Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05 Open Board – 05 November 2013 BSE
TWEAKING BSE TSE PRION MAD COW SCIENCE TO SUIT THE INDUSTRY...AGAIN.
talking or wishing mad cow disease away, will not work.
the OIE/USDA/APHIS/FSIS/CFIA/MAFF/DEFRA/WTO have failed the world terribly
in regards to mad cow disease (all types and strains in all species i.e. the TSE
prion disease), no matter how hard you try, will not put those mad cows back in
the barn, but to now, go forward, as if it never happened, and start relaxing
all the rules, before the science is finished dictating how much further this
mad cow type TSE prion disease will spread and mutate, is absolutely not
scientific.
who’s kidding whom $$$
for the FSA et al, to go along with the USDA/OIE et al, in now what I call
the legal trading of commodities in different Transmissible Spongiform
Encephalopathy TSE prion disease, by allowing the free trading of the TSE prion
disease, by exempting atypical scrapie and typical scrapie, and now trying to
omit all TSE prion disease including the atypical BSE strains, is absurd, and
risk taking us back 3 decades in the attempted eradication of BSE. ...TSS
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
1
BSE BSE – A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON
SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A
REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND
ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON
SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A
REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND
ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON
SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A
REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND
ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON
SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A
REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND
ENFORCEMENT OF CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEEDCONTROLS ON
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND
ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEEDCONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND
ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEEDCONTROLS ON
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEEDCONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND
ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEEDCONTROLS ON
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND
ANIMAL FEEDCONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND
ANIMAL FEED CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEEDCONTROLS ON
SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEEDCONTROLS ON SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL AND
ANIMAL FEED - MARCH MARCH to AUGUST 2013 AUGUST 2013 AUGUST 2013 AUGUST 2013
AUGUST 2013 AUGUST 2013 AUGUST 2013 AUGUST 2013
Report by Steve Wearne, Director of Policy
For further information contact Chris Walding on 0207 276 8334, email
chris.walding@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk or Liz Olney on 07738 198928, email
liz.olney@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk
SUMMARY
1.1. At the meeting on 11 December 2012 the FSA Board agreed to advise
Ministers that it would be acceptable on grounds of negligible risk to consumers
and proportionality to stop BSE testing of healthy cattle slaughtered for human
consumption in the UK.1 This advice was subject to higher-risk cattle aged over
48 months continuing to be tested for BSE and the specified risk material (SRM)
and feed controls remaining in force. This change in BSE testing requirements
was implemented on 1 March 2013.
1.2. In making its decision, the Board requested a regular report on the
results of BSE monitoring and enforcement of feed and SRM controls to ensure
confidence in the continued effectiveness of the BSE controls.
1.3 The Board is asked to:
• Note the contents of this paper;
• Comment on the data presented and the action being taken by the FSA on
the issues raised; and
• Note that results of increased monitoring will be included in the next
six monthly report to the Board.
INTRODUCTION
2.1. With the relaxation of BSE testing requirements, the FSA has placed an
increased focus on ensuring SRM controls are robust and effective to ensure that
consumer safeguards are maintained. Two main BSE controls work together to
eradicate BSE in cattle and protect consumers:
1 Advice from the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) of
March 2011, in relation to the raising of the age threshold for BSE testing of
healthy cattle from 48 to 72 months, remains relevant. SEAC advised that in the
short-term an insignificant additional risk to human health would result from
raising the age for testing healthy cattle from 48 to 72 months or equally from
stopping testing of these cattle altogether. The full text of the SEAC advice is
annexed to the earlier Board paper on this issue -
http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/board/fsa121204.pdf
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
2
• the ban on feeding animal protein to farmed animals prevents the spread
of BSE to animals through feed;
• removing specified risk material (SRM) – the most risky parts of animals
– protects consumers from the risk from food.
2.2. The main purpose of the current BSE testing is for animal disease
surveillance, to monitor the level of BSE in cattle over time and thereby check
on the continued effectiveness of BSE controls.
2.3. This is the first of the regular reports requested by the Board on the
results of BSE monitoring and enforcement of feed and SRM controls to ensure
confidence in the continued effectiveness of BSE controls. This report covers
the period 1
March – 31 August 2013.
STRATEGIC AIMS
3.1. To protect public health through effective, risk-based and
proportionate application of EU regulation.
EVIDENCE
4.1. BSE monitoring data and information on the enforcement of animal feed
controls have been obtained from Defra. Information for the report on the
enforcement of controls on SRM has been obtained from the FSA’s own records and
is split into two sections:
• Non-compliance information, where an operator of a slaughterhouse has not
complied with the SRM controls and this has been discovered during routine daily
inspection by FSA’s plant based staff; and
• Breaches of SRM controls which occur when non-compliant carcases and part
carcases leave a premises undetected and are discovered subsequently.
4.2. All NI data within the report has been obtained from DARD.
DISCUSSION
BSE Monitoring Data
5.1. In the period 1 March 2013 – 31 August 2013, a total of 77,778 higher
risk cattle were tested in GB with a further 17,295 tested in NI. Only two
positive tests were reported, both being from fallen stock that were not
destined for human consumption. Cross checks on animals slaughtered and testing
data have not revealed any animals requiring testing that missed tests and
entered the food chain. Two FBOs have been referred for investigation for
failure to test animals that required testing. These failures were found during
routine
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
3
checks at the slaughterhouse and no untested carcases entered the food
chain.
Controls on Animal Feed
5.2. A report from AHVLA on the National Feed Audit shows that:
• No evidence of the presence of processed animal proteins in animal feed
was detected in a total of 1,008 inspections of feed premises and hauliers and
targeted surveillance of livestock farms.
• The presence of animal protein from terrestrial animals was detected in
seven of 2,350 samples of feed materials and compound feeding stuffs.
• Four separate incidents of the presence of animal protein in feeding
stuffs intended for farm animals have been reported.
5.3. The AHVLA report concludes that the samples where processed animal
protein was detected were likely to be the result of the contamination of sugar
beet pellets with bone fragments of adventitious origin. The bones most likely
originated from rodents with the contamination occurring either during the
harvesting of the sugar beet or as a result of the presence of rodents in
storage facilities. Rodents are not known to be a pathway for BSE exposure. 5.4.
In the period of this report, no breaches or non-compliances were detected
during animal feed inspections in Northern Ireland. During this time 206 animal
feed samples were collected and tested for processed animal protein. These were
all negative.
SRM Controls – Non-compliance
5.5. A non-compliance is when a food business operator is not operating in
accordance with TSE requirements and this is identified during routine daily
inspection, and FSA plant-based staff intervene to rectify the problem.
5.6 In the period of the report a total of 153 interventions were made by
FSA staff in 14 slaughterhouses in GB and NI to ensure the appropriate removal
and disposal of SRM. Of these, 44 related to the incomplete removal of SRM with
most of the remainder being related to the staining of SRM and the labelling and
condition of the containers in which the SRM was stored.
5.7 To put these non-compliances into perspective, 213 premises in G.B.
slaughtered a total of 1.065m cattle during the period of this report. None of
the non-compliances resulted in SRM entering the food chain. Food Standards
Agency FSA 13/11/05 Open Board – 05 November 2013
4
SRM Controls - Breaches
5.8 A breach of controls takes place when a non-compliance is not
identified at the slaughterhouse or cutting plant and results in meat containing
SRM leaving the premises and potentially reaching the market.
5.9 Since March 2013, 7 cutting plants (out of 171 authorised to remove SRM
VC) in GB have been identified as having breached rules on the removal and
disposal of SRM vertebral column (VC). No similar breaches were detected in
Northern Ireland where there were a total of 530 inspections and 18 unannounced
audits in the 18 authorised cutting plants in the period of this report. No
breaches involving other specified risk material were detected in either GB or
NI during this period.
5.10 The breaches included the following FBO failures:
• Failure of the cutting plant FBO to notify FSA that they were to process
OTM carcases, meaning that processing was not subject to official
supervision.
• Failure of the slaughterhouse FBO to despatch OTM carcases to an
authorised cutting plant.
• SRM VC removed by an unauthorised cutting plant without official
supervision.
• Despatch of small OTM bone-in cuts to another Member State without the
required agreement between the two competent authorities being in place.
• Despatch of OTM bone-in cuts to butchers’ premises (which are not
permitted to remove SRM VC)
• Removed VC not stained or disposed of as a Category 1 ABP
5.11 Breaches of this kind have the potential to expose consumers to SRM,
or for the removed SRM to be incorrectly disposed of as a Category 3 ABP,
potentially allowing it into pet food. Our enquiries have found that one of the
seven breaches is likely to have resulted in consumer exposure to VC SRM. Of the
remaining six cases there is evidence in four that the VC was removed. In the
other two, the FBOs concerned maintain that the SRM was removed and disposed of
correctly but documentation to confirm this is not available.
5.12 The one incident in which VC SRM is likely to have resulted in
consumer exposure to VC SRM involved a combined GB slaughterhouse and cutting
plant which despatched cuts of meat containing SRM VC to four premises in Spain
and to a small chain of butchers in the UK over a period of 22 months. Only one
of the premises, a cutting plant in Spain, was authorised to remove
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
5
SRM VC. The UK butchers were supplied with nearly 2000 individual bone-in
cuts which will have been sold to restaurants or direct to the public. Action
Taken Following the Breaches
5.13 Ensuring the necessary controls are in place and that these are
effective remains a high priority for the FSA. The FSA has proactively sought to
verify SRM controls in the round and the particular area of concern is in the
removal of VC in cutting plants.
• In the case referred to in paragraph 5.12 that led to consumer exposure
to VC SRM, the FBO’s procedures have been modified to prevent a recurrence of
this breach. The FBO is no longer selling bone-in cuts from over 30 months old
animals and is removing all SRM VC in the co-located cutting plant under
official supervision. The FSA wrote to all red meat slaughterhouses and
cutting plants in GB on 31 May 2013 to remind them of their obligations in
relation to the removal of VC from over 30 month beef carcases. The letter was
copied to the main trade associations representing meat processors. A similar
letter was sent to FSA’s contract vets and reminders were issued to plant based
staff. This was in response to issues flagged up during a series of unannounced
visits to standalone cutting plants commissioned in February 2013 (reported to
the Board in July 20132).
• In June and July 2013, a series of themed Lead Veterinarian visits was
organised to carry out more detailed checks on the effectiveness of SRM VC
removal and disposal. 144 establishments were visited, these being a
cross-section of slaughterhouses processing OTM cattle and sheep, and cutting
plants approved for VC removal. This represented just over 28% of all the
establishments involved in these activities in GB.
• The themed visits raised concerns about both the FBOs’ controls and the
FSA’s operational performance including ability to verify FBO controls in a
significant minority of premises. Results have been shared with trade
organisations and the FSA continues to work in collaboration with industry
representatives to ensure controls are as they should be.
• A further series of unannounced visits was commissioned in September for
completion during October to check VC removal activities in standalone cutting
plants.
• Normal operating requirements would be that the FSA would verify cutting
plant controls, through audit and additional attendance as required.
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
6
However, in the current circumstances enhanced monitoring of the
effectiveness of FBO controls, over and above those required by the legal
framework, is taking place. Over a 3 month period, from September to November
2013, OVs in slaughterhouses dispatching OTM carcases for off-site VC removal
are checking that the slaughterhouse has confirmed that receiving plants have
the necessary authorisation. The slaughterhouse OVs are also notifying FSA
officials with responsibility for official controls at the receiving premises,
to ensure appropriate supervision at the receiving premises. Following
evaluation of the results we will assess the value and practicalities of these
additional checks and the impact of any costs associated with the
activity.
• Statements of Resources setting out FBO operating requirements and FSA
supervision requirements are being reviewed for all plants authorised to remove
VC to ensure FBOs have up to date FSA contact information so that they can
comply with their obligation to notify the FSA of the intention to remove VC and
FSA resources can be deployed effectively to supervise the activities.
• With support from trade organisations, strict enforcement measures are
being imposed on those cutting plants found to be in breach of requirements for
VC removal. These include active application of the enforcement hierarchy and
ultimately could lead to revoking or suspending authorisations for those FBOs
who continue not to meet their legal obligations and requirements.
• Five of the FBOs involved in the breaches have so far been referred for
investigation with a view to prosecution. RISK IMPLICATIONS
Public health risk
6.1 The potential BSE health risk to people (variant Creutzfeld-Jakob
Disease)3 from consumption of meat containing SRM VC is extremely low
because:
• There are now very few cases of BSE, three so far in the UK in 2013 (one
atypical, two classical), and three in 2012 (one atypical and two classical).
All but two of these cases were in animals born before 1996, which are excluded
from the food chain.
• In the unlikely event of a BSE infected animal entering the food chain,
the infectivity in the VC is contained in the dorsal root ganglia which is
embedded into the VC and is therefore unlikely to be eaten with the meat. 3 See
http://www.cjd.ed.ac.uk/documents/figs.pdf
for current statistics on vCJD incidence in the UK.
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
7
Potential for further breaches
6.2 The identified breaches have illustrated the potential for SRM material
to reach the food chain. Whilst we have no evidence that other breaches have
occurred in the period of this report in addition to those reported on in this
paper, we cannot be totally sure about this or provide an assurance that similar
breaches may not occur in future. This is because the FSA does not have
full-time presence in cutting plants. EU law does not specify this as a
requirement, simply that official controls are carried out to verify that bovine
VC is correctly removed at cutting plants and disposed of as ABP. Domestic UK
law does already provide for controls additional to EU controls, namely that
cutting plants are specifically authorised to remove bovine VC, that the
slaughterhouse notifies the cutting plant of dispatch of carcases requiring VC
removal and that verification checks are carried out by FSA or DARD during the
removal process. Given the recent breaches, the level of FSA presence during VC
removal will be kept under review in light of the additional checks and
monitoring we are carrying out.
6.3 It is important to stress that responsibility for correct removal of
SRM, together with responsibility for compliance with other aspects of food
legislation, sits with the food business operator.
6.4 It is worth noting that whilst the SRM controls described in this paper
and the remedial action taken in the event of a breach of those controls are
intended to protect consumers from exposure to SRM, this does not provide
protection in the event of meat produced through illegal slaughter. Reputational
risks
6.5 The identified breaches pose reputational risks for the FSA and for the
UK meat industry and continuation of such breaches could impact on consumer and
trade confidence in UK meat. In line with normal practice, the FSA made the
European Commission aware of the breach which led to the dispatch of meat
containing SRM VC to establishments in Spain that are not authorised to remove
VC. This could lead to the Food and Veterinary Office focusing on this issue in
a future audit of UK meat establishments. The issue has been discussed
extensively with UK industry leaders to raise their awareness of both the need
for greater FBO compliance and the risks associated with non-compliance. FSA
operational performance
6.6 Our monitoring of SRM removal and disposal has identified the need for
greater vigilance by staff visiting cutting plants, additional checks and for
new procedures to be put in place to provide greater assurance on the
effectiveness of FBO activities. This increased activity is currently
being
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
8
undertaken within existing FSA resources. The need for increased levels of
FSA presence at cutting plants, which could require an increase to existing
resources, will be kept under review.
DEVOLUTION IMPLICATIONS
7.1. No specific devolved issues.
CONSUMER ENGAGEMENT
8.1. No specific consumer engagement on the issues raised in this paper is
envisaged at this stage. Information on the breaches of SRM controls referred to
in this paper will be published on the website when investigations are
completed, in line with normal practice. The FBOs directly involved in the
breaches will be identified in these reports.
8.2 Consumers generally, and the families of vCJD victims in particular,
may be concerned about these breaches and the effectiveness of SRM controls in
general in protecting human health from the potential BSE risk. They will want
to be re-assured that the corrective measures that have been, and are being,
taken to tighten controls on the removal of bovine vertebral column will be
effective. We have described in section 5.13 above the action that has been
taken, and we will include results of increased monitoring in the next six
monthly report to the Board.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1. The relaxation of BSE testing controls has provided a renewed focus on
SRM controls. This report identifies the need for these controls to be more
effective and robust. The FSA and industry stakeholders are therefore taking
action to ensure that consumer safeguards are maintained, through raised
awareness, increased monitoring and supervision, and robust application of the
enforcement hierarchy.
9.2. Ensuring strict adherence to operational requirements to verify FBO
controls and with additional assurance checks and notification procedures for
FBOs, the FSA is guarding against industry non-compliance with application of
the enforcement hierarchy where there are non-compliances. The FSA will keep the
effectiveness of the controls under review, including an assessment of the
benefits of the additional controls introduced in September at slaughterhouses
dispatching OTM carcases for off-site VC removal, and FSA communications to
officials at receiving plants to ensure necessary supervision is in place.
Results of the increased monitoring will be reported to the FSA Board in the
next six monthly report.
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
9
9.3. The Board is asked to:
• note the contents of this paper;
• comment on the data presented and the action being taken by the FSA on
the issues raised; and
• note that results of increased monitoring will be included in the next
six monthly report to the Board.
Board meeting agenda: 5 November 2013
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
1
BSE – A REPORT ON SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF CONTROLS ON SPECIFIED
RISK MATERIAL AND ANIMAL FEED - MARCH to AUGUST 2013
Report by Steve Wearne, Director of Policy
For further information contact Chris Walding on 0207 276 8334, email
chris.walding@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk or Liz Olney on 07738 198928, email
liz.olney@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk
SUMMARY
1.1. At the meeting on 11 December 2012 the FSA Board agreed to advise
Ministers that it would be acceptable on grounds of negligible risk to consumers
and proportionality to stop BSE testing of healthy cattle slaughtered for human
consumption in the UK.1 This advice was subject to higher-risk cattle aged over
48 months continuing to be tested for BSE and the specified risk material (SRM)
and feed controls remaining in force. This change in BSE testing requirements
was implemented on 1 March 2013.
1.2. In making its decision, the Board requested a regular report on the
results of BSE monitoring and enforcement of feed and SRM controls to ensure
confidence in the continued effectiveness of the BSE controls.
1.3 The Board is asked to:
• Note the contents of this paper;
• Comment on the data presented and the action being taken by the FSA on
the issues raised; and
• Note that results of increased monitoring will be included in the next
six monthly report to the Board.
INTRODUCTION
snip...
DISCUSSION
BSE Monitoring Data
5.1. In the period 1 March 2013 – 31 August 2013, a total of 77,778 higher
risk cattle were tested in GB with a further 17,295 tested in NI. Only two
positive tests were reported, both being from fallen stock that were not
destined for human consumption. Cross checks on animals slaughtered and testing
data have not revealed any animals requiring testing that missed tests and
entered the food chain. Two FBOs have been referred for investigation for
failure to test animals that required testing. These failures were found during
routine
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
3
checks at the slaughterhouse and no untested carcases entered the food
chain.
DEVOLUTION IMPLICATIONS
7.1. No specific devolved issues.
CONSUMER ENGAGEMENT
8.1. No specific consumer engagement on the issues raised in this paper is
envisaged at this stage. Information on the breaches of SRM controls referred to
in this paper will be published on the website when investigations are
completed, in line with normal practice. The FBOs directly involved in the
breaches will be identified in these reports.
8.2 Consumers generally, and the families of vCJD victims in particular,
may be concerned about these breaches and the effectiveness of SRM controls in
general in protecting human health from the potential BSE risk. They will want
to be re-assured that the corrective measures that have been, and are being,
taken to tighten controls on the removal of bovine vertebral column will be
effective. We have described in section 5.13 above the action that has been
taken, and we will include results of increased monitoring in the next six
monthly report to the Board.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1. The relaxation of BSE testing controls has provided a renewed focus on
SRM controls. This report identifies the need for these controls to be more
effective and robust. The FSA and industry stakeholders are therefore taking
action to ensure that consumer safeguards are maintained, through raised
awareness, increased monitoring and supervision, and robust application of the
enforcement hierarchy.
9.2. Ensuring strict adherence to operational requirements to verify FBO
controls and with additional assurance checks and notification procedures for
FBOs, the FSA is guarding against industry non-compliance with application of
the enforcement hierarchy where there are non-compliances. The FSA will keep the
effectiveness of the controls under review, including an assessment of the
benefits of the additional controls introduced in September at slaughterhouses
dispatching OTM carcases for off-site VC removal, and FSA communications to
officials at receiving plants to ensure necessary supervision is in place.
Results of the increased monitoring will be reported to the FSA Board in the
next six monthly report.
Food Standards Agency FSA 13/11/05
Open Board – 05 November 2013
9
9.3. The Board is asked to:
• note the contents of this paper;
• comment on the data presented and the action being taken by the FSA on
the issues raised; and
• note that results of increased monitoring will be included in the next
six monthly report to the Board.
snip...see full text ;
please see ;
Conclusions
***In conclusion, demonstration of transmission of the disease even with
low concentrations of PrPsc [54], highlights BSE’s ability to adopt different
behavior, even sometimes similar to Scrapie [55], should reinforce that
vigilance is required in interpreting results so that subtle changes do not go
unnoticed. Additionally, to maintain a continued supervision of the techniques
which are applied in the routine diagnosis would prove essential for the
ultimate eradication of the disease. A study of the actual BSE presence should
be considered as necessary because a state of sporadic prevalence could exist
[56] and samples without a diagnosis [57,58] could reach the food chain,
involving therefore a risk for public health.
Keywords
TSEs, BSE, Confirmatory diagnosis, Non-conclusive cases
WOW! holy mad cows, how many more were there, and how many were consumed or
put into by-products for consumption, for humans and animals ???
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 3:58 PM
To: Science.Advisory.Council@defra.gsi.gov.uk
Subject: Idiopathic Brainstem Neuronal Chromatolysis (IBNC): a novel prion
protein related disorder of cattle?
Greetings Honorable Science Advisory Council et al @ DEFRA,
I wish to ask a question about something I have seen no updates on, that
concerns me.
IDIOPATHIC BRAINSTEM NEURONAL CHROMATOLYSIS IBNC or what I some times call,
IBNC BSE.
I have seen nothing in the scientific literature updated on this in years,
since around 2008, then it was like it fell off the face of the earth ?
can you please give me some sort of update on the IBNC BSE science to date
?
how many cases of IBNC BSE have been detected ?
is there an ongoing surveillance for this the IBNC BSE, and are the BSE
test even capable of detecting it ?
could the USA and or North America even detect, if they were even looking
for it ?
latest studies, if any more since "All of the 15 cattle tested showed that
the brains had abnormally accumulated PrP" ?
thank you,
kind regards,
terry
SNIP...see full text ;
MAD COW TESTING ONLY CATCHES SOME MAD COWS
SPREADING IT ALL AROUND
Saturday, October 19, 2013
***A comparative study of modified confirmatory techniques and additional
immuno-based methods for non-conclusive autolytic Bovine spongiform
encephalopathy cases
Thursday, June 6, 2013
FSA MORE BSE MAD COW CONTROL BREACHES JUNE 2013
Friday, October 25, 2013
UK FSA TSE BSE Board meeting agenda: 5 November 2013
New USDA Rule Designed to Help Meatpackers Break Domestic Cattle Market
November 1, 2013 Washington, D.C. – Today the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced
its plans to radically relax U.S. import restrictions for countries where bovine
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE or mad cow disease) continues to persist.
“Despite the fact that BSE persists in the European Union (EU), which
reported four new BSE cases in 2013, the new USDA rule opens the door to allow
U.S. meatpackers to begin supplementing tight U.S. beef supplies with beef of
questionable safety from Europe,” said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard.
Bullard continued: “USDA cannot explain why BSE persists in Europe despite
the fact that all scientific measures that are believed to be effective at
breaking the BSE cycle have been rigorously enforced in Europe for nearly two
decades.
“If you believe what USDA is telling the public – that BSE is no longer a
concern in European livestock because all steps necessary to control BSE are
already in place, then it is impossible for Europe to be continually detecting
new BSE cases. But this is exactly what Europe continues to do as it has
detected 83 new cases of BSE just since 2010.
“This irresponsible action by USDA underscores the need for country of
origin labeling (COOL), which is presently under attack by meatpackers and the
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) in the federal court system, by
members of Congress in the 2013 Farm Bill, and by foreign countries at the World
Trade Organization (WTO).”
According to Bullard, COOL would provide consumers the opportunity to
better safeguard their families by enabling them to avoid meat products from
countries that have not controlled BSE and that cannot explain why they continue
to detect the pernicious disease in their livestock.
Bullard said the new BSE rule represents the abrogation of USDA’s
responsibility to protect U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd from the
introduction of foreign animal disease and it exemplifies how USDA is
acquiescing to the unelected and un-appointed officials at the WTO who have no
loyalties whatsoever to U.S. livestock producers or to U.S. consumers.
“USDA is working closely with the multinational meatpackers to open new
import platforms so they can break the U.S. cattle market that has only recently
reached profitable levels after being severely depressed for more than a decade.
Cargill’s recent announcement that it has partnered with an Australian exporter
to import grain-fed and grass-fed beef in the U.S. will now be followed by
announcements to further increase price-depressing imports from Europe, thanks
to USDA,” Bullard concluded.
# # #
R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of
America) is the largest producer-only cattle trade association in the United
States. It is a national, nonprofit organization dedicated to ensuring the
continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. For more
information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516.
I AGREE WITH MR. BULLARD, it’s all about trade and money, BSE TSE PRION aka
mad cow type disease and sound science there from, was thrown out the window by
the USDA et al that fateful day in December 23, 2003, when the USDA lost it’s
‘gold card’ of supposedly being BSE FREE, (that was and still is a sad joke
though), that’s when mad cow junk science was adopted by the USDA...
see why below...kind regards, terry
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
*** Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations BSE
TSE PRION 2013
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
*** SPECIFIED RISK MATERIAL (SRM) CONTROL VERIFICATION TASK FSIS NOTICE
70-13 10/30/13
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
*** NORDION (US), INC., AND BIOAXONE BIOSCIENCES, INC., Settles $90M Mad
Cow TSE prion Contamination Suit Cethrin(R)
Case 0:12-cv-60739-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/26/2012 Page 1
of 15
snip...
NATURE OF THE CASE
1. This is an action for negligence against the Defendants arising from the
improper and negligent use of contaminated material in the preparation of the
Bacterial Master Cell Bank ("MCB") for a new breakthrough drug, Cethrin" (BA-21
0), researched and developed by BIOAXONE. Cethrin is a biologic drug that will
provide the most advanced treatment for patients who have suffered acute spinal
cord injury. Defendants negligently prepared the MCB using kanamycin they
purchased that was made in China and that contained beef broth and avian
products. The MCB is contaminated with beef broth and avian products that cause
human disease including bovine spongiform encephalopathy ("BSE"), commonly known
as mad cow disease, which created an unreasonably dangerous risk of the
development of BSE in patients to whom the Cethrin made from the contaminated
MCB would be administered.
Case 0:12-cv-60739-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/26/2012 Page 3
of 15
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
28. At all times prior to October 16, 2008, MDS/RICERCA had actual or
constructive knowledge that the kanamycin it purchased and used in the
preparation of the MCB for BIOAXONE was contaminated and was not fit or intended
for use in humans.
29. At all times prior to October 16,2008, MDS/RICERCA had actual or
constructive knowledge that the purchase and use of contaminated kanamycin in
the preparation of the MCB for BIOAXONE created an unreasonably dangerous and
foreseeable risk of adventitious agents that cause human disease including the
development of BSE or mad cow disease in humans.
Case 0:12-cv-60739-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/26/2012 Page 9
of 15
snip...see full text and more here ;'
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
*** NORDION (US), INC., AND BIOAXONE BIOSCIENCES, INC., Settles $90M Mad
Cow TSE prion Contamination Suit Cethrin(R)
Case 0:12-cv-60739-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/26/2012 Page 1
of 15
with great sadness and disgust, I must inform you that our federal
government has failed us again, and chose the industry over sound science, with
regards to TSE prion disease, aka mad cow type disease...tss
Saturday, November 2, 2013
APHIS Finalizes Bovine Import Regulations in Line with International Animal
Health Standards while enhancing the spread of BSE TSE prion mad cow type
disease around the Globe
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
APHIS USDA Administrator Message to Stakeholders: Agency Vision and Goals
Eliminating ALL remaining BSE barriers to export market
Sunday, November 3, 2013
***Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Animal Carcass
Management [Docket No. APHIS-2013-0044]
I kindly urge the OIE to upgrade the USA BSE GBR risk facto to BSE GBR IV,
for the reasons listed above. ...
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
*** World Organization for Animal Health Recommends United States' BSE Risk
Status Be Upgraded
Statement from Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack:
2013 USA
Monday, September 02, 2013
Atypical BSE: role of the E211K prion polymorphism
*** Research Project: TRANSMISSION, DIFFERENTIATION, AND PATHOBIOLOGY OF
TRANSMISSIBLE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHIES
Location: Virus and Prion Research Unit
Sunday, September 1, 2013
Evaluation of the Zoonotic Potential of Transmissible Mink Encephalopathy
We previously described the biochemical similarities between PrPres derived
from L-BSE infected macaque and cortical MM2 sporadic CJD: those observations
suggest a link between these two uncommon prion phenotypes in a primate model
(it is to note that such a link has not been observed in other models less
relevant from the human situation as hamsters or transgenic mice overexpressing
ovine PrP [28]). We speculate that a group of related animal prion strains
(L-BSE, c-BSE and TME) would have a zoonotic potential and lead to prion
diseases in humans with a type 2 PrPres molecular signature (and more
specifically type 2B for vCJD)
snip...
***Together with previous experiments performed in ovinized and bovinized
transgenic mice and hamsters [8,9] indicating similarities between TME and
L-BSE, the data support the hypothesis that L-BSE could be the origin of the TME
outbreaks in North America and Europe during the mid-1900s.
Monday, November 4, 2013
*** R-CALF Bullard new BSE rule represents the abrogation of USDA’s
responsibility to protect U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd from the
introduction of foreign animal disease
Monday, October 7, 2013
*** BARBACOA BLUES AND SPECIFIED RISK MATERIALS SRMs BSE TSE PRION aka MAD
COW DISEASE
Sunday, July 21, 2013
*** Welsh Government and Food Standards Agency Wales Joint Public
Consultation on the Proposed Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies (Wales)
Regulations 2013 Singeltary Submission WG18417
Saturday, September 21, 2013
*** Westland/Hallmark: 2008 Beef Recall A Case Study by The Food Industry
Center January 2010 THE FLIM-FLAM REPORT
Wednesday, October 09, 2013
*** WHY THE UKBSEnvCJD ONLY THEORY IS SO POPULAR IN IT'S FALLACY,
£41,078,281 in compensation REVISED
Thursday, October 10, 2013
*** CJD REPORT 1994 increased risk for consumption of veal and venison and
lamb
Monday, October 14, 2013
***Researchers estimate one in 2,000 people in the UK carry variant CJD
proteins
Friday, August 16, 2013
*** Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) biannual update August 2013 U.K. and
Contaminated blood products induce a highly atypical prion disease devoid of
PrPres in primates
WHAT about the sporadic CJD TSE proteins ?
WE now know that some cases of sporadic CJD are linked to atypical BSE and
atypical Scrapie, so why are not MORE concerned about the sporadic CJD, and all
it’s sub-types $$$
Sunday, August 11, 2013
Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease CJD cases rising North America updated report
August 2013
*** Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease CJD cases rising North America with Canada
seeing an extreme increase of 48% between 2008 and 2010
Sunday, October 13, 2013
*** CJD TSE Prion Disease Cases in Texas by Year, 2003-2012
kind regards, terry
layperson
mom dod 12/14/97 confirmed hvCJD
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518