SEARCH VEGSOURCE:

 

 

Follow Ups | Post Followup | Back to Discussion Board | VegSource
See spam or
inappropriate posts?
Please let us know.
  




From: TSS ()
Subject: TERRESTRIAL ANIMAL HEALTH STANDARDS COMMISSION REPORT OCT 2006 CHAPTER 2.3.13. BSE
Date: January 16, 2007 at 1:32 pm PST

TERRESTRIAL ANIMAL HEALTH STANDARDS COMMISSION REPORT OCT 2006

CHAPTER 2.3.13.

BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY

Article 2.3.13.1.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ncie/oie/pdf_files/tahc-bse-75-oct06.pdf

USDA/OIE i.e. GW et al damn be all, i will do as i please, and make up things as i go BSE policy i.e. The BSE MRR policy, the legal trading of all strains of TSE, legally. ...TSS

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To:
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 11:39 AM
Subject: BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01

Subject: BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01
Date: January 9, 2007 at 9:08 am PST


[Federal Register: January 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 5)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 1101-1129]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09ja07-21]


[[Page 1101]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part III

Department of Agriculture

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


9 CFR Parts 93, 94, 95, and 96


Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of
Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines; Proposed Rule


[[Page 1102]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 93, 94, 95, and 96

[Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041]
RIN 0579-AC01


Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions;
Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations regarding the
importation of animals and animal products to establish conditions for
the importation of the following commodities from regions that present
a minimal risk of introducing bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)
into the United States: Live bovines for any use born on or after a
date determined by APHIS to be the date of effective enforcement of a
ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban in the region of export; blood and blood
products derived from bovines; and casings and part of the small
intestine derived from bovines. We are proposing these amendments after
conducting a risk assessment and comprehensive evaluation of the issues
that concluded that such bovines and bovine products can be safely
imported under the conditions described in this proposed rule.

DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before March
12, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov
, select ``Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service'' from the agency drop-down menu, then click ``Submit.'' In the
Docket ID column, select APHIS-2006-0041 to submit or view public
comments and to view supporting and related materials available
electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including
instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing
the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through
the site's ``User Tips'' link.
Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies
of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS
2006-0041, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-
03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state
that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS 2006-0041.
Reading Room: You may read any comments that we receive on this
docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of
the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to
help you, please call (202) 690-2817 before coming.
Other Information: Additional information about APHIS and its
programs is available on the Internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding ruminant
products, contact Dr. Karen James-Preston, Director, Technical Trade
Services, Animal Products, National Center for Import and Export, VS,
APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-
4356.
For information concerning live ruminants, contact Dr. Lee Ann
Thomas, Director, Technical Trade Services, Animals, Organisms and
Vectors, and Select Agents, National Center for Import and Export, VS,
APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-
4356.
For other information concerning this proposed rule, contact Dr.
Lisa Ferguson, Senior Staff Veterinarian, National Center for Animal
Health Programs, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 43, Riverdale, MD
20737-1231; (301) 734-6954.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background ............... snip .................... full text ;


http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-17.htm

EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of the United States of America (USA)


Summary of the Scientific Report

The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in the United States of America, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientific report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic cattle in the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads to an internal challenge in the early nineties.

A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly) into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90’s when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.

EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as there are no significant changes in rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very unstable. Thus, the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with the BSE-agent persistently increases.


http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/573.html

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/etc/medialib/efsa/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/573.Par.0004.File.dat/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_v2_en1.pdf


EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR) of Canada


Summary of the Scientific Report

The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Risk (GBR) were asked to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Canada, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Canada. This scientific report addresses the GBR of Canada as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into the country middle of the eighties and could have reached domestic cattle in the early nineties. These cattle imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early 90s. It is possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Canada reached domestic cattle and led to an internal challenge in the early 90s.

A certain risk that BSE-infected cattle entered processing in Canada, and were at least partly rendered for feed, occurred in the early 1990s when cattle imported from UK in the mid 80s could have been slaughtered. This risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90’s when domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.

EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of Canada is III, i.e. it is confirmed at a lower level that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as the system remains unstable, it is expected that the GBR continues to grow, even if no additional external challenges occur.


http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/564.html

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/etc/medialib/efsa/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/564.Par.0001.File.dat/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_v2_en1.pdf


R-CALF USA v. USDA, et al., On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana, D.C. No. CV-05-00006-RFC - Brief of Appellant December 26, 2006 (Adobe Acrobat Reader PDF File 94K)


see full text 60 pages ;


http://www.r-calfusa.com/BSE/MSJ%20App%20Merits%20Opening%20Brief.pdf


BSE MRR TSS, R-CALF ON CANADA VS USA


Bill
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 1418
Location: GWN
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:49 am Post subject:

Texan wrote:


Hey Terry, I'd like to get a little further clarification on something if/when you have time. I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly....

flounder wrote:

This is what sank my battleship in regards to testifying for r-calf. they actually appoached me about it, but i told them i would be glad to testify, but i was not stopping at the Canadian border, my testimony was to come south as well if given the opportunity. and that ended that, but i did supply them with a load of data, for whatever that was worth.


I highlighted the parts that confuse me. This almost makes it seem as if R-CALF was asking you to testify for them, but changed their mind when they found out that you were going to tell the WHOLE truth, instead of just the truth as regards Canadian imports.

I thought that R-CALF was only interested in the WHOLE truth - not just the selected parts of the truth that fit their protectionist agenda? After reading your post, it makes a person wonder. Maybe I read it wrong...

Am I reading this correctly, Terry? That can't be right, can it? Thanks.


I was wondering exactly the same thing Texan.


_________________
Canadian Beef....A cut above the rest!


my answer to big muddy from canada ;

*** http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=12


http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=24

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=36

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=48

THE USDA JUNE 2004 ENHANCED BSE SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM WAS TERRIBLY FLAWED ;


CDC DR. PAUL BROWN TSE EXPERT COMMENTS 2006


The U.S. Department of Agriculture was quick to assure the public earlier
this week that the third case of mad cow disease did not pose a risk to
them, but what federal officials have not acknowledged is that this latest
case indicates the deadly disease has been circulating in U.S. herds for at
least a decade.

The second case, which was detected last year in a Texas cow and which USDA
officials were reluctant to verify, was approximately 12 years old.

These two cases (the latest was detected in an Alabama cow) present a
picture of the disease having been here for 10 years or so, since it is
thought that cows usually contract the disease from contaminated feed they
consume as calves. The concern is that humans can contract a fatal,
incurable, brain-wasting illness from consuming beef products contaminated
with the mad cow pathogen.

"The fact the Texas cow showed up fairly clearly implied the existence of
other undetected cases," Dr. Paul Brown, former medical director of the
National Institutes of Health's Laboratory for Central Nervous System
Studies and an expert on mad cow-like diseases, told United Press
International. "The question was, 'How many?' and we still can't answer
that."

Brown, who is preparing a scientific paper based on the latest two mad cow
cases to estimate the maximum number of infected cows that occurred in the
United States, said he has "absolutely no confidence in USDA tests before
one year ago" because of the agency's reluctance to retest the Texas cow
that initially tested positive.

USDA officials finally retested the cow and confirmed it was infected seven
months later, but only at the insistence of the agency's inspector general.

"Everything they did on the Texas cow makes everything USDA did before 2005
suspect," Brown said. ...snip...end


http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID=20060315-055557-1284r

CDC - Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Variant Creutzfeldt ...
Dr. Paul Brown is Senior Research Scientist in the Laboratory of Central
Nervous System ... Address for correspondence: Paul Brown, Building 36, Room
4A-05, ...


http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/brown.htm

O.I.E. .......... ??? GOD HELP US!


sample survey via oie for bse is about 400 test via 100 million cattle, if i am not mistaken. MOST countries that went

by these OIE guidelines all eventually went down with BSE. ...TSS


http://www.oie.int/downld/SC/2005/bse_2005.pdf


THE OIE has now shown they are nothing more than a National Trading Brokerage for all strains of animal TSE.

AS i said before, OIE should hang up there jock strap now, since it appears they will buckle every time a country

makes some political hay about trade protocol, commodities and futures. IF they are not going to be science based, they

should do everyone a favor and dissolve there organization. ...

Page 95 of 98

8/3/2006

WHAT ABOUT RISK FACTORS TO HUMANS FROM ALL OTHER TSEs, WITH RELATIONS TO SRMs ???

a.. BSE OIE

see full text ;

http://p079.ezboard.com/fwolftracksproductionsfrm2.showMessage?topicID=470.topic


IT'S as obvious as day and night, either Larry, Curley, and Mo have been at the helm of the

USDA/APHIS/FSIS/FDA/CDC/NIH et al for many many years, or the incompetence of these agencies are so inept,

either through ignorance and or just too overweight with industry reps., they then should be all done away with and a

single agency brought forth, and if not, how will you correct this ongoing problem ?


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf

http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0612&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=20678

http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0611&L=sanet-mg&T=0&I=-3&P=3381

Subject: [Docket No. FSIS-2006-0011] FSIS Harvard Risk Assessment of Bovine
Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf

Volume 12, Number 12–December 2006


PERSPECTIVE

On the Question of Sporadic

or Atypical Bovine SpongiformEncephalopathy and

Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease

Paul Brown,* Lisa M. McShane,† Gianluigi Zanusso,‡ and Linda Detwiler§

Strategies to investigate the possible existence of sporadic

bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) require

systematic testing programs to identify cases in countries

considered to have little or no risk for orally acquired disease,

or to detect a stable occurrence of atypical cases in

countries in which orally acquired disease is disappearing.

To achieve 95% statistical confidence that the prevalence

of sporadic BSE is no greater than 1 per million (i.e., the

annual incidence of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

[CJD] in humans) would require negative tests in 3 million

randomly selected older cattle. A link between BSE and

sporadic CJD has been suggested on the basis of laboratory

studies but is unsupported by epidemiologic observation.

Such a link might yet be established by the discovery

of a specific molecular marker or of particular combinations

of trends over time of typical and atypical BSE and various

subtypes of sporadic CJD, as their numbers are influenced

by a continuation of current public health measures that

exclude high-risk bovine tissues from the animal and

human food chains.


SNIP...


http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm?s_cid=eid06_0965_e

3:00 Afternoon Refreshment Break, Poster and Exhibit Viewing in the Exhibit
Hall


3:30 Transmission of the Italian Atypical BSE (BASE) in Humanized Mouse

Models Qingzhong Kong, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Pathology, Case Western Reserve
University

Bovine Amyloid Spongiform Encephalopathy (BASE) is an atypical BSE strain
discovered recently in Italy, and similar or different atypical BSE cases
were also reported in other countries. The infectivity and phenotypes of
these atypical BSE strains in humans are unknown. In collaboration with
Pierluigi Gambetti, as well as Maria Caramelli and her co-workers, we have
inoculated transgenic mice expressing human prion protein with brain
homogenates from BASE or BSE infected cattle. Our data shows that about half
of the BASE-inoculated mice became infected with an average incubation time
of about 19 months; in contrast, none of the BSE-inoculated mice appear to
be infected after more than 2 years. ***These results indicate that BASE is
transmissible to humans and suggest that BASE is more virulent than
classical BSE in humans.

6:30 Close of Day One


http://www.healthtech.com/2007/tse/day1.asp

SEE STEADY INCREASE IN SPORADIC CJD IN THE USA FROM
1997 TO 2006. SPORADIC CJD CASES TRIPLED, with phenotype
of 'UNKNOWN' strain growing. ...


http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/resources-casereport.html


There is a growing number of human CJD cases, and they were presented last
week in San Francisco by Luigi Gambatti(?) from his CJD surveillance
collection.

He estimates that it may be up to 14 or 15 persons which display selectively
SPRPSC and practically no detected RPRPSC proteins.


http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/1006-4240t1.htm

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/2006-4240t1.pdf


Calves were challenged by mouth with homogenised brain from confirmed cases of BSE. Some received 300g (3 doses of 100g), some 100g, 10g or 1g. They were then left to develop BSE, but were not subjected to the normal stresses that they might have encountered in a dairy herd. Animals in all four groups developed BSE. There has been a considerable spread of incubation period in some of the groups, but it appears as if those in the 1 and 10g challenge groups most closely fit the picture of incubation periods seen in the epidemic. Experiments in progress indicate that oral infection can occur in some animals with doses as low as 0.01g and 0.001g. .........


http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/bse/science-research/pathog.html#dose


and i think, with time, and testing becomes more and more sensitive, we will all be surprised at just how much is too much, and just how young one might be to spread the agent, even as sub-clinical.


IF i remember correctly, the infamous PURINA FEED MILL incident in Gonzales TEXAS,
where at one feeding, those cows could not have consumed more than......or no more than 5.5 grams...etc. so, how many feedings does a feeder and or dairy calf have in there lifespan ? wouldn't you multiply that by those figures by that ??? be a lot of potential mad cow protein IN COMMERCE, and still is in 2006......tss


FDA has determined that each animal could have consumed, at most and in total, five-and-one-half grams - approximately a quarter ounce -- of prohibited material. These animals weigh approximately 600 pounds.


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2001/NEW00752.html


http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/archive/2001/ch5/default.htm

Subject: DOCUMENTATION RELATED TO SPECIFIED RISK MATERIALS (SRMs) AND OTHER REGULATIONS FSIS NOTICE 01-07 1/8/07
Date: January 8, 2007 at 9:28 am PST

FSIS NOTICE 01-07 1/8/07

DOCUMENTATION RELATED TO SPECIFIED RISK MATERIALS (SRMs)
AND OTHER REGULATIONS


This notice clarifies how inspection program personnel are to document regulatory noncompliance related to 9 CFR 310.22 for controlling specified risk materials, as well as other regulations

Inspection program personnel are to cite 9 CFR 310.22 in the Relevant Regulation section of every noncompliance report (NR) for an establishment that does not meet the regulatory requirements for controlling SRMs. In addition to selecting 9 CFR 310.22, inspection program personnel are to select all other regulations with which there has been noncompliance.

For example, while performing the 03C02 procedure, the Inspector-in-Charge (IIC) sees spinal cord material on previously cut T-bone steaks that had passed the Critical Control Point (CCP). The IIC cites 9 CFR 417.2(c)(4) and 310.22(b) in the Relevant Regulations section on the Procedure Results NR screen. The IIC notifies the appropriate establishment official of the finding. The IIC also verifies that the corrective actions implemented by the establishment meet the requirements of 9 CFR 417.3(a) before issuing the NR.

Inspection program personnel are to describe the noncompliances in the Narrative Section, block 10, of the NR. The narrative should include a complete description of the SRM noncompliance, including the type of SRM and any other information relevant to the noncompliance. The narrative should also address each of the other regulations that inspection program personnel cite in the Relevant Regulations section on the NR screen. The statements in block 10 of the NR are to support completely and adequately the regulatory noncompliances cited.

For every NR that inspection program personnel issue, it is important that they cite all relevant regulations. These citations provide data that are the basis for critical, risk-based decisions that the FSIS must regularly make when working to ensure that meat and poultry products are safe. Thus, it is not appropriate for inspection program personnel to cite only one regulation if other regulations are also violated by the noncompliance that is the subject of the NR.

Inspection program personnel with technical questions related to the use of PBIS, or who experience technical problems, should contact the FAIM Help Desk at 1-800-473-9135. They should contact the Technical Service Center at 1-800-233-3935 for policy-related questions.


Philip S. Derfler /s/


Assistant Administrator
Office of Policy, Program, and Employee Development

DISTRIBUTION: Inspection Offices; T/A Inspectors; Plant Mgt; TRA; ABB; TSC; Import Offices NOTICE EXPIRES: 2/1/08 OPI: OPPED


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/Notice_01-07/index.asp

> This notice clarifies how inspection program personnel are to document regulatory noncompliance

> related to 9 CFR 310.22 for controlling specified risk materials, as well as other regulations


SO, it's Monday Jan. 8, 2007, in 2006 ALONE, the FDA allowed literally 100s of 1,000s of TONS of ruminant protein to be fed to not only USA cattle and livestock, but it also exported this poison to other parts of the globe as well, and the FSIS is just NOW clarifying how it's inspectors handle SRMs ??? and no SRMs are being fed to cattle in the USA ???


LIKE i said,


IT'S as obvious as day and night, either Larry, Curley, and Mo have been at the helm of the
USDA/APHIS/FSIS/FDA/CDC/NIH et al for many many years, or the incompetence
of these agencies are so inept, either through ignorance and or just too overweight with industry reps.,
they then should be all done away with and a single agency brought forth, and if not, how will you
correct this ongoing problem ?


http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf

http://www.prwatch.org/node/4624


====================================


2006 (partial list of) highly potential mad cow protein in commerce USA


Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL USA SEPT 6, 2006 1961.72 TONS IN COMMERCE AL,
TN, AND WV
Date: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST

PRODUCT
a) EVSRC Custom dairy feed, Recall # V-130-6;
b) Performance Chick Starter, Recall # V-131-6;
c) Performance Quail Grower, Recall # V-132-6;
d) Performance Pheasant Finisher, Recall # V-133-6.
CODE
None
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Donaldson & Hasenbein/dba J&R Feed Service, Inc., Cullman, AL, by telephone
on June 23, 2006 and by letter dated July 19, 2006. Firm initiated recall is
complete.
REASON
Dairy and poultry feeds were possibly contaminated with ruminant based
protein.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
477.72 tons
DISTRIBUTION
AL
______________________________
PRODUCT
a) Dairy feed, custom, Recall # V-134-6;
b) Custom Dairy Feed with Monensin, Recall # V-135-6.
CODE
None. Bulk product
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Recalling Firm: Burkmann Feed, Greeneville, TN, by Telephone beginning on
June 28, 2006.
Manufacturer: H. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL. Firm initiated
recall is complete.
REASON
Possible contamination of dairy feeds with ruminant derived meat and bone
meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
1,484 tons
DISTRIBUTION
TN and WV


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00968.html


Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALLS ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006 KY, LA,
MS, AL, GA, AND TN 11,000+ TONS
Date: August 16, 2006 at 9:19 am PST

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE - CLASS II
______________________________
PRODUCT
Bulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-115-6
CODE
None
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Hiseville Feed & Seed Co., Hiseville, KY, by telephone and letter on or
about July 14, 2006. FDA initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON
Custom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak which may contain
ruminant derived meat and bone meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
Approximately 2,223 tons
DISTRIBUTION
KY

______________________________
PRODUCT
Bulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-116-6
CODE
None
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Rips Farm Center, Tollesboro, KY, by telephone and letter on July 14, 2006.
FDA initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON
Custom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak which may contain
ruminant derived meat and bone meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
1,220 tons
DISTRIBUTION
KY

______________________________
PRODUCT
Bulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-117-6
CODE
None
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Kentwood Co-op, Kentwood, LA, by telephone on June 27, 2006. FDA initiated
recall is completed.
REASON
Possible contamination of animal feed ingredients, including ingredients
that are used in feed for dairy animals, with ruminant derived meat and bone
meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
40 tons
DISTRIBUTION
LA and MS

______________________________
PRODUCT
Bulk Dairy Feed, Recall V-118-6
CODE
None
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Cal Maine Foods, Inc., Edwards, MS, by telephone on June 26, 2006. FDA
initiated recall is complete.
REASON
Possible contamination of animal feed ingredients, including ingredients
that are used in feed for dairy animals, with ruminant derived meat and bone
meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
7,150 tons
DISTRIBUTION
MS

______________________________
PRODUCT
Bulk custom dairy pre-mixes, Recall # V-119-6
CODE
None
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Walthall County Co-op, Tylertown, MS, by telephone on June 26, 2006. Firm
initiated recall is complete.
REASON
Possible contamination of dairy animal feeds with ruminant derived meat and
bone meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
87 tons
DISTRIBUTION
MS

______________________________
PRODUCT
Bulk custom dairy pre-mixes, Recall # V-120-6
CODE
None
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Ware Milling Inc., Houston, MS, by telephone on June 23, 2006. Firm
initiated recall is complete.
REASON
Possible contamination of dairy animal feeds with ruminant derived meat and
bone meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
350 tons
DISTRIBUTION
AL and MS

______________________________
PRODUCT
a) Tucker Milling, LLC Tm 32% Sinking Fish Grower, #2680-Pellet,
50 lb. bags, Recall # V-121-6;
b) Tucker Milling, LLC #31120, Game Bird Breeder Pellet,
50 lb. bags, Recall # V-122-6;
c) Tucker Milling, LLC #31232 Game Bird Grower,
50 lb. bags, Recall # V-123-6;
d) Tucker Milling, LLC 31227-Crumble, Game Bird Starter, BMD
Medicated, 50 lb bags, Recall # V-124-6;
e) Tucker Milling, LLC #31120, Game Bird Breeder, 50 lb bags,
Recall # V-125-6;
f) Tucker Milling, LLC #30230, 30 % Turkey Starter, 50 lb bags,
Recall # V-126-6;
g) Tucker Milling, LLC #30116, TM Broiler Finisher,
50 lb bags, Recall # V-127-6
CODE
All products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/20/2006
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Recalling Firm: Tucker Milling LLC, Guntersville, AL, by telephone and visit
on June 20, 2006, and by letter on June 23, 2006.
Manufacturer: H. J. Baker and Brothers Inc., Stamford, CT. Firm initiated
recall is ongoing.
REASON
Poultry and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant based
protein were not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
7,541-50 lb bags
DISTRIBUTION
AL, GA, MS, and TN

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006

###


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ENFORCE/2006/ENF00964.html


Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL MI MAMMALIAN PROTEIN VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN
COMMERCE 27,694,240 lbs
Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:14 pm PST
PRODUCT
Bulk custom dairy feds manufactured from concentrates, Recall # V-113-6
CODE
All dairy feeds produced between 2/1/05 and 6/16/06 and containing H. J.
Baker recalled feed products.
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Vita Plus Corp., Gagetown, MI, by visit beginning on June 21, 2006. Firm
initiated recall is complete.
REASON
The feed was manufactured from materials that may have been contaminated
with mammalian protein.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
27,694,240 lbs
DISTRIBUTION
MI


END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006

###


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html


Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL AL AND FL VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 125
TONS Products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006
Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:16 pm PST
PRODUCT
a) CO-OP 32% Sinking Catfish, Recall # V-100-6;
b) Performance Sheep Pell W/Decox/A/N, medicated,
net wt. 50 lbs, Recall # V-101-6;
c) Pro 40% Swine Conc Meal -- 50 lb, Recall # V-102-6;
d) CO-OP 32% Sinking Catfish Food Medicated,
Recall # V-103-6;
e) "Big Jim's" BBB Deer Ration, Big Buck Blend,
Recall # V-104-6;
f) CO-OP 40% Hog Supplement Medicated Pelleted,
Tylosin 100 grams/ton, 50 lb. bag, Recall # V-105-6;
g) Pig Starter Pell II, 18% W/MCDX Medicated 282020,
Carbadox -- 0.0055%, Recall # V-106-6;
h) CO-OP STARTER-GROWER CRUMBLES, Complete
Feed for Chickens from Hatch to 20 Weeks, Medicated,
Bacitracin Methylene Disalicylate, 25 and 50 Lbs,
Recall # V-107-6;
i) CO-OP LAYING PELLETS, Complete Feed for Laying
Chickens, Recall # 108-6;
j) CO-OP LAYING CRUMBLES, Recall # V-109-6;
k) CO-OP QUAIL FLIGHT CONDITIONER MEDICATED,
net wt 50 Lbs, Recall # V-110-6;
l) CO-OP QUAIL STARTER MEDICATED, Net Wt. 50 Lbs,
Recall # V-111-6;
m) CO-OP QUAIL GROWER MEDICATED, 50 Lbs,
Recall # V-112-6
CODE
Product manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Alabama Farmers Cooperative, Inc., Decatur, AL, by telephone, fax, email and
visit on June 9, 2006. FDA initiated recall is complete.
REASON
Animal and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant based
protein not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
125 tons
DISTRIBUTION
AL and FL


END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006

###


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html


Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL KY VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE ?????
Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:19 pm PST
PRODUCT
Bulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-114-6
CODE
None
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Burkmann Feeds LLC, Glasgow, KY, by letter on July 14, 2006. Firm initiated
recall is ongoing.
REASON
Custom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak, which may contain
ruminant derived meat and bone meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
?????
DISTRIBUTION
KY
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006

###


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html


CJD WATCH MESSAGE BOARD
TSS
MAD COW FEED RECALL USA EQUALS 10,878.06 TONS NATIONWIDE
Sun Jul 16, 2006 09:22
71.248.128.67


RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE -- CLASS II
______________________________
PRODUCT
a) PRO-LAK, bulk weight, Protein Concentrate for Lactating Dairy Animals,
Recall # V-079-6;
b) ProAmino II, FOR PREFRESH AND LACTATING COWS, net weight 50lb (22.6 kg),
Recall # V-080-6;
c) PRO-PAK, MARINE & ANIMAL PROTEIN CONCENTRATE FOR USE IN ANIMAL
FEED, Recall # V-081-6;
d) Feather Meal, Recall # V-082-6
CODE
a) Bulk
b) None
c) Bulk
d) Bulk
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
H. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL, by telephone on June 15, 2006 and
by press release on June 16, 2006. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON
Possible contamination of animal feeds with ruminent derived meat and bone
meal.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
10,878.06 tons
DISTRIBUTION
Nationwide

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR July 12, 2006

###


http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00960.html


Subject: MAD COW FEED BAN WARNING LETTER ISSUED MAY 17, 2006
Date: June 27, 2006 at 7:42 am PST
Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration

New Orleans District
297 Plus Park Blvd.
Nashville, TN 37217

Telephone: 615-781-5380
Fax: 615-781-5391


May 17, 2006

WARNING LETTER NO. 2006-NOL-06

FEDERAL EXPRESS
OVERNIGHT DELIVERY

Mr. William Shirley, Jr., Owner
Louisiana.DBA Riegel By-Products
2621 State Street
Dallas, Texas 75204

Dear Mr. Shirley:

On February 12, 17, 21, and 22, 2006, a U.S. Food & Drug Administration
(FDA) investigator inspected your rendering plant, located at 509 Fortson
Street, Shreveport, Louisiana. The inspection revealed significant
deviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 589.2000 [21 CFR 589.2000], Animal Proteins Prohibited in
Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and
amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). You failed to
follow the requirements of this regulation; products being manufactured and
distributed by your facility are misbranded within the meaning of Section
403(a)(1) [21 USC 343(a)(1)] of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(the Act).

Our investigation found you failed to provide measures, including sufficient
written procedures, to prevent commingling or cross-contamination and to
maintain sufficient written procedures [21 CFR 589.2000(e)] because:

You failed to use clean-out procedures or other means adequate to prevent
carryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into animal protein or
feeds which may be used for ruminants. For example, your facility uses the
same equipment to process mammalian and poultry tissues. However, you use
only hot water to clean the cookers between processing tissues from each
species. You do not clean the auger, hammer mill, grinder, and spouts after
processing mammalian tissues.

You failed to maintain written procedures specifying the clean-out
procedures or other means to prevent carryover of protein derived from
mammalian tissues into feeds which may be used for ruminants.

As a result . the poultry meal you manufacture may contain protein derived
from mammalian tissues prohibited in ruminant feed. Pursuant to 21 CFR
589.2000(e)(1)(i), any products containing or may contain protein derived
from mammalian tissues must be labeled, "Do not feed to cattle or other
ruminants." Since you failed to label a product which may contain protein
derived from mammalian tissues with the required cautionary statement. the
poultry meal is misbranded under Section 403(a)(1) [21 USC 343(a)(1)] of the
Act.

This letter is not intended as an all-inclusive list of violations at your
facility. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you
are responsible for ensuring your overall operation and the products you
manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should take
prompt action to correct these violations, and you should establish a system
whereby violations do not recur. Failure to promptly correct these
violations may result in regulatory action, such as seizure and/or
injunction, without further notice.

You should notify this office in writing within 15 working days of receiving
this letter, outlining the specific steps you have taken to bring your firm
into compliance with the law. Your response should include an explanation of
each step taken to correct the violations and prevent their recurrence. If
corrective action cannot be completed within 15 working days, state the
reason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will be
completed. Include copies of any available documentation demonstrating
corrections have been made.

Your reply should be directed to Mark W. Rivero, Compliance Officer, U.S.
Food and Drug Administration, 2424 Edenborn Avenue, Suite 410, Metairie,
Louisiana 70001. If you have questions regarding any issue in this letter,
please contact Mr. Rivero at (504) 219-8818, extension 103.

Sincerely,

/S

Carol S. Sanchez
Acting District Director
New Orleans District


http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g5883d.htm


look at the table and you'll see that as little as 1 mg (or 0.001 gm) caused
7% (1 of 14) of the cows to come down with BSE;


Risk of oral infection with bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent in
primates

Corinne Ida Lasmézas, Emmanuel Comoy, Stephen Hawkins, Christian Herzog,
Franck Mouthon, Timm Konold, Frédéric Auvré, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie
Lescoutra-Etchegaray, Nicole Salès, Gerald Wells, Paul Brown, Jean-Philippe
Deslys
Summary The uncertain extent of human exposure to bovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE)--which can lead to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
(vCJD)--is compounded by incomplete knowledge about the efficiency of oral
infection and the magnitude of any bovine-to-human biological barrier to
transmission. We therefore investigated oral transmission of BSE to
non-human primates. We gave two macaques a 5 g oral dose of brain homogenate
from a BSE-infected cow. One macaque developed vCJD-like neurological
disease 60 months after exposure, whereas the other remained free of disease
at 76 months. On the basis of these findings and data from other studies, we
made a preliminary estimate of the food exposure risk for man, which
provides additional assurance that existing public health measures can
prevent transmission of BSE to man.


snip...


BSE bovine brain inoculum

100 g 10 g 5 g 1 g 100 mg 10 mg 1 mg 0·1 mg 0·01 mg

Primate (oral route)* 1/2 (50%)

Cattle (oral route)* 10/10 (100%) 7/9 (78%) 7/10 (70%) 3/15 (20%) 1/15 (7%)
1/15 (7%)

RIII mice (ic ip route)* 17/18 (94%) 15/17 (88%) 1/14 (7%)

PrPres biochemical detection

The comparison is made on the basis of calibration of the bovine inoculum
used in our study with primates against a bovine brain inoculum with a
similar PrPres concentration that was

inoculated into mice and cattle.8 *Data are number of animals
positive/number of animals surviving at the time of clinical onset of
disease in the first positive animal (%). The accuracy of

bioassays is generally judged to be about plus or minus 1 log. ic
ip=intracerebral and intraperitoneal.

Table 1: Comparison of transmission rates in primates and cattle infected
orally with similar BSE brain inocula


Published online January 27, 2005

http://www.thelancet.com/journal/journal.isa


Feb 06, 2004 Washington State Investigation—Final Epidemiology Report


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/WashingtonState_epi_final3-04.pdf


Secretary's Advisory Committee Recommendations


Feb 13, 2004 Secretary’s Advisory Committee Report

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/SAC-Report2-13-04.pdf


Feb 02, 2004 International Review Team (IRT) Report

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/US_BSE_Report2-2-04.pdf


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/surveillance/bse_disease_surv.shtml

Information on the Washington State Investigation of the BSE-positive Cow

This Office of Inspector General (OIG)


http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/TestimonyBlurb2.pdf

http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/Testimony7-2004.pdf

http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-9-final.pdf


OIG REPORT ON IMPORTS FROM CANADA

http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/33601-01-HY.pdf


Final Case Summeries


May 02, 2006 Alabama BSE Investigation—Final Epidemiology Report

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/EPI_Final5-2-06.pdf

http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/feds_confirm_mad_cow_in_alabama_10204.html

http://www.prwatch.org/node/4624

http://www.microbes.info/forums/index.php?showtopic=306

Aug 30, 2005 USDA Texas BSE Investigation—Final Epidemiology Report

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/bse_final_epi_report8-05.pdf


TSS REPORT ON 2ND TEJAS MAD COW Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:12:15 -0600 (the one
that did NOT get away, thanks to the Honorable Phyllis Fong)


-------- Original Message --------


Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:12:15 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To: Carla Everett
References: <[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask] us>


Greetings Carla,still hear a rumor;

Texas single beef cow not born in Canada no beef entered the food chain?

and i see the TEXAS department of animal health is ramping up forsomething,
but they forgot a url for update?I HAVE NO ACTUAL CONFIRMATION YET...can you
confirm???terry


==============================
==============================


-------- Original Message --------


Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:38:21 -0600
From: Carla Everett
To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
References: <[log in to unmask]>


The USDA has made a statement, and we are referring all callers to the USDA
web site. We have no informationabout the animal being in Texas. CarlaAt
09:44 AM 11/19/2004, you wrote:>Greetings Carla,>>i am getting
unsubstantiated claims of this BSE 'inconclusive' cow is from>TEXAS. can you
comment on this either way please?>>thank you,>Terry S. Singeltary Sr.>>


===================
===================


-------- Original Message --------


Subject: Re: BSE 'INCONCLUSIVE' COW from
TEXAS ???
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:33:20 -0600
From: Carla Everett
To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
References: <[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask] us>
<[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]
us> <[log in to unmask]>


our computer department was working on a place holder we could post USDA's
announcement of any results. There are no results to be announced tonight by
NVSL, so we are back in a waiting mode and will post the USDA
announcementwhen we hear something.At 06:05 PM 11/22/2004, you wrote:>why
was the announcement on your TAHC site removed?>>Bovine Spongiform
Encephalopathy:>November 22: Press Release title here >>star image More BSE
information>>>>terry>>Carla Everett wrote:>>>no confirmation on the U.S.'
inconclusive test...>>no confirmation on location of
animal.>>>>>>


==========================
==========================


THEN, 7+ MONTHS OF COVER-UP BY JOHANN ET AL! no doubt about it now $$$


NO, it's not pretty, hell, im not pretty, but these are the facts, take em
or leave em, however, you cannot change them.

with kindest regards,

I am still sincerely disgusted and tired in sunny Bacliff, Texas USA 77518

Terry S. Singeltary Sr.


FULL 130 LASHINGS TO USDA BY OIG again


http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-10-KC.pdf


http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0612&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=23557

Feb 06, 2004 Washington State Investigation—Final Epidemiology Report


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/downloads/WashingtonState_epi_final3-04.pdf


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....


Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518




Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail: (optional)
Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: