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

From: TSS (
Date: December 20, 2004 at 7:30 am PST

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:41:50 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy

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

Greetings list members,

Thought i might bring this up one more time before the year ending

BSE Test Results

Daily Update

On December 16, 2004, no inconclusive test results were reported.

A closer look;

PLEASE see full text pdf below and see why this administration
decided to not test mad cows that are stumbling and staggering in

- Letter to USDA


AND for sure why USDA et al did not use the WB after
2 positive BSE/TSE tests on that other cow in Texas?
IF the USDA/APHIS would have used the Western Blot,
that positive, positive, negative, would have been positive
a third time, and they know it, that is why the elected to
not use it at that very moment...

Statement by John Clifford, Deputy Administrator Animal & Plant Health
Inspection Service

November 23, 2004

"The USDA National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in Ames,
Iowa, has determined that the inconclusive screening test sample
reported on Nov. 18 has tested negative for BSE upon confirmatory testing.

"The Nov. 18 sample is the first that has tested inconclusive under an
APHIS protocol announced in August that calls for public reporting of
screening results only after two reactive screens. NVSL used the
immunohistochemistry (IHC) test, an internationally-recognized gold
standard test for BSE, and received a negative result on Nov. 22.
Because the Nov. 18 screening test results were reactive in both the
first and second screens, NVSL scientists made the recommendation to run
the IHC test a second time. On Nov. 23 they reported the second IHC test
was negative. Negative results from both IHC tests make us confident
that the animal in question is indeed negative for BSE.

"APHIS began an enhanced surveillance program on June 1 and to date has
tested over 121,000 samples for BSE. Screening tests are designed to be
extremely sensitive and false positives are not unexpected. APHIS has
reported three inconclusives including the Nov. 18 sample and all have
tested negative on confirmatory testing."!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?contentidonly=true&contentid=2004/11/0508.xml

OH, i did ask Bio-Rad about this with NO reply to date;

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:37:28 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."

Hello Susan and Bio-Rad,

Happy Holidays!

I wish to ask a question about Bio-Rad and USDA BSE/TSE testing
and there inconclusive. IS the Bio-Rad test for BSE/TSE that complicated,
or is there most likely some human error we are seeing here?

HOW can Japan have 2 positive cows with
No clinical signs WB+, IHC-, HP- ,
BUT in the USA, these cows are considered 'negative'?

IS there more politics working here than science in the USA?

What am I missing?

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: USDA: More mad cow testing will demonstrate beef's safety
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 09:26:19 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."


Experts doubt USDA's mad cow results

By Steve Mitchell
Medical Correspondent

Published 11/24/2004 4:34 PM

> The U.S. cow in question tested positive last week on two so-called
> rapid tests manufactured by Bio-Rad Laboratories in Hercules, Calif.
> The USDA said Tuesday the animal had tested negative on more
> sophisticated confirmatory tests called immunohistochemistry or IHC
> tests.

> John Clifford of the USDA said in a statement that the negative IHC
> results "makes us confident that the animal in question is indeed
> negative."

> A U.S. veterinarian knowledgeable about mad cow tests told UPI that
> experts she has spoken with are "very, very skeptical about" the
> USDA's negative test result.
> The veterinarian, who requested anonymity because she feared
> repercussions for speaking out against the USDA, said the skepticism
> arose because the agency did not run another kind of mad cow test
> called a Western blot. The test sometimes can pick up positive cases
> that IHC misses and the agency has used it in the past to rule out
> suspect cases.
> Moser said a Western blot test would make sense for the United States,
> where the prevalence of mad cow is thought to be low. Other countries
> -- including Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Mexico -- that are
> either free of the disease or have low rates, have elected to use the
> Western blot as part of their surveillance programs, he said.

> The veterinarian said concerns also have emerged because the USDA has
> not made a sample from the cow in question available for examination
> by outside experts. She added that the USDA did not notify state
> officials, as officials previously said they would about positive
> results on rapid tests.


> Moser said despite USDA's reliance on the IHC test results, repeated
> negatives on that test does not necessarily rule out the cow being
> infected.
> "The reason for this is that the IHC test ... is done on a different
> piece of tissue" than that used for the rapid test, he said. Prions,
> the pathogen thought to cause mad cow disease, tend to concentrate in
> a region of the brain called the obex, so the different outcomes of
> the different tests could be due to sampling a brain region that
> contains little or no prions.
> This could be made worse if the animal had lay dead for several days
> before its brain was collected. The brain might be so degraded that it
> would be difficult to locate the obex region for confirmatory testing
> and a sample might mistakenly be taken from a region that contains no
> prions.
> "So with these samples, the confirmatory testing would be even less
> reliable, not because of the confirmatory test itself, but because of
> the sampling," he said.
> --
> E-mail
> Copyright © 2001-2004 United Press International
> Get Copyright Clearance
> Want to
> use this article? Click here for options!
> Copyright
> 2004 United Press International

THE USDA June 2004 ENHANCED BSE/TSE Mad Cow 'cover up' is just
that, a cover up, unless the USDA/APHIS et al can come up with a good
reason why the WB was not used on the most recent Positive, Positive,
Negative and why that other TEXAS mad cow that was stumbling and
staggering, that was suppose to be tested (by every standard the USDA
APHIS et al have on record of old and new), but was later over ruled and
sent to the render. I will not even go into the other 500+ cows that UPI
found via the FOIA, of which the USDA failed to test for mad cow disease
or collect the correct portion of the brain ;

OR the FSIS inspectors that were convicted of bribery for passing
downer (dying, diseased or disabled) livestock in exchange for money;

JAPAN BSE # 8 & 9 cow

8. 6/10/2003 Holstein Steer 13/10/2001 23 mths
No clinical signs WB+, IHC-, HP-

9. 4/11/2003 Holstein Steer 13/1/2002
21 mths No clinical signs WB+, IHC-, HP-


Effect of Tissue Deterioration on Postmortem BSE Diagnosis by
Immunobiochemical Detection of an Abnormal Isoform of Prion Protein

Hiroko HAYASHI1), Masuhiro TAKATA1), Yoshifumi IWAMARU1), Yuko
USHIKI1)2), Kumiko M. KIMURA1), Yuichi TAGAWA1), Morikazu SHINAGAWA1)
and Takashi YOKOYAMA1)

1) Prion Disease Research Center, National Institute of Animal Health
2) Nippi Research Institute of Biomatrix

(Received 25-Aug-2003)
(Accepted 14-Jan-2004)

ABSTRACT. Surveillance for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in
fallen stock in Japan is conducted with a commercial enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for mass screening, with Western blotting
(WB) and immunohistochemistry performed for confirmation of the ELISA.
All tests are based on immunological detection of an abnormal isoform of
the prion protein (PrPSc) in brain tissues, which have sometimes
deteriorated by the time samples from fallen stock reach a diagnostic
laboratory. To evaluate BSE surveillance procedures for fallen stock, we
examined PrPSc detection from artificially deteriorated BSE-affected
bovine brain tissues with a commercial ELISA kit and compared the
results with those of WB. The optical density (OD) values of the ELISA
decreased with advancing deterioration of the tissues, whereas no
reduction in the signal for PrPSc was observed in WB, even when
performed after 4 days of incubation at 37°C. The progressive decrease
in the OD values in the ELISA appear to be caused by a partial loss of
the N-terminal moiety of PrPSc due to digestion by endogeneous and/or
contaminated microbial enzymes, and by the presence of ELISA inhibitors
that are generated in deteriorated tissues. These results suggest that
WB is the most reliable test for fallen stock, especially for cattle
brains within decaying carcasses.

KEY WORDS: BSE, ELISA, PrPSc, Western blot

[PDF (96K) ]
[References ]

To cite this article:
Hiroko HAYASHI, Masuhiro TAKATA, Yoshifumi IWAMARU, Yuko USHIKI, Kumiko
Effect of Tissue Deterioration on Postmortem BSE Diagnosis by
Immunobiochemical Detection of an Abnormal Isoform of Prion Protein. J.
Vet. Med. Sci.. Vol. 66: 515-520. (2004) .

DOI 10.1292/jvms.66.515
JOI JST.JSTAGE/jvms/66.515

Copyright(c) 2004 by the Japanese Society of Veterinary Science


Mad Cow: Linked to thousands of CJD cases?

By Steve Mitchell
United Press International
Published 12/29/2003 9:50 AM

The U.S. government's monitoring system for cases of Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease, a fatal human brain illness, could be missing tens of thousands
of victims, scientists and consumer advocates have told United Press

WHAT will 2005 bring us? can't wait...

Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518

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

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

E-mail: (optional)


Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: