SEARCH VEGSOURCE:

 

 

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




From: TSS ()
Subject: Quantitative assessment residual BSE risk posed by DCP/TCP from bovine bones used as an animal feed additive or as fertiliser
Date: April 12, 2006 at 7:20 am PST

Opinion of the Scientific Panel BIOHAZ on the “Quantitative assessment of the residual BSE risk posed by di-calcium phosphate (DCP) and tri-calcium phosphate (TCP) from bovine bones used as an animal feed additive or as fertiliser”
Last updated: 11 April 2006
Adopted on 16 March 2006 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-099)

Opinion
Summary
Summary

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Biohazards (BIOHAZ) panel was invited to assess the validity of the outcome of a quantitative risk assessment (QRA) of the residual BSE risk in di-calcium phosphate (DCP) and tri-calcium phosphate (TCP)from bovine bones, used as an animal feed additive or as fertiliser.

Given the outcome was considered valid, the previous SSC opinion “on the safety of di-calcium phosphate (DCP) and tri-calcium phosphate (TCP) from bovine bones, used as an animal feed additive or as fertiliser (submitted to the SSC at its meeting of 6-7 March 2003)” should be reviewed and an opinion should be given on how to interpret the results in order to make an estimation of the number of potential BSE cases expected per year in a population.

The BIOHAZ panel concluded that when a limit of less than 1 case per year is considered as negligible, no scenario of sourcing bovine bones derived phosphates from GBR III or GBR IV countries leads to an average residual BSE risk equivalent to less than 1 case of BSE per year in either adult dairy or beef cattle.

This appears to conflict with the previous wording in the SSC Opinion stating that the residual risk of di-calcium phosphate derived from bovine bones from GBR II, GBR III and GBR IV countries is negligible when the raw material for the production of bovine bone DCP is:

a) obtained from tissues from animals fit for human consumption with exclusion of specified risk materials including skull and vertebrae and avoidance of cross-contamination [with CNS] of these bones

b) submitted to a production process that has proven TSE infectivity reduction capacity


Publication date: 11 April 2006


http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/biohaz/biohaz_opinions/1440_en.html


FULL TEXT OPINION ;


http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/biohaz/biohaz_opinions/1440/biohaz_op_ej339_qra_dcp_tcp_en1.pdf

USA, CANADA, AND MEXICO BSE GBR III

EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of Mexico

Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083)


[Last updated 08 September 2004]


http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/565/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_v2_en1.pdf


EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA)

Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083)


[Last updated 08 September 2004]


http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/573/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_v2_en1.pdf


EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of Canada

Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083)


[Last updated 08 September 2004]


http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/564/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_v2_en1.pdf

TSS



Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail: (optional)
Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: