|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
From: TSS ()
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RANCHERS CATTLEMEN ACTION LEGAL FUND UNITED STOCKGROWERS OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; MIKE JOHANNS, in his capacity as the Secretary of Agriculture, Defendants - Appellants. No. 05-35264 DC No. CV 05-006 RFC D. Mont. ORDER Before: TASHIMA, PAEZ, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. The court, after consideration of the briefs of the parties and the various amici curiae, and oral argument, has determined that the order of the United States District Court for the District of Montana of March 5, 2005, granting a preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of a final rule issued by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, published on January 4, 2005, entitled "Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, Minimal Risk FILED JUL 14 2005 CATHY A. CATTERSON, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 2 Regions and Importation of Commodities; Final Rule and Notice" (the "Preliminary Injunction Order"), 70 Fed. Reg. 460, must be reversed. It is therefore ORDERED: 1. Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 8(a), the court sua sponte hereby stays the Preliminary Injunction Order, effective immediately, pending the final resolution of this appeal. 2. An opinion setting forth the reasons for the court’s reversal of the Preliminary Injunction Order shall be issued expeditiously and in due course. http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/Documents.nsf/54dbe3fb372dcb6c88256ce50065fcb8/134c98ea28ef26cd88256fcb007db929/$FILE/R-CALF_stayord.pdf R-CALF Cattle Update: Disappointment In Court Ruling “We are disappointed in today’s ruling by the 9th S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The 9th Circuit gave no reasons for their action, so there isn’t much we can do until we see those reasons. “R-CALF USA remains confident that USDA’s Final Rule was not justified, and that USDA did not provide significant justification for overturning a longstanding policy that protected both the U.S. cattle herd and U.S. consumers from the introduction of BSE. “USDA’s Final Rule is based merely on a reinterpretation of existing science that has been around for years. USDA is motivated by political considerations of wanting to resume trade with Canada. “R-CALF is confident that when we have a full hearing on the merits of the case, we will demonstrate to the district court that USDA’s actions are premature and unjustified. “This decision makes mandatory COOL all the more important so consumers will know where their beef comes from.” http://www.cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?contentid=5940 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Office of the Clerk of Court July 8, 2005 NOTICE Re: Oral Arguments in Seattle, Washington, July 13, 2005 • Ranchers Cattlemen v. USDA, CA# 05-35214 etc. ("the beef case") • National Wildlife Federation v. National Marine Fisheries,CA# 05-35569, 70 ("the salmon case") Two of the cases on the July 13, 2005 oral argument calendar in Seattle have generated media interest. Oral argument will take place at The Park Place Building, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 21st Floor, Seattle, Washington. The first case, the "beef" case, is scheduled for oral argument Wednesday morning, July 13, 2005 before the panel of Ninth Circuit Judges A. Wallace Tashima, Richard Paez, and Consuelo Callahan. The calendar for that day starts at 9:00 a.m. The "beef" case is scheduled fourth on the morning calendar; argument is expected to start at approximately 11:00am and last one hour. Seating for the lawyers in the cases on the calendar will be reserved, along with a limited number of seats for the media. The media seats are available on a first come basis. An overflow courtroom with a video connection is available on the fourth floor. The courtroom doors will be opened at 8:00am. Picture identification is required to enter the courtroom. The second cases generating media interest is the "salmon" case, scheduled for argument in the same courtroom at 2:00 p.m. before the Ninth Circuit panel of Judges A. Wallace Tashima, Sidney Thomas and Richard Paez. That case is the only case on the afternoon calendar. Oral argument is scheduled to take approximately forty minutes. The panel is not expected to rule from the bench. The Court’s decisions will be posted on the court’s web page as soon as they are available. Digital audio recordings of all oral arguments before the Court are available the next day on the court’s web page. Pleadings filed in both these cases are also available on the web page. www.ca9.uscourts.gov. Seattle Clerk’s Office: 206/553-2937 San Francisco Clerk’s Office: 415/556-9800 http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/Documents.nsf/54dbe3fb372dcb6c88256ce50065fcb8/3bd4a626371607c588257038006023ec/$FILE/OralArgSeattle.pdf Release No. 0258.05 SECRETARY JOHANNS STATEMENT ON NINTH CIRCUIT COURT RULING July 14,2005 "I applaud today's ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to lift the preliminary injunction that blocked implementation of the BSE minimal risk regions rule. Because the ruling is effective immediately, we are immediately taking steps to resume the importation of cattle under 30 months of age from Canada. "USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is already in contact with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to prepare to certify cattle for shipment. We have been safely importing boneless boxed beef from Canada since September 2003, and now we will use the scientific approach laid-out in our minimal risk rule to once again safely import live Canadian cattle for processing. "This is great news for the future of the U.S. beef industry, specifically the many ranchers, feeders, and processing plants that have been struggling to make ends meet due to the closed border. It also bolsters our position with other international trading partners by following the very advice we have given them to base trade decisions on sound science." GW's BSE/TSE MRR POLICY IS A LEGAL TRADING POLICY TSEs. A POLICY FOR SUICIDE OF LONG INCUBATION. IT'S ABOUT NOTHING MORE THAN COMMODITIES AND FUTURES $$$ TSS 24 August, 1995 STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL UKASTA POLICY ON BSE At the President's suggestion in the light of recent events, I have The paper enclosed with this letter is the result. For obvious reasons, If you have any comments on the policy, or the paper, I should be glad Yours sincerely, J.W. REED JWR/cg copied to SMT members - IJD; JN; JAS; REW UKASTA INTERNAL POSITION STATEMENT POLICY AIMS 1. These have been consistent, although unstated except In FEC discussions, since at least 1989:- • To minimise the risk of farmers' claims for compensation from feed • To minimise the potential damage to compound feed markets • To maximise freedom of action for feed compounders. notably by 2. Strategy has depended upon the situation at a particular time. 3. Successful examples of this strategy include: • "Voluntary Ban" on SBO's In all MBM purchase contracts from • Pressing Government for full compensation to farmers, which was • evidence (not Just on BSE) to the Lamming Committee in 1991/92 continued..... 95/8.24/2.2 2 • UKASTA pressure dissuaded MAFF from publicly linking voluntary • in August 1995. while tightening the SBO Order and responding 4. BSE has for more than seven years posed the greatest single potential 5. Tests may show that ruminant feeds have been sold which contain 6. The threat remains real and it will be some years before feed JWR/cg/23.8.95 95/8.24/2.3 http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1995/08/24002001.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date Posted Document 8.6 3,175.8 7,574.6 3,453.8 78.2 957.2 2,625.8 68.5 3,629.6 2,527.9 9,946.3 7,751.5 2,563.2 3,060.2 2,539.3 1,738.7 3,278.3 1,753.0 1,942.2 4,636.6 3,381.7 1,753.0 91.6 160.4 426.4 6.6 48.6 179.0 1,931.9 1,891.9 314.4 254.6 323.9 273.2 104.8 256.5 45.6 987.6 85.8 87.4 66.5 1,254.6 212.2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/Documents.nsf/54DBE3FB372DCB6C88256CE50065FCB8/134C98EA28EF26CD88256FCB007DB929?OpenDocument By DENNIS BUECKERT William Leiss of the University of Ottawa, who is also a past president of the Royal Society of Canada, said the CFIA assessed the risk of mad cow to animal health and human health, but not the risk of losing export markets. Yet Canada was party to an international agreement providing for a ban on exports from any country with even a single case of the disease. The policy was known as "one cow and you're out." "What would be the economic impact of one or just a few cases of BSE (bovine spongiform encepalopathy) in the Canadian herd?" Leiss asked at a World Health Organization conference on risk management. "We failed completely to manage or even to recognize this risk at our great cost." He said Canada followed U.S. policies in adopting a minimal testing program. But Canada's risk profile is completely different from that of the United States. At the time, Canada exported 75 per cent of beef production while the United States exported only 10 per cent. Losing export markets was not a serious problem for the Americans, he said. "In food issues we are cursed with the political attitude that we've just got to be onside with the U.S. and nothing else matters." He said the CFIA also followed the U.S. lead in making a half-hearted effort to stop recycling infected protein in ruminant food, which is widely believed to be the cause of mad cow disease. Leiss said the United States conducted a full risk assessment in 1997-98, but Canada did not do one until six years later. CFIA spokesman Marc Richard said the agency didn't include economic consequences in its assessment because that is not the agency's mandate. "We don't usually address the economic stuff," said Richard in an interview. "The risk assessment was based strictly on the disease. Overall we're the administrators of the Animal Health Act. "The CFIA's risk assessments have to do with animal disease. That is our mandate and in our mandate we specifically don't address economics." But another CFIA official, senior veterinarian Darcy Undseth, said economic consequences of a mad cow infection in Canada were considered in a 2002 risk assessment even though they were not quantified. He said the consequences were described in that assessment as "extreme." Undseth said the CFIA's response was "very successful because of the proactive steps taken since 1990 and the very measured response taken in a North American context. "BSE has not established and amplified in North America but was captured on its way to eradication." Asked about the estimated $8 billion in economic losses to date, Undseth said animal diseases do have economic impact but the BSE response "has been a successful program." http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2005/07/12/1128444-cp.html Working Group Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR 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 http://www.efsa.eu.int/press_room/press_release/575_en.html 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 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. BOX 42 Bacliff, TEXAS USA Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Minneapolis District Office WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL Refer to MIN 05-15 Michael J. Langenhorst Dear Mr. Langenhorst: Our inspection of your rendering plant located at 505 Hardman Avenue South, South St. Paul, Minnesota, from January 12-20, 2005, revealed significant deviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations , Part 589 .2000 (21 CFR 589 .2000), Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Because you failed to follow the requirements of this regulation, products being manufactured and distributed by your facility are adulterated within the meaning of Section 402(a)(4) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) [21 U.S.C. 342(a)(4)], and misbranded within the meaning of Section 403(a)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C. 343(a)(1)]. Our investigation found that you failed to provide for measures to prevent commingling or cross-contamination and to maintain sufficient written procedures [21 CFR 589.2000(e)] in that: 1. You failed to use clean-out procedures or other means adequate to prevent carryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into feeds that may be used for ruminants. 2. You failed to maintain written procedures specifying the clean-out procedures or other means to prevent carryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into feeds that may be used for ruminants. Our investigation also found that you failed to label products that may contain protein derived from mammalian tissues with the statement, "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants." For example, your Feather Meal and Stabilized Poultry By-Product Meal lack this statement, even though the absence of sufficient measures to avoid commingling or cross-contamination may result in these products containing protein derived from mammalian tissues. Because your products do not bear this caution statement, they are misbranded under Section 403(a)(1) of the Act [21 U.S .C. 343(a)(1)). The above is not intended as an all-inclusive list of violations. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you are responsible for ensuring that your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should acknowledge this letter within 15 working days of receiving and include any additional corrective actions concerning your facility. We have received your letter dated January 31, 2005, which replies to the Form FDA-483 issued on January 20, 2005, and your letter dated February 25, 2005, that states all corrections have been implemented. The corrections you have reported appear to be adequate but will be evaluated further during our follow-up inspection. Your response should be directed to Compliance Officer Jane E . Nelson at the address on the letterhead. If you have any questions regarding this letter, you may phone Ms. Nelson at (612) 758-7119. Sincerely, /S/ W. Charles Becoat Docket No, 04-047-l Regulatory Identification No. (RIN) 091O-AF46 NEW BSE SAFEGUARDS (comment submission) https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/0/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt Docket Management Docket: 02N-0273 - Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed Comment Number: EC -10 Accepted - Volume 2 PART 2 PDF]Freas, William TSS SUBMISSION File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Page 1. J Freas, William From: Sent: To: Subject: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [flounder@wt.net] Monday, January 08,200l 3:03 PM freas ... http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3681s2_09.pdf Asante/Collinge et al, that BSE transmission to the 129-methionine genotype can lead to an alternate phenotype that is indistinguishable from type 2 PrPSc, the commonest _sporadic_ CJD; http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/slides/3923s1_OPH.htm Docket Management Docket: 96N-0417 - Current Good Manufacturing Practice http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Mar03/031403/96N-0417-EC-2.htm Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt # Docket No: 02-088-1 RE-Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of Docket Management Docket: 02N-0276 - Bioterrorism Preparedness; Registration of Food Facilities, Section 305 http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02n0276/02N-0276-EC-254.htm OTC External Analgesic Drug Products, ... EMC 7, Terry S. Singeltary Sr. www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/oct03/100203/100203.htm DOCKETS ENTERED on 2/5/03. ... EMC 4 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol#: 2. 03N-0009 Federal Preemption of State & Local Medical Device Requireme. ... Docket: 02N-0370 - Neurological Devices; Classification of Human Dura Mater Comment Number: EC -1 Accepted - Volume 1 ... 00D-1662 Use of Xenotransplantation Products in Humans. http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jun03/060903/060903.htm 2003D-0186 01N-0423 Substances Prohibited from use in animal food/Feed Ruminant APE 5 National Renderers Association, Inc. Vol#: 2 APE 6 Animal Protein Producers Industry Vol#: 2 APE 7 Darling International Inc. Vol#: 2 EMC 1 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol#: 3 http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/01/Oct01/101501/101501.htm Send Post-Publication Peer Review to journal: disease in the United States I lost my mother to hvCJD (Heidenhain Variant CJD). I would like to comment on the CDC's attempts to monitor the occurrence of emerging forms of CJD. Asante, Collinge et al [1] have reported that BSE transmission to the 129-methionine genotype can lead to an alternate phenotype that is indistinguishable from type 2 PrPSc, the commonest sporadic CJD. However, CJD and all human TSEs are not reportable nationally. CJD and all human TSEs must be made reportable in every state and internationally. I hope that the CDC does not continue to expect us to still believe that the 85%+ of all CJD cases which are sporadic are all spontaneous, without route/source. We have many TSEs in the USA in both animal and man. CWD in deer/elk is spreading rapidly and CWD does transmit to mink, ferret, cattle, and squirrel monkey by intracerebral inoculation. With the known incubation periods in other TSEs, oral transmission studies of CWD may take much longer. Every victim/family of CJD/TSEs should be asked about route and source of this agent. To prolong this will only spread the agent and needlessly expose others. In light of the findings of Asante and Collinge et al, there should be drastic measures to safeguard the medical and surgical arena from sporadic CJDs and all human TSEs. I only ponder how many sporadic CJDs in the USA are type 2 PrPSc? LANCET INFECTIOUS DISEASE JOURNAL My name is Terry S Singeltary Sr, and I live in Bacliff, Texas. I lost my mom to hvCJD (Heidenhain variant CJD) and have been searching for answers ever since. What I have found is that we have not been told the truth. CWD in deer and elk is a small portion of a much bigger problem. largely unsatisfied after being told that a close relative died from a rapidly progressive dementia compatible with spontaneous Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). So he decided to gather hundreds of documents on transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE) and realised that if Britons could get variant CJD from bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), Americans might get a similar disorder from chronic wasting disease (CWD)the relative of mad cow disease seen among deer and elk in the USA. Although his feverish search did not lead him to the smoking gun linking CWD to a similar disease in North American people, it did uncover a largely disappointing situation. occurrence of CJD and CWD in the USA. Only a few states have made CJD reportable. Human and animal TSEs should be reportable nationwide and internationally , he complained in a letter to the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA 2003; 285: 733). I hope that the CDC does not continue to expect us to still believe that the 85% plus of all CJD cases which are sporadic are all spontaneous, without route or source. region in Colorado. But since early 2002, it has been reported in other areas, including Wisconsin, South Dakota, and the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. Indeed, the occurrence of CWD in states that were not endemic previously increased concern about a widespread outbreak and possible transmission to people and cattle. transmitted to cattle by intracerebral inoculation and that it can cross the mucous membranes of the digestive tract to initiate infection in lymphoid tissue before invasion of the central nervous system. Yet the plausibility of CWD spreading to people has remained elusive. is only reported in those areas known to be endemic foci of CWD. Moreover, US authorities have been criticised for not having performed enough prionic tests in farm deer and elk. issued a directive to state public-health and agriculture officials prohibiting material from CWD-positive animals from being used as an ingredient in feed for any animal species, epidemiological control and research in the USA has been quite different from the situation in the UK and Europe regarding BSE. teeth , Singeltary argues. You get it when they want you to have it, and only what they want you to have. University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI, USA), says that current surveillance of prion disease in people in the USA is inadequate to detect whether CWD is occurring in human beings ; adding that, the cases that we know about are reassuring, because they do not suggest the appearance of a new variant of CJD in the USA or atypical features in patients that might be exposed to CWD. However, until we establish a system that identifies and analyses a high proportion of suspected prion disease cases we will not know for sure . The USA should develop a system modelled on that established in the UK, he points out. Ali Samii, a neurologist at Seattle VA Medical Center who recently reported the cases of three hunterstwo of whom were friendswho died from pathologically confirmed CJD, says that at present there are insufficient data to claim transmission of CWD into humans ; adding that [only] by asking [the questions of venison consumption and deer/elk hunting] in every case can we collect suspect cases and look into the plausibility of transmission further . Samii argues that by making both doctors and hunters more aware of the possibility of prions spreading through eating venison, doctors treating hunters with dementia can consider a possible prion disease, and doctors treating CJD patients will know to ask whether they ate venison. the [Samii] cases because there is no evidence that the men ate CWD-infected meat . He notes that although the likelihood of CWD jumping the species barrier to infect humans cannot be ruled out 100% and that [we] cannot be 100% sure that CWD does not exist in humans& the data seeking evidence of CWD transmission to humans have been very limited . Association (JAMA 2003; 285: 733). I hope that the CDC does not continue to expect us to still believe that the 85% plus of all CJD cases which are sporadic are all spontaneous, without route or source. <<< actually, that quote was from a more recent article in the Journal of Neurology (see below), not the JAMA article... Full Text Diagnosis and Reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Singeltary, Sr et al. JAMA.2001; 285: 733-734. http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/285/6/733?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=dignosing+and+reporting+creutzfeldt+jakob+disease&searchid=1048865596978_1528&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&journalcode=jama BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL SOMETHING TO CHEW ON BMJ http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/319/7220/1312/b#EL2 BMJ http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/320/7226/8/b#EL1 THE PATHOLOGICAL PROTEIN BY Philip Yam Yam Philip Yam News Editor Scientific American www.sciam.com IN light of Asante/Collinge et al findings that BSE transmission to the -------- Original Message -------- Subject: re-BSE prions propagate as either variant CJD-like or sporadic CJD Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 10:23:43 -0000 From: "Asante, Emmanuel A" To: Dear Terry, I have been asked by Professor Collinge to respond to your request. I am a Senior Scientist in the MRC Prion Unit and the lead author on the paper. I have attached a pdf copy of the paper for your attention. Thank you for your interest in the paper. In respect of your first question, the simple answer is, yes. As you will find in the paper, we have managed to associate the alternate phenotype to type 2 PrPSc, the commonest sporadic CJD. It is too early to be able to claim any further sub-classification in respect of Heidenhain variant CJD or Vicky Rimmer's version. It will take further studies, which are on-going, to establish if there are sub-types to our initial finding which we are now reporting. The main point of the paper is that, as well as leading to the expected new variant CJD phenotype, BSE transmission to the 129-methionine genotype can lead to an alternate phenotype which is indistinguishable from type 2 PrPSc. I hope reading the paper will enlighten you more on the subject. If I can be of any further assistance please to not hesitate to ask. Best wishes. Emmanuel Asante <> ____________________________________ Dr. Emmanuel A Asante MRC Prion Unit & Neurogenetics Dept. Imperial College School of Medicine (St. Mary's) Norfolk Place, LONDON W2 1PG Tel: +44 (0)20 7594 3794 Fax: +44 (0)20 7706 3272 email: e.asante@ic.ac.uk (until 9/12/02) New e-mail: e.asante@prion.ucl.ac.uk (active from now) ____________________________________ snip... full text ; http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/slides/3923s1_OPH.htm Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease THE findings from Corinne Ida Lasmézas*, [dagger] , Jean-Guy Fournier*, Hermann Boe*, Domíníque Marcé*, François Lamoury*, Nicolas Kopp [Dagger ] , Jean-Jacques Hauw§, James Ironside¶, Moira Bruce [||] , Dominique Dormont*, and Jean-Philippe Deslys* et al, that The agent responsible http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/041490898v1 Characterization of two distinct prion strains http://vir.sgmjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/8/2471 ALL human TSEs must be made reportable Nationally and Internationally, TSS
|
