U.S. plans a major reduction in its BSE testing

Discussion in 'Food and nutrition' started by [email protected], Apr 14, 2005.

  1. http://calgary.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=ca-mad-cow-usda20050414

    U.S. denies having 2 BSE cases in 1997
    Last Updated Apr 14 2005 08:18 AM MDT
    CBC News
    WASHINGTON - The U.S. Department of Agriculture admits there were
    problems with the samples taken from two cows in 1997, but insists the
    animals did not have mad cow disease.

    Ron DeHaven, administrator of the USDA's Animal and Plant Inspection
    Service, said that while key parts of the animals' brains needed to
    make an accurate diagnosis were missing and not tested, it was better
    to test what they had.

    "We had two choices: run the tests with the samples that we had, or not
    run them at all," DeHaven said "If we had something to hide, we could
    make an argument for not running the samples at all.

    "In this case, we chose to run the samples with the tissues that we had
    and subject them to three different tests to compensate for the fact
    that we may not have the perfect tissues."

    For years Canadian cattle producers have been suspicious about U.S.
    claims that it has only found one cow affected with bovine spongiform
    encephalopathy - and that the one animal had been born in Canada. The
    cow, sent south from Leduc, was diagnosed in December 2003 in
    Washington state.

    Three other Canadian-born animals have tested positive for BSE. The
    first case, confirmed in May 2003, saw the U.S. shut its border to
    Canadian beef. It was to reopen last month, but an American ranchers'
    group obtained a temporary injunction.

    CBC News uncovered a USDA video showing what USDA veterinarians feared
    might be two cases of mad cow disease in the U.S.

    The official tests were negative. But CBC news uncovered documents
    showing key areas of the cow's brain, in both cases, were never tested.

    FROM APRIL 13, 2005: Concerns raised about 1997 U.S. mad cow tests

    Retired USDA scientist Karl Langheinrich says without those tests,
    American authorities will never be able to rule out mad cow disease.

    "It means you cannot make a diagnosis, a specific diagnosis," he said.

    Rick Paskal, who runs a feedlot near Iron Springs and has fought to
    have the U.S. border reopened, says the news is frustrating.

    "It just enrages me, this double standard that they have set on the
    North American continent," he said. "We need to ensure to the consumers
    that our beef is safe.

    "And when people within the USDA, their own people are questioning
    their own organization as to whether some of the protocols were
    followed or not followed, then my goodness, it doesn't speak for their
    system."

    Bill Donald, president of the Montana Stockgrowers Association, says
    the important thing is that the U.S. has been diligent in its testing
    for the last 14 months.

    "I think this increased testing that's being done right now is more
    meaningful than some tests in 1997, where they thought they had some
    problems with the samples," he said.

    Rob McNabb, of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, says his
    organization wants the USDA to investigate.

    "What we would fully expect is that the USDA address the allegations,"
    he said.

    One of the USDA's top officials said that the U.S. testing program was
    never designed to catch every single case of mad cow disease, but to
    measure how much disease there is.

    After testing thousands of animals the USDA believes if BSE exists,
    it's at a very low level.

    Next year, the U.S. plans a major reduction in its BSE testing program,
    from a high of 300,000 animals to just 40,000.

    *******

    I hope they implement an Country of Origin Labeling program in North
    America for beef. I am only buying Canadian Beef. At least then I know
    that they are doing all they can to properly deal with all cases of
    BSE, unlike in the US where they are trying to hide it from their own
    consumers.

    TC
     
    Tags:


  2. Tom G

    Tom G Guest

    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >

    http://calgary.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=ca-mad-cow-usda20050414
    >
    > *******
    >
    > I hope they implement an Country of Origin Labeling program in North
    > America for beef. I am only buying Canadian Beef. At least then I know
    > that they are doing all they can to properly deal with all cases of
    > BSE, unlike in the US where they are trying to hide it from their own
    > consumers.
    >
    > TC
    >


    It's a shame that the Canadian cattle industry is being decimated while
    many people in the beef industry suspect the problem is not confined by a
    border.
     
  3. " It's a shame that the Canadian cattle industry is being decimated
    while
    many people in the beef industry suspect the problem is not confined by
    a
    border. "

    I suspect that you're an asshole too, but that's just suspicion too,
    though clearly more justifiable.
     
  4. " It's a shame that the Canadian cattle industry is being decimated
    while
    many people in the beef industry suspect the problem is not confined by
    a
    border. "

    I suspect that you're an asshole too, but that's just suspicion too,
    though clearly more justifiable.
     
  5. [email protected] wrote:
    > " It's a shame that the Canadian cattle industry is being decimated
    > while
    > many people in the beef industry suspect the problem is not confined

    by
    > a
    > border. "
    >
    > I suspect that you're an asshole too, but that's just suspicion too,
    > though clearly more justifiable.


    What's your problem? Why are you attacking people personally?

    TC
     
  6. Tom G

    Tom G Guest

    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > " It's a shame that the Canadian cattle industry is being decimated
    > while
    > many people in the beef industry suspect the problem is not confined by
    > a
    > border. "
    >
    > I suspect that you're an asshole too, but that's just suspicion too,
    > though clearly more justifiable.
    >


    The U.S. should be suspicious enough to test it's cattle. The U.S. beef
    market is about 7 times larger than Canada's. What do you think the chances
    are of isolating the disease to one small locale, given the free trade of
    live cattle ( before border closing ), and the fact that it takes years
    before it is detected?
     
  7. Tom G wrote:
    > <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > " It's a shame that the Canadian cattle industry is being decimated
    > > while
    > > many people in the beef industry suspect the problem is not

    confined by
    > > a
    > > border. "
    > >
    > > I suspect that you're an asshole too, but that's just suspicion

    too,
    > > though clearly more justifiable.
    > >

    >
    > The U.S. should be suspicious enough to test it's cattle. The U.S.

    beef
    > market is about 7 times larger than Canada's. What do you think the

    chances
    > are of isolating the disease to one small locale, given the free

    trade of
    > live cattle ( before border closing ), and the fact that it takes

    years
    > before it is detected?


    The number of cattle in the US is about 11 times greater than Canada's
    and for all intents and purposes they are so integrated as to be
    un-divisible. Thousands of cattle go back and forth across the border
    every year, or I should say, used to go across the border every year.
    At least one of the BSE infected cows originated in the US.

    TC
     
  8. Tom G

    Tom G Guest

    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Tom G wrote:
    > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]
    > > > " It's a shame that the Canadian cattle industry is being decimated
    > > > while
    > > > many people in the beef industry suspect the problem is not

    > confined by
    > > > a
    > > > border. "
    > > >
    > > > I suspect that you're an asshole too, but that's just suspicion

    > too,
    > > > though clearly more justifiable.
    > > >

    > >
    > > The U.S. should be suspicious enough to test it's cattle. The U.S.

    > beef
    > > market is about 7 times larger than Canada's. What do you think the

    > chances
    > > are of isolating the disease to one small locale, given the free

    > trade of
    > > live cattle ( before border closing ), and the fact that it takes

    > years
    > > before it is detected?

    >
    > The number of cattle in the US is about 11 times greater than Canada's


    O.K.

    > and for all intents and purposes they are so integrated as to be
    > un-divisible.


    That's why many believe the problem is more wide spread.

    > Thousands of cattle go back and forth across the border
    > every year, or I should say, used to go across the border every year.
    > At least one of the BSE infected cows originated in the US.


    Isolating the disease, when found, is a good thing. It would be foolish
    for one to believe that it's only a Canadian problem.

    >
    > TC
    >
     
  9. "Tom G" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > The U.S. should be suspicious enough to test it's cattle.


    Not particularly.....if out of millions of cows you consistantly get no
    disease....testing and the expence is rather pointless. There are many ways
    to get sick or die.... at some point probability is a reasonable marker in
    determining which test to run and how often.

    >The U.S. beef
    > market is about 7 times larger than Canada's. What do you think the
    > chances
    > are of isolating the disease to one small locale,


    Very good

    > given the free trade of
    > live cattle ( before border closing ), and the fact that it takes years
    > before it is detected?


    The contaminated cows came from specific contaminated feed ......localized
    in Canada as well as eventually the U.S......appropriate steps have been
    taken to avoid this danger in the future especially following Britains much
    larger problem etc.....By law in 1997 animal feed requirements were
    tightened.....Besides most beef cattle do not live a long life (30 months or
    less)....the only old cattle still possibly left are only ground up for
    hamburger with particular attention now to how potentially contaminated
    internal parts are handled or disposed of.....with only one single case
    ever.... that was successfully caught and removed from the food
    supply....with not a single U.S. death or injury to the disease.... worrying
    about Mad cow from the consumer point of view is quite pointless. Your more
    likely to die from your monitor falling on you....Rod
     
  10. Rod & Betty Jo wrote:
    > "Tom G" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > >
    > > The U.S. should be suspicious enough to test it's cattle.

    >
    > Not particularly.....if out of millions of cows you consistantly get

    no
    > disease....testing and the expence is rather pointless. There are

    many ways
    > to get sick or die.... at some point probability is a reasonable

    marker in
    > determining which test to run and how often.
    >


    If you only test thousands, not millions, and when there is a
    suspicious case you don't test or you hide the test results, testing
    does indeed become pointless.

    > >The U.S. beef
    > > market is about 7 times larger than Canada's. What do you think the


    > > chances
    > > are of isolating the disease to one small locale,

    >
    > Very good
    >
    > > given the free trade of
    > > live cattle ( before border closing ), and the fact that it takes

    years
    > > before it is detected?

    >
    > The contaminated cows came from specific contaminated feed

    .......localized
    > in Canada as well as eventually the U.S......appropriate steps have

    been
    > taken to avoid this danger in the future especially following

    Britains much
    > larger problem etc.....By law in 1997 animal feed requirements were
    > tightened.....Besides most beef cattle do not live a long life (30

    months or
    > less)....the only old cattle still possibly left are only ground up

    for
    > hamburger with particular attention now to how potentially

    contaminated
    > internal parts are handled or disposed of.....with only one single

    case
    > ever.... that was successfully caught and removed from the food
    > supply....with not a single U.S. death or injury to the disease....

    worrying
    > about Mad cow from the consumer point of view is quite pointless.

    Your more
    > likely to die from your monitor falling on you....Rod


    That is exactly what the British government officials said running up
    to the outbreak there. "There has been no death or injury from the
    disease therefore we are safe, worrying about it is pointless" Boy,
    were they wrong. Hundreds of Brits died from the disease.

    Canada has taken steps to ensure as definitively as possible that all
    BSE cows are identified and prevented from entering the food chain,
    that re-assures the consumer that the odds of CJDs are as minimized as
    possible.

    The US appears to have done everything it can to avoid finding any
    cases and getting bad publicity for their industry, that may be safe
    for the industry but it sure is dangerous to the consumer.

    TC
     
  11. Moo

    Moo Guest

    >
    > The US appears to have done everything it can to avoid finding any
    > cases and getting bad publicity for their industry, that may be safe
    > for the industry but it sure is dangerous to the consumer.


    Go eat a samonella chicken burger or a pig with trich. Eh?
    And wash it down with an infected Moosehead. Eh?
     
  12. "What's your problem? Why are you attacking people personally? "

    Maybe it's because you suddenly show up here in a low carb newsgroup
    trying to promote fear about meat over a news report that's apparently
    based on a disgruntled former USDA employee's unconfirmed accusations?
     
  13. Jim Bard

    Jim Bard Guest

    Let's not eat anything until it's proven safe.

    I live in cattle country. Headlines recently were that area cattle were
    going to be tested for tuberculosis, and I'm like "Huh?"

    The USDA actually does a pretty good job. I haven't heard of anyone in the
    US dying from infected beef. Until that happens, I have to ask, where's the
    beef?
     
  14. Tom G

    Tom G Guest

    "Rod & Betty Jo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "Tom G" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > >
    > > The U.S. should be suspicious enough to test it's cattle.

    >
    > Not particularly.....if out of millions of cows you consistantly get no
    > disease....testing and the expence is rather pointless. There are many

    ways
    > to get sick or die.... at some point probability is a reasonable marker in
    > determining which test to run and how often.


    Why the fuss over Canadian beef then? It's only a few cows out of
    millions. No new cases are being found, or there doesn't seem to be. Since
    the cattle of U.S. and Canada have been intermingling for many years, the
    same standards should be used for both. I have not reduced my consumption of
    beef. I believe everything is being done to make sure our beef is safe to an
    acceptable level.

    >
    > >The U.S. beef
    > > market is about 7 times larger than Canada's. What do you think the
    > > chances
    > > are of isolating the disease to one small locale,

    >
    > Very good
    >
    > > given the free trade of
    > > live cattle ( before border closing ), and the fact that it takes years
    > > before it is detected?

    >
    > The contaminated cows came from specific contaminated feed ......localized
    > in Canada as well as eventually the U.S......appropriate steps have been
    > taken to avoid this danger in the future especially following Britains

    much
    > larger problem etc.....By law in 1997 animal feed requirements were
    > tightened.....Besides most beef cattle do not live a long life (30 months

    or
    > less)....the only old cattle still possibly left are only ground up for
    > hamburger with particular attention now to how potentially contaminated
    > internal parts are handled or disposed of.....with only one single case
    > ever.... that was successfully caught and removed from the food
    > supply....with not a single U.S. death or injury to the disease....

    worrying
    > about Mad cow from the consumer point of view is quite pointless. Your

    more
    > likely to die from your monitor falling on you....Rod
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
Loading...