cannot be considered satisfactory. the OIE told me 2 years ago that they were concerned with CWD, but said any changes might take years. well, two years have come and gone, and no change in relations with CWD as a human health risk. if we wait for politics and science to finally make this connection, we very well may die before any decisions or changes are made. this is not acceptable. we must take the politics and the industry out of any final decisions of the Scientific community. this has been the problem from day one with this environmental man made death sentence. some of you may think i am exaggerating, but you only have to see it once, you only have to watch a loved one die from this one time, and you will never forget, OR forgive...yes, i am still very angry... but the transmission studies DO NOT lie, only the politicians and the industry do... and they are still lying to this day...TSS http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. BOX 42 Bacliff, TEXAS USA :mad: [/QUOTE]

Verification: What city in Missouri has a big arch?