Now on ScienceBlogs: Oh, no! School wi-fi is making our kids sick! (2012 edition)

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Thoughts from Kansas

You will notice that it lacks definiteness; that it lacks purpose; that it lacks coherence; that it lacks a subject to talk about; that it is loose and wabbly; that it wanders around; that it loses itself early and does not find itself any more. --Mark Twain

Search

Profile

Josh at work Joshua Rosenau spends his days defending the teaching of evolution at the National Center for Science Education. He is formerly a doctoral candidate at the University of Kansas, in the department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. When not battling creationists or modeling species ranges, he writes about developments in progressive politics and the sciences.

The opinions expressed here are his own, do not reflect the official position of the NCSE. Indeed, older posts may no longer reflect his own official position.

Sb/DonorsChoose Drive


Thanks!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Subscribe to TfK:

Accolades

Best of Kansas City

Good posts from history

The Birth of Intelligent Falling

A failure of Intelligent Design

Why it's called Intelligent Design Creationism

Write a letter to the editor

My photo albums.

Support TfK

Buy me things from my Amazon.com wishlist.

Buy yourself things!

Search Now:
Search Amazon.com
Add yourself to the Frappr map!
Check out our Frappr or add yourself to it!

    follow me on Twitter

    « Oy versus argh | Main | False alarms degrade security »

    USDA to continue meatpacker restrictions on mad cow tests

    Category: Policy and Politics
    Posted on: June 2, 2007 3:46 PM, by Josh Rosenau

    Creekstone Farms wants to test every steer they slaughter for mad cow disease. The USDA, under pressure from larger meatpackers, says they can't:

    The Bush administration said Tuesday it will fight to keep meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease.

    The Agriculture Department tests less than 1 percent of slaughtered cows for the disease, which can be fatal to humans who eat tainted beef. But Kansas-based Creekstone Farms Premium Beef wants to test all of its cows.

    Larger meat companies feared that move because, if Creekstone tested its meat and advertised it as safe, they might have to perform the expensive test, too.

    A federal judge ruled in March that such tests must be allowed. The ruling was to take effect June 1, but the Agriculture Department said Tuesday it would appeal - effectively delaying the testing until the court challenge plays out.

    Creekstone serves the Japanese market, and since the first cow tested positive for mad cow, Japan refuses to import beef that hasn't been tested.

    Share on Facebook
    Share on StumbleUpon
    Share on Facebook

    TrackBacks

    TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/42066

    Comments

    1

    What authority, never mind what right, does the USDA have to limit testing by food companies?

    That's utterly absurd - how dare they stop companies from seeking to make their products as safe as possible, and how dare they stop them from advertising this?

    Talk about the influence of special-interest groups...

    Posted by: Caledonian | June 2, 2007 4:32 PM

    2

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
    To: "Agriculture Committee"
    Cc: ; ; ;
    ; ;
    Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:48 PM
    Subject: USDA VS CREEKSTONE BSE/BASE/TSE TESTING Civil Action No. 06-0544
    (JR)


    USDA Fights Court Decision
    Approving BSE Tests
    From Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
    flounder9@verizon.net
    5-30-7

    To: agsec@usda.gov
    Cc: john.clifford@aphis.usda.gov; usaha@usaha.org;
    jmeng@cpfbeef.com;LAVET22@aol.com Phyllis.Fong@usda.gov
    Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 2:07 PM
    Subject: USDA VS CREEKSTONE BSE/BASE/TSE TESTING Civil Action No. 06-0544
    (JR)


    May 27, 2007

    Honorable Michael Johanns
    Secretary of Agriculture
    U.S. Department of Agriculture
    Room 200 Jamie Whitten Federal Building
    Washington, D.C. 20250

    CC

    Honorable Judge James Robertson
    U.S. District Court
    333 Constitution Ave. North West
    Washington, D. C. 20001

    Subject: Request to let the Creekstone vs. USDA court decision stand.

    Ref: Letter from United States Animal Health Association, dated May 22,
    2007

    Dear Mr. Secretary et al :

    I am requesting that you allow the court decision in the Creekstone vs. USDA
    to stand so that Creekstone may begin testing the beef they process for BSE
    and or BASE and or any other TSE phenotype there of. WE must let them test
    since the USDA et al refuse to do so properly. This is not to say that there
    should be no strict TSE testing protocols. IF testing is to take place
    privately, there must be strict TSE testing protocol to assure the most up
    to date, sensitive, and validated tests are used, and used properly. These
    tests must be announced to the public in a timely manner at every step of
    the way, validated and confirmed by the federal government, Weybridge, and
    an independent third party consumer organization and there TSE expert of
    choice, in my opinion.

    My mother died from a exceedingly rare strain of sporadic CJD i.e. the
    Heidenhain Variant of CJD. My neighbors mother also lost his mother to a
    form of sporadic CJD exactly one year previously from the day my mother
    died. BOTH cases were confirmed by autopsy. There is new data out about the
    BASE atypical BSE, which pathologically is more related to a phenotype of
    sporadic CJD, than the nvCJD in humans from the UK. To continue to ignore
    these scientific findings with the old UKBSEnvCJD only theory is not
    justified by science anymore. It is not logical.

    The logic behind the reasons not to let test for TSE in the USA because of
    The Virus Serum Toxin Act of 1913 and or because of the recent letter from
    the USAHA (see letter below) bring forth, are totally bogus. NO one could
    screw the testing up any worse than the USDA has done in the past. The OIG
    and the GAO has shown this time and time again. The 2004 Enhanced BSE
    surveillance program where some 275,000+ cattle were tested for BSE was
    proven to be terribly flawed from the beginning. This documented time and
    time again. Even Paul Brown, known and respected TSE scientist, former TSE
    expert for the CDC said he had ''absolutely no confidence in USDA tests
    before one year ago'', and this was on March 15, 2006 ;

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

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

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

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

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


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

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


    PAUL BROWN COMMENT TO ME ON THIS ISSUE

    Tuesday, September 12, 2006 11:10 AM

    "Actually, Terry, I have been critical of the USDA handling of the mad cow
    issue for some years, and with Linda Detwiler and others sent lengthy
    detailed critiques and recommendations to both the USDA and the Canadian
    Food Agency."

    OR, what the Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG found ;


    Audit Report
    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
    Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program � Phase II
    and
    Food Safety and Inspection Service

    Controls Over BSE Sampling, Specified Risk Materials, and Advanced Meat
    Recovery Products - Phase III

    Report No. 50601-10-KC January 2006

    Finding 2 Inherent Challenges in Identifying and Testing High-Risk Cattle
    Still Remain

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


    Mr. Johanns,

    The August 4, 1997 FDA BSE ruminant to ruminant feed ban was nothing more
    than ink on paper. In 2007 alone, 10 MILLION plus pounds of banned blood
    laced MBM has already gone out into commerce for the feeding of banned
    product to cattle. yes, were still feeding cows banned BSE/BASE product in
    2007, almost 10 years after the voluntary ban was put in place. guess what,
    it aint working.

    YOU and this Administration have failed terribly in protecting not only the
    consumer, but your precious commodity that you speak so highly of i.e. the
    beef industry. In your continued efforts to cover up the real mad cow
    problem in the USA, you have in fact only amplified it and continued it's
    spread, and in doing so, you have needlessly exposed millions to the TSE
    agent, from many different proven routes and sources. The only saving grace
    you have is the incubation period has been on your side. It will catch up.
    When it does, when the people finally figure all this out, when some of the
    millions you have needlessly exposed to this agent become clinical in the
    future, rest assured I will stand in line to see that you and your
    administration are convicted for murder.

    What you and this administration have done over the past 8 years is
    criminal, in my opinion. I have watched not only you, but the Bush
    administration thumb there nose to science for almost 8 years, all to
    protect the beef industry. The science was there, but you chose to ignore
    it, and even manipulated science with the bogus BSE MRR policy, all the
    while your were implementing that, you were covering up another mad cow in
    Texas. But thanks to the Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG, and an act of
    Congress, that mad cow was finally proven positive, unlike the other
    stumbling and staggering mad cow that was rendered without any test at all
    in Texas, but by then you had succeeded in the BSE MRR policy, the legal
    trading of all strains of TSE globally. You and this administration have
    done the same thing the UK did when they poisoned the globe with there
    exporting of BSE, except you made it legal now with the BSE MRR policy, and
    now we are dealing with BASE, a strain that is more virulent to humans. what
    happens when it mutates again?

    When cwd deer and elk and there different phenotypes have all been rendered
    into feed, along with scrapie infected sheep in the USA, and a few TME to
    top that off, it will be a most interesting recipe will it not, and an
    interesting case study for humans for decades to come. sadly though, with
    the recent pet food scandal, and the deaths there of, we have learned a few
    things. one, that the elderly are expendable, but cats, dogs, and
    adolescents are not. and that the problem of our feeding of food producing
    animals has been tainted for decades. and with the melamine scandal, as with
    the mad cow feed scandal, it's the same old song and dance by you and the
    Bush administration, everything is o.k., will not hurt you, cover-up and
    protect the industry at all cost, and this will be another part of your sad
    legacy in History Sir.

    To not allow BSE/TSE testing in the USA, testing that will find, only proves
    our point, you have and will continue to cover up the real mad cow problem
    in the USA. and the world knows this. ...


    Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
    P.O. Box 42
    Bacliff, Texas USA 77519


    UNITED STATES ANIMAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION
    8100 Three Chopt Road, Suite 203
    P. O. BOX K227
    RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23288
    804- 285-3210 FAX 804-285-3367
    E-Mail: usaha@usaha.org
    Web Site: www.usaha.org

    May 22, 2007
    Honorable Michael Johanns
    Secretary of Agriculture
    U.S. Department of Agriculture
    Room 200 Jamie Whitten Federal Building
    Washington, D.C. 20250

    Dear Mr. Secretary:

    The United States Animal Health Association (USAHA), wishes to express its
    encouragement to you and the Department of Agriculture to appeal the
    litigation surrounding private testing for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy.
    We hope you will strongly consider this as you work with the Office of
    General Counsel on this suit.

    To support this appeal, we offer that this sets a detrimental precedence on
    USDA's ability to regulate disease and testing processes in animal
    agriculture. As we appreciate the entrepreneurial spirit of Creekstone, the
    larger scale implications could lead to devastating impacts for food animal
    production in this country as itrelates to animal health. We do feel that
    private testing could hamper animal health officials' ability to locate
    disease occurrences, and exercise proper practices to trace, control and
    eliminate them. As you are aware, there are a number of factors that raise
    concern among animal health leaders and diagnosticians. We encourage you to
    thoroughly consider those upon your decision to appeal. We do recognize this
    is now a matter of the courts, and trust that our ability to safeguard
    animal health is not compromised as a result of this litigation. Please let
    us know if there is any further support we can provide.

    Sincerely,

    Lee M. Myers
    President, U.S. Animal Health Association
    Cc: Dr. John Clifford

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


    USA MAD COW STRAIN MORE VIRULENT TO HUMANS THAN UK STRAIN

    18 January 2007 - Draft minutes of the SEAC 95 meeting (426 KB) held on 7
    December 2006 are now available.

    snip...

    64. A member noted that at the recent Neuroprion meeting, a study was
    presented showing that in transgenic mice BSE passaged in sheep may be more
    virulent and infectious to a wider range of species than bovine derived BSE.

    Other work presented suggested that BSE and bovine amyloidotic spongiform
    encephalopathy (BASE) MAY BE RELATED. A mutation had been identified in the
    prion protein gene in an AMERICAN BASE CASE THAT WAS SIMILAR IN NATURE TO A
    MUTATION FOUND IN CASES OF SPORADIC CJD.

    snip...

    http://www.seac.gov.uk/minutes/95.pdf


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

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

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

    ***These results indicate that BASE is transmissible to humans and suggest
    that BASE is more virulent than classical BSE in humans.***

    6:30 Close of Day One


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


    Diagnosis and Reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease
    Singeltary, Sr et al. JAMA.2001; 285: 733-734.

    http://jama.ama-assn.org/http://www.neurology.org/cgi/eletters/60/2/176#535


    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
    BMJ
    vCJD in the USA * BSE in U.S.
    15 November 1999

    http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/319/7220/1312/b#5406


    BMJ

    U.S. Scientist should be concerned with a CJD epidemic in the U.S., as
    well...

    2 January 2000

    http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/320/7226/8/b#6117


    JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
    MARCH 26, 2003

    RE-Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
    in the United States

    Email Terry S. Singeltary:
    flounder@wt.net

    I lost my mother to hvCJD (Heidenhain Variant CJD). I would like to comment
    on the CDC's attempts to monitor the occurrence of emerging forms of CJD.
    Asante, Collinge et al [1] have reported that BSE transmission to the
    129-methionine genotype can lead to an alternate phenotype that is
    indistinguishable from type 2 PrPSc, the commonest sporadic CJD. However,
    CJD and all human TSEs are not reportable nationally. CJD and all human TSEs
    must be made reportable in every state and internationally. I hope that the
    CDC does not continue to expect us to still believe that the 85%+ of all CJD
    cases which ar sporadic are all spontaneous, without route/source. We have
    many TSEs i the USA in both animal and man. CWD in deer/elk is spreading
    rapidly and CWD does transmit to mink, ferret, cattle, and squirrel monkey
    by intracerebral inoculation. With the known incubation periods in other
    TSEs, oral transmission studies of CWD may take much longer. Every
    victim/family of CJD/TSEs should be asked about route and source of this
    agent. To prolong this will only spread the agent and needlessly
    exposeothers. In light of the findings of Asante and Collinge et al, there
    should be drastic measures to safeguard the medical and surgical arena from
    sporadic CJDs and all human TSEs. I only ponder how many sporadic CJDs in
    the USA are type 2 PrPSc?

    http://www.neurology.org/cgi/eletters/60/2/176#535


    doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(03)00715-1
    Copyright � 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Newsdesk

    Tracking spongiform encephalopathies in North America
    Xavier Bosch
    Available online 29 July 2003.
    Volume 3, Issue 8, August 2003, Page 463


    "My name is Terry S Singeltary Sr, and I live in Bacliff, Texas. I lost my
    mom to hvCJD (Heidenhain variant CJD) and have been searching for answers
    ever since. What I have found is that we have not been told the truth. CWD
    in deer and elk is a small portion of a much bigger problem."

    ............................


    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473309903007151/fulltext

    http://download.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/1473-3099/PIIS1473309903007151.pdf


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

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


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

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

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

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


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

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


    [Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk
    Materials for Human Food and Requirement for the Disposition of
    Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle

    03-025IFA
    03-025IFA-2

    http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/03-025IFA/03-025IFA-2.pdf


    THE SEVEN SCIENTIST REPORT ***

    http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02n0273/02n-0273-EC244-Attach-1.pdf

    Sporadic creutzfeldt-jakob disease in two adolescents (sCJD, the big lie)
    Date: May 28, 2007 at 7:58 am PST

    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0705&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=25276


    IN A NUT SHELL ;

    (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 then Central
    Bureau............

    http://www.oie.int/eng/Session2007/RF2006.pdf


    Audit Report
    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
    Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program � Phase II
    and
    Food Safety and Inspection Service

    Controls Over BSE Sampling, Specified Risk Materials, and Advanced Meat
    Recovery Products - Phase III

    Report No. 50601-10-KC January 2006

    Finding 2 Inherent Challenges in Identifying and Testing High-Risk Cattle
    Still Remain

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


    Report to Congressional Requesters:
    February 2005:
    Mad Cow Disease:

    FDA's Management of the Feed Ban Has Improved, but Oversight Weaknesses
    Continue to Limit Program Effectiveness:

    [Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-101]:

    http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05101.html

    http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d05101high.pdf


    January 2002 MAD COW DISEASE Improvements in the Animal Feed Ban and
    Other Regulatory Areas Would Strengthen U.S. Prevention Efforts GAO-02-183

    http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02183.pdf


    OIE BSE RECOMMENDATION FOR USA, bought and paid for by your local cattle
    dealers i.e. USDA

    Date: May 14, 2007 at 9:00 am PST

    http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18748


    What Do We Feed to Food-Production Animals? A Review of Animal Feed
    Ingredients and Their Potential Impacts on Human Health

    Date: May 24, 2007 at 6:59 am PST

    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0705&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=22301


    The Economic Impact of B.S.E. on the U.S. Beef Industry: BY NOT TESTING TO
    FIND

    Date: May 6, 2007 at 3:05 pm PST

    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0705&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=4687


    SCRAPIE UPDATE USA AS OF MARCH 2007 NOR98 INCLUDED

    Date: May 9, 2007 at 6:43 pm PST

    http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/animal_diseases/scrapie/downloads/monthly_scrapie_rpt.pps


    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0705&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=6721


    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0704&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=8315

    LIKE LAMBS TO SLAUGHTER

    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0704&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=11598


    Scrapie Agent (Strain 263K) Can Transmit Disease via the ORAL Route after
    Persistence in Soil over Years

    Date: May 16, 2007 at 10:01 am PST

    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0705&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=15481


    Colorado Surveillance Program for Chronic Wasting Disease Transmission to
    Humans (TWO SUSPECT CASES)

    Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 16:22:22 -0500

    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0704&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=1165


    Subject: Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP

    Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 2:37 PM

    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0704&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=816


    EXPORTATION AND IMPORTATION OF ANIMALS AND ANIMAL PRODUCTS:
    BSE; MRR AND IMPORTATION OF COMMODITIES, 65758-65759 [E6-19042]

    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0701&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=3854


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


    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0703&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=498


    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0702&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=10277


    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0701&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=9972


    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0703&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=4492


    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0703&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=2583


    http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0703&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=2470

    HUMAN and ANIMAL TSE Classifications i.e. mad cow disease and the UKBSEnvCJD
    only theory


    TSEs have been rampant in the USA for decades in many species, and they all
    have been rendered and fed back to animals for human/animal consumption. I
    propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances
    and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the
    UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2005. With all the science to date refuting it, to
    continue to validate this myth, will only spread this TSE agent through a
    multitude of potential routes and sources i.e. consumption, surgical, blood,
    medical, cosmetics etc. I propose as with Aguzzi, Asante, Collinge, Caughey,
    Deslys, Dormont, Gibbs, Ironside, Manuelidis, Marsh, et al and many more,
    that the world of TSE Tranmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy is far from an
    exact science, but there is enough proven science to date that this myth
    should be put to rest once and for all, and that we move forward with a new
    classification for human and animal TSE that would properly identify the
    infected species, the source species, and then the route. This would further
    have to be broken down to strain of species and then the route of
    transmission would further have to be broken down.

    Accumulation and Transmission are key to the threshold from subclinical to
    clinical disease, and of that, I even believe that physical and or blunt
    trauma may play a role of onset of clinical symptoms in some cases, but key
    to all this, is to stop the amplification and transmission of this agent,
    the spreading of, no matter what strain. BUT, to continue with this myth
    that the U.K. strain of BSE one strain in cows, and the nv/v CJD, one strain
    in humans, and that all the rest of human TSE is one single strain i.e.
    sporadic CJD (when to date there are 6 different phenotypes of sCJD), and
    that no other animal TSE transmits to humans, to continue with this
    masquerade will only continue to spread, expose, and kill, who knows how
    many more in the years and decades to come. ONE was enough for me, My Mom,
    hvCJD, DOD 12/14/97 confirmed, which is nothing more than another mans name
    added to CJD, like CJD itself, Jakob and Creutzfeldt, or
    Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker syndrome, just another CJD or human TSE,
    named after another human. WE are only kidding ourselves with the current
    diagnostic criteria for human and animal TSE, especially differentiating
    between the nvCJD vs the sporadic CJD strains and then the GSS strains and
    also the FFI fatal familial insomnia strains or the ones that mimics one or
    the other of those TSE? Tissue infectivity and strain typing of the many
    variants of the human and animal TSEs are paramount in all variants of all
    TSE. There must be a proper classification that will differentiate between
    all these human TSE in order to do this. With the CDI and other more
    sensitive testing coming about, I only hope that my proposal will some day
    be taken seriously.

    My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr. and I am no scientist, no doctor and have
    no PhDs, but have been independently researching human and animal TSEs since
    the death of my Mother to the Heidenhain Variant of Creutzfeldt Jakob
    Disease on December 14, 1997 'confirmed'. ...TSS

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    CREEKSTONE FARMS PREMIUM BEEF,
    L.L.C.,
    Plaintiff,
    v.
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
    et al.,
    Defendants.
    :::::::::::
    Civil Action No. 06-0544 (JR)

    snip...

    JAMES ROBERTSON
    United States District Judge

    The government's additional argument, that private testing 14 somehow would
    interfere with USDA's surveillance program, is unexplained and therefore
    rejected. Of greater concern is the possibility that private testing 15
    could produce a false positive result, which might trigger unnecessary
    public alarm. USDA has asserted this possibility as a reason to avoid
    private testing. Indeed, the Bio-Rad kits that Creekstone proposes using are
    used throughout the world, including as part of the USDA's own surveillance
    testing. - 18 -

    https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2006cv0544-22


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

    Posted by: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. | June 2, 2007 5:14 PM

    3

    Yes I can't understand the constitutionality of this move. I can see why it was thrown out once and will be again. Moves like this - trying to use your clout to restrict competitors activities - ALWAYS backfire in the end. People never learn that til after though.

    Posted by: Markk | June 2, 2007 7:08 PM

    4

    The next thread is "False Alarms Degrade Security."

    Leaving aside the legal and public relations stupidity of the guvmint, BSE testing is a bit like the current fad of having a CAT scan every now and then whether it's indicated or not. For every hidden problem detected, there will be lots more people who worry about false positives and take unnecessary further tests, even invasive biopsies and such. I think that MDs are generally opposed, except maybe those who have invested in scanners.

    Any of the major players in this can be accused of less than pure motives.

    Posted by: John | June 3, 2007 12:27 PM

    5

    With CAT scans, the issue isn't so much the danger of false positives, but the cumulative radiation exposure. The scans are extremely useful and often necessary tools, but the harm they do isn't negligible, and it adds up over time.

    Posted by: Caledonian | June 3, 2007 2:19 PM

    6

    >The scans are extremely useful and often necessary tools

    The analogy was to unnecessary scans.

    From this site:
    http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/radiation/ctbodyscans.htm

    "On the other hand, people whose scans produce suspicious findings may be subjected to expensive, invasive and sometimes unnecessary follow-up medical procedures. In healthy people, about 80% of abnormalities detected on CT studies are relatively harmless findings such as benign nodules, non-cancerous tumours, and scar tissue from past infections."

    "The American College of Radiology issued a statement on 27 September 2000 in which it proposed that there is not sufficient evidence to justify whole body CT screening in people with no symptoms or family history of illness. The College also expressed concerns that the procedure would lead to findings that will not be of benefit to the person's health but would rather result in increased anxiety, unnecessary follow-up examinations and treatments, and wasted expense."

    Cattle that should be tested aren't average cattle. General testing is a statistical nightmare for anything that is present in 1 out of millions of cases. Testing most of them doesn't provide any confidence that the others are disease free. In young cattle, it's not certain that the prions are present at high enough levels to show up in the test, so negatives aren't completely reliable either.

    The Japanese guvmint gets points with Japanese consumers for being vigilant and with Japanese farmers for keeping out cheap foreign meat. The US beef company gets to sell in a premium market. The only potential losers are other beef producers who get hurt by the headlines resulting from the false positives.

    Posted by: John | June 3, 2007 2:50 PM

    7

    The question is: How many false positives are you willing to endure to make certain the beef you consume (or beef you want to sell to Japan) is BSE free?

    What ever happened to the "self-policing" concept for mega corporations and wouldn't a free market mentality demand a process to produce a premium product thereby raising the quality or dropping the price of the "less-than" premium products? Should the FDA be effectively exercising a trust/anti-trust role by manipulating the potential market for fear of market pressures?

    The insane are running the asylum, they are not even for the issues they use to divide us.

    Posted by: capt | June 3, 2007 8:26 PM

    Post a Comment

    (Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





    ScienceBlogs

    Search ScienceBlogs:

    Go to:

    Advertisement
    Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

    © 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.