##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #####################
Greetings list members,
mooving right along;
> These include: proper animal identification; accompanying animal
> health certification that includes information on individual animal
> identification, age, origin, destination, and responsible parties; the
> movement of the cattle to feedlots or slaughter facilities in sealed
> containers; the prohibition on cattle moving to more than one feedlot
> in the United States; and the removal of specified risk materials
> (SRMs) from cattle slaughtered in the United States.
FROM a space in time, and i'm not talking leon russel ;-}
Brains have other ways of getting into the food supply, though.
According to disturbing new research from Texas A&M University and the
Canadian government, cattle brain tissue can end up scattered throughout
the carcass during slaughtering.
In some plants, the first step in slaughtering a cow is to stun it with
a pneumatic gun. "The force is so explosive that it splatters brain
tissue into the cow's blood vessels," says Graham Clarke, Chief of Red
Meat Inspection for Canada's Food Inspection Agency.
"Our research shows that it's possible that microscopic particles of
brain matter can be circulated to the lungs, liver, and maybe other
sites," reports Tam Garland, a research veterinarian at Texas A&M. The
Canadian government has found the same.
"That's not surprising," says Garland, "because it has long been known
that the same thing happens in humans who suffer head traumas.
"Brain tissue could, in theory, circulate anywhere," she adds. That
includes the cow's muscles, which are turned into steaks and burgers.
"The implications are frightening," says Garland.
"My gut feeling is that the cattle industry will eventually have to
change the way it slaughters cattle as a result of Garland's research,"
says Will Hueston.
* Spinal Cords. If you're a fan of hamburgers, hot dogs, or luncheon
meats, odds are you sometimes eat small bits of cow spinal cords.
You can thank something called Advanced Meat Recovery (AMR) for that.
Human deboners remove all the meat they can as each cow carcass goes
whizzing by on the production line. What they can't easily cut away ends
up at AMR plants, where metal cylinders rub another 1 and a half pounds
per carcass off the bones. Why bother? Because it boosts the yield by as
much as 300 million pounds a year.
Up to ten percent of your next hamburger or slice of bologna could have
come from an AMR plant. And you'll never know. Foods that contain AMR
meat don't have to say so on the label.
The problem is that any tissue that's on or near the bones -- including
parts of the spinal cord -- can end up in the mix.
"Most AMR plants voluntarily remove spinal cords before processing, "
says the American Meat Institute's Janet Riley. But last year, in
response to complaints from consumer groups (including CSPI
), the USDA surveyed seven
AMR plants in the U.S. The Feds found bits of spinal cord in two out of
11 meat samples.
Tams study was published in the Lancet
Tam Garland, Nathan Bauer, Murl Bailey Jr Depts of Veterinary
emboli in the lungs of cattle after stunning. Lancet 1996; 348: 610 11. ...
and posted on this list, way to go Tam, i think you still lurk ;
> "My gut feeling is that the cattle industry will eventually have to
> change the way it slaughters cattle as a result of Garland's
> research," says Will Hueston.
[Federal Register: January 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 18)]
[Proposed Rules] [Page 4047-4048]
> From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
9 CFR Ch. III
[Docket No. 04-040N]
Regulatory Flexibility Act; Amended Plan for Reviewing Regulations Under
Section 610 Requirements
AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), USDA.
ACTION: Schedule of regulations to be reviewed under section 610
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act; amended.
SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is publishing an
amended scheduling plan for reviewing regulations under Section 610 of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended. These provisions require
that all Federal agencies review existing regulations that have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities to
determine whether the associated impact can be minimized.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Dr.
Quita Bowman Blackwell, Director, Directives and Economic Analysis
Staff, FSIS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 300 12th Street, SW, Room
112, Washington, DC 20250-3700, (202) 720-5627.
Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended (5
U.S.C. 601-612), requires that all Federal agencies review any
regulations that have been identified as having a significant economic
impact upon a substantial number of small entities as a means to
determine whether the associated impact can be minimized by considering
the following factors: (1) The continued need for the rule; (2) the
nature of the complaints or comments received concerning the rule from
the public; (3) the complexity of the rule; (4) the extent to which the
rule overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other Federal rules; and
(5) the length of time since the rule has been initially evaluated or
the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors
have changed in the area affected by the rule.
On April 2, 2002, FSIS published in the Federal Register (67 FR
15501) a scheduling plan for reviewing regulations under the 610
provisions. At that point, the Agency had determined to review all rules
deemed economically significant, regardless of whether the Agency had
stated that the rule would impose a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities or not. After further
consideration, FSIS now believes that it would be more effective and
beneficial if the Agency concentrated its reviews under Section 610 of
the RFA on those final and interim final rules that the Agency has
identified as having a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Accordingly, FSIS has amended its plan for reviewing the Agency rules
that it has identified as having a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Schedule of FSIS' Regulations Identified for Review Under
the RFA'S 610 Provisions
CFR parts affected and legal
authority Regulation title
Publication citation and date Review date
9 CFR 304, 308, 310, 320, 327, 381, Pathogen Reduction; Hazard 61
FR 38806; July 25, 1996... 2005
416, 417; 21 U.S.C. 451-470, 601- Analysis and Critical
695; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. Control Point (HACCP)
9 CFR 430; 7 U.S.C. 450; 7 U.S.C. Control of Listeria 68
FR 34208; June 6, 2003.... 2007
1901-1906; 21 U.S.C. 451-470, 601- monocytogenes in Ready-to-
695; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. Eat Meat and Poultry
9 CFR 309, 310, 311, 318, 319; 21 Prohibition of the Use of 69
FR 1862; January 12, 2004. 2008
U.S.C. 601-695; 7 U.S.C. 138f, 450, Specified Risk Materials for
1901-1906; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.18, 2.53, Human Food and Requirements
2.55. for the Disposition of Non-
Ambulatory Disabled Cattle.
9 CFR 301, 318, 320; 21 U.S.C. 601- Meat Produced by Advanced 69
FR 1874; January 12, 2004. 2009
695; 7 U.S.C. 138f, 450, 1901-1906; Meat/Bone Separation
7 CFR 2.7, 2.18, 2.53. Machinery and Meat Recovery
Additional Public Notification
Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy development
is important. Consequently, in an effort to ensure that the public and
in particular minorities, women, and persons with disabilities, are
aware of this notice, FSIS will announce it on-line through the FSIS Web
page located at http://www.fsis.usda.gov.
FSIS also will make copies of this Federal Register publication
available through the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide
information regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, Federal
Register notices, FSIS public meetings, recalls, and other types of
information that could affect or would be of interest to our
constituents and stakeholders. The update is communicated via Listserv,
a free e-mail subscription service consisting of industry, trade, and
farm groups, consumer interest groups, allied health
professionals, scientific professionals, and other individuals who have
requested to be included.
The update also is available on the FSIS web page. Through Listserv
and the web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much broader,
more diverse audience.
Done at Washington, DC, on January 24, 2005.
Barbara J. Masters,
[FR Doc. 05-1613 Filed 1-27-05; 8:45 am]
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE
WASHINGTON, DC REVISION ?
AMENDMENT ? CHANGE TRANSMITTAL SHEET
FSIS Notices BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPAHTY (BSE) FSIS 4-04 1/31/05
EXTENSION OF EFFECTIVE DATE FOR BOVINE SPONGIFORM
ENCEPHALOPAHTY (BSE) FSIS NOTICES
FSIS is extending the expiration date for the following FSIS Notices
until February 1,
FSIS Notice 4-04, Awareness Meeting Regarding New Regulations That
Ambulatory Disabled Cattle and the Use of Certain Materials From Cattle
FSIS Notice 5-04, Interim Guidance For Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle
FSIS Notice 7-04, Questions and Answers For FSIS Notice 4-04 Regarding
FSIS Notice 9-04, Verification Instructions For The Interim Final Rule
Specified Risk Materials (SRMs) In Cattle
These notices are due to expire February 1, 2005. However, it is
necessary for the
notices and instructions provided in them to remain in effect until FSIS
takes final action
on the interim final rule, Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk
Materials for Human
Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disable
the Agency does so, FSIS will reissue the relevant information from
these notices in a
Philip S. Derfler /s/
Office of Policy, Program, and Employee Development
DISTRIBUTION: Inspection Offices, T/A Inspectors, OPI: OPPED
Plant Mgt., T/A Plant Mgt., TRA, ABB, PRD, Import
Subject: Implementation: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk
Regions and Importation of Commodities from Canada
To: Brokers, Importers, and Other Interested Parties
On January 4, 2005, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS) published a final rule in the Federal Register to amend the
regulations regarding the importation of animals and animal products and
to recognize a category of regions that present a minimal risk of
introducing bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) into the United
States via live ruminants and ruminant products. APHIS also added Canada
to this minimal risk category, which allows the importation of certain
live ruminants and ruminant products and byproducts from Canada under
certain conditions. The effective date of the final rule is March 7, 2005.
A. Effective March 7, 2005, the following ruminant products may be
the United States from Canada without an import permit under the prescribed
1. Beef (including veal) or bison meat, meat byproducts, and meat food
products as defined by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)
regulations in 9 CFR 301.2, when accompanied by the required Canadian
Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) veterinary health export certificate
certifying that the products:
a. Were processed in a CFIA-inspected establishment, which operates in
compliance with an approved CFIA program to prevent commingling of
ruminant meat products eligible for export to the United States with
ineligible ruminant meat products;
b. Were derived from animals that were subjected to a ruminant feed ban
equivalent to the requirements of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(21 CFR 589.2000);
c. Were derived from animals for which air-injected stunning was not
used at slaughter;
d. Were derived from animals that were under 30 months of age when
e. Do not contain specified risk materials (SRMs) as defined by FSIS
regulations (9 CFR Parts 301, 309, et. al.).
Establishments wishing to export to the United States must also comply
with the following FSIS requirements that the meat, meat food, or meat
a. Do not contain mechanically separated bovine meat.
b. Do not contain product from an advanced meat recovery (AMR) system in
which SRMs were used.
c. Are derived from animals that have been determined to be fit for
slaughter (i.e. were not non-ambulatory disabled).
BSE Minimal-Risk Regions and the Importation of Live Animals
to Importers, Brokers and Other Interested Parties) PDF
IN THE SAME ARTICLE ;
> "We have people who have spent their careers trying to find BSE and
> haven't succeeded," says Will Hueston, associate dean of the
> Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine in College Park,
> Maryland. Hueston used to run the USDA's BSE surveillance program.
> "You can't just hide BSE if a cow's got it," he adds.
THAT'S the biggest load of BSe i ever heard.
THE USDA has done a fair job at doing just that if you consider that
Texas mad cow
that was rendered, you know, the stumbling and staggering one, and not
to forget those
positive, positive, inconclusive, negatives that they failed to used WB
with. i think maybe
what Will Hueston meant to say was that they had people who had spent
their careers trying
to _cover up_ any BSE, and have succeeded in doing just that ;
> The FDA has taken things a step further. It has announced a ban on
> feeding rendered mammals to cows, sheep, and goats.
> "This will build a firewall around our meat supply," says Gary Weber
> of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. "It will be a
> gangbusters of a protection," seconds the NIH's Brown.
oh and that partial and voluntary rtr ban worked out real well didn't it.
worked so well they are still feeding cows to cows in 2005. these same
so called _experts_ that are still hanging on (the ones that have not been
put out to pasture yet) should be put out to pasture with the rest of
that got us in the mess. i forgot though, this administration et al do
or reprimand there failures, they give them medals and awards, then
with huge pention for there failures, and the agent continues to spread
still disgusted in Bacliff, Texas