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

Some Canadian BSE Info!

A

Anonymous

Guest
Interesting- part of a post that I picked off AgriVille by the attorney thats leading the class action suit for farmers/ranchers against the Canadian government/etal over BSE....

Some interesting info- and interesting allegations- some of which I had never seen before...

posted Feb 11, 2010 13:19
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tough to provide a synopsis of more that ten years of ongoing screwups (alleged), but here goes.

1986 - BSE is first described by George Wells at the Central Veterinary Laboratory in Weybridge, England. Dr. Wells calls it bovine spongiform encephalopathy (spongiform because it creates holes in the brain, encephaopathy because it is a neurological disorder with no swelling involved - unlike encephalitis). When asked by the British government what causes BSE, Dr. Wells says he doesn't know, but John Wilesmith is just the man to ask that very important question.

1987 - In December Dr. Wilesmith completes his report to the British government and tells them that BSE is caused by feeding ruminant meat and bonemeal (MBM) from BSE infected carcassses to healthy animals. The incubation period between initial infection and symptoms is about 5.5 years, and calves appear to be particularly susceptible to infection (about 20 times more vulnerable than adult animals). Calf starter incorporating MBM (to boost the protein content) is identified as the most obvious means of transmission.

1988 - On July 18 the British government bans the feeding of ruminant MBM to ruminants. Dr. Wilesmith has advised that the number of diagnosed cases of BSE in the UK will continue to rise for some time because of the long incubation period.

1989 - The US, Australia and others ban the importation of British cattle for fear they may spread BSE. Australia institutes a monitoring program for all British cattle imported since 1981 over concerns that they may be harbouring BSE. The Australian government pays farmers for the British animals when they have outlived their usefulness and destroys the carcasses. Farmers are advised that if any of these British imports enter the human or animal food chain they will be charged. The Australian monitoring program works; none of the 131 imported British cattle enter the human or animal food chain. Australia is BSE-free today.

1990 - Canada passes a regulation to the Feeds Act permitting the feding of MBM to cattle and calves. Canada bans the importation of British cattle. Canada puts all 196 British cattle imported since 1982 into a monitoring program 'amid growing concerns about the spread of BSE through exported cattle'

1993 - The first case of BSE is diagnosed in North America, confirmed on December 7, 1993 in a Salers cow from Alberta. The cow is one of eight birth cohort animals imported as a group that had been hand fed the same calf starter in Britain. When the records are examined it is found that 80 (eighty) of the British cattle in the monitoring program had been allowed to go to routine slaughter (68 ) or had entered the rendering vats whole as deadstock (12). The British cattle that have entered the animal feed system in Canada include two of the birth cohort animals. Some monitoring program. The balance of the British animals remaining in Canada are ordered exported or destroyed.
In a memorandum to the Minister of Agriculture dated December 7, 1993 outlining the situation, the Department of Agriculture failed to inform the Minister of four points:
1. BSE is spread by healthy animals, particularly calves, eating feed rations containing MBM from infected animals;
2. The only universally recognized means of containment of BSE is a ruminant feed ban;
3. 80 British animals entered the human and animal feed system in the last four years (oops); and
4. In holding up Denmark as an example of a country that had one infected British import but were able to maintain their BSE free status by disinfecting the farm in question, they failed to mention that Denmark had a ruminant feed ban in place as the cornerstone of their BSE control policy.
Subsequent memos to the Minister providing him with updates on the situation referred back to this one as providing the necessary background information.

1994 - In May the government completes an internal risk assessment that finds that there is a 100% statistical probability that one or more of the 80 British animals that entered the Canadian animal feed system had BSE. This report identifies the risk that 'further cases of BSE would likely prompt a trade embargo against Canadian exports of cattle, beef and dairy products for an indefinite period of time by some or all of importing countries.' The report is buried. Canadian cattle producers are not warned that there is a ticking economic time bomb in the Canadian herd.
Three cattle producers whose British animals have been ordered destroyed take the fight to the federal court. In ordering the last of these animals destroyed, the Federal Court of Appeal finds in July that:
"The Act requires the Minister to exercise considerable expertise with regards to the health of Canadian livestock and the risks imposed by potential parasites, and directs him to act on the basis of mere suspicion. It is obvious that there were aspects of the factual and scientific evidence placed before the Minister that could support, especially if looked at with the utmost prudence, a suspicion reaching any cattle imported into Canada from the United Kingdom between 1982 and 1990 regardless of their age or history."
The government responds by continuing to do nothing to diminish the risk of the spread of BSE that their negligence (alleged) has created.

1996 - On April 3 the World Health Organization recommends that all countries ban the use of ruminant tissues in ruminant feed. Australia responds, and by May 26 there is a ruminant feed ban in place in Australia. Various organizations in the US push for a ruminant feed ban, and legislation is begun in the US.

1997 - In April, the cow that closed the border on May 20, 2003 is born in Saskatchewan. In May, she is fed calf starter containing the BSE prion.
In August, Canada finally brings in a ruminant feed ban. It is based on the 1988 British model. The British are now up to model number 4 (enacted in March of 1996). This Canadian feed ban does not address the known issues of cross-feeding (when you throw a little chicken or hog feed into the calf mix for one reason or another) or cross-contamination (when some chicken of hog feed left in the production lines, truck, hopper, etc gets into the calf starter).

2003 - The Central Veterinary Laboratory confirms the diagnosis of BSE in an Angus cross cow (now in Alberta). International borders immediately slam shut to Canadian cattle and beef.

2007 - Canada finally implements a feed ban that adresses cross-feeding and cross-contamination issues more than 11 years after Britain and 4 years ofter the border closure.

You know the rest.

There is much, much, much more. The breadth and depth of the buffoonery involved is astounding. The statement of claim can be found at:

http://www.bseclassaction.ca/pdfs/BSE%20AFaASOC%2026%20Jan%2009.pdf

You should know that the closing of the border by the US on May 20, 2003 was not political. It was automatic. The regulations closing the US border to any country with a single domestic case of BSE date back to 1991. Canada entered into a bilateral 'one cow and you're out' agreement on BSE with the US in 1994.

http://www.agri-ville.com/cgi-bin/forums/viewThread.cgi?1265903264
 

burnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Interesting- part of a post . . .
" . . . the closing of the border by the US on May 20, 2003 was not political. It was automatic.


Nice smoke screen there old boy. That was true only at the start. When the U.S. adopted the SSS policy (Texas cow), then it was strictly political.

Thanks for your help, you backstabbing hypocrite.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
I would like to see the USDA's list of what they did to contain European cattle and the feed ban they have enacted.


Oh ya they haven't done anything. :roll:
 

burnt

Well-known member
Big Muddy rancher said:
I would like to see the USDA's list of what they did to contain European cattle and the feed ban they have enacted.


Oh ya they haven't done anything. :roll:

Gives a whole new meaning to "short-listed", don't it?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
burnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Interesting- part of a post . . .
" . . . the closing of the border by the US on May 20, 2003 was not political. It was automatic.


Nice smoke screen there old boy. That was true only at the start. When the U.S. adopted the SSS policy (Texas cow), then it was strictly political.

Thanks for your help, you backstabbing hypocrite.

You should know that the closing of the border by the US on May 20, 2003 was not political. It was automatic. The regulations closing the US border to any country with a single domestic case of BSE date back to 1991. Canada entered into a bilateral 'one cow and you're out' agreement on BSE with the US in 1994.


No- the hypocritical and really sad thing is that YOU and the Katos of Canada- in your bias against US cattle producers, groups actually representing US cattlemen and consumers, and apparently the US as a whole- won't even believe the evidence brought forward by an attorney representing a major group of Canadian producers and still blame the closing of the border on US cattlemen- and some of their representatives like R-CALF--
WHEN--
the actual political games that went against years of scientific study/research- along with 10 years of established treaty and protocol- and attempts at disease prevention- were when the multinational packers wanted to open the borders to any and everything for their own profiteering-(without allowing any small packers of either country to do any testing and marketing of tested beef) and convinced the US government to do so...And with the amount of reopened trade with the Asian and old markets we (both US and Canada) still have not gotten- they prove it.....
 

burnt

Well-known member
Golly I feel so chastened for my grievous lack of insight . . . . I never before realized that rcalf was only showing us a bit of tough love by trying to kill us off!

:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:
 

flounder

Well-known member
2001



U.S. Beef-Cattle Trade Deficit With Canada Increases

(Billings, MT) Trade data reported by USDA shows that if present trends continue, Canadian imports of beef and live cattle could reach an all-time high in 2001. According to USDA-Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) reports, Canadian live cattle imports through August 31 of this year were 33 percent higher than the same period last year.

Beginning in September of this year and continuing through most of November, the U.S. cattle industry was marked by declining beef demand, sluggish movement of cattle to market, and reports that some packing plants were shortening their processing week. Despite these unfavorable economic indicators, Canadian cattle imports were 46 percent higher during this period than was imported during the same period last year.

In the primary market of Colorado, Canadian fed cattle imports reached 10.6 percent of all cattle slaughtered in the state in July. This represents a 400 percent increase over Colorado’s July slaughter of last year. “Many U.S. producers believe these unprecedented import surges have caused the recent back-up of U.S. cattle supplies, leading to increased domestic carcass weights,” said R-CALF USA President Leo McDonnell.

In addition to the marked increase in Canadian live cattle imports, imports of Canadian beef were 6 percent higher through November of 2001 than during the same period last year. “If this trend continues, Canadian live cattle imports will reach nearly 1.3 million head and Canadian beef imports will set a new record at around 970 million pounds, for a combined 1.97 billion pounds of Canadian beef and live cattle imports (converted to carcass weight equivalent),” predicted McDonnell.

While Canadian beef and live cattle imports are on the rise, U.S. exports of beef and live cattle to Canada are falling. From January through August of this year, the U.S. exported 149 million pounds of beef to Canada – down 12 percent from the same period last year. Also through August of this year, the U.S. exported 139,576 head of live cattle to Canada – down 6.5 percent from the same period last year. “Exports of live cattle to Canada are expected to reach 350,000 head by year’s end primarily due to the efforts of the Northwest Pilot Project,” McDonnell commented.

“By the end of this year, the trade deficit for beef and live cattle with Canada could reach an all-time high of 1.45 billion pounds,” he said. This trade deficit would surpass the previous high in 1998, the year when the U.S. cattle industry filed a cattle dumping and trade subsidy investigation against Canada. It would also far surpass the 300 million pound level of 1987, set just prior to the U.S.-Canadian Free Trade Agreement that phased out tariffs and quotas on live cattle and beef imports from Canada.

Reprinted by permission of R-CALF USA



http://www.aaminc.org/newsletter/v8i1/v8i1p4.htm
 

flounder

Well-known member
The most recent assessments (and reassessments) were published in June 2005 (Table I; 18), and included the categorisation of Canada, the USA, and Mexico as GBR III. Although only Canada and the USA have reported cases, the historically open system of trade in North America suggests that it is likely that BSE is present also in Mexico.

http://www.oie.int/boutique/extrait/06heim937950.pdf

Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk (GBR) of the USA Question number: EFSA-Q-2003-083

Adopted: 1 July 2004 Summary (0.1Mb)

Report (0.2Mb)

Summary

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.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1211902594180.htm

Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk (GBR) of Canada Question number: EFSA-Q-2003-083

Adopted: 1 July 2004 Summary (0.1Mb)

Report (0.2Mb)

Summary

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 to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Canada, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Canada. This scientific report addresses the GBR of Canada as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into the country middle of the eighties and could have reached domestic cattle in the early nineties. 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 90s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Canada reached domestic cattle and led to an internal challenge in the early 90s.

A certain risk that BSE-infected cattle entered processing in Canada, and were at least partly rendered for feed, occurred in the early 1990s when cattle imported from UK in the mid 80s could have been slaughtered. 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 Canada is III, i.e. it is confirmed at a lower level that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as the system remains unstable, it is expected that the GBR continues to grow, even if no additional external challenges occur.

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1211902594094.htm

Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk (GBR) of Mexico Question number: EFSA-Q-2003-083

Adopted: 1 July 2004 Summary (108 KB)

Report (168 KB)

Annex (251 KB)

Summary

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.

Further information

Overview of GBR assessments covering 2000-2006: list of countries and their GBR level of risk (64 KB)

Published: 20 August 2004 Last updated: 8 September 2004

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/scdoc/4r.htm



Wednesday, April 16, 2008


MBM, greaves, meat offal, live cattle, imports from UK to USA vs Canada


http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2008/04/mbm-greaves-meat-offal-live-cattle.html




Monday, November 23, 2009

BSE GBR RISK ASSESSMENTS UPDATE NOVEMBER 23, 2009 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND O.I.E.

http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009/11/bse-gbr-risk-assessments-update.html



MY comments/questions are as follows ;

1. SINCE the first Harvard BSE Risk Assessment was so flawed and fraught with error after the PEER REVIEW assessment assessed this fact, how do you plan on stopping this from happening again, will there be another peer review with top TSE Scientist, an impartial jury so-to-speak, to assess this new and updated Harvard BSE/TSE risk assessment and will this assessment include the Atypical TSE and SRM issues ?

*** Suppressed peer review of Harvard study October 31, 2002 ***

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/oa/topics/BSE_Peer_Review.pdf


***

http://www.scribd.com/doc/1490709/USDA-200600111


***

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf


***

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf


***

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf


***

Response to Public Comments on the Harvard Risk Assessment of BSE USA


RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM TERRY S. SINGELTARY SR. Comment #1: SINCE the first Harvard BSE Risk Assessment was so flawed and fraught ...


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/BSE_Risk_Assess_Response_Public_Comments.pdf


IT ALL STARTED, LEGALLY, RIGHT HERE ;

Docket APHIS-2006-0026 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Animal Identification and Importation of Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0026-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions, Identification of Ruminants and Processing and Importation of Commodities Public Submission APHIS-2006-0026-0012 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary


http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801e47e1


Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary

Comment 2006-2007 USA AND OIE POISONING GLOBE WITH BSE MRR POLICY

THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species.

MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???

go figure. ...


http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f8151


Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singletary comment

January 28, 2007

Greetings APHIS,

I would kindly like to submit the following to ;

BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01


http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f8152&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8




Monday, October 26, 2009

MAD COW DISEASE, AND U.S. BEEF TRADE

MAD COW DISEASE, CJD, TSE, SOUND SCIENCE, COMMERCE, AND SELLING YOUR SOUL TO THE DEVIL

http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2009/10/mad-cow-disease-and-us-beef-trade.html



Greetings USDA/APHIS et al,

I would kindly like to comment on OIE proposed guidelines.

AS I said before, OIE should hang up there jock strap now, since it appears they will buckle every time a country makes some political hay about trade protocol, commodities and futures. IF they are not going to be science based, they should do everyone a favor and dissolve there organization. THE reason most every country around the globe came down with BSE/TSE in their cattle, were due to the failed and flawed BSE/TSE testing and surveillance policy of the O.I.E. NOW, they don't even acknowledge atypical scrapie it seems, as one for concern $

SO, chew on that !

Monday, November 23, 2009

BSE GBR RISK ASSESSMENTS UPDATE NOVEMBER 23, 2009 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND O.I.E.

http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009/11/bse-gbr-risk-assessments-update.html


Wednesday, February 10, 2010

NAIS MAD COW TRACEABILITY DUMPED BY USDA APHIS 2010

http://naiscoolyes.blogspot.com/2010/02/nais-mad-cow-traceability-dumped-by.html



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



18.173 page 189

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


From: xxxx
To: Terry Singeltary
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 9:09 AM
Subject: 14th ICID - abstract accepted for 'International Scientific Exchange'

Your preliminary abstract number: 670

Dear Mr. Singeltary,

On behalf of the Scientific Committee, I am pleased to inform you that your abstract

'Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009'

WAS accepted for inclusion in the INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE (ISE) section of the 14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases. Accordingly, your abstract will be included in the "Intl. Scientific Exchange abstract CD-rom" of the Congress which will be distributed to all participants.

Abstracts accepted for INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE are NOT PRESENTED in the oral OR poster sessions.

Your abstract below was accepted for: INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE

#0670: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009

Author: T. Singeltary; Bacliff, TX/US

Topic: Emerging Infectious Diseases Preferred type of presentation: International Scientific Exchange

This abstract has been ACCEPTED.

#0670: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009

Authors: T. Singeltary; Bacliff, TX/US

Title: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009

Body: Background

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

Methods

12 years independent research of available data

Results

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

Conclusion

I would like to submit a review of past CJD surveillance in the USA, and the urgent need to make all human TSE in the USA a reportable disease, in every state, of every age group, and to make this mandatory immediately without further delay. The ramifications of not doing so will only allow this agent to spread further in the medical, dental, surgical arena's. Restricting the reporting of CJD and or any human TSE is NOT scientific. Iatrogenic CJD knows NO age group, TSE knows no boundaries.

I propose as with Aguzzi, Asante, Collinge, Caughey, Deslys, Dormont, Gibbs, Gajdusek, Ironside, Manuelidis, Marsh, et al and many more, that the world of TSE Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy is far from an exact science, but there is enough proven science to date that this myth should be put to rest once and for all, and that we move forward with a new classification for human and animal TSE that would properly identify the infected species, the source species, and then the route.

Keywords: Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease Prion


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

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

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


Monday, October 19, 2009

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

snip...

I ask Professor Kong ;

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

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

Professor Kong reply ;

.....snip

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

Thanks for your interest.''

Best regards,

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

END...TSS

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

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


Friday, January 29, 2010

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


http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/01/14th-international-congress-on.html



Thursday, January 07, 2010

Scrapie and Nor-98 Scrapie November 2009 Monthly Report Fiscal Year 2010 and FISCAL YEAR 2008

http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/2010/01/scrapie-and-nor-98-scrapie-november.html


Monday, December 14, 2009

Similarities between Forms of Sheep Scrapie and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Are Encoded by Distinct Prion Types

http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2009/12/similarities-between-forms-of-sheep.html


Friday, February 05, 2010

New Variant Creutzfelt Jakob Disease case reports United States 2010 A Review

http://vcjd.blogspot.com/2010/02/new-variant-creutzfelt-jakob-disease.html


BSE prions propagate as either variant CJD-like or sporadic CJD-like prion strains in transgenic mice expressing human prion protein

Emmanuel A. Asante, Jacqueline M. Linehan, Melanie Desbruslais, Susan Joiner, Ian Gowland, Andrew L. Wood, Julie Welch, Andrew F. Hill, Sarah E. Lloyd, Jonathan D.F. Wadsworth, and John Collinge1 MRC Prion Unit and Department of Neurodegenerative Disease, Institute of Neurology, University College, Queen Square, London WC1N 3BG, UK 1Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected] August 1, 2002; Revised September 24, 2002; Accepted October 17, 2002.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC136957/?tool=pubmed



http://www.nature.com/emboj/journal/v21/n23/abs/7594869a.html



Thursday, February 4, 2010

SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Draft Minutes of the 103rd Meeting held on 24th November 2009


http://seac992007.blogspot.com/2010/02/spongiform-encephalopathy-advisory.html



and there from, what will friendly fire, i.e. pass it forward, i.e. iCJD, the pathology, what will that look like pathologically?


sporadic CJD does not mean one strain of CJD. it is multiple strains, and they are growing in number ;



CJD USA RISING, with UNKNOWN PHENOTYPE ;

5 Includes 41 cases in which the diagnosis is pending, and 17 inconclusive cases; 6 Includes 46 cases with type determination pending in which the diagnosis of vCJD has been excluded.

http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/pdf/case-table.pdf




Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
You should know that the closing of the border by the US on May 20, 2003 was not political. It was automatic. The regulations closing the US border to any country with a single domestic case of BSE date back to 1991. Canada entered into a bilateral 'one cow and you're out' agreement on BSE with the US in 1994.

So flounder- you disagree with the Canadians attorney that the automatic closing of the border was due to a a bilateral 'one cow and you're out' agreement on BSE with the US in 1994? And then apparently agree with the change of this long time researched/enacted rule when the multinational packers could profiteer from it was just hunky dory - and started the shipping of beef from BSE countries back and forth around the world ?
Some of the Asian/Japanese/European markets don't agree with you..... :???:
 

flounder

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
You should know that the closing of the border by the US on May 20, 2003 was not political. It was automatic. The regulations closing the US border to any country with a single domestic case of BSE date back to 1991. Canada entered into a bilateral 'one cow and you're out' agreement on BSE with the US in 1994.

So flounder- you disagree with the Canadians attorney that the automatic closing of the border was due to a a bilateral 'one cow and you're out' agreement on BSE with the US in 1994? And then apparently agree with the change of this long time researched/enacted rule when the multinational packers could profiteer from it was just hunky dory - and started the shipping of beef from BSE countries back and forth around the world ?
Some of the Asian/Japanese/European markets don't agree with you..... :???:


OT,

i'm saying everything about the BSE TSE debacle in North American Cattle is nothing but political trade bull sh!t. and it started before the 2003 cow. there was no science. i cannot say it any clearer.

as i said before ;



''AS I said before, OIE should hang up there jock strap now, since it appears they will buckle every time a country makes some political hay about trade protocol, commodities and futures. IF they are not going to be science based, they should do everyone a favor and dissolve there organization. THE reason most every country around the globe came down with BSE/TSE in their cattle, were due to the failed and flawed BSE/TSE testing and surveillance policy of the O.I.E.''


http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009/11/bse-gbr-risk-assessments-update.html




http://www.scribd.com/doc/1490709/USDA-200600111


***


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf


***


http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf


***


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf




''The O.I.E., by bending over for the USDA with this damn BSE MRR policy, has sold their sole to the devil, and in doing so, sold yours too.''


Wednesday, February 10, 2010

NAIS MAD COW TRACEABILITY DUMPED BY USDA APHIS 2010


http://naiscoolyes.blogspot.com/2010/02/nais-mad-cow-traceability-dumped-by.html




TSS
 

Latest posts

Top