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

From: TSS ()
Date: September 14, 2006 at 11:48 am PST


Report on the monitoring and testing

of ruminants for the presence

of transmissible spongiform

encephalopathy (TSE) in the EU in


In 2005, a total of 10.113.559 bovine, 349.340 ovine and 265.489 caprine animals were

tested in the EU in the framework of the TSE monitoring programme. 561 bovine, 2906 ovine

and 989 caprine animals turned out positive.

1.489.988 risk bovine animals and 8.607.051 healthy animals slaughtered for human consumption

were tested by rapid tests. 2.971 bovine animals were tested in the framework of

passive surveillance (animals reported as BSE suspects by the farmer or the veterinary practitioner

and subject to laboratory examination). In addition, 13.549 animals were tested in the

framework of culling of animals with an epidemiological connection to a BSE case. 87 % of

positive cases were detected by the active monitoring (testing of risk animals, healthy slaughtered

and culled cattle) and 13 % were detected by passive surveillance. BSE cases were found

in all Member States except Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Finland

and Sweden. The number of BSE cases and the overall prevalence in tested animals decreased

by respectively 35 % and 29 % in 2005 compared to 2004. The decrease was similar in both

risk and healthy animals. These reductions and the increasing age of positive cases indicate

that measures taken in the past are having some effect.

346.959 ovine animals were tested by active monitoring, while 2.424 were animals reported

as TSE suspects and therefore subjected to laboratory examination. In caprine animals, the

numbers of tests in the respective groups were 263.921 (active monitoring) and 1.560 (TSE

suspects), 806 and 153 TSE cases in respectively sheep and goats confirmed in 2005 were

subjected to discriminatory testing. Only in 2 sheep BSE could not be excluded by the primary

discriminatory test and further analyses were needed. No new BSE cases in small ruminants

were confirmed in 2005. The results of genotyping TSE positive and random sampled sheep,

provides useful information to evaluate the susceptibility of sheep genotypes to classical and

atypical scrapie.

In addition to the Member States, Bulgaria and Norway forwarded information on the TSE testing

of bovine, ovine and caprine animals.

Further information:

Health and Consumer Protection Directorate-General, Unit E2;

fax: +32-2-296.90.62;


"The fact the Texas cow showed up fairly clearly implied the existence of
other undetected cases," Dr. Paul Brown, former medical director of the
National Institutes of Health's Laboratory for Central Nervous System
Studies and an expert on mad cow-like diseases, told United Press
International. "The question was, 'How many?' and we still can't answer

Brown, who is preparing a scientific paper based on the latest two mad cow
cases to estimate the maximum number of infected cows that occurred in the
United States, said he has "absolutely no confidence in USDA tests before
one year ago" because of the agency's reluctance to retest the Texas cow
that initially tested positive.

USDA officials finally retested the cow and confirmed it was infected seven
months later, but only at the insistence of the agency's inspector general.

"Everything they did on the Texas cow makes everything USDA did before 2005
suspect," Brown said. ...snip...end

AND NOT TO FORGET what the OIG has said time and time again over the years;

03-025IF 03-025IF-631 Linda A. Detwiler [PDF]

Specified Risk Materials (SRMs)

I am in full support of the interim final rule which prohibits SRMs from

being included in food for human consumption. In addition to the list of

tissues published in this rule, I am requesting that additional tissues be

added to the list. These would include dura

("sheath") covering the spinal cord and the ENTIRE INTESTINE (from pylorus

to rectum). The scientific justification is provided below. THESE SRMs

should also be prohibited from ANY FDA regulated food or product intended

for human consumption, including but not limited to flavorings, extracts,

etc. ...

Dr. Linda Detwiler comments in full;

[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


Subject: SCRAPIE and CWD USA UPDATE July 19, 2006
Date: July 19, 2006 at 12:06 pm PST

Infected and Source Flocks

As of May 31, 2006, there were 93 scrapie infected and source flocks (Figure 3). There were 12 new infected and source flocks reported in May (Figure 4) with a total of 67 flocks reported for FY 2006 (Figure 5). The total infected and source flocks that have been released in FY 2006 are 53 (Figure 6), with 7 flocks released in May. The ratio of infected and source flocks released to newly infected and source flocks for FY 2006 = 0.79 : 1. In addition, as of May 31, 2006, 216 scrapie cases have been confirmed and reported by the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL), of which 33 were RSSS cases (Figure 7). This includes 33 newly confirmed cases in May 2006 (Figure . Eighteen cases of scrapie in goats have been reported since 1990 (Figure 9). The last goat case was reported in March 2006. New infected flocks, source flocks, and flocks released for FY 2006 are depicted in Chart 3. New infected and source statuses from 1997 to 2006 are depicted in Chart 4.


Scrapie Testing

In FY 2006, 26,185 animals have been tested for scrapie : 22,634 RSSS*; 2063 regulatory field cases; 61 necropsy validations, 5 rectal biopsy and 1427 regulatory third eyelid biopsies (Chart 9). ...



NOTICE CWD creeping its way to TEXAS, literally to it's border. ...

THEN NOTICE CWD sample along that border in TEXAS, Three Year Summary of Hunter-Kill CWD sampling as of 31 August 2005 of only 191 samples, then compare to the other sample locations ;

THREE NEW CASES OF CWD were announced in this same location this month ;



SANTA FE - Three deer in southern New Mexico have tested positive for chronic wasting disease, bringing the total number of confirmed CWD-infected deer in the state to 15 since the first infected deer was discovered in 2002.

The Department received test results Wednesday from the state Veterinary Diagnostic Services laboratory in Albuquerque that two wild deer captured near the White Sands Missile Range headquarters east of Las Cruces had tested positive for chronic wasting disease. A third wild deer captured in the small community of Timberon in the southern Sacramento Mountains also tested positive for the disease.

The discoveries of the infected deer were part of the Department's ongoing efforts to monitor the disease, which to date has been confined to the southern Sacramento Mountains southeast of Cloudcroft and areas surrounding the Organ Mountains near Las Cruces. Two wild elk from the southern Sacramento Mountains tested positive for the disease in December 2005.

Chronic wasting disease is a fatal neurological illness that afflicts deer, elk and moose. There is no evidence of CWD being transmitted to humans or livestock. The disease causes animals to become emaciated, display abnormal behavior and lose control of bodily functions. To date, it has been found in captive and wild deer, elk and moose in eight states and two Canadian provinces.

For more information about CWD in New Mexico and how hunters can assist in research and prevention, please visit the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Web site, . More information about CWD also can be found on the Chronic Wasting Disease Alliance site at .





Chair: Dr. Jim Logan, Cheyenne, WY

Vice Chair: Dr. Joe D. Ross, Sonora, TX

Dr. Deborah L. Brennan, MS; Dr. Beth Carlson, ND; Dr. John R. Clifford, DC; Dr. Thomas F. Conner, OH; Dr. Walter E. Cook, WY; Dr. Wayne E. Cunningham, CO; Dr. Jerry W. Diemer, TX; Dr. Anita J. Edmondson, CA; Dr. Dee Ellis, TX; Dr. Lisa A. Ferguson, MD; Dr. Keith R. Forbes, NY; Dr. R. David Glauer, OH; Dr. James R. Grady, CO; Dr. William L. Hartmann, MN; Dr. Carolyn Inch, CAN; Dr. Susan J. Keller, ND; Dr. Allen M. Knowles, TN; Dr. Thomas F. Linfield, MT; Dr. Michael R. Marshall, UT; Dr. Cheryl A. Miller, In; Dr. Brian V. Noland, CO; Dr. Charles Palmer, CA; Dr. Kristine R. Petrini, MN; Mr. Stan Potratz, IA; Mr. Paul E. Rodgers, CO; Dr. Joan D. Rowe, CA; Dr. Pamela L. Smith, IA; Dr. Diane L. Sutton, MD; Dr. Lynn Anne Tesar, SD; Dr. Delwin D. Wilmot, NE; Dr. Nora E. Wineland, CO; Dr. Cindy B. Wolf, MN.

The Committee met on November 9, 2005, from 8:00am until 11:55am, Hershey Lodge and Convention Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania. The meeting was called to order by Dr. Jim Logan, chair, with vice chairman Dr. Joe D. Ross attending. There were 74 people in attendance.

The Scrapie Program Update was provided by Dr. Diane Sutton, National Scrapie Program Coordinator, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services (APHIS), Veterinary Services (VS). The complete text of the Status Report is included in these Proceedings.

Dr. Patricia Meinhardt, USDA-APHIS-VS-National Veterinary Services Laboratory (NVSL) gave the Update on Genotyping Labs and Discrepancies in Results. NVSL conducts investigations into discrepancies on genotype testing results associated with the Scrapie Eradication Program. It is the policy of the Program to conduct a second genotype test at a second laboratory on certain individual animals. Occasionally, there are discrepancies in those results. The NVSL conducts follow-up on these situations through additional testing on additional samples from the field and archive samples from the testing laboratories.

For the period of time from January 1, 2005, until October 15, 2005, there were 23 instances of discrepancies in results from 35 flocks. Of those 23 instances, 14 were caused by laboratory error (paperwork or sample mix-up), 3 results from field error, 5 were not completely resolved, and 1 originated from the use of a non-approved laboratory for the first test. As a result of inconsistencies, one laboratory’s certification was revoked by APHIS-VS.

To reduce/eliminate these problems, the Program has placed additional quality requirements on the testing laboratories: additional review of final reports, additional coding systems for testing operations, strict follow-up and reports to NVSL on corrective actions, dual data entry systems, and more frequent inspections.



Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

E-mail: (optional)


Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: