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

Tested animals in US and Canada

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Service (APHIS) has undertaken an intensive animal health surveillance program for BSE. The program is designed as a one-time effort that will provide a snapshot of the domestic cattle population to help define whether BSE is present in the United States, and if so, help calculate at what level.

Experience in the Europe since the first BSE diagnosis has shown that testing high-risk cattle is the method most likely to identify BSE if it is present. APHIS’ increased surveillance of the U.S. cattle population is designed to test as many cattle from the high-risk population as possible in a 12- to 18-month period. The program is tailored to collect the majority of samples from the following categories:

Nonambulatory cattle;

• Cattle exhibiting signs of a central nervous system disorder, such as staggering, excess nervousness, or apprehension;

• Cattle exhibiting other signs that may be associated with BSE, such as emaciation or injury; or,

• Dead cattle.

---------------------------------

The level and design of BSE testing in Canada is in full accordance with the guidelines recommended by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). The samples collected target the highest risk cattle within the national herd. This includes all animals over 30 months of age that are dead, down, dying or diseased, and clinical suspects of any age.
---------------------

Now where are the huge discrepancies in the testing samples?

USDA Canada
Nonambulatory Down
Nervous Disorder Diseased
Signs of BSE Diseased
Dead Dead, Dying
 

Bill

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Service (APHIS) has undertaken an intensive animal health surveillance program for BSE. The program is designed as a one-time effort that will provide a snapshot of the domestic cattle population to help define whether BSE is present in the United States, and if so, help calculate at what level.

Experience in the Europe since the first BSE diagnosis has shown that testing high-risk cattle is the method most likely to identify BSE if it is present. APHIS’ increased surveillance of the U.S. cattle population is designed to test as many cattle from the high-risk population as possible in a 12- to 18-month period. The program is tailored to collect the majority of samples from the following categories:

Nonambulatory cattle;

• Cattle exhibiting signs of a central nervous system disorder, such as staggering, excess nervousness, or apprehension;

• Cattle exhibiting other signs that may be associated with BSE, such as emaciation or injury; or,

• Dead cattle.

---------------------------------

The level and design of BSE testing in Canada is in full accordance with the guidelines recommended by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). The samples collected target the highest risk cattle within the national herd. This includes all animals over 30 months of age that are dead, down, dying or diseased, and clinical suspects of any age.
---------------------

Now where are the huge discrepancies in the testing samples?

USDA Canada
Nonambulatory Down
Nervous Disorder Diseased
Signs of BSE Diseased
Dead Dead, Dying

Guess what! You forgot to highlight the best part!

The program is tailored to collect the majority of samples from the following categories:

Every press release I have seen uses the word MAJORITY when the US talks about its BSE testing program and MAJORITY can mean as little as 51% while Canada committed to taking taking ALL of theirs from the 4-D population. If you can find something from any US gov't agency that says ALL their tests come from the high risk population and therefore has the same testing program as Canada please feel free to share it.
 

Tex

Well-known member
The best method of making sure the govt. is credible is to allow private testing.

Has Canada or the U.S. allowed this?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Bill said:
Sandhusker said:
Service (APHIS) has undertaken an intensive animal health surveillance program for BSE. The program is designed as a one-time effort that will provide a snapshot of the domestic cattle population to help define whether BSE is present in the United States, and if so, help calculate at what level.

Experience in the Europe since the first BSE diagnosis has shown that testing high-risk cattle is the method most likely to identify BSE if it is present. APHIS’ increased surveillance of the U.S. cattle population is designed to test as many cattle from the high-risk population as possible in a 12- to 18-month period. The program is tailored to collect the majority of samples from the following categories:

Nonambulatory cattle;

• Cattle exhibiting signs of a central nervous system disorder, such as staggering, excess nervousness, or apprehension;

• Cattle exhibiting other signs that may be associated with BSE, such as emaciation or injury; or,

• Dead cattle.

---------------------------------

The level and design of BSE testing in Canada is in full accordance with the guidelines recommended by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). The samples collected target the highest risk cattle within the national herd. This includes all animals over 30 months of age that are dead, down, dying or diseased, and clinical suspects of any age.
---------------------

Now where are the huge discrepancies in the testing samples?

USDA Canada
Nonambulatory Down
Nervous Disorder Diseased
Signs of BSE Diseased
Dead Dead, Dying

Guess what! You forgot to highlight the best part!

The program is tailored to collect the majority of samples from the following categories:

Every press release I have seen uses the word MAJORITY when the US talks about its BSE testing program and MAJORITY can mean as little as 51% while Canada committed to taking taking ALL of theirs from the 4-D population. If you can find something from any US gov't agency that says ALL their tests come from the high risk population and therefore has the same testing program as Canada please feel free to share it.

"Majority" could be 99.99%, too. Why don't you do a little digging and let us know - and then you had better call the CDC and inform them, too. I'm sure they have absolutely no idea. :roll: :lol: :lol:
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Okay Sandhusker. Tell us one story about one American Rancher who called the vet and asked that vet to take a sample of brain from his sick cow.

Dig a bit deeper Sandyboy and find an American program that pays raqnchers for on farm samples of 4D cattle. And if you find one, --- give us some numbers.

You are getting desperate bud.
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Sorry - I forgot to applaud the only statement about BSE testing that makes any sense.

Tex wrote ---
The best method of making sure the govt. is credible is to allow private testing.

Has Canada or the U.S. allowed this?
:clap:
 

flounder

Well-known member
let's see now, from a USA cattle herd of some 95 million head, the expanded
2004 BSE cover-up that suddenly halted after the finding of the 2 BASE cases
i.e. atypical h-BSE documented in Alabama and Texas, this after rendering
another stumbling and staggering mad cow in Texas that was suspect BSE, but
_no_ test at all was given, and after suspect BSE samples sat stored on some
shelf somewhere for months and months, while the OIE BSE MRR was being born,
etc, etc, the USA total figures for BSE testing in this day and time, regardless of the
figures the OIE recommend, are terribly flawed to say the least. ...TSS


BSE OIE USDA

http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2008/01/bse-oie-usda.html



BOTTOM LINE $$$


(Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 23 May 2006)

11. Information published by the OIE is derived from appropriate declarations made by the
official Veterinary Services of Member Countries. The OIE is not responsible for inaccurate
publication of country disease status based on inaccurate information or changes in
epidemiological status or other significant events that were not promptly reported to the
Central Bureau,

http://www.oie.int/eng/Session2007/RF2006.pdf



THE only difference between the UK poisoning the globe, and the USA, it is
now legal with GWs and OIEs BSE MRR policy ;


IT's O.K. to poison 3rd world countries ;

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1994/05/20002001.pdf


On 20 February 1990, Dr Pickles wrote to Ms Verity
(APS/CMO). Dr Picklesí minute included the following:

1. Mr Meldrum is arguing that MAFF have already taken all the
necessary and responsible steps to warn importing countries
of the BSE dangers in UK meat and bone meal. Yet the action taken
so far overseas suggest the message has not got
through, or where it has this has been late. The first nation
that woke up to the danger did so a year after our own feed
ban. It seems even now several EC countries neither ban our
imports or the general feeding of ruminant protein. It also
seems the OIE and CVO have yet to inform the rest of the world.

2. I do not see how this can be claimed to be responsible. We
do not need an expert group of the Scientific Veterinary
Committee to tell us British meat and bone meal is unsafe for
ruminants. I fail to understand why this cannot be tackled
from the British end which seems to be the only sure way of doing
it, preferably by banning exports. As CMO says in his
letter of 3 January surely it is short sighted for us to risk
being seen in future as having been responsible for the
introduction of BSE to the food chain in other countries.[79]

http://www.bse.org.uk/dfa/dfa25.htm

PLEASE SEE CORRECT URL HERE ;

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1990/02/20010001.pdf

http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jul00_dont_eat_sheep.html#hhh


TSS
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Bill said:
Sandhusker said:
Service (APHIS) has undertaken an intensive animal health surveillance program for BSE. The program is designed as a one-time effort that will provide a snapshot of the domestic cattle population to help define whether BSE is present in the United States, and if so, help calculate at what level.

Experience in the Europe since the first BSE diagnosis has shown that testing high-risk cattle is the method most likely to identify BSE if it is present. APHIS’ increased surveillance of the U.S. cattle population is designed to test as many cattle from the high-risk population as possible in a 12- to 18-month period. The program is tailored to collect the majority of samples from the following categories:

Nonambulatory cattle;

• Cattle exhibiting signs of a central nervous system disorder, such as staggering, excess nervousness, or apprehension;

• Cattle exhibiting other signs that may be associated with BSE, such as emaciation or injury; or,

• Dead cattle.

---------------------------------

The level and design of BSE testing in Canada is in full accordance with the guidelines recommended by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). The samples collected target the highest risk cattle within the national herd. This includes all animals over 30 months of age that are dead, down, dying or diseased, and clinical suspects of any age.
---------------------

Now where are the huge discrepancies in the testing samples?

USDA Canada
Nonambulatory Down
Nervous Disorder Diseased
Signs of BSE Diseased
Dead Dead, Dying

Guess what! You forgot to highlight the best part!

The program is tailored to collect the majority of samples from the following categories:

Every press release I have seen uses the word MAJORITY when the US talks about its BSE testing program and MAJORITY can mean as little as 51% while Canada committed to taking taking ALL of theirs from the 4-D population. If you can find something from any US gov't agency that says ALL their tests come from the high risk population and therefore has the same testing program as Canada please feel free to share it.

"Majority" could be 99.99%, too. Why don't you do a little digging and let us know - and then you had better call the CDC and inform them, too. I'm sure they have absolutely no idea. :roll: :lol: :lol:

Sandhusker the problem with the APHIS one time shot testing was pointed out by an audit from the OIG. The audit proved even though alot of testing was done there were regions in the US that did not test enough to show a true picture. In Canada when BSE was found each Province was assigned a target quota Alberta being the highest as it was the hot spot. Alberta more than doubled their quota as did most Provinces. Now when Texas found BSE, that State tested Less than 74% of the quota the OIG figured they should have tested . When Alabama found BSE they never tested their OIG figured quota. BC and Sask had high quotas as they were the neighoring provinces to Alberta but Montana the only State the borders Alberta tested a whopping 182 head of their OIG figured goal of 5,076, in the first year of enhanced testing. When this report was pointed out to a person that is very high in the Montana Media his answer was.

I am afraid I don’t see the concern about Montana testing. The report says clearly that APHIS was not trying to meet any particular sampling goals in particular states. It also says that in areas like Montana they had gaps because they did not have contracts with collection sites, (slaughter plants). That is because Montana doesn’t HAVE hardly any such sites. We have but a very few small processing plants that usually only handle a handful of cattle a week.

This state actually slaughters very few cattle of any kind…they are almost all slaughtered out of state.

Thus, I assume among the thousands of mature cows tested at plants in Washington, Utah, Colorado, Nebraska, and the Dakotas…a great many had just come off of a truck from Montana.
First the whole northwest Region never met the quota the OIG figured they should have
Second Canada tests ON FARM DEAD AND DIEING according to the US media the US tests SLAUGHTER ANIMALS.

the 130 page OIG Audit Report
http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-10-KC.pdf
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam-- Did you forget-- or are you being a turd just trying to stir stuff again????? :???:

USDA answered that figure for some states low numbers...Its true-In Montana- since NAFTA- there are no slaughter plants- rendering plants- dogfood plants left...So many of those animals from Montana were tested at plants in Wisc, SD, California, etc. etc. where they ended up at -- and wrongly given credit to those states in the paperwork....But they acknowledged that 1000's of cattle from those areas had been tested (and could have been tracked back if they had showed up positive)- and their was no conspiracy to avoid testing cattle from certain areas :roll: .....

They knew where they were from because they were requiring backtagging on all cattle...Did you miss the post where I talked about the State Vet and USDA Vet were in town checking to make sure that that tagging was being done correctly- just for that checking....

When you live in a state that has few Vets (that can't handle the current required workload)- and many of them hundreds of miles away- that this method was the easiest and most cost effective way to go.....

But what the Hay--Canada doesn't worry about money--look at the millions and billions $ they are telling folks you guys are getting now for your bailouts :wink: :lol: :lol:
 

Bill

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Tam-- Did you forget-- or are you being a turd just trying to stir stuff again????? :???:

USDA answered that figure for some states low numbers...In Montana there are no slaughter plants- rendering plants- dogfood plants left...So many of those animals from Montana were tested at plants in Wisc, SD, California, etc. etc. where they ended up at -- and wrongly given credit to those states in the paperwork....But they acknowledged that 1000's of cattle from those areas had been tested (and could have been tracked back if they had showed up positive)- and their was no conspiracy to avoid testing cattle from certain areas :roll: .....

They new where they were from because they were requiring backtagging on all cattle...Did you miss the post where I talked about the State Vet and USDA Vet were in town checking to make sure that that tagging was being done correctly- just for that checking....

HEY wait a minute!!!!!! You better PM the Banker and get your stories straight.

Sandhusker says that the US was testing the same cattle as Canada from those :
• Nonambulatory cattle; • Cattle exhibiting signs of a central nervous system disorder, such as staggering, excess nervousness, or apprehension; • Cattle exhibiting other signs that may be associated with BSE, such as emaciation or injury; or, • Dead cattle.
Do a lot of those normally go to US slaughter plants? Those cattle are banned from slaughter in Canada.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Bill said:
Oldtimer said:
Tam-- Did you forget-- or are you being a turd just trying to stir stuff again????? :???:

USDA answered that figure for some states low numbers...In Montana there are no slaughter plants- rendering plants- dogfood plants left...So many of those animals from Montana were tested at plants in Wisc, SD, California, etc. etc. where they ended up at -- and wrongly given credit to those states in the paperwork....But they acknowledged that 1000's of cattle from those areas had been tested (and could have been tracked back if they had showed up positive)- and their was no conspiracy to avoid testing cattle from certain areas :roll: .....

They new where they were from because they were requiring backtagging on all cattle...Did you miss the post where I talked about the State Vet and USDA Vet were in town checking to make sure that that tagging was being done correctly- just for that checking....

HEY wait a minute!!!!!! You better PM the Banker and get your stories straight.

Sandhusker says that the US was testing the same cattle as Canada from those :
• Nonambulatory cattle; • Cattle exhibiting signs of a central nervous system disorder, such as staggering, excess nervousness, or apprehension; • Cattle exhibiting other signs that may be associated with BSE, such as emaciation or injury; or, • Dead cattle.
Do a lot of those normally go to US slaughter plants? Those cattle are banned from slaughter in Canada.

Bill--Your're blowing smoke up the wrong rearend if your trying to tell me that every cow that died on the Saskatchewan prairie was tested :shock: Same as Montana- many were not found until months/years after they died....I have one missing from this year- I still haven't found hide nor hair of....Could be anywhere in about 50,000+ acres- so forgive me for not calling out the search and rescue to find her to get tested....

And like I said before--we were not in the same shape Canada was where you could not sell/slaughter your cattle and you had to leave them around for years--to get old and die on farm....Anything here that started getting a little age- or looking like it was going down hill, went to the truck.....And remember when that border was closed-we had record high cull cow prices, so it was worth money to get rid of them before they did go downhill....Actually worth it to ship anything-because those turned down at the slaughter plants still went to the renderers/dogfood plants....

Whole different scenerio in the two countries- so the testing protocols were done different to best get the largest number of "at risk" cattle where they were.....
 

Bill

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Bill said:
Oldtimer said:
Tam-- Did you forget-- or are you being a turd just trying to stir stuff again????? :???:

USDA answered that figure for some states low numbers...In Montana there are no slaughter plants- rendering plants- dogfood plants left...So many of those animals from Montana were tested at plants in Wisc, SD, California, etc. etc. where they ended up at -- and wrongly given credit to those states in the paperwork....But they acknowledged that 1000's of cattle from those areas had been tested (and could have been tracked back if they had showed up positive)- and their was no conspiracy to avoid testing cattle from certain areas :roll: .....

They new where they were from because they were requiring backtagging on all cattle...Did you miss the post where I talked about the State Vet and USDA Vet were in town checking to make sure that that tagging was being done correctly- just for that checking....

HEY wait a minute!!!!!! You better PM the Banker and get your stories straight.

Sandhusker says that the US was testing the same cattle as Canada from those :
• Nonambulatory cattle; • Cattle exhibiting signs of a central nervous system disorder, such as staggering, excess nervousness, or apprehension; • Cattle exhibiting other signs that may be associated with BSE, such as emaciation or injury; or, • Dead cattle.
Do a lot of those normally go to US slaughter plants? Those cattle are banned from slaughter in Canada.

Bill--Your're blowing smoke up the wrong rearend if your trying to tell me that every cow that died on the Saskatchewan prairie was tested :shock: Same as Montana- many were not found until months/years after they died....I have one missing from this year- I still haven't found hide nor hair of....Could be anywhere in about 50,000+ acres- so forgive me for not calling out the search and rescue to find her to get tested....

And like I said before--we were not in the same shape Canada was where you could not sell/slaughter your cattle and you had to leave them around for years--to get old and die on farm....Anything here that started getting a little age- or looking like it was going down hill, went to the truck.....And remember when that border was closed-we had record high cull cow prices, so it was worth money to get rid of them before they did go downhill....Actually worth it to ship anything-because those turned down at the slaughter plants still went to the renderers/dogfood plants....

Whole different scenerio in the two countries- so the testing protocols were done different to best get the largest number of "at risk" cattle where they were.....

Your imagination seems to be only equalled by your inability to keep the facts straight. Where did I EVER say that EVERY animal that died on ranch in any Canadian province was tested. WHAT I SAID WAS THAT THE ANIMALS TESTED IN CANADA ARE FROM THE 4-D POPULATION.
Which is not the case in the US despite all the excuses you can come up with. PM your buddy the Banker and tell him what you wrote in the last paragraph as he musn't have read that R-Klan speaking point.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Bill said:
Oldtimer said:
Bill said:
HEY wait a minute!!!!!! You better PM the Banker and get your stories straight.

Sandhusker says that the US was testing the same cattle as Canada from those : Do a lot of those normally go to US slaughter plants? Those cattle are banned from slaughter in Canada.

Bill--Your're blowing smoke up the wrong rearend if your trying to tell me that every cow that died on the Saskatchewan prairie was tested :shock: Same as Montana- many were not found until months/years after they died....I have one missing from this year- I still haven't found hide nor hair of....Could be anywhere in about 50,000+ acres- so forgive me for not calling out the search and rescue to find her to get tested....

And like I said before--we were not in the same shape Canada was where you could not sell/slaughter your cattle and you had to leave them around for years--to get old and die on farm....Anything here that started getting a little age- or looking like it was going down hill, went to the truck.....And remember when that border was closed-we had record high cull cow prices, so it was worth money to get rid of them before they did go downhill....Actually worth it to ship anything-because those turned down at the slaughter plants still went to the renderers/dogfood plants....

Whole different scenerio in the two countries- so the testing protocols were done different to best get the largest number of "at risk" cattle where they were.....

Your imagination seems to be only equalled by your inability to keep the facts straight. Where did I EVER say that EVERY animal that died on ranch in any Canadian province was tested. WHAT I SAID WAS THAT THE ANIMALS TESTED IN CANADA ARE FROM THE 4-D POPULATION.
Which is not the case in the US despite all the excuses you can come up with. PM your buddy the Banker and tell him what you wrote in the last paragraph as he musn't have read that R-Klan speaking point.

Dead cattle at the rendering plant isn't 4D :???: Downers at the renderers or dogfood plant are not 4D :???:
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Bill said:
Oldtimer said:
Bill--Your're blowing smoke up the wrong rearend if your trying to tell me that every cow that died on the Saskatchewan prairie was tested :shock: Same as Montana- many were not found until months/years after they died....I have one missing from this year- I still haven't found hide nor hair of....Could be anywhere in about 50,000+ acres- so forgive me for not calling out the search and rescue to find her to get tested....

And like I said before--we were not in the same shape Canada was where you could not sell/slaughter your cattle and you had to leave them around for years--to get old and die on farm....Anything here that started getting a little age- or looking like it was going down hill, went to the truck.....And remember when that border was closed-we had record high cull cow prices, so it was worth money to get rid of them before they did go downhill....Actually worth it to ship anything-because those turned down at the slaughter plants still went to the renderers/dogfood plants....

Whole different scenerio in the two countries- so the testing protocols were done different to best get the largest number of "at risk" cattle where they were.....

Your imagination seems to be only equalled by your inability to keep the facts straight. Where did I EVER say that EVERY animal that died on ranch in any Canadian province was tested. WHAT I SAID WAS THAT THE ANIMALS TESTED IN CANADA ARE FROM THE 4-D POPULATION.
Which is not the case in the US despite all the excuses you can come up with. PM your buddy the Banker and tell him what you wrote in the last paragraph as he musn't have read that R-Klan speaking point.

Dead cattle at the rendering plant isn't 4D :???: Downers at the renderers or dogfood plant are not 4D :???:


You mean like at the Moses Lake plant where they euthanized them right on the trailer so they didn't have to be able to walk?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
You mean like at the Moses Lake plant where they euthanized them right on the trailer so they didn't have to be able to walk?

Depends upon who you want to believe--the nutty loser that looked to get rich from his story-- or all the others which testtified in front of Congress which included several employees, the plant owner, and the USDA vet, that the animal was not 4D.. :???:

You believing the nutty loser-Eh :???: :wink:
 

feeder

Well-known member
I've said it before that in my part of Iowa it has been law that the rendering plant had to test every dead bovine they collected from a farm. I don't know if they still have to test but they had been.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Tam-- Did you forget-- or are you being a turd just trying to stir stuff again????? :???:

USDA answered that figure for some states low numbers...Its true-In Montana- since NAFTA- there are no slaughter plants- rendering plants- dogfood plants left...So many of those animals from Montana were tested at plants in Wisc, SD, California, etc. etc. where they ended up at -- and wrongly given credit to those states in the paperwork....But they acknowledged that 1000's of cattle from those areas had been tested (and could have been tracked back if they had showed up positive)- and their was no conspiracy to avoid testing cattle from certain areas :roll: .....

They knew where they were from because they were requiring backtagging on all cattle...Did you miss the post where I talked about the State Vet and USDA Vet were in town checking to make sure that that tagging was being done correctly- just for that checking....

When you live in a state that has few Vets (that can't handle the current required workload)- and many of them hundreds of miles away- that this method was the easiest and most cost effective way to go.....

But what the Hay--Canada doesn't worry about money--look at the millions and billions $ they are telling folks you guys are getting now for your bailouts :wink: :lol: :lol:



Highest Risk Cows May Go Untested;
Report Shows Serious Flaws in Mad Cow Testing Program

Statement of Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist, Consumers Union Findings in USDA OIG’s Audit Report

(Washington)--A report released February 1, 2006 by the USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG) reveals serious flaws in the USDA mad cow surveillance program. We believe the USDA surveillance program is spending much of its resources looking in the wrong places for carriers of this deadly disease.

The USDA surveillance program may be missing significant numbers of additional cases of BSE that could exist in the United States, because they have not adequately sampled the cow populations that are at highest risk for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease. While the program identified two positive cases of BSE in the United States, it sampled less than one percent of the total US cattle population last year. USDA is supposed to test the highest risk animals. However, many animals tested were not those at highest risk, according to the OIG report.

The following are the categories of cattle that are at highest risk for BSE, along with the OIG's findings on whether the USDA's testing program is reaching them.

Older Cattle: The ages of the cattle tested by USDA are not known to the public. It is thus impossible to tell whether the surveillance program is getting valid results. A cow’s chances of showing signs of BSE increase with age. The two positive cows identified in the USDA program so far were seven and twelve years old respectively. The disease is seldom detected in cattle under the age of two years. It is thus extremely important to know whether USDA has been testing older cattle, especially animals seven years old and up. Neither USDA nor the OIG report state how many of the 356,195 cattle USDA tested from June 1, 2004 through May, 2005 were in this age group. Nor do we know how many were under two years old, a group in which we would expect to find almost no positive results.

High Risk Geographical Regions: The two cases identified in the US so far were from Texas, and Washington State. The latter was born in Canada, and five cases have been found in Alberta. It would thus make sense for the USDA to take extra samples from the states bordering Canada and in Texas. USDA did not take extra samples however in the Pacific Northwest or in Texas. In fact, the sampling rate in the Pacific Northwest, 76% of USDA’s goal for the region, was the lowest of the 6 regions in the U.S.
Animals Showing Signs of Disease: USDA had said it would test cattle that showed signs of central nervous system (CNS) disease. However it appears to have tested very few such animals. According to the OIG report, one problem is that slaughter facilities routinely pre-screen and reject incoming animals that show CNS symptoms before a USDA inspector sees them. The inspector therefore fails to select such animals for testing. Instead, 87 percent of the cattle USDA tested were dead on arrival at a rendering facility, cause of death unknown. Cattle die and get sent to the renderer for many reasons, including heat, various diseases, and birthing difficulties. While dead animals are higher risk of BSE than living healthy animals, many dead animals are not high risk. Especially given the lack of information about the age of the animals tested, it is hard to judge how many of the animals USDA tested really were high risk.
Because of the many shortcomings of the USDA testing program, it is possible that USDA is missing BSE cases in the United States. Consumers Union urges USDA to correct the shortcomings identified by the OIG and to continue the surveillance program at an expanded level next year.

Oldtimer was this not the group your R-CALF buddies were saddled up to at a Press conference a while back? Are they lieing about the testing being done in the US too?
:wink:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
Looks like you treed a couple of coons real quick on this thread Tam. :wink:

Shiiiiiiiiiiit. She's not treeing anyone, she's chasing her tail....

"The ages of the cattle tested by USDA are not known to the public. It is thus impossible to tell whether the surveillance program is getting valid results"

If they don't know the ages being tested, how do they know the older ones are not getting tested? They just admitted they don't know the ages! If it is impossible to tell if the results are valid, how can the statement be made that the right animals are not being tested? They have nothing to make a statement on either way! :lol:

"Neither USDA nor the OIG report state how many of the 356,195 cattle USDA tested from June 1, 2004 through May, 2005 were in this age group. Nor do we know how many were under two years old"

Again, then how do they know the right cattle aren't being tested?

"In fact, the sampling rate in the Pacific Northwest, 76% of USDA’s goal for the region, was the lowest of the 6 regions in the U.S."

How many times does OT have to explain to you that most of those cattle get shipped out because of the low number of packers?

"Instead, 87 percent of the cattle USDA tested were dead on arrival at a rendering facility, cause of death unknown."

Ummmm, Tam, do you know what two of the "D"s that Canada checks stands for? Like Dead and Dying? Did you forget that? Can you show me where the CFIA breaks out all the causes for dying?

You guys don't have a dang thing here! All you have is a guy saying, "It is impossible for us to know what they're doing, but we know they're doing it wrong". You think this guy's accusations would stand up in court? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Man, you guys are really, really reaching! :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
rkaiser said:
Looks like you treed a couple of coons real quick on this thread Tam. :wink:

Shiiiiiiiiiiit. She's not treeing anyone, she's chasing her tail....

"The ages of the cattle tested by USDA are not known to the public. It is thus impossible to tell whether the surveillance program is getting valid results"

If they don't know the ages being tested, how do they know the older ones are not getting tested? They just admitted they don't know the ages! If it is impossible to tell if the results are valid, how can the statement be made that the right animals are not being tested? They have nothing to make a statement on either way! :lol:

"Neither USDA nor the OIG report state how many of the 356,195 cattle USDA tested from June 1, 2004 through May, 2005 were in this age group. Nor do we know how many were under two years old"

Again, then how do they know the right cattle aren't being tested?

"In fact, the sampling rate in the Pacific Northwest, 76% of USDA’s goal for the region, was the lowest of the 6 regions in the U.S."

How many times does OT have to explain to you that most of those cattle get shipped out because of the low number of packers?

"Instead, 87 percent of the cattle USDA tested were dead on arrival at a rendering facility, cause of death unknown."

Ummmm, Tam, do you know what two of the "D"s that Canada checks stands for? Like Dead and Dying? Did you forget that? Can you show me where the CFIA breaks out all the causes for dying?

You guys don't have a dang thing here! All you have is a guy saying, "It is impossible for us to know what they're doing, but we know they're doing it wrong". You think this guy's accusations would stand up in court? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Man, you guys are really, really reaching! :lol: :lol: :lol:


:D :D First your little group saddles up to the Consumer Union at a press conference so they can attract media attention in their fight against the USDA and now you are standing up for the USDA against the Consumer Union when they say the USDA testing is flawed
Then it's the USDA can't track 7 imported cattle with CCIA tags and vertified health import papers and now you expect us to believe they can track 1000's of cattle with a mire backtag. Sandhusker where was the Alabama cow born?

It really doesn't matter as you said the US was testing the same cattle as Canada is. But we are testing ON FARM Dead and you are testing cattle that are healthy enough to load on a truck and send from Montana to plants in Wisc, SD, California, for slaughter. Don't sound like the same to any body but you Sandhusker not even Oldtimer is agreeing with you on this one

From Oldtimer.

Whole different scenerio in the two countries- so the testing protocols were done different to best get the largest number of "at risk" cattle where they were.....
Have to wonder why the largest number of at risk cattle are on trucks head to slaughter plants in far off states though ?????? :???: :???:

And then you can add this comment that I recieve in an email from someone high up in the US.

I don’t think US Producers feel nearly the kind of obligation that Canadian producers are showing. I believe most US producers support the enhanced testing as it has been conducted, but they are certainly not so committed as to call the vet and pay that extra expense every time they have a dead animal. If some had a downer that they personally thought was BSE, I am afraid there are those who would just dispose of her quietly themselves

Sandhusker asked: Can you show me where the CFIA breaks out all the causes for dying

Sandhusker the Age and the condition of the animal prior to death is filed when the vet sends in a sample. AND the CFIA audits the system by randomly calling the producers and asking the age and the condition of the animals the vet took samples from. I Know as I personally talked to the CFIA auditor when he called to confirm what we had sent in before they issued the check they were sending the Producers and accredited vets. So they do have the information on file if the OIE were to come asking. If the OIE came in and Audited your testing would the USDA beable to verify the age and conditions prior to death NO AS YOUR GOVERNMENT AUDIT COULDN"T.
:roll:
 
Top