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

From: TSS (
Subject: KERRY CALLS FOR GUTTING OF USDA (and it should be gutted starting at the top VENEMAN)
Date: September 12, 2004 at 10:03 am PST

Brasher: Ag secretary Veneman acts like a (job) candidate

September 12, 2004

Washington, D.C. - President Bush isn't the only one trying to keep his job. Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman's schedule is starting to look like she is campaigning for another term, too.

In recent weeks, Veneman has been to Minnesota, Oregon, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania - all battleground states heading into the November election.

She stayed through the entire Republican National Convention in New York, where she blasted Democratic nominee John Kerry in a highly partisan speech at an agribusiness event. "I am secretary of the department that John Kerry wants to get rid of," she said, referring to Kerry's one-time suggestion to gut the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Next Wednesday, she will be in Spencer, Ia., for the Clay County Fair, and she is also planning trips soon to Florida and possibly Minnesota.

Veneman, of course, says it is up to Bush as to whether she keeps her job if he is re-elected. But she isn't looking to leave.

"If the president asked me to serve him in any way, I will certainly give that very serious consideration," she said in a recent interview. "I don't have a plan to walk out the door."

Veneman, a lawyer and the daughter of a California peach grower, was as well-prepared for the job as any agriculture secretary in recent years, having previously worked her way up to the No. 2 post at the USDA during the administration of the first President Bush.

But nothing could have quite prepared her for the challenges thrown at her almost from the day she took office - the foot-and-mouth crisis in Europe in 2001; enacting an election-year farm bill that outraged conservatives because of its cost; massive meat recalls in 2002, which forced USDA to fast-track new safety rules; and the United States' first case of mad cow disease.

Oh, and by the way, she was diagnosed with treatable breast cancer in 2002.

She got off to a bad start, too, with some farm groups and on Capitol Hill.

National Journal, a nonpartisan magazine that covers the government, gave her a "D" grade after her first two years in office. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., called her "clueless." When the magazine asked Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Ia., what he thought about Veneman, he would not comment.

Agriculture secretary is no easy job, certainly not for a Republican.

On one side are business interests and big givers to Republican causes who expect to have a lot of influence in a GOP administration. On the other side are farm-state Democrats in Congress, including Conrad and Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota, who watch for any tilt toward agribusiness interests.

Then there are the various consumer activists who think the USDA is too pro-farmer and should not even be in charge of issues like food safety and dietary advice.

In this very disciplined administration, Veneman also has the White House's Office of Management and Budget looking over her shoulder. The office is driving USDA's effort to restrict the growth of the new Conservation Security Program.

Jon Doggett, the National Corn Growers Association's lead lobbyist in Washington, says Veneman is likely to stay another two years or so if Bush is re-elected. After that, he figures there will be plenty of job possibilities for her, such as at a research organization or foundation.

"I don't think I've heard a disparaging word about Ann Veneman for quite some time, as in a year-plus," Doggett said. "I've heard many more complimentary comments for her."

As for Grassley, he says he would not oppose her staying on. He hardly gushes, however.

"I think that Secretary Veneman has tried to do a good job," Grassley said.

By the way, if Veneman wants to make a lot of money in her next job, she need only look to her predecessor, Dan Glickman, for inspiration. Glickman was recently named chief lobbyist for the Motion Picture Association of America.

The salary? More than $1 million a year.

>"I am secretary of the department that John Kerry wants to get rid of," she said, referring to Kerry's one-time suggestion to gut the U.S. Department of Agriculture.<

GO !!!


we are all aware of all the lies about the USA mad cows, SO,

let us start with the atypical TSE sheep in VERMONT they lied about;

Subject: Re: AW: [BSE-L] USDA did not test possible mad cows - Dr. Detwiler, what about those sheep?
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:27:24 -0500
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
References: <> <>

######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########

Greetings list members,

Thought I should let the list know that Dr. Detwiler kindly replied to my
question about the delayed 'atypical' TSE testing in the Vermont sheep and
tried to explain what caused the delay. If I interpreted it correctly,
seems it was the fault of the U.K. ;

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Sheep
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:26:04 EDT

Mr. Singeltary.

I hope this finds you well. As you are aware I left the USDA last
year. I can only update you on the sheep before that time. Contact was
established with the UK on doing the bioassay studies. They agreed.
However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay. I
am aware that there are now additional labs in Europe running the mouse
bioassay strain typing. You will have to contact USDA for further word.

Linda Detwiler

My reply to Dr. Detwiler;

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Sheep
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:53:57 -0500
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
References: <>

hello Dr. Detwiler,

thanks for your kind reply.

> However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay.

not sure i understand that?

> You will have to contact USDA for further word.

already done that, and there answer was;


>Dear Mr. Singeltary,
>The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this
>year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the
>results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of
>Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is
>Have a nice day,
>Jim Rogers

and with my previous attempts for information via the FOIA through
this administration (as you are probably very well aware of) they have
all been ignored/refused. so any further attempts would be fruitless i am

thanks anyway...

kindest regards,
Terry wrote:

> Mr. Singeltary.



Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:

> ######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
> #########
> Greetings Dr. Detwiler,
> glad to see you are still with us, you had become very silent lately.
> hope you are enjoying semi retirement.
> recently, i inquired through the BSE-L and via USDA official about
> those Vermont sheep via belgium which there was an Extraordinary
> Declaration of Emergency declared here in the USA due to
> atypical scrapie. The thread is;
> Confiscation of Sheep in Vermont and testing results ? Thu, 20 May 2004
> 12:10:03 -0500 "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." Bovine
> Spongiform Encephalopathy BSE-L
>> Imported
>> Belgium/Netherlands
>> Sheep Test Results
>> Background
>> Factsheet
>> Veterinary Services April 2002
> snip...
>> Additional tests will be conducted to determine
>> exactly what TSE the animals haveBSE or scrapie.
>> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist
>> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals
>> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing
>> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.
> d=fr20jy00-32
> d=fr20jy00-31
> or if those old urls dont work, go here;
> - Terry S.
> Singeltary Sr. 7/20/00 (0)
> I was told that ;
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton...question please...scrapie...TSS
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400
> From:
> To:
> Dear Mr. Singeltary,
> The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this
> year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the
> results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of
> Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is
> 301-734-5941.
> Have a nice day,
> Jim Rogers
> =========
> Dr. Detwiler, my question is, why have these very important test been
> delayed for so long when we were told they were to have been started
> some 2+ years ago?
> who made this call to delay these very important test and why ?
> thank you,
> with kindest regards,
> Terry
> Linda Detwiler wrote:
>> ######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
>> #########
>> I m responding to Roland's post about my quote in the article by Steve
>> Mitchell. I spent a fair amount of time on the phone with Mr.
>> Mitchell on more than
>> one occasion. The quote was one aspect of our conversation. Even
>> the quote
>> included "probably". I explained about proper location and sampling
>> condition of the brain. I also added in our conversation that the
>> best methodology is
>> to utilize both a test for PrP as well as histopathology when examining
>> brains from cattle with CNS disease. This is why as early as
>> 1993-94 the USDA
>> began using IHC in its TSE testing regime at the National Veterinary
>> Services
>> Laboratory. However, utilizing only a PrP test eliminates the
>> possibility of
>> diagnosing another neurologic disease.
>> All of the tests have advantages and disadvantages. For example, I
>> have been
>> to a number of laboratories in Europe and watched as technicians took
>> the
>> test samples from the brain stem. They sample hundreds per night.
>> If they get
>> distracted the may take the sample lateral, or rostral to the
>> obex. If this
>> animal was in an earlier stage of disease, there may be a very small
>> amount of
>> PrPsc and limited to a single location in the brain. If that sample
>> missed
>> the obex, the sample would be negative and life goes on. With any
>> test using
>> a homogenate I am not aware that there is any cross check for location.
>> With IHC, the pathologist can determine location, however it too has
>> drawbacks in regard to sample condition. There is no perfect test.
>> There are
>> limitations to the tests themselves and there are limitations to all
>> of the aspects
>> of collection. Hence utilizing multiple tests especially for CNS
>> cases is
>> prudent. It is also prudent to examine other locations of the brain
>> in the event
>> a disease changes or something new emerges.
>> Linda Detwiler
>> #########
>> ##########
> #########
> ##########

######### ##########

and here are a few more lies;



What has happened in USDA goes beyond a process of capture intended to
restrict competition.
Thanks to its political influence, Big Agribusiness has been able to
pack USDA with appointees who
have a background of working in the industry, lobbying for it, or
performing research or other functions
on its behalf. These appointees have helped to implement policies that
undermine the regulatory
mission of USDA in favor of the bottom-line interests of agribusiness.
In other words, public
health and livelihoods are at stake.
To see that agribusiness has packed USDA with its apparent
representatives, one has only to look
at the biographies on the Department’s website of its roughly 45 top
officials, including the Secretary,
Deputy Secretary, Under Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, Deputy Under
Secretaries, Deputy
Assistant Secretaries and heads of key offices. Many of the biographies
cite previous work with
agribusiness companies and their trade associations, lobbying firms and
research arms, including university
research centers bankrolled by the food industry. Additional research
makes clear that there
are approximately as many industry people among the appointees as there
are career civil servants.
Here are some examples of appointees with past industry ties (unless
otherwise noted, the source for
each affiliation is the individual’s biography on the USDA website):


HARVARD STUDY bought and paid for by your local cattle dealer
(USDA paid Harvard $800,000 for study) there 'gold standard' study
they use as the bible of all BSE studies.

original Risk Assessmen November 26, 2001)

SUPPRESSED PEER review of Harvard study October 31, 2002

Report of the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Foreign Animal and
Poultry Diseases

Measures Relating to Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
in the United States

February 13, 2004

Concerns Regarding Differing Opinions on Risk

The Subcommittee made many additional recommendations. However, the
Committee cannot adequately resolve the differing BSE risk assessment
presented by the Subcommittee as compared to the assessment by Harvard
University. A major discrepancy exists with the Subcommittee’s
conclusions that BSE continues to circulate, or even amplify, in the US
and North America, when compared with the Harvard risk assessment. The
Committee must have this issue of risk resolved prior to completing its
recommendations to the Secretary. It is imperative that the Secretary
has the best available science and more precise risk assessments in
order to make appropriate regulatory decisions.

Recommendations by the Committee

· Prior to implementing regulatory changes in addition to what USDA
and FDA have already announced, the Committee recommends that
representatives of Harvard University be asked to review the
Subcommittee Report and its findings (Harvard and the Subcommittee
should communicate directly and come to consensus if possible) in light
of the risk model they have previously developed and report back to the
Secretary and this Committee;
· Immediately develop and implement an enhanced national surveillance
program for BSE to increase testing of high risk animals (cattle showing
symptoms of central nervous system disease, non-ambulatory cattle, and
cattle that die on farms); this action will further the scientific
evaluation of risk for BSE in the U.S. and North America;
· Concurrent with an enhanced surveillance for BSE, a comprehensive
system must be implemented to facilitate adequate pathways for dead and
non-ambulatory cattle to allow for collection of samples, and for
proper, safe disposal of carcasses; this must be done to ensure
protection of public health, animal health and the environment; such as
system will require expending federal resources to assist with costs for
sampling, transport and safe disposal;



2 February 2004

Subject: INTERNATIONAL BSE/TSE EXPERT SAYS "We believe that the
infection in North America took place at least 10 years
Date: February 5, 2004 at 9:18 am PST

Mad cow has home on U.S. ranges

International experts say the disease is "indigenous" to North America, and
it will take drastic measures to stop its spread.

Kihm said he thought that infection of the North American herd had begun
before the disease was diagnosed extensively in Britain and linked to
human deaths but that it only recently had spread to detectable levels
in Canada and the United States.

"We believe that the infection in North America took place at least 10
years ago," Kihm said. "You need one cycle before you have a few animals
positive, and you don't see them in the first cycle. You need a second
or a third."

The findings were presented to a USDA subcommittee appointed by Veneman.
Some members expressed frustration.

[PDF] GAO-02-183: Mad Cow Disease: Improvements in the Animal Feed Ban

Summary of the Scientific Report

The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working
Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform
Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission
(EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in the United
States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more
cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in
USA. This scientific report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004
based on data covering the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached
domestic cattle in the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in
the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and
therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is
possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached
domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge in the early nineties.

A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle
imports from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were
processed (partly) into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This
risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90s when
domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the
low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with
continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.

EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is
likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or
pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as there are no
significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains
extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be
(pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the BSE-agent persistently


Dave Louthan - Killed the Mad Cow

Senator Michael Machado from California

''USDA does not know what's going on''.

''USDA is protecting the industry''.

''SHOULD the state of California step in''

Stanley Prusiner

''nobody has ever ask us to comment''

''they don't want us to comment''

''they never ask''

i tried to see Venemon, after Candian cow was discovered with BSE.
went to see lyle. after talking with him... absolute ignorance... then
thought i should see Venemon... it was clear his entire policy was to
get cattle boneless beef prods across the border... nothing else
mattered... his aids confirmed this... 5 times i tried to see Venemon,
never worked... eventually met with carl rove the political... he is the
one that arranged meeting with Venemon... just trying to give you a sense
of the distance... healh public safety... was never contacted... yes i
believe that prions are bad to eat and you can die from them...END

Dr. Stan bashing Ann Veneman - 3 minutes

Recall Authority and Mad Cow Disease: Is the Current System Good for

Tuesday, February 24, 2004

Choose a RealPlayer video --->
Selected excerpts:

Opening Statement by Senator Michael Machado


July 13, 2004

IG Audit Finds Multiple Flaws in Mad Cow Surveillance Plan
Rep. Waxman raises questions about the effectiveness and credibility of
USDA's response to mad cow disease, citing an audit by the USDA
Inspector General that finds systemic deficiencies in the Department's
surveillance plan and new evidence that USDA misled the public in the
wake of the detection of an infected cow in Washington State.

- Letter to USDA

IG Draft Audit

May 13, 2004

Failure To Test Staggering Cow May Reflect Wider Problems
Rep. Waxman raises concerns that the recent failure of USDA to test an
impaired cow for BSE may not be an isolated incident, citing the failure
of USDA to monitor whether cows condemned for central nervous system
symptoms are actually tested for mad cow disease.

- Letter to USDA



No mad cow results for nearly 500 cows

By Steve Mitchell
United Press International
Published 8/11/2004 11:23 AM

WASHINGTON, Aug. 11 (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture failed
to test for mad cow disease or collect the correct portion of the brain
on nearly 500 suspect cows over the past two years -- including some in
categories considered most likely to be infected -- according to agency
records obtained by United Press International.

The testing problems mean it may never be known with certainty whether
these animals were infected with the deadly disease. Department
officials said these animals were not included in the agency's final
tally of mad cow tests, but the records, obtained by UPI under the
Freedom of Information Act, indicate at least some of them were counted...



Steve Mitchell is UPI's Medical Correspondent. E-mail
Copyright © 2001-2004 United Press International

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)

[20 August 2004]

From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. []
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:03 PM
Cc:;; BSE-L
Subject: Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION
TO DOCKET 2003N-0312]

Greetings FDA,


PLUS, if the USA continues to flagrantly ignore the _documented_ science
to date about the known TSEs in the USA (let alone the undocumented TSEs
in cattle), it is my opinion, every other Country that is dealing with
BSE/TSE should boycott the USA and demand that the SSC reclassify the
USA BSE GBR II risk assessment to BSE/TSE GBR III 'IMMEDIATELY'. for the
SSC to _flounder_ any longer on this issue, should also be regarded with
great suspicion as well. NOT to leave out the OIE and it's terribly
flawed system of disease surveillance. the OIE should make a move on CWD
in the USA, and make a risk assessment on this as a threat to human
health. the OIE should also change the mathematical formula for testing
of disease. this (in my opinion and others) is terribly flawed as well.
to think that a sample survey of 400 or so cattle in a population of 100
million, to think this will find anything, especially after seeing how
many TSE tests it took Italy and other Countries to find 1 case of BSE
(1 million rapid TSE test in less than 2 years, to find 102 BSE cases),
should be proof enough to make drastic changes of this system. the OIE
criteria for BSE Country classification and it's interpretation is very
problematic. a text that is suppose to give guidelines, but is not
understandable, cannot be considered satisfactory. the OIE told me 2
years ago that they were concerned with CWD, but said any changes might
take years. well, two years have come and gone, and no change in
relations with CWD as a human health risk. if we wait for politics and
science to finally make this connection, we very well may die before any
or changes are made. this is not acceptable. we must take the politics
and the industry out of any final decisions of the Scientific community.
this has been the problem from day one with this environmental man made
death sentence. some of you may think i am exaggerating, but you only
have to see it once, you only have to watch a loved one die from this
one time, and you will never forget, OR forgive...yes, i am still very
angry... but the transmission studies DO NOT lie, only the politicians
and the industry do... and they are still lying to this day...TSS

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. BOX 42 Bacliff, TEXAS USA

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

E-mail: (optional)


Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: