SEARCH VEGSOURCE:

 

 

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




From: TSS ()
Subject: USDA 2004 ENHANCED BSE SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM AND HOW NOT TO FIND BSE CASES (OFFICIAL DRAFT OIG REPORT)
Date: June 6, 2006 at 11:29 am PST

USDA 2004 ENHANCED BSE SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM AND HOW NOT TO FIND BSE CASES (OFFICIAL DRAFT OIG REPORT)

snip...


CATTLE With CNS Symptoms Were NOT Always Tested


snip...


Between FYs 2002 and 2004, FSIS condemned 680 cattle of all ages due to CNS symptoms. About 357 of these could be classified as adult. We could validate that ONLY 162 were tested for BSE (per APHIS records. ...

snip...

WE interviewed officials at five laboratories that test for rabies. Those officials CONFIRMED THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO SUBMIT RABIES-NEGATIVE SAMPLES TO APHIS FOR BSE TESTING. A South Dakota laboratory official said they were not aware they could submit rabies-negative samples to APHIS for BSE testing. A laboratory official in another State said all rabies-negative cases were not submitted to APHIS because BSE was ''NOT ON THEIR RADAR SCREEN." Officials from New York, Wisconsin, TEXAS, and Iowa advised they would NOT submit samples from animals they consider too young. Four of the five States contacted defined this age as 24 months; Wisconsin defined it as 30 months. TEXAS officials also advised that they do not always have sufficient tissue remaining to submit a BSE sample. ...

snip...


FULL TEXT 54 PAGES OF HOW NOT TO FIND BSE IN USA ;


http://www.house.gov/reform/min/pdfs_108_2/pdfs_inves/pdf_food_usda_mad_cow_july_13_ig_rep.pdf

SEE MORE BSe from APHIS ;


TSE Disease Surveillance


Data from APHIS animal disease surveillance programs can be used to
detect occurrences of disease, provide information for better policy
decisions, and better understand the diseases. Most surveillance
programs are based on data from live-animal tests; however, since such
tests are generally unavailable for TSE's, in this area APHIS generally
relies on observation of animals exhibiting signs of TSE's and tissue
samples from dead animals. Since 1990, animals targeted for BSE
surveillance by APHIS include cattle exhibiting signs of neurological
disease in the field (i.e., prior to being brought to slaughter),
cattle condemned at slaughter for neurologic reasons, rabies-negative
cattle submitted to public health laboratories,\3\ neurologic cases
submitted to veterinary diagnostic laboratories and teaching hospitals,
nonambulatory cattle (``downer cattle'') over 24 months of age at
slaughter, and adult cattle dying from unknown causes on farms. The
primary reason we target downer animals is that surveillance data from
European countries in which BSE has been detected indicate that downer
cattle have a greater incidence of BSE.\4\ If BSE enters the United
States, downer cattle testing programs are likely to first reveal it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

SNIP...

Summary of Issues Open for Comment


[sbull] What is the preferred approach and associated costs to
affected parties for controlling risks associated with disposal of
nonambulatory and dead livestock?
[sbull] Are there any cross-cutting issues between safe disposal of
specified risk materials such as brain and spinal cord and safe
disposal options for downer and on-farm dead animals?
[sbull] Are there practical ways to cull higher-risk downer cattle,
e.g. cattle that may have a non-obvious CNS condition, before they are
sent to slaughter? How should risk factors such as age, physical
condition, and the source and type of cattle be considered when sending
downer cattle to slaughter? What would such culling cost affected
parties?
[sbull] Since APHIS currently relies on collecting samples from
downer animals, at slaughter and other locations, as a key part of BSE
surveillance, how could we continue to obtain samples for testing from
downer cattle if they are not sent to slaughter?
[sbull] What carcass disposal methods are safe, fast, complete, and
environmentally acceptable? What combination of regulatory
requirements, incentives, and cooperative relationships with production
and disposal industries would result in sustainable procedures for the
safe disposal of dead stock, and what are the costs associated with
such solutions?
[sbull] Can rendering be an effective means for safely disposing of
dead stock in a manner that minimizes risks of spreading BSE and other
animal diseases? Under what conditions? What are the associated
technical, economic, regional, environmental, and practical business
issues?
[sbull] What are equitable ways to share the costs of dead stock
disposal, to concentrate and increase economic opportunities and social
benefits that can be associated with responsible dead stock disposal?
[sbull] What businesses, levels of government, or other parties
should be involved in dead stock disposal? Should such programs be
organized on the


[[Page 2711]]


county or State level, a regional level, or a national level, and what
role should the Federal Government play?
[sbull] Is there a need to particularly address disposal of sheep
and goats with regard to scrapie, and disposal of captive elk and deer
with regard to CWD? What dead stock disposal issues are common to all
species, and what issues are of particular importance to different
types of producers?


Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of January 2003.
Bill Hawks,
Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
[FR Doc. 03-1210 Filed 1-17-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-34-P


http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-1210.htm

TSS




Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail: (optional)
Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: