USDA: Animal Disease Traceability August 2010
Greetings,
as a consumer, my opinion (if that matters), you need some sort of traceability for your livestock. I don't want to know anything about your family, your income, your kids, your sex life, nothing but to be able to trace that animal from farm to fork. I want to know whether or not if that animal has been fed animal protein, antibiotics, and if myself or my family do get sick, we should be able to trace that product. I don't see the problem. you can trace every part on your car, I can find out anything I want about you on the internet. why can't I do that with a cow?
let's review a few things about the NAIS, why we need it past and present. let's review first the few mad cows that were accidently found, birth cohorts, herd cohorts etc., and how efficient or NOT the traceability of those 4 animals were....oops, that's right, the first stumbling and staggering mad cow in Texas was sent straight to the render, did not pass GO(inspection), did not get $200.(prion rapid test), and of course, was never confirmed. THEN the second mad cow, the one that would never have been confirmed if not for an act of Congress and the Honorable Fong of the OIG, and scientist from the EU and the USA asking questions, meanwhile the BSE MRR was being finalized. Then after 7 months of sitting on the shelf, after a secret test had already turned up positive, but yet still 7 months no confirmation on a BSE positive test that by the BSE Red Books, it should have been a 48 hour turnaround on that test. Finally, the 2nd Texas mad cow was confirmed positive BSE. later termed atypical h-BSE. Then you had the Alabama mad cow, now termed g-h-BSEalabama, and then of course the mad cow old Luther capped in Washington state, the white one, that changed colors, and then was said to be a Canadian traitor c-BSE mad cow. IT's all Canada's fault ;-(NOT)
Be sure to see the latest data on the typical and atypical cases of BSE and Scrapie and any human CJD TSE there from. This is down toward the bottom of the posting.
BSE, USDA, NAIS, AND TRACEABILITY
Let's look at how the USDA et al trace BSE aka mad cow cases, birth, and index herd cattle in the past (or rather how they could not trace them).
TEXAS MAD COW (h-BSE), that was finally tested and documented 7+ months after an act of Congress, and Scientist from all over the Globe questioning the testing methods and negative findings of this Texas mad cow. ...
TEXAS h-BSE MAD COW CASE THAT WAS FINALLY DOCUMENTED
Birth Cohort The owner of Farm A kept very few herd records; this made finding documentation on this cow’s birth cohort difficult. The birth cohort, by definition, included all cattle born on the positive animal’s birth premises within 1 year, before or after, the positive animal’s date of birth. The index cow was approximately 12 years of age in November 2004, but there was no exact birth date in the herd records. A potential age range of 11 to 13 years was used to sufficiently cover the animal’s most likely age. Using this range, all cattle born on the index premises between 1990 and 1995 were considered part of the birth cohort. In lieu of the owner’s records, herd records from Veterinary Services’ Generic Database (GDB) were used to compile a list of brucellosis calfhood vaccination (CV) tag numbers from the index herd that corresponded to animals to be included in the birth cohort. There were 121 animals identified through GDB as having been calfhood vaccinated on the index farm between 1991 and 1994. The owner of Farm A did not calfhood vaccinate after 1994. Moreover, calfhood vaccinates include only heifers. Therefore, the list of 121 animals was not a complete list of all birth cohorts. However the tracing that response personnel conducted on other COI was designed to account for the remainder of the birth cohorts.
Feed Cohort ...
SNIP...
Tracing of Progeny
The 2003/2004 progeny of the index cow was known to have left the farm through a specific livestock market sometime between February and October 2004. The 2002/2003 progeny of the index cow left the farm through the same market sometime between January
8
and December 2003. Response personnel learned early in the investigation that animals from the index farm were sold not only under the index farm owner’s name and that of his wife, but also by other members of the owner’s immediate family. Additionally, there were no herd records to indicate the gender of the two at-risk progeny. Therefore, market records for February through October 2004 and January through December 2003 were obtained for all calves sold both by Farm A’s owner and by members of his immediate family; response personnel traced all such calves to determine their disposition. With the index herd being composed of mixed breed beef cattle, the calves that left the farm were genetically unsuitable for use as replacement animals or for sale as breeding stock, a fact that was confirmed by the trace work and the documentation of the final disposition of the calves of interest.
Response personnel ultimately identified 213 calves of interest to be traced. Of these, 208 were confirmed to have entered known rendering/slaughter channels, 4 were presumed to have entered rendering/slaughter channels, and 1 was purchased in cash through a livestock market with no buyer name or contact information (this animal was classified as untraceable. See Appendix 1). A calf was categorized as presumed to have entered rendering/slaughter channels if it passed through at least one livestock market subsequent to its original sale and could not be individually traced due to unknown resale date and new backtag, but all calves resold matching that description during an appropriate date range were purchased by known rendering/slaughter order buyers.
It was not possible to DNA test the calves that entered known rendering and slaughter channels – most were of an age in which they were likely to have been slaughtered prior to the time of the investigation. There were no calves traced to farms outside of rendering and slaughter channels.
Tracing of Birth Cohorts
Since there were essentially no records maintained on the index farm, it was necessary to compile the list of known birth cohorts using brucellosis CV tag numbers for this herd from the period 1991 to 1994. The calves vaccinated during that time period were part of the index cow’s birth cohort and tracing activities centered on finding those animals. There were 121 animals whose CV tag number and/or tattoo included them as part of the birth cohort. Of those 121 animals, 67 animals were definitively accounted for (42 were found in the index herd, removed, and tested BSE negative; 25 were identified as having left Farm A through the market system and were traced, 11 of those were reported slaughtered, 13 were classified as presumed dead, and 1 was found alive, euthanized, and tested BSE negative). Of the remaining 54 animals from the birth cohort, there may have been several that died within the index herd, but the majority likely left the herd without identification and would have been either re-tagged at the livestock market or consigned directly to slaughter without identification. To account for these remaining birth cohorts, all adult cattle that left the index farm since 1990 were traced as COI.
9
Tracing of Cattle of Interest
The investigation revealed that many animals left Farm A, arrived at markets without any identification tags, and were subsequently re-tagged at the market. Due to lack of farm records, it is unknown which of these re-tagged animals may have belonged to the birth cohort. As a result, all animals that may have left Farm A since 1990 were traced as COI. Additionally, animals from the index farm were sold not only under the index farm owner’s name and that of his wife, but also by other members of the owner’s immediate family; therefore, cattle sold from the index farm by all pertinent family members were traced. There were some older animals that left the index farm but were able to be excluded from further trace work because they were known not to have been part of the birth cohort or feed cohort of the index cow despite their being of the appropriate age. The index farm owner’s late father had maintained a herd of cattle separate from the index farm but which was added to the index farm in 1997. Complete herd test data and CV data from the GDB was obtained for the father’s herd and those animals were excluded from the tracing activities.
There were a total of 200 COI traced: 143 were reported to have been slaughtered (131 of those were confirmed as having been slaughtered), 1 is known to have died previously and was buried, 2 were found alive (1 was a known birth cohort that tested negative, 1 was determined not to be one of the cattle of interest due to her young age), 34 were classified as presumed dead, 20 were classified as untraceable. (See Appendix 1). Animals were confirmed at slaughter using GDB slaughter testing data or the hard copies of slaughter testing Form 4-54.
An animal was classified as presumed dead if records that could be used to advance the tracing of the animal were exhausted or did not exist, and the age of the animal at the time of the investigation was estimated to be at least 11 years old or older. Since the index herd was not a purebred or seedstock operation, and animals leaving the herd were unlikely to be purchased as replacement cattle, standard industry practices indicated that most adult animals that had left the herd would have been culled and slaughtered by the time they were in this age group. Additionally, this age cutoff was arrived at through review of market records and the specific years in which Farm A sold cattle through the market. An animal was classified as untraceable if all records to advance the tracing of the animal were exhausted or did not exist, and the age of the animal at the time of the investigation was estimated to be less than 11 years of age (the animal, therefore, could not be presumed dead).
snip...
Trace Herd 1
The owner of Trace Herd 1 was identified as having received one of the adult COI from the index herd. Trace Herd 1 contained 909 head of cattle in multiple pastures and was placed under hold order on 7/21/05. Upon completion of herd inventory, the animal of interest was not found within the herd. A GDB search of all recorded herd tests conducted on Trace Herd 1 and all market sales by the owner failed to locate the identification tag of the animal of interest and she was subsequently classified as untraceable. The hold order on Trace Herd 1 was released on 8/8/05.
Trace Herd 2
Trace Herd 2 was identified as having received one of the adult COI from the index herd. Trace Herd 2 contained 19 head of cattle on one pasture and was placed under hold order on 7/25/05. The owner of Trace Herd 2 identified the animal of interest by her eartag while he was feeding his cattle out of a bucket and individually penned her for inspection by field personnel. While the cow was identified as one of the animals that had left the index farm, her age by dentition was estimated to be only 5 years old, which was too young to have placed her as part of the birth or feed cohort of the index animal. She was classified as found alive but determined not to be one of the COI; the hold order on Trace Herd 2 was released on 7/26/05.
11
Trace Herd 3
The owner of Trace Herd 3 was identified as possibly having received an animal of interest. The herd was placed under hold order on 7/27/05. The herd inventory was conducted on 7/28/05. The animal of interest was not present within the herd, and the hold order was released on 7/28/05. The person who thought he sold the animal to the owner of Trace Herd 3 had no records and could not remember who else he might have sold the cow to. Additionally, a search of GDB for all cattle sold through the markets by that individual did not result in a match to the animal of interest. The animal of interest traced to this herd was classified as untraceable because all leads were exhausted.
Trace Herd 4
The owner of Trace Herd 4 was identified as having received one of the COI through an order buyer. Trace Herd 4 was placed under hold order on 7/29/05. A complete herd inventory was conducted on 8/22/05 and 8/23/05. There were 233 head of cattle that were examined individually by both State and Federal personnel for all man-made identification and brands. The animal of interest was not present within the herd. Several animals were reported to have died in the herd sometime after they arrived on the premises in April 2005. A final search of GDB records yielded no further results on the eartag of interest at either subsequent market sale or slaughter. With all leads having been exhausted, this animal of interest has been classified as untraceable. The hold order on Trace Herd 4 was released on 8/23/05.
Trace Herd 5
The owner of Trace Herd 5 was identified as having received two COI and was placed under hold order on 8/1/05. Trace Herd 5 is made up of 67 head of cattle in multiple pastures. During the course of the herd inventory, the owner located records that indicated that one of the COI, a known birth cohort, had been sold to Trace Herd 8 where she was subsequently found alive. Upon completion of the herd inventory, the other animal of interest was not found within the herd. A GDB search of all recorded herd tests conducted on Trace Herd 5 and all market sales by the owner failed to locate the identification tag of the animal of interest and she was subsequently classified as untraceable due to all leads having been exhausted. The hold order on Trace Herd 5 was released on 8/8/05.
Trace Herd 6
The owner of Trace Herd 6 was identified as possibly having received an animal of interest and was placed under hold order on 8/1/05. This herd is made up of 58 head of cattle on two pastures. A herd inventory was conducted and the animal of interest was not present within the herd. The owner of Trace Herd 6 had very limited records and was unable to provide further information on where the cow might have gone after he purchased her from the livestock market. A search of GDB for all cattle sold through the markets by that individual did not result in a match to the animal of interest. Additionally, many of the animals presented for sale by the owner of the herd had been re-tagged at the market effectually losing the traceability of the history of that animal prior to re-tagging. The animal of interest traced to this herd was classified as untraceable due to all leads having been exhausted. The hold order on Trace Herd 6 was released on 8/3/05.
12
Trace Herd 7
The owner of Trace Herd 7 was identified as having received an animal of interest and was placed under hold order on 8/1/05. Trace Herd 7 contains 487 head of cattle on multiple pastures in multiple parts of the State, including a unit kept on an island. The island location is a particularly rough place to keep cattle and the owner claimed to have lost 22 head on the island in 2004 due to liver flukes. Upon completion of the herd inventory, the animal of interest was not found present within Trace Herd 7. A GDB search of all recorded herd tests conducted on Trace Herd 7 and all market sales by the owner failed to locate the identification tag of the animal of interest. The cow was subsequently classified as untraceable. It is quite possible though that she may have died within the herd, especially if she belonged to the island unit. The hold order on Trace Herd 7 was released on 8/8/05.
Trace Herd 8
Trace Herd 8 received an animal of interest, which happened to be a known birth cohort of the index cow, from Trace Herd 5. Trace Herd 8 consists of 146 head of cattle that were placed under hold order on 8/4/05. A herd inventory was conducted, the birth cohort was found alive in the herd, and she was purchased and euthanized. The hold order on Trace Herd 8 was released on 8/4/05. The cow was sampled on 8/5/05 and BSE tested by ELISA at NVSL. Results were negative (as reported on 8/6/05); carcass disposal was completed by alkaline digestion.
Analysis of Data on Presumed Dead and Untraceable Animals
CEAH performed an analysis of the minimum estimated ages of those COI that were classified as either presumed dead or untraceable to determine the likely disposition of those animals based on their ages. Moreover, CEAH performed an analysis of the likely disposition of the one calf that was classified as untraceable during the investigation.
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/bse_final_epi_report8-05.pdf
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2009/03/nais-comments-ncba-and-r-calf-wednesday.html
OF course, the birth and herd cohorts of this highly suspect, stumbling and staggering mad cow in Texas, will never be known ;
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Statement May 4, 2004 Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242 Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA
Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms
On Friday, April 30 th , the Food and Drug Administration learned that a cow with central nervous system symptoms had been killed and shipped to a processor for rendering into animal protein for use in animal feed.
FDA, which is responsible for the safety of animal feed, immediately began an investigation. On Friday and throughout the weekend, FDA investigators inspected the slaughterhouse, the rendering facility, the farm where the animal came from, and the processor that initially received the cow from the slaughterhouse.
FDA's investigation showed that the animal in question had already been rendered into "meat and bone meal" (a type of protein animal feed). Over the weekend FDA was able to track down all the implicated material. That material is being held by the firm, which is cooperating fully with FDA.
Cattle with central nervous system symptoms are of particular interest because cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, also known as "mad cow disease," can exhibit such symptoms. In this case, there is no way now to test for BSE. But even if the cow had BSE, FDA's animal feed rule would prohibit the feeding of its rendered protein to other ruminant animals (e.g., cows, goats, sheep, bison).
FDA is sending a letter to the firm summarizing its findings and informing the firm that FDA will not object to use of this material in swine feed only. If it is not used in swine feed, this material will be destroyed. Pigs have been shown not to be susceptible to BSE. If the firm agrees to use the material for swine feed only, FDA will track the material all the way through the supply chain from the processor to the farm to ensure that the feed is properly monitored and used only as feed for pigs.
To protect the U.S. against BSE, FDA works to keep certain mammalian protein out of animal feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. FDA established its animal feed rule in 1997 after the BSE epidemic in the U.K. showed that the disease spreads by feeding infected ruminant protein to cattle.
Under the current regulation, the material from this Texas cow is not allowed in feed for cattle or other ruminant animals. FDA's action specifying that the material go only into swine feed means also that it will not be fed to poultry.
FDA is committed to protecting the U.S. from BSE and collaborates closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on all BSE issues. The animal feed rule provides crucial protection against the spread of BSE, but it is only one of several such firewalls. FDA will soon be improving the animal feed rule, to make this strong system even stronger.
####
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/new01061.html
BSE UPDATE ALABAMA March 17, 2006
BSE Update From Alabama
News Date March 27, 2006
Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks and Alabama State Veterinarian Dr. Tony Frazier with the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries (ADAI) and USDA have provided an update on their ongoing joint investigation of the cow that died from bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Alabama.
Since the investigation began, the ADAI and the USDA have followed multiple leads in the traceback process. At this time, 13 locations and 32 movements of cattle have been examined with 27 of those being substantially completed. Additional investigations of locations and herds will continue. In addition, state and federal officials have confirmed that a black bull calf was born in 2005 to the index animal (the red cow). The calf was taken by the owner to a local stockyard in July 2005 where the calf died. The calf was disposed of in a local landfill and did not enter the human or animal food chain.
Without a premises or animal ID program in place, the traceback process to find the herd of origin of the index cow is time-consuming and difficult. It includes conducting interviews, reviewing of records and documents, and testing of cattle DNA. State and federal officials have discovered several herds of interest and they are planning to use DNA testing to determine DNA linkage between the index cow and the herds. Through the DNA testing of these herds, investigators will attempt to find a genetic path that could lead to the herd of origin. Sparks stressed that the DNA testing being conducted on the herds is for genetic markers and is not a test for the disease BSE.
As part of the thorough investigative process, a large number of cattle may be tested in this phase and the number of herds included will continue to grow as the traceback progresses. Leads will be followed by state and federal officials until they are exhausted. Even when an index animal is traced to its birth herd, often cohorts of that animal are no longer in that herd. In addition, even if an animal's cohort has been exposed to the same infective material in feed, the other animals will not necessarily contract BSE.
BSE is not a contagious disease that spreads animal to animal, or animal to human. BSE spreads in cattle through the consumption of feed containing specified risk material (brain and spinal cord) derived from BSE infected cattle. The United States banned the use of such protein supplements in cattle feed since 1997. Sparks says that beef consumption in this country is safe and there are measures in place to see that it continues to be safe. For example, downer animals are not allowed to enter commerce for human consumption and there is a ban on feeding ruminant derived protein to cattle. (Contact: Bob Ehart)
News Contact: Bob Ehart; 202-296-9680
http://www.nasda.org/cms/7196/7347/10354.aspx
WELL, we know that the FDA mad cow feed ban of August 4, 1997 was nothing but ink on paper. there is still animal protein in commerce in the USA being fed out to cattle and other livestock as we speak. see a few warning letters and or recalls here ;
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/02/import-alert-99-25-detention-without.html
WE also know that the USDA certified dead stock downer cow school lunch program NSLP, fed these most high risk cattle for BSE and mad cow disease and other deadly pathogens to our children all across our Nation for over 4 YEARS, you can see this here ;
http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2009/09/suit-meatpacker-used-downer-cows-for-4.html
AND there is evidence of cohort BSE documented (see at bottom) ;
Alabama BSE Investigation Final Epidemiology Report May 2, 2006
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/EPI_Final5-2-06.pdf
ALSO, that Washington Mad Cow case ;
Appendix II
Federal Actions Associated with the Discovery of an Animal in the United States Infected with BSE
Page 40 GAO-05-51 Food Recall Programs
On December 26, 2003, USDA began checking the primary and secondary customers of the recalling company that it was aware of, although the entire product distribution chain was unknown. During the checks, USDA tried to determine if the product was further distributed, and it used verification checks to acquire distribution lists for secondary and tertiary customers of the recalling company.
Verification checks continued until February 25, 2004. Three USDA districts conducted these verification checks. The Boulder District coordinated the checks and assigned checks to the Minneapolis District Office for customers in Montana and to the Alameda District Office for customers in California. USDA required that 100 percent of the primary checks, 50 percent of the secondary checks, and 20 percent of the tertiary checks be conducted on-site. According to USDA, more than 50 percent of the secondary checks were actually conducted on-site. FDA officials helped conduct verification checks. According to USDA, the recall took a long time to complete because USDA contacted each customer at least twice. USDA first contacted each customer to conduct the check and again to verify product disposition.
On February 25, 2004, the Boulder District concluded that the recall was conducted in an effective manner. On March 1, 2004, USDA s Recall Management Division recommended that the agency terminate the recall, and USDA sent a letter to the recalling company to document that USDA considered the recall to be complete.
Recall Was Complicated by Inaccurate Distribution Lists and Mixing of Potentially Contaminated and Noncontaminated Beef USDA used distribution lists and shipping records to piece together where the recalled product was distributed. According to USDA, one of the recalling company s three primary customers was slow in providing its customer list. USDA could not begin verification activities for that primary customer without this list. Furthermore, some customers of the recalling company provided USDA with imprecise lists that did not specify which customers received the recalled product. As a consequence, USDA could not quickly determine the scope of product distribution and had to take time conducting extra research using shipping invoices to determine which specific customers received the product.
Even when USDA determined the amount and location of beef, the agency still had trouble tracking the beef in certain types of establishments, such as grocery store distributors. USDA could not easily track the individual stores where those distributors sent the beef because of product mixing Appendix II Federal Actions Associated with the Discovery of an Animal in the United States Infected with BSE Page 41 GAO-05-51 Food Recall Programs and the distributors record-keeping practices. Generally, distributors purchase beef from multiple sources, mix it in their inventory, and lose track of the source of the beef they send to the stores that they supply. ...
snip...
QFC sued over mad cow case
Grocer negligently exposed them to beef, family claims
Friday, March 5, 2004
snip...
QFC s Delayed Mad Cow Response Draws Lawsuit
Family claims QFC should have used customer database to warn those at risk sooner
March 05, 2004
snip...
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY
JILL CROWSON, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS
VS
QUALITY FOOD CENTERS, INC., an Ohio corporation Defendent
NO. 04-2-05608-0 SEA
snip...
The Court hereby GRANTS the defendant's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claims based on a manufacturer's strict liability (Counts I and II) and DENIES the defendant's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claim of negligence by a product seller (Count III).
DATED this 14th day of June, 2004
snip...
http://www.hagens-berman.com/files/Mad%20Cow%20Order%20Denying%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss1088546283878.pdf
http://www.hbsslaw.com/flash/files/Mad%20Cow%20Order%20Denying%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss1088546283878.pdf
* GAO-05-51 October 2004 FOOD SAFETY (over 500 customers receiving potentially BSE contaminated beef) - TSS 10/20/04
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0551.pdf
http://www.gao.gov/htext/d0551.html
http://agri.nv.gov/GAO_FDA%20Mgmt%20Mad%20Cow%20IMprove_Feb05.pdf
http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-10-KC.pdf
October 2004
FOOD SAFETY USDA and FDA Need to Better Ensure Prompt and Complete Recalls of Potentially Unsafe Food
snip...
Do Stores That Offer Loyalty Cards Have a Duty to Notify Customers of Product Safety Recalls? A Recent Suit Raises This Novel Question By ANITA RAMASASTRY Thursday, Aug. 05, 2004 An interesting new Washington state court suit raises an important question: If a retailer benefits from collecting personally identifiable information about its customers, does it have a corresponding duty to use such data to alert its customers that products they've bought have been recalled for health or safety reasons? And if so, could turning over private data to companies actually create benefits, as well as privacy risks, for the consumer?
In the suit, consumer Jill Crowson is suing her grocery store -- Quality Food Center (QFC), a subsidiary of Kroger -- for negligent infliction of emotional distress and disregard of a "duty to warn" under the Washington Product Liability Act. Crowson alleges in her complaint that QFC failed to alert her family that ground beef it had sold them had been recalled in December's mad-cow scare.
Yet, Crowson says, QFC easily could have done so through information it maintained connected with her Advantage card - a "loyalty card" that meant QFC had Crowson's name, address and purchasing information. According to her complaint, QFC tracks every purchase made by consumers presenting the Advantage Card, including product description, date of purchase, store of purchase and the price, and saves that data alongside customer contact information.
Now, Crowson says, her family members "feel like walking time bombs" knowing they may be infected with the human form of mad-cow disease which the complaint states may have an up-to-30-year incubation period. And they are not the only ones: Crowson is seeking class action status for herself and what she believes are "hundreds" of similarly-situated Washington customers at QFC's approximately 40 stores in the state.
Some lawyers think Crowson's suit is a stretch. Federal law does not impose on companies a specific duty to notify consumers when tainted meat is recalled under the direction of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), as was the case here. Also, Crowson and her family, and the class she seeks to represent, are suing based on fear (and possible future harm), not current illness. Moreover, the chance they will actually get Mad Cow Disease some time in the future are apparently remote.
Nevertheless, the lawsuit has strong intuitive appeal: QFC could have saved the Crowsons and others like them a lot of worry, and perhaps sleepless nights, with what appears would have been minimal effort, using information at its digital fingertips. And the court has already once refused to dismiss it - finding that there were sufficient factual questions about the beef and about QFC's responsibility to the Crowsons, to merit further exploration of the evidence, through discovery and in the courtroom.
Regardless of the outcome of Crowson's suit, it underscores the need for retailers and policymakers to examine what sort of responsibilities come with private data gathering under loyalty card schemes.
The Lawsuit: The Chronology of Facts Alleged, and the Loyalty Card at Issue
On December 22 and 23, 2003, Crowson bought ground beef from a QFC store. Also on December 23, 2003, the USDA recalled Washington beef after it confirmed that a cow slaughtered in Washington had been infected with Mad Cow Disease. But Crowson says QFC did not pull the affected meat from its shelves until December 24, and did not post signs in its stores announcing the recall until December 27. By then, the Crowson family had eaten the meat.
Crowson states that she only learned of the recall by reading an article in her local newspaper. She said she subsequently called the supermarket chain, then faxed QFC a letter asking that her purchase be traced through her QFC Advantage card. On January 10, she was notified that her ground beef purchase was indeed from the recalled batch.
Crowson says that what QFC allegedly did in response to the recall - pulling the beef from shelves the next day, and posting signs three days after that -- was far from enough. She says it should have immediately warned customers who had bought possibly tainted meat through newspaper, radio and television advertising -- and by contacting individually those who, like her, had Advantage cards. Its failure to do so, she says, is what makes the company liable to her and other shoppers.
The Advantage Card is known in the retail industry as a customer "loyalty card" - providing discounts on specific items, in exchange for consumer information that will aid in better tailoring the company's marketing efforts. Combining the data from one's loyalty card application with data from other commercial databases or public records (for examples, mortgage records, or court filings) can often allow a very specific profile of each consumer.
Some states limit the types of information that a grocery store can collect from you when you register for a loyalty card. For example, California state law prohibits a grocery store from requiring that you turn over your social security or your driver's license number.
Companies, of course, stress the potential savings that might result from use of a loyalty card. Consider, for instance, the sales pitch on the QFC website it reads: "If you don't have a QFC Advantage Card, you're missing out! The Advantage Card is a powerful new way to save on the groceries you buy every day. It gives you the best of all possible worlds: premium quality, superb service and lower prices. That's something no other grocery store can match. So make sure you take advantage of the big savings."
Privacy advocates complain that loyalty cards result in the improper use - and, often, sale to third parties - of customers' private information. QFC apparently doesn't sell customers' data to third parties, however. Its website promises that "QFC will not release your name to any list service or manufacturer, and that such information will be held in the strictest of confidence-even within our company."
Privacy advocates also warn, however, that even if third-party sales of data are not allowed, the data compiled can always be accessed with a subpoena or warrant and used against the customer in court proceedings. Meanwhile, consumer advocates claim that certain loyalty cards don't really offer the savings they promise. Nevertheless, numerous stores employ loyalty cards.
Turning the Privacy Debate on Its Head: With Great Information, Comes Great Responsibility?
The Crowson lawsuit turns the privacy debate on its head. Typically, privacy advocates ask retailers to safeguard the personal information they collect about their shoppers. In this case, in contrast, plaintiff is asking that QFC delve into its database to notify her about a meat recall.
QFC does this very thing if a consumer loses his or her keys with an Advantage Card attached to them - returning the keys free of charge. So Crowson's attorney, Steve Berman, asks: "If they can contact you over a lost set of car keys, why couldn't they contact you and tell you that the beef you purchased could kill you?"
According to some news reports, QFC was reluctant to call customers regarding the recall based on privacy concerns. But in this case, the concerns seem misplaced. No privacy law is violated when a consumer communicates with the customer herself regarding private information - indeed, every offer the customer receives is, in a sense, this kind of communication. When the customer is receiving personalized discounts based on her purchase history, why can't she receive personalized health and safety warnings based on that history, too?
Was There a Duty to Warn Here?
From the law's perspective, the question will be not whether QFC ideally should have warned the Crowsons - of course it should have. The question will be if it had a legal duty to do so. Such a duty would come from either the common law of torts, which allows claims where there is a duty to behave reasonably to prevent foreseeable harm to others. . Or it might come from the Washington product liability statute - which, as noted above, creates a "duty to warn" in certain situations.
And of course, if there is no current duty, the legislature may see fit to pass a statute creating such a duty. :It may seem more prudent, however, for retailers to voluntarily assume such a responsibility. When companies benefit from collecting customer information, shouldn't they also assume a duty to protect customers from known risks associated with that very information? Some risks, of course, may be a matter of opinion. But this one was not: The fact of the risk was acknowledged by the USDA recall of the meat. With this kind of clear notice of the risk, it seems that QFC either does - or ought to - have a duty to protect customers from this risk.
Of course, should a retailer not wish to take on this responsibility, it can also change its loyalty program. QFC and other retailers could still track consumer purchases without asking them for personally identifiable information.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anita Ramasastry is an Associate Professor of Law at the University of Washington School of Law in Seattle and a Director of the Shidler Center for Law, Commerce & Technology.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20040805.html
Family Sues Grocer over BSE Recalled Beef
A family who claims they ate beef linked to the nation’s only known case of mad cow disease recently filed a class action lawsuit against Quality Food Centers (QFC), claiming the grocery store chain negligently exposed them and others to “highly hazardous” meat and did not properly notify them that they had bought it. Attorneys for Jill Crowson filed the lawsuit in King County Superior Court on behalf of her family and possibly hundreds of other customers who unwittingly bought and consumed beef potentially exposed to mad cow disease. The lawsuit is believed to be the first stemming from this country’s only confirmed case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), which was detected in a slaughtered dairy cow on December 23. Neither officials at Quality Food Centers’ Bellevue headquarters, or Kroger’s, the company’s Ohio-based corporate parent, could be reached for comment about the lawsuit. The suit contends the family bought and later ate ground beef from their local QFC that was part of a batch processed at Vern’s Moses Lake Meats on December 9 and included meat from the diseased cow. The beef was later shipped to wholesalers and retailers in Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Montana and Nevada. On December 23, after government scientists confirmed the infection, businesses began pulling potentially affected beef from their shelves under a voluntary recall. The family’s suit claims that, although QFC was aware of the recall, the store did not begin pulling the recalled beef from about 40 of its stores that carried it until December 24. The suit also claims that the company did not try to warn customers about the recalled beef until days later, and only then with small, inconspicuous signs inside the stores. Steve Berman, the family’s attorney, said the company had “a duty to warn” consumers who bought the beef under terms of the Washington Product Liability Act. Lawyers for the family say they believe hundreds, if not thousands, of QFC customers, and those of other stores, likely ate recalled beef - the reason why Berman filed their legal claim as a class action. A U.S. Department of Agriculture official last week said up to 17,000 pounds of meat affected by the recall likely was eaten or thrown out by customers. USDA officials have repeatedly said the risk from eating muscle cuts from an infected cow - the likely cut of meat processed and sold for hamburger in the recall - is extremely low. The family seeks damages for emotional distress and medical monitoring costs.
http://www.southwestmeat.org/newsletters/archive/March1504.pdf
see also ;
http://naiscoolyes.blogspot.com/
OF INTEREST BSE AND BSE COHORTS
U.K.
FINAL REPORT ON BSE CONFIRMED IN AN ANIMAL BORN ON 3 OCTOBER 2001 & TWO COHORT ANIMALS BORN ON 28 SEPTEMBER 2001 & 1 MAY 2002 IN A PEMBROKESHIRE HERD
snip...
Thirty-nine cohort animals1 and one offspring animal (born January 2004) were identified and effectively restricted within 24 hours of suspicion of the index case. The cohort and offspring animals were slaughtered following confirmation of the index case. Thirty-four cohorts were slaughtered in an OTMS abattoir on 12 May 2005. The offspring animal and five of the cohorts were slaughtered on farm. All the cohort animals were tested for BSE. Two of the animals slaughtered in the OTMS abattoir tested positive on BioRad ELISA. These homebred pedigree Holstein Friesian cows were born on 28 September 2001 and 1 May 2002, and were aged 43 and 36 months respectively at slaughter. These cases were confirmed on 27 May 2005 following positive Hybrid Western Blot (2001), OIE Western Blot (both), Immunohistochemistry (both) and Histopathology (2002) results. Where possible, samples from the BioRad negative cohorts were also subjected to further testing, all with negative results.
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS
http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/diseases/atoz/bse/documents/2001-02barb-finalreport.pdf
ITEM 6 – BARB CASE CLUSTERS
39. Professor John Wilesmith (Defra) updated the committee on the BSE cases born after the 1996 reinforced mammalian meat and bone meal ban in the UK (BARB cases). Around 116 BARB cases had been identified in Great Britain up to 22 November 2005, mostly through active surveillance. BARB cases had decreased in successive birth cohorts, from 44 in the 1996/1997 cohort to none to date in the 2000/2001 cohort. However, 3 BARB cases had been identified in the 2001/2002 cohort. Backcalculation of the prevalence of BARB cases indicated a drop from 130 infected animals per million (95% confidence interval 90-190) in the 1996/1997 cohort to 30 infected animals per million (95% confidence interval 10-60) in the 1999/2000 cohort. A shift in the geographical distribution of BSE cases, from the concentration of pre-1996 BSE cases in Eastern England to a more uniform
14
© SEAC 2005
distribution of BARB cases, had occurred. However, it appeared that certain post-1996 cohorts had a higher exposure to BSE in certain areas for limited periods. Several clusters of BARB cases within herds had been identified (5 pairs, 2 triplets and 1 quadruplet).
40. A triplet of BARB cases in South West Wales had been investigated in detail. The triplet comprised 2 cases born in September and October 2001 and a third in May 2002. The animals born in 2001 were reared outdoors from the spring of 2002 but the animal born in 2002 had been reared indoors. Further investigation of feeding practices revealed that a new feed bin for the adult dairy herd had been installed in September 1998. In July 2002 the feed bin was emptied, but not cleaned, and relocated. All 3 BARB cases received feed from the relocated bin. This finding suggested the hypothesis that the feed bin installed in September 1998 was filled initially with contaminated feed, that remnants of this feed fell to the bottom of the bin during its relocation, and thus young animals in the 2001/2002 birth cohort were exposed to feedstuffs produced in 1998. No adult cattle had been infected because of the reduced susceptibility to BSE with increasing age.
41. Further investigation of multiple case herds had found no association of BARB clusters with the closure of feed mills.
42. Professor Wilesmith concluded that there is evidence of a decline in risk of infection for successive birth cohorts of cattle. The BARB epidemic is unlikely to be sustained by animals born after 31 July 2000. Feed bins could represent a continued source of occasional infection and advice to farmers is being formulated to reduce this risk. There is no evidence for an indigenous source of infection for the BARB cases.
43. Members considered it encouraging that no other factor, apart from feed contamination, had been identified as a possible cause of BARB cases to date. Members commented that this study suggests that only a small amount of contaminated feed may be required for infection and that BSE infectivity can survive in the environment for several years. Professor Wilesmith agreed and noted that infection caused by small doses of infectious material was consistent with other studies, and it would appear there is little dilution of infectivity, if present, in the rendering system.
Additionally it appeared that the infectious agent had survived for 4 years in the feed bin.
44. The Chair thanked Professor Wilesmith for his presentation.
snip...
http://www.seac.gov.uk/minutes/final90.pdf
AUGUST 2010
let's take a closer look at this new prionpathy or prionopathy, and then let's look at the g-h-BSEalabama mad cow.
This new prionopathy in humans? the genetic makeup is IDENTICAL to the g-h-BSEalabama mad cow, the only _documented_ mad cow in the world to date like this, ......wait, it get's better. this new prionpathy is killing young and old humans, with LONG DURATION from onset of symptoms to death, and the symptoms are very similar to nvCJD victims, OH, and the plaques are very similar in some cases too, bbbut, it's not related to the g-h-BSEalabama cow, WAIT NOW, it gets even better, the new human prionpathy that they claim is a genetic TSE, has no relation to any gene mutation in that family. daaa, ya think it could be related to that mad cow with the same genetic make-up ??? there were literally tons and tons of banned mad cow protein in Alabama in commerce, and none of it transmitted to cows, and the cows to humans there from ??? r i g h t $$$
Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee The possible impacts and consequences for public health, trade and agriculture of the Government’s decision to relax import restrictions on beef Final report June 2010
2.65 At its hearing on 14 May 2010, the committee heard evidence from Dr Alan Fahey who has recently submitted a thesis on the clinical neuropsychiatric, epidemiological and diagnostic features of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.48 Dr Fahey told the committee of his concerns regarding the lengthy incubation period for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, the inadequacy of current tests and the limited nature of our current understanding of this group of diseases.49
2.66 Dr Fahey also told the committee that in the last two years a link has been established between forms of atypical CJD and atypical BSE. Dr Fahey said that: They now believe that those atypical BSEs overseas are in fact causing sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. They were not sure if it was due to mad sheep disease or a different form. If you look in the textbooks it looks like this is just arising by itself. But in my research I have a summary of a document which states that there has never been any proof that sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease has arisen de novo—has arisen of itself. There is no proof of that. The recent research is that in fact it is due to atypical forms of mad cow disease which have been found across Europe, have been found in America and have been found in Asia. These atypical forms of mad cow disease typically have even longer incubation periods than the classical mad cow disease.50
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/rrat_ctte/mad_cows/report/report.pdf
ALABAMA MAD COW g-h-BSEalabama
In this study, we identified a novel mutation in the bovine prion protein gene (Prnp), called E211K, of a confirmed BSE positive cow from Alabama, United States of America. This mutation is identical to the E200K pathogenic mutation found in humans with a genetic form of CJD. This finding represents the first report of a confirmed case of BSE with a potential pathogenic mutation within the bovine Prnp gene. We hypothesize that the bovine Prnp E211K mutation most likely has caused BSE in "the approximately 10-year-old cow" carrying the E221K mutation.
http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1000156
http://www.plospathogens.org/article/fetchObjectAttachment.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1000156&representation=PDF
Saturday, August 14, 2010
BSE Case Associated with Prion Protein Gene Mutation (g-h-BSEalabama) and VPSPr PRIONPATHY
(see mad cow feed in COMMERCE IN ALABAMA...TSS)
http://prionpathy.blogspot.com/2010/08/bse-case-associated-with-prion-protein.html
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
re-Freedom of Information Act Project Number 3625-32000-086-05, Study of Atypical BSE UPDATE July 28, 2010
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/07/re-freedom-of-information-act-project.html
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Variably protease-sensitive prionopathy: A new sporadic disease of the prion protein
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2010/08/variably-protease-sensitive-prionopathy.html
Monday, August 9, 2010
Variably protease-sensitive prionopathy: A new sporadic disease of the prion protein or just more PRIONBALONEY ?
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2010/08/variably-protease-sensitive-prionopathy.html
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Seven main threats for the future linked to prions
http://prionpathy.blogspot.com/2010/08/seven-main-threats-for-future-linked-to.html
http://prionpathy.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Hansard Import restrictions on beef FRIDAY, 5 FEBRUARY 2010 AUSTRALIA
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Proof Committee Hansard
RRA&T 2 Senate Friday, 5 February 2010
RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT
[9.03 am]
BELLINGER, Mr Brad, Chairman, Australian Beef Association
CARTER, Mr John Edward, Director, Australian Beef Association
CHAIR—Welcome. Would you like to make an opening statement?
Mr Bellinger—Thank you. The ABA stands by its submission, which we made on 14 December last year, that the decision made by the government to allow the importation of beef from BSE affected countries is politically based, not science based. During this hearing we will bring forward compelling new evidence to back up this statement. When I returned to my property after the December hearing I received a note from an American citizen. I will read a small excerpt from the mail he sent me in order to reinforce the dangers of allowing the importation of beef from BSE affected countries. I have done a number of press releases on this topic, and this fellow has obviously picked my details up from the internet. His name is Terry Singeltary and he is from Bacliff, Texas. He states, and rightfully so:
You should be worried. Please let me explain. I’ve kept up with the mad cow saga for 12 years today, on December 14th 1997, some four months post voluntary and partial mad cow feed ban in the USA, I lost my mother to the Heidenhain variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). I know this is just another phenotype of the infamous sporadic CJDs. Here in the USA, when USA sheep scrapie was transmitted to USA bovine, the agent was not UK BSE—it was a different strain. So why then would human TSE from USA cattle look like UK CJD from UK BSE? It would not. So this accentuates that the science is inconclusive still on this devastating disease. He goes on to state:
The OIE— the International Organisation of Epizootics, the arm of the WTO— is a failed global agent that in my opinion is bought off via bogus regulations for global trade and industry reps. I have done this all these years for nothing but the truth. I am a consumer, I eat meat, but I do not have to sit idly by and see the ignorance and greed of it all while countless numbers of humans and animals are being exposed to the TSE agents. All the USA is interested in is trade, nothing else matters.
Even Dr Stanley Prusiner, who incidentally won the Nobel Health Prize in 1997 for his work on the prion—he invented the word ‘prion’, or it came from him—states:
The BSC policy was set up for one purpose only, trade—the illegal trading of all strains of TSE globally throughout North America, which is home to CBSC, IBSC and HBSC, many scrapie strains and two strains of CJD to date. (please note typo error, those should have read cBSE, lBSE, and hBSE...tss)
I would also like, while I have the opportunity, to explain the beef-off-the-shelves myth. At the first Senate hearing on 14 December, it was explained that the reason why they allowed BSC beef into Australia was the beef-off-the-shelves policy, whereby if we found a case of BSC in Australia they would have to recall all—
Friday, 5 February 2010 Senate RRA&T 3
RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT
Senator HEFFERNAN—Which of course is total BS.
Mr Bellinger—Correct. This is written in the FSANZ document—Food Standards Australia New Zealand. Why isn’t this same policy in New Zealand? It is not—it is only in Australia. We are the only country in the world to have this idiotic policy. So we again call for the tabling of the WTO obligations paperwork. We do not believe that exists.
snip...see full text 110 pages ;
http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/S12742.pdf
for those interested, please see much more here ;
http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2010/03/commonwealth-of-australia-hansard.html
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2010/02/transmissible-spongiform-encephalopathy.html
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
(SEE BEEF PRODUCTS EXPORTED TO AUSTRALIA FROM USA...TSS)
AUSTRALIAN QUESTIONNAIRE TO ASSESS BSE RISK (OIE) Terrestrial Animal Health Code, 2009 and USA export risk factor for BSE to Australia
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2010/07/australian-questionnaire-to-assess-bse.html
Saturday, August 14, 2010
USA NON-SPECIES CODING SYSTEM (BEEF IMPORT EXPORT BSE RISK THERE FROM)
US denies it's illegally sending beef to Australia ?
Friday, 13/08/2010
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2010/08/usa-non-species-coding-system-beef.html
Saturday, June 19, 2010
U.S. DENIED UPGRADED BSE STATUS FROM OIE
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2010/06/us-denied-upgraded-bse-status-from-oie.html
Sunday, August 15, 2010
ATYPICAL BSE NOW LINKED TO CAUSING SPORADIC CJD OVERSEAS Commonwealth of Australia
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/08/atypical-bse-now-linked-to-causing.html
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Spontaneous generation of mammalian prions
http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2010/07/spontaneous-generation-of-mammalian.html
P.9.21
Molecular characterization of BSE in Canada
Jianmin Yang1, Sandor Dudas2, Catherine Graham2, Markus Czub3, Tim McAllister1, Stefanie Czub1 1Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Centre, Canada; 2National and OIE BSE Reference Laboratory, Canada; 3University of Calgary, Canada
Background: Three BSE types (classical and two atypical) have been identified on the basis of molecular characteristics of the misfolded protein associated with the disease. To date, each of these three types have been detected in Canadian cattle.
Objectives: This study was conducted to further characterize the 16 Canadian BSE cases based on the biochemical properties of there associated PrPres. Methods: Immuno-reactivity, molecular weight, glycoform profiles and relative proteinase K sensitivity of the PrPres from each of the 16 confirmed Canadian BSE cases was determined using modified Western blot analysis.
Results: Fourteen of the 16 Canadian BSE cases were C type, 1 was H type and 1 was L type. The Canadian H and L-type BSE cases exhibited size shifts and changes in glycosylation similar to other atypical BSE cases. PK digestion under mild and stringent conditions revealed a reduced protease resistance of the atypical cases compared to the C-type cases. N terminal- specific antibodies bound to PrPres from H type but not from C or L type. The C-terminal-specific antibodies resulted in a shift in the glycoform profile and detected a fourth band in the Canadian H-type BSE.
Discussion: The C, L and H type BSE cases in Canada exhibit molecular characteristics similar to those described for classical and atypical BSE cases from Europe and Japan. This supports the theory that the importation of BSE contaminated feedstuff is the source of C-type BSE in Canada. It also suggests a similar cause or source for atypical BSE in these countries.
http://www.prion2009.com/sites/default/files/Prion2009_Book_of_Abstracts.pdf
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
REPORT ON THE INVESTIGATION OF THE SIXTEENTH CASE OF BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY (BSE) IN CANADA
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/08/report-on-investigation-of-sixteenth.html
Thursday, August 19, 2010
REPORT ON THE INVESTIGATION OF THE SEVENTEENTH CASE OF BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY (BSE) IN CANADA
http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2010/08/report-on-investigation-of-seventeenth.html
Thursday, August 19, 2010
SCRAPIE CANADA UPDATE Current as of 2010-07-31 The following table lists sheep flocks and/or goat herds confirmed to be infected with scrapie in Canada in 2010.
Current as of: 2010-07-31
http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2010/08/scrapie-canada-update-current-as-of.html
14th ICID International Scientific Exchange Brochure -
Final Abstract Number: ISE.114
Session: International Scientific Exchange
Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America
update October 2009
T. Singeltary
Bacliff, TX, USA
Background:
An update on atypical BSE and other TSE in North America. Please remember, the typical U.K. c-BSE, the atypical l-BSE (BASE), and h-BSE have all been documented in North America, along with the typical scrapie's, and atypical Nor-98 Scrapie, and to date, 2 different strains of CWD, and also TME. All these TSE in different species have been rendered and fed to food producing animals for humans and animals in North America (TSE in cats and dogs ?), and that the trading of these TSEs via animals and products via the USA and Canada has been immense over the years, decades.
Methods:
12 years independent research of available data
Results:
I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2009. With all the science to date refuting it, to continue to validate this old myth, will only spread this TSE agent through a multitude of potential routes and sources i.e. consumption, medical i.e., surgical, blood, dental, endoscopy, optical, nutritional supplements, cosmetics etc.
Conclusion:
I would like to submit a review of past CJD surveillance in the USA, and the urgent need to make all human TSE in the USA a reportable disease, in every state, of every age group, and to make this mandatory immediately without further delay. The ramifications of not doing so will only allow this agent to spread further in the medical, dental, surgical arena's. Restricting the reporting of CJD and or any human TSE is NOT scientific. Iatrogenic CJD knows NO age group, TSE knows no boundaries. I propose as with Aguzzi, Asante, Collinge, Caughey, Deslys, Dormont, Gibbs, Gajdusek, Ironside, Manuelidis, Marsh, et al and many more, that the world of TSE Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy is far from an exact science, but there is enough proven science to date that this myth should be put to rest once and for all, and that we move forward with a new classification for human and animal TSE that would properly identify the infected species, the source species, and then the route.
http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/14th_ICID_ISE_Abstracts.pdf
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Atypical BSE in Cattle
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/03/atypical-bse-in-cattle-position-post.html
FRIENDLY FIRE FROM ALL OF THE ABOVE ;
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Incidence of CJD Deaths Reported by CJD-SS in Canada as of July 31, 2010
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2010/08/incidence-of-cjd-deaths-reported-by-cjd.html
Monday, August 9, 2010
National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center Cases Examined (July 31, 2010)
(please watch and listen to the video and the scientist speaking about atypical BSE and sporadic CJD and listen to Professor Aguzzi)
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2010/08/national-prion-disease-pathology.html
Thursday, August 12, 2010
USA Blood products, collected from a donor who was at risk for vCJD, were distributed July-August 2010
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2010/08/usa-blood-products-collected-from-donor.html
Friday, August 20, 2010
Heidenhain Variant of Sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease With the Co-Occurrence of Two Different Types of Prion Protein
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2010/08/heidenhain-variant-of-sporadic.html
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518 flounder9@verizon.net
Friday, August 20, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
NAIS MAD COW TRACEABILITY DUMPED BY USDA APHIS 2010
NAIS MAD COW TRACEABILITY DUMPED BY USDA APHIS
On February 5, 2010, USDA announced a new, flexible framework for animal disease traceability in the United States.
The framework will provide the basic tenets of an improved animal disease traceability capability in the United States. USDA’s efforts will:
•Only apply to animals moved in interstate commerce; •Be administered by the States and Tribal Nations to provide more flexibility; •Encourage the use of lower-cost technology; and •Be implemented transparently through federal regulations and the full rulemaking process. USDA is committed to working in partnership with States, Tribal Nations and industry in the coming months to address many of the details of this framework, and is establishing a Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health to address specific issues, such as confidentiality and liability.
For more information about the new framework, please read the following documents:
•USDA Announces New Framework for Animal Disease Traceability(En Español)
•Questions and Answers: New Animal Disease Traceability Framework
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/
Bloomberg
February 05, 2010, 02:26 PM EST
U.S. Cuts Animal-Tracking Plan Created After Mad Cow (Update3)
(Adds export figures, mad cow disease-related losses, and European Union tracking system starting in seventh paragraph.)
By Daniel Enoch and Whitney McFerron
Feb. 5 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. is scrapping a national system to track livestock from birth to slaughter as industry opposition led to the failure of a voluntary program created after cases of mad cow disease emerged starting in 2003.
snip...see full text ;
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-05/usda-to-limit-animal-id-plan-to-interstate-moves-update1-.html
USDA announces plans to revise animal ID system Issue Date: February 10, 2010
By Ching Lee Assistant Editor
Responding to criticism from what it called a "vast majority" of ranchers who spoke out at public forums, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced last week it is revising its policy on the National Animal Identification System in favor of a more "flexible, coordinated approach" to animal disease traceability.
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the new policy allows states to administer their own trace-back program that focuses only on animals that move across state lines.
Rather than mandating a national, one-size-fits-all system for all producers, the USDA would work with states to adopt specific methods that work best for their local needs, he added.
The changes come after a series of public meetings last year in which producers and other stakeholders raised concerns about the old system, including cost, confidentiality, liability and privacy. Some groups also complained that the system benefits only large-scale producers and that the animal ID system is unnecessary because existing animal identification systems are sufficient.
Citing the feedback, Vilsack said "it is apparent that a new strategy for animal disease traceability is needed."
The ability to identify and track livestock became a top priority for USDA following the nation's first case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in 2003. The department proposed the system in 2004 and subsequently spent more than $120 million trying to implement it. However, only 36 percent of producers to date have signed up for the program.
While many producers say they recognize the importance of having a system in place to protect animal health and enhance disease control, the USDA plan to tag and track millions of livestock ignited opposition and controversy among ranchers across the nation.
Vilsack said under his new plan, USDA would work with states to create new federal rules and a basic blueprint for the new system. But states would ultimately decide how they want to design their program to meet federal standards.
He said he plans to re-establish an advisory committee with state animal health leaders to assist in evaluating commodity-based animal disease traceability approaches. ...SNIP...END
FULL TEXT ;
http://www.cfbf.com/agalert/AgAlertStory.cfm?ID=1478&ck=83CDCEC08FBF90370FCF53BDD56604FF
SEE what old Ron has to say now, after he let the mad cows out the barn door ;
Some Concerned with USDA's Decision to Scrap NAIS
02/08/2010 from NAFB News Service
Veterinarians and a Bush-era USDA official are expressing reservations about USDA’s decision to dump the National Animal Identification System.
CEO Ron DeHaven says the American Veterinary Medical Association cannot endorse Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack's new approach to animal disease traceability because there are simply too many unanswered questions. “As I understand it they will let each state and tribal nation more or less develop their own program. So I’m concerned about interoperability between fifty or more different systems. Will one state be able to talk to another state as an animal moves through interstate commerce?"
According to DeHaven, who was USDA’s Chief Veterinarian when the first U.S. BSE case was discovered in 2003, politics trumped animal disease control. "In my estimation we’ve allowed those political issues to get in the way of what is a much more important issue, and that is our ability to rapidly trace animals to contain and eliminate a disease outbreak. It’s not a partisan issue, but I think both administrations have been caving to this public resistance, which in my estimation, while it may be important, it pales in comparison to the economic impact of a major disease outbreak."
Bruce Knight, USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory Under Secretary in the final years of the Bush Administration, fears that abandoning the NAIS model will undercut U.S. efforts to obtain a negligible BSE risk rating from the World Organization for Animal Health.
USDA estimates the new animal disease traceability framework will take 18 months to two years to create and implement. But Jay Truitt of Policy Solutions, a Washington-based lobbying firm, says it’ll take a lot longer than that, maybe 4 or 5 years, making it more difficult to lift remaining BSE-related restrictions on U.S. beef exports.
Truitt, formerly Vice President of Government Affairs at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, wasn’t surprised by Vilsack’s decision to scrap NAIS. He described beef cattle producer participation in the program as "pitiful."
http://www.hoosieragtoday.com/wire/news/00222_naisscrap_223049.php
see more of Ron here ;
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/02/report-on-testing-ruminants-for-tses-in.html
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2008/01/bse-oie-usda.html
Remarks
Bruce I. Knight, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs FFA Cooperative Agreement Signing Washington, DC
June 4, 2007
SNIP...
We all understand that the goal for NAIS first and foremost is to protect animal health. It's designed to help producers safeguard their flocks and herds, to protect their neighbors and to preserve their profits.
NAIS also builds confidence in the health and wholesomeness of U.S. livestock. Further, the animal ID program enables us to meet the international obligations we face in the world market. Having the system in place will smooth the way for livestock exports.
OIE Designation
As you know, there's been significant concern about BSE around the world. But we're making progress in reassuring our trading partners that we have the safeguards in place to ensure that the products we sell are safe and healthful to eat.
Just two weeks ago, the OIE-the World Organization for Animal Health-awarded the U.S. a formal classification of "controlled risk" for BSE. As Secretary Johanns put it, "That classification confirms what we have always contended-that U.S. regulatory controls are effective and that U.S. fresh beef and beef products from cattle of all ages can be safely traded due to our interlocking safeguards."
The controlled risk classification is essentially an international clean bill of health for our national cattle herd. It's a determination based on a scientific assessment of risk using internationally agreed upon standards.
Any nation that recognizes the OIE standards now has no scientific reason to block imports of U.S. beef-of any age. Eventually, it should put an end to the need for export verification programs.
The key is for our trading partners to adopt the OIE standards as their own standards for safe trade. And we must do the same.
Conclusion
We are moving forward to expand markets and to ensure the health of U.S. herds and flocks with the voluntary NAIS. Today, we welcome FFA as they join with us as partners to encourage farmers and ranchers to take the first step and register their premises.
SEE FULL TEXT ;
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/speeches/content/2007/06/document/FFA-NAIS-SigningFinal%206-4-07.doc
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/downloads/NAIS-UserGuide.pdf
National Animal Identification System (NAIS)
NAIS: AT A GLANCE
What is (WAS...TSS) NAIS?
Simply put, NAIS is a modern, streamlined information system that helps producers and animal health officials respond quickly and effectively to animal disease events in the United States. The NAIS program—a voluntary State-Federal-Industry partnership—is beneficial because it helps us protect U.S. livestock and poultry from disease spread, maintain consumer confidence in our food supply, and retain access to domestic and foreign markets.
USDA is not requiring participation in the program. NAIS can help producers protect the health and marketability of their animals—but the choice to participate is theirs.
Animal health officials across the country agree that premises registration, the foundation of NAIS, is a necessary first step to achieving these goals. Premises information ensures that producers will be notified quickly when a disease event might impact their area or the species of animals they have. In an animal health emergency, we cannot help producers protect their animals if we do not know they are there. By voluntarily registering their premises and providing contact information, producers will ensure that they receive the information they need—when they need it most—to protect their animals and their investment. In an emergency, animal health officials will be able to quickly locate at-risk animals and take precise actions to address the situation, minimize hardships, and speed disease eradication efforts as much as possible.
The voluntary NAIS also encompasses animal identification and animal movement tracing systems. These components are currently being refined by NAIS’ industry and private sector partners. While the focus today is on premises registration, animal owners should know that the other components of NAIS will be additional options for them when they’re ready to make decisions about what level of participation best suits their needs.
USDA is required by law to protect individuals’ private information. Regardless of the level of participation animal owners choose, the voluntary NAIS is limited in terms of the type and quantity of information maintained by the Federal Government. At the Federal level, the system will hold and maintain only minimal premises information. Beyond the premises registration system, USDA will not “own” any additional data on participants in the system. If USDA needs animal movement and location information to respond to an animal health emergency, data will be requested from the private and State databases where it is held. Federal law protects individuals’ private information and confidential business information from public disclosure.
FULL TEXT 74 PAGES ;
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/downloads/NAIS-UserGuide.pdf
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
NAIS, COOL, FROM FARM TO FORK, MAD COW DISEASE
http://naiscoolyes.blogspot.com/2009/12/nais-cool-from-farm-to-fork-mad-cow.html
Friday, March 13, 2009
NAIS comments NCBA and R-Calf Wednesday, March 11, 2009 – 10:30 a.m. Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry — Public Hearing
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2009/03/nais-comments-ncba-and-r-calf-wednesday.html
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Qualitative Analysis of BSE Risk Factors in the United States February 13, 2000 at 3:37 pm PST (BSE red book)
http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2008/08/qualitative-analysis-of-bse-risk.html
48 hour traceback for BSE mad cow disease in the USA ???
NOT in your lifetime !
8 YEARS IN REVIEW OF THE MAD COW DEBACLE IN THE USA ;
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/12/mad-cow-disease-usa-december-28-2008-8.html
The most recent assessments (and reassessments) were published in June 2005 (Table I; 18), and included the categorisation of Canada, the USA, and Mexico as GBR III. Although only Canada and the USA have reported cases, the historically open system of trade in North America suggests that it is likely that BSE is present also in Mexico.
http://www.oie.int/boutique/extrait/06heim937950.pdf
February 10, 2010
Greetings,
IN my opinion, i think we need NAIS. i think as a consumer, we have a right to this information. as a Country importing our product, they have a right to know, it should be law. it should be mandatory that when an animal disease or human disease there from break out, the animal and or it's product can be traced. and as a producer of that product, if you are too worried about confidentiality, you are trying to hide something, then you should not be in the business. how in the world can knowing from where a cow comes from i.e. traceability, be such a threat to the producer, unless they simply want to hide something? in 2010, the USA, in relations to cattle identification and tracing, could not trace their @ss if they had both hands on it, in my opinion, and going by past history of the last two documented mad cows. the USA has been discussing this for over a decade. I don't understand it, all these other Country's that have some sort of Animal Traceability in place, they are and have been trying to eradicate BSE, that have had a feed ban in place, that have been abiding by it, testing in numbers to find and eradicate the TSEs, and the USA just seems to be doing the opposite in many ways it seems to me. if the USA is not going to trace it's meat products, why should other Country's trace theirs? The USA is BSE GBR III, all of North America is BSE GBR III (with all the evidence of breaches in the bse feed ban, the breaches in the BSE surveillance program, i personally believe it is BSE GBR IV). The problem is, the USDA just never accepted it (BSE GBR III), and then changed the rules with the BSE MRR. this BSE MRR policy literally trashed 30 years of attempted BSE GBR eradication of this disease. What about other trading partners with the U.S.A. that DO HAVE a traceability system. i think Australia is getting ready to roll over and get MRR'ed, therefore they too will just be another victim of allowing all strains of Typical and Atypical BSE/TSE into their Country via the USDA OIE BSE MRR policy, a policy of trading all strains of mad cow disease globally. The O.I.E., by bending over for the USDA with this damn BSE MRR policy, has sold their sole to the devil, and in doing so, sold yours too. ...
remember, and do not forget what the Honorable Nobel Peace Prize winner of the PRION i.e. Stanley Prusiner said ;
THEY DON'T WANT TO KNOW ! ABSOLUTE IGNORANCE, ALL THAT MATTERS IS TRADE...
AFTER THE COW IN CANADA...LEVEL OF ABSOLUTE IGNORANCE, OF WHAT HE WAS TRYTING TO CONTAIN...
THE ENTIRE POLICY WAS DRIVEN BY WHAT THE USA WAS TELLING HIM TO DO...SO NOW AFTER SOME TIME HAS PASSED...
SO NOW AFTER TIME HAS PASSED IT'S O.K. FOR BONELESS BEEF PRODUCTS FROM UNDER 30 MONTHS TO BE EXPORTED FROM CANADA TO THE UNITED STATES, THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERED...
YES, I THINK THAT PRIONS ARE BAD TO EAT, AND YOU CAN DIE FROM THEM...
http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/prusinerclip.html
Analysis of Data on Presumed Dead and Untraceable Animals
CEAH performed an analysis of the minimum estimated ages of those COI that were classified as either presumed dead or untraceable to determine the likely disposition of those animals based on their ages. Moreover, CEAH performed an analysis of the likely disposition of the one calf that was classified as untraceable during the investigation.
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/bse_final_epi_report8-05.pdf
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2009/03/nais-comments-ncba-and-r-calf-wednesday.html
WE know that the FDA mad cow feed ban of August 4, 1997 was nothing but ink on paper. there is still animal protein in commerce in the USA being fed out to cattle and other livestock as we speak. see a few warning letters and or recalls here ;
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/02/import-alert-99-25-detention-without.html
WE also know that the USDA certified dead stock downer cow school lunch program NSLP, fed these most high risk cattle for BSE and mad cow disease and other deadly pathogens to our children all across our Nation for over 4 YEARS, you can see this here ;
http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2009/09/suit-meatpacker-used-downer-cows-for-4.html
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Establishing a Fully Integrated National Food Safety System with Strengthened Inspection, Laboratory and Response Capacity Draft 09/24/09
http://fdafailedus.blogspot.com/2010/01/establishing-fully-integrated-national.html
Friday, January 29, 2010 14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases H-type and L-type Atypical BSE January 2010 (special pre-congress edition)
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/01/14th-international-congress-on.html
Beef imports from BSE nations not traced
19:16 AEST Mon Feb 8 2010 ago By Simon Jenkins
Beef imported to Australia from countries where there has been an outbreak of mad cow disease will not be traced back to individual farms, a Senate inquiry has been told.
Yet beef farms in Australia are subject to full traceability through the National Livestock Identification System.
The double standard drew the ire of coalition senators during a Senate estimates hearing in Canberra on Monday.
"How on earth ... can we be sure about the beef that's coming from that (overseas) property?" Nationals senator Fiona Nash asked the chief veterinary officer from the government's Biosecurity Service Group.
Asked whether there would be individual assessments of traceability, Dr Andy Carroll replied: "No."
Traceability will be determined on a country-to-country basis, and administered through Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FANZ).
SNIP...END...TSS
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/1009496/beef-imports-from-bse-nations-not-traced
for those interested, please see ;
http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009/05/oie-upgrades-japans-bse-status-to.html
http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009/11/bse-gbr-risk-assessments-update.html
Docket APHIS-2007-0033 Docket Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2007-0033-0001 Document Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Public Submission APHIS-2007-0033-0002.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singeltary comment
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648027c28e
Manuscript Draft Manuscript Number: Title: HUMAN and ANIMAL TSE Classifications i.e. mad cow disease and the UKBSEnvCJD only theory Article Type: Personal View Corresponding Author: Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Corresponding Author's Institution: na First Author: Terry S Singeltary, none Order of Authors: Terry S Singeltary, none; Terry S. Singeltary Abstract: TSEs have been rampant in the USA for decades in many species, and they all have been rendered and fed back to animals for human/animal consumption. I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2007.
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Date: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PST
August 24, 2005
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings APHIS ET AL,
My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;
PROPOSED RULES
Exportation and importation of animals and animal products:
Whole cuts of boneless beef from-
Japan,
48494-48500 [05-16422]
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=0900006480086ebc&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw6
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed
PLEASE SEE FULL TEXT HERE ;
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-no-03-080-1-usda-issues-proposed.html
Docket APHIS-2006-0026 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Animal Identification and Importation of Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0026-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions, Identification of Ruminants and Processing and Importation of Commodities Public Submission APHIS-2006-0026-0012 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801e47e1
Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary
Comment 2006-2007 USA AND OIE POISONING GLOBE WITH BSE MRR POLICY
THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species.
MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???
go figure. ...
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f8151
Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singletary comment
January 28, 2007
Greetings APHIS,
I would kindly like to submit the following to ;
BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f8152&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: TSE advisory committee for the meeting December 15, 2006 [TSS SUBMISSION
snip...
ONE FINAL COMMENT PLEASE, (i know this is long Dr. Freas but please bear with me)
THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted blood from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone.
These are the facts as i have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species. ...
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
snip... 48 pages...
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f3413&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 3:23 PM
Subject: 14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases H-type and L-type Atypical BSE January 2010 (special pre-congress edition)
18.173 page 189
Experimental Challenge of Cattle with H-type and L-type Atypical BSE
A. Buschmann1, U. Ziegler1, M. Keller1, R. Rogers2, B. Hills3, M.H. Groschup1. 1Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany, 2Health Canada, Bureau of Microbial Hazards, Health Products & Food Branch, Ottawa, Canada, 3Health Canada, Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Secretariat, Ottawa, Canada
Background: After the detection of two novel BSE forms designated H-type and L-type atypical BSE the question of the pathogenesis and the agent distribution of these two types in cattle was fully open. From initial studies of the brain pathology, it was already known that the anatomical distribution of L-type BSE differs from that of the classical type where the obex region in the brainstem always displays the highest PrPSc concentrations. In contrast in L-type BSE cases, the thalamus and frontal cortex regions showed the highest levels of the pathological prion protein, while the obex region was only weakly involved.
Methods:We performed intracranial inoculations of cattle (five and six per group) using 10%brainstemhomogenates of the two German H- and L-type atypical BSE isolates. The animals were inoculated under narcosis and then kept in a free-ranging stable under appropriate biosafety conditions.At least one animal per group was killed and sectioned in the preclinical stage and the remaining animals were kept until they developed clinical symptoms. The animals were examined for behavioural changes every four weeks throughout the experiment following a protocol that had been established during earlier BSE pathogenesis studies with classical BSE.
Results and Discussion: All animals of both groups developed clinical symptoms and had to be euthanized within 16 months. The clinical picture differed from that of classical BSE, as the earliest signs of illness were loss of body weight and depression. However, the animals later developed hind limb ataxia and hyperesthesia predominantly and the head. Analysis of brain samples from these animals confirmed the BSE infection and the atypical Western blot profile was maintained in all animals. Samples from these animals are now being examined in order to be able to describe the pathogenesis and agent distribution for these novel BSE types. Conclusions: A pilot study using a commercially avaialble BSE rapid test ELISA revealed an essential restriction of PrPSc to the central nervous system for both atypical BSE forms. A much more detailed analysis for PrPSc and infectivity is still ongoing.
http://www.isid.org/14th_icid/
http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/IMED2009_AbstrAuth.pdf
http://www.isid.org/publications/ICID_Archive.shtml
From: xxxx
To: Terry Singeltary
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 9:09 AM Subject: 14th ICID - abstract accepted for 'International Scientific Exchange'
Your preliminary abstract number: 670
Dear Mr. Singeltary,
On behalf of the Scientific Committee, I am pleased to inform you that your abstract
'Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009'
WAS accepted for inclusion in the INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE (ISE) section of the 14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases. Accordingly, your abstract will be included in the "Intl. Scientific Exchange abstract CD-rom" of the Congress which will be distributed to all participants.
Abstracts accepted for INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE are NOT PRESENTED in the oral OR poster sessions.
Your abstract below was accepted for: INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE
#0670: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009
Author: T. Singeltary; Bacliff, TX/US
Topic: Emerging Infectious Diseases Preferred type of presentation: International Scientific Exchange
This abstract has been ACCEPTED.
#0670: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009
Authors: T. Singeltary; Bacliff, TX/US
Title: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009
Body: Background
An update on atypical BSE and other TSE in North America. Please remember, the typical U.K. c-BSE, the atypical l-BSE (BASE), and h-BSE have all been documented in North America, along with the typical scrapie's, and atypical Nor-98 Scrapie, and to date, 2 different strains of CWD, and also TME. All these TSE in different species have been rendered and fed to food producing animals for humans and animals in North America (TSE in cats and dogs ?), and that the trading of these TSEs via animals and products via the USA and Canada has been immense over the years, decades.
Methods
12 years independent research of available data
Results
I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2009. With all the science to date refuting it, to continue to validate this old myth, will only spread this TSE agent through a multitude of potential routes and sources i.e. consumption, medical i.e., surgical, blood, dental, endoscopy, optical, nutritional supplements, cosmetics etc.
Conclusion
I would like to submit a review of past CJD surveillance in the USA, and the urgent need to make all human TSE in the USA a reportable disease, in every state, of every age group, and to make this mandatory immediately without further delay. The ramifications of not doing so will only allow this agent to spread further in the medical, dental, surgical arena's. Restricting the reporting of CJD and or any human TSE is NOT scientific. Iatrogenic CJD knows NO age group, TSE knows no boundaries.
I propose as with Aguzzi, Asante, Collinge, Caughey, Deslys, Dormont, Gibbs, Gajdusek, Ironside, Manuelidis, Marsh, et al and many more, that the world of TSE Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy is far from an exact science, but there is enough proven science to date that this myth should be put to rest once and for all, and that we move forward with a new classification for human and animal TSE that would properly identify the infected species, the source species, and then the route.
Keywords: Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease Prion
http://www.isid.org/14th_icid/
http://www.isid.org/publications/ICID_Archive.shtml
http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/IMED2009_AbstrAuth.pdf
Monday, October 19, 2009
Atypical BSE, BSE, and other human and animal TSE in North America Update October 19, 2009
snip...
I ask Professor Kong ;
Thursday, December 04, 2008 3:37 PM Subject: RE: re--Chronic Wating Disease (CWD) and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathies (BSE): Public Health Risk Assessment
''IS the h-BSE more virulent than typical BSE as well, or the same as cBSE, or less virulent than cBSE? just curious.....''
Professor Kong reply ;
.....snip
''As to the H-BSE, we do not have sufficient data to say one way or another, but we have found that H-BSE can infect humans. I hope we could publish these data once the study is complete.
Thanks for your interest.''
Best regards,
Qingzhong Kong, PhD Associate Professor Department of Pathology Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
END...TSS
I look forward to further transmission studies, and a true ENHANCED BSE/atypical BSE surveillance program put forth testing all cattle for human and animal consumption for 5 years. a surveillance program that uses the most sensitive TSE testing, and has the personnel that knows how to use them, and can be trusted. I look forward to a stringent mad cow feed ban being put forth, and then strictly enforced. we need a forced, not voluntary feed ban, an enhanced feed ban at that, especially excluding blood. we need some sort of animal traceability. no more excuses about privacy. if somebody is putting out a product that is killing folks and or has the potential to kill you, then everybody needs to know who they are, and where that product came from. same with hospitals, i think medical incidents in all states should be recorded, and made public, when it comes to something like a potential accidental transmission exposure event. so if someone is out there looking at a place to go have surgery done, if you have several hospitals having these type 'accidental exposure events', than you can go some place else. it only makes sense. somewhere along the road, the consumer lost control, and just had to take whatever they were given, and then charged these astronomical prices. some where along the line the consumer just lost interest, especially on a long incubating disease such as mad cow disease i.e. Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy. like i said before, there is much more to the mad cow story than bovines and eating a hamburger, we must start focusing on all TSE in all species. ...TSS
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/10/atypical-bse-bse-and-other-human-and.html
snip...full text ;
Friday, January 29, 2010
14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases H-type and L-type Atypical BSE January 2010 (special pre-congress edition)
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/01/14th-international-congress-on.html
Sunday, January 17, 2010
BSE USA feed inspection violations 01/01/2009 to 01/17/2010 FDA BSE/Ruminant Feed Inspections Firms Inventory Report
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/01/bse-usa-feed-inspection-violations.html
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
CVM's OR Develops New PCR-Based Method for Testing Animal Feed
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/01/cvms-or-develops-new-pcr-based-method.html
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Human Prion Diseases in the United States January 1, 2010 ***FINAL***
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2010/01/human-prion-diseases-in-united-states.html
my comments to PLosone here ;
http://www.plosone.org/annotation/listThread.action?inReplyTo=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fannotation%2F04ce2b24-613d-46e6-9802-4131e2bfa6fd&root=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fannotation%2F04ce2b24-613d-46e6-9802-4131e2bfa6fd
Thursday, February 4, 2010
SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Draft Minutes of the 103rd Meeting held on 24th November 2009
http://seac992007.blogspot.com/2010/02/spongiform-encephalopathy-advisory.html
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
The Honorable Ms. Kim Min-sun Anti-US Beef Actress Prevails in Court
http://usdavskorea.blogspot.com/2010/02/honorable-ms-kim-min-sun-anti-us-beef.html
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
R-CALF: 40 Groups Disagree With USDA's Latest BSE Court Submission
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/11/r-calf-40-groups-disagree-with-usdas.html
Monday, October 19, 2009
Atypical BSE, BSE, and other human and animal TSE in North America Update October 19, 2009
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/10/atypical-bse-bse-and-other-human-and.html
Sunday, September 6, 2009
MAD COW USA 1997 SECRET VIDEO
http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/2009/09/mad-cow-usa-1997-video.html
U.S.A. HIDING MAD COW DISEASE VICTIMS AS SPORADIC CJD ? see video at bottom
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2009/07/usa-hiding-mad-cow-disease-victims-as.html
DAMNING TESTIMONY FROM STANLEY PRUSINER THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER ON PRIONS SPEAKING ABOUT ANN VENEMAN see video
http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/prusinerclip.html
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Scrapie and Nor-98 Scrapie November 2009 Monthly Report Fiscal Year 2010 and FISCAL YEAR 2008
http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/2010/01/scrapie-and-nor-98-scrapie-november.html
Monday, December 14, 2009
Similarities between Forms of Sheep Scrapie and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Are Encoded by Distinct Prion Types
http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2009/12/similarities-between-forms-of-sheep.html
Friday, February 05, 2010
New Variant Creutzfelt Jakob Disease case reports United States 2010 A Review
http://vcjd.blogspot.com/2010/02/new-variant-creutzfelt-jakob-disease.html
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
On February 5, 2010, USDA announced a new, flexible framework for animal disease traceability in the United States.
The framework will provide the basic tenets of an improved animal disease traceability capability in the United States. USDA’s efforts will:
•Only apply to animals moved in interstate commerce; •Be administered by the States and Tribal Nations to provide more flexibility; •Encourage the use of lower-cost technology; and •Be implemented transparently through federal regulations and the full rulemaking process. USDA is committed to working in partnership with States, Tribal Nations and industry in the coming months to address many of the details of this framework, and is establishing a Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health to address specific issues, such as confidentiality and liability.
For more information about the new framework, please read the following documents:
•USDA Announces New Framework for Animal Disease Traceability(En Español)
•Questions and Answers: New Animal Disease Traceability Framework
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/
Bloomberg
February 05, 2010, 02:26 PM EST
U.S. Cuts Animal-Tracking Plan Created After Mad Cow (Update3)
(Adds export figures, mad cow disease-related losses, and European Union tracking system starting in seventh paragraph.)
By Daniel Enoch and Whitney McFerron
Feb. 5 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. is scrapping a national system to track livestock from birth to slaughter as industry opposition led to the failure of a voluntary program created after cases of mad cow disease emerged starting in 2003.
snip...see full text ;
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-05/usda-to-limit-animal-id-plan-to-interstate-moves-update1-.html
USDA announces plans to revise animal ID system Issue Date: February 10, 2010
By Ching Lee Assistant Editor
Responding to criticism from what it called a "vast majority" of ranchers who spoke out at public forums, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced last week it is revising its policy on the National Animal Identification System in favor of a more "flexible, coordinated approach" to animal disease traceability.
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the new policy allows states to administer their own trace-back program that focuses only on animals that move across state lines.
Rather than mandating a national, one-size-fits-all system for all producers, the USDA would work with states to adopt specific methods that work best for their local needs, he added.
The changes come after a series of public meetings last year in which producers and other stakeholders raised concerns about the old system, including cost, confidentiality, liability and privacy. Some groups also complained that the system benefits only large-scale producers and that the animal ID system is unnecessary because existing animal identification systems are sufficient.
Citing the feedback, Vilsack said "it is apparent that a new strategy for animal disease traceability is needed."
The ability to identify and track livestock became a top priority for USDA following the nation's first case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in 2003. The department proposed the system in 2004 and subsequently spent more than $120 million trying to implement it. However, only 36 percent of producers to date have signed up for the program.
While many producers say they recognize the importance of having a system in place to protect animal health and enhance disease control, the USDA plan to tag and track millions of livestock ignited opposition and controversy among ranchers across the nation.
Vilsack said under his new plan, USDA would work with states to create new federal rules and a basic blueprint for the new system. But states would ultimately decide how they want to design their program to meet federal standards.
He said he plans to re-establish an advisory committee with state animal health leaders to assist in evaluating commodity-based animal disease traceability approaches. ...SNIP...END
FULL TEXT ;
http://www.cfbf.com/agalert/AgAlertStory.cfm?ID=1478&ck=83CDCEC08FBF90370FCF53BDD56604FF
SEE what old Ron has to say now, after he let the mad cows out the barn door ;
Some Concerned with USDA's Decision to Scrap NAIS
02/08/2010 from NAFB News Service
Veterinarians and a Bush-era USDA official are expressing reservations about USDA’s decision to dump the National Animal Identification System.
CEO Ron DeHaven says the American Veterinary Medical Association cannot endorse Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack's new approach to animal disease traceability because there are simply too many unanswered questions. “As I understand it they will let each state and tribal nation more or less develop their own program. So I’m concerned about interoperability between fifty or more different systems. Will one state be able to talk to another state as an animal moves through interstate commerce?"
According to DeHaven, who was USDA’s Chief Veterinarian when the first U.S. BSE case was discovered in 2003, politics trumped animal disease control. "In my estimation we’ve allowed those political issues to get in the way of what is a much more important issue, and that is our ability to rapidly trace animals to contain and eliminate a disease outbreak. It’s not a partisan issue, but I think both administrations have been caving to this public resistance, which in my estimation, while it may be important, it pales in comparison to the economic impact of a major disease outbreak."
Bruce Knight, USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory Under Secretary in the final years of the Bush Administration, fears that abandoning the NAIS model will undercut U.S. efforts to obtain a negligible BSE risk rating from the World Organization for Animal Health.
USDA estimates the new animal disease traceability framework will take 18 months to two years to create and implement. But Jay Truitt of Policy Solutions, a Washington-based lobbying firm, says it’ll take a lot longer than that, maybe 4 or 5 years, making it more difficult to lift remaining BSE-related restrictions on U.S. beef exports.
Truitt, formerly Vice President of Government Affairs at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, wasn’t surprised by Vilsack’s decision to scrap NAIS. He described beef cattle producer participation in the program as "pitiful."
http://www.hoosieragtoday.com/wire/news/00222_naisscrap_223049.php
see more of Ron here ;
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/02/report-on-testing-ruminants-for-tses-in.html
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2008/01/bse-oie-usda.html
Remarks
Bruce I. Knight, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs FFA Cooperative Agreement Signing Washington, DC
June 4, 2007
SNIP...
We all understand that the goal for NAIS first and foremost is to protect animal health. It's designed to help producers safeguard their flocks and herds, to protect their neighbors and to preserve their profits.
NAIS also builds confidence in the health and wholesomeness of U.S. livestock. Further, the animal ID program enables us to meet the international obligations we face in the world market. Having the system in place will smooth the way for livestock exports.
OIE Designation
As you know, there's been significant concern about BSE around the world. But we're making progress in reassuring our trading partners that we have the safeguards in place to ensure that the products we sell are safe and healthful to eat.
Just two weeks ago, the OIE-the World Organization for Animal Health-awarded the U.S. a formal classification of "controlled risk" for BSE. As Secretary Johanns put it, "That classification confirms what we have always contended-that U.S. regulatory controls are effective and that U.S. fresh beef and beef products from cattle of all ages can be safely traded due to our interlocking safeguards."
The controlled risk classification is essentially an international clean bill of health for our national cattle herd. It's a determination based on a scientific assessment of risk using internationally agreed upon standards.
Any nation that recognizes the OIE standards now has no scientific reason to block imports of U.S. beef-of any age. Eventually, it should put an end to the need for export verification programs.
The key is for our trading partners to adopt the OIE standards as their own standards for safe trade. And we must do the same.
Conclusion
We are moving forward to expand markets and to ensure the health of U.S. herds and flocks with the voluntary NAIS. Today, we welcome FFA as they join with us as partners to encourage farmers and ranchers to take the first step and register their premises.
SEE FULL TEXT ;
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/speeches/content/2007/06/document/FFA-NAIS-SigningFinal%206-4-07.doc
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/downloads/NAIS-UserGuide.pdf
National Animal Identification System (NAIS)
NAIS: AT A GLANCE
What is (WAS...TSS) NAIS?
Simply put, NAIS is a modern, streamlined information system that helps producers and animal health officials respond quickly and effectively to animal disease events in the United States. The NAIS program—a voluntary State-Federal-Industry partnership—is beneficial because it helps us protect U.S. livestock and poultry from disease spread, maintain consumer confidence in our food supply, and retain access to domestic and foreign markets.
USDA is not requiring participation in the program. NAIS can help producers protect the health and marketability of their animals—but the choice to participate is theirs.
Animal health officials across the country agree that premises registration, the foundation of NAIS, is a necessary first step to achieving these goals. Premises information ensures that producers will be notified quickly when a disease event might impact their area or the species of animals they have. In an animal health emergency, we cannot help producers protect their animals if we do not know they are there. By voluntarily registering their premises and providing contact information, producers will ensure that they receive the information they need—when they need it most—to protect their animals and their investment. In an emergency, animal health officials will be able to quickly locate at-risk animals and take precise actions to address the situation, minimize hardships, and speed disease eradication efforts as much as possible.
The voluntary NAIS also encompasses animal identification and animal movement tracing systems. These components are currently being refined by NAIS’ industry and private sector partners. While the focus today is on premises registration, animal owners should know that the other components of NAIS will be additional options for them when they’re ready to make decisions about what level of participation best suits their needs.
USDA is required by law to protect individuals’ private information. Regardless of the level of participation animal owners choose, the voluntary NAIS is limited in terms of the type and quantity of information maintained by the Federal Government. At the Federal level, the system will hold and maintain only minimal premises information. Beyond the premises registration system, USDA will not “own” any additional data on participants in the system. If USDA needs animal movement and location information to respond to an animal health emergency, data will be requested from the private and State databases where it is held. Federal law protects individuals’ private information and confidential business information from public disclosure.
FULL TEXT 74 PAGES ;
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/downloads/NAIS-UserGuide.pdf
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
NAIS, COOL, FROM FARM TO FORK, MAD COW DISEASE
http://naiscoolyes.blogspot.com/2009/12/nais-cool-from-farm-to-fork-mad-cow.html
Friday, March 13, 2009
NAIS comments NCBA and R-Calf Wednesday, March 11, 2009 – 10:30 a.m. Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry — Public Hearing
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2009/03/nais-comments-ncba-and-r-calf-wednesday.html
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Qualitative Analysis of BSE Risk Factors in the United States February 13, 2000 at 3:37 pm PST (BSE red book)
http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2008/08/qualitative-analysis-of-bse-risk.html
48 hour traceback for BSE mad cow disease in the USA ???
NOT in your lifetime !
8 YEARS IN REVIEW OF THE MAD COW DEBACLE IN THE USA ;
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/12/mad-cow-disease-usa-december-28-2008-8.html
The most recent assessments (and reassessments) were published in June 2005 (Table I; 18), and included the categorisation of Canada, the USA, and Mexico as GBR III. Although only Canada and the USA have reported cases, the historically open system of trade in North America suggests that it is likely that BSE is present also in Mexico.
http://www.oie.int/boutique/extrait/06heim937950.pdf
February 10, 2010
Greetings,
IN my opinion, i think we need NAIS. i think as a consumer, we have a right to this information. as a Country importing our product, they have a right to know, it should be law. it should be mandatory that when an animal disease or human disease there from break out, the animal and or it's product can be traced. and as a producer of that product, if you are too worried about confidentiality, you are trying to hide something, then you should not be in the business. how in the world can knowing from where a cow comes from i.e. traceability, be such a threat to the producer, unless they simply want to hide something? in 2010, the USA, in relations to cattle identification and tracing, could not trace their @ss if they had both hands on it, in my opinion, and going by past history of the last two documented mad cows. the USA has been discussing this for over a decade. I don't understand it, all these other Country's that have some sort of Animal Traceability in place, they are and have been trying to eradicate BSE, that have had a feed ban in place, that have been abiding by it, testing in numbers to find and eradicate the TSEs, and the USA just seems to be doing the opposite in many ways it seems to me. if the USA is not going to trace it's meat products, why should other Country's trace theirs? The USA is BSE GBR III, all of North America is BSE GBR III (with all the evidence of breaches in the bse feed ban, the breaches in the BSE surveillance program, i personally believe it is BSE GBR IV). The problem is, the USDA just never accepted it (BSE GBR III), and then changed the rules with the BSE MRR. this BSE MRR policy literally trashed 30 years of attempted BSE GBR eradication of this disease. What about other trading partners with the U.S.A. that DO HAVE a traceability system. i think Australia is getting ready to roll over and get MRR'ed, therefore they too will just be another victim of allowing all strains of Typical and Atypical BSE/TSE into their Country via the USDA OIE BSE MRR policy, a policy of trading all strains of mad cow disease globally. The O.I.E., by bending over for the USDA with this damn BSE MRR policy, has sold their sole to the devil, and in doing so, sold yours too. ...
remember, and do not forget what the Honorable Nobel Peace Prize winner of the PRION i.e. Stanley Prusiner said ;
THEY DON'T WANT TO KNOW ! ABSOLUTE IGNORANCE, ALL THAT MATTERS IS TRADE...
AFTER THE COW IN CANADA...LEVEL OF ABSOLUTE IGNORANCE, OF WHAT HE WAS TRYTING TO CONTAIN...
THE ENTIRE POLICY WAS DRIVEN BY WHAT THE USA WAS TELLING HIM TO DO...SO NOW AFTER SOME TIME HAS PASSED...
SO NOW AFTER TIME HAS PASSED IT'S O.K. FOR BONELESS BEEF PRODUCTS FROM UNDER 30 MONTHS TO BE EXPORTED FROM CANADA TO THE UNITED STATES, THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERED...
YES, I THINK THAT PRIONS ARE BAD TO EAT, AND YOU CAN DIE FROM THEM...
http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/prusinerclip.html
Analysis of Data on Presumed Dead and Untraceable Animals
CEAH performed an analysis of the minimum estimated ages of those COI that were classified as either presumed dead or untraceable to determine the likely disposition of those animals based on their ages. Moreover, CEAH performed an analysis of the likely disposition of the one calf that was classified as untraceable during the investigation.
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/bse_final_epi_report8-05.pdf
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/2009/03/nais-comments-ncba-and-r-calf-wednesday.html
WE know that the FDA mad cow feed ban of August 4, 1997 was nothing but ink on paper. there is still animal protein in commerce in the USA being fed out to cattle and other livestock as we speak. see a few warning letters and or recalls here ;
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/02/import-alert-99-25-detention-without.html
WE also know that the USDA certified dead stock downer cow school lunch program NSLP, fed these most high risk cattle for BSE and mad cow disease and other deadly pathogens to our children all across our Nation for over 4 YEARS, you can see this here ;
http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2009/09/suit-meatpacker-used-downer-cows-for-4.html
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Establishing a Fully Integrated National Food Safety System with Strengthened Inspection, Laboratory and Response Capacity Draft 09/24/09
http://fdafailedus.blogspot.com/2010/01/establishing-fully-integrated-national.html
Friday, January 29, 2010 14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases H-type and L-type Atypical BSE January 2010 (special pre-congress edition)
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/01/14th-international-congress-on.html
Beef imports from BSE nations not traced
19:16 AEST Mon Feb 8 2010 ago By Simon Jenkins
Beef imported to Australia from countries where there has been an outbreak of mad cow disease will not be traced back to individual farms, a Senate inquiry has been told.
Yet beef farms in Australia are subject to full traceability through the National Livestock Identification System.
The double standard drew the ire of coalition senators during a Senate estimates hearing in Canberra on Monday.
"How on earth ... can we be sure about the beef that's coming from that (overseas) property?" Nationals senator Fiona Nash asked the chief veterinary officer from the government's Biosecurity Service Group.
Asked whether there would be individual assessments of traceability, Dr Andy Carroll replied: "No."
Traceability will be determined on a country-to-country basis, and administered through Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FANZ).
SNIP...END...TSS
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/1009496/beef-imports-from-bse-nations-not-traced
for those interested, please see ;
http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009/05/oie-upgrades-japans-bse-status-to.html
http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009/11/bse-gbr-risk-assessments-update.html
Docket APHIS-2007-0033 Docket Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2007-0033-0001 Document Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Public Submission APHIS-2007-0033-0002.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singeltary comment
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648027c28e
Manuscript Draft Manuscript Number: Title: HUMAN and ANIMAL TSE Classifications i.e. mad cow disease and the UKBSEnvCJD only theory Article Type: Personal View Corresponding Author: Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Corresponding Author's Institution: na First Author: Terry S Singeltary, none Order of Authors: Terry S Singeltary, none; Terry S. Singeltary Abstract: TSEs have been rampant in the USA for decades in many species, and they all have been rendered and fed back to animals for human/animal consumption. I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2007.
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Date: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PST
August 24, 2005
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings APHIS ET AL,
My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;
PROPOSED RULES
Exportation and importation of animals and animal products:
Whole cuts of boneless beef from-
Japan,
48494-48500 [05-16422]
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=0900006480086ebc&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw6
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed
PLEASE SEE FULL TEXT HERE ;
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-no-03-080-1-usda-issues-proposed.html
Docket APHIS-2006-0026 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Animal Identification and Importation of Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0026-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions, Identification of Ruminants and Processing and Importation of Commodities Public Submission APHIS-2006-0026-0012 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801e47e1
Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary
Comment 2006-2007 USA AND OIE POISONING GLOBE WITH BSE MRR POLICY
THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species.
MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???
go figure. ...
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f8151
Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singletary comment
January 28, 2007
Greetings APHIS,
I would kindly like to submit the following to ;
BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f8152&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: TSE advisory committee for the meeting December 15, 2006 [TSS SUBMISSION
snip...
ONE FINAL COMMENT PLEASE, (i know this is long Dr. Freas but please bear with me)
THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted blood from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone.
These are the facts as i have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species. ...
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
snip... 48 pages...
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064801f3413&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 3:23 PM
Subject: 14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases H-type and L-type Atypical BSE January 2010 (special pre-congress edition)
18.173 page 189
Experimental Challenge of Cattle with H-type and L-type Atypical BSE
A. Buschmann1, U. Ziegler1, M. Keller1, R. Rogers2, B. Hills3, M.H. Groschup1. 1Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany, 2Health Canada, Bureau of Microbial Hazards, Health Products & Food Branch, Ottawa, Canada, 3Health Canada, Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Secretariat, Ottawa, Canada
Background: After the detection of two novel BSE forms designated H-type and L-type atypical BSE the question of the pathogenesis and the agent distribution of these two types in cattle was fully open. From initial studies of the brain pathology, it was already known that the anatomical distribution of L-type BSE differs from that of the classical type where the obex region in the brainstem always displays the highest PrPSc concentrations. In contrast in L-type BSE cases, the thalamus and frontal cortex regions showed the highest levels of the pathological prion protein, while the obex region was only weakly involved.
Methods:We performed intracranial inoculations of cattle (five and six per group) using 10%brainstemhomogenates of the two German H- and L-type atypical BSE isolates. The animals were inoculated under narcosis and then kept in a free-ranging stable under appropriate biosafety conditions.At least one animal per group was killed and sectioned in the preclinical stage and the remaining animals were kept until they developed clinical symptoms. The animals were examined for behavioural changes every four weeks throughout the experiment following a protocol that had been established during earlier BSE pathogenesis studies with classical BSE.
Results and Discussion: All animals of both groups developed clinical symptoms and had to be euthanized within 16 months. The clinical picture differed from that of classical BSE, as the earliest signs of illness were loss of body weight and depression. However, the animals later developed hind limb ataxia and hyperesthesia predominantly and the head. Analysis of brain samples from these animals confirmed the BSE infection and the atypical Western blot profile was maintained in all animals. Samples from these animals are now being examined in order to be able to describe the pathogenesis and agent distribution for these novel BSE types. Conclusions: A pilot study using a commercially avaialble BSE rapid test ELISA revealed an essential restriction of PrPSc to the central nervous system for both atypical BSE forms. A much more detailed analysis for PrPSc and infectivity is still ongoing.
http://www.isid.org/14th_icid/
http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/IMED2009_AbstrAuth.pdf
http://www.isid.org/publications/ICID_Archive.shtml
From: xxxx
To: Terry Singeltary
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 9:09 AM Subject: 14th ICID - abstract accepted for 'International Scientific Exchange'
Your preliminary abstract number: 670
Dear Mr. Singeltary,
On behalf of the Scientific Committee, I am pleased to inform you that your abstract
'Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009'
WAS accepted for inclusion in the INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE (ISE) section of the 14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases. Accordingly, your abstract will be included in the "Intl. Scientific Exchange abstract CD-rom" of the Congress which will be distributed to all participants.
Abstracts accepted for INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE are NOT PRESENTED in the oral OR poster sessions.
Your abstract below was accepted for: INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGE
#0670: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009
Author: T. Singeltary; Bacliff, TX/US
Topic: Emerging Infectious Diseases Preferred type of presentation: International Scientific Exchange
This abstract has been ACCEPTED.
#0670: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009
Authors: T. Singeltary; Bacliff, TX/US
Title: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009
Body: Background
An update on atypical BSE and other TSE in North America. Please remember, the typical U.K. c-BSE, the atypical l-BSE (BASE), and h-BSE have all been documented in North America, along with the typical scrapie's, and atypical Nor-98 Scrapie, and to date, 2 different strains of CWD, and also TME. All these TSE in different species have been rendered and fed to food producing animals for humans and animals in North America (TSE in cats and dogs ?), and that the trading of these TSEs via animals and products via the USA and Canada has been immense over the years, decades.
Methods
12 years independent research of available data
Results
I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2009. With all the science to date refuting it, to continue to validate this old myth, will only spread this TSE agent through a multitude of potential routes and sources i.e. consumption, medical i.e., surgical, blood, dental, endoscopy, optical, nutritional supplements, cosmetics etc.
Conclusion
I would like to submit a review of past CJD surveillance in the USA, and the urgent need to make all human TSE in the USA a reportable disease, in every state, of every age group, and to make this mandatory immediately without further delay. The ramifications of not doing so will only allow this agent to spread further in the medical, dental, surgical arena's. Restricting the reporting of CJD and or any human TSE is NOT scientific. Iatrogenic CJD knows NO age group, TSE knows no boundaries.
I propose as with Aguzzi, Asante, Collinge, Caughey, Deslys, Dormont, Gibbs, Gajdusek, Ironside, Manuelidis, Marsh, et al and many more, that the world of TSE Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy is far from an exact science, but there is enough proven science to date that this myth should be put to rest once and for all, and that we move forward with a new classification for human and animal TSE that would properly identify the infected species, the source species, and then the route.
Keywords: Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease Prion
http://www.isid.org/14th_icid/
http://www.isid.org/publications/ICID_Archive.shtml
http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/IMED2009_AbstrAuth.pdf
Monday, October 19, 2009
Atypical BSE, BSE, and other human and animal TSE in North America Update October 19, 2009
snip...
I ask Professor Kong ;
Thursday, December 04, 2008 3:37 PM Subject: RE: re--Chronic Wating Disease (CWD) and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathies (BSE): Public Health Risk Assessment
''IS the h-BSE more virulent than typical BSE as well, or the same as cBSE, or less virulent than cBSE? just curious.....''
Professor Kong reply ;
.....snip
''As to the H-BSE, we do not have sufficient data to say one way or another, but we have found that H-BSE can infect humans. I hope we could publish these data once the study is complete.
Thanks for your interest.''
Best regards,
Qingzhong Kong, PhD Associate Professor Department of Pathology Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
END...TSS
I look forward to further transmission studies, and a true ENHANCED BSE/atypical BSE surveillance program put forth testing all cattle for human and animal consumption for 5 years. a surveillance program that uses the most sensitive TSE testing, and has the personnel that knows how to use them, and can be trusted. I look forward to a stringent mad cow feed ban being put forth, and then strictly enforced. we need a forced, not voluntary feed ban, an enhanced feed ban at that, especially excluding blood. we need some sort of animal traceability. no more excuses about privacy. if somebody is putting out a product that is killing folks and or has the potential to kill you, then everybody needs to know who they are, and where that product came from. same with hospitals, i think medical incidents in all states should be recorded, and made public, when it comes to something like a potential accidental transmission exposure event. so if someone is out there looking at a place to go have surgery done, if you have several hospitals having these type 'accidental exposure events', than you can go some place else. it only makes sense. somewhere along the road, the consumer lost control, and just had to take whatever they were given, and then charged these astronomical prices. some where along the line the consumer just lost interest, especially on a long incubating disease such as mad cow disease i.e. Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy. like i said before, there is much more to the mad cow story than bovines and eating a hamburger, we must start focusing on all TSE in all species. ...TSS
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/10/atypical-bse-bse-and-other-human-and.html
snip...full text ;
Friday, January 29, 2010
14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases H-type and L-type Atypical BSE January 2010 (special pre-congress edition)
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/01/14th-international-congress-on.html
Sunday, January 17, 2010
BSE USA feed inspection violations 01/01/2009 to 01/17/2010 FDA BSE/Ruminant Feed Inspections Firms Inventory Report
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/01/bse-usa-feed-inspection-violations.html
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
CVM's OR Develops New PCR-Based Method for Testing Animal Feed
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/01/cvms-or-develops-new-pcr-based-method.html
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Human Prion Diseases in the United States January 1, 2010 ***FINAL***
http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2010/01/human-prion-diseases-in-united-states.html
my comments to PLosone here ;
http://www.plosone.org/annotation/listThread.action?inReplyTo=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fannotation%2F04ce2b24-613d-46e6-9802-4131e2bfa6fd&root=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fannotation%2F04ce2b24-613d-46e6-9802-4131e2bfa6fd
Thursday, February 4, 2010
SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Draft Minutes of the 103rd Meeting held on 24th November 2009
http://seac992007.blogspot.com/2010/02/spongiform-encephalopathy-advisory.html
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
The Honorable Ms. Kim Min-sun Anti-US Beef Actress Prevails in Court
http://usdavskorea.blogspot.com/2010/02/honorable-ms-kim-min-sun-anti-us-beef.html
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
R-CALF: 40 Groups Disagree With USDA's Latest BSE Court Submission
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/11/r-calf-40-groups-disagree-with-usdas.html
Monday, October 19, 2009
Atypical BSE, BSE, and other human and animal TSE in North America Update October 19, 2009
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/10/atypical-bse-bse-and-other-human-and.html
Sunday, September 6, 2009
MAD COW USA 1997 SECRET VIDEO
http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/2009/09/mad-cow-usa-1997-video.html
U.S.A. HIDING MAD COW DISEASE VICTIMS AS SPORADIC CJD ? see video at bottom
http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2009/07/usa-hiding-mad-cow-disease-victims-as.html
DAMNING TESTIMONY FROM STANLEY PRUSINER THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER ON PRIONS SPEAKING ABOUT ANN VENEMAN see video
http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/prusinerclip.html
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Scrapie and Nor-98 Scrapie November 2009 Monthly Report Fiscal Year 2010 and FISCAL YEAR 2008
http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/2010/01/scrapie-and-nor-98-scrapie-november.html
Monday, December 14, 2009
Similarities between Forms of Sheep Scrapie and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Are Encoded by Distinct Prion Types
http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2009/12/similarities-between-forms-of-sheep.html
Friday, February 05, 2010
New Variant Creutzfelt Jakob Disease case reports United States 2010 A Review
http://vcjd.blogspot.com/2010/02/new-variant-creutzfelt-jakob-disease.html
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)