frenchie
Well-known member
Bse-tester check your P.m
Question for BSE tester
- Thread starter Mrs.Greg
- Start date
Help Support Ranchers.net:
Sandhusker
Well-known member
What makes some of you folks seem to think you know more about BSE and BSE testing than bse-tester?
bse-tester
Well-known member
Cowsense wrote:
All I can say to this is something that most producers will readily understand!!!
"Bull$hit!"
I have never "..called down producers - period! I have taken one or two to task that have gone out of their way to insult me, but they deserved to get a broadside from me. Also, you state that..." anyone (me) who has to rely on fear and hysteria to market a so-called testing procedure has absolutely no integrity or credibility in either the scientific or business world!"
You make this statement based upon what?
First of all, it has to be said that yes, I am hoping to have our test validated. But this process takes two years and we are still hoping to get this underway this year. Secondly, I am not going to press the facts that many scientists have been trying to get across to producers around the world that BSE is a deadly disease and that testing each and every animal is the only way to eradicate from the human food chain. Even grade school kids would agree with that. Some producers find that too difficult to comprehend due to their own lack of knowledge about BSE. They tend to only see the financial cost of testing rather than the costs of the human impact that comes from BSE.
Also, When I threaten reprecussions to Mrs. Greg, she damn well deserved it - each and every word. She was wrong to make those statement in light of her being told repeatedly that all she had to do was PM me for the info, but she chose to post public insults, as you have, based upon her own shortcomings and lack of ability to simply ask through the PM process.
Now you have climbed abord her wagon and frankly, you are free of course, to make whatever statements you wish on this board, but to accuse me of lying, making false and ridiculous claims about the state of the National herd, here in Canada or in the USA, and doing it to mislead and to create hysteria is wrong! I have never knowingly done that.
As for your buddy Bill, he wrote:
What the hell does he have to say about me not providing a shred of evidence? Where has he been this past week? I have offered it to anyone who had only to PM me. Give your head a shake Bill!! I have nevered slandered anyone Bill but I sure am getting it from you guys of late.
He also accuses me of trying to jeopardize producers with speculation and inuendo!! How on earth was I doing that Bill? Are you really that ignorant that you would make such a statement?? Back it up man with quotes please!!
All I can say to this is something that most producers will readily understand!!!
"Bull$hit!"
I have never "..called down producers - period! I have taken one or two to task that have gone out of their way to insult me, but they deserved to get a broadside from me. Also, you state that..." anyone (me) who has to rely on fear and hysteria to market a so-called testing procedure has absolutely no integrity or credibility in either the scientific or business world!"
You make this statement based upon what?
First of all, it has to be said that yes, I am hoping to have our test validated. But this process takes two years and we are still hoping to get this underway this year. Secondly, I am not going to press the facts that many scientists have been trying to get across to producers around the world that BSE is a deadly disease and that testing each and every animal is the only way to eradicate from the human food chain. Even grade school kids would agree with that. Some producers find that too difficult to comprehend due to their own lack of knowledge about BSE. They tend to only see the financial cost of testing rather than the costs of the human impact that comes from BSE.
Also, When I threaten reprecussions to Mrs. Greg, she damn well deserved it - each and every word. She was wrong to make those statement in light of her being told repeatedly that all she had to do was PM me for the info, but she chose to post public insults, as you have, based upon her own shortcomings and lack of ability to simply ask through the PM process.
Now you have climbed abord her wagon and frankly, you are free of course, to make whatever statements you wish on this board, but to accuse me of lying, making false and ridiculous claims about the state of the National herd, here in Canada or in the USA, and doing it to mislead and to create hysteria is wrong! I have never knowingly done that.
As for your buddy Bill, he wrote:
What the hell does he have to say about me not providing a shred of evidence? Where has he been this past week? I have offered it to anyone who had only to PM me. Give your head a shake Bill!! I have nevered slandered anyone Bill but I sure am getting it from you guys of late.
He also accuses me of trying to jeopardize producers with speculation and inuendo!! How on earth was I doing that Bill? Are you really that ignorant that you would make such a statement?? Back it up man with quotes please!!
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
BSE TESTER said "I was at a meeting here in Edmonton wherein a top Alberta Government advisor, openly stated that if Tyson and Cargill ever decided to use our test, then the Alberta Government and the Canadian Government would take a look at it, but not before as the total being tested per year throughout Canada would be capped at 30,000 animals - period! If that is not true government BS then I do not know what is? So who drives the government? Is it the packing industry or a handfull of advisors - or both? Personally, I think it a couple of twins called "bliss" and "ignorance!"
Already we have tested 57,768 head last year so your 30,000 comment does seem out of whack .
Already we have tested 57,768 head last year so your 30,000 comment does seem out of whack .
bse-tester
Well-known member
Big Muddy wrote:
I was quoting what was said at that meeting Big Muddy. Let me make this as clear as humanly possible -
I DID NOT MAKE THAT STATEMENT - DR. BOB CHURCH MADE IT AT A MEETING AT NORWEST LABS!!! See, I mentioned his name and the location of the meeting, so let him deny it!
So when someone of Dr. Bob Church's stature makes a statement like that, then I take it as being of some quality, yet you blame me for being the origine of it. This is getting ridiculous!!!
Is it so darn difficult for some of you to see that I am quoting some other person's statements and yet you attribute the statement to me. For crying out loud, give me a break!! A quote is exactly that - a quote!!! But, in hindsight, I guess I should have prefixed it by saying it was a quote.
I guess I thought you guys might possibly have heard of that 30,000 number being attributed to NORMAL annual testing. The figure stated by you today is, I think, part of the ongoing testing brought about by and due to the most recent cases of BSE and do not reflect the figues for NORMAL annual testing which has been suggested not only by Dr. Bob Church, but by the CFIA, at 30,000 head by the CFIA.
I was quoting what was said at that meeting Big Muddy. Let me make this as clear as humanly possible -
I DID NOT MAKE THAT STATEMENT - DR. BOB CHURCH MADE IT AT A MEETING AT NORWEST LABS!!! See, I mentioned his name and the location of the meeting, so let him deny it!
So when someone of Dr. Bob Church's stature makes a statement like that, then I take it as being of some quality, yet you blame me for being the origine of it. This is getting ridiculous!!!
Is it so darn difficult for some of you to see that I am quoting some other person's statements and yet you attribute the statement to me. For crying out loud, give me a break!! A quote is exactly that - a quote!!! But, in hindsight, I guess I should have prefixed it by saying it was a quote.
I guess I thought you guys might possibly have heard of that 30,000 number being attributed to NORMAL annual testing. The figure stated by you today is, I think, part of the ongoing testing brought about by and due to the most recent cases of BSE and do not reflect the figues for NORMAL annual testing which has been suggested not only by Dr. Bob Church, but by the CFIA, at 30,000 head by the CFIA.
PORKER
Well-known member
Dr. Bob Church, educator, medical scientist, cattleman and entrepreneur. Dr. Church is Professor Emeritus, University of Calgary; Chair of the Board, Canadian Science and Technology Growth Fund Inc.; Chair, Alberta Science and Research Authority; a Director of AVAC Ltd.; CV Technologies Inc., and PENCE (Protein Engineering National Centres of Excellence) among other appointments. He is a member of the Order of Canada. He has received many honours including: the Alberta Order of Excellence; Honorary Doctor of Law, University of Lethbridge; Olds College Alumni Hall of Fame and Distinguished Alumni Award; University of Alberta and the Growing Alberta Leadership Award. Bob and his wife own and operate Lochend Luing Ranch in the foothills west of Airdrie, Alberta.
Sounds to me that the Status Quo in the Canadain Cattle industry is bitching. Bse TESTER you are right with your remarks .Is it the packing industry or a handfull of advisors - or both?
Sounds to me that the Status Quo in the Canadain Cattle industry is bitching. Bse TESTER you are right with your remarks .Is it the packing industry or a handfull of advisors - or both?
cowsense
Well-known member
Tester; I stand behind my statements. As a cattle producer I take extreme offence towards anyone that attempts to harm MY industry in an attempt to further their own unknown agenda. Right from the time you have first posted on here you have expressed ridiculous, exaggerated, and extreme claims about BSE. These claims run totally counter to everything that the OIE and it's expert panels proclaim about the disease. As a producer I have already lost serious equity in my operation and I will do everything possible to protect my livelihood from unjustified, uncredible and anonymous attack :!:
cowsense said:
Again very well put Cowsense.
BSE Tester if you do have the names of the feed mills and people on the public forum have asked for them why don't you just click on the little PM dot at the bottom of the requester's post and give them the names would that be so hard? why all the crap about if you want them PM me and I will give them to you. If you can back your claims of them doing something illegal why aren't you willing to out these guys to the public so we all know who they are and who to go after. By keeping it all private it looks as if you don't want them to know it was you that made the accusations of illegal activities. What are you scared of them coming after you for making false accusations in public.
I may have missed it but I'm still wondering if Japan is using your test as you claim and it can detect BSE in the unine at any age, why don't they just test their whole herd and dispose of all positives right now and go back to BSE free status? According to you the cost should not be a factor when it comes to the safety of our beef. So why hasn't Japan tested their entire herd with your test and proved to the World they are BSE free by eliminating it all together?
Again you show how little you know about our testing numbers, That is not the NORMAL that is the MINIMUM QUOTA NUMBER We have no NORMAL ANNUAL TESTING NUMBERS. And anybody that cares about what WE ARE DOING would know that. Passing that number off as the normal annual testing number is supporting false information. That is just a number we have to EXCEED
The CFIA put a quote of 8000 for 2004, we exceeded it by testing 23,550 animals with no positives in that year. So why if we were to just test the quote did we test almost 3 times as many. I'll tell you why BSE tester it is because the 8000 head quota was a MINIMUM that we were to test not the MAXIMUM and the Canadian producer want to know what we are facing.
The CFIA asked us to test a MINIMUM of 30,000 in 2005 we exceeded their request by testing 57,768. Again because the 30,000 was a MINIMUM not a MAXIMUM . There is no NORMAL ANNUAL TESTING NUMBER JUST A QUOTA TO EXCEED They asked but the Canadian producer went way beyond what they asked. If we, the producers, do like we NORMALLY do we will again test far more than the MINIMUM of 30,000 for 2006 . That is the Normal you and the rest of these people should be talking about instead of implying we only test 30,000. That is if you weren't busy try to stir up some fear.
bse-tester
Well-known member
Why don't you post my comments that have offended you so much and then we will see if I have actually made some erroneous comments to cause this? You use some fierce words but you do not post those word that you say have made you so darn mad. So let us all see them!!
bse-tester
Well-known member
Tam wrote:
Tam, this statement that you posted above about me trying to stir up some fear is pure BS. Where is the fear I am spreading you speak of???? Post it!!! Be specific and post the statements in which I am trying to create fear and whatever else you accuse me of - please, I want you to do it now!!!
Not only that, but you write as if the producers actually have a choice in how many get tested!! Do you actually believe that the CFIA and the Federal Government are going to listen to people like you, or any producer who seems to think they rule and make the policies. The Government of Canada makes the darn policies, not you!!
What constitutes normal testing is a random sampling carried out across Canada that has, in the past, taken a number generally below 11000 animals per year, not including suspect cases. Due to the outbreak of BSE in the past few years, the Government of Canda, through its branch the CFIA, has decided to appease foreign and domestic markets by taking more than the generally accepted amount of animals from the National herd and having them tested. The bottom line is that although this is designed to accomplish more than one thing, such as appeasing the foreign markets, it also is designed to give Canadian producers a sense of "...a government that is openly trying to fight BSE." The problem is simple in that the producers, for the most part, can see through this smoke and mirror game the Feds are playing and see it for what it is. If the Government can provide higher testing numbers and not have any "hits" then they can appease the foreign markets, including the USA, and make a case wherein the Canadian herd appears to be free of BSE. By testing more than the norm, the Feds can make a strong case which is going to be heard in places like Washington and Tokyo.
It is one thing to accuse me of spreading fear, which I am most certainly not, but it is an entirely different matter when you are trying to convince producers that the world is all one beautiful rainbow and that nothing bad is going to happen. I consider that to be living in a bubble and most certainly a dangerous mistake.
In order for Canadian producers to have an absolute open market around the world for their product, we have to show that world-wide market place that our product going to market is free of BSE. We cannot do that with only a random sampling. Sure, it is no secret that I advocate 100% testing for BSE. It is also no secret that I most certainly do not agree with the statements like "...BSE tested does not mean BSE free!" Having said that, if Creekstone was thinking of using the currently accepted test being used by the USDA, then I would certainly agree with it. That test is flawed!! Creekstone, by the way, never made any such statement from what I have read.
Tam, I am not here to create fear. I am here to discuss openly what issues surround BSE and Canadian producers. You and your friends have attacked me because you do not agree with things I have said. That is fine and we are a democracy still, so you are entitled to your opinion. If you do not agree with anything I have posted, you could simply challenge me on it and we could discuss it further, but you chose to attack and throw rocks instead of trying to discuss things in a friendly manner. I am hoping you will try because I would welcome that.
One last thing. In early 2003, during the early days of the BSE crisis, we, my company, sent a team of Prion researchers including a leading UK scientist and a highly respected scientist from right here in Edmonton, to Winnipeg and presented our test to the CFIA. THey loved the protocol so much Tam that they actually offered us bench space in the CFIA labs. Of course, we told them that we had to get our test validated and they agreed that once it was validated they would engage it and begin a testing program to verify it here in Canada and the USDA in Aimes, Iowa, also agreed to take it on. As the BSE crisis grew, we went back to them and said that even if the test was not validated, the fact that they agreed with the science and that they new the test worked, why could the Canadian Government not introduce an emergency program wherein the Canadian Cattle producers could have a "Live Animal Test" made available to them to ensure that their herds were free of BSE. The Government of Canada was not interested one bit!! We offered to provide up to 1 million tests free of charge, but the answer was no! As you know, the cost to the industry went over 7 Billion dollars. We told the Federal Government that we could test every single cow, sheep and goat in the entire country for a lot less than that. But they were not interested and that Tam was the saddest day of my life because we offered it to the Government for nothing!!! All they had to do was provide the lab space for the testing. We even had Maurice Bardsley, the VLA Head of Archives, at Weybridge, in the UK, ready to provide us with samples of BSE infected urine and also Scrapie infected urine to use for our baseline collaborations in the lab. The VLA also liked our test so much that they presented it to the EFSA in Brussles, on our behalf.
So if you think I am here to make money and create fear, you are sadly mistaken Tam. I am here to try to make a difference in my own way and that is to try to provide a simple and proven test for BSE that will allow cattle producers the ability to sell their product to anyone, anywhere, any time!! That is why I am starting the validation process this spring. Certainly, there will come a time when a small charge per test will be inacted, but in order to get our Canadian cattle industry back on its feet, we have been prepared to provide the test to any and all who want it at no charge. The test is something that once it is accepted, then we will put a figure on it on a per test basis, but it will not exceed $10.00 per test but that is a long way down the road Tam.
Tam, this statement that you posted above about me trying to stir up some fear is pure BS. Where is the fear I am spreading you speak of???? Post it!!! Be specific and post the statements in which I am trying to create fear and whatever else you accuse me of - please, I want you to do it now!!!
Not only that, but you write as if the producers actually have a choice in how many get tested!! Do you actually believe that the CFIA and the Federal Government are going to listen to people like you, or any producer who seems to think they rule and make the policies. The Government of Canada makes the darn policies, not you!!
What constitutes normal testing is a random sampling carried out across Canada that has, in the past, taken a number generally below 11000 animals per year, not including suspect cases. Due to the outbreak of BSE in the past few years, the Government of Canda, through its branch the CFIA, has decided to appease foreign and domestic markets by taking more than the generally accepted amount of animals from the National herd and having them tested. The bottom line is that although this is designed to accomplish more than one thing, such as appeasing the foreign markets, it also is designed to give Canadian producers a sense of "...a government that is openly trying to fight BSE." The problem is simple in that the producers, for the most part, can see through this smoke and mirror game the Feds are playing and see it for what it is. If the Government can provide higher testing numbers and not have any "hits" then they can appease the foreign markets, including the USA, and make a case wherein the Canadian herd appears to be free of BSE. By testing more than the norm, the Feds can make a strong case which is going to be heard in places like Washington and Tokyo.
It is one thing to accuse me of spreading fear, which I am most certainly not, but it is an entirely different matter when you are trying to convince producers that the world is all one beautiful rainbow and that nothing bad is going to happen. I consider that to be living in a bubble and most certainly a dangerous mistake.
In order for Canadian producers to have an absolute open market around the world for their product, we have to show that world-wide market place that our product going to market is free of BSE. We cannot do that with only a random sampling. Sure, it is no secret that I advocate 100% testing for BSE. It is also no secret that I most certainly do not agree with the statements like "...BSE tested does not mean BSE free!" Having said that, if Creekstone was thinking of using the currently accepted test being used by the USDA, then I would certainly agree with it. That test is flawed!! Creekstone, by the way, never made any such statement from what I have read.
Tam, I am not here to create fear. I am here to discuss openly what issues surround BSE and Canadian producers. You and your friends have attacked me because you do not agree with things I have said. That is fine and we are a democracy still, so you are entitled to your opinion. If you do not agree with anything I have posted, you could simply challenge me on it and we could discuss it further, but you chose to attack and throw rocks instead of trying to discuss things in a friendly manner. I am hoping you will try because I would welcome that.
One last thing. In early 2003, during the early days of the BSE crisis, we, my company, sent a team of Prion researchers including a leading UK scientist and a highly respected scientist from right here in Edmonton, to Winnipeg and presented our test to the CFIA. THey loved the protocol so much Tam that they actually offered us bench space in the CFIA labs. Of course, we told them that we had to get our test validated and they agreed that once it was validated they would engage it and begin a testing program to verify it here in Canada and the USDA in Aimes, Iowa, also agreed to take it on. As the BSE crisis grew, we went back to them and said that even if the test was not validated, the fact that they agreed with the science and that they new the test worked, why could the Canadian Government not introduce an emergency program wherein the Canadian Cattle producers could have a "Live Animal Test" made available to them to ensure that their herds were free of BSE. The Government of Canada was not interested one bit!! We offered to provide up to 1 million tests free of charge, but the answer was no! As you know, the cost to the industry went over 7 Billion dollars. We told the Federal Government that we could test every single cow, sheep and goat in the entire country for a lot less than that. But they were not interested and that Tam was the saddest day of my life because we offered it to the Government for nothing!!! All they had to do was provide the lab space for the testing. We even had Maurice Bardsley, the VLA Head of Archives, at Weybridge, in the UK, ready to provide us with samples of BSE infected urine and also Scrapie infected urine to use for our baseline collaborations in the lab. The VLA also liked our test so much that they presented it to the EFSA in Brussles, on our behalf.
So if you think I am here to make money and create fear, you are sadly mistaken Tam. I am here to try to make a difference in my own way and that is to try to provide a simple and proven test for BSE that will allow cattle producers the ability to sell their product to anyone, anywhere, any time!! That is why I am starting the validation process this spring. Certainly, there will come a time when a small charge per test will be inacted, but in order to get our Canadian cattle industry back on its feet, we have been prepared to provide the test to any and all who want it at no charge. The test is something that once it is accepted, then we will put a figure on it on a per test basis, but it will not exceed $10.00 per test but that is a long way down the road Tam.
Mike
Well-known member
Give it a break Tam. Don't you see how frustrating it would be if you had a product that could help the beef industry and the dang guvment agencies were stonewalling you.
Don't say a live animal test couldn't help us either.
Sit down quietly, take a few deep breaths and calm down. You'll be fine.
I see where Dr. Neil Cashman has come out with a blood test. It is currently in the pre-validation stage also.
Don't say a live animal test couldn't help us either.
Sit down quietly, take a few deep breaths and calm down. You'll be fine.
I see where Dr. Neil Cashman has come out with a blood test. It is currently in the pre-validation stage also.
bse-tester
Well-known member
I am meeting with one of his team on Friday Mike.
As for Tam, I don't think anything will help her. She has a mission to derail any who want to conduct 100% testing and she continues to rant and rave. She still cannot get it through that thick skull of hers that I offered to provide the names of the Feed Mills ONLY if I was PM'd. But she choses to twist it as far around as she can. Tam, I can only hold out my hand so long and if you keep on spitting in it, then to heck with you!!
Lord knows I tried to offer you a handshake, but all you want to do it argue and prove me wrong. I will readily admit that some of my statements have been wrong due to the misinformation I received, but hey, what the heck, let's all shoot the messanger and remember this lady, are you so damn perfect that you do not make mistakes?? I suspect you do but you cannot possibly admit it can you.
As for Tam, I don't think anything will help her. She has a mission to derail any who want to conduct 100% testing and she continues to rant and rave. She still cannot get it through that thick skull of hers that I offered to provide the names of the Feed Mills ONLY if I was PM'd. But she choses to twist it as far around as she can. Tam, I can only hold out my hand so long and if you keep on spitting in it, then to heck with you!!
Lord knows I tried to offer you a handshake, but all you want to do it argue and prove me wrong. I will readily admit that some of my statements have been wrong due to the misinformation I received, but hey, what the heck, let's all shoot the messanger and remember this lady, are you so damn perfect that you do not make mistakes?? I suspect you do but you cannot possibly admit it can you.
Mike
Well-known member
Did I read the article right? (I don't remember where I read it) He says the test will also check for Alzheimer's? I'm fairly certain that's what it said.
Mike said:
Mike if you really want me to calm down you would stick to the topic and stop with you pain where the sun doesn't shine comments. :wink:
I have never said a live test wouldn't help
BUT if BSE tester can't stick to the truth of the issue when trying to sell us on his test, why should we believe it can do what HE CLAIMS IT WILL DO? Maybe he should think about how his credibility is holding him back.
bse-tester
Well-known member
Tam posted:
Tam, you are and have to be the only person on this board to make me laugh!! Do you honestly believe this line about not being able to detect BSE in animals younger than 30 months garbage?? Oh, I guess you do!!
The USDA, after reviewing the so-called test that Creekstone proposed issued a statement that the Creekstone test would not and could not detect PrPsc in animals younger than 30 months. If you believe that statement to be true, I will still sell you that bridge in the darn desert, HECK, I WILL EVEN GIVE IT TO YOU.
There is a chance of course that the Creekstone test was simply not sensitive anough to detect any PrPsc - period, regardless of the animals age!!
Do you know how a test actually works Tam??? Plese tell all of us.
Tell us how the test isolates the PrPsc from the rest of the matrix???? Come on Tam, you are the resident expert around these parts so get off your high horse and tell us all how the Creekstone test works or any test for that matter - even mine - and hey, I am really interested in how the test will identify the age of the animal by simply looking at the prion at the correct marker location???? Now that is something I need you to tell me also Tam. So put up or shut up!!
Can you give me a straight answer to that simple question Tam?? I very much doubt it, so let me spell it out for you in plain English!!!
TELL ME HOW A "LIVE ANIMAL URINE OR BLOOD OR BRAIN HOMOGENATE TEST" FOR PrPsc WORKS AND INCLUDE THE PART WHERE THE ANIMAL'S AGE HAS A MAJOR BEARING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE TEST? LET US SAY THE ANIMAL IS KNOWN TO HAVE bse IN ITS BODY SO COME ON TAM, SHOW ME YOUR STUFF GIRL.
YOU HAVE THE ENTIRE ROOM WAITING TO READ YOUR WORDS, BUT NO MORE THAN ME!! NOW IS YOUR CHANCE TO MAKE US ALL BELIEVERS TAM - DON'T WASTE THIS OPPOTUNITY WITH MORE RANTING OR PASTING COMMENTS FROM BEFORE. JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION, THAT'S ALL.
Tam, you are and have to be the only person on this board to make me laugh!! Do you honestly believe this line about not being able to detect BSE in animals younger than 30 months garbage?? Oh, I guess you do!!
The USDA, after reviewing the so-called test that Creekstone proposed issued a statement that the Creekstone test would not and could not detect PrPsc in animals younger than 30 months. If you believe that statement to be true, I will still sell you that bridge in the darn desert, HECK, I WILL EVEN GIVE IT TO YOU.
There is a chance of course that the Creekstone test was simply not sensitive anough to detect any PrPsc - period, regardless of the animals age!!
Do you know how a test actually works Tam??? Plese tell all of us.
Tell us how the test isolates the PrPsc from the rest of the matrix???? Come on Tam, you are the resident expert around these parts so get off your high horse and tell us all how the Creekstone test works or any test for that matter - even mine - and hey, I am really interested in how the test will identify the age of the animal by simply looking at the prion at the correct marker location???? Now that is something I need you to tell me also Tam. So put up or shut up!!
Can you give me a straight answer to that simple question Tam?? I very much doubt it, so let me spell it out for you in plain English!!!
TELL ME HOW A "LIVE ANIMAL URINE OR BLOOD OR BRAIN HOMOGENATE TEST" FOR PrPsc WORKS AND INCLUDE THE PART WHERE THE ANIMAL'S AGE HAS A MAJOR BEARING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE TEST? LET US SAY THE ANIMAL IS KNOWN TO HAVE bse IN ITS BODY SO COME ON TAM, SHOW ME YOUR STUFF GIRL.
YOU HAVE THE ENTIRE ROOM WAITING TO READ YOUR WORDS, BUT NO MORE THAN ME!! NOW IS YOUR CHANCE TO MAKE US ALL BELIEVERS TAM - DON'T WASTE THIS OPPOTUNITY WITH MORE RANTING OR PASTING COMMENTS FROM BEFORE. JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION, THAT'S ALL.
Mike
Well-known member
He don't "HAVE" to sell you on his test. You'll never have a need for one. (I hope) He ain't selling nothing here.
Except what's on his mind. And I find him quite credible.
bse-tester
Well-known member
Yes Mike, he is hoping it will. Identifying PrPsc clusters in blood is rather tricky due to blood being a highly complex matrix full of other proteins that can create accuracy problems, but my discussions with Dr. Cashman yesterday indicates that has found a way to detect the clumps of PrPsc in blood and isolate them. He is also hoping to collaborate with us on the urine test and we discussed the fact that many scientists have tried for some time now to replicate Dr. Ruth Gabizon's (Hadassah University, Israel) urine test without success. He nows the scientists that perfected our test and is well aware of their qualifications. I am so looking forward to meeting his "guy" on Friday. I will keep you posted. Ron.