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

Texas ranchers are looking south to send there BASE mad cows

flounder

Well-known member
Nov. 22, 2007, 10:34PM
Texas ranchers are looking south
They hope Mexico will lift beef import limit


By LYNN COOK
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle


Texas ranchers say they believe this week's lifting of a ban on U.S. imports
of older cows from Canada could open the gates to more exports of Texas
cattle.

That's largely because ranchers hope Mexico will follow suit, abolishing a
similar ban against imports of U.S. cattle over 30 months of age that has
been in place since a North American mad cow scare erupted in 2003,
cratering the export markets for U.S. live cattle and beef products.

Bans on younger cattle were lifted previously, but older cattle are
considered more at risk than younger ones of having the brain-wasting
disease formally called bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture confirmed it is trying to set up talks
with Mexico to normalize beef and cattle trade relations, but no meeting
date has been set.

Live cattle exports out of the U.S. have recovered to only 20 percent of
their level before the outbreak, according to figures from the U.S.
Department of Commerce. Most U.S. cattle exports go to Canada or Mexico.

"We support the reopening of the Canadian border based on internationally
accepted scientific principles. These are the same criteria that we expect
other countries to accept for our beef and cattle," said Ross Wilson, CEO of
the Texas Cattle Feeders Association. "Mexico has told us, 'We will open our
border to you when you open it to the Canadians.' "

Other trade groups oppose the ban's lifting, which was effective Monday.
R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America has asked a U.S. District Court in
South Dakota to block the new rule that allows Canadian cows over 30 months
of age into the country.

Wilson's Amarillo-based trade group represents the industry across Texas,
Oklahoma and New Mexico, an area that accounts for 30 percent of the
nation's annual cattle production.


BSE cases
Even though it's rare for Canadian cattle to be shipped as far south as
Texas, many of the state's cattle breeders count on exporting their
livestock to Mexico.

Mexico was among dozens of countries that banned Canadian and U.S. beef and
cattle imports after it was confirmed a cow in Alberta and one in Washington
state, whose origins were traced back to Canada, were infected with bovine
spongiform encephalopathy.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has reported two more confirmed cases of
BSE in the U.S. since then. Several more cases, including one as recently as
May, have been confirmed in Canada.

Eldon White, executive vice president of the Fort Worth-based Texas and
Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, said most Texas cattle that move
across the border to Mexico are being sold to breed.

"To give you some perspective, in 2002, prior to the BSE situation, 58
percent of Texas cattle exported went to Mexico. In 2006 that number was
down to 3.6 percent," White said.

"You can really see the magnitude of the change when you look at the dollar
figures. In 2002 the value of that exported cattle was $10.7 million, and in
2006 it had dropped to $100,000."


Fattening in feedlots
Meanwhile, more than 1.2 million head of cattle are still imported from
Mexico into the U.S. each year, White said. Those cows primarily go to
feedlots for fattening before they are processed into meat.

"We want this border open with the condition that nothing happen to the
inflow of cattle coming from Mexico because there's a significant feeding
industry in the state that relies on that," White said.

David Anderson, a livestock economist and associate professor at Texas A&M,
said now that the barrier has been lifted on Canadian cattle, U.S. consumers
could see a slight moderation in milk prices.

Many older Canadian cows are shipped across the border to stock U.S.
dairies.

Anderson said he doubts the lifting of the ban will make much difference in
beef prices. Many of the smaller processing plants along the U.S. border
with Canada closed in the aftermath of the outbreak of 2003, so many cattle
destined for the slaughterhouse likely will stay north of that border.

Even though Texas ranchers are concerned with live cattle exports to Mexico,
Anderson cited continuing bans on U.S. beef in Japan and South Korea as the
biggest concern going forward.

"Those are the places we haven't recovered yet, and at this point it's
really about political give and take," Anderson said.


Leading the world
South Korea imports virtually no U.S. beef, according to the Commerce
Department, and Japan's imports are just 5 percent of what they were in
2003.

