• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Interesting article

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Interesting article

    I wonder why the Canadian media hasn't caught wind of this.


    http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20031223-103657-3424r

    USDA refused to release mad cow records
    By Steve Mitchell
    United Press International
    Published 12/24/2003 12:50 PM
    View printer-friendly version


    WASHINGTON, Dec. 23 (UPI) -- The United States Department of Agriculture insisted the U.S. beef supply is safe Tuesday after announcing the first documented case of mad cow disease in the United States, but for six months the agency repeatedly refused to release its tests for mad cow to United Press International.

    The USDA claims to have tested approximately 20,000 cows for the disease in 2002 and 2003, but has been unable to provide any documentation in support of this to UPI, which first requested the information in July.

    In addition, former USDA veterinarians tell UPI they have long suspected the disease was in U.S herds and there are probably additional infected animals.

    USDA Secretary Ann M. Veneman announced late Tuesday during a hastily scheduled news briefing that a cow slaughtered Dec. 9 on a farm in Mabton, Wash., had tested positive for mad cow disease. The farm has been quarantined but the meat from the animal may have already passed into the human food supply.

    The slaughtered meat was sent for processing to Midway Meats in Washington and the USDA is currently trying to trace if the meat went for human consumption, Veneman said.

    The fear is mad cow disease can infect humans and cause a brain-wasting condition known as variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease that is always fatal. More than 100 people contracted this disease in the United Kingdom after a widespread outbreak of mad cow disease in that country in the 1980s.

    An outbreak of mad cow disease in the United States has the potential to dwarf the situation in the United Kingdom because the American beef industry is far larger and U.S. beef is exported to countries all over the globe.

    "We're talking about billions of people" around the world who potentially have been exposed to U.S. beef, Lester Friedlander, a former USDA veterinarian who has been insisting mad cow is present in American herds for years, told UPI.

    The USDA insisted the case is probably isolated and the US beef supply is safe. "I plan to serve beef for my Christmas dinner," Veneman said, "and we remain confident in the safety of our food supply."

    Responded Friedlander: "She might as well kiss her (behind) goodbye, then."

    Veneman went on to say she had confidence in the USDA surveillance system for detecting mad cow and protecting the public, noting the agency has tested more than 20,000 cattle for the disease this year.

    This represents only a small percentage of the millions of cows in the U.S. herd, however, and experts say current procedures are unlikely to detect mad cow.

    The Washington cow was tested because it was a so-called downer cow -- a cow unable to stand on its own -- which is one possible sign of mad cow disease. However, the United States sees approximately 200,000 of these per year or about 10 times as many animals as are tested for the disease.

    USDA officials told UPI as recently as Dec. 17 the agency still is searching for documentation of its mad cow testing results from 2002 and 2003.

    UPI initially requested the documents on July 10, and the agency sent a response letter dated July 24, saying it had launched a search for any documents pertaining to mad cow tests from 2002 and 2003.

    "If any documents exist, they will be forwarded," USDA official Michael Marquis wrote in the letter.

    Despite this and a 30-day limit under the Freedom of Information Act on responding to such a request, the USDA never sent any corresponding documents. The agency's FOI office also did not return several calls from UPI placed over a series of months.

    Finally, UPI threatened legal action in early December if the agency did not respond.

    In a Dec. 17 letter to UPI from USDA Freedom of Information Act Office Andrea E. Fowler, the agency wrote: "Your request has been forwarded to the (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service) for processing and to search for the record responsive to your earlier request."

    To date, the USDA has not said if any records exist or if they will be sent to UPI.

    "It's always concerned me that they haven't used the same rapid testing technique that's used in Europe," where mad cow has been detected in several additional countries outside of the United Kingdom, Michael Schwochert, a retired USDA veterinarian in Ft. Morgan, Colo., told UPI.

    "It was almost like they didn't want to find mad cow disease," Schwochert said.

    He noted he had been informed that approximately six months ago a cow displaying symptoms suggestive of mad cow disease showed up at the X-cel slaughtering plant in Ft. Morgan.

    Once cows are unloaded off the truck they are required to be inspected by USDA veterinarians. However, the cow was spotted by plant employees before USDA officials saw it and "it went back out on a special truck and they called the guys in the office and said don't say anything about this," Schwochert said.

    Veneman said the Washington case "does not pose any kind of significant risk to the human food chain."

    Friedlander called that assessment, "B.S." Referring to the USDA's failure to provide their testing documentation to UPI, he said, "The government doesn't have records to substantiate their testing so how do they know whether this is an isolated case." The agency also cannot provide any assurance that this animal did not get processed for human consumption, he said.

    Schwochert agreed with that, saying the USDA's sparse testing means they cannot say with any confidence whether there are additional cases or not.

    Both Schwochert and Friedlander said the report of a mad cow case would devastate the U.S. beef industry.

    "It scares the hell out of me what it's going to do to the cattle industry," Schwochert said. "This could be catastrophic."

    Only hours after Veneman's announcement, Japan -- the biggest importer of U.S. beef -- and South Korea both banned the importation of American meat.

    The American Meat Institute, a trade group in Arlington, Va., representing the U.S. meat and poultry industry, maintained the U.S. beef supply is safe for human consumption.

    "First and foremost, the U.S. beef supply is safe," AMI spokesman Dan Murphy told UPI. "We think its safe for U.S. consumers to eat."

    This is because infectious prions, thought to be the causative agent of mad cow and vCJD, are not found in muscle tissue that comprises hamburgers and steaks, he said. They are generally located in brain and spinal cord tissue.

    However, recent studies have suggested prions may occur, albeit in smaller numbers, in muscle tissue, and bits of brain and spinal cord tissue have been detected in hamburger meat.

    Other protective measures have also been put in place that should protect consumers, Murphy said.

    Mad cow disease is thought to be spread by feeding infected cow tissue back to cattle -- a practice that was common in the United Kingdom and is thought to have contributed to their widespread outbreak. The practice has been banned in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration since 1997, which should help ensure this is "an isolated case," Murphy said.

    A report from the General Accounting Office issued just last year, however, found some ranchers in the United States still violate the feed ban and do feed cow tissue to cattle.

    The GAO concluded: "While (mad cow disease) has not been found in the United States, federal actions do not sufficiently ensure that all (mad cow)-infected animals or products are kept out or that if (mad cow) were found, it would be detected promptly and not spread to other cattle through animal feed or enter the human food supply."

    --

    Steve Mitchell is UPI's medical correspondent. E-mail sciencemail@upi.com

    #2
    Perhaps our old American friends have been taking Ralphs advice, on a large scale, and doing the old shoot, shovel and shut up? If the American public ever finds out they have been playing that game we are all out of business!
    At least it is comforting to know one media outlet is trying to find out the truth and consequences be damned!
    Time to test everything?

    Comment


      #3
      Yes Bruce, and interesting article indeed. I think it is saying what we have known intuitively for some time. Statistically, if we have a single BSE case, there must be others out there. Even if they originated from Canada, there must be some in the US herd given the movement of cattle through the border. This article would suggest they have their own 'home grown' variety.

      Testing 10% of downer cattle does not seem like a dedicated effort towards food safety. I don't suppose we have tested any more. It would be good to know. I would think that all obviously sick or down animals should certainly be tested from now on.

      Its not that you can blame the US for not wanting to find a case of BSE. After seeing what happened in Canada, they have a good model to predict the demise of their own industry.

      Comment


        #4
        GeneThera, Inc. Announces live blood test now available for BSE, CWD December 30, 2003

        From a press release

        WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO -- GeneThera, Inc. (OTC BB: GTHA) announced today that they have the capability to test for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
        (BSE) in live animals. GeneThera's test, originally designed for the detection of BSE in live animals has been successfully applied to Chronic Wasting Disease due to its presence in the Western United States. Since the two diseases are nearly identical, belonging to the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (TSE) family, the test works equally well with both diseases. This test should become the standard for all cattle industry testing of BSE, as no other blood test is available that works on live animals. The test uses proprietary technology for detection and quantification of TSE. This will enable ranchers to test their animals on an ongoing basis without having to slaughter them. The test is also very quick, with results usually available within 24-48 hours. Dr. Antonio Milici, CEO of GeneThera, Inc., stated, "We are extremely excited to be able to offer the industry a live blood test relatively non-invasive for BSE." He went on to add, "The recent news that BSE was found here in the United States will afford us the opportunity to start testing animals at our laboratory in Colorado and look forward to working with the USDA to provide any assistance in solving the BSE problem."

        good news or bad?

        Comment


          #5
          it's a good thing because it's another step along the road to getting where we have to go. there is pretty good evidence that there is more bse in the herd in n. america and we have to deal with it. if the upi article is substantially correct it would seem this case in washington was a staged event to start the process of handling bse. things will have to change and testing of at least older animals will be seen as a necessity.

          Comment


            #6
            Who has any credibility left on the BSE issue? Do we believe Steve Mitchell who claims that U.S. slaughter plants process 200,000 downer animals yearly but claim to test only 20,000 and apparently the USDA is reluctant to back up that number with verifiable data. Do we believe the Dr. DeHavens of this world who make claims such as the Washington cow was 4 ½ years old, then the cow is from Canada, and then the cow is 6 ½ years old. Do we believe the USDA when they say the sample of tissue they received from Britain, then forwarded to Canada for DNA testing, was from the same U.S. cow that tested positive. I don’t know who we believe anymore.
            As long as the response to a single positive BSE test is to shut the borders and restrict trade in a perishable product like beef, then the 4S approach will always be a possible, even probable response to BSE testing.
            Note I said 4S approach: shoot, shovel, shut up and switch as in switch ear tags and tissue samples.
            As long as countries like the U.S. and Japan can use BSE as an excuse to support their domestic industry by irresponsibly blocking imports of competitors product, as long as a country such as the U.S. can deflect multi billion dollar losses in an important domestic industry by claiming the one positve test came from another country, as long as the response to BSE is based on politics rather than science and sensationalism not fact then no one, not our government, the CFIA, not the U.S. or Japan, industry associations or the press have any credibility to offer producers or the public on this issue.
            Until the OIE develops a reasonable response to BSE based on the low level of risk in countries such as Canada and the United States and yes, even Australia, then it is folly to believe anyone when it comes to BSE including Anne Veneman when she says the U.S. beef is safe and Lester Friedlander when he says "[Veneman] might as well kiss her (behind) goodbye, then."

            Comment


              #7
              rsomer - there have been many of us who have believed for quite some time that the us was using the three s approach. they have been able to manage it until now but i do think it was getting unmanageable and they thought the canadian cow stunt was a good one to pull. if this american case is not on the up and up i think the japanese will smell it and not let them off the hook. the americans are going to have to give evidence that they have conducted a thorough and honest investigation to come up with the results they present. americans on agriculture.com are saying they make the rules because they have the gold (among other more offensive statements) but really what they have right now is the cattle and the japanese (and others) have the gold.

              Comment


                #8
                further to the above - the japanese and others have put a hold on accepting shipments of american french fries that were prepared using beef fat and that is tightening the grip the japanese have on this

                Comment


                  #9
                  SITUATIONAL ETHICS PREVAIL as the norm. I agree I'm getting real tired of reading all the OPINION on all these issues.

                  It's time our leaders tell the beautiful USA (my son lives there and at one time I would have considered voting in Alberta to join the US) "If and when they can prove that that cow in WA came from Canada with BSE and its all our fault then we will cover all their costs.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    The US and Japan (among others, but with lesser effect) are using the BSE issue as a means of trade/tariff removal.

                    The Canadian government - in the form of our old federal ag minister and our new Ag Minister - are going to fight to the last penny to maintain supply management in this country and not reduce the tariffs or quota restrictions on imports.

                    Can you see where this is going to end up in a stand-off and some REAL concessions being made?

                    Canada keeps saying that they want tariffs removed so we can get into other countries, yet we adamantly stand there and say we will not give an inch on supply management.

                    Methinks I see a showdown coming.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I reiterate: Japan has said very clearly that what it requires of us is to test every animal. We can continue this dog and pony show with the US or we can bite the bullet and get testing.
                      The US would have to follow us whether they liked it or not. And it would raise food safety all over the world.
                      Now we keep hearing that the incidence of BSE is a low risk thing. How do we know that if we don't test? Best guesstimate? Or pull a number out of a hat?
                      Once we begin to test everything we would require all beef,lamb, deer imports to be tested along with all products made from these animals. I guess that would be the end of the kangaroo meat from down under?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Morning cowman
                        I met a fellow in Scotland who farmed but wrote a weekly news column in a Scotish paper. When the UK health minister made the link between BSE and variant CJD he wrote an article in his column using his real name(he wrote under a psuedonym). He basically stated that they had to change the way they were doing things, not because it wasn't scientifically correct but because of consumer confidents. When asked why, he replied that he would rather lose half his herd now and get on with producing beef than not be able to sell any in a few years.

                        Maybe it is time to bite the bullet and test every animal. With the amount of testing going on, the price of the test should come down.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I've got to agree wholeheartedly with that Scottish farmer. Consider what might happen if we manage to sweep this all under the rug. When people start dropping like flies, then what?
                          The experts tell us this is a feed problem...maybe? They are sort of iffy about transference to offspring? Or about cross species transfer? Or sporatic manifestation of the disease?
                          I am starting to get a sense that the experts don't really have a clue! Bluster and pseudo-science just won't cut it with the consumer when we start getting a bunch of Mad Cow people!
                          We also need to consider that Americans and Canadians eat a lot more beef than Europeans. And that our packers are not exactly paragons of ethics or sanitation? Consider our two main packers? They would fit right in with the Sopranos?

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Cowman
                            We can start testing but are we going to like what we find? In the old days we were quite happy with a test that detected parts per 1000. Now we can detect parts per trillion. Has it made us any safer or are we just starting to worry more and more about less and less. Until we get a definitive conclusion on how this disease is caused and spread, we could create a lot of fear and depression in the food industry over something that kills fewer people than mad bulls.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              From a consumer perspective, we have the right to be informed, the right to safety, the right to redress should something arise, the right to choose and the right to be heard. Along with those rights, comes the responsibility to seek out credible information and act with integrity in all dealings.

                              Now I agree with Rod on this one - we have to be willing to share the information and to do it in such a manner that does not create widespread panic or create a problem where there isn't on.

                              I heard an interesting statement the other day and that was "the best way to predict the future is to create it."

                              Maybe what we need to do is start testing and deal with the eventualities as they arise. After all, the alternative isn't so good either.

                              Comment

                              • Reply to this Thread
                              • Return to Topic List
                              Working...