WAS SHE AN IMPORT ?

[Clarence]

Agman, Agman, Agman, Where in the world did you get the idea that I was suggesting the Western Blot test be only used on imported cattle? It seems to me that you are becoming more transparent with each posting you make.

If the Western blot test is more accurate than the so called Gold Standard Test let's use it. There should be enough well established evidence out there if it is, without digging up old bones, and get this all in the media. When there is confusion, and when our officials do not explain, or want to explain the reasoning behind their acts the conspiracy theories will abound.

Everyone has their own motives, even you Agman. In your business a volitile and fluxulating market is a benefit. You do your research not just to help the producer but also to demostrate how volitile the markets are.

If you have the expertise you claim, the concern for the beef producer you claim, and are a clear thinker, I can not see why, now that this cow has been confirmed BSE, that you would favor just letting it go into limbo.
Let us do the traceback and more investigations.

 

[PORKER]

The Western blot test is more accurate than the so called Gold Standard Test let's use it. There should be enough well established evidence out there if it is, without digging up old bones, and get this all in the media.

 

[agman]

Agman, Agman, Agman, Where in the world did you get the idea that I was suggesting the Western Blot test be only used on imported cattle? It seems to me that you are becoming more transparent with each posting you make.

If the Western blot test is more accurate than the so called Gold Standard Test let's use it. There should be enough well established evidence out there if it is, without digging up old bones, and get this all in the media. When there is confusion, and when our officials do not explain, or want to explain the reasoning behind their acts the conspiracy theories will abound.

Everyone has their own motives, even you Agman. In your business a volitile and fluxulating market is a benefit. You do your research not just to help the producer but also to demostrate how volitile the markets are.

If you have the expertise you claim, the concern for the beef producer you claim, and are a clear thinker, I can not see why, now that this cow has been confirmed BSE, that you would favor just letting it go into limbo.
Let us do the traceback and more investigations.

I was incorrect in making the assumption regarding testing imported cattle-my error in assuming that. I admit to that.

Where did you ever see me state or imply that they should just let this case go into "limbo" as you state? I believe that is your error. I believe as you do that a full traceback should be completed and I am quite certain it will. That is to everyone's benefit. The fact that this animal's age predates the feed ban makes it less critical than if its age was post-ban. However, that does not negate the need for a full traceback.

I am waiting for the answer to your statement that "they" wanted a case of BSE. Who is "they" and please explain the possible logic of your statement. Is such a malicious statement not totally transparent?

 

[Clarence]

Agman:

There are so many facts on this issue that has not been disclosed. This has led to a strong conspiracy theory that the packers, the AMI, and others would go to any length to get the border open. They are running scared that all imports from Canada might be stopped. There is a theory that these people have enough political clout to get the USDA to abide by their wishes. No, I do not accept these theories, but some of the recent events has made them look more creditable.

The they, would be those who want to consider us as a North American Cattle Industry, not a separate US Industry. The US and Canada has separate and different policies so can not be considered as one. Canada has always piggy-backed on our markets, this would have eventually changed, but now since the BSE incidents they are begining to realize they need to change

I strongly believe we should not leave any stone unturned, but this thing was done Backend Before. If they would have announced that farther testing was warranted on these questionable cows, then ordered an additional test, it would have made the USDA look a lot more creditable, and would have done less damage to the industry.

 

[agman]

Agman:

There are so many facts on this issue that has not been disclosed. This has led to a strong conspiracy theory that the packers, the AMI, and others would go to any length to get the border open. They are running scared that all imports from Canada might be stopped. There is a theory that these people have enough political clout to get the USDA to abide by their wishes. No, I do not accept these theories, but some of the recent events has made them look more creditable.

The they, would be those who want to consider us as a North American Cattle Industry, not a separate US Industry. The US and Canada has separate and different policies so can not be considered as one. Canada has always piggy-backed on our markets, this would have eventually changed, but now since the BSE incidents they are begining to realize they need to change

I strongly believe we should not leave any stone unturned, but this thing was done Backend Before. If they would have announced that farther testing was warranted on these questionable cows, then ordered an additional test, it would have made the USDA look a lot more creditable, and would have done less damage to the industry.

I just don't buy the conspiracy theories that pop up when something does not go as we would all like. You still have not explained why in your theory "they" would want a case of BSE. That is such a reach it is beyond all logic.

Remember, you are blaming the USDA for something that was conducted by the USDA at the behest of the OIG. There was a complete failure to communicate this action to the Sec of AG and establish the proper authority. Someone should lose their job over that situation. I fully agree that the USDA should have announced the testing beforehand. On the other hand, if they had and the result was negative who do you think would be suing because of a market disruption. What conspiracy theory would you have derived at then? Don't tell me you would not have one for the latter scenerio.

 

[mrj]

Agman, did you read or hear, as I did, that the sample had such a low level of "infectivity" that it was difficult to test? Will that tissue be tested multiple times at Weybridge? It just seems there must have been scientifically legitimate reasons for the inconclusive tests in the USA and seems reasonable and logical that multiple tests by the different methods might give some important clues to the disease and diagnostic problems.

If that is true, would that be a legitimate reason for the missed diagnosis in the first rounds of testing last fall?

Since BSE is such a new problem and so little is known absolutely, isn't it legitimate and reasonable that there are such problems?

It just seems ludicrous at best, and maliiciously evil at worst for people to be placing blame and trotting out all the tired old conspiracy theories aimed at promoting various agendas. That takes time and effort away from solving the problem, IMO.

Also, I don't understand the relationship between the OIG and the USDA. Is OIG simply a watchdog agency? And does it only concern itself with USDA, or with all government agencies? Does anyone know who (individual, agency, or organization) requested, suggested, or pushed OIG to demand this re-test?

MRJ

 

[Mike]

I think it was clever for the United States to do that (introduce a new testing scheme), and the move marks important progress in achieving an accurate grasp of the contamination situation," said Kiyotoshi Kaneko, a professor at Tokyo Medical University who serves as acting chief of the prion panel.

"I can give it high marks because it means the United States officially acknowledges its previous checking system was insufficient," he said. (Kyodo News)

OUCH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Bill]

MRJ

Since BSE is such a new problem and so little is known absolutely, isn't it legitimate and reasonable that there are such problems?

BSE was first diagnosed in the UK in 1987. It may be a new problem in the US but the experts are definitely in Europe.

 

[Mike]

MRJ

Since BSE is such a new problem and so little is known absolutely, isn't it legitimate and reasonable that there are such problems?

BSE was first diagnosed in the UK in 1987. It may be a new problem in the US but the experts are definitely in Europe.

Bill, Our so-called "experts" ARE the problem. I was reading a press release in Nov 2004 of Ron DeHaven. He was sure "without a doubt" this case was a negative. :???: :???:

 

[Bill]

MRJ

Since BSE is such a new problem and so little is known absolutely, isn't it legitimate and reasonable that there are such problems?

BSE was first diagnosed in the UK in 1987. It may be a new problem in the US but the experts are definitely in Europe.

Bill, Our so-called "experts" ARE the problem. I was reading a press release in Nov 2004 of Ron DeHaven. He was sure "without a doubt" this case was a negative. :???: :???:

As I said, the experts are definitely in Europe with the exception of at least one who emigrated to Canada.

 

[Jeannie]

Well Agman, as you stated. the traceback was completed previously. What was the reason for a re-test? Forage for the media, perhaps?

Great attempt at nothing Clarence. Tell me, what does traceback have to do with an additonal test being ordered at the urging of the OIG? Are you suggesting that only imported cattle would now be subjected to the Western Blot test?!!!! The OIG did not oder traceback, they suggested the latter test be performed in addition to the initial test.

Agman- This article and Johanns comments suggest he was blindsided by the OIG- either that or he has absolutely no idea what is happening within his department--

I vote for the second option. If he had a clue what was going on, and was actually interested in curtailing BSE in the US, he would have ordered a WB test last November when there were conflicting results from the tests used.

 

[Tam]

Great attempt at nothing Clarence. Tell me, what does traceback have to do with an additonal test being ordered at the urging of the OIG? Are you suggesting that only imported cattle would now be subjected to the Western Blot test?!!!! The OIG did not oder traceback, they suggested the latter test be performed in addition to the initial test.

Agman- This article and Johanns comments suggest he was blindsided by the OIG- either that or he has absolutely no idea what is happening within his department--

I vote for the second option. If he had a clue what was going on, and was actually interested in curtailing BSE in the US, he would have ordered a WB test last November when there were conflicting results from the tests used.

Just to clarify He was not in Washington in November Anne V. was He took office in Jan.

 

[Jeannie]

Thank you Tam, I forgot that rather large detail, and I stand corrected. But that only changes the timing, not the fact that he is not doing what he should be doing as far as BSE is concerned. Why did he not order a WB test in January or even February when he learned about the conflicting test results instead of waiting for the OIG to intervene in June? I still don't believe that he has a clue.