On Nov. 16, the Philippines announced it would resume importing U.S. beef
products and cattle of all ages.

The United States is the largest producer of beef in the world but remains a
net importer because the U.S. consumes more beef than any other country,
according to the Agriculture Department. Most exported U.S. beef is
high-value grain-finished cuts, such as steaks. Most beef imported into the
country comes from lower-value grass-fed cattle used for hamburger meat.

[email protected]


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/biz/5323089.html



>>>"We support the reopening of the Canadian border based on internationally
accepted scientific principles. These are the same criteria that we expect
other countries to accept for our beef and cattle," said Ross Wilson, CEO of
the Texas Cattle Feeders Association<<<


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/biz/5323089.html


THIS means absolutely nothing $$$ THIS so called ''internationally accepted
scientific principles'', was bought and paid for by your local cattle
dealer, and the only thing it was designed for was commodities and futures,
it had nothing to do with human health. The BSE MRR policy i.e. minimal risk
region, was a tool to get around the BSE GBR risk assessments and trade
policies there of. It was and is nothing more than the legal trading of all
strains of mad cow disease globally. and that's something else, in this
article why was it conviently left out about not only the Texas mad cow that
got away, the stumbling and staggering cow that went to the render, the one
that was flagged for suspect mad cow disease, but higher ups in Austin said
send that straight to the render without any mad cow test what so ever, get
rid of all evidence, not that cow. The other Texas mad cow that was suspect,
secret positive test, however, concluded to be negative, after sitting on a
shelf for 7+ months while the BSE MRR policy was in the making, ONLY to be
proven Positive, after literally an act of congress had to be initiated to
finally 'confirm' that Texas Mad Cow as POSITIVE for H-BASE atypical BSE, a
strain of atypical BSE unlike the UK typical BSE. A strain of mad cow that
is more virulent to humans! A strain of mad cow that was also confirmed in
an Alabama cow i.e. the H-BASE atypical BSE. WHY was this not mentioned by
the TCFA ? WHY was it not mentioned by the TCFA also that in 2007 there have
been 5 cases of the atyipcal NOR-98 sheep scrapie documented in the USA ?
WHY was it not mentioned by the TCFA that in 2007 the USA is still feeding
mad cow protein to USA cattle, that the August 4, 1997 ruminant to ruminant
voluntary and partial feed ban was nothing more than ink on paper ? WHY is
it that there is a dramatic increase in USA CJD of an 'UNKNOWN PHENOTYPE' ?

WHY is all this $$$



(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 then Central Bureau............

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


WHAT this OIE gold stamp actually means, you can get this stamp of approval
simply by what ever data you submit,
no matter how false it may be, simple as that, and we know just how honest
this administration has been in the past.
it was about nothing more than trade, commodities and futures.


please see full text here ;


BSE MRR POLICY AND THE LEGAL TRADING OF ALL STRAINS OF MAD COW DISEASE

http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/


BSE BASE MAD COW TESTING TEXAS, USA, AND CANADA, A REVIEW OF SORTS


http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/


MADCOW USDA the untold story

http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/


MADCOW USDA the untold story continued

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6472149427883113751&postID=4829467681293855400


USA NOR-98 SCRAPIE UPDATE AUGUST 31, 2007 RISES TO 5 DOCUMENTED CASES

http://nor-98.blogspot.com/


ABSTRACTS SPORADIC CJD AND H BASE MAD COW ALABAMA AND TEXAS SEPTEMBER 2007

Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 21:31:55 -0500


I suggest that you all read the data out about h-BASE and sporadic CJD, GSS,
blood, and some of the other abstracts from the PRION2007. ...


http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&F=&S=&P=19744



*** PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS !!! THE PRICE OF
POKER INDEED GOES UP. ...TSS

USA BASE CASE, (ATYPICAL BSE), AND OR TSE (whatever they are calling it
today), please note that both the ALABAMA COW, AND THE TEXAS COW, both were
''H-TYPE'', personal communication Detwiler et al Wednesday, August 22, 2007
11:52 PM. ...TSS


http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0708&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=19779



10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. MBM IN COMMERCE USA
2007

Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST
RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINES -- CLASS II
___________________________________
PRODUCT
Bulk cattle feed made with recalled Darling’s 85% Blood Meal, Flash Dried,
Recall # V-024-2007
CODE
Cattle feed delivered between 01/12/2007 and 01/26/2007
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Pfeiffer, Arno, Inc, Greenbush, WI. by conversation on February 5, 2007.
Firm initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON
Blood meal used to make cattle feed was recalled because it was
cross-contaminated with prohibited bovine meat and bone meal that had been
manufactured on common equipment and labeling did not bear cautionary BSE
statement.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
42,090 lbs.
DISTRIBUTION
WI

___________________________________
PRODUCT
Custom dairy premix products: MNM ALL PURPOSE Pellet, HILLSIDE/CDL
Prot-Buffer Meal, LEE, M.-CLOSE UP PX Pellet, HIGH DESERT/ GHC LACT Meal,
TATARKA, M CUST PROT Meal, SUNRIDGE/CDL PROTEIN Blend, LOURENZO, K PVM DAIRY
Meal, DOUBLE B DAIRY/GHC LAC Mineral, WEST PIONT/GHC CLOSEUP Mineral, WEST
POINT/GHC LACT Meal, JENKS, J/COMPASS PROTEIN Meal, COPPINI – 8# SPECIAL
DAIRY Mix, GULICK, L-LACT Meal (Bulk), TRIPLE J – PROTEIN/LACTATION, ROCK
CREEK/GHC MILK Mineral, BETTENCOURT/GHC S.SIDE MK-MN, BETTENCOURT #1/GHC
MILK MINR, V&C DAIRY/GHC LACT Meal, VEENSTRA, F/GHC LACT Meal, SMUTNY,
A-BYPASS ML W/SMARTA, Recall # V-025-2007
CODE
The firm does not utilize a code - only shipping documentation with
commodity and weights identified.
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Rangen, Inc, Buhl, ID, by letters on February 13 and 14, 2007. Firm
initiated recall is complete.
REASON
Products manufactured from bulk feed containing blood meal that was cross
contaminated with prohibited meat and bone meal and the labeling did not
bear cautionary BSE statement.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
9,997,976 lbs.
DISTRIBUTION
ID and NV

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR MARCH 21, 2007


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2007/ENF00996.html


Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL USA SEPT 6, 2006 1961.72 TONS IN COMMERCE AL,
TN, AND WV
Date: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST ...snip...end... to many to list here
for 2006 and back. ...tss


Subject: Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the
Oral Route
Date: September 29, 2007 at 12:50 pm PST

P04.27

Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the Oral Route


Holznagel, E1; Yutzy, B1; Deslys, J-P2; Lasmézas, C2; Pocchiari, M3;
Ingrosso, L3;
Bierke, P4; Schulz-Schaeffer, W5; Motzkus, D6; Hunsmann, G6; Löwer, J1
1Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Germany; 2Commissariat à l´Energie Atomique, France;
3Instituto
Superiore di Sanità, Italy; 4Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease
control, Sweden;
5Georg August University, Germany; 6German Primate Center, Germany


Background:

In 2001, a study was initiated in primates to assess the risk for humans
to contract BSE through contaminated food. For this purpose, BSE brain was
titrated in cynomolgus monkeys.


Aims:

The primary objective is the determination of the minimal infectious dose
(MID50)
for oral exposure to BSE in a simian model, and, by in doing this, to assess
the risk for
humans. Secondly, we aimed at examining the course of the disease to
identify
possible biomarkers.


Methods:


Groups with six monkeys each were orally dosed with lowering amounts of
BSE brain: 16g, 5g, 0.5g, 0.05g, and 0.005g. In a second titration study,
animals were intracerebrally (i.c.) dosed (50, 5, 0.5, 0.05, and 0.005 mg).


Results:


In an ongoing study, a considerable number of high-dosed macaques already
developed simian vCJD upon oral or intracerebral exposure or are at the
onset of the
clinical phase. However, there are differences in the clinical course
between orally and
intracerebrally infected animals that may influence the detection of
biomarkers.


Conclusions:


Simian vCJD can be easily triggered in cynomolgus monkeys on the oral
route using less than 5 g BSE brain homogenate. The difference in the
incubation
period between 5 g oral and 5 mg i.c. is only 1 year (5 years versus 4
years). However,
there are rapid progressors among orally dosed monkeys that develop simian
vCJD as
fast as intracerebrally inoculated animals.


The work referenced was performed in partial fulfilment of the study “BSE in
primates“
supported by the EU (QLK1-2002-01096).


http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf


look at the table and you'll see that as little as 1 mg (or 0.001 gm) caused
7% (1 of 14) of the cows to come down with BSE;


Risk of oral infection with bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent in
primates

Corinne Ida Lasmézas, Emmanuel Comoy, Stephen Hawkins, Christian Herzog,
Franck Mouthon, Timm Konold, Frédéric Auvré, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie
Lescoutra-Etchegaray, Nicole Salès, Gerald Wells, Paul Brown, Jean-Philippe
Deslys
Summary The uncertain extent of human exposure to bovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE)--which can lead to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
(vCJD)--is compounded by incomplete knowledge about the efficiency of oral
infection and the magnitude of any bovine-to-human biological barrier to
transmission. We therefore investigated oral transmission of BSE to
non-human primates. We gave two macaques a 5 g oral dose of brain homogenate
from a BSE-infected cow. One macaque developed vCJD-like neurological
disease 60 months after exposure, whereas the other remained free of disease
at 76 months. On the basis of these findings and data from other studies, we
made a preliminary estimate of the food exposure risk for man, which
provides additional assurance that existing public health measures can
prevent transmission of BSE to man.


snip...


BSE bovine brain inoculum

100 g 10 g 5 g 1 g 100 mg 10 mg 1 mg 0·1 mg 0·01 mg

Primate (oral route)* 1/2 (50%)

Cattle (oral route)* 10/10 (100%) 7/9 (78%) 7/10 (70%) 3/15 (20%) 1/15 (7%)
1/15 (7%)

RIII mice (ic ip route)* 17/18 (94%) 15/17 (88%) 1/14 (7%)

PrPres biochemical detection

The comparison is made on the basis of calibration of the bovine inoculum
used in our study with primates against a bovine brain inoculum with a
similar PrPres concentration that was

inoculated into mice and cattle.8 *Data are number of animals
positive/number of animals surviving at the time of clinical onset of
disease in the first positive animal (%). The accuracy of

bioassays is generally judged to be about plus or minus 1 log. ic
ip=intracerebral and intraperitoneal.

Table 1: Comparison of transmission rates in primates and cattle infected
orally with similar BSE brain inocula


Published online January 27, 2005

http://www.thelancet.com/journal/journal.isa



It is clear that the designing scientists must

also have shared Mr Bradley’s surprise at the results because all the dose

levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.


http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s145d.pdf


2

6. It also appears to me that Mr Bradley’s answer (that it would take less
than say 100 grams) was probably given with the benefit of hindsight;
particularly if one
considers that later in the same answer Mr Bradley expresses his surprise
that it could take as little of 1 gram of brain to cause BSE by the oral
route
within the same species. This information did not become available until the
"attack
rate" experiment had been completed in 1995/96. This was a titration
experiment
designed to ascertain the infective dose. A range of dosages was used to
ensure that the actual result was within both a lower and an upper limit
within the
study and the designing scientists would not have expected all the dose
levels to
trigger infection. The dose ranges chosen by the most informed scientists at
that
time ranged from 1 gram to three times one hundred grams. It is clear that
the
designing scientists must have also shared Mr Bradley’s surprise at the
results
because all the dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.


http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s147f.pdf



PRION DISEASE UPDATE 2007 (07)
******************************
A ProMED-mail post
<http://www.promedmail.org>


snip...


******
[2] USA: National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center
Date: June 2007
Source: National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center (USA) [edited]
<http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/pdf/case-table.pdf>


CJD Cases examined
----------------------
Year / Referrals / Prion disease / Sporadic / Familial / Iatrogenic / vCJD

1996 / 42 / 32 / 26 / 4 / 0 / 0
1997 / 115 / 68 / 57 / 9 / 0 / 0
1998 / 93 / 53 / 45 / 7 / 1 / 0
1999 / 114 / 69 / 61 / 8 / 0 / 0
2000 / 151 / 103 / 89 / 14 / 0 / 0
2001 / 208 / 116 / 106 / 9 / 0 / 0
2002 / 255 / 143 / 118 / 23 / 2 / 0
2003 / 272 / 174 / 132 / 41 / 0 / 0
2004 / 334 / 183 / 157 / 21 / 0 / 1*
2005 / 352 / 195 / 152 / 37 / 1 / 0
2006 / 372 / 186 / 143 / 30 / 0 / 1**
2007 / 120 / 68 / 35 / 7 / 0 / 0
TOTAL / 2428*** / 1390**** / 1121 / 210 / 4 / 2

*Acquired in UK
** Acquired in Saudi Arabia
*** Includes 17 inconclusive and 9 pending (1 from 2006, 8 from 2007.
**** Includes 17 non-vCJD type unknown (2 from 1996, 2 from 1997, 1
from 2001, 1 from 2003, 4 from 2004, 3 from 2005, 4 from 2006) and 36
type pending (2 from 2005, 8 from 2006, 26 from 2007).

Notes:

-- Cases are listed based on the year of death when available. If the
year of death is not available, the year of sample receipt is used.

-- Referrals: Cases with possible or probable prion disease from
which brain tissue or blood in the case of familial disease were submitted.

-- Inconclusive: Cases in which the samples were not sufficient to
make a diagnosis.

-- Non-vCJD type unknown are cases in which the tissue submitted was
adequate to establish the presence but not the type; in all cases,
vCJD could be excluded.

--
Communicated by:
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

[In submitting these data, Terry S. Singeltary Sr. draws attention to
the steady increase in the "type unknown" category, which, according
to their definition, comprises cases in which vCJD could be excluded.
The total of 26 cases for the current year (2007) is disturbing,
possibly symptomatic of the circulation of novel agents.
Characterization of these agents should be given a high priority. - Mod.CP]


http://pro-med.blogspot.com/2007/11/proahedr-prion-disease-update-2007-07.html


PRO/AH/EDR> Prion disease update 2007 (07)

http://pro-med.blogspot.com/2007/11/proahedr-prion-disease-update-2007-07.html


Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in
the United States


http://cjdusa.blogspot.com/


I am reminded of a few things deep throat (high ranking official at usda)
told me years ago;


==========================================


The most frightening thing I have read all day is the
report of Gambetti's finding of a new strain of
sporadic cjd in young people.........Dear God,


https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7842737484277562285&postID=5759550357128128100


PLEASE NOTE IN USA CJD UPDATE AS AT JUNE 2007, please note steady increase
in ''TYPE UNKNOWN''. ...TSS


1 Acquired in the United Kingdom; 2 Acquired in Saudi Arabia; 3 Includes 17
inconclusive and 9 pending (1 from 2006, 8
from 2007); 4 Includes 17 non-vCJD type unknown (2 from 1996, 2 from 1997, 1
from 2001, 1 from 2003, 4 from 2004, 3
from 2005, 4 from 2006) and 36 type pending (2 from 2005, 8 from 2006,

*** 26 from 2007)



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


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