This comes from the FoodSafety Net. Maybe it's as Willowcreek has stated in another thread - the USDA may not pass everything that the NCBA has put forth:
USDA/APHIS delivers strong response to R-CALF in new fact sheet
February 04, 2005
MeatAMI.com News
USDA?s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) delivered a point-by-point rebuttal to R-CALF?s statements about BSE, Canada?s risk profile and Office of International Epizootics guidelines.
The rebuttal, made in a February 2 APHIS fact sheet, details seven different claims made by R-CALF and offers detailed explanations about why these claims are incorrect. To view the fact sheet, go to: http://www.meatami.com/Content/FoodSafety_Inspection/AnimalHealth_Biotech/r-calfstatement2-05.pdf
A summary follows:
Claim 1: Regarding OIE guidelines for minimal-risk regions ? ?The OIE guidelines are NOT specific international mandates, as misinterpreted by R-CALF, but rather are guidelines for countries to conduct risk assessments of potential trading partners,? APHIS says. ?USDA?s minimal-risk criteria are designed to consider an individual country?s specific situation and to analyze based on the overall effectiveness of actions take by the country to prevent the introduction and spread of BSE.?
Claim 2: Regarding OIE recommendations for removal of specified risk materials ? ?R-CCALF has completely misunderstood the SRM removal recommendations of the OIE code,? APHIS says. ?For countries determined to be of minimal-risk (like Canada) , the OIE in fact recommends the removal of brains, eyes, spinal cords, skull and vertebral column ONLY from animals that are 30 months of age and older at slaughter.?
Claim 3: Regarding Canada?s BSE surveillance testing ? ?USDA cannot stress enough that BSE tests are not food safety tests ? they are valid only for a statistically based surveillance system,? APHIS said. ?Europe and Japan have included testing healthy cattle at slaughter in their testing programs as a measure which they hope will restore consumer confidence. These countries do not conduct these tests for food safety purposes?.The OIE is very clear in stating that the likelihood of detecting BSE in cattle varies immensely among cattle sub-populations, and testing healthy cattle at slaughter is the least likely to produce [positive] results.?
Claim 4: Regarding international trade relations ? ?Unless USDA takes the lead to establish the concept of minimal-risk regions, based on risk analysis, for animal pests and diseases ? especially for BSE ? the United States (which has multiple effective mitigation measures in place) will be vulnerable to having its exports treated no differently than those of countries with rampant levels of pests and diseases.? APHIS goes on to point out that, ?The OIE code has never recommended banning the trade of cattle or their products even from countries with high BSE risk.?
Claim 5: Regarding feed ban protections in the United States ? ?We fully agree that any feed ban may not have perfect compliance ? including in the United States and Canada ? but based on scientific risk analyses in both countries we believe there is a negligible risk that the BSE agent would amplify within the system,? APHIS said. ?And, R-CALF has again mis-stated OIE?s recommendation of SRM removal for young cattle from a minimal-risk country such as Canada (addressed in response to Claim #2).?
Claim 6: Regarding the likely age of BSE exposure ? ?R-CALF?s assumptions in applying the mean rate of incubation to determine the time of exposure to the BSE agent in the older cattle in Canada that have tested positive for BSE are incorrect and are scientifically unsound,? APHIS said. ?Again, it is vital to view the feed ban as important, but one of several, interlocking , redundant mitigation measures to prevent BSE transmission to U.S. animals from Canada.?
Claim 7: Regarding BSE risk to consumers ? ?While there are uncertainties about BSE, USDA and the international scientific community has learned from Europe the primary pathways of spread of this disease and put measures in place to prevent its dispersion,? APHIS said. ?Based on internationally accepted scientific principles, and using guidelines recommended by the OIE, the United States has published a final rule (following extensive notice and comment rulemaking) to allow trade in certain products from countries that present a minimal risk.?
USDA/APHIS delivers strong response to R-CALF in new fact sheet
February 04, 2005
MeatAMI.com News
USDA?s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) delivered a point-by-point rebuttal to R-CALF?s statements about BSE, Canada?s risk profile and Office of International Epizootics guidelines.
The rebuttal, made in a February 2 APHIS fact sheet, details seven different claims made by R-CALF and offers detailed explanations about why these claims are incorrect. To view the fact sheet, go to: http://www.meatami.com/Content/FoodSafety_Inspection/AnimalHealth_Biotech/r-calfstatement2-05.pdf
A summary follows:
Claim 1: Regarding OIE guidelines for minimal-risk regions ? ?The OIE guidelines are NOT specific international mandates, as misinterpreted by R-CALF, but rather are guidelines for countries to conduct risk assessments of potential trading partners,? APHIS says. ?USDA?s minimal-risk criteria are designed to consider an individual country?s specific situation and to analyze based on the overall effectiveness of actions take by the country to prevent the introduction and spread of BSE.?
Claim 2: Regarding OIE recommendations for removal of specified risk materials ? ?R-CCALF has completely misunderstood the SRM removal recommendations of the OIE code,? APHIS says. ?For countries determined to be of minimal-risk (like Canada) , the OIE in fact recommends the removal of brains, eyes, spinal cords, skull and vertebral column ONLY from animals that are 30 months of age and older at slaughter.?
Claim 3: Regarding Canada?s BSE surveillance testing ? ?USDA cannot stress enough that BSE tests are not food safety tests ? they are valid only for a statistically based surveillance system,? APHIS said. ?Europe and Japan have included testing healthy cattle at slaughter in their testing programs as a measure which they hope will restore consumer confidence. These countries do not conduct these tests for food safety purposes?.The OIE is very clear in stating that the likelihood of detecting BSE in cattle varies immensely among cattle sub-populations, and testing healthy cattle at slaughter is the least likely to produce [positive] results.?
Claim 4: Regarding international trade relations ? ?Unless USDA takes the lead to establish the concept of minimal-risk regions, based on risk analysis, for animal pests and diseases ? especially for BSE ? the United States (which has multiple effective mitigation measures in place) will be vulnerable to having its exports treated no differently than those of countries with rampant levels of pests and diseases.? APHIS goes on to point out that, ?The OIE code has never recommended banning the trade of cattle or their products even from countries with high BSE risk.?
Claim 5: Regarding feed ban protections in the United States ? ?We fully agree that any feed ban may not have perfect compliance ? including in the United States and Canada ? but based on scientific risk analyses in both countries we believe there is a negligible risk that the BSE agent would amplify within the system,? APHIS said. ?And, R-CALF has again mis-stated OIE?s recommendation of SRM removal for young cattle from a minimal-risk country such as Canada (addressed in response to Claim #2).?
Claim 6: Regarding the likely age of BSE exposure ? ?R-CALF?s assumptions in applying the mean rate of incubation to determine the time of exposure to the BSE agent in the older cattle in Canada that have tested positive for BSE are incorrect and are scientifically unsound,? APHIS said. ?Again, it is vital to view the feed ban as important, but one of several, interlocking , redundant mitigation measures to prevent BSE transmission to U.S. animals from Canada.?
Claim 7: Regarding BSE risk to consumers ? ?While there are uncertainties about BSE, USDA and the international scientific community has learned from Europe the primary pathways of spread of this disease and put measures in place to prevent its dispersion,? APHIS said. ?Based on internationally accepted scientific principles, and using guidelines recommended by the OIE, the United States has published a final rule (following extensive notice and comment rulemaking) to allow trade in certain products from countries that present a minimal risk.?
Comment