SEARCH VEGSOURCE:

 

 

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




From: TSS ()
Subject: Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
Date: July 10, 2007 at 1:14 pm PST

Greetings,


latest response to my FOIA request about those mad sheep from mad river valley is simply unbelievable and inexcusable ;


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

USDA

JULY 3, 2007

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

Dear Mr. Singeltary:


This is in response to your March 15, 2007, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records related to bio-assays of sheep imported from Belgium. Your request was received in this office on March 27, 2007, and assigned case number FOIA 07-566. We apologize for the delay of this response.

For your information, the FOIA is designed to allow the public access to agency records, not to answer questions. After consulting with agency staff, we were informed up to two years is required for a final result on the bio-assay. Therefore, we did not locate any records responsive to your request. You may appeal our no records determination. If you choose to appeal, your appeal must be in writing and must be sent within 45 days of the date of this letter to:

snip...

To assist the Administrator in reviewing your appeal, provide specific reasons why you believe modification of the determination is warranted.

If you have any questions, please contact..............


Sincerely


Cheri A. Oswalt
Acting Director
Freedom of Information $ Privacy Act Staff
Legislative and Public Affairs

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


> After consulting with agency staff, we were informed up to two years is required for a final result on the bio-assay.

> Therefore, we did not locate any records responsive to your request.


Unbelievable !


OVER 3 years ago, on May 20, 2004, I was told ;


> --- Original Message ---
>
>
> Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton.question please.scrapie.TSS
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400
> From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov
> To: flounder@wt.net
>
> Dear Mr. Singeltary,
>
> The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this
> year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the
> results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of
> Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is
> 301-734-5941.
>
> Have a nice day,
>
> Jim Rogers
> APHIS LPA


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


OVER 5 YEARS AGO WE WERE ALL TOLD THIS ;


>> Imported
>> Belgium/Netherlands
>> Sheep Test Results
>> Background
>> Factsheet
>> Veterinary Services April 2002
>> APHIS
>
>
>
> snip...
>
>> Additional tests will be conducted to determine
>> exactly what TSE the animals haveBSE or scrapie.
>> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist
>> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals
>> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing
>> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.
>
>
>
> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf


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


NOT to forget the 'atypical' VERMONT USA' sheep scrapie/BSE/TSE?
back in 2000 with the testing conveniently ignored and put off once
again with animal TSEs. Why I ask?


SCRAPIE ''ATYPICAL'' TSE IN SHEEP VERMONT UPDATE 2004

Greetings,

IN the year 2000, some sheep in Vermont were confiscated due to what
the USDA/APHIS said was an 'atypical TSE'.

WE were told there would be additional testing to confirm exactly what
TSE we were dealing with;

Release No. 0141.02

Ed Curlett (301) 734-3256
Jerry Redding (202) 720-6959


TESTING TO CONTINUE ON IMPORTED SHEEP CONFISCATED LAST YEAR


WASHINGTON, April 11, 2002 -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture today
announced that tests conducted on a flock of sheep confiscated last year
from a farm in Vermont confirm that two of the 125 sheep tested positive
for an atypical undifferentiated transmissible spongiform encephalopathy
(TSE) of foreign origin. The flock of 125 sheep was confiscated in March
2001 after four animals from an associated flock tested positive for TSE
in July 2000. USDA will continue to conduct additional tests to
determine the type of TSE in these sheep.

"These results confirm our previous conclusions were correct and that we
took the appropriate preventative actions in confiscating these
animals," said Bobby Acord, administrator of USDAs Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service. "USDAs actions to confiscate, sample and
destroy these sheep were on target. As a result of our vigilance, none
of these confiscated animals entered the animal or human food supply."

The sheep, imported from Belgium and the Netherlands in 1996, were
placed under certain federal restrictions when they entered the country
as part of USDA's scrapie control efforts. In 1998, USDA learned that it
was likely that sheep from Europe were exposed to feed contaminated with
bovine spongiform encephalopathy. At that time, the state of Vermont, at
the request of USDA, imposed a quarantine on these flocks, which
prohibited slaughter or sale for breeding purposes.

On July 10, 2000, several sheep from the flock tested positive for a
TSE, a class of degenerative neurological diseases that is characterized
by a very long incubation period and a 100 percent mortality rate in
infected sheep. Two of the better known varieties of TSE are scrapie in
sheep and BSE in cattle. There is no evidence that scrapie poses a risk
to human health.

On July 14, 2000, USDA issued a declaration of extraordinary emergency
to acquire the sheep. This action was contested by the flock owners. A
federal district court judge ruled in favor of USDA based on the merits
of the case. The flock owners appealed to the Second Circuit Court
requesting a stay, which was denied. The sheep were confiscated by USDA
in March 2001 and transported to USDA's National Veterinary Services
Laboratories in Ames, Iowa, where they were humanely euthanized. Tissue
samples were collected from the sheep for diagnostic testing and USDA
will continue with additional tests which could take up to 2 - 3 years
to complete. In all, USDA has acquired 380 sheep from a total of three
flocks. All of the animals were humanely euthanized, sampled and
disposed and did not enter the animal or human food supply.

Our goal continues to be to prevent, detect and eradicate foreign animal
diseases to protect American agriculture, natural resources and
consumers," said Acord. "We will continue to utilize the scientific
results of these and other tests conducted during the last several years
to strengthen our extensive surveillance, monitoring and prevention
efforts."

For more information about USDAs ongoing surveillance, monitoring and
prevention efforts as it relates to this situation, please visit
www.aphis.usda.gov/oa/tse/index.html


#


NOW, June 2004 those same test that we were told would start in
2002, have yet to be started. THE TSE those VERMONT sheep
was supposedly to have had, has yet to be confirmed.

WHY?

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

snip...


you would have thought that this would have been at the top of someone's
priority list. However, it does not look that way.

I ask again, WHY?

I wish to submit the following;

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: AW: [BSE-L] USDA did not test possible mad cows - Dr.
Detwiler, what about those sheep?
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:27:24 -0500
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
To: BSE-L@uni-karlsruhe.de
References: <13.2d20eaae.2df84fb9@aol.com> <40C8C7A0.1080107@wt.net>

######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########

Greetings list members,

Thought I should let the list know that Dr. Detwiler kindly replied to my
question about the delayed 'atypical' TSE testing in the Vermont sheep and
tried to explain what caused the delay. If I interpreted it correctly,
seems it was the fault of the U.K. ;

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Sheep
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:26:04 EDT
From: LAVET22@aol.com
To: flounder@wt.net

Mr. Singeltary.

I hope this finds you well. As you are aware I left the USDA last
year. I can only update you on the sheep before that time. Contact was
established with the UK on doing the bioassay studies. They agreed.
However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay. I
am aware that there are now additional labs in Europe running the mouse
bioassay strain typing. You will have to contact USDA for further word.


Linda Detwiler
=========

My reply to Dr. Detwiler;


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Sheep
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:53:57 -0500
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To: LAVET22@aol.com
References: <54.2bd2ac1e.2dfca4bc@aol.com>

hello Dr. Detwiler,

thanks for your kind reply.

> However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay.


not sure i understand that?

> You will have to contact USDA for further word.


already done that, and there answer was;

>5/20/04
>

>Dear Mr. Singeltary,
>
>The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this
>year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the
>results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of
>Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is
>301-734-5941.
>
>Have a nice day,
>
>Jim Rogers
>APHIS LPA
>

and with my previous attempts for information via the FOIA through
this administration (as you are probably very well aware of) they have
all been ignored/refused. so any further attempts would be fruitless i am
sure.

thanks anyway...

kindest regards,
Terry

LAVET22@aol.com wrote:

> Mr. Singeltary.

snip...

TSS

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:

> ######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
> #########
>
> Greetings Dr. Detwiler,
>
> glad to see you are still with us, you had become very silent lately.
> hope you are enjoying semi retirement.
>
> recently, i inquired through the BSE-L and via USDA official about
> those Vermont sheep via belgium which there was an Extraordinary
> Declaration of Emergency declared here in the USA due to
> atypical scrapie. The thread is;
>
> Confiscation of Sheep in Vermont and testing results ? Thu, 20 May 2004
> 12:10:03 -0500 "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." Bovine
> Spongiform Encephalopathy BSE-L
>
>
>
>> Imported
>> Belgium/Netherlands
>> Sheep Test Results
>> Background
>> Factsheet
>> Veterinary Services April 2002
>> APHIS
>
>
>
> snip...
>
>> Additional tests will be conducted to determine
>> exactly what TSE the animals haveBSE or scrapie.
>> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist
>> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals
>> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing
>> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.
>
>
>
> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf

snip...full text ;


https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/0/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument

i'm still waiting, and apparently I am not the only one ;


Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:03:09 -0500
Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group
Subject: Agencies slow in responding to FOIA requests

http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0707&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=2679

TSS/July, 10, 2007
===============

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To:
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP


Greetings BSE-L Members,

I thought I might update you on the latest BSeee from USDA on my endless
attempts to find the truth as to what those mad sheep of mad river valley
really had, either typical scrapie, atypical scrapie, BSE, and or nothing.
My endeavors to get this information via FOIA and through every other avenue
has failed it seems. YOU will see in this latest letter from the USDA, the
stalling continues. This latest letter says that the USDA will not be able
to comply with the twenty-working-day time limit, as well they will not be
able to comply with the ten additional days provided by the statute. This 20
day thing, and the additional 10 days thing to comply by any statute is a
hoot to say the least. I have been waiting to get this data for almost 4+
years, only to be turned down at every corner. seems to be just another in a
long line of cover ups on TSE in the USA. ALSO, the USDA does not seem to be
sure even if they can request a waiver fee I made due to my disability and
financial situation from that. all in all, seems to be the same old BSeee. I
only ponder if this recent discovery of the first case of atypical scrapie
in the USA (NOR98), and the announcement of that, has anything to do with
the delay in my FOIA request on mad sheep of mad river valley ???

Lot of things to ponder here, as the question I raised below also, why the
quarantine of land for 4 to 5 years and slaughter of all the Faillaces
animals, but yet we have heard nothing about this with this recent NOR98
case ??? AS with the atypical TSE in the Tejas bovine and the Alabama
bovine, why no quarantine of land and slaughter of animals there ??? Many
things about this case has been very disturbing from the start of this mess.
I will post the additional letters below (have to print, scanner shot, and
computer is about loaded up), but on my end around Johanns et al, I did go
through the OIG with all this too, and I will post that letter I recieved as
well. Then some links to all this from way back, for anyone interested. ...

IF you remember correctly, my latest letter requesting this information went
out to ;


----- Original Message -----
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
To: Boyd.Rutherford@usda.gov
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 1:35 PM
Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP


Greetings USDA,


I respectfully request the final results of the mouse bio-assays test that
were to have supposedly began 2+ years late, 5 years ago, on the imported
sheep from Belgium ?


WHAT happened to the test results and MOUSE BIO-ASSAYS of those imported
sheep from Belgium that were confiscated and slaughtered from the
Faillace's, what sort of TSE did these animals have ?


WERE they atypical scrapie, BSE, and or typical scrapie ?


HOW much longer will you refuse to give us this information ? and for what
reason ?


WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley were
quarantined for 5 years, but none of these farms from Texas and Alabama with
Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not been quarantined for 5 years, why
not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?


snip.

full text ;


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


https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument

FURTHERMORE, I respectfully request up front, that any fees for this FOIA be
wavered due to the fact this information should be free to the public and is
in the best interest for the public to have these final results, no
financial gain from this FOIA information is to be made either. ...

Thank You,


kind regards,

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


snip...full text is at bottom of this email.

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


THEN, when i figured they were going to ignore me again, I sent this to the
OIG and the Honorable Phyllis Fong ;


----- Original Message -----
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
To: FOIASTAFF@oig.usda.gov
Cc: Phyllis.Fong@usda.gov
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 3:09 PM
Subject: Fw: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP


Dear O.I.G. F.O.I.A.,

A kind greetings from Texas.

Maybe you can help me out. I have tried relentlessly to find out the final
results of the TSE Mouse-bioassays of those Atypical TSE in the Vermont
sheep where there was a Declaration of Emergency announced. I have been
unable to get any answer on those test and cannot figure out why not. OH, i
have my guess on what they were.
but my guess is not good enough.

Could you please help find out for me ??? please see emails below on this
matter.

many thanks, and keep up the good work in regards to trying to police the
USDA/FSIS/APHIS et al on TSE.
it's indeed a full time job. ...


with kindest regards,

I am sincerely,

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

snip...end


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


LOW and behold, the OIG responds March 7, 2007 ;


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
1400 INDEPENDENCE AVE., SW, MAIL STOP 2308
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20250


DATE: MARCH 7, 2007

TO: Terry Singeltary
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas 77518


Your request has been received. For your information, this office currently
has a considerable backlog of requests for information, which we manage in
accordance with USDA's Regulations and Department of Justice Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) policy. The FOIA Staff processes requests on a
first-in, first-out basis using ''multitracks.'' There are four tracks: an
expedited track if the request involves a matter of imminent threat to life;
a simple track for relatively simple requests; a complex track for more
complex and lengthy requests; and a remanded track, when a FOIA appeal is
granted. Please be assured that your request will be categorized and
processed in turn.

Should you have questions, you may call the FOIA staff at (202) 720-5677 and
refer to Log. No. 07-00060.

FOIA/PA Staff
Legal Staff

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


THEN, LOW and behold, on March 15, 2007, I finally receive acknowledgement
from USDA on this matter (i.e. Fong syndrome takes effect again) ;


USDA

March 15, 2007

Mr. Terry S. Singeltary
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, TX 77518


Dear Mr. Singeltary,


This letter acknowledges receipt by the USDA Freedom of Information Act
Service Center of your FOIA request dated February 25, 2007, for records
related to bio-assays of sheep imported from Belgium. Your request has been
referred to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) for
processing.

You will receive a response directly from APHIS.

Contact the APHIS FOIA Service Center at 301-734-5267 regarding any question
on the status of your request.


Sincerely,

Rita Morgan
Acting USDA Freedom of Information Act Officer
Administration

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


NOW, with reality setting in, I receive this letter from USDA on March 28,
2007 ;

USDA

March 28, 2007

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

Re: FOIA 07-566

Dear Mr. Singeltary:


This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated March 15, 2007, which
was received in this Office on March 27, 2007, in which you requested
atypical TSE information on Vermont Sheep.

The records you seek are maintained outside of this Office and we have not
yet been able to complete a search to determine whether there are records
within the scope of your request. Additionally, all Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) requests are processed on a ''first-in, first-out'' basis,
according to track. Due to the large number of FOIA requests our Agency has
been receiving, we have a considerable backlog, and unfortunately a number
of requests still remain in the queue (TRASH...TSS). Accordingly, we will be
UNABLE TO COMPLY with the twenty-working-day time limit in THIS CASE, as
well AS THE TEN ADDITIONAL DAYS provided by the statute (and is anyone
surprised by this from this administration, i'm not. ...TSS). Please be
advised; however, responding to all FOIA requests as promptly as possible is
a high priority for out Agency. (not...tss)


We have not yet made a decision on your request for a fee waiver. We will do
so after we determine whether fees will be assessed for this request.


I regret the necessity of this delay, but I assure you that your request
will be processed as soon as possible. If you have any questions or wish to
discuss reformulation or an alternative time frame for processing of your
request, you may contact me at (301-734-3755).


Sincerely,

Celeste Camp
Program Specialist

APHIS Safeguarding American Agriculture


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

News Focus
INFECTIOUS DISEASES:
Is the U.S. Doing Enough to Prevent Mad Cow Disease?
Martin Enserink

U.S. officials say they're taking every reasonable step to keep mad cow
disease out. But critics still see chinks in the country's armor
On a cold spring morning, when the hills in East Warren, Vermont, were
covered with a fresh pack of snow, the Faillace family lost its livelihood.
It happened in a government action that--if you hear Larry Faillace recount
it--was every bit as dramatic as the one that wrenched Elián González from
his Miami relatives last year. At 5:30 a.m. on 23 March, says Faillace,
armed federal agents in flak jackets entered the family farm and ordered his
three children to stop feeding the sheep. Shortly after, an enormous truck
pulled up, and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) agents began loading
all of the Faillaces' 126 sheep. A few hours later, the truck was gone,
leaving the family, the town, and several dozen protesters behind in anger
and shock.
The early morning raid is perhaps the most dramatic example of the U.S.
government's efforts to keep "mad cow disease," or bovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE), out of the country. USDA suspected that the sheep,
which the Faillaces had imported from Belgium and the Netherlands in 1996,
were infected with a sheep version of BSE. So they took no chances: The
entire herd was destroyed days after the animals were seized.

To prevent a BSE outbreak, USDA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the
U.S. Customs Service, and other government agencies have put in place a long
list of safeguards--from barricading the borders to analyzing brains of
people suspected of having died from the human form of mad cow disease,
called variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). Yet public interest groups
and others have long argued that the government's response has been too
little, too late. Because of this lax response, the critics say, the disease
may well be among us. And if it is, the government is not vigilant enough to
detect it, they warn, nor tough enough on the meat industry to keep it out
of the human food chain.

Government agencies say they've taken "aggressive" measures to prevent the
disease, and many scientists agree. They admit that the precautions are not
failsafe and that the disease could emerge in the country--but say the risk
is vanishingly small. Even so, the concerns are reverberating on Capitol
Hill, where House and Senate committees have summoned officials to discuss
the risks. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) announced recently that he will
introduce a bill that would beef up border inspections and other controls to
keep BSE out of the food chain.

But underlying the argument is a broader question: How much prevention is
enough? Scientists point out that the U.S. defense against BSE consists of
multiple tiers, each of which would have to break down for an outbreak to
occur. Although the risk could be reduced further, the necessary control
measures would become increasingly costly and draconian. "You don't go
spending half the budget to reduce the risk to zero," says Paul Brown, a
senior scientist at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and
Stroke (NINDS) in Bethesda, Maryland, "especially in view of much more
serious public health problems that afflict us."

Multitiered containment
BSE is one of the so-called transmissible spongiform encephalopathies
(TSEs), a mysterious class of fatal brain diseases. Scientists are still
debating their etiology, but the leading theory is that they're caused by
abnormal forms of proteins, called prions. Several TSEs have the scary
ability to jump the species barrier; in Britain, for instance, 99 people are
known to have died or are presumed to be dying of vCJD, most likely
contracted after eating meat products from infected cattle. Epidemiologists
expect more cases in the United Kingdom, but they're not sure how many;
there could be tens of thousands.

In the United States, the first line of defense is to block entry of the BSE
agent, and most people agree that the government has been thorough. As early
as 1989, USDA banned the importation of all ruminants (cattle, goats, and
sheep) and many animal products from the United Kingdom and other countries
with BSE. In 1997, when BSE cases started showing up in several other
countries, that ban was extended to all of Europe. The 500 or so animals
that were imported from those countries before 1997--such as the Vermont
sheep--have almost all been quarantined or purchased and killed.

But closed borders offer no guarantees. Researchers still don't know how BSE
arose in Britain, but whatever the process, it could happen here, too. One
prominent theory is that the agent that causes scrapie, a TSE in sheep,
crossed the species barrier and ignited the cattle epidemic in
Britain--specifically, when cattle were fed meal that contained infected
sheep tissue. That practice is now banned in the United States, making such
a scenario unlikely.

But BSE could also arise out of nowhere. Each year about one in every
million humans worldwide gets CJD spontaneously, and it's possible that the
same happens in cattle--or indeed all mammals. Last year a U.K. panel
chaired by Lord Andrew Phillips supported the theory that such a "sporadic"
case may have started the British outbreak.

Work by Richard Marsh, a veterinary virologist at the University of
Wisconsin, Madison, who died in 1997, suggests that sporadic cases of a
cattle TSE may have already arisen in the United States. Five times between
1947 and 1985, a disease called transmissible mink encephalopathy decimated
populations on U.S. mink farms. After investigating the last outbreak, Marsh
concluded that cow carcasses fed to the mink were the most likely source of
the disease agent. He speculated that at least one of the cows must have had
a TSE.

Another potential source of BSE is a homegrown prion disease that afflicts
deer and elk. Conceivably, this ailment, called chronic wasting disease,
could jump to cattle or sicken people who eat infected venison (see
sidebar).

But would anybody have noticed if the United States had a couple of cases of
BSE? Probably not, say some critics. USDA now tests some 50 suspect cows a
week. The test program pales in comparison to the massive effort started
last year in the European Union, where every cow over 30 months old is
tested after slaughtering. The United States should do something similar,
says Thomas Pringle, a molecular biologist with the Sperling Biomedical
Foundation in Eugene, Oregon, who maintains a Web site about BSE. "You can
try all these containment measures, but at the end of the day the question
is: How much BSE do you have?" he says. "The way to find out is to run
hundreds of thousands of tests."

Testing at that level would be silly, replies Linda Detwiler, a senior staff
veterinarian at the USDA, because BSE has never been found in the country.
Even so, she says, this year the agency will double the number of tests it
performs.

Cows eating cows
Even if a cow got BSE and it went undetected, that wouldn't spell doom for
the rest of the nation's livestock. The only plausible way for an outbreak
to occur would be if that cow were fed to other cows, thereby passing on the
infectious agent. For decades, cows did eat other cows, when they were fed
meat-and-bone meal, a protein concoction produced by milling and boiling (or
"rendering") the carcasses of, say, sick farm animals, road kill, and dead
pets. The epidemic in Britain is believed to have been fueled after infected
cattle were recycled on a large scale.

But this route is now cut off in the United States, at least in theory: FDA
banned feeding most mammalian protein to all ruminants in 1997. Those same
proteins can still be fed to pigs and poultry, however, so FDA has ordered
rendering plants and feed mills to prevent commingling of the two types of
feed. Enforcing this separation has proven difficult, however. A March 2001
FDA inspection report showed that about one in seven feed mills and
rendering plants didn't have adequate procedures to prevent commingling;
many haven't been inspected yet.

Indeed, Purina Mills in Texas discovered in January that a new employee had
mistakenly let cattle protein slip into a batch of cow feed. After 1222
animals that had been given the suspect feed were quarantined, Purina paid
for the entire herd to be destroyed. "Who knows how many other cases have
been swept under the rug?" asks Peter Lurie, a researcher at Public Citizen,
a consumer watchdog group in Washington, D.C., and a member of FDA's
advisory committee on TSEs. Lurie would like to see the FDA get much tougher
on the feed industry.

Although that may not be a bad idea, others say, the current situation is
hardly a recipe for disaster. Suppose a BSE-infected animal did end up in
cattle feed, says NINDS's Brown, and a few cows became infected and went to
the slaughterhouse undiagnosed. For the outbreak to continue, they would
have to be rendered themselves and mistakenly turned into cattle feed again.
"A regulatory breakdown of this magnitude is virtually impossible," Brown
wrote recently in Emerging Infectious Diseases. Similarly, Will Hueston, a
veterinary epidemiologist at the University of Maryland, College Park, says
the risk of even a single case of BSE is "pretty darn small."

The chance that humans might get vCJD from eating infected cattle is even
smaller. But here, too, critics see loopholes that they would like closed.
European countries now require brains and spinal cords to be removed from a
carcass directly after slaughter; no such safeguard exists in the United
States.

Another route of infection could come from the local health food store. In
1994, Congress deregulated dietary supplements. Many of these contain animal
parts-- including brain tissue. Although the FDA has asked manufacturers not
to use such materials from countries known to have BSE, it can't ensure that
no cow brains make it in, says Lurie. Supplements are a problem as long as
FDA lacks jurisdiction over them, agrees Brown, who chaired FDA's advisory
panel on TSEs until last January.

PRION DISEASES FOUND IN THE U.S.
Scrapie. First case diagnosed in 1947; now 40 to 60 infected sheep farms are
reported per year.
Chronic wasting disease (CWD). Afflicts wild deer and elk in Colorado,
Wyoming, and Nebraska; also found on elk farms in other states and in
Canada.
Transmissible mink encephalopathy (TME). Five outbreaks reported at mink
farms in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Idaho between 1947 and 1985.
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). An estimated 250 to 300 cases per year;
about 85% "sporadic," 15% genetic.
Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker disease and fatal familial insomnia. Two
extremely rare genetic human diseases.
NOT FOUND IN THE U.S.
Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or "mad cow disease"
Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD), the human form of BSE


How much is enough?
In the end, nobody disputes that more can be done to prevent BSE; the
question is how much the country is willing to invest. For instance, banning
the use of all animal proteins in livestock feed would all but eliminate any
risk, says Brown. But it would be the end of the $2.5 billion rendering
industry, and it might make meat more expensive, he says.

In his recent commentary, Brown summed up seven holes in the safety net that
critics are sure to pounce on if a BSE case were ever to occur. Even so,
Brown thinks the current safeguards earn "high marks." Rather than closing
each and every hole, he suggests that the money could be better spent on
other public health issues, such as diabetes, hypertension, or car
accidents.

George Gray, a risk analyst at Harvard School of Public Health in Boston,
agrees. "Every bit of attention and effort we put into [BSE] takes away from
something else," says Gray. "And I think there are considerably bigger risks
out there in the food supply." An estimated 5000 people a year die from
microbial contamination in food alone--many more than would be harmed by BSE
in any plausible scenario, he asserts. At USDA's request, Gray is studying
the risks of BSE and related diseases in the United States. The study, which
will guide future policy, will be presented to the agency within the next 2
months.

Lurie dismisses such comparisons. "By that argument, we should not worry
about microbial contamination because many more people die from cancer," he
says. Although the risk may be low, he says, the worst-case scenario would
have such disastrous public health and economic consequences that extreme
caution is warranted.

That's the argument that led USDA to kill the Faillaces' sheep and another
nearby flock, says Detwiler. Tests carried out last year on four slaughtered
animals showed signs of a BSE-like disease, although it wasn't clear whether
it was scrapie or a sheep version of BSE. Sheep have been infected with BSE
in the lab, but no natural cases have been found in the world. If the
Vermont sheep did have a form of BSE, they would be the first. Better to err
on the side of caution, says Detwiler, than for the United States to have
that dubious honor.

The Faillaces, who fought the seizure in a long legal battle, claim the
sheep were healthy and the tests were sloppy. Additional tests of the
Faillaces' sheep are now being performed at the National Animal Disease
center in Ames, Iowa. The results, says Detwiler, will be available in a few
months--about the time that Gray's risk assessment is due.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/292/5522/1639

Dr. Tom Pringle, founder, Sperling Foundation
"[Mad Sheep] shows how far a corrupt government agency will go to protect
industry. This is a truly Kafkaesque story."


http://www.amazon.com/Mad-Sheep-Story-Behind-Family/dp/1933392096


Mad Sheep
The True Story Behind the USDA’s War on a Family Farm
Linda Faillace
The page-turning account of a government cover-up, corporate greed, and a
courageous family’s fight to save their farm.
http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep
got to read this months ago, and it is deeply disturbing how the feds
handled this from the very beginning, and to this day we do not know the
results of the mouse bio-assays, and what those sheep actually had. i don't
necessarily agree with the TSE science in this book, but the book is a must
read if your interested at all in human and animal TSEs. ...TSS
Submitted by flounder on Thu, 09/07/2006 - 9:43pm.

http://vtcommons.org/node/568

FULL TEXT AND THREAD BETWEEN TSS, MAFF, USDA AND DR. DETWILER HERE ;


https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?

OpenDocument

7. WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley were
quarantined for 5 years, but none of these

farms from Texas and Alabama with Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not
been quarantined for 5 years, why

not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?


snip...


full text ;


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

NOW the Faillaces' claim there sheep were disease free ;


When Linda Faillace sat down to write a memoir about the events in 2001 that
led to the federal seizure of her family’s sheep, she wasn’t motivated by
fame or fortune. Her impetus was purely personal.

“Basically, Larry (my husband) had said I’d gotten too difficult to live
with,” Faillace recalled. “He said, ‘You really gotta do something.’”

So she set to work putting their story on paper, as much for her own peace
of mind as for posterity. And now, just five years after the USDA forcibly
removed the couple’s 125 sheep on their 90-acre homestead in East Warren,
Faillace has a book in hand that details the family’s struggle for answers.

In “Mad Sheep,” Faillace writes that they still don’t know why their flock
was targeted by the USDA for testing for the rare brain-wasting disease
known as transmissible spongiform encephalopathy. Since the seizure and
subsequent liquidation of the flock at a laboratory in Ames, Iowa,
government scientists have determined that none of the sheep had TSE, a
condition related to mad cow disease. The Faillaces meanwhile, lost all hope
of fulfilling their dream of sheep farming and producing artisanal
sheep-milk cheese.
-Times Argus

http://nonais.org/index.php/2006/09/25/fallice-sheep-disease-free/


some history here ;


Subject: Re: CONFUSIOUS ASKS, WHY were the Faillaces of mad river valley and
there farm quarantined for 5 years ...
Date: July 3, 2006 at 9:23 am PST

In Reply to: CONFUSIOUS ASKS, WHY were the Faillaces of mad river valley and
there farm quarantined for 5 years ... posted by TSS on June 28, 2006 at
11:16 am:

##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #####################

Greetings,

there are over 20 documented strains of typical scrapie to date. however, we
are talking atypical TSE of foreign origin is what the declaration of
extraordinary emergency was ordered for. if it was just regular scrapie,
then why not all other scrapie infected farms, why were they not treated the
same way, scrapie is and has been out of control in the USA for decades,
it's rampant? if it was atypical TSE in either cattle or sheep, they do not
know SRMs and or horizontal/vertical transmissions. if it were BSE, then why
the fuss of vertical and lateral transmission? so again, were not talking
regular scrapie with those sheep, and were not talking regular BSE with the
mad cows in Alabama and Texas. so confusious is confused still. why not the
same treatment$ ...tss


MAD SHEEP OF MAD RIVER VALLEY

THE TRUE STORY BEHIND THE USDA'S WAR ON A FAMILY FARM

LINDA FAILLACE


The video is available as either a Windows Media Player file or QuickTime
file.

View QuickTime clip

View Windows Media Clip


http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/lambslow.mov


http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/lambslow.wmv


http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep/FilmClip


I have the book transcript, and wept several times through the course of
reading. IT
will blow you away. I was at a crossroads of being mad because of a 'oh my
poor sheep blah blah blah, to what about my poor mom, mentality', to
Francis and Heather and there plight with there animals, heathers remarkable
dear leon speech, to francis and his true grit, and honorable strong young
man indeed, to 'what about a farmers rights and how far can the gov go
mentality'. i would argue with some parts of the book about atypical TSE and
BSE to sheep and the fact i still believe that not only atypical scrapie and
or BSE in sheep, but some and or all of the 20+ strains of typical scrapie
are transmissible to humans, and the fact in my opinion it was USDA's fault
for ever letting those sheep into the USA in the first place. They knew
Europe was infected with BSE. But USDA got caught up in a bunch of lies and
deceit here with the Faillaces'. The testing is very very questionable to
date.
I guess i might now have my answer as to those infamous 'mouse bio-assays',
but the book is remarkable, i received a copy from the publisher. everyone
in the world of TSE pro/con needs to read this book. .....TSS

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To:
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL
T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES


> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
#####################
>
> Greetings list members,
>
> confusious is confused again. confusious asks;
>
> WHY were the Faillaces of mad river valley and there farm quarantined for
5
> years, all animals slaughtered, and that either the top six inches of
> topsoil removed where manure and or compost had been and or multiple
> hypochlorite treatments of the surface soil to take place from fear of
there
> sheep having BSE, when none of this takes place for BSE cattle in the USA
of
> the typical strain and or the atypical strain as in Texas and Alabama???
>
> SINCE the Texas mad cow and the mad cow in Alabama was atypical BSE, why
> then were there no quarantine for 5 years, no removal of top soil, and all
> animals were not slaughtered???
>
> confusious still confused in sunny, hot, Bacliff, Texas. ...TSS
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 9:33 PM
> Subject: DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL
> T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES
>
>
> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
> #####################
>
> Subject: DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL
> T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES
> Date: June 17, 2006 at 6:56 pm PST
> Greetings list members,
>
> here i go again. i must bring those mad sheep of mad river valley up
again.
> what about those mouse bio-assays? can one of the aphis/usda lurkers on
this
> list, can one of them please comment please?
> a declaration of emergency was announced ;
>
>
> >> Imported
> >> Belgium/Netherlands
> >> Sheep Test Results
> >> Background
> >> Factsheet
> >> Veterinary Services April 2002
> >> APHIS
> >
> >
> >
> > snip...
> >
> >> Additional tests will be conducted to determine
> >> exactly what TSE the animals haveBSE or scrapie.
> >> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist
> >> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals
> >> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing
> >> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf
>
>
> >
> > DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.
> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES
> >
> >
>
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E
> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [2]
> >
> >
>
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > or if those old urls dont work, go here;
> >
> > DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E
> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES
> > - Terry S.
> > Singeltary Sr. 7/20/00 (0)
> >
>
> > [Federal Register: July 20, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 140)] [Notices]
> > [Page 45018] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
> > [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy00-32]
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> >
> > DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
> >
> > Office of the Secretary
> >
> > [Docket No. 00-072-1]
> >
> > Declaration of Extraordinary Emergency Because of an Atypical
> > Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (Prion Disease) of Foreign
Origin
> >
> > A transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) (prion disease) of
> > foreign origin has been detected in the United States. It is different
> > from TSE's previously diagnosed in the United States. The TSE was
> > detected in the progeny of imported sheep. The imported sheep and
> > their progeny are under quarantine in Vermont. Transmissible
> > spongiform encephalopathies are degenerative fatal diseases that can
> > affect livestock. TSE's are caused by similar, as yet uncharacterized,
> > agents that usually produce spongiform changes in the brain.
> > Post-mortem analysis has indicated positive results for an atypical
> > TSE of foreign origin in four sheep in Vermont. Because of the
> > potentially serious consequences of allowing the disease to spread to
> > other livestock in the United States, it is necessary to seize and
> > dispose of those flocks of sheep in Vermont that are affected with or
> > exposed to the disease, and their germ plasm. The existence of the
> > atypical TSE of foreign origin represents a threat to U.S. livestock.
> > It constitutes a real danger to the national economy and a potential
> > serious burden on interstate and foreign commerce. The Department has
> > reviewed the measures being taken by Vermont to quarantine and
> > regulate the flocks in question and has consulted with appropriate
> > officials in the State of Vermont. Based on such review and
> > consultation, the Department has determined that Vermont does not have
> > the funds to compensate flock owners for the seizure and disposal of
> > flocks affected with or exposed to the disease, and their germ plasm.
> > Without such funds, it will be unlikely to achieve expeditious
> > disposal of the flocks and germ plasm. Therefore, the Department has
> > determined that an extraordinary emergency exists because of the
> > existence of the atypical TSE in Vermont. This declaration of
> > extraordinary emergency authorizes the Secretary to seize, quarantine,
> > and dispose of, in such manner as he deems necessary, any animals that
> > he finds are affected with or exposed to the disease in question, and
> > their germ plasm, and otherwise to carry out the provisions and
> > purposes of the Act of July 2, 1962 (21 U.S.C. 134-134h). The State of
> > Vermont has been informed of these facts.
> >
> > Dated: This declaration of extraordinary emergency shall become
> > effective July 14, 2000. Dan Glickman, Secretary of Agriculture. [FR
> > Doc. 00-18367 Filed 7-19-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
> >
> >
>
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32
>
> ================================
> > [Federal Register: July 20, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 140)] [Notices]
> > [Page 45018] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
> > [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy00-31]
> >
> > ========================================================================
> > Notices Federal Register
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> >
> > This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than
> > rules or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of
> > hearings and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and
> > rulings, delegations of authority, filing of petitions and
> > applications and agency statements of organization and functions are
> > examples of documents appearing in this section.
> >
> > ========================================================================
> >
> > [[Page 45018]]
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
> >
> > Office of the Secretary
> >
> > [Docket No. 00-072-2]
> >
> > Declaration of Emergency Because of an Atypical Transmissible
> > Spongiform Encephalopathy (Prion Disease) of Foreign Origin
> >
> > A transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) (prion disease) of
> > foreign origin has been detected in the United States. It is different
> > from TSE's previously diagnosed in the United States. The TSE was
> > detected in the progeny of imported sheep. The imported sheep and
> > their progeny are under quarantine in Vermont. Transmissible
> > spongiform encephalopathies are degenerative fatal diseases that can
> > affect livestock. TSE's are caused by similar, as yet uncharacterized,
> > agents that usually produce spongiform changes in the brain.
> > Post-mortem analysis has indicated positive results for an atypical
> > TSE of foreign origin in four sheep in Vermont. Because of the
> > potentially serious consequences of allowing the disease to spread to
> > other livestock in the United States, it is necessary to seize and
> > dispose of those flocks of sheep in Vermont that are affected with or
> > exposed to the disease, and their germ plasm. The existence of the
> > atypical TSE of foreign origin represents a threat to U.S. livestock.
> > It constitutes a real danger to the national economy and a potential
> > serious burden on interstate and foreign commerce. APHIS has
> > insufficient funds to carry out the seizure and disposal of animals
> > and germ plasm necessary to eliminate this disease risk. These funds
> > would be used to compensate the owners of the animals and germ plasm
> > for their seizure and disposal in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 134a.
> > Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the Act of September
> > 25, 1981, as amended (7 U.S.C. 147b), I declare that there is an
> > emergency that threatens the livestock industry of this country and
> > hereby authorize the transfer and use of such funds as may be
> > necessary from appropriations or other funds available to agencies or
> > corporations of the United States Department of Agriculture to seize
> > and dispose of animals that are affected with or exposed to this TSE,
> > and their germplasm, in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 134a.
> >
> > Dated: This declaration of emergency shall become effective July 14,
> > 2000. Dan Glickman, Secretary of Agriculture. [FR Doc. 00-18368 Filed
> > 7-19-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
>
>
> >
> > I was told that ;
> >
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton...question please...scrapie...TSS
> > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400
> > From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov
> > To: flounder@wt.net
>
>
> snip...
>
>
> FULL TEXT AND THREAD BETWEEN TSS, MAFF, USDA AND DR. DETWILER HERE ;
>
>
>
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument
>
>
>
>
> Greetings again BSE-L members,
>
>
> NOW, i cannot for the life of me figure out why we have not heard anything
> about those mouse bio-assays of those mad sheep of mad river valley, and
> atypical TSE ? i mean hell, there was a DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY
> EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN
IN
> THE UNITED STATES and we never hear of final results, is this not another
> case of the TEXAS BSE PROTOCOLS of just never confirming anything unless
the
> GAO gets involved? maybe USDA could comment on this now? or is this too
like
> those WMD, just something that never existed? i know Dr. Detwiler is out
of
> the loop on this now, but there are others here that could answer this
> question if they wanted too and or could???
>
>
> QUOTE ;
>
> 1998
>
> Dr. Detwiler replied. "There is new research which shows that sheep can
> contract BSE" ......"information I can't divulge".....end
>
>
> WHY, after some 7 years, do we still not have any answers ???
>
> WHERE are those mouse bio-assays ???
>
> PLEASE look on every shelf, maybe same one that those TEXAS MAD COW tissue
> samples were left on for 7+ months before finally confirming after a
> Congressional order and or end around, they could be there. ...
>
>
> still disgusted in sunny Bacliff, Texas
>
> Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
>
>
> FSA 06/06/03 AGENDA 3.1, 15 JUNE 2006
>
> ATYPICAL SCRAPIE IN SMALL RUMINANTS: CONSIDERATION OF THE
>
> CURRENT PRECAUTIONARY RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES
>
> Executive Summary
>
> 1. This paper provides information on atypical scrapie (a transmissible
> spongiform
>
> encephalopathy (TSE)) in sheep and goats and the precautionary measures
>
> currently in place to protect consumers from the possible risks from TSEs
in
>
> these species. There are a great many unknowns about atypical scrapie,
>
> including the potential implications, if any, for human health.
>
> 2. It also reports on the views of stakeholders and consumer focus groups
> who
>
> were asked whether, in the light of this uncertainty, additional
> precautionary
>
> measures were needed and for their views on the Agency’s advice on this
>
> subject.
>
> 3. The Board is asked to:
>
> • note that the Agency’s advice has been reworded to take account of the
> views
>
> of stakeholders and the consumer focus groups and will be tested further
>
> • note that the background information on sheep TSEs on the Agency’s
website
>
> will be reviewed
>
> • note that the agricultural departments are planning to review the Ram
>
> Genotyping Scheme
>
> • note that surveillance for atypical scrapie will be maintained in order
to
> detect
>
> any changes in prevalence.
>
> • agree that the Agency’s advice and recommendations on precautionary
>
> measures should be kept under review and be brought back to the Board if
>
> there are significant changes in the understanding of the risk.
>
> • agree that developments on atypical scrapie be kept under review to
enable
>
> contingency policy to be refined as new information emerges.
>
> • agree that the Agency should open discussions with the European
>
> Commission on the issue of the identification of meat from older sheep or
>
> goats and natural sausage casings made from sheep intestines to enable
>
> consumer choice.
>
> 2
>
> TSE DIVISION
>
> Contacts:
>
> Alison Gleadle Tel: 020 7276 8303
>
> Email: alison.gleadle@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk
>
> Irene Hill Tel: 020 7276 8324
>
> Email: irene.hill@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk
>
> 3
>
> FSA 06/06/03 AGENDA ITEM 3.1, 15 JUNE 2006
>
> ATYPICAL SCRAPIE IN SHEEP AND GOATS: CONSIDERATION OF THE
>
> CURRENT PRECAUTIONARY RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES
>
> Issue
>
> 1. To consider whether the Agency should recommend, on the basis of
current
>
> evidence, that additional precautionary measures are needed to reduce the
>
> possible risk to consumers from atypical scrapie.......
>
>
> snip...
>
>
> Conclusions
>
> 27. Atypical scrapie is definitely present in the UK flock, and in the
> flocks of other
>
> Member States (MS), and animals with atypical scrapie have, and will be,
>
> entering the food supply. However it is not known if this constitutes any
> risk to
>
> human health. Unlike the situation when BSE was first discovered in
cattle,
>
> precautionary measures are already in place. Based on the limited
knowledge
> of
>
> the distribution of infectivity in atypical scrapie, the SEAC Subgroup
> concluded
>
> that the SRM requirements that were put in place on a precautionary basis
> for
>
> BSE in sheep may provide at least a similar level of protection against
the
>
> possible risk from atypical scrapie.
>
> 28. The consideration of the proportionality of any additional
precautionary
> measures
>
> is very difficult when the human health risk is unknown, and, as reported
by
>
> SEAC, there is insufficient data to carry out a risk assessment.
>
> 29. Any additional precautionary measures that could be put in place have
a
> high
>
> economic cost, are currently highly impractical (see Annex 1 for details)
> and
>
> would impose a cost on industry that would, according to industry
> stakeholders,
>
> be likely to bring into question the economic viability of sheep farming.
> ...
>
>
> snip...
>
>
> full text ;
>
>
> http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/fsa060603.pdf
>
>
>
>
> FSA 06/06/04 AGENDA ITEM 3.2, 15 JUNE 2006
>
> BSE AND SHEEP CONTINGENCY POLICY
>
> Executive Summary
>
> 1. This paper asks the Board to agree, for purposes of contingency
planning,
> a
>
> possible approach to a graduated strengthening of measures to protect
>
> consumers in response to one or more findings of BSE in the current UK
sheep
>
> flock.
>
> 2. The paper also notes the high level of uncertainty around estimates of
> the
>
> possible risk from BSE in sheep and that, if BSE were ever found in a UK
> sheep,
>
> the estimate of the risk to consumers would depend on the accumulated
> results
>
> of surveillance for BSE in sheep up to that time. It therefore recommends
> that the
>
> policy be kept under review and that any policy agreed now on a
contingency
>
> basis should urgently be reconfirmed taking into account the circumstances
> at the
>
> time of any finding of BSE in a UK sheep.
>
> 3. The Board is invited to:
>
> • note that, in the event of confirmation of BSE in a sheep, targeted
> testing of
>
> animals in the affected flock or flocks would be carried out to assist in
>
> determining the potential spread of the disease and whether it may have
>
> entered the food supply (paragraph 9).
>
> • agree that an expert group be set up to advise on what additional
> surveillance
>
> should be put in place, if BSE were to be found in a UK sheep, to improve
>
> estimates of prevalence of BSE in UK sheep (paragraph 13).
>
> • agree that, on current knowledge, it would advise the following
graduated
>
> response to one or more findings of BSE in the current UK sheep flock:
>
> • one finding of BSE in sheep - remove additional SRM;
>
> • two findings of BSE in unrelated flocks - exclude sheep aged over 12
>
> months from the food supply and remove the additional SRM from the
>
> remaining sheep;
>
> • three findings of BSE in unrelated flocks - allow into the food supply
> only
>
> sheep that were either genetically resistant to BSE or semi-resistant and
>
> aged under 12 months and remove the additional SRM from those sheep
>
> (paragraph 20).
>
> 2
>
> • agree that its contingency policy for a finding of BSE in sheep should
be
> kept
>
> under review and be urgently reconfirmed should BSE actually be found in a
>
> UK sheep (paragraph 22).
>
> • comment on the outline handling plan at Annex F and the strategy for the
>
> external communication that would be needed (paragraph 30).
>
> TSE Division
>
> Contacts:
>
> Alison Gleadle Tel: 020 7276 8303 (GTN 7276 8303)
>
> Email: alison.gleadle@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk
>
> David Carruthers Tel: 020 7276 8305 (GTN 7276 8305)
>
> Email: david.carruthers@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk
>
> snip...
>
>
> http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/fsa060604.pdf
>
>
>
>
> Subject: REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCRAPIE November 9, 2005 USAHA
> Date: February 12, 2006 at 1:03 pm PST
>
> REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCRAPIE
>
> Chair: Dr. Jim Logan, Cheyenne, WY
>
> Vice Chair: Dr. Joe D. Ross, Sonora, TX
>
> Dr. Deborah L. Brennan, MS; Dr. Beth Carlson, ND; Dr. John R. Clifford,
DC;
> Dr. Thomas F. Conner, OH; Dr. Walter E. Cook, WY; Dr. Wayne E. Cunningham,
> CO; Dr. Jerry W. Diemer, TX; Dr. Anita J. Edmondson, CA; Dr. Dee Ellis,
TX;
> Dr. Lisa A. Ferguson, MD; Dr. Keith R. Forbes, NY; Dr. R. David Glauer,
OH;
> Dr. James R. Grady, CO; Dr. William L. Hartmann, MN; Dr. Carolyn Inch,
CAN;
> Dr. Susan J. Keller, ND; Dr. Allen M. Knowles, TN; Dr. Thomas F. Linfield,
> MT; Dr. Michael R. Marshall, UT; Dr. Cheryl A. Miller, In; Dr. Brian V.
> Noland, CO; Dr. Charles Palmer, CA; Dr. Kristine R. Petrini, MN; Mr. Stan
> Potratz, IA; Mr. Paul E. Rodgers, CO; Dr. Joan D. Rowe, CA; Dr. Pamela L.
> Smith, IA; Dr. Diane L. Sutton, MD; Dr. Lynn Anne Tesar, SD; Dr. Delwin D.
> Wilmot, NE; Dr. Nora E. Wineland, CO; Dr. Cindy B. Wolf, MN.
>
> The Committee met on November 9, 2005, from 8:00am until 11:55am, Hershey
> Lodge and Convention Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania. The meeting was called
> to order by Dr. Jim Logan, chair, with vice chairman Dr. Joe D. Ross
> attending. There were 74 people in attendance.
>
> The Scrapie Program Update was provided by Dr. Diane Sutton, National
> Scrapie Program Coordinator, United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA),
> Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services (APHIS), Veterinary Services
> (VS). The complete text of the Status Report is included in these
> Proceedings.
>
> Dr. Patricia Meinhardt, USDA-APHIS-VS-National Veterinary Services
> Laboratory (NVSL) gave the Update on Genotyping Labs and Discrepancies in
> Results. NVSL conducts investigations into discrepancies on genotype
testing
> results associated with the Scrapie Eradication Program. It is the policy
of
> the Program to conduct a second genotype test at a second laboratory on
> certain individual animals. Occasionally, there are discrepancies in those
> results. The NVSL conducts follow-up on these situations through
additional
> testing on additional samples from the field and archive samples from the
> testing laboratories.
>
> For the period of time from January 1, 2005, until October 15, 2005, there
> were 23 instances of discrepancies in results from 35 flocks. Of those 23
> instances, 14 were caused by laboratory error (paperwork or sample
mix-up),
> 3 results from field error, 5 were not completely resolved, and 1
originated
> from the use of a non-approved laboratory for the first test. As a result
of
> inconsistencies, one laboratory’s certification was revoked by APHIS-VS.
>
> To reduce/eliminate these problems, the Program has placed additional
> quality requirements on the testing laboratories: additional review of
final
> reports, additional coding systems for testing operations, strict
follow-up
> and reports to NVSL on corrective actions, dual data entry systems, and
more
> frequent inspections.
>
> The Agricultural Research Services (ARS) Scrapie Research Update was given
> by Janet Alverson, USDA- ARS. Dr. Alverson reported on the effect of
> multiple births and fetal position within the uterus on PrP-Sc
accumulation
> in fetal cotyledons. Fetal cotyledons of fetuses with
>
> resistant genotypes can accumulate PrP-Sc when positioned next to a fetus
of
> susceptible genotype with cotyledons positive for PrP-Sc accumulation.
>
> Scrapie Surveillance Evaluation Working Group Update was presented by
Tracey
> Lynn, Epidemiologist with the National Surveillance Unit, Center for
> Epidemiology and Animal Health (CEAH). The presentation provided a
> background on evaluation, a quick review of analyses completed to date by
> the scrapie surveillance evaluation working group, and some of the
> preliminary findings. The process of surveillance system evaluation is
> undertaken to assist a disease control program with identifying possible
> improvements to their surveillance system, and includes an assessment of
the
> overall utility of the system, identification of potential gaps in
coverage,
> and an evaluation of the overall performance of the system. The scrapie
> surveillance evaluation working group reviewed the structure and processes
> of the scrapie surveillance program, as well as various quality and
> effectiveness measures.
>
> Overall, 98-99% of surveillance samples come from the Regulatory Scrapie
> Surveillance System (RSSS), so the RSSS system has been the primary focus
of
> the evaluation process. The working group developed a flow chart
indicating
> the flow of sheep through RSSS, which identified potential gaps in
> surveillance coverage, including custom kill plants and sheep being
exported
> to Mexico. Spatial analyses can assist in identifying areas with high
> density sheep populations with lower levels of RSSS sampling.
Identification
> compliance is being evaluated by reviewing reports from slaughter plants
on
> the proportion of animals with appropriate identification. Additional
> analyses remain, including defining the most appropriate economic
analyses,
> and comparing the surveillance system with developing surveillance
> standards. The working group hopes to have a draft written report for
review
> by the end of the year.
>
> Giving the Update on Scrapie Diagnostics and Susceptibility was Katherine
O’
> Roarke, Research Microbiologist, USDA-ARS. "What’s New in Scrapie" --
Biopsy
> sampling of the third eyelid or tonsillar lymphoid tissue is a useful live
> animal test for scrapie. The biopsy sample is examined for accumulation of
> the abnormal prion protein using immunohistochemistry. A joint project
> conducted by the Veterinary Laboratory Agencies and the Moredun Institute
in
> the United Kingdom has developed an alternative technique in which tissue
is
> collected from the narrow band of lymphoid tissue near the rectal-anal
> junction. The morphology of the lymphoid follicles is similar in the
tonsil,
> retropharyngeal lymph nodes, third eyelid, and rectal-anal mucosal tissue.
A
> report on more than 300 sheep in the United Kingdom (UK), prepared by Drs.
> Lorenzo Gonzalez and Jeffrey Martin, will describe the sensitivity,
> specificity, and optimal collection interval for this technique in a
variety
> of breeds of British sheep. ARS has done a preliminary evaluation of the
> technique in US sheep. Samples of third eyelid and rectal-mucosal tissue
> were collected from 56 sheep. Forty-two (42) sheep had negative biopsies
at
> both sites; most of these sheep have been necropsied and no PrP-d was
found
> in retropharyngeal lymph node or tonsil, showing good agreement with the
> antemortem biopsies. Fourteen (14) sheep had positive rectal biopsy
samples;
> of those, only 12 had positive eyelid biopsies. These sheep will be
> monitored for disease development. However, the protocol is identical for
> all samples and it is probable that these sheep represent false negative
> third eyelid results. Abstracts of reports on the UK studies indicate that
> sensitivity of the test was 70% in the UK; similar large scale testing on
US
> sheep is necessary. The biopsy tissue is somewhat difficult to handle in
the
> tissue processing laboratory and adaptation to an ELISA format may improve
> test performance.
>
> Alexia McKnight, Assistant Professor of Radiology, University of
> Pennsylvania, reviewed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnostics before
> the committee. A synopsis containing references is attached at the end of
> this report. Dr. McKnight asked the question, "could MRI be a
cost-effective
> screening test, estimated at $25-30 each with results immediately
> available." The committee feels that it is not practical as compared to
> other alternatives currently available. However, the committee expressed
> interest in future reference to this technology.
>
> Dr. Diane Sutton lead the Uniform Methods and Rules (UM&R) and Regulatory
> Issues Discussion. Several modifications to the UM&R were discussed. Eight
> issues were identified and communicated to the APHIS scrapie program
> coordinator. The committee acknowledged that APHIS and the industry is
> adequately addressing the year-to-year industry concerns.
>
> Dr. Kris Petrini representing the North Central United States Animal
Health
> Association District presented five recommendations to the Committee.
During
> the discussions regarding these recommendations it was evident that all
five
> issues had been addressed during the year at this Committee meeting.
>
> The Committee approved a recommendation that USDA-APHIS-VS continue to
> provide indemnity funds for animals that have been designated for testing
in
> Flocks Under Investigation as an alternative to third eyelid testing after
> consultation with the designated Scrapie Epidemiologist (DSE) and the
> Regional Area Epidemiologist (RAE).
>
> The 2004 Resolutions along with their responses were reviewed by the
> Committee.
>
> A Resolution concerning premises registration and identification was
> approved by the Committee and forwarded to the Committee on Nominations
and
> Resolutions.
>
> Committee on Scrapie
>
> Status Report-Fiscal Year 2005: Cooperative State-Federal Scrapie
> Eradication Program
>
> Submitted by Diane Sutton, DVM and Gary Ross, DVM
>
> National Center for Animal Health Programs, APHIS, USDA
>
> In Fiscal Year 2005 the Scrapie Eradication Program focused on: (1)
> utilization of a genetic based approach to flock clean-up plans; (2)
> cleaning up infected and source flocks; (3) tracing and testing exposed
> animals and flocks; (4) expansion of regulatory slaughter surveillance
> (RSSS); (5) conducting considtent state reviews, (6) producer education;
(7)
> upgrading of the Scrapie National Generic Database and (8) publishing the
> updated Scrapie Eradication Uniform Methods and Rules (UM&R). The current
> Scrapie Eradication UM&R is posted at
> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/nahps/scrapie/umr-scrapie-erad.pdf.
>
> Consistent State Reviews
>
> States must meet the requirements in 9 CFR 79.6 in order to move sheep and
> goats in interstate commerce with minimal restrictions. Twenty seven
states
> have enacted the required identification rules, the remaining states have
> submitted a work plan that describes the steps that will be taken to
comply
> and provided a timeline for completing significant milestones. USDA is
> conducting onsite scrapie program consistent state reviews and has
completed
> reviews in 12 states. States must be in full compliance by the end of
their
> current rule making cycle. States not in full compliance at that time will
> be removed from the consistent state list. Removal from the list would
> create a significant impact on the interstate movement of sheep and goats
> from those States.
>
> Scrapie Flock Certification Program
>
> As of September 30, 2005, there were 1,961 flocks participating in the
> Scrapie Flock Certification Program (SFCP). Of these flocks 188 were
> certified flocks, 1,770 were complete monitored flocks, and 3 were
selective
> monitored flocks (figure 2). There were 209 flocks newly enrolled and 53
> newly certified (13 with status dates in FY 2005 and 40 with status dates
in
> previous years) in FY 2005 (figure 3).
>
> Infected and Source Flocks
>
> As of September 30, 2005, there were 105 scrapie infected and source
flocks.
> There were a total of 165** new infected and source flocks reported for FY
> 2005. The total infected and source flocks that have been released in FY
> 2005 was 128. The ratio of infected and source flocks cleaned up or placed
> on clean up plans vs. new infected and source flocks discovered in FY 2005
> was 1.03 : 1*. In addition 622 scrapie cases were confirmed and reported
by
> the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in FY 2005, of which
> 130 were RSSS cases. Fifteen cases of scrapie in goats have been reported
> since 1990. The last goat case was reported in May 2005. Approximately
5,626
> animals were indemnified comprised of 49% non-registered sheep, 45%
> registered sheep, 1.4% non-registered goats and 4.6% registered goats.
>
> Regulatory Scrapie Slaughter Surveillance (RSSS)
>
> RSSS was designed to utilize the findings of the Center for Epidemiology
and
> Animal Health (CEAH) Scrapie: Ovine Slaughter Surveillance (SOSS) study.
The
> results of SOSS can be found at
> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/cahm/Sheep/sheep.htm . RSSS started
April
> 1,
>
> 2003. It is a targeted slaughter surveillance program which is designed to
> identify infected flocks for clean-up. During FY 2005 collections
increased
> by 32% overall and by 90% for black and mottled faced sheep improving
> overall program effectiveness and efficiency as demonstrated by the 26%
> decrease in percent positive black faced sheep compared to FY 2004.
Samples
> have been collected from 62,864 sheep since April 1, 2003, of which
results
> have been reported for 59,105 of which 209 were confirmed positive. During
F
> Y 2005, 33,137 samples were collected from 81 plants. There have been 130
> NVSL confirmed positive cases (30 collected in FY 2004 and confirmed in FY
> 2005 and 100 collected and confirmed in FY 2005) in FY 2005. Face colors
of
> these positives were 114 black, 14 mottled, 1 white and 1 unknown. The
> percent positive by face color is shown in the chart below.
>
> Scrapie Testing
>
> In FY 2005, 35,845 animals have been tested for scrapie: 30,192 RSSS;
4,742
> regulatory field cases; 772 regulatory third eyelid biopsies; 10 third
> eyelid validations; and 129 necropsy validations (chart 9).
>
> Animal ID
>
> As of October 04, 2005, 103,580 sheep and goat premises have been assigned

> identification numbers in the Scrapie National Generic Database. Official
> eartags have been issued to 73,807 of these premises.
>
> *This number based on an adjusted 12 month interval to accommodate the 60
> day period for setting up flock plans.
>
>
>
> http://www.usaha.org/committees/reports/2005/report-scr-2005.pdf
>
>
>
>
>
> Subject: SCRAPIE USA UPDATE AS of March 31, 2006 2 NEW CASES IN GOAT, 82
> INFECTED SOURCE FLOCKS, 19 INFECTED RSSS
>
> Date: April 30, 2006 at 4:49 pm PST
> SCRAPIE USA UPDATE AS of March 31, 2006
>
>
> 2 NEW CASES IN GOAT, 82 INFECTED SOURCE FLOCKS, WITH 4 NEW INFECTED SOURCE
> FLOCKS IN MARCH, WITH 19 SCRAPIE INFECTED RSSS REPORTED BY NVSL
>
>
>
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/nahps/scrapie/monthly_report/monthly-report.html
>
>
>
>
> 12/10/76
> AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
> REPORT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTE ON SCRAPIE
> Office Note
> CHAIRMAN: PROFESSOR PETER WILDY
>
> snip...
>
> A The Present Position with respect to Scrapie
> A] The Problem
>
> Scrapie is a natural disease of sheep and goats. It is a slow
> and inexorably progressive degenerative disorder of the nervous system
> and it ia fatal. It is enzootic in the United Kingdom but not in all
> countries.
>
> The field problem has been reviewed by a MAFF working group
> (ARC 35/77). It is difficult to assess the incidence in Britain for
> a variety of reasons but the disease causes serious financial loss;
> it is estimated that it cost Swaledale breeders alone $l.7 M during
> the five years 1971-1975. A further inestimable loss arises from the
> closure of certain export markets, in particular those of the United
> States, to British sheep.
>
> It is clear that scrapie in sheep is important commercially and
> for that reason alone effective measures to control it should be
> devised as quickly as possible.
>
> Recently the question has again been brought up as to whether
> scrapie is transmissible to man. This has followed reports that the
> disease has been transmitted to primates. One particularly lurid
> speculation (Gajdusek 1977) conjectures that the agents of scrapie,
> kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and transmissible encephalopathy of
> mink are varieties of a single "virus". The U.S. Department of
> Agriculture concluded that it could "no longer justify or permit
> scrapie-blood line and scrapie-exposed sheep and goats to be processed
> for human or animal food at slaughter or rendering plants" (ARC 84/77)"
> The problem is emphasised by the finding that some strains of scrapie
> produce lesions identical to the once which characterise the human
> dementias"
>
> Whether true or not. the hypothesis that these agents might be
> transmissible to man raises two considerations. First, the safety
> of laboratory personnel requires prompt attention. Second, action
> such as the "scorched meat" policy of USDA makes the solution of the
> acrapie problem urgent if the sheep industry is not to suffer
> grievously.
>
> snip...
>
>
> 76/10.12/4.6
>
>
> http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1976/10/12004001.pdf
>
>
>
>
> Published online before print October 20, 2005
>
> Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 10.1073/pnas.0502296102
> Medical Sciences
>
> A newly identified type of scrapie agent can naturally infect sheep with
> resistant PrP genotypes
>
> ( sheep prion | transgenic mice )
>
> Annick Le Dur *, Vincent Béringue *, Olivier Andréoletti , Fabienne Reine
*,
> Thanh Lan Laï *, Thierry Baron , Bjørn Bratberg ¶, Jean-Luc Vilotte ||,
> Pierre Sarradin **, Sylvie L. Benestad ¶, and Hubert Laude *
> *Virologie Immunologie Moléculaires and ||Génétique Biochimique et
> Cytogénétique, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 78350
> Jouy-en-Josas, France; Unité Mixte de Recherche, Institut National de la
> Recherche Agronomique-Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse,
Interactions
> Hôte Agent Pathogène, 31066 Toulouse, France; Agence Française de Sécurité
> Sanitaire des Aliments, Unité Agents Transmissibles Non Conventionnels,
> 69364 Lyon, France; **Pathologie Infectieuse et Immunologie, Institut
> National de la Recherche Agronomique, 37380 Nouzilly, France; and
> ¶Department of Pathology, National Veterinary Institute, 0033 Oslo, Norway
>
>
> Edited by Stanley B. Prusiner, University of California, San Francisco,
CA,
> and approved September 12, 2005 (received for review March 21, 2005)
>
> Scrapie in small ruminants belongs to transmissible spongiform
> encephalopathies (TSEs), or prion diseases, a family of fatal
> neurodegenerative disorders that affect humans and animals and can
transmit
> within and between species by ingestion or inoculation. Conversion of the
> host-encoded prion protein (PrP), normal cellular PrP (PrPc), into a
> misfolded form, abnormal PrP (PrPSc), plays a key role in TSE transmission
> and pathogenesis. The intensified surveillance of scrapie in the European
> Union, together with the improvement of PrPSc detection techniques, has
led
> to the discovery of a growing number of so-called atypical scrapie cases.
> These include clinical Nor98 cases first identified in Norwegian sheep on
> the basis of unusual pathological and PrPSc molecular features and "cases"
> that produced discordant responses in the rapid tests currently applied to
> the large-scale random screening of slaughtered or fallen animals.
> Worryingly, a substantial proportion of such cases involved sheep with PrP
> genotypes known until now to confer natural resistance to conventional
> scrapie. Here we report that both Nor98 and discordant cases, including
> three sheep homozygous for the resistant PrPARR allele (A136R154R171),
> efficiently transmitted the disease to transgenic mice expressing ovine
PrP,
> and that they shared unique biological and biochemical features upon
> propagation in mice. These observations support the view that a truly
> infectious TSE agent, unrecognized until recently, infects sheep and goat
> flocks and may have important implications in terms of scrapie control and
> public health.
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ----
>
> Author contributions: H.L. designed research; A.L.D., V.B., O.A., F.R.,
> T.L.L., J.-L.V., and H.L. performed research; T.B., B.B., P.S., and S.L.B.
> contributed new reagents/analytic tools; V.B., O.A., and H.L. analyzed
data;
> and H.L. wrote the paper.
>
> A.L.D. and V.B. contributed equally to this work.
>
> To whom correspondence should be addressed.
>
> Hubert Laude, E-mail: laude@jouy.inra.fr
>
>
>
> www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0502296102
>
>
>
>
> http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0502296102v1
>
>
>
>
>
> Of greatest interest today is the BSE agent because it is the presumptive
> cause of new variant CJD and must be considered a demonstrated risk to
human
> health. The scrapie agent poses a theoretical risk to human health.
>
> Today we ask you to consider the implications of two theoretical
> possibilities: the first, that sheep and goats in BSE countries
> theoretically might be infected with the BSE agent, and Professor Almond,
> who headed a subcommittee of the United Kingdom's Spongiform
Encephalopathy
> Advisory Committee, has agreed to review that topic for us today.
>
> Then scrapie, which theoretically might be a human pathogen, though
there's
> no hard evidence for that, and of course, some number of sheep and goats
in
> many countries, including the United States, are infected with the scrapie
> agent.
>
> Now, let me say now that no U.S. government regulatory authority would
ever
> knowingly permit humans or animals to be exposed to a product containing
the
> scrapie agent, but considering the nature of the scrapie agent and the
> disease, we are not so naive as to think that such exposures have not
> already occurred. ...
>
>
> FULL TEXT ;
>
>
>
>
> http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/99/transcpt/3518t2.rtf
>
>
>
>
http://72.14.209.104/searchq=cache:pKJPlLI2R44J:www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/99/transcpt/3518t2.rtf+scrapie+strains+breed+east+friesian&hl=en&gl=us&ct=c
lnk&cd=23
>
>
>
>
>
> TSS
>
> #################### https://lists.aegee.org/bse-l.html
> ####################
>

still disgustedly mad in Bacliff, Texas and pondering my next move. ...


TSS

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 12:39 PM
Subject: Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP


> Greetings BSE-L,
>
> I am sorry to say, but confusious is confused again about something.
> IF you remember correctly, we had a DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY
> BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE
> UNITED STATES, and this was about those VERMONT sheep from Belgium, of mad
> river valley. IF you remember correctly, all those sheep were confiscated
> and slaughtered, supposedly with immediate mouse bioassays to begin. 7
years
> later, were still waiting for an answer that should have taken 2 years
with
> mouse bio-assays. THE farm was quarantined for years. SO, why no
declaration
> of emergency, why no sheep slaughter, why no farm quarantined about this
new
> atypical TSE sheep case in Wyoming i.e. nor98 case ???
>
> ALSO, about my FOIA request. USDA would never answer, so i turned to the
OIG
> about this, and they HAVE opened a FOIA request case for me about this.
you
> call this the 'end around'. now whether or not we get an answer of what
> exact phenotype of TSE those mad sheep of mad river valley really had,
well
> have to wait and see. but rest assured i will let you know if and when i
> find out. ...
>
> kind regards,
> terry
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 10:00 AM
> Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
> To: Boyd.Rutherford@usda.gov
> Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:35 PM
> Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
>
>
> Greetings USDA,
>
>
> I respectfully request the final results of the mouse bio-assays test that
> were to have supposedly began 2+ years late, 5 years ago, on the imported
> sheep from Belgium ?
>
>
> WHAT happened to the test results and MOUSE BIO-ASSAYS of those imported
> sheep from Belgium that were confiscated and slaughtered from the
> Faillace's, what sort of TSE did these animals have ?
>
>
> WERE they atypical scrapie, BSE, and or typical scrapie ?
>
>
> HOW much longer will you refuse to give us this information ? and for what
> reason ?
>
>
> WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley were
> quarantined for 5 years, but none of these farms from Texas and Alabama
with
> Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not been quarantined for 5 years,
why
> not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?
>
>
> snip.
>
> full text ;
>
>
> http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf
>
>
>
>
>
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument
>
>
>
>
> FURTHERMORE, I respectfully request up front, that any fees for this FOIA
be
> wavered due to the fact this information should be free to the public and
is
> in the best interest for the public to have these final results, no
> financial gain from this FOIA information is to be made either. ...
>
>
> Thank You,
>
>
> kind regards,
>
> Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
> P.O. Box 42
> Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
>
>
> Imported
>
> Belgium/Netherlands
>
> Sheep Test Results
>
> Background
>
> Factsheet
>
> Veterinary Services April 2002
>
> APHIS
>
> snip.
>
> Additional tests will be conducted to determine
>
> exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie.
>
> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist
>
> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals
>
> Page 15 of 98
>
> 8/3/2006
>
> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing
>
> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.
>
> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf
>
>
>
> DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.
>
> (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES
>
>
>
>
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31
>
>
>
> DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E
>
> (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [2]
>
>
>
>
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32
>
>
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>
> Subject: Sheep
> Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:26:04 EDT
> From: LAVET22@aol.com
> To: flounder@wt.net
>
> Mr. Singeltary.
>
> I hope this finds you well. As you are aware I left the USDA last
> year. I can only update you on the sheep before that time. Contact was
> established with the UK on doing the bioassay studies. They agreed.
> However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay. I
> am aware that there are now additional labs in Europe running the mouse
> bioassay strain typing. You will have to contact USDA for further word.
>
> Linda Detwiler
> =========
>
> My reply to Dr. Detwiler;
>
> --- Original Message ---
> Subject: Re: Sheep
> Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:53:57 -0500
> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
> To: LAVET22@aol.com
> References:
>
> hello Dr. Detwiler,
>
> thanks for your kind reply.
>
> > However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay.
>
> not sure i understand that?
>
> > You will have to contact USDA for further word.
>
> already done that, and there answer was;
>
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>
> Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton.question please.scrapie.TSS
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400
> From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov
> To: flounder@wt.net
>
> Dear Mr. Singeltary,
>
> The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this
> year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the
> results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of
> Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is
> 301-734-5941.
>
> Have a nice day,
>
> Jim Rogers
> APHIS LPA
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>
> Subject: re-85th Meeting of SEAC - 30.11.04
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:56:55 -0000
> From: "Barlow, Tom (SEAC)"
> To: "'flounder@wt.net'"
>
> Dear Mr Singeltary
>
> Thank you for you enquiry to the SEAC secretariat about mouse bioassays
> commissioned by the USDA to investigate TSE cases in imported sheep.
>
> After making a number of enquiries, it appears that Defra were not
involved
> with this work. However, it is possible that a UK research laboratory was
> contacted by the USDA about such tests but I have been unable to find out
> any further information. You may wish to make further enquiries with the
> USDA.
>
> Yours sincerely
>
> Tom Barlow
>
> Dr Tom Barlow
> Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) Secretariat
> Area 108, 1A Page Street, London SW1P 4PQ
>
> Tel: 0207 904 6267
>
>
> ===================
>
>
>
>
>
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?
>
>
>
> http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf
>
>
>
> 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: