30 months or 23 months

[rsomer]

Preliminary tests performed at a Alberta provincial laboratory and at the CFIA's National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease in Winnipeg were unable to rule out BSE but there was no positive test within Canada. The CFIA sent specimens to the World Reference Laboratory at Weybridge, United Kingdom, where one person made a subjective evaluation of the sample which verified the presence of BSE. It was pointed out to me that a subjective evaluation such as this should never have been made by one person but by a panel of three qualified individuals and as such the positive determination is open to question. I understand all the BSE tests can give false positives although some tests are considered highly accurate. Don’t know what information John Schmidt has but there were allegations that there was no DNA link established between the subject cow and the actual sample that was tested in Britain.

It would seem reasonable to assume that once the source herd was established and the other animals in that herd that had consumed the same feed were tested and were found negative then either the positive test cow had acquired BSE by some other means than by consuming contaminated feed or else the positive test was inaccurate.

[cowman]

Well I did not know any of that! Thanks once again for educating me.
I'm not one for conspiracy theories but sometimes I get an uneasy feeling about this whole thing!
Lets see: A newly arrived American farmer. Suggestions that the cow might have originated in the US. And now a shaky test? Only one animal showing up.
An American administration bent on protectionalism and not above playing dirty tricks.
Do you think I am just paranoid? How did our federal government never ask some tough questions in regards to some of this stuff?

[rsomer]

It makes good coffee shop gossip doesn’t it. Bottom line though, if we are going to accept all the negative test results as accurate then we are stuck to accept the one positive test as accurate too. But realizing it was just one positive, alleged or not, helps to put the whole thing in perspective. A reasoned, measured response to the one positive BSE test is what is called for.

Along the lines of a measured response, I found a link to the proposal that is to go before the OIE for a new trade response to isolated BSE positives. It is marked confidential - not for distribution but it is on the web. Entitled "A Reorientation of Standards Development for International Trade - A Discussion Paper" part of the Discussion Document on New Approaches to Dealing with BSE and Global Trade, it describes a reasoned response to a positive test for those countries where the incidence of BSE is less than 1 per 1 million head of cattle. Interesting reading. It points out that at this time no country is considered free of BSE because the required 8 years since a ban on feeding animal protein to ruminants was put in place has not yet passed. At best countries are provisionally free. The Discussion Paper suggests a new Country Status called "Minimal Isolated Occurrence". It is suggested this new approach to animal health could be applied to diseases other than BSE, I see this as changing the ability of countries with FMD such as Argentina to trade globally. Certainly would open the borders to our Canadian product.

The link is: http://www.animalhealth.ca/DiscussionPaperBSE.pdf

A year ago I was 100% in favour of more testing for BSE and would have supported testing of all older animals. I may have even written some letters to the editor on the subject. But I was basing that on the response we got to the first BSE positive of the imported British cow. The response we got this last time would suggest the 3S approach is the way to go. Hopefully the suggestions in the Discussion Paper are considered carefully and implemented quickly. Then Canadians and their NAFTA trading partners can revisit their testing protocols for BSE to ensure that a more than adequate level of testing is being done to ensure the highest possible level of food safety.

[rsomer]

Just a comment on paranoid. I like to not think of myself as paranoid, preferring the phrase "thinking out of the box" instead. Works for me! :-)

[cowman]

I suspect the old 3S approach is the unofficial policy of the US government, not only on BSE but on a lot of things including SARS and Gulf War Syndrome. After all in America you can't let things like health and safety get in the way of corporate profits! Somewhere along the line we need to realize that MONEY is not the most important thing in the world! I believe the American capitalistic system has gone too far and needs to be reigned in.
Our governments need to stand up for the common man and not the financial overlords. Isn't it supposed to be government for the people? All the people? Not just the super rich?
Now I'm no socialist but I do believe in everyone getting a fair kick at the can and the chance to have a decent life. All a government can do is make sure that everyone gets that chance and as far as I can see they are failing to do that.
Our meat inspection agency did the right thing and now we are paying for it! But I for one applaud what they did! And I am proud that Van clief is standing firm on the blue tongue thing even though it might keep the border closed to Canadian beef. It shows that we haven't sunk to the level of the USA. There once was a time when I believed we should join the USA, but now I realize just how far they have slipped morally and I want no part of them! They are beginning to rot from within.