Monday, August 1, 2016

USDA Announces Reopening of Brazilian Market to U.S. Beef Exports and the Potential for Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy TSE prion disease

Release No. 0175.16


Contact: Office of Communications (202) 720-4623


USDA Announces Reopening of Brazilian Market to U.S. Beef Exports


WASHINGTON, Aug. 1, 2016 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has reached agreement with Brazil's Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply to allow access for U.S. beef and beef products to the Brazilian market for the first time since 2003. Brazil's action reflects the United States' negligible risk classification for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and aligns Brazil's regulations to the OIE's scientific international animal health guidelines.


"After many years of diligently working to regain access to the Brazilian market, the United States welcomes the news that Brazil has removed all barriers to U.S. beef and beef product exports," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "We are pleased that Brazil, a major agricultural producing and trading country, has aligned with science-based international standards, and we encourage other nations to do the same. Since last year alone, USDA has eliminated BSE-related restrictions in 16 countries, regaining market access for U.S. beef and pumping hundreds-of-millions of dollars into the American economy.


"The Brazilian market offers excellent long-term potential for U.S. beef exporters. The United States looks forward to providing Brazil's 200-million-plus consumers, and growing middle class, with high-quality American beef and beef products," Vilsack said.


Both countries will immediately begin updating their administrative procedures in order to allow trade to resume. U.S. companies will need to complete Brazil's regular facilities registration process.


In a separate decision, USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) also recently determined that Brazil's food safety system governing meat products remains equivalent to that of the United States and that fresh (chilled or frozen) beef can be safely imported from Brazil. Following a multi-year science based review consistent with U.S. food safety regulations for countries that export meat, poultry and egg products to the U.S., FSIS is amending the list of eligible countries and products authorized for export to the United States to allow fresh (chilled or frozen) beef from Brazil.


The Brazilian agreement is just the latest example of USDA's ongoing efforts to knock down barriers to U.S. exports. In 2016 alone, these efforts have led to the reopening of the Saudi Arabian and Peruvian markets for U.S. beef, the South Korean market for U.S. poultry, and the South African market for U.S. poultry, pork and beef. In 2015, U.S. beef exports reached $6.3 billion thanks to aggressive efforts by USDA to eliminate BSE-related restrictions in 16 countries since January 2015, gaining additional market access for U.S. beef in Colombia, Costa Rica, Egypt, Guatemala, Iraq, Lebanon, Macau, New Zealand, Peru, Philippines, Saint Lucia, Singapore, South Africa, Ukraine, Vietnam and, now, Brazil.


The past seven years have represented the strongest period in history for American agricultural exports, with international sales of U.S. farm and food products totaling $911.4 billion between fiscal years 2009 and 2015.


Since 2009, USDA has worked to strengthen and support American agriculture, an industry that supports one in 11 American jobs, provides American consumers with more than 80 percent of the food we consume, ensures that Americans spend less of their paychecks at the grocery store than most people in other countries, and supports markets for homegrown renewable energy and materials. USDA has also provided $5.6 billion in disaster relief to farmers and ranchers; expanded risk management tools with products like Whole Farm Revenue Protection; and helped farm businesses grow with $36 billion in farm credit. The Department has engaged its resources to support a strong next generation of farmers and ranchers by improving access to land and capital; building new markets and market opportunities; and extending new conservation opportunities. USDA has developed new markets for rural-made products, including more than 2,500 biobased products through USDA's BioPreferred program; and invested $64 billion in infrastructure and community facilities to help improve the quality of life in rural America. For more information, visit





 “This is absurd,” said Bullard adding, “Brazil produces far more beef than it can consume. This is why, with the world’s second largest cattle herd, which far and away dwarfs the size of the U.S. herd, Brazil is the world’s third largest beef exporter, behind only India and Australia. And like India and Australia, Brazil’s imports of U.S. beef for longer than a decade before it closed its borders to U.S. beef in 2003 were miniscule.


“To say that the Brazilian market affords U.S. cattle producers with economic opportunities would be laughable if not for the significant risk associated with Vilsack’s weakening of our longstanding import restrictions for countries like Brazil that continue to battle foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) and other dangerous livestock diseases.”


Bullard claims that one of the reasons it has taken so long for the USDA to approve raw beef imports from Brazil was because Brazilian cattle and their resulting beef continued to exceed tolerance levels for pesticides such as Ivermectin.


“Brazil lacks the resources and infrastructure to maintain health and safety standards that are at least equal to that of the United States,” said Bullard adding, “That is why the USDA lowered the U.S. standard to that of mere equivalency – which essentially means “close enough.”


“This reckless action by the Secretary, which helps multinational meatpackers leverage down U.S. cattle prices with increased imports that do not meet identical U.S. safety standards is yet another in a long line of failures by the USDA to do anything to strengthen the economic condition of the U.S. cattle industry.


“The Secretary capitulated on country-of-origin labeling (COOL) and continues to weaken U.S. import standards that protect our cattle herd and our customers from foreign diseases, including his most recent proposal to relax our import standards for raw beef from Namibia, Africa. He has refused to protect the competitiveness of the U.S. cattle market from antitrust and anticompetitive practices of the monopolistic meatpackers. He has refused to reform the beef checkoff program that funds a lobbying group that represents the economic interests of multinational meatpackers. And, under the Secretary’s watch, our industry continues to experience an alarming exodus of cattle farmers and ranchers, feedlot numbers have declined by the tens of thousands, domestic beef production has fallen to the lowest level since before NAFTA, and the U.S. cattle herd shrank to the lowest level in over 70 years.


“Even the Secretary’s depiction of exports over the past seven years as they relate to this particular announcement is deceitful at best. While the Secretary boasts that ‘the past seven years have represented the strongest period in history for American agricultural exports,’ this irresponsible statement purposely omits the fact that while the dollar value of beef and cattle exports did increase over the past seven years, they were decisively overwhelmed by record imports, which caused the trade deficit for our industry to grow from less than $1 billion in 2009 to more than $2.5 billion in 2015.


“We couldn’t be more disappointed in the Secretary’s actions, which clearly demonstrate that he is advocating the interests of multinational meatpackers at the expense of independent U.S. farmers and ranchers and consumers,” concluded Bullard.


# # #


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 or, call 406-252-2516.


Posted by R-Calf USA on Monday, August 1st, 2016 @ 1:03PM Categories: Latest News, News Releases, Trade



r-calf deleted my posts, I had three. then r-calf put one of my post back up, the one that suited them the most. all r-calf wanted to hear about was Brazil, nothing about the USA. that’s too bad...tss


Terry Singeltary first up, see past history of mad cow political wrangling here;



Brazil: mad cow threat or trade war trashing? 05 Feb 01 By Phil Stewart Reuters


The timing alone is suspicious. Just one day after Canada failed to win a fresh World Trade Organization review of Brazil's aircraft subsidy program, it announced Friday that mad cow fears justify a temporary ban on Brazilian beef imports. The move was unprecedented. Brazil, home to the world's biggest cattle herd, has never had a case of mad cow disease. Yet it not only lost the Canadian market, but also the U.S. and Mexican markets since Canada's decision applied to the entire NAFTA trade bloc.


Now the big question on everybody's mind is whether Brazil is truly a threat to food safety -- as Canada contends -- or if this is merely the first shot in a trade war between the two countries.


"Canada is highly suspect. Had trade relations with Brazil been better, Canada would never have taken this line of action," said political analyst Andre Pereira Cesar.


Canada's official line is that Brazil was too slow in passing on information on the country's 160 million head of cattle. Canada, on behalf of NAFTA, asked for the documents in May 1998 -- and only received them after it informed Brazil of the ban last week. The lack of information, Canada argued, was enough of a health risk to merit a temporary ban.


But in the background is a seething feud between Brazil and Canada over aircraft subsidies. Canada has already won the right from the WTO to impose sanctions of $233.5 million a year on Brazil over its ProEx aircraft export subsidy program.


Canada alleges ProEx has unfairly helped Brazil's top civilian aircraft manufacturer, Embraer , and robbed sales from Canada's Bombardier Inc. Canada has repeatedly stressed that the ban on Brazilian beef has nothing to do with the subsidy dispute. But Brazilian officials see things very differently.


On Monday, Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Lafer issued a statement threatening it would respond if Canada did not not reverse its decision. Brazil exports $5.5 million in processed beef to Canada annually, and some $82.5 million to the U.S.


"If Canada persists in acts that effectively damage Brazil's foreign trade, the Brazilian government reserves the right to take measures it judges convenient," Lafer said, without elaborating. Meanwhile, Agriculture Minister Marcus Vinicius Pratini de Moraes extended his stay in the United States to appeal to officials in Washington on Monday -- bypassing Canada entirely.


According to U.S. Department of Agriculture's representatives in Brazil, the South American country's cattle seem just fine. "We've done a preliminary review of the information and there doesn't appear to be any problem," said William Westman, chief Brazil counselor for the USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) at the U.S. Embassy in Brasilia. "From what we've seen from the preliminary results, there's not an issue here."


Mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), has led to more than 80 deaths in humans and many scientists believe that people who catch the illness do so because they ate BSE-infected beef. Mad cow has never been reported in the U.S. or in Brazil.


Diplomatic sources in Brasilia said they expect NAFTA nations to scrap the ban on Brazil within six to eight weeks -- the standard review period for phytosanitary reports. But no doubt, damage has already been done. Trade relations between the two countries have clearly worsened -- making a trade war that much more likely. In this environment, the chances of the Bush Administration laying the groundwork for a Free Trade Area of the Americas stretching from Alaska to Argentina are that much more bleak.


Brazil decries beef ban February 5, 2001 By ADALID CABRERA LEMUZ, Associated Press Brazil on Monday invited foreign experts to inspect its cattle herds for signs of mad cow disease and insisted there's no reason for a ban on Brazilian beef imports imposed by the United States and other countries. Brazilian cattle feed in pastures and not on ground cattle parts that have been blamed for spreading the disease in European countries, said Farm Defense Secretary Luiz Carlos de Oliveira. Brazil "is willing to open its borders to allow sanitary specialists to verify that there is not the slightest risk of contamination," he said.


Meanwhile, Agriculture Minister Marcus Vinicius Pratini de Moraes was in Washington to push for a suspension of the ban on imports of Brazilian beef products. He was to meet with U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman and offer data showing that Brazil is free of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease...


"We're concerned about the domino effect that the U.S. ban could have on Brazilian beef imports in other markets," local news agency Agencia Estado quoted Pratini as saying.


On Friday, Canada suspended Brazilian beef imports until the risk of mad cow was fully assessed. The United States and Mexico quickly followed suit. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency said the ban was a precautionary step and there is no evidence mad cow disease has infected Brazilian cattle.


Still, the ban could hurt Brazil's exports just as the country is striving to improve its trade balance. The United States imported some $82 million in processed meat from Brazil last year and Canada purchased $5.5 million, the Agriculture Ministry said. Together, the two countries account for about 10 percent of Brazil's beef exports.


Opinion (webmaster): Canada's action, quickly followed by the US and Mexico, may have opened up a whole new era in BSE, whereby countries deliberately trash each other's cattle industry for unrelated tariff retaliation purposes.


TSEs are diseases believed by many scientists to occur roughly at a one in a million rate per year in all species of mammals due to de novo mutation. Short of knocking out the prion gene with genetic engineering, a background rate of one per million cows of BSE is unavoidable, just like background radioactivity from potassium-40 in rocks. This would be true even of a strictly grass and soy fed animal -- cow cannabalism is strictly an amplification mechansim, not an origination. The strains of BSE arising in this manner would not necessarily resemble British BSE in their properties. The risks to humans from these strains, if any, are unknown. However, health risks cannot be catastrophic because CJD remains a fairly rare disease, even allowing for under-reporting, and the fact that cattle were domesticated millenia ago.


Putting the shoe on the other foot, what if -- in a flurry of worldwide press releases -- Pitcairn Island, with Namibia and Tajikistan joining in, abruptly outlawed Canadian beef products because of alleged BSE risks. After all, unlike Brazil, Canada has reported a confirmed case of BSE (December 1993 cow in Alberta imported from UK in 1987), fails to use the Prionics gold standard surveillance test, and was a member of the Group of 70 countries on the receiving end of British meat and bone meal exports. (Canada imported 125 tons, the US 20 tons, Brazil zero, according to Her Majesty's Excise and Custom table published by the Sunday London Times on 5 Feb 01 -- see below.)


Canada would no doubt be mighty annoyed at Pitcairn Island.


Food fights are different than tariffs on airline parts: the aspersions cast linger on long after the event. Many people hear the initial story but not the followup clarification. Garbage can circulate for years on chat rooms. Canada could have substantive reasons for banning Brazilian beef that they have not yet disclosed: these need to be disclosed. Yes, Canada is following the precautionary form (extreme version): Brazil may indeed have non-zero risk -- but what country has been totally spared?


Now while most of the world frets over containment of the globalization of both BSE and its accompaning nvCJD, other elements have long seen a profiteering opportunity. For every country where domestic producers are hurt, there is another country that benefits. For example, USDA's Glickman was quick to publicly assure the British at the height of their troubles of the continuing availability of US beef.


However, innuendo, if that is all it is, of a developing country that just happens to have the world's largest beef herd that Mexico and the US endorsed this week is an unwelcome escalation that serves no one. Where is this going to end -- with the global consumer not trusting anyone's beef?



Brazil and the USA will be swapping BSE TSE Prions like two lovers swapping spit now...


Friday, October 30, 2015


Brazil Agriculture minister to visit Saudi Arabia over BSE mad cow trade



Life | Sat May 10, 2014 2:58pm EDT Related: Health, Brazil


Brazil confirms second case of atypical mad cow disease


 Brazil has confirmed a second case of atypical mad cow disease, a year after several countries banned Brazilian beef imports when a similar case of the disease was confirmed.


The agriculture ministry said late Friday that a lab in Weybridge, England approved by the World Animal Health Organization confirmed it was a spontaneous case of atypical bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, with no link to contaminated feed.



LAUGH OUT LOUD LOL OR LAUGH MY ASS OFF LMAO !!! that last part is a total pipe dream, a myth...tss


now some facts about atypical BSE mad cow disease and feed. that spontaneous myth is just that, a myth, one that keeps faltering, see why ;



Monday, May 5, 2014


Brazil BSE Mad Cow disease confirmed OIE 02/05/2014



Thursday, September 26, 2013


Brazil evaluate the implementation of health rules on animal by-products and derived products SRM BST TSE PRION aka MAD COW DISEASE



Friday, December 07, 2012





Wednesday, December 19, 2012


Scientific Report of the European Food Safety Authority on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE Risk (GBR) of Brazil



Wednesday, January 29, 2014


Another Suspect case of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease investigated in Brazil





 (Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 23 May 2006)


 11. Information published by the OIE is derived from appropriate declarations made by the official Veterinary Services of Member Countries. The OIE is not responsible for inaccurate publication of country disease status based on inaccurate information or changes in epidemiological status or other significant events that were not promptly reported to the Central Bureau,



 Wednesday, March 11, 2015


 OIE and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Reinforce Collaboration



 Friday, April 4, 2014


 China, Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Morocco, Israel, South Africa and Saudi Arabia still retain BSE-related closures



 Thursday, May 30, 2013


 World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) has upgraded the United States' risk classification for mad cow disease to "negligible" from "controlled", and risk further exposing the globe to the TSE prion mad cow type disease


 U.S. gets top mad-cow rating from international group and risk further exposing the globe to the TSE prion mad cow type disease




 The OIE is nothing more than a trading brokerage for the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy TSE prion disease aka mad cow type disease. Frances is still in the midst of a mad cow disease outbreak with atypical BSE cases still growing. mad cow disease is so bad in France, as with the USA, they stopped testing for mad cow disease (France altogether and the USA to figures so low, you would only detect a case of mad cow disease, only by chance).


 from the inside looking out ;


 Quote: Maybe familirise yourself with the OIE. The primary concern is animal health of the world they are the animal version of the WHO. It is a long way down from that ivory tower but here we go, until pressured by the USA representatives a country could not export animals for 6 years after finding a BSE/BASE positive animal so under the old rules the US would not be able to export anywhere in the world for another 4 1/2 years. Who got the risk levels system put in to allow some trade - your US representatives. You guys want to change rules - OK , but you do not get special rules that only apply to the US. As i have told you before Sand h I market all my own slaughter animals and you know that, so don't do the whole holier than thow act.


 With all due respect, it is obvious that you know little about the OIE and how it actually works. Having been to their offices in Paris and talked personally with the Head of the Animal Test Section, you would choke if you knew how many lobby groups attend that office daily. There is a steady stream of paid lobby groups that have one goal in life and that is to sway the Section Heads of each department within the OIE to suit the needs of different jurisdictions around the world, which curiously enough, also includes the USA and Canada. Anyone can go there and chat with them - providing they can provide valid cause to be let in. To say that the only goal of the OIE is animal health is actually only part of their function. They are more than that and my discussions with Dr. Diaz there has showed me that. But to blindly make a statement regarding what they do when you have no idea what they actually do is like eating the skin of the orange and not knowing what is actually under.


 Interestingly you state that the US Government applied pressure (to the OIE) I assume and that is a great example of the lobby groups doing their job. So, at the end of the day, one can safely assume that it is the pressure applied by certain influential lobby groups that will determine a likely outcome to an apparent OIE directive. Man alive, isn't it great to live in a democracy wherein the people get to make the choices and not just some "other" interested party or group - say like........Cargill or Tyson for example?


 So, one last question, question?


 Who wags the tail of that dog?? And for what reason other than one that is purely associated with trade and international agreements and greed?


 And you think it is so simply explainable.




 Subject: UPDATED WHO Guidelines include tissues from Cervidae affected with Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD)


 snip...see full text ;


Sunday, October 18, 2015


*** World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the Institut Pasteur Cooperating on animal disease and zoonosis research




Thursday, December 17, 2015


Annual report of the Scientific Network on BSE-TSE 2015 EFSA-Q-2015-00738 10 December 2015



Saturday, December 12, 2015





*** Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy TSE PRION UPDATE USA update 2016 ***


Saturday, July 23, 2016





Tuesday, July 26, 2016


*** Atypical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy BSE TSE Prion UPDATE JULY 2016



Monday, June 20, 2016


*** Specified Risk Materials SRMs BSE TSE Prion Program



Saturday, July 16, 2016


*** Importation of Sheep, Goats, and Certain Other Ruminants [Docket No. APHIS-2009-0095]RIN 0579-AD10


*** WITH great disgust and concern, I report to you that the OIE, USDA, APHIS, are working to further legalize the trading of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy TSE Pion disease around the globe.


THIS is absolutely insane. it’s USDA INC.



Wednesday, May 25, 2016


USDA APHIS National Scrapie TSE Prion Eradication Program April 2016 Monthly Report Prion 2016 Tokyo Update



*** Transmission data also revealed that several scrapie prions propagate in HuPrP-Tg mice with efficiency comparable to that of cattle BSE. While the efficiency of transmission at primary passage was low, subsequent passages resulted in a highly virulent prion disease in both Met129 and Val129 mice. Transmission of the different scrapie isolates in these mice leads to the emergence of prion strain phenotypes that showed similar characteristics to those displayed by MM1 or VV2 sCJD prion. These results demonstrate that scrapie prions have a zoonotic potential and raise new questions about the possible link between animal and human prions.



Saturday, April 23, 2016


SCRAPIE WS-01: Prion diseases in animals and zoonotic potential 2016 TOKYO


Prion. 10:S15-S21. 2016 ISSN: 1933-6896 printl 1933-690X



Monday, May 02, 2016


*** Zoonotic Potential of CWD Prions: An Update Prion 2016 Tokyo ***



Sunday, July 17, 2016





Saturday, May 28, 2016


*** Infection and detection of PrPCWD in soil from CWD infected farm in Korea Prion 2016 Tokyo ***



*** NIH awards $11 million to UTHealth researchers to study deadly CWD prion diseases Claudio Soto, Ph.D. ***


Public Release: 29-Jun-2016



Tuesday, July 12, 2016


Chronic Wasting Disease CWD, Scrapie, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy BSE, TSE, Prion Zoonosis Science History


see history of NIH may destroy human brain collection



Terry S. Singeltary Sr.