SEARCH VEGSOURCE:

 

 

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




From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (216-119-156-19.ipset36.wt.net)
Subject: Canada Confirms Mad-Cow Case, Further Clouding U.S. Import Plan
Date: January 12, 2005 at 8:46 am PST

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Canada Confirms Mad-Cow Case, Further Clouding U.S. Import Plan
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:35:59 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
To: BSE-L@LISTSERV.KALIV.UNI-KARLSRUHE.DE


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

Canada Confirms Mad-Cow Case,
Further Clouding U.S. Import Plan

By TAMSIN CARLISLE and SCOTT KILMAN
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
January 12, 2005; Page A2

Canada confirmed another case of "mad cow" disease, raising doubts about
the efficacy of its cattle-feed regulations and further complicating a
U.S. plan to reopen the border to live imports of Canadian animals.

The latest case, less than two weeks after an earlier case, involves a
purebred Alberta Charolais beef cow born in March 1998.

The birth date is crucial, as it is seven months after strict feed
regulations were adopted in an effort to curb the spread of the deadly
brain-wasting disease.

The latest animal brings to four the number of Canadian-born cattle
diagnosed with bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE, the formal name
for mad-cow disease.

But until now, the animals had been older ones that consumed feed that
still included renderings of dead animals. That practice of adding
renderings from cows and other ruminants to cattle feed was banned in
1997 by both the U.S. and Canada as a means to build a barrier against
the brain-wasting disease.

[madcow] AP VIDEO
Watch an Associated Press video report

on the Canadian mad-cow case. RealPlayerG2 is
required.

While the Bush administration is sticking with its plans for now to
reopen the Canadian border to cattle imports in March, it did leave the
door open for a policy change -- a softer position than it took last
week in the wake of Canada's other recent mad-cow discovery. In a
statement yesterday by Ron DeHaven, head of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, the agency
said it will investigate the newest Canadian case before deciding the
"appropriate next steps" in regard to its border plan. The ban has been
in place since Canada's first case of homegrown mad-cow disease was
discovered in 2003.

The Bush administration has little to gain by making an immediate
decision, because the border move isn't scheduled to occur for another
two months.

Some U.S. farm organizations and several consumer groups have been
lobbying Congress to keep the border closed. The U.S. Senate Agriculture
Committee is making plans to hold hearings. American ranchers, who worry
that a flood of Canadian cattle would erode what have been unusually
high prices for their cattle, contend that allowing Canadian cattle to
mingle with U.S. cattle again would make it even harder for the U.S. to
regain the confidence of its foreign beef customers, particularly Japan.

The U.S. meatpacking industry, meanwhile, contends that the closure of
the Canadian border is aggravating a cattle shortage that is making U.S.
beef operations unprofitable. Tyson Foods

Inc., the biggest U.S. meat concern, announced last week that it is
temporarily closing several plants for a month, idling thousands of
workers, because it can't find enough cattle to kill. Economists
estimate that Canada would export roughly 1.7 million cattle to the U.S.
this year if the border were to reopen in March.

Commodity traders are betting that the latest discovery will make it
harder for the Bush administration to reopen the Canadian border. In
trading at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the live-cattle contract for
February delivery rose 1.32 cents a pound to settle at 91.87 cents a pound.

The latest Canadian case heightens concerns about the Canadian feed
industry's compliance with the August 1997 ban on using cattle remains
in cattle feed and it elevates fears that the disease agent may have
circulated in Canada more recently and more widely than first thought.

Responding to the concerns over compliance, Canadian Agriculture
Minister Andy Mitchell yesterday ordered a "thorough audit" of Canada's
cattle-feed system to determine whether the country's feed regulations
are operating as planned. "This reporting of a second case [of BSE]
within 10 days in my view requires further action on our part," he said
during a news conference.

Mr. Mitchell said he remains "confident" of the efficacy of Canada's
feed regulations and suggested that the infected cow ate contaminated
cattle-feed produced before Canada introduced its feed restrictions. But
this hasn't been proved -- a situation likely to increase pressures on
the Bush administration.

All of the four infected animals that have been discovered in North
America -- including the only case found in the U.S. so far -- have ties
to Alberta, the Canadian province that produces roughly half of Canada's
beef supply.

Mr. Mitchell said he has spoken with U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ann
Veneman about the latest mad-cow case and hopes, through the feed audit,
to provide Canada's trade partners with additional evidence of Canadian
compliance with measures introduced to protect human health and to
prevent the spread of mad cow.

Write to Tamsin Carlisle at tamsin.carlisle@wsj.com
and Scott Kilman at scott.kilman@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB110546941256322984,00.html


TSS

######### https://listserv.kaliv.uni-karlsruhe.de/warc/bse-l.html ##########

EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA)
Publication date: 20 August 2004

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

* 167 kB Report
* 105 kB Summary

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 90’s 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 increases.

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573_en.html


USA BSE GBR RAISED TO BSE GBR III

Working Group Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR
III) of USA 2004 ''extremely/very unstable BSE/cattle system''

USA

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/574/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_annex_en1.pdf>

CANADA

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/563/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_annex_en1.pdf

MEXICO

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/566/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_annex_en1.pdf


Canada and the United States have been raised to level III (presence of BSE likely but not confirmed, or confirmed at a lower level) following a new assessment taking into account the most recent evidence. EFSAs Scientific Expert Working Group on geographic BSE risk assessment also evaluated the status of Mexico and South Africa which were classified as level III.

http://www.efsa.eu.int/press_room/press_release/575_en.html

European Food Safety Authority
20 August 2004
PRESS RELEASE
EFSA publishes Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) assessments for
Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Sweden
and the United States of America
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has issued today seven up-to-date
scientific reports on the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
Risk (GBR) assessments for Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa
Sweden and the United States of America. While Australias GBR level I (i.e.
presence of BSE in domestic cattle is highly unlikely) is maintained, that of Norway
has been raised to level II (presence of BSE unlikely but not excluded), Sweden
remains at GBR level II and those of Canada and the United States have been raised
to level III (presence of BSE likely but not confirmed, or confirmed at a lower level)
following a new assessment taking into account the most recent evidence. EFSAs
Scientific Expert Working Group on geographic BSE risk assessment also evaluated
the status of Mexico and South Africa which were classified as level III.
In 2003 EFSA was requested by the European Commission (EC) to re-assess the
Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) risk (GBR) for 13 countries:
Australia, Botswana, Canada, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Namibia, Norway,
Mexico, Panama, Swaziland, Sweden and the United States. Although the European
Commission did not specifically seek advice from EFSA relating to the appearance of
BSE in South Africa, the working group decided to carry out a risk assessment for this
country under a self-tasking mandate in order to allow for a meaningful evaluation of the
three other countries in the Southern African Region for which a GBR assessment was
requested (i.e. Botswana, Namibia, Swaziland). EFSAs Scientific Expert Working
Group on the Assessment of the GBR has completed to date those assessments relating to
Australia, Canada, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and the United States of
America. The GBR assessments for the remaining countries will be finalized by the end
of 2004.
In conducting the GBR assessments, EFSAs GBR working group followed the
methodology developed by the former Scientific Steering Committee of DG Health and
Consumer Safety (DG SANCO) of the European Commission which is described in its
final opinion on GBR assessment1. The risk assessments published today are based on
up-to-date data provided by the countries concerned as well as other sources of data (i.e.
Eurostat and country export data) covering the period of 1980 to 2003.
A detailed analysis for each country is presented in the Scientific Reports which can be
found at:
http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/catindex_en.html
For media enquiries, please contact:
Carola Sondermann, Senior Press Officer
Tel: +32 2 337 2294
Carola.Sondermann@efsa.eu.int
Or EFSA Communications Director, Anne-Laure Gassin
Tel: +32 2 337 2248
Anne-Laure.Gassin@efsa.eu.int
For more background information about the European Food Safety Authority, go to:
http://www.efsa.eu.int/
Notes to editors
1. The Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) is a qualitative indicator of the likelihood of the
presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as
1 Final opinion on the Geographical Risk of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (GBR) (Adopted on 6
July 2000). http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/ssc/out113_en.pdf
Updated opinion on the Geographical Risk of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (GBR) (adopted on 11
January 2002). http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/ssc/out243_en.pdf
clinically, at a given point in time, in a country. Where its presence is confirmed, the
GBR gives an indication of the level of infection.
2. The GBR assessments are based on information submitted by countries concerned in
response to a European Commission recommendation in 1998 setting out the information
requirements for such an assessment.2 The information concerns in particular imports of
bovines and meat and bone meal (MBM) from the United Kingdom and other BSE-risk
countries, rendering standards for animal by-products, use of so called Specified Risk
Materials (SRMs), feeding of MBM to ruminants etcetera.
3. The table below shows the current GBR levels of the seven countries assessed by
EFSA so far, as well as their former classification where available.
GBR
level
Presence of one or more cattle clinically or
pre-clinically infected with the BSE agent in
a geographical region/country
GBR of the country/Region
Current status
(status before)
I Highly unlikely
Australia (I)
II Unlikely but not excluded
Norway (I), Sweden (II)
III Likely but not confirmed or confirmed at a
lower level
Canada (II), Mexico (N/A),
South Africa (N/A), USA (II)
IV Confirmed at a higher level
N/A= not applicable, i.e. not assessed before
2 Preliminary-opinion on a method to assess the geographical BSE-Risk of Countries or Regions (adopted
on 10 December 1998). http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/ssc/out35_en.html

http://www.efsa.eu.int/press_room/press_release/575/pr_biohaz02_gbr_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)
[20 August 2004]

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573_en.html

EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA)
Publication date: 20 August 2004

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

* 167 kB Report

* 105 kB Summary


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 increases.

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573_en.html

SUMMARY

javascript:popwindow('http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/573/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_summary_en1.pdf',750,480,1,0,1,0,0,1,1,0)

REPORT USA

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

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/574/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_annex_en1.pdf


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

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

[20 August 2004]

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

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

[20 August 2004]

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

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

[20 August 2004]

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

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

[20 August 2004]

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

Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-074)

[20 August 2004]

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

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

[20 August 2004]

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]

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/catindex_en.html

From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [flounder@wt.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:03 PM
To: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov
Cc: ggraber@cvm.fda.gov; Linda.Grassie@fda.gov; BSE-L
Subject: Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION
TO DOCKET 2003N-0312]

Greetings FDA,

snip...

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 decisions
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


http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt

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






Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail: (optional)
Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: