SEARCH VEGSOURCE:

 

 

Follow Ups | Post Followup | Back to Discussion Board | VegSource
See spam or
inappropriate posts?
Please let us know.
  




From: TSS ()
Subject: Re: 9,200 USA POTENTIAL MAD COWS IN JUNE 2004 ENHANCED COVER-UP SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM NO WB
Date: August 19, 2005 at 8:14 am PST

In Reply to: Re: 9,200 USA POTENTIAL MAD COWS IN JUNE 2004 ENHANCED COVER-UP SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM NO WB posted by TSS on August 17, 2005 at 7:30 pm:

Hello Dr. Vogel,

thank you for your kind reply.

Dr. Vogel answers;

> WHY was this not reported in the feed enforcement updates?"
>
> The answer is because they were NOT feed discrepancies. These were
> noncompliance reports issued by USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service
> employees to meat processing establishments.
>


WOULD it not be likely that from some of these noncompliance reports that indeed some breaches led to some potential tainted materials to enter the animal/human feed chain?

ALL we have heard about in the last 7 years or better, well, since the 12/14/97 partial and voluntary ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban is that the feed ban is working, tripple fire walls, no ruminant protein entering the animal feed chain. along with this was a constant barage of 'no mad cow disease in the USA'. then we find this 12 year old TEXAS cow that was infected from tainted feed some time in that 12 year period. so, the NE TEXAS CJD cluster, where it was stated that NO mad cow was in the USA or TEXAS at that time frame, was in fact not true.

SINCE some 460 of these occurred because slaughter plants did not have an adequate plan for dealing with BSE in their plant’s food safety plan, as required by the USDA, the analysis showed, and of those 460 violations, 60 percent described plans that contained no mention of BSE at all. then again, would it not be very possible that indeed some potentially tainted material of a BSE or atypical TSE DID enter the animal feed chain, thus later some of those animals entering the human food chain.

WHAT about the SRM violations? Violations of rules about the removal and handling of specified risk material (SRMs) occurred at 131 plants in at least 35 states. SRMs are the high-risk materials, such as brains and spinal cords, most likely to be infectious. More than 30 percent of the NRs analyzed were due to either improperly handling or removing SRMs. Could this not have also led to potentially BSE/TSE tainted materials entering the animal/human food chain?

In 10 percent of the NRs analyzed, plants incorrectly identified the age of cattle. THIS also could have led to tainted BSE/TSE SRM materials entering the animal/human food chain.

IN my opinion, this could have led to many feed discrepancies and should HAVE been reported to the public, without the media having to request this data via FOIA. I think in the future it would be best if the NRs (non-compliance reports) were made easily available to the public in there feed enforement reports. ...

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AUGUST 18, 2005
5:25 PM CONTACT: Public Citizen
(202) 588-1000


Evidence of Weak Meat Inspection Program Found in Nearly a Thousand Violations of Mad Cow Rules at Slaughter Plants
Noncompliance Records Show Plants Failed to Follow Regulations

WASHINGTON - August 18 - In stark contrast to the public relations message touted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the beef industry that the U.S. regulatory system is adequate to prevent the spread of mad cow disease, an analysis released today by the consumer group Public Citizen found significant lapses in the industry’s compliance with federal rules.
The analysis stems from a December 2004 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from Public Citizen to the USDA for all “noncompliance records” (NRs) related to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Public Citizen received copies of 829 records on Aug. 15.

More than half the violations (460) occurred because slaughter plants did not have an adequate plan for dealing with BSE in their plant’s food safety plan, as required by the USDA, the analysis shows. Of those 460 violations, 60 percent described plans that contained no mention of BSE at all.

“The fact that 60 percent of the violations were due to a failure to even mention BSE or risk materials such as brains and spinal cords is significant,” said Patty Lovera, deputy director of Public Citizen’s food program. “If officials running a meat plant cannot be bothered to recognize the risk of BSE when writing their safety plan, how much of a priority is it in daily operations and training of staff?”

The analysis also found that:


Violations of rules about the removal and handling of specified risk material (SRMs) occurred at 131 plants in at least 35 states. SRMs are the high-risk materials, such as brains and spinal cords, most likely to be infectious. More than 30 percent of the NRs analyzed were due to either improperly handling or removing SRMs. The SRM ban is considered a critical firewall in protecting the food supply from BSE.

The violations described in the NRs occurred from January 2004 through March 2005. This shows that the problems in the plants persisted long after plants should have adapted to new rules issued in January 2004 after the discovery of the first case of BSE in the United States.

In 10 percent of the NRs analyzed, plants incorrectly identified the age of cattle. Properly determining the age of cattle is a crucial step in proper SRM removal because the definition of SRMs is dependent on age; in cattle older than 30 months, there is a greater likelihood that SRM will carry BSE and therefore must be removed. Accurately identifying the head, spine and carcass of cattle by age is necessary to ensure that all SRMs are removed as the carcass moves down the slaughter line.
“These enforcement records only increase our concerns about how easily potentially infected cattle are bypassing inspection points at slaughterhouses, creating one more opportunity for infected meat to slip through the system,” said Tony Corbo, legislative representative of Public Citizen’s food program. “We’re approaching the two-year mark of our first case of mad cow in the United States, yet the government is still lagging behind on protecting consumers.”

Public Citizen sent the FOIA request to the USDA in December 2004 after the chairman of the USDA meat inspectors union, Stan Painter, raised concerns about the agency’s policy for ensuring that cattle age is properly determined. Instead of investigating whether the policy was adequate, the agency opened a misconduct investigation on Painter. The investigation was closed this week, shortly after Public Citizen received the documentation, which contained more than 80 records of plants improperly identifying cattle age.

###

http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0819-02.htm


thank you,
kind regards,

Terry S. Singeltary Sr.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Lyle Vogel"
To:
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: 1,000 CITATIONS ISSUED ON MAD COW REGULATIONS


> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #####################
>
> Terry, you asked:
>
> "Greetings,
>
> WHY was this not reported in the feed enforcement updates?"
>
> The answer is because they were NOT feed discrepancies. These were
> noncompliance reports issued by USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service
> employees to meat processing establishments.
>
> Lyle P. Vogel, DVM, MPH
> Director, Scientific Activities Division
> American Veterinary Medical Association
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy [mailto:BSE-L@aegee.org] On
> Behalf Of Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 9:35 AM
> To: BSE-L@aegee.org
> Subject: Re: 1,000 CITATIONS ISSUED ON MAD COW REGULATIONS
>
>
> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
> #####################
>
> Greetings,
>
> WHY was this not reported in the feed enforcement updates?
>
>
> BSE -- CVM Updates
>
> June 2005 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of
> BSE (June 20, 2005)
>
> http://www.fda.gov/cvm/bse0605.htm
>
> or here;
>
> March 2005 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of
> BSE (March 17, 2005)
>
> http://www.fda.gov/cvm/BSE0305.htm
>
>
>
> TSS
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 8:19 AM
> Subject: 1,000 CITATIONS ISSUED ON MAD COW REGULATIONS
>
>
> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
> #####################
>
> From: TSS ()
> Subject: 1,000 CITATIONS ISSUED ON MAD COW REGULATIONS
> Date: August 16, 2005 at 6:09 am PST
>
> Aug. 15, 2005, 11:39PM
>
> 1,000 citations issued on mad cow regulations
> Meatpackers didn't follow rules on tissue removal
> By DANIEL GOLDSTEIN
> Bloomberg News
>
> U.S. government inspectors cited meatpackers more than 1,000 times over
> a 17-month period for violating rules concerning the removal of tissue
> associated with mad cow disease, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said
> Monday.
>
>
> Some 1,036 "noncompliance" reports covering the January 2004-May 2005
> period were released, the USDA said. The reports document instances of
> meatpackers failing to properly remove "specified risk materials" or
> SRMs - brains, spinal cord tissue and other tissues that scientists say
> harbor the disease.
>
> "No specified risk materials got into the food supply" as a result of
> any of the violations, said Lisa Wallenda Picard, a spokeswoman for the
> USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service. In all cases, corrective
> actions were taken or unsafe practices were changed, Picard said.
>
> The release of the noncompliance reports comes as Japan, normally the
> biggest overseas customer for U.S. beef, debates whether to ease the ban
> on U.S. beef it imposed in December 2003 after the U.S. found its first
> case of mad cow disease.
>
> Many of the violations cited by the USDA were related to paperwork
> mistakes, according to the American Meat Institute, which represents
> Tyson Foods, Smithfield Foods and other large U.S. meatpackers. The USDA
> released the noncompliance reports to news organizations that had sought
> the information in freedom of information requests, the Washington-based
> trade group said in a prepared statement.
>
> Consumer group Public Citizen said it was still reviewing all the
> documents and would need several days to summarize the noncompliance
> reports. "I think there still has to be a concern about meat from an
> infected animal making it into the food supply," said Tony Corbo,
> legislative representative for Public Citizen. "It is not a fail-safe
> system."
>
> The meat industry disagreed.
>
> "Some groups will no doubt attempt to use this information as evidence
> of possible operational problems and even a food safety concern, when
> nothing is further from the truth," said Jim Hodges, president of the
> AMI Foundation.
>
> The USDA ordered that the risk materials be removed from slaughtered
> cattle Dec. 30, 2003, a week after the first U.S. mad cow case was
> confirmed.
>
> The second case was confirmed in June, at an undisclosed location in
> Texas.
>
> The noncompliance citations generally broke down into five categories:
> not having sufficient plans to address SRM removal, inadequate SRM
> removal, cross-contamination, poor record-keeping and inadequate age
> determination, Tyson Foods spokesman Gary Mickelson said.
>
> Reuters News contributed to this report.
>
>
> http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/3311823
>
> #################### https://lists.aegee.org/bse-l.html ####################
>



Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail: (optional)
Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: