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

Pull the Scab

Help Support Ranchers.net:

pharmer said:
I agree totally with your premise PPRM that we will not know, at least in the short term, what the extent of BSE infection in North America is unless we test a significant number.

However, USDA APHIS and CFIA have repeatedly stated that testing does not guarantee a product is 'BSE Free' . Product could only state that they are BSE Tested. The crux of the matter is the sensitivity of the test can only detect BSE when prions reach a certain level in target tissues. Cattle must be in a latter stage of BSE in order for the test to pick them up. USDA and CFIA have therefore stated that removal of the tissue which would contain the abnormal prion from all potentially infected animals is the most effective way of protecting the consumer. Check out USDA response to R-Calf http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/r-calfstatement.pdf

The best way to determine the level of infectivity is to do what is done in Canada, which is to pay farmers, feedlots etc. to test any 4D animal (distressed, diseased, down, dead over 30 months). The owner of the cow will be compensated a token amount for calling in the vet to take a sample (who is also paid) and proper disposal of the animals is insured. In this way, cattle with the highest risk of BSE would be tested which will go a long way toward establishing whether there is a significant problem. This has been in effect in Canada since last summer I believe.
Click to expand...

pharmer- I'm not against testing everything in both countries until we see the extent of the disease- have at it... Should have been done a year or two ago except for the wishy washy indecision and inconsistency of the USDA leadership---Above all keep the consumer confidence, rather than the mixed "sound science", "best science available" , "whatever comes to mind science" they throw out----- But I do question the good of testing only 4-D's in my part of the country-- I don't think it would do much good-- anything that is looking poorly or is getting old usually is shipped long before they die or go down- the majority of cows that die are never found or when found are just bones and skin- sometimes a year or two after they came up missing....Might work in some parts of the States, but around here it would be futile and unproductive if you relied on just 4 D's........Right now at this time, we have about 900 head of cows in the valley- not one has died since fall roundup-altho one came close to meeting her maker when my cousin threatened to shoot her after she tore down 4 sets of corrals while pouring them a month ago... Most that come close to being 4 D leave long before they cost you money.......
 
I will say, I apppreciate the civility entwined in this thread. i think that when a group gets together with a solution based approach vs a blame and fear approach, it results in this. Thanks for the agreeable disagreements
 
Reader,

with our free enterprise system and ingenuity, if we had a big enough testing industry, you can bet there would be less expensive tests that were quicker and easier
 
PPRM. I think you missed my point. We are talking 3 different issues.

1. Protecting the consumer: Remove SRM's
2. Determining the level of infection: Test the cattle most likely to be detected by the test, OTM and especially 4D's
3. Keep the Canada/US border open: Test all under 30 months cattle
 
Oldtimer, you point is well taken regarding extensive ranching enterprises and 4D's. I can see that many would not make back to the yard. On the other hand, these cows would be the most likely to test positive. Even if the majority of testing was done on OTM cattle being slaughtered, it would improve the probability of finding out what the level of BSE actually was.
 
pharmer,

thanks for laying it out more clearly.

1) Protect the consumer, continue to remove SRM's. I could go along with that until we find out more about th true prvelance and have a good live test.

2) I think you would be surprised how many older cows would be tested under a labeling program that results in premiums. Given thought to this. Originally called for label BSE free, the tested, but something like Creekstone tested might be more palatable.

3) Keep the border open, My point is after reading judge Cebul's decision, and I read several times, I am not happy with testing on either side. I think paramount to bordr opening would be higher testing levels, and Ifully expect other countries to subject the US to the same., 100 % testing, I think if we can get 5-15% testing on a market funded voluntary program, we would have a better idea if we need to 100% test.

Whether it be the long road we are taking now or the shorter road we could take, I think the reality is we will have to 100% test meat bound for the export markets we truly want,
 
PPRM,
My point number 3. was tongue in cheek in that by testing under 30 months the probability of finding a positive BSE would by minimal (with the exception that Japan claims to have found a positive in a 24 month old calf).

Therefore, nothing found...no problem.

If testing all cattle opens markets (borders), then I am all for it. However, I agree with USDA/CFIA in that it is not a food safety issue but a market issue. . At the present time, with the lack of sensitivity of the test, the only way you will find positives is if you test older cattle, especially those that are showing signs of illness.
 
As far as backlog, two things. Carcasses hang in wait for a USDA grade right now. They hang in wait of aging.
Look at the time they are in the carcass cooler and at the vet station and in some plants scanner time for cutouts.
Click to expand...
 
PPRM---so nice to hear from one who does the studying, research and reading up before voice his/her opinions....i, too, am a studier and, therefore, have often read the postings without stating an opinion...i need to see PROOF...FACTS...ETC!! my heart and prayers go to every canadian rancher out there who is losing their very life-blood due to a FEW, rare cases of bse!! from the american standpoint, i can also sympathize with the feelings of protection and helplessness!! you brought up some very valid points and excellent suggestion!! i will wait, watch, read and see where we go from here...until then, god bless!!
 
Porker:
As far as backlog, two things. Carcasses hang in wait for a USDA grade right now. They hang in wait of aging.
Click to expand...

Just a note about "aging" and how long "carcasses hang in wait" for a USDA grader.....

It is standard in most of the larger US packing facilities that harvest feedlot cattle (mostly A and B maturity cattle) to have carcasses hang for 36 hours or less---only one I know of lets carcasses hang for 36 hours (they claim they can make up loss in carcass weight (shrink) in improved quality grade)---the remainder have the carcasses moving past the grader at 24 hours and then onto the fabrication floor.

Onto the issue of "aging" the vast majority of beef today is "wet" aged meaning that is ages as it's vacuum packaged not as it hangs. "Dry" aged is aging while beef hangs. In some cases it is aged so long that a mold begins to form on the backfat/outter fat of the carcass. Dry aging is very costly because of the loss of water/shrink in the carcass. Incidently in trained consumer taste panel tests, there is not significant difference in taste or preference between wet and dry aged beef!

How long does the BSE test take? While I'll readily admit that I haven't kept up on technology I'm guessing it's longer than 36 hours---which leads to the point that an animal less than 20 months has never been found to be BSE positive when evaluated by the "gold" standard BSE test--

Now on the side of the harvest of cattle over 30 months, or typically market cows and bulls--99.999% of these cattle are not graded-they are inspected if the meat will be sold for human consumption, but not graded. They are often assigned a house or plant grade but rarely a USDA grade. So what does this mean??? Well that usually these carcasses don't hang nearly as long as feedlot beef carcasses, because the packers aren't waiting for the "bloom" to come for a better grading carcass!

I hope I'm not out of line pointing this out---I spent 5 years of my life collecting carcass data in a packing plant--everyone who is beef producer should spend some time in one! I can say I don't love the packers but also have a respect for them (hopefully that doesn't cause too much controversy!)

Have a great day everyone,

TTB
 
Good post TTB, Times change and so do techniques. Most of us just know what we learned at the local abottior and not in a big packing house. I toured one in Winsor Ontario on my honey moon. Many moons ago. They chased us out when the USDA inspectors showed up. They used to Kill Kosoir cattle their. Some of the cattle I saw killed I saw the fall before go thru the sale ring in Mankota Sk.
 
TTB:"How long does the BSE test take? While I'll readily admit that I haven't kept up on technology I'm guessing it's longer than 36 hours---which leads to the point that an animal less than 20 months has never been found to be BSE positive when evaluated by the "gold" standard BSE test--"
---------------------------------------------------------
Modern tests take as little as 2-4 hours. You are right! The "Gold" standard test cannot detect BSE subclincal as the newer tests can. It checks for holes in the brain - where newer tests detect antibodies which would be indicative of prions other places. (tonsils, small intestine,etc.) One reason so few UTM's have been found positive, that was the only test in town for years.
Immunohistochemistry (Gold Standard) is being replaced with newer tests for confirmation in many countries. One reason is because it is subject to interpretation by the technician(s). The "gold standard" is not so "Gold" anymore.
 
The newest technology for OTM cattle is supposed to be installed in the plant scheduled for Lethbridge. They call it hot boning where the animal is fully deboned immediately after killing. They claim it can increase tenderness by up to 60% and the animal could in theory be on the truck heading for a production facility within 45 minutes of killing.

Try to track them boxes with a BSE test...
 
The newest technology for OTM cattle is supposed to be installed in the plant scheduled for Lethbridge. They call it hot boning where the animal is fully deboned immediately after killing. They claim it can increase tenderness by up to 60% and the animal could in theory be on the truck heading for a production facility within 45 minutes of killing.

Try to track them boxes with a BSE test...
Click to expand...

Jason:

That was my point exactly---in a packing plant time is money---just like shrink is money.

Maybe I'm wrong in my thinking but I do have concerns about the accuracy of these new tests. I hope that they are absolutely accurate with NO false positives or negatives....with all the negative press in the US about BSE we don't need much negative publicity to help the markets go down more with "inconclusive" tests.

By the way are any of you willing to use these new tests on your own operations with your "4D" cattle??? I know we don't always find them before they are deceased for quite a period of time, but I also know that many operators have cattle that they know are in poor condition before they are deceased---are you all willing to have these new test performed at your operation on these cattle?

Thanks for the info. Mike---I am always open to learning something new--that is the only way a person can "grow"--in the mental fashion....sweets have helped me grow the the physical fashion!

Have a good afternoon--

TTB
 
Jason said:
Jason from what I understand, you do not support testing all OTM animals in Canada. Are you willing to let the Canadian beef industry totally collapse because of principles? Judging by your posts I have seen I believe you are quite progressive but am afraid you are to willing to accept the status quo as the new reality of our country.
Click to expand...

Bill you are correct that I do not support testing all OTM cattle.

Here is why. Our packing capacity is already below what we need. If we hold all OTM cattle for testing, besides the fact that we can't test before SRM removal, there will be a terrible back log of carcasses hanging, creating a backlog and increasing costs of processors that handle these cattle. The test might cost $28 but the back log could cost hundreds.

We have had offers to take our OTM cattle, China would take them untested...at 5 cents a pound.

Status quo suggests we are not making headway. I think we are. It is slow and painful, but those who survive will be stronger.

For the record I am not one of the wealthy ranchers that has everything paid for. I might be one who doesn't survive.


Randy, I don't think spontaneous BSE and what we have seen are one in the same. If they were, why has feed bans in each country where BSE has been discovered reduced the incidence? Why do only animals exposed to mammalian protien test positive? I am not discounting spontaneous occurance, but don't discount feed in occurance either. We still have lots to learn, but while we learn, SRM removal takes out the small risk for consumers and keeps beef the safest food around.
Click to expand...

6 hours is the turn around time for BSE tests and that can be improved upon.

Testing is being negotitated and will happen on some age classes.
 
The tests they perform on the 4D cattle in Canada takes over a week to get results.

Are they using the Western Blot?

In a business that is heading for less than 6 hour out the door product... BSE testing everything isn't viable at this time.

Never kid yourself...they say costs will be negligible, or that the customer will pay, but all this will come back on the producer.
 
:roll: Don't quite understand what you are arguing about Jason. Is is simply offering your knowledge or what? Do you realise, as some call it, Canada's trump card, would vault us ahead of the USA in exports and secure a future for your industry.
 
Jason said:
The tests they perform on the 4D cattle in Canada takes over a week to get results.

Are they using the Western Blot?

In a business that is heading for less than 6 hour out the door product... BSE testing everything isn't viable at this time.

Never kid yourself...they say costs will be negligible, or that the customer will pay, but all this will come back on the producer.
Click to expand...

Jason I have admired your ability to often look outside the box so I am surprised you fail to see th opportunity in this as Rkaiser suggests.

Fortunately pressure from the ever growing vocal and increasing majority will soon take presedence as the border looks doubtful to open anytime soon. We will realize a different but stronger beef industry in Canada out of all this. I wish I could say the same for the US.
 
Jason,

I see you are from Canada and can't for the life of me understand your position. Your market is was dieing a slow death, maybe a bit faster one now and you are worried about plant speed????

To get something different you have to do something different. If you want to insist on the same methods, don't look for any different results.

First of all, many have pointed out quick screen methods. So the carcass has to hang for a few hours. If a processing facility can't adapt to that, they have bigger problems. This from a guy who was in food proccessing as a manager for 10 years.

Second, you talk about the cost of testing. Take a second to look at the cost of not testing. I guess I haven't researched Canadian Cattle prices, I only have taken the word of those on this board. Are they wrong??? Are you guys really getting strong Cattle Prices????

We can't test because it might interfere with plans to hot bone??? How about we can't Hot Bone because we have a situation where we need to seriously defend against concerns of BSE. Which is the tail and which is the dog????

Sorry if this reply is a little harsh. When I see a tone of we can't do anything about a situation because we might have to change what we have always done, it brings back a lot of battles I have had in several careers,
 
I just don't see the value behind 100% testing. We have proven we don't have hundreds of cases of BSE. We have taken steps to make beef even safer by removing SRMs.

By holding up efficency we would lose any advantage new markets that possibly might open up with 100% testing.

This is not a BSE issue, this is a political trade barrier issue.

The question becomes if we test for BSE for 1 or 2 customers what if a customer wants us to test for some other rare disease?

Where do we draw the line and say no we won't test unneccessarily?

Our testing still pulls any animal that exhibits signs of BSE and with on farm testing of 4D cattle we test more high risk cattle as a percentage of our herd than other countries. How much more do we need to do to?

I think the stance that this is right and enough testing sends a confident message to consumers. If we keep changing standards with no new soild information, consumers start to question if the beef industry trusts our own product.

A poll from a Calgary TV station about what should the gov't do to help the beef industry said 43% think finding new markets is best. 35% said more slaughter capacity. 17% said 100% testing and 8% said get the border open. 1700 ppl voted and Calgary is a large urban center so many would have no affiliation with ag.

I would still like to see the demand form customers that will pay extra for 100% tested beef. It hasn't been shown yet.
 

Latest posts

Top