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

From: TSS ()
Subject: Re: BSE ALABAMA Epidemiology Update March 23, 2006
Date: March 24, 2006 at 10:36 am PST

In Reply to: BSE ALABAMA Epidemiology Update March 23, 2006 posted by TSS on March 23, 2006 at 2:14 pm:

> The calf was appropriately disposed of in a local
> landfill and did not enter the human or animal food chain.

well, back at the ranch with larry, curly and mo heading up the USDA et al,
what would you expect, nothing less than shoot, shovel and shut the hell up.
no mad cow in USA, feed ban working, no civil war in Iraq either.

but what has past history shown us, evidently it has shown the USDA et al nothing ;

Disposal of meat and bone meal (MBM) derived from specified risk material (SRM) and over thirty month scheme carcasses by landfill
The Committee was asked to consider a quantitative risk assessment of the disposal of meat and bone meal derived from specified risk material and over thirty month scheme carcasses by landfill, prepared in response to a request from the Committee at its June 1999 meeting.

The Committee was asked whether, in the light of the results of the risk assessment, it held to its earlier published (June 1999) view that landfill was an acceptable outlet for MBM of any origin, although it retained a preference for incineration. The Committee reiterated that it had a strong preference for incineration as the favoured route for the disposal of MBM and were uneasy about the use of landfill for the disposal of this material. If there were cases where incineration was not practical the Committee felt it would be preferable for any material going to landfill to be pressure-cooked first or possibly stored above ground prior to incineration.

Disposal of BSE suspect carcases
It is the Department's policy to dispose of BSE suspects by incineration wherever feasible. No BSE suspect carcases have been landfilled since 1991.








The details of the SSC’s evaluation are provided in the attached report. The SSC

concludes as follows:

(1) The term “burial” includes a diversity of disposal conditions. Although burial is

widely used for disposal of waste the degradation process essential for BSE/TSE

infectivity reduction is very difficult to control. The extent to which such an

infectivity reduction can occur as a consequence of burial is poorly characterised.

It would appear to be a slow process in various circumstances.

(2) A number of concerns have been identified including potential for groundwater

contamination, dispersal/transmission by birds/animals/insects, accidental

uncovering by man.

(3) In the absence of any new data the SSC confirms its previous opinion that animal

material which could possibly be contaminated with BSE/TSEs, burial poses a

risk except under highly controlled conditions (e.g., controlled landfill).



In the absence of new evidence the opinion of the SSC “Opinion on Fallen Stock”

(SSC 25th June 1999) must be endorsed strongly that land burial of all animals and

material derived from them for which there is a possibility that they could

incorporate BSE/TSEs poses a significant risk. Only in exceptional circumstances

where there could be a considerable delay in implementing a safe means of disposal

should burial of such materials be considered. Guidelines should be made available

to aid on burial site selection.


During the 2001 outbreak of FMD in the UK, the

Department of Health prepared a rapid qualitative

assessment of the potential risks to human health

associated with various methods of carcass disposal

(UK Department of Health, 2001c). The most

relevant hazards to human health resulting from

burial were identified as bacteria pathogenic to

humans, water-borne protozoa, and BSE. The main

potential route identified was contaminated water

supplies, and the report generally concluded that an

engineered licensed landfill would always be

preferable to unlined burial. In general terms, the

findings of the qualitative assessment relative to

biological agents are summarized in Table 13.

TABLE 13. Potential health hazards and associated pathways of exposure resulting from landfill or burial of

animal carcasses (adapted from UK Department of Health, 2001c).



Rendering and fixed-facility incineration were

preferred, but the necessary resources were not

immediately available and UK officials soon learned

that the capacity would only cover a portion of the

disposal needs. Disposal in commercial landfills was

seen as the next best environmental solution, but

legal, commercial, and local community problems

limited landfill use. With these limitations in mind,

pyre burning was the actual initial method used but

was subsequently discontinued following increasing

public, scientific, and political concerns. Mass burial

and on-farm burial were last on the preferred

method list due to the complicating matter of bovine

spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and the risk posed

to groundwater (Hickman & Hughes, 2002).

Carcase disposal:

A Major Problem of the

2001 FMD Outbreak

Gordon Hickman and Neil Hughes, Disposal Cell,

FMD Joint Co-ordination Centre, Page Street


3. Prof. A. Robertson gave a brief account of BSE. The US approach
was to accord it a _very low profile indeed_. Dr. A Thiermann showed
the picture in the ''Independent'' with cattle being incinerated and thought
this was a fanatical incident to be _avoided_ in the US _at all costs_...



Some unofficial information from a source on the inside looking out -


As early as 1992-3 there had been long studies conducted on small
pastures containing scrapie infected sheep at the sheep research station
associated with the Neuropathogenesis Unit in Edinburgh, Scotland.
Whether these are documented...I don't know. But personal recounts both
heard and recorded in a daily journal indicate that leaving the pastures
free and replacing the topsoil completely at least 2 feet of thickness
each year for SEVEN years....and then when very clean (proven scrapie
free) sheep were placed on these small pastures.... the new sheep also
broke out with scrapie and passed it to offspring. I am not sure that TSE
contaminated ground could ever be free of the agent!!
A very frightening revelation!!!


You can take that with however many grains of salt you wish, and
we can debate these issues all day long, but the bottom line,
this is not rocket-science, all one has to do is some
experiments and case studies. But for the life of me,
I don't know what they are waiting on?

Kind regards,

Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
Bacliff, Texas USA

More here:


Requirements include:

a. after burning to the range of 800 to 1000*C to eliminate smell;

well heck, this is just typical public relations fear factor control.
do you actually think they would spend the extra costs for fuel,
for such extreme heat, just to eliminate smell, when they spread
manure all over your veg's. i think not. what they really meant were
any _TSE agents_.

b. Gas scrubbing to eliminate smoke -- though steam may be omitted;

c. Stacks to be fitted with grit arreaters;


1.2 Visual Imact

It is considered that the requirement for any carcase incinerator
disign would be to ensure that the operations relating to the reception,
storage and decepitation of diseased carcasses must not be publicly
visible and that any part of a carcase could not be removed or
interfered with by animals or birds.

full text;


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

E-mail: (optional)


Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: