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

From: TSS ()
Date: March 14, 2006 at 7:16 am PST

----- Original Message -----
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 9:40 AM

March 14, 2006, 8:09AM
Mad cow case arises
Alabama case could be a blow for beef exports

Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

WASHINGTON - An Alabama cow has tested positive for mad cow disease, the third case of the brain-wasting disorder discovered on the nation's cattle farms in the last 2 1/2 years, the Agriculture Department said Monday.

In what could be yet another blow to beef exporters' efforts to pry open foreign markets closed to their products, USDA officials announced that a follow-up test conducted on tissue taken from an older downer cow had confirmed the presence of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, better known as mad cow disease.

Further test results could come later this week.

Regulators said beef from the animal had not entered the food supply.

"This animal did not enter the human food or animal feed chains," USDA Chief Veterinarian John Clifford said.

The diseased animal had lived on the unidentified Alabama farm for less than a year, regulators said.

USDA officials could not immediately say exactly how old the cow was or where it was born.

Regulators are keen to know the animal's age because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration implemented new feed rules in 1997 that were designed to better avoid the spread of the disease through contaminated food.

A veterinarian who examined the cow's teeth estimated the cow's age at "upwards of 10 years," Clifford said.

The cow was buried on the farm. Regulators are looking for offspring as well as the cow's original herd-mates.

The farm, where about 40 head of cattle had been kept, has not been formally quarantined, although Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks noted: "No animals are leaving this farm until we've finished our investigation."

USDA officials reported the nation's first case of mad cow disease in December 2003, when a cow imported from Canada was found to have had the ailment. Then last June, regulators learned a Texas cow months earlier had been infected with the disease.

After the first case of mad cow was discovered, Japan and other major export markets quickly slammed the door on U.S. beef products.

Regulators responded to the crisis by launching a massive program to better screen for the disease, and more than 650,000 cattle have been tested since June 2004.

Late last year, Japan reopened its market, only to seal its borders once again when a New York processing plant shipped banned animal parts to that country.

Clifford said USDA officials "would not anticipate that this would impact our ongoing negotiations.

'Product is safe'
"Our product is safe," Clifford said. "We've got a number of interlocking safeguards, and Japan has had 20-plus cases" of the disease itself.

Edna cattleman Shane Sklar acknowledged that "it's always scary when these things happen," but said he does not expect any "knee-jerk" reactions from U.S. trading partners.

USDA officials first revealed over the weekend they had discovered a possible case of mad cow. That allowed traders to digest the news before trading resumed on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange on Monday.

June live cattle futures rose 0.025 cent to close at 79.125 cents a pound Monday, while May feeder cattle futures were up 0.475 cent to $1.04575 a pound.

"Based on what we saw today on the futures market, I don't think we're anticipating much of a reaction," said Burt Rutherford, a spokesman for the Amarillo-based Texas Cattle Feeders Association.

But before they can become too sanguine, cattle raisers want to know exactly where this cow came from.

"Everybody in the industry is going to be pretty anxious to know that," Rutherford said.

In Texas, the cattle business is a $5.6 billion industry.

The diseased animal was a Santa Gertrudis cow, USDA officials said.

King Ranch breed
That's a breed developed on the King Ranch in Kingsville during the early part of the 20th century to tolerate the South Texas heat and insects, Rutherford said.

The discovery of this latest case comes as regulators were preparing to ratchet back the heightened screening program.

Whether the Alabama cow will force them to reconsider those plans is unclear.

Tony Corbo, legislative representative for the Washington-based consumers group Food and Water Watch, argued that the industry would more quickly build confidence abroad if the surveillance program remains in place.

"The trading partners may insist on it," he said.

Food safety groups also questioned regulators' suggestions that the animal would have contracted the disease by eating contaminated food sometime before the feed regulations were imposed in 1997.

Loopholes and errors
"We know through all sorts of government inspections of the feed ban that there are loopholes and errors and noncompliance with that feed ban," said Joseph Mendelson, legal director for the Washington-based Center for Food Safety.

"It's the ultimate 'don't look, don't find' policy. And the people who pay the price are consumers," Mendelson said.

Still, cattle industry officials hope diners will continue to order hamburger and steaks, just as they did after the last two mad cow cases were detected.

"I had a hamburger for lunch," said Richard Wortham, executive vice president of the Texas Beef Council. And he said he planned to eat beef again for dinner last night.

Jenalia Moreno reported from Houston.


The diseased animal was a Santa Gertrudis cow, USDA officials said.

King Ranch breed
That's a breed developed on the King Ranch in Kingsville during the early part of the 20th century to tolerate the South Texas heat and insects, Rutherford said.


i figured that damn cow might have a Texas connection. no place like home, home of the purina feed mill, where fda states its ok to feed cattle 5.5 grams of potentially tainted feed and that's safe, when we know now and knew back then that 5.5 grams is enough to kill 100+ cows. ...

January 30, 2001
Print Media: 301-827-6242
Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA


Note: On Dec. 23, 2003, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that a cow in Washington state had tested positive for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, or mad cow disease). As a result, information on this Web page stating that no BSE cases had been found in the United States is now incorrect. However, because other information on this page continues to have value, the page will remain available for viewing.


Today the Food and Drug Administration announced the results of tests taken on feed used at a Texas feedlot that was suspected of containing meat and bone meal from other domestic cattle -- a violation of FDA's 1997 prohibition on using ruminant material in feed for other ruminants. Results indicate that a very low level of prohibited material was found in the feed fed to cattle.

FDA has determined that each animal could have consumed, at most and in total, five-and-one-half grams - approximately a quarter ounce -- of prohibited material. These animals weigh approximately 600 pounds.

It is important to note that the prohibited material was domestic in origin (therefore not likely to contain infected material because there is no evidence of BSE in U.S. cattle), fed at a very low level, and fed only once. The potential risk of BSE to such cattle is therefore exceedingly low, even if the feed were contaminated.

According to Dr. Bernard Schwetz, FDA's Acting Principal Deputy Commissioner, "The challenge to regulators and industry is to keep this disease out of the United States. One important defense is to prohibit the use of any ruminant animal materials in feed for other ruminant animals. Combined with other steps, like U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) ban on the importation of live ruminant animals from affected countries, these steps represent a series of protections, to keep American cattle free of BSE."

Despite this negligible risk, Purina Mills, Inc., is nonetheless announcing that it is voluntarily purchasing all 1,222 of the animals held in Texas and mistakenly fed the animal feed containing the prohibited material. Therefore, meat from those animals will not enter the human food supply. FDA believes any cattle that did not consume feed containing the prohibited material are unaffected by this incident, and should be handled in the beef supply clearance process as usual.

FDA believes that Purina Mills has behaved responsibly by first reporting the human error that resulted in the misformulation of the animal feed supplement and then by working closely with State and Federal authorities.

This episode indicates that the multi-layered safeguard system put into place is essential for protecting the food supply and that continued vigilance needs to be taken, by all concerned, to ensure these rules are followed routinely.

FDA will continue working with USDA as well as State and local officials to ensure that companies and individuals comply with all laws and regulations designed to protect the U.S. food supply.

WE know now, and we knew decades ago, that 5.5 grams of suspect feed in TEXAS was enough to kill 100 cows.

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.


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 (icip 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. icip=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

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.


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.

Re: BSE .1 GRAM LETHAL NEW STUDY SAYS via W.H.O. Dr Maura Ricketts

[BBC radio 4 FARM news]

2) Infectious dose:

To cattle: 1 gram of infected brain material (by oral ingestion)



GAO-06-157R FDA Feed Testing Program

October 11, 2005


Mad Cow Disease: An Evaluation of a Small Feed Testing Program FDA Implemented in 2003 With Recommendations for Making the Program a Better Oversight Tool. GAO-06-157R, October 11

CVM Update
November 2005 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE

Issued by:
FDA, Center for Veterinary Medicine,
Communications Staff, HFV-12
7519 Standish Place, Rockville, MD 20855
Telephone: (240) 276-9300 FAX: (240) 276-9115
Internet Web Site:

[Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirement for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle

Terry S. Singeltary

Page 1 of 17

From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. []

Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 6:17 PM


Subject: [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements

for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle

Greetings FSIS,

I would kindly like to submit the following to [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and

Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle

THE BSE/TSE SUB CLINICAL Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle

Broken bones and such may be the first signs of a sub clinical BSE/TSE Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle ;

snip...FULL TEXT ;




To minimise the risk of farmers' claims for compensation from feed

To minimise the potential damage to compound feed markets through adverse publicity.

To maximise freedom of action for feed compounders, notably by
maintaining the availability of meat and bone meal as a raw
material in animal feeds, and ensuring time is available to make any
changes which may be required.




MAFF remains under pressure in Brussels and is not skilled at
handling potentially explosive issues.

5. Tests _may_ show that ruminant feeds have been sold which
contain illegal traces of ruminant protein. More likely, a few positive
test results will turn up but proof that a particular feed mill knowingly
supplied it to a particular farm will be difficult if not impossible.

6. The threat remains real and it will be some years before feed
compounders are free of it. The longer we can avoid any direct
linkage between feed milling _practices_ and actual BSE cases,
the more likely it is that serious damage can be avoided. ...

SEE full text ;

THIS is what happens when you have the industry run the government. ...


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

E-mail: (optional)


Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: