Thursday, April 9, 2009

Docket No. FDA2002N0031 (formerly Docket No. 2002N0273) RIN 0910AF46 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed

Thursday, April 09, 2009

Docket No. FDA2002N0031 (formerly Docket No. 2002N0273) RIN 0910AF46 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed

mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:burt.pritchett@fda.hhs.gov

Greetings FDA et al,

I kindly wish to comment on the following ;

[Docket No. FDA-2002-N-0031] (formerly Docket No. 2002N-0273) RIN 0910-AF46

[Federal Register: April 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 67)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 16160-16161] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ap09-18]

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 589

[Docket No. FDA-2002-N-0031] (formerly Docket No. 2002N-0273) RIN 0910-AF46

Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed Delay of Effective Date

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed delay of effective date.




http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-8127.htm





MY COMMENT AS FOLLOWS ;

I find it deeply disturbing, that with the science to date, especially with the science to date, transmission studies, the more virulent atypical strains of the BSE i.e. h-BSE and l-BSE, both of which have now been documented in North America, that we are even still discussing this most important topic. The industry involved has beat this mad cow feed ban to death, and still refuse to comply. IF they would have adhered to policy, rules and regulations put forth August 4th, 1997, when the partial, and voluntary ruminant to ruminant feed ban was first put in place, they would not still be crying the same tune. WE need not only to enforce the present ban, but strengthen it, especially to include blood in the ban. WE (the consumer), was promised this would happen years ago. For Pete's sake, this will be the third president to have to address these same questions, and I pray that this one has the guts to finally do something. We need NOT discuss this for one more second. We had 8 years that President Bush literally covered up mad cow disease, and let literally millions and millions of pounds of mad cow feed into commerce to be fed out. IN one feed ban recall alone in 2007, 10 MILLION PLUS POUNDS was fed out into commerce. and under this same President, we now millions of kids across our Nation that have been needlessly exposed to the mad cow agent via the infamous USDA CERTIFIED DOWNER COW DEAD STOCK SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM. if you think for one moment that the largest meat recall in the history of the USA was because a few animals were filmed being abused, your only kidding yourself. that meat was recalled because dead stock downer cows are at the highest risk to carry mad cow disease, and they had been feeding our children this stuff for years. AND then had the nerve to lie to us about THE GREAT BSE FIREWALL IN THE USA THAT WOULD PROTECT THE CONSUMER I.E. THE BSE FEED BAN, that never was nothing more than ink on paper. who will monitor these children in the years and decades to come for a human form of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy? who can with a CJD/TSE surveillance system and CJD Questionnaire set up the way it is now? you can't.


ENOUGH already $ NO MORE DISCUSSION PLEASE, WE NEED ACTION !


I strenuously urge President Obama to NOT discuss this for one more moment, actions must be put forth now, and enforce such actions.

I strenuously urge President Obama to ENHANCE the feed ban to include blood, and enforce said regulations, based on sound science.

I strenuously urge President Obama to ban the use of "poultry litter" and the use of all mammalian and poultry protein in ruminant feed,as a feed ingredient for ruminant animals, and enforce said regulations, based on sound science.

I strenuously urge President Obama to ban the use of "plate waste" as a feed ingredient for ruminants, and enforce said regulations, based on sound science.

I strenuously urge President Obama to ban from human food (including dietary supplements please see latest May 2009 CDC warning on these type supplements, CWD, and Elk Antler Velvet), and cosmetics a wide range of bovine-derived material so that the same safeguards that protect Americans from exposure to the agent of BSE through meat products regulated by USDA also apply to food products that FDA regulates, and enforce such actions, based on sound science.

I strenuously urge President Obama to further minimize the possibility of cross-contamination of ruminant and non-ruminant animal feed by requiring equipment, facilities or production lines to be dedicated to non-ruminant animal feeds if they use protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed. Currently, some equipment, facilities and production lines process or handle prohibited and non-prohibited materials and make both ruminant and non-ruminant feed -- a practice which could lead to cross-contamination, and enforce said regulations, based on sound science.


LET's take a look back at past promises and discussions on this issue, and then for a breath of fresh air, let's look at some sound science, and why no further discussion is warranted, and why action is needed ASAP ;


FDA to add new BSE-related feed rules soon Robert Roos News Editor

Sep 22, 2005 (CIDRAP News) – The head of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said this week the agency will soon align its rules on animal feed more closely with those in Canada and Europe, signaling a likelihood of new restrictions to prevent the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease.

The United States and Canada both ban the use of cattle parts in feed for cattle and other ruminant animals but allow cattle parts in feed for other animals such as pigs and poultry. However, Canada plans to ban the use of high-risk cattle parts, such as the brain and spinal cord of cattle older than 30 months, in all animal feeds in the near future. Europe already bans high-risk parts, called specified-risk materials (SRMs), from all animal feeds.

In July 2004 the FDA said it had reached a "preliminary" decision to ban SRMs from all animal feed, as recommended by an international panel of experts after the first US BSE case surfaced in December 2003. The agency promised to develop a proposal to that effect. SRMs are the tissues most likely to contain the abnormal proteins associated with BSE in infected animals.

FDA Commissioner Lester Crawford's comments in a Sep 19 speech now suggest the agency is about to go ahead with the plan, though he gave no date.

Crawford said the new rules will be "quite a bit stronger" than initially planned, according to a Sep 19 Bloomberg News report on his speech to the Consumer Federation of America. He said the rules will be similar to those in Europe and Canada.

"Our regulation will mimic theirs and it will supersede earlier considerations," Crawford was quoted as saying.

Will D. Hueston, DVM, a University of Minnesota professor who served on the expert panel that advised the US government about responses to the first BSE case, said Crawford's comments probably mean the FDA will ban SRMs from all animal feeds.

"I think it means they'll take additional action to remove SRMs from animal feeds—I think they' really targeting the high-risk materials, the brain and spinal cord," Hueston told CIDRAP News. "They're actively collaborating with Canada to try to get a uniform program, because we have a lot of trade with Canada in feed and animals and everything else."

"It's the international standard to remove SRMs from animal feed . . . in countries where BSE has been identified," said Hueston, who directs the university's Center for Animal Health and Food Safety.

SRMs are banned from human food; they are removed from cattle carcasses at slaughterhouses and taken to rendering plants, where they can currently be used in poultry feed and other nonruminant feeds. Hueston said the main concern is that cattle can be exposed to SRMs if they are accidentally given poultry feed. "So this [proposed ban] reduces the potential for leakage in the system."

Another pathway that exposes cattle to poultry feed is the practice of putting poultry litter—spilled bedding, feed, and waste collected underneath poultry cages—in cattle feed. Hueston said Canada has banned that, while the United States still permits it.

The FDA said last year it was considering banning the use of poultry litter in cattle feed. Reports on Crawford's speech didn't mention any comments on that issue.

"They [the FDA] haven't given a clear indication which way they're going to move on that," Hueston said. He commented that keeping SRMs out of poultry feed would address that concern.

According to accounts of his speech, Crawford did not suggest whether the FDA will ban the use of cattle blood and restaurant leftovers in cattle feed—practices that some regard as other risk factors for spreading BSE.

The United States has been trying to persuade Japan to reopen its market to US beef ever since BSE turned up here in 2003. According to the Bloomberg story, a draft report issued last week by Japan's Food Safety Commission said US cattle are more exposed to BSE than Japanese cattle because of insufficient feed regulations.

Hueston said the FDA is undoubtedly weighing the possible effects of its feed rules on the effort to reopen beef trade with Japan and other countries. "Aso, you don't want to create a brand-new disparity with Canada, when our beef industries are essentially joined at the hip," he added.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) said this week it hopes to ban SRMs from all animal feeds by the end of this year, according to a Sep 20 Reuters report. The story quoted Billy Hewett, the CFIA's policy director, as saying, "I know it seems slow, but it is enormously complex."

See also:

Jul 9, 2004, CIDRAP News story "FDA sets BSE-related rules but delays action on feed"

Overview of Canadian BSE safeguards




http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/heasan/disemala/bseesb/bseesbfs2e.shtml




http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/other/bse/news/sep2205bse.html




*** DO NOT forget what was originally promised years ago !!!


Press Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, Jan. 26, 2004 FDA Press Office 301-827-6242

Expanded "Mad Cow" Safeguards Announced to Strengthen Existing Firewalls Against BSE Transmission HHS Secretary Tommy G. Thompson today announced several new public health measures, to be implemented by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to strengthen significantly the multiple existing firewalls that protect Americans from exposure to the agent thought to cause bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, also known as mad cow disease) and that help prevent the spread of BSE in U.S. cattle.

The existing multiple firewalls, developed by both the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and HHS, have been extremely effective in protecting the American consumer from exposure to BSE. The first firewall is based on import controls started in 1989. A second firewall is surveillance of the U.S. cattle population for the presence of BSE, a USDA firewall that led to the finding of the BSE cow in December. The third firewall is FDA's 1997 animal feed ban, which is the critical safeguard to help prevent the spread of BSE through cattle herds by prohibiting the feeding of most mammalian protein to ruminant animals, including cattle. The fourth firewall, recently announced by USDA, makes sure that no bovine tissues known to be at high risk for carrying the agent of BSE enter the human food supply regulated by USDA. The fifth firewall is effective response planning to contain the potential for any damage from a BSE positive animal, if one is discovered. This contingency response plan, which had been developed over the past several years, was initiated immediately upon the discovery of a BSE positive cow in Washington State December 23.

The new safeguards being announced today are science-based and further bolster these already effective safeguards.

Specifically, HHS intends to ban from human food (including dietary supplements), and cosmetics a wide range of bovine-derived material so that the same safeguards that protect Americans from exposure to the agent of BSE through meat products regulated by USDA also apply to food products that FDA regulates.

FDA will also prohibit certain currently allowed feeding and manufacturing practices involving feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. These additional measures will further strengthen FDA's 1997 "animal feed" rule.

"Today's actions will make strong public health protections against BSE even stronger," Secretary Thompson said. "Although the current animal feed rule provides a strong barrier against the further spread of BSE, we must never be satisfied with the status quo where the health and safety of our animals and our population is at stake. The science and our own experience and knowledge in this area are constantly evolving. Small as the risk may already be, this is the time to make sure the public is protected to the greatest extent possible."

"Today we are bolstering our BSE firewalls to protect the public," said FDA Commissioner Mark B. McClellan, M.D., Ph.D. "We are further strengthening our animal feed rule, and we are taking additional steps to further protect the public from being exposed to any potentially risky materials from cattle. FDA's vigorous inspection and enforcement program has helped us achieve a compliance rate of more than 99 percent with the feed ban rule, and we intend to increase our enforcement efforts to assure compliance with our enhanced regulations. Finally, we are continuing to assist in the development of new technologies that will help us in the future improve even further these BSE protections. With today's actions, FDA will be doing more than ever before to protect the public against BSE by eliminating additional potential sources of BSE exposure."

To implement these new protections, FDA will publish two interim final rules that will take effect immediately upon publication, although there will be an opportunity for public comment after publication.

The first interim final rule will ban the following materials from FDA-regulated human food, (including dietary supplements) and cosmetics:

Any material from "downer" cattle. ("Downer" cattle are animals that cannot walk.) Any material from "dead" cattle. ("Dead" cattle are cattle that die on the farm (i.e. before reaching the slaughter plant); Specified Risk Materials (SRMs) that are known to harbor the highest concentrations of the infectious agent for BSE, such as the brain, skull, eyes, and spinal cord of cattle 30 months or older, and a portion of the small intestine and tonsils from all cattle, regardless of their age or health; and The product known as mechanically separated beef, a product which may contain SRMs. Meat obtained by Advanced Meat Recovery (an automated system for cutting meat from bones), may be used since USDA regulations do not allow the presence of SRMs in this product. The second interim final rule is designed to lower even further the risk that cattle will be purposefully or inadvertently fed prohibited protein. It was the feeding of such protein to cattle that was the route of disease transmission that led to the BSE epidemic in United Kingdom cattle in the 1980's and 1990's.

This interim final rule will implement four specific changes in FDA's present animal feed rule. First, the rule will eliminate the present exemption in the feed rule that allows mammalian blood and blood products to be fed to other ruminants as a protein source. Recent scientific evidence suggests that blood can carry some infectivity for BSE.

Second, the rule will also ban the use of "poultry litter" as a feed ingredient for ruminant animals. Poultry litter consists of bedding, spilled feed, feathers, and fecal matter that are collected from living quarters where poultry is raised. This material is then used in cattle feed in some areas of the country where cattle and large poultry raising operations are located near each other. Poultry feed may legally contain protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed, such as bovine meat and bone meal. The concern is that spillage of poultry feed in the chicken house occurs and that poultry feed (which may contain protein prohibited in ruminant feed) is then collected as part of the "poultry litter" and added to ruminant feed.

Third, the rule will ban the use of "plate waste" as a feed ingredient for ruminants. Plate waste consists of uneaten meat and other meat scraps that are currently collected from some large restaurant operations and rendered into meat and bone meal for animal feed. The use of "plate waste" confounds FDA's ability to analyze ruminant feeds for the presence of prohibited proteins, compromising the Agency's ability to fully enforce the animal feed rule.

Fourth, the rule will further minimize the possibility of cross-contamination of ruminant and non-ruminant animal feed by requiring equipment, facilities or production lines to be dedicated to non-ruminant animal feeds if they use protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed. Currently, some equipment, facilities and production lines process or handle prohibited and non-prohibited materials and make both ruminant and non-ruminant feed -- a practice which could lead to cross-contamination.

To accompany these new measures designed to provide a further layer of protection against BSE, FDA will in 2004 step up its inspections of feed mills and renderers. FDA will itself conduct 2,800 inspections and will make its resources go even further by continuing to work with state agencies to fund 3,100 contract inspections of feed mill and renderers and other firms that handle animal feed and feed ingredients. Through partnerships with states, FDA will also receive data on 700 additional inspections, for a total of 3,800 state contract and partnership inspections in 2004 alone, including annual inspections of 100 percent of all known renderers and feed mills that process products containing materials prohibited in ruminant feed.

"We have worked hard with the rendering and animal feed production industries to try and achieve full compliance with the animal feed rule," said Dr. McClellan, "and through strong education and a vigorous enforcement campaign, backed by additional inspections and resources, we intend to maintain a high level of compliance."

Dr. McClellan also noted that, in response to finding a BSE positive cow in Washington state December 23, FDA inspected and traced products at 22 facilities related to that positive cow or products from the cow, including feed mills, farms, dairy farms, calf feeder lots, slaughter houses, meat processors, transfer stations, and shipping terminals. Moreover, FDA has conducted inspections at the rendering facilities that handled materials from the positive cow, and they were found to be fully in compliance with FDA's feed rule.

To further strengthen protections for Americans, FDA/HHS intends to work with Congress to consider proposals to assure that these important protective measures will be implemented as effectively as possible.

FDA is also continuing its efforts to assist in the development of better BSE science, to achieve the same or greater confidence in BSE protection at a lower cost. For example, to enhance the ability of our public health system to detect prohibited materials in animal feed, FDA will continue to support the development and evaluation of diagnostic tests to identify prohibited materials. These tests would offer a quick and reliable method of testing animal feeds for prohibited materials and for testing other products for contamination with the agent thought to cause BSE.

FDA has publicly discussed many of the measures being announced today with stakeholders in workshops, videoconferences, and public meetings. In addition, FDA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in November 2002 (available online at http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/110602c.htm concerning possible changes to the animal feed rule.

Comprehensive information about FDA's work on BSE and links to other related websites are available at http://www.fda.gov.

###




http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/hhs_012604.html





For Immediate Release July 9, 2004 FSIS Press Office APHIS Press Office FDA Media Relations

(202) 720-9113 (202) 734-7799 (301) 827-6242

USDA and HHS Strengthen Safeguards Against Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy WASHINGTON, July 9, 2004--HHS Secretary Tommy G. Thompson and Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman today announced three actions being taken to further strengthen existing safeguards that protect consumers against the agent that causes bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, also known as "mad cow disease").

The three documents on display today include:

A joint USDA Food Safety & Inspection Service (FSIS), USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) notice that asks for public comment on additional preventive actions that are being considered concerning BSE; An interim final FDA rule that prohibits the use of certain cattle-derived materials in human food (including dietary supplements) and cosmetics; and A proposed FDA rule on recordkeeping requirements for the interim final rule relating to this ban. "Today's actions continue our strong commitment to public health protections against BSE," Secretary Thompson said. "Although our current rules are strong, when it comes to public health and safety we cannot be content with the status quo. We must continue to make sure the public is protected to the greatest extent possible."

"This Administration is committed to science-based measures to enhance and protect public health," Veneman said. "The advance notice of proposed rulemaking will allow the public the opportunity to provide their input."

"The series of firewalls already in place offer excellent protection against BSE," said Acting Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Lester M. Crawford. "With these additional measures, we will make a strong system even stronger by putting into effect the most comprehensive, science-based improvements possible."

The steps already taken have been effective in protecting the American consumer from exposure to BSE. Import controls on live cattle and certain ruminant products were put in place more than 15 years ago. In 1997, FDA finalized its animal feed ban, which has been the critical safeguard to stop the spread of BSE through the U.S. cattle population by prohibiting the feeding of most mammalian protein to cattle and other ruminant animals. USDA implemented additional measures in January to ensure that no cattle tissues known to be high risk for carrying the BSE agent are included in USDA-regulated products. Finally, as became evident last December, there is a contingency response plan, developed over the past several years, that is launched immediately to contain any potential damage after a BSE positive animal is found.

To allow interested parties and stakeholders the opportunity to comment on the additional regulatory and policy measures under consideration, USDA's APHIS and FSIS, along with the FDA, developed an advance notice of proposed rulemaking that includes several additional actions the federal government is considering regarding BSE.

The ANPR also provides the public a succinct report on the work of the international review team (IRT) convened by Secretary Veneman to review the U.S. response to the single case of BSE in the United States (in a cow imported from Canada), along with a summary of the many actions already taken by each agency on BSE.

USDA's FSIS continues to seek and address comments on actions taken in relation to the BSE mitigation measures and put in place in January 2004. FSIS is also specifically seeking comments on whether a country's BSE status should be taken into account when determining whether a country's meat inspection system is equivalent to the U.S. regulations including the provisions in the FSIS interim final rules.

USDA's APHIS is specifically seeking comments on the implementation of a national animal identification system. In April, USDA announced the availability of $18 million in Commodity Credit Corporation funding to expedite development of a national animal identification system, which is currently underway. APHIS is inviting comments on when and under what circumstances the program should move from voluntary to mandatory, and which species should be covered now and over the long term.

The ANPRM also requests comment on the following measures related to animal feed, which is regulated by FDA:

removing specified risk materials (SRM's) from all animal feed, including pet food, to control the risks of cross contamination throughout feed manufacture and distribution and on the farm due to misfeeding; requiring dedicated equipment or facilities for handling and storing feed and ingredients during manufacturing and transportation, to prevent cross contamination; prohibiting the use of all mammalian and poultry protein in ruminant feed, to prevent cross contamination; and prohibiting materials from non-ambulatory disabled cattle and dead stock from use in all animal feed. FDA has reached a preliminary conclusion that it should propose to remove SRM's from all animal feed and is currently working on a proposal to accomplish this goal. Comments on these issues raised in the ANPRM are due to FDA next month.

FDA today also issued an interim final rule that prohibits the use of cattle-derived materials that can carry the BSE-infectious agent in human foods, including certain meat-based products and dietary supplements, and in cosmetics. These highÇrisk cattle-derived materials include SRM's that are known to harbor concentrations of the infectious agent for BSE, such as the brain, skull, eyes, and spinal cord of cattle 30 months of age or older, and a portion of the small intestine and tonsils from all cattle, regardless of their age. Prohibited high-risk bovine materials also include material from non-ambulatory disabled cattle, the small intestine of all cattle, material from cattle not inspected and passed for human consumption, and mechanically separated beef.

This action is consistent with the recent interim final rule issued by USDA declaring these materials to be inedible (unfit for human food) and prohibiting their use as human food.

FDA's interim final rule, in conjunction with interim final rules issued by FSIS in January 2004, will minimize human exposure to materials that scientific studies have demonstrated are likely to contain the BSE agent when derived from cattle that are infected with the disease. Consumption of products contaminated with the agent that causes BSE is the likely cause of a similar disease in people called variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.

Although FDA's interim final rule has the full force and effect of law and takes effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register, FDA is also asking for public comment on it.

In conjunction with the publication of the interim final rule, FDA is also proposing to require that manufacturers and processors of FDA-regulated human food and cosmetics containing cattle-derived material maintain records showing that prohibited materials are not used in their products. FDA is taking this action because records documenting the absence of such materials are important to ensure compliance with requirements of the interim final rule.

Publication of this USDA-FDA notice, as well as the two FDA documents, is scheduled for mid-July in the Federal Register. Comments should be submitted as directed in the addresses section of each document. Each document also provides information about how and where comments received may be viewed.

####

Note to Reporters: USDA news releases, program announcements and media advisories are available on the Internet. Go to the APHIS home page at www.aphis.usda.gov and click on the "News" button.

HHS news releases are available online at www.hhs.gov; FDA news releases can be found at www.fda.gov, which will also provide links to the documents discussed in this release.

####





http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01084.html





STATEMENT BY LESTER M. CRAWFORD, D.V.M., PH.D. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF FOOD AND DRUGS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY UNITED STATES SENATE JANUARY 27, 2004

Introduction

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to participate in today’s hearing on measures taken by the Federal government to safeguard human and animal health in the United States from Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) and the response to the finding of a BSE-positive cow in the State of Washington. I am Dr. Lester M. Crawford, Deputy Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency).

The mission of FDA is to protect the public health by assuring the safety and efficacy of our nation’s human and veterinary drugs, human biological products, medical devices, human and animal food supply, cosmetics, and radiation emitting products. In fulfilling this mission, FDA is the Agency responsible for assuring that all FDA-regulated products remain safe and uncompromised from BSE and related diseases. Many FDA-regulated products contain bovine ingredients, for example, heart valves, ophthalmic devices, dental products, wound dressings, injectable drugs, vaccines, soups, gravies, sausage casings, and animal feeds.

FDA has long been actively involved nationally and internationally in efforts to understand and prevent the spread of BSE. FDA collaborates extensively with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), other Federal agencies, state and local jurisdictions, and with affected industries and consumer groups. Many of these activities fit within the framework of the Department of Health and Human Service’s (HHS or the Department) Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy/Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE/TSE) Action Plan, which was released in August 2001. This collaboration over many years has enabled FDA to strengthen safeguards for FDA-regulated products and to respond quickly and effectively to the first case of BSE within the U.S.

Executive Summary

The mission of the Agency is to protect the public health by assuring the safety and efficacy of our nation’s human and veterinary drugs, human biological products, medical devices, human and animal food supply, cosmetics, and radiation emitting products. In fulfilling this mission, FDA is the Agency responsible for assuring that all FDA-regulated products remain safe and uncompromised from BSE and related diseases.

BSE is a progressive neurological disorder of cattle that results from infection by an unconventional transmissible agent, and was first diagnosed in the United Kingdom (U.K.) in 1986. Many FDA-regulated products contain bovine ingredients, for example, heart valves, ophthalmic devices, dental products, wound dressings, injectable drugs, vaccines, soups, gravies, sausage casings, and animal feeds and thus must be taken into consideration as part the effort to prevent infectivity by BSE.

FDA has a longstanding commitment to protecting consumers from BSE by following multiple measures designed to safeguard FDA-regulated products from possible contamination by the BSE agent. Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act, FDA has the authority to prevent the adulteration and misbranding of FDA-regulated products. Further, for medical products that require pre-market approval (e.g., drugs under Section 505 and medical devices under Section 513 of the FD&C Act), FDA has addressed safety concerns related to BSE through requirements of the application and approval process.

The U.S. employs a robust multi-layered approach to preventing the introduction and amplification of BSE. While the goal of this approach is to achieve an extremely high level of compliance with each preventative measure, this multi-layered approach is designed to protect the U.S. consumer from exposure to the BSE infective material, and to date this approach has been working. Since 1989, USDA has prohibited the importation of live animals and animal products from BSE-positive countries. Since 1997, FDA has prohibited the use of certain mammalian proteins in the manufacture of ruminant feed. FDA continues to implement policies to keep safe all FDA-regulated products, including food, food ingredients, dietary supplements, drugs, vaccines, and cosmetics from risk of any BSE-contaminated bovine material. As a result of these multiple regulatory safeguards, the risk of exposure to BSE through products, FDA regulates remains extremely low in the U.S.

FDA’s 1997 animal feed regulation forms the basis of the Agency’s efforts to prevent the spread of BSE through animal feed. This rule prohibits the use of most mammalian protein in the manufacture of animal feeds for ruminants. FDA implemented this rule to establish in our country feeding practices consistent with the best science and epidemiological knowledge known at the time to prevent the spread of BSE throughout herds of U.S. cattle. A risk assessment sponsored by USDA and conducted by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, released in November 2001, identified FDA’s feed ban as one of the primary safeguards against the spread of BSE in U.S. cattle.

To maximize protection afforded by the feed regulation, FDA has developed and implemented a BSE/Ruminant Feed Ban Inspection compliance program and established the goal of 100 percent compliance. FDA’s strategy for achieving uniform compliance with the feed rule focuses on three areas: education, inspection, and enforcement. FDA and its state counterparts conduct, at least annually, targeted BSE inspections of 100 percent of known renderers, protein blenders, and feed mills processing products containing material prohibited from use in ruminant feed. Compliance by these establishments with FDA’s feed rule is estimated to be at better than 99 percent. As of December 20, 2003, FDA had received over 26,000 inspection reports (6,404 for Fiscal Year 2003). The majority of these inspections (around 70 percent) were conducted by state officials for FDA, with the remainder conducted by FDA officials. The total number of inspection reports represents 13,672 firms, 1,949 of which are active and handle materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed. The 1,949 active firms that handle prohibited material have been inspected by FDA and, as of December 31, 2003, only five were found to have significant violations, resulting in official action indicated (OAI). FDA is working with these firms to bring them into compliance.

On December 23, 2003, FDA was notified by USDA of a presumptive-positive finding of BSE in a cow in Washington State. FDA immediately initiated its BSE Emergency Response Plan. As part of the plan, FDA has been coordinately closely with USDA so that we can effectively investigate this BSE case, trace the various products involved, and take the appropriate steps to protect the public. FDA investigators and inspectors located the high risk material rendered from the infected cow, and the rendering plants placed a hold on the rendered material, which is being disposed of appropriately. I am happy to report that all of the establishments inspected by FDA during the course of the investigation were in compliance with the feed ban. In addition, to help address the concerns of foreign governments and restore confidence in American products, FDA has participated, along with USDA, in numerous meetings and consultations with foreign governments since USDA surveillance found the BSE-positive cow.

In addition to new policies and regulations, new knowledge and tools gained through applied research can greatly help us to be more effective in our regulatory mission, such as protecting the country from BSE. Several of FDA’s Centers, as well as many private laboratories, academic institutions, and other Federal agencies (most notably NIH) are also involved in significant research activities relating to TSEs. Basic areas requiring research include: increasing our understanding of prions, learning how prions are transmitted within a species and potentially between species, developing diagnostic tests for humans and animals, developing detection methods for use on regulated products, developing methods to increase or eliminate infectivity, and designing new treatments. We are optimistic about the promise of new technologies, such as better methods to quickly distinguish the species of proteins and sensors to detect abnormal prions in food. Development of these technologies can contribute significantly to the effort to prevent the spread of BSE and must be considered carefully when evaluating potential regulatory changes to address BSE.

At the time that FDA implemented the feed rule in 1997, the Agency also recognized that evolving, complex scientific and public health issues, particularly regarding BSE required the Agency to continue to assess and scrutinize the rule to ensure its integrity as a firewall against the potential for spread of BSE. To further explore ways the animal feed regulation could be improved in November 2002, FDA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) soliciting information and views from the affected industries and the public on some potential changes to its current feed regulation, including ways that the animal feed regulation could be strengthened. Although the risk of exposure to BSE in the U.S. remains extremely low and the measures in place are working, as a result of the recently discovered infected cow in the state of Washington, the Agency is evaluating the appropriateness of additional science-based measures to further strengthen our current protections.

Yesterday, Department Secretary Tommy Thompson and FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan announced several additional public health measures to further strengthen the current robust safeguards that help protect Americans from exposure to the agent that causes BSE and help prevent the spread of BSE in U.S. cattle. These measures relate to both protections for foods intended for human consumption as well as additional measures to strengthen FDA’s 1997 final rule regulating animal feed. With respect to human foods, FDA announced that it will extend to FDA-regulated foods, dietary supplements and cosmetics, restrictions on using specified risk materials that would complement the recent USDA announcements. Concerning animal feed, the Agency announced a series of measures designed to lower even further the risk that cattle will be purposefully or inadvertently fed “ruminant” proteins, including, eliminating an exemption in the feed rule that allows mammalian blood and blood products at slaughter to be fed to ruminants as a protein source; banning the use of “poultry litter” as a feed ingredient for cattle and other ruminants; prohibiting the use of “plate waste” as a feed ingredient for ruminants, including cattle; and taking steps to further minimize the possibility of cross-contamination of animal feed via equipment, facilities or production lines.

Finally, FDA is increasing its inspections of feed mills and renderers in 2004. Our 2001 base funding for BSE-related activities was $3.8 million. We shifted resources internally in 2001 and received a substantial increase from Congress in 2002. Our funded level for 2004 is currently approximately $21.5 million, almost a five-fold increase over the 2001 base. FDA will itself conduct 2,800 inspections and will make its resources go even further by working with state agencies to fund 3,100 contract inspections of feed mills and renderers and other firms that handle animal feed and feed ingredients. Through partnerships with states, FDA will also receive data on 700 additional inspections, for a total of 3,800 state contract and partnership inspections in 2004. These inspections would include 100 percent of all known renderers and feed mills that process products containing prohibited materials.

The Agency looks forward to continuing to assist Congress as it evaluates the risks associated with BSE, identifies opportunities to promote technologies that will detect and prevent the spread of BSE, and considers science-based approaches to further strengthen regulatory protections and bolster the resources available to assist Federal, state, local and private efforts to assure that BSE does not present a threat to human or animal health in the U.S.

see full text ;




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/04/substances-prohibited-from-use-in.html





OH, that's right, old lester sold out to the highest bidder $$$



Ex-FDA Chief Faces Fines in Stock Case By ANDREW BRIDGES, Associated Press Writer 1:55 PM PST, January 19, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Former FDA Commissioner Lester Crawford would face a $50,000 fine and probation but no jail time as punishment for lying about ownership of illegally held stocks, according to a deal worked out between his attorney and federal prosecutors.

Crawford and the government both have agreed to the fine and some form of probation, though his ultimate sentence will be at the discretion of Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson, according to sentencing memoranda filed with the U.S. District Court in Washington.

His sentencing is set for Tuesday.

Crawford pleaded guilty in October to charges of having a conflict of interest and false reporting of information about stocks he and his wife owned in food, beverage and medical device companies he regulated while head of the Food and Drug Administration.

The U.S. Attorney's office recommended the $50,000 fine, saying it would exceed the roughly $39,000 Crawford and his wife, Cathy, made from exercising options and in dividends from the forbidden stocks they held in the FDA-regulated companies.

The government also recommended Crawford be sentenced to probation and community service but skip any jail time, according to its sentencing memo filed with the court. Crawford could face up to six months in jail under sentencing guidelines.

"Given his early acceptance of responsibility, the defendant's actions merit the stigma of criminal convictions, a fine, and probation, but not incarceration," according to the government memo, signed by assistant U.S. attorneys Howard R. Sklamberg and Timothy G. Lynch. Sklamberg declined to comment Friday.

Crawford's attorney, Barbara Van Gelder, said her client agreed to pay the fine, according to her memo to the court. However, Van Gelder specifically requested unsupervised probation, which would allow Crawford to travel overseas for work. Van Gelder did not mention community service in her memo. She did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

In October, Crawford admitted to falsely reporting that he had sold or did not own stock when he continued holding shares in the firms governed by rules of the FDA, which is illegal. Beginning in 2002, Crawford filed seven incorrect financial reports with a government ethics office and Congress, leading to the misdemeanor charges.

Although Crawford lied about ownership of the stocks -- including under oath before the Senate -- government attorneys acknowledged there is no evidence he was "engaged in a concerted scheme to use his high office for personal gain."

Van Gelder, meanwhile, suggested Crawford's wife, secretary and financial adviser prepared and handled the inaccurate financial statements Crawford filed with the government. She acknowledged, however, that Crawford remained ultimately responsible for their accuracy.

Crawford, a veterinarian and food-safety expert, abruptly resigned from the FDA in September 2005 but gave no reason for leaving. He had held the job for two months, following his confirmation by the Senate.

* __

On the Net:

Food and Drug Administration: http://www.fda.gov

http://www.latimes.com/


Date: October 18, 2006 at 7:44 am PST

Former FDA Commissioner Pleads Guilty to Conflict of Interest and Making False Financial Disclosures

WASHINGTON, Oct. 17, 2006 - Lester M. Crawford, a former Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), has pled guilty to a Conflict of Interest charge and Making False Financial Disclosures to the U.S. Senate and the Executive Branch, announced U.S. Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor and Inspector General Daniel Levinson, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Crawford entered his guilty plea to the two misdemeanor charges this afternoon in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia before U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah Robinson. Crawford is scheduled to be sentenced on January 22, 2007. He faces a sentence of up to one year in prison on each charge.

"One of the most important principles of our ethics laws is that public officials cannot have a financial interest in any decision that they make,” stated U.S. Attorney Taylor. “Lester Crawford, who held one of the most important jobs in government, blatantly violated these principles. Today, he is being held accountable for his actions."

Inspector General Levinson stated, "Any Government official's disregard of the conflict of interest laws undermines the integrity of the rules of conduct established for all those in Government. Taxpayers must have confidence that administrators of Government programs will be objective and free from improper influences in carrying out their official duties."

Crawford, 68, of Chevy Chase, Maryland, held some of the most senior positions in the FDA. He served as Deputy Commissioner between February 25, 2002 and March 26, 2004, when he became Acting Commissioner. On February 15, 2005, Crawford was nominated to become Commissioner. On July 18, 2005, the U.S. Senate confirmed Crawford, who remained Commissioner until September 30, 2005.

As a senior FDA employee, Crawford was required to file regular Public Financial Disclosure Reports, known as Standard Form SF 278s. Schedule A of the SF 278 required the filer to list all investment assets having a value exceeding $1,000 that were held by the filer or the filer's spouse, as well as sources of income exceeding $200 earned by the filer during the applicable reporting period.

Each year, ethics officials at the Department of Health and Human Services reviewed Crawford's SF 278s to ensure that he and his wife were not holding stocks or stock options of companies that were "significantly regulated organizations," which federal regulations defined as organizations for which the sales of products regulated by the FDA constitute ten percent or more of annual gross sales in the organization's previous fiscal year. Any FDA employee who was required to file an SF 278 could not hold a "financial interest," such as stock or stock options, in a significantly regulated organization.

Crawford's nomination as Commissioner required confirmation by the U.S. Senate and was considered by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. As a nominee, Crawford was required to submit two financial disclosure documents to the Committee: an SF 278 and a Statement for Completion by Presidential Nominees. Crawford filed both forms in February 2005.

Crawford’s plea to Making False Writings is based on his failure to disclose his and his wife’s ownership of stock in “significantly regulated organizations” to the Senate Committee and to the Executive Branch.

During the relevant time periods, Crawford and/or his wife owned forbidden stocks in the following “significantly regulated organizations”: Pepsico, Sysco, Kimberly-Clark, and Embrex.

Crawford filed a number of disclosure forms and other false writings in which he did not declare his and his wife’s ownership of forbidden stocks and stock options. Specifically,

•July 1, 2004. In this SF 278, Crawford disclosed ownership of Sysco and Kimberly-Clark stock. When an HHS ethics official inquired about Crawford’s ownership of this stock, Crawford responded in a December 28, 2004 email that the stocks in "Sysco and Kimberly-Clark have in fact been sold." That statement was false.

• February 23, 2005. Crawford did not disclose on this SF 278 his income from a November 17, 2004 exercise of Embrex stock options or the Crawfords' ownership of Kimberly-Clark or Sysco stock.

• February 25, 2005. Crawford failed to disclose in his nominee Statement to the Senate Committee his income from the exercise of Embrex stock options in October 2003 and November 2004. Crawford also did not disclose his remaining Embrex stock options.

Crawford’s ownership of Sysco and Pepsico stock and his role as Chairman of the FDA’s Obesity Working Group (“OWG”) gave rise to the Conflict of Interest charge, to which he has also pled guilty. On February 11, 2004, Crawford and the OWG's Vice Chairman submitted the OWG's final report and recommendations, entitled "Calories Count: Report of the Working Group on Obesity," to then-FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan. The report contained many recommendations, including encouraging manufacturers to re-label serving sizes, noting as an example that "a 20 oz bottle of soda that currently states 110 calories per serving and 2.5 servings per bottle could be labeled as 275 calories per bottle." The FDA publicly released "Calories Count" on March 12, 2004.

On June 3, 2004, Crawford testified before the House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform about the government's role in combating obesity. In his testimony, Crawford outlined the OWG's recommendations and again stressed the importance of re-labeling serving sizes for sodas.

During the entire period from the formation of the OWG to the date of Crawford's congressional testimony, Crawford and his wife owned 1,400 shares of Pepsico stock, worth a minimum of about $62,000, and 2,500 shares of Sysco stock, worth a minimum of about $78,000. Pepsico, a leading manufacturer of soft drinks and snack foods, and its shareholders had a financial interest in the OWG's conclusions and recommendations. Sysco, a leading manufacturer of food products, and its shareholders had a financial interest in the OWG's conclusions and recommendations.

There is no evidence that the OWG's conclusions were altered because of the Crawfords' ownership of Pepsico or Sysco stock.

Following the announcement of Crawford’s departure from office, Senators Mike Enzi and Edward Kennedy and Representatives Maurice Hinchey, Marcy Kaptur, Lynn Woolsey, Raúl Grijalva, and Sam Farr asked that the Inspector General investigate this matter.

In announcing today’s guilty plea, U.S. Attorney Taylor and Inspector General Levinson commended Inspector Thomas Sowinski of the Inspector General’s office for his outstanding investigation of this case. They also thanked the Senate Legal Counsel’s Office for the help that it provided in the investigation. Finally, they commended Assistant U.S. Attorneys Howard Sklamberg and Timothy Lynch, who prosecuted the case, and intern Vi Do, who assisted in the investigation.

For Information, Contact Public Affairs Channing Phillips (202) 514-6





http://www.pharmalive.com/News/index.cfm?articleid=382127&categoryid=30





SO, in essence, the fda simply hung a carrot out in front of the public, and the public bit. i ain't biting. it's all about money, to hell with human health ;

reminds me of ;

STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 25, AUGUST 1995

snip...END full text ;





http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/04/substances-prohibited-from-use-in.html





FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE P07-08 January 19, 2007 Media Inquiries: Kathleen Quinn, 301-827-6242 Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA

FDA Commissioner Announces Important Personnel Changes

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Andrew C. von Eschenbach is pleased to announce two new personnel changes at the Agency; the creation of the Office of the Chief Medical Officer which will be overseen by Deputy Commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock and the appointment of John R. Dyer, MPH, as the agency's Deputy Commissioner for Operations and the Chief Operating Officer (COO).

snip...

"FDA is a science-based agency and science-led Agency; science provides the foundation for our regulatory decisions and the work we do on a daily basis to promote and protect the nations' health," said Dr. von Eschenbach. "Creation of this office, and position, will better ensure we achieve this mission with the highest scientific quality and effectiveness needed."

snip...

Mr. Dyer most recently served as the Chief Operating Officer for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), a federal agency within the Department of Health and Human Services that is responsible for providing health insurance benefits to the elderly, disabled, and indigent through the Medicare and Medicaid programs. In that capacity, he led the implementation of the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA) and was responsible for the overall day to day operations of the agency. Specifically as COO, he helped develop the program policies and regulations, and stood up the business and systems operations of the prescription drug program in time for the congressionally mandated start of open enrollment on Oct 15, 2005 and start of the drug prescription benefits on January 1, 2006.

Prior to CMS, from 2001-2003, Mr. Dyer worked in the private sector for information technology and executive leadership companies. He was involved in entrepreneurial ventures in agriculture, real estate, and industrial enterprises in Latin America from 2003-2004.

In his federal career from 1972 to 2000, Mr. Dyer held increasingly responsible executive positions with the Social Security Administration (SSA), including the Chief Information Officer and Principal Deputy Commissioner where he assisted the agency by leading the effort to automate and modernize systems and improve the level of customer service. Other federal positions include the Director for Budget and Management at CMS (then the Health Care Financing Administration) from 1984-1998 and Commerce Branch Chief at the Office of Management and Budget in the Executive Office of the President. While at OMB, Mr. Dyer had budget and policy review of wide-ranging research and development programs ranging from mental health to ocean and atmospheric related.

Mr. Dyer has been the recipient of many awards during his federal career including the Presidential Award for Distinguished Executive. He holds a Masters Degree in Public Health from the University of Michigan and obtained his undergraduate Bachelor of Arts in Sociology from Notre Dame.

####





http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2007/NEW01549.html





and this is science based ???


Owner and Corporation Plead Guilty to Defrauding Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program

An Arizona meat processing company and its owner pled guilty in February 2007 to charges of theft of Government funds, mail fraud, and wire fraud. The owner and his company defrauded the BSE Surveillance Program when they falsified BSE Surveillance Data Collection Forms and then submitted payment requests to USDA for the services. In addition to the targeted sample population (those cattle that were more than 30 months old or had other risk factors for BSE), the owner submitted to USDA, or caused to be submitted, BSE obex (brain stem) samples from healthy USDA-inspected cattle. As a result, the owner fraudulently received approximately $390,000. Sentencing is scheduled for May 2007.

snip...

Topics that will be covered in ongoing or planned reviews under Goal 1 include:

soundness of BSE maintenance sampling (APHIS),

implementation of Performance-Based Inspection System enhancements for specified risk material (SRM) violations and improved inspection controls over SRMs (FSIS and APHIS),

snip...

The findings and recommendations from these efforts will be covered in future semiannual reports as the relevant audits and investigations are completed.

4 USDA OIG SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS FY 2007 1st Half




http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf




-MORE Office of the United States Attorney District of Arizona FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For Information Contact Public Affairs February 16, 2007 WYN HORNBUCKLE Telephone: (602) 514-7625 Cell: (602) 525-2681

CORPORATION AND ITS PRESIDENT PLEAD GUILTY TO DEFRAUDING GOVERNMENT’S MAD COW DISEASE SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM

PHOENIX -- Farm Fresh Meats, Inc. and Roland Emerson Farabee, 55, of Maricopa, Arizona, pleaded guilty to stealing $390,000 in government funds, mail fraud and wire fraud, in federal district court in Phoenix. U.S. Attorney Daniel Knauss stated, “The integrity of the system that tests for mad cow disease relies upon the honest cooperation of enterprises like Farm Fresh Meats. Without that honest cooperation, consumers both in the U.S. and internationally are at risk. We want to thank the USDA’s Office of Inspector General for their continuing efforts to safeguard the public health and enforce the law.” Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee were charged by Information with theft of government funds, mail fraud and wire fraud. According to the Information, on June 7, 2004, Farabee, on behalf of Farm Fresh Meats, signed a contract with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (the “USDA Agreement”) to collect obex samples from cattle at high risk of mad cow disease (the “Targeted Cattle Population”). The Targeted Cattle Population consisted of the following cattle: cattle over thirty months of age; nonambulatory cattle; cattle exhibiting signs of central nervous system disorders; cattle exhibiting signs of mad cow disease; and dead cattle. Pursuant to the USDA Agreement, the USDA agreed to pay Farm Fresh Meats $150 per obex sample for collecting obex samples from cattle within the Targeted Cattle Population, and submitting the obex samples to a USDA laboratory for mad cow disease testing. Farm Fresh Meats further agreed to maintain in cold storage the sampled cattle carcasses and heads until the test results were received by Farm Fresh Meats.

Evidence uncovered during the government’s investigation established that Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee submitted samples from cattle outside the Targeted Cattle Population. Specifically, Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee submitted, or caused to be submitted, obex samples from healthy, USDA inspected cattle, in order to steal government moneys.

Evidence collected also demonstrated that Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee failed to maintain cattle carcasses and heads pending test results and falsified corporate books and records to conceal their malfeasance. Such actions, to the extent an obex sample tested positive (fortunately, none did), could have jeopardized the USDA’s ability to identify the diseased animal and pinpoint its place of origin. On Wednesday, February 14, 2007, Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee pleaded guilty to stealing government funds and using the mails and wires to effect the scheme. According to their guilty pleas:

(a) Farm Fresh Meats collected, and Farabee directed others to collect, obex samples from cattle outside the Targeted Cattle Population, which were not subject to payment by the USDA;

(b) Farm Fresh Meats 2 and Farabee caused to be submitted payment requests to the USDA knowing that the requests were based on obex samples that were not subject to payment under the USDA Agreement;

(c) Farm Fresh Meats completed and submitted, and Farabee directed others to complete and submit, BSE Surveillance Data Collection Forms to the USDA’s testing laboratory that were false and misleading;

(d) Farm Fresh Meats completed and submitted, and Farabee directed others to complete and submit, BSE Surveillance Submission Forms filed with the USDA that were false and misleading;

(e) Farm Fresh Meats falsified, and Farabee directed others to falsify, internal Farm Fresh Meats documents to conceal the fact that Farm Fresh Meats was seeking and obtaining payment from the USDA for obex samples obtained from cattle outside the Targeted Cattle Population; and

(f) Farm Fresh Meats failed to comply with, and Farabee directed others to fail to comply with, the USDA Agreement by discarding cattle carcasses and heads prior to receiving BSE test results. A conviction for theft of government funds carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Mail fraud and wire fraud convictions carry a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment. Convictions for the above referenced violations also carry a maximum fine of $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for organizations. In determining an actual sentence, Judge Earl H. Carroll will consult the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, which provide appropriate sentencing ranges. The judge, however, is not bound by those guidelines in determining a sentence.

Sentencing is set before Judge Earl H. Carroll on May 14, 2007. The investigation in this case was conducted by Assistant Special Agent in Charge Alejandro Quintero, United States Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General. The prosecution is being handled by Robert Long, Assistant U.S. Attorney, District of Arizona, Phoenix. CASE NUMBER: CR-07-00160-PHX-EHC RELEASE NUMBER: 2007-051(Farabee) # # #




http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/az/press_releases/2007/2007-051(Farabee).pdf




Thu Dec 6, 2007 11:38

FDA IN CRISIS MODE, AMERICAN LIVES AT RISK




http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/fs/food-disease/news/dec0407fda.html




FDA SCIENCE AND MISSION AT RISK




http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/07/briefing/2007-4329b_02_01_FDA%20Report%20on%20Science%20and%20Technology.pdf




snip...



see full text ;




http://fdafailedus.blogspot.com/2008/06/federal-oversight-of-food-safety-fda.html





oh, and by the way, let me remind you that ;


you know as well as I do, that in Texas, the SSS policy has been in full force for years.

they don't test suspect mad cows, they send them straight to the pet food render.

they don't get tested.


FDA Statement FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Statement May 4, 2004 Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242 Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA

Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms On Friday, April 30 th , the Food and Drug Administration learned that a cow with central nervous system symptoms had been killed and shipped to a processor for rendering into animal protein for use in animal feed.

FDA, which is responsible for the safety of animal feed, immediately began an investigation. On Friday and throughout the weekend, FDA investigators inspected the slaughterhouse, the rendering facility, the farm where the animal came from, and the processor that initially received the cow from the slaughterhouse.

FDA's investigation showed that the animal in question had already been rendered into "meat and bone meal" (a type of protein animal feed). Over the weekend FDA was able to track down all the implicated material. That material is being held by the firm, which is cooperating fully with FDA.

Cattle with central nervous system symptoms are of particular interest because cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, also known as "mad cow disease," can exhibit such symptoms. In this case, there is no way now to test for BSE. But even if the cow had BSE, FDA's animal feed rule would prohibit the feeding of its rendered protein to other ruminant animals (e.g., cows, goats, sheep, bison).

FDA is sending a letter to the firm summarizing its findings and informing the firm that FDA will not object to use of this material in swine feed only. If it is not used in swine feed, this material will be destroyed. Pigs have been shown not to be susceptible to BSE. If the firm agrees to use the material for swine feed only, FDA will track the material all the way through the supply chain from the processor to the farm to ensure that the feed is properly monitored and used only as feed for pigs.

To protect the U.S. against BSE, FDA works to keep certain mammalian protein out of animal feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. FDA established its animal feed rule in 1997 after the BSE epidemic in the U.K. showed that the disease spreads by feeding infected ruminant protein to cattle.

Under the current regulation, the material from this Texas cow is not allowed in feed for cattle or other ruminant animals. FDA's action specifying that the material go only into swine feed means also that it will not be fed to poultry.

FDA is committed to protecting the U.S. from BSE and collaborates closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on all BSE issues. The animal feed rule provides crucial protection against the spread of BSE, but it is only one of several such firewalls. FDA will soon be improving the animal feed rule, to make this strong system even stronger.

####




http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/new01061.html





and the one they did finally document, it took an act of congress to get the be nice mad cow documented, of which it was the h-BSE atypical. and if it were not for the Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG, that mad cow too would have never been documented. these are the facts.

Thursday, December 04, 2008 2:37 PM

"we have found that H-BSE can infect humans."

personal communication with Professor Kong. ...TSS

see full text ;





http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/02/atypical-bse-north-america-update.html





Saturday, January 24, 2009

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy h-BSE ATYPICAL USA 2008 Annual Report Research Project: Study of Atypical Bse

Location: Virus and Prion Diseases of Livestock

2008 Annual Report





http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/01/bovine-spongiform-encephalopathy-h-bse.html





SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM FROM DOWNER CATTLE UPDATE

IS THERE A SCRAPIE-LIKE DISEASE IN CATTLE ?

In April of 1985, a mink rancher in Wisconsin reported a debilitating neurologic disease in his herd which we diagnosed as TME by histopathologic findings confirmed by experimental transmission to mink and squirrel monkeys. The rancher was a ''dead stock'' feeder using mostly (>95%) downer or dead dairy cattle and a few horses. She had never been fed.

We believe that these findings may indicate the presence of a previously unrecognized scrapie-like disease in cattle and wish to alert dairy practitioners to this possibility.

snip...

PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEVENTH ANNUAL WESTERN CONFERENCE FOR FOOD ANIMAL VETERINARY MEDICINE, University of Arizona, March 17-19, 1986




http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m09a/tab01.pdf




http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m09/tab05.pdf




IS THERE A SCRAPIE-LIKE DISEASE IN CATTLE ?

YOU BET THERE IS, AND HAS BEEN, AND WE BEEN FEEDING THE MOST HIGH RISK I.E. DEAD STOCK DOWNER COWS TO OUR CHILDREN FOR DECADES, who will follow these children for human TSE from mad cow disease here in the USA in the years, decades to come, and how many will they expose from the 'pass it forward' friendly fire modes ???



http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2008/12/evaluation-of-fsis-management-controls.html



http://downercattle.blogspot.com/




Saturday, March 14, 2009 Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack Announces Final Rule for Handling of Non-Ambulatory Cattle

Release No. 0060.09 Contact: Amanda Eamich (202) 720-9113



http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2009/03/agriculture-secretary-tom-vilsack.html



and if you don't believe me, just ask the Honorable and Nobel Prize winner for the PRION, Stanley Prusiner ;

DAMNING TESTIMONY FROM STANLEY PRUSINER THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER ON PRIONS SPEAKING ABOUT ANN VENEMAN

''they don't wanna know, the dont' care'' "they don't want our comments'' ''level of absolute ignorance'' ''beef export'' ''nothing else matters'' ''yes, i think prions are bad to eat, and you can die from them''




http://maddeer.org/video/embedded/prusinerclip.html




Saturday, February 21, 2009 Renderers say industry not prepared for FDA feed ban rule ??? WHAT, IT'S 2009 FOR PETE'S SAKE $$$ Two recent articles caught my eye ;

Renderers say industry not prepared for FDA feed ban rule

Food Chemical News

February 2, 2009

and

BSE, rendering relate to human safety

Emma Struve 02/17/2009




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/02/renderers-say-industry-not-prepared-for.html




Risk of Introduction of BSE into Japan by the Historical Importation of Live Cattle from the United Kingdom (USA AND CANADA)




http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2009/03/risk-of-introduction-of-bse-into-japan.html




Wednesday, January 28, 2009

TAFS1 Position Paper on Specified Risk Materials (January, 2009)

TAFS INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR TRANSMISSIBLE ANIMAL DISEASES AND FOOD SAFETY a non-profit Swiss Foundation

(January 2009)

TAFS1 Position Paper on Specified Risk Materials




http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2009/01/tafs1-position-paper-on-specified-risk.html




TAFS1 Position Paper on Testing of Cattle for BSE (Revision January 2009)




http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/02/tafs1-position-paper-on-testing-of.html




Wednesday, February 11, 2009 Atypical BSE North America Update February 2009




http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/02/atypical-bse-north-america-update.html




RECEIVED FSIS DOCKET ROOM 04 MAY 18 AM 9:51

03-025IF 03-025IF-634 Linda A. Detwiler

Linda A. Detwiler, DVM 225 Hwy 35 Red Ban, New Jersey 07701 Phone: 732-741-2290

Animal Feed

Epidemiological evidence in Europe and results from the attack rate study indicate that it does NOT take much exposure to transmit BSE to cattle. Recent results from the attack rate study, which is still in progress, has found that .001 gr of raw infected brain cant transmit BSE (1 cow out of 15) through the ORAL ROUTE. The role of cross contamination was under estimated throughout Europe. Experience in other countries has also shown that human error especially at the farm level is difficult to control. It is imperative that the feed ban be effective. There are a number of actions which still need to be taken by the FDA to prevent any potential recycling of the BSE agent in the US cattle population. The FDA is urged to act immediately and put these measures in place. ...snip...end




http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/03-025IF/03-025IF-634.pdf




10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. BLOOD LACED MBM IN COMMERCE USA 2007

Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINES -- CLASS II

___________________________________

PRODUCT

Bulk cattle feed made with recalled Darling's 85% Blood Meal, Flash Dried, Recall # V-024-2007

CODE

Cattle feed delivered between 01/12/2007 and 01/26/2007

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Pfeiffer, Arno, Inc, Greenbush, WI. by conversation on February 5, 2007.

Firm initiated recall is ongoing.

REASON

Blood meal used to make cattle feed was recalled because it was cross-contaminated with prohibited bovine meat and bone meal that had been manufactured on common equipment and labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

42,090 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

WI

___________________________________

PRODUCT

Custom dairy premix products: MNM ALL PURPOSE Pellet, HILLSIDE/CDL Prot-Buffer Meal, LEE, M.-CLOSE UP PX Pellet, HIGH DESERT/ GHC LACT Meal, TATARKA, M CUST PROT Meal, SUNRIDGE/CDL PROTEIN Blend, LOURENZO, K PVM DAIRY Meal, DOUBLE B DAIRY/GHC LAC Mineral, WEST PIONT/GHC CLOSEUP Mineral, WEST POINT/GHC LACT Meal, JENKS, J/COMPASS PROTEIN Meal, COPPINI - 8# SPECIAL DAIRY Mix, GULICK, L-LACT Meal (Bulk), TRIPLE J - PROTEIN/LACTATION, ROCK CREEK/GHC MILK Mineral, BETTENCOURT/GHC S.SIDE MK-MN, BETTENCOURT #1/GHC MILK MINR, V&C DAIRY/GHC LACT Meal, VEENSTRA, F/GHC LACT Meal, SMUTNY, A-BYPASS ML W/SMARTA, Recall # V-025-2007

CODE

The firm does not utilize a code - only shipping documentation with commodity and weights identified.

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Rangen, Inc, Buhl, ID, by letters on February 13 and 14, 2007. Firm initiated recall is complete.

REASON

Products manufactured from bulk feed containing blood meal that was cross contaminated with prohibited meat and bone meal and the labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

9,997,976 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

ID and NV

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR MARCH 21, 2007




http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2007/ENF00996.html




Thursday, March 19, 2009 MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF POUNDS OF MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE USA WITH ONGOING 12 YEARS OF DENIAL NOW, WHY IN THE WORLD DO WE TO TALK ABOUT THIS ANYMORE $$$




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/03/millions-and-millions-of-pounds-of-mad.html




P04.27

Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the Oral Route

Holznagel, E1; Yutzy, B1; Deslys, J-P2; Lasmézas, C2; Pocchiari, M3; Ingrosso, L3; Bierke, P4; Schulz-Schaeffer, W5; Motzkus, D6; Hunsmann, G6; Löwer, J1 1Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Germany; 2Commissariat à l´Energie Atomique, France; 3Instituto Superiore di Sanità, Italy; 4Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease control, Sweden; 5Georg August University, Germany; 6German Primate Center, Germany

Background:

In 2001, a study was initiated in primates to assess the risk for humans to contract BSE through contaminated food. For this purpose, BSE brain was titrated in cynomolgus monkeys.

Aims:

The primary objective is the determination of the minimal infectious dose (MID50) for oral exposure to BSE in a simian model, and, by in doing this, to assess the risk for humans. Secondly, we aimed at examining the course of the disease to identify possible biomarkers.

Methods:

Groups with six monkeys each were orally dosed with lowering amounts of BSE brain: 16g, 5g, 0.5g, 0.05g, and 0.005g. In a second titration study, animals were intracerebrally (i.c.) dosed (50, 5, 0.5, 0.05, and 0.005 mg).

Results:

In an ongoing study, a considerable number of high-dosed macaques already developed simian vCJD upon oral or intracerebral exposure or are at the onset of the clinical phase. However, there are differences in the clinical course between orally and intracerebrally infected animals that may influence the detection of biomarkers.

Conclusions:

Simian vCJD can be easily triggered in cynomolgus monkeys on the oral route using less than 5 g BSE brain homogenate. The difference in the incubation period between 5 g oral and 5 mg i.c. is only 1 year (5 years versus 4 years). However, there are rapid progressors among orally dosed monkeys that develop simian vCJD as fast as intracerebrally inoculated animals.

The work referenced was performed in partial fulfilment of the study “BSE in primates“ supported by the EU (QLK1-2002-01096).




http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf





look at the table and you'll see that as little as 1 mg (or 0.001 gm) caused 7% (1 of 14) of the cows to come down with BSE;

Risk of oral infection with bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent in primates

Corinne Ida Lasmézas, Emmanuel Comoy, Stephen Hawkins, Christian Herzog, Franck Mouthon, Timm Konold, Frédéric Auvré, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie Lescoutra-Etchegaray, Nicole Salès, Gerald Wells, Paul Brown, Jean-Philippe Deslys Summary The uncertain extent of human exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)--which can lead to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD)--is compounded by incomplete knowledge about the efficiency of oral infection and the magnitude of any bovine-to-human biological barrier to transmission. We therefore investigated oral transmission of BSE to non-human primates. We gave two macaques a 5 g oral dose of brain homogenate from a BSE-infected cow. One macaque developed vCJD-like neurological disease 60 months after exposure, whereas the other remained free of disease at 76 months. On the basis of these findings and data from other studies, we made a preliminary estimate of the food exposure risk for man, which provides additional assurance that existing public health measures can prevent transmission of BSE to man.

snip...

BSE bovine brain inoculum

100 g 10 g 5 g 1 g 100 mg 10 mg 1 mg 0·1 mg 0·01 mg

Primate (oral route)* 1/2 (50%)

Cattle (oral route)* 10/10 (100%) 7/9 (78%) 7/10 (70%) 3/15 (20%) 1/15 (7%) 1/15 (7%)

RIII mice (ic ip route)* 17/18 (94%) 15/17 (88%) 1/14 (7%)

PrPres biochemical detection

The comparison is made on the basis of calibration of the bovine inoculum used in our study with primates against a bovine brain inoculum with a similar PrPres concentration that was

inoculated into mice and cattle.8 *Data are number of animals positive/number of animals surviving at the time of clinical onset of disease in the first positive animal (%). The accuracy of

bioassays is generally judged to be about plus or minus 1 log. ic ip=intracerebral and intraperitoneal.

Table 1: Comparison of transmission rates in primates and cattle infected orally with similar BSE brain inocula

Published online January 27, 2005




http://www.thelancet.com/journal/journal.isa





It is clear that the designing scientists must

also have shared Mr Bradley’s surprise at the results because all the dose

levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.




http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s145d.pdf





6. It also appears to me that Mr Bradley’s answer (that it would take less than say 100 grams) was probably given with the benefit of hindsight; particularly if one considers that later in the same answer Mr Bradley expresses his surprise that it could take as little of 1 gram of brain to cause BSE by the oral route within the same species. This information did not become available until the "attack rate"

experiment had been completed in 1995/96. This was a titration experiment designed to ascertain the infective dose. A range of dosages was used to ensure that the actual result was within both a lower and an upper limit within the study and the designing scientists would not have expected all the dose levels to trigger infection. The dose ranges chosen by the most informed scientists at that time ranged from 1 gram to three times one hundred grams. It is clear that the designing scientists must have also shared Mr Bradley’s surprise at the results because all the dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.




http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s147f.pdf





Friday, November 21, 2008

Plasma & Serum Proteins Receive Continued FDA Approval




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/11/plasma-serum-proteins-receive-continued.html




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/




Thursday, November 27, 2008

Prion diseases are efficiently transmitted by blood transfusion in sheep




http://vcjdblood.blogspot.com/2008/11/prion-diseases-are-efficiently.html




Scientists warn of first ever case of human mad cow disease from blood plasma




http://vcjdtransfusion.blogspot.com/2009/02/scientists-warn-of-first-ever-case-of.html




Saturday, February 21, 2009

Renderers say industry not prepared for FDA feed ban rule ??? WHAT, IT'S 2009 FOR PETE'S SAKE $$$ Two recent articles caught my eye ;

Renderers say industry not prepared for FDA feed ban rule

Food Chemical News

February 2, 2009

and

BSE, rendering relate to human safety

Emma Struve 02/17/2009




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/02/renderers-say-industry-not-prepared-for.html




November 25, 2008

Update On Feed Enforcement Activities To Limit The Spread Of BSE




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/11/november-2008-update-on-feed.html





STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 25, AUGUST 1995

snip...

To minimise the risk of farmers' claims for compensation from feed compounders.

To minimise the potential damage to compound feed markets through adverse publicity.

To maximise freedom of action for feed compounders, notably by maintaining the availability of meat and bone meal as a raw material in animal feeds, and ensuring time is available to make any changes which may be required.

snip...

THE FUTURE

4..........

MAFF remains under pressure in Brussels and is not skilled at handling potentially explosive issues.

5. Tests _may_ show that ruminant feeds have been sold which contain illegal traces of ruminant protein. More likely, a few positive test results will turn up but proof that a particular feed mill knowingly supplied it to a particular farm will be difficult if not impossible.

6. The threat remains real and it will be some years before feed compounders are free of it. The longer we can avoid any direct linkage between feed milling _practices_ and actual BSE cases, the more likely it is that serious damage can be avoided. ...

SEE full text ;



http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1995/08/24002001.pdf





THIS is what happens when you have the industry run the government. ...



update ;

2009 31 March 2009 - A summary of the 102nd SEAC meeting (35 KB) held on 4th March 2009

snip...

SEAC noted that IBNC appeared to be a rare disease that occurred in older cattle, predominantly as single cases, although it is possible that surveillance may not detect all cases. Biochemical studies suggested that the prion protein may play a role in the disease. However, it is unclear whether the normal form of the protein or an abnormal form is involved. Studies are required to determine whether IBNC is transmissible or not. SEAC concluded, noting that specified risk material controls are in place to prevent cattle brain from entering the food supply, that current data on IBNC do not suggest it presents a risk to human health.



http://www.seac.gov.uk/summaries/seac102_summary.pdf





>>>All of the 15 cattle tested showed that the brains had abnormally accumulated prion protein. <<<


Saturday, February 28, 2009


NEW RESULTS ON IDIOPATHIC BRAINSTEM NEURONAL CHROMATOLYSIS "All of the 15 cattle tested showed that the brains had abnormally accumulated PrP" 2009 SEAC 102/2




http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/02/new-results-on-idiopathic-brainstem.html




''THE LINE TO TAKE'' ON IBNC $$$ 1995 $$$

1995

page 9 of 14 ;

30. The Committee noted that the results were unusual. the questioned whether there could be coincidental BSE infection or contamination with scrapie. Dr. Tyrell noted that the feeling of the committee was that this did not represent a new agent but it was important to be prepared to say something publicly about these findings. A suggested line to take was that these were scientifically unpublishable results but in line with the policy of openness they would be made publicly available and further work done to test their validity. Since the BSE precautions were applied to IBNC cases, human health was protected. Further investigations should be carried out on isolations from brains of IBNC cases with removal of the brain and subsequent handling under strict conditions to avoid the risk of any contamination.

31. Mr. Bradley informed the Committee that the CVO had informed the CMO about the IBNC results and the transmission from retina and he, like the Committee was satisfied that the controls already in place or proposed were adequate. ...

snip... see full text




http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1995/06/21005001.pdf




Absence of spontaneous disease and comparative prion susceptibility of transgenic mice expressing mutant human prion proteins

Emmanuel A. Asante, Ian Gowland, Andrew Grimshaw, Jacqueline M. Linehan, Michelle Smidak, Richard Houghton, Olufunmilayo Osiguwa, Andrew Tomlinson, Susan Joiner, Sebastian Brandner, Jonathan D. F. Wadsworth and John Collinge Correspondence John Collinge mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:j.collinge@prion.ucl.ac.uk MRC Prion Unit and Department of Neurodegenerative Disease, UCL Institute of Neurology, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London WC1N 3BG, UK Received 15 October 2008 Accepted 2 December 2008

Approximately 15% of human prion disease is associated with autosomal-dominant pathogenic mutations in the prion protein (PrP) gene. Previous attempts to model these diseases in mice have expressed human PrP mutations in murine PrP, but this may have different structural consequences. Here, we describe transgenic mice expressing human PrP with P102L or E200K mutations and methionine (M) at the polymorphic residue 129. Although no spontaneous disease developed in aged animals, these mice were readily susceptible to prion infection from patients with the homotypic pathogenic mutation. However, while variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) prions transmitted infection efficiently to both lines of mice, markedly different susceptibilities to classical (sporadic and iatrogenic) CJD prions were observed. Prions from E200K and classical CJD M129 homozygous patients, transmitted disease with equivalent efficiencies and short incubation periods in human PrP 200K, 129M transgenic mice. However, mismatch at residue 129 between inoculum and host dramatically increased the incubation period. In human PrP 102L, 129M transgenic mice, short disease incubation periods were only observed with transmissions of prions from P102L patients, whereas classical CJD prions showed prolonged and variable incubation periods irrespective of the codon 129 genotype. Analysis of diseaserelated PrP (PrPSc) showed marked alteration in the PrPSc glycoform ratio propagated after transmission of classical CJD prions, consistent with the PrP point mutations directly influencing PrPSc assembly. These data indicate that P102L or E200K mutations of human PrP have differing effects on prion propagation that depend upon prion strain type and can be significantly influenced by mismatch at the polymorphic residue 129.

snip...

Transgenic mice expressing high levels of mouse PrP 101L (equivalent to 102L in human PrP) spontaneously developed neurological dysfunction at 166 days of age (Hsiao et al., 1990). PrPSc levels were low or undetectable, and brain extracts from affected mice did not transmit CNS degeneration to wild-type mice, but transmission to hamsters and Tg(GSSPrP)196 mice, expressing lower levels of the same mutant transgene product, was reported (Hsiao et al., 1994; Telling et al., 1996a). These Tg(GSSPrP)196 mice have subsequently been reported to develop spontaneous disease at advanced age (Tremblay et al., 2004; Nazor et al., 2005). It therefore remains debateable as to whether prions had been generated in these transgenic mice or this simply represents acceleration of a spontaneous neurodegenerative disease already poised to occur in these mice (Nazor et al., 2005). Others generated transgenic mice expressing endogenous levels of mouse PrP 101L by the gene knock-in approach (Manson et al., 1999). These mice did not develop spontaneous neurodegeneration but were reported to show greater susceptibility to human P102L prions than wildtype mice (Barron et al., 2001).

However, we consider it essential to study this and other human pathogenic mutations in human PrP, rather than in mouse PrP where the mutation may have different structural consequences. With respect to such models it is important to demonstrate that human PrP is functionally active and can participate in prion propagation and pathogenesis in mouse cells. Human PrP can rescue a PrP null phenotype in mice (Whittington et al., 1995), confirming it is functionally active and human prions can replicate in transgenic mice expressing only human PrP, which develop spongiform neurodegeneration (Collinge et al., 1995).

snip...see full text ;



http://vir.sgmjournals.org/cgi/reprint/90/3/546





****** [2] Correction Date: Tue 5 Sep 2006 From: "Terry S Singeltary Sr" <mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:flounder9@verizon.net>

Characterization of atypical BSE in Germany: correction ------------------------------------------------------- [In the Moderator's comment accompanying the abstract of the paper entitled "Atypical BSE in Germany-Proof of transmissibility and biochemical characterization'" by A Buschmannaet et al, (see part [2] of CJD (new var.) update 2006 (09) 20060904.2519) it was wrongly implied that Terry S Singeltary Sr endorsed the conclusions of the paper, whereas his comments were intended merely to highlight the conclusions of the paper. Namely that the atypical cases suggested the possible existence of sporadic BSE cases in bovines and perhaps the BSE epidemic in the UK could have also been initiated by an intraspecies transmission from a sporadic BSE case. I apologize for inadvertently misrepresenting Terry's views. - Mod.CP]

Terry S Singeltary Sr has written the following. "In fact I disagree with the spontaneous/sporadic BSE/TSE theory, IF this is what the authors of this paper meant by 'sporadic BSE' to mean. For one thing, it has never been proven. IF atypical BSE i.e. BASE is so similar to some sporadic CJDs, then how did they all of a sudden become spontaneous? Could it not be so simple as an atypical BSE i.e. BASE was transmitted the same way most of all of the other BSE cattle were i.e. feed of just an atypical source, thus causing atypical strain? Why would these animals not develop an atypical BSE i.e. BASE from the same oral route? WHAT about an atypical strain mutating to become infectious via a lateral or horizontal mode in the bovine, as with CWD and scrapie? Also, please explain to me how a distinct synthetic prion, of a strain that is supposedly unlike any other we have ever seen, how can this explain 6 different documented phenotypes of sporadic CJD to date?

It's like trying to explain away all the 6 phenotypes of sporadic CJD with the spontaneous theory, it's just not scientific. OR, if you render an atypical TSE of what ever phenotype, in what ever species, of the atypical strain and feed it to another whatever species, nothing happens x 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 etc passage? This all has been proven?

Please show me these transmission studies? What Prusiner and Soto produced in vitro did not look like any natural field TSE, and as far as this in vitro TSE being infectious, well this was questionable too. If this was the case, then why does CWD not spontaneously happen in geographical areas where it has never been documented, OR with scrapie, as in scrapie free New Zealand? If TSE were to arise spontaneously, I don't see how the scientific arena can dictate which animal TSE can arise spontaneously, and which ones cannot, without any scientific evidence to support this to date, and by even suggesting this in this study, was not scientific. The words sporadic and spontaneous are very confusing in the world literature of human and animal TSE and, in my opinion, should not be used as terminology of any TSE."

-- Terry S Singeltary Sr <mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:flounder9@verizon.net>





http://apex.oracle.com/pls/otn/f?p=2400:1202:17822992441545446841::NO::F2400_P1202_CHECK_DISPLAY,F2400_P1202_PUB_MAIL_ID:X,34659





Manuscript Draft Manuscript Number: Title: HUMAN and ANIMAL TSE Classifications i.e. mad cow disease and the UKBSEnvCJD only theory Article Type: Personal View Corresponding Author: Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Corresponding Author's Institution: na First Author: Terry S Singeltary, none Order of Authors: Terry S Singeltary, none; Terry S. Singeltary Abstract: 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 2007.





http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf





Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary

Comment 2006-2007 USA AND OIE POISONING GLOBE WITH BSE MRR POLICY

THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species.

MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???

go figure. ...




http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064801f8151





Docket APHIS-2007-0033 Docket Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2007-0033-0001 Document Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Public Submission APHIS-2007-0033-0002.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singeltary comment




http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648027c28e





Docket Management Docket: 02N-0273 - Substances Prohibited From Use in

Animal Food or Feed; Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed

Comment Number: EC -10

Accepted - Volume 2



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be07.html





PART 2



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be09.html





01N-0423 Substances Prohibited from use in animal food/Feed Ruminant

APE 5 National Renderers Association, Inc. Vol#: 2

APE 6 Animal Protein Producers Industry Vol#: 2

APE 7 Darling International Inc. Vol#: 2

EMC 1 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol#: 3



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/01/Oct01/101501/101501.htm





DOCKET-- 03D-0186 -- FDA Issues Draft Guidance on Use of Material From Deer and Elk in Animal Feed; Availability

Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:47:37 -0500

EMC 1 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol #: 1



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jun03/060903/060903.htm




http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/oct03/100203/100203.htm




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-03d-0186-fda-issues-draft.html




Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION TO DOCKET 2003N-0312]



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt




# Docket No: 02-088-1 RE-Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; [TSS SUBMISSION ON POTENTIAL FOR BSE/TSE & FMD 'SUITCASE BOMBS'] - TSS 1/27/03 (0)

Docket Management

Docket: 02N-0276 - Bioterrorism Preparedness; Registration of Food Facilities, Section 305 Comment Number: EC-254 [TSS SUBMISSION]




http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02n0276/02N-0276-EC-254.htm




http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-aphis-2007-0033-docket-title.html




Subject: Re: Docket No. 2005N-0373 RIN number 0910-AF54 Use of Materials Derived From Cattle in Medical Products

REOPENING COMMENT PERIOD

Date: March 30, 2007 at 11:37 am PST



http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-no-2005n-0373-and-rin-number.html




Wednesday, July 9, 2008 [Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0369] Ruminant Feed Ban Support Project; ``Response to RFA-FDA-08-008''



http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-no-fda-2008-n-0369-ruminant-feed.html




Monday, December 22, 2008 [Docket No. FDA–2008–D–0597] Draft Guidance for Industry: Small Entities Compliance Guide for Renderers—Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food



http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/12/docket-no-fda2008d0597-draft-guidance.html




http://brain.hastypastry.net/forums/showthread.php?t=26908




http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/BSE_Risk_Assess_Response_Public_Comments.pdf




http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648027c28e&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf




http://www.scribd.com/doc/1490709/USDA-200600111




15 November 1999 British Medical Journal vCJD in the USA * BSE in U.S.




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




2 January 2000 British Medical Journal U.S. Scientist should be concerned with a CJD epidemic in the U.S., as well




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





Diagnosis and Reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Singeltary, Sr et al. JAMA.2001; 285: 733-734. Vol. 285 No. 6, February 14, 2001 JAMA

Diagnosis and Reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease

To the Editor: In their Research Letter, Dr Gibbons and colleagues1 reported that the annual US death rate due to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) has been stable since 1985. These estimates, however, are based only on reported cases, and do not include misdiagnosed or preclinical cases. It seems to me that misdiagnosis alone would drastically change these figures. An unknown number of persons with a diagnosis of Alzheimer disease in fact may have CJD, although only a small number of these patients receive the postmortem examination necessary to make this diagnosis. Furthermore, only a few states have made CJD reportable. Human and animal transmissible spongiform encephalopathies should be reportable nationwide and internationally.

Terry S. Singeltary, Sr Bacliff, Tex

1. Gibbons RV, Holman RC, Belay ED, Schonberger LB. Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in the United States: 1979-1998. JAMA. 2000;284:2322-2323. FREE FULL TEXT




http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/285/6/733?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=singeltary&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT




http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/285/6/733?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=singeltary&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT





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:

mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto: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 are sporadic are all spontaneous, without route/source. We have many TSEs in 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 expose others. 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




Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease




http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/





USA PRION UNIT BLOG




http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/




THE PATHOLOGICAL PROTEIN

Hardcover, 304 pages plus photos and illustrations. ISBN 0-387-95508-9

June 2003

BY Philip Yam

CHAPTER 14 LAYING ODDS

*** Answering critics like Terry Singeltary, who feels that the U.S. under- counts CJD, Schonberger conceded that the current surveillance system has errors but stated that most of the errors will be confined to the older population.




http://www.thepathologicalprotein.com/




In short, a great deal of further work will need to be done before the phenotypic features and prevalence of atypical BSE are understood. More than a single strain may have been present from the beginning of the epidemic, but this possibility has been overlooked by virtue of the absence of widespread Western blot confirmatory testing of positive screening test results; or these new phenotypes may be found, at least in part, to result from infections at an older age by a typical BSE agent, rather than neonatal infections with new "strains" of BSE. Neither alternative has yet been investigated.




http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm





A New Prionopathy OR more of the same old BSe and sporadic CJD




http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2008/08/new-prionopathy-or-more-of-same-old-bse.html




Communicated by: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

[In submitting these data, Terry S. Singeltary Sr. draws attention to the steady increase in the "type unknown" category, which, according to their definition, comprises cases in which vCJD could be excluded. The total of 26 cases for the current year (2007) is disturbing, possibly symptomatic of the circulation of novel agents. Characterization of these agents should be given a high priority. - Mod.CP]




http://pro-med.blogspot.com/2007/11/proahedr-prion-disease-update-2007-07.html




http://www.promedmail.org/pls/askus/f?p=2400:1001:6833194127530602005::NO::F2400_P1001_BACK_PAGE,F2400_P1001_PUB_MAIL_ID:1010,39963





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



sporadic Fatal Familial Insomnia



http://sporadicffi.blogspot.com/





Sunday, April 20, 2008


Progress Report from the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center April 3, 2008

Atypical forms of BSE have emerged which, although rare, appear to be more virulent than the classical BSE that causes vCJD.

see full text ;




http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2008/04/progress-report-from-national-prion.html





CJD TEXAS (cjd clusters)



http://cjdtexas.blogspot.com/





Thursday, January 29, 2009

Medical Procedures and Risk for Sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, Japan, 1999-2008 (WARNING TO Neurosurgeons and Ophthalmologists) Volume 15, Number 2-February 2009 Research



http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2009/01/medical-procedures-and-risk-for.html



Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) update report Emerging Infections/CJD Published on: 12 December 2008



http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2008/12/creutzfeldt-jakob-disease-cjd-update.html



Friday, August 29, 2008

CREEKSTONE VS USDA COURT OF APPEALS, BUSH SAYS, NO WAY, NO HOW



http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2008/08/creekstone-vs-usda-court-of-appeals.html





Sunday, March 16, 2008

MAD COW DISEASE terminology UK c-BSE (typical), atypical BSE H or L, and or Italian L-BASE



http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/03/mad-cow-disease-terminology-uk-c-bse.html





1: J Infect Dis 1980 Aug;142(2):205-8

Oral transmission of kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and scrapie to nonhuman primates.

Gibbs CJ Jr, Amyx HL, Bacote A, Masters CL, Gajdusek DC.

Kuru and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease of humans and scrapie disease of sheep and goats were transmitted to squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) that were exposed to the infectious agents only by their nonforced consumption of known infectious tissues. The asymptomatic incubation period in the one monkey exposed to the virus of kuru was 36 months; that in the two monkeys exposed to the virus of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was 23 and 27 months, respectively; and that in the two monkeys exposed to the virus of scrapie was 25 and 32 months, respectively. Careful physical examination of the buccal cavities of all of the monkeys failed to reveal signs or oral lesions. One additional monkey similarly exposed to kuru has remained asymptomatic during the 39 months that it has been under observation.

PMID: 6997404



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6997404&dopt=Abstract





12/10/76 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COUNCIL REPORT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTE ON SCRAPIE Office Note CHAIRMAN: PROFESSOR PETER WILDY

snip...

A The Present Position with respect to Scrapie A] The Problem

Scrapie is a natural disease of sheep and goats. It is a slow and inexorably progressive degenerative disorder of the nervous system and it ia fatal. It is enzootic in the United Kingdom but not in all countries.

The field problem has been reviewed by a MAFF working group (ARC 35/77). It is difficult to assess the incidence in Britain for a variety of reasons but the disease causes serious financial loss; it is estimated that it cost Swaledale breeders alone $l.7 M during the five years 1971-1975. A further inestimable loss arises from the closure of certain export markets, in particular those of the United States, to British sheep.

It is clear that scrapie in sheep is important commercially and for that reason alone effective measures to control it should be devised as quickly as possible.

Recently the question has again been brought up as to whether scrapie is transmissible to man. This has followed reports that the disease has been transmitted to primates. One particularly lurid speculation (Gajdusek 1977) conjectures that the agents of scrapie, kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and transmissible encephalopathy of mink are varieties of a single "virus". The U.S. Department of Agriculture concluded that it could "no longer justify or permit scrapie-blood line and scrapie-exposed sheep and goats to be processed for human or animal food at slaughter or rendering plants" (ARC 84/77)" The problem is emphasised by the finding that some strains of scrapie produce lesions identical to the once which characterise the human dementias"

Whether true or not. the hypothesis that these agents might be transmissible to man raises two considerations. First, the safety of laboratory personnel requires prompt attention. Second, action such as the "scorched meat" policy of USDA makes the solution of the acrapie problem urgent if the sheep industry is not to suffer grievously.

snip...

76/10.12/4.6



http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1976/10/12004001.pdf




Epidemiology of Scrapie in the United States 1977



http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m08b/tab64.pdf




http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/





P03.141

Aspects of the Cerebellar Neuropathology in Nor98

Gavier-Widén, D1; Benestad, SL2; Ottander, L1; Westergren, E1 1National Veterinary Insitute, Sweden; 2National Veterinary Institute, Norway

Nor98 is a prion disease of old sheep and goats. This atypical form of scrapie was first described in Norway in 1998. Several features of Nor98 were shown to be different from classical scrapie including the distribution of disease associated prion protein (PrPd) accumulation in the brain. The cerebellum is generally the most affected brain area in Nor98. The study here presented aimed at adding information on the neuropathology in the cerebellum of Nor98 naturally affected sheep of various genotypes in Sweden and Norway. A panel of histochemical and immunohistochemical (IHC) stainings such as IHC for PrPd, synaptophysin, glial fibrillary acidic protein, amyloid, and cell markers for phagocytic cells were conducted. The type of histological lesions and tissue reactions were evaluated. The types of PrPd deposition were characterized. The cerebellar cortex was regularly affected, even though there was a variation in the severity of the lesions from case to case. Neuropil vacuolation was more marked in the molecular layer, but affected also the granular cell layer. There was a loss of granule cells. Punctate deposition of PrPd was characteristic. It was morphologically and in distribution identical with that of synaptophysin, suggesting that PrPd accumulates in the synaptic structures. PrPd was also observed in the granule cell layer and in the white matter. ***The pathology features of Nor98 in the cerebellum of the affected sheep showed similarities with those of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans.



http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf





Published online before print October 20, 2005

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 10.1073/pnas.0502296102 Medical Sciences

A newly identified type of scrapie agent can naturally infect sheep with resistant PrP genotypes

( sheep prion transgenic mice )

Annick Le Dur *, Vincent Béringue *, Olivier Andréoletti , Fabienne Reine *, Thanh Lan Laï *, Thierry Baron , Bjørn Bratberg ¶, Jean-Luc Vilotte , Pierre Sarradin **, Sylvie L. Benestad ¶, and Hubert Laude * *Virologie Immunologie Moléculaires and Génétique Biochimique et Cytogénétique, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 78350 Jouy-en-Josas, France; Unité Mixte de Recherche, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique-Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, Interactions Hôte Agent Pathogène, 31066 Toulouse, France; Agence Française de Sécurité Sanitaire des Aliments, Unité Agents Transmissibles Non Conventionnels, 69364 Lyon, France; **Pathologie Infectieuse et Immunologie, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 37380 Nouzilly, France; and ¶Department of Pathology, National Veterinary Institute, 0033 Oslo, Norway

Edited by Stanley B. Prusiner, University of California, San Francisco, CA, and approved September 12, 2005 (received for review March 21, 2005)

Scrapie in small ruminants belongs to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs), or prion diseases, a family of fatal neurodegenerative disorders that affect humans and animals and can transmit within and between species by ingestion or inoculation. Conversion of the host-encoded prion protein (PrP), normal cellular PrP (PrPc), into a misfolded form, abnormal PrP (PrPSc), plays a key role in TSE transmission and pathogenesis. The intensified surveillance of scrapie in the European Union, together with the improvement of PrPSc detection techniques, has led to the discovery of a growing number of so-called atypical scrapie cases. These include clinical Nor98 cases first identified in Norwegian sheep on the basis of unusual pathological and PrPSc molecular features and "cases" that produced discordant responses in the rapid tests currently applied to the large-scale random screening of slaughtered or fallen animals. Worryingly, a substantial proportion of such cases involved sheep with PrP genotypes known until now to confer natural resistance to conventional scrapie. Here we report that both Nor98 and discordant cases, including three sheep homozygous for the resistant PrPARR allele (A136R154R171), efficiently transmitted the disease to transgenic mice expressing ovine PrP, and that they shared unique biological and biochemical features upon propagation in mice. These observations support the view that a truly infectious TSE agent, unrecognized until recently, infects sheep and goat flocks and may have important implications in terms of scrapie control and public health.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Author contributions: H.L. designed research; A.L.D., V.B., O.A., F.R., T.L.L., J.-L.V., and H.L. performed research; T.B., B.B., P.S., and S.L.B. contributed new reagents/analytic tools; V.B., O.A., and H.L. analyzed data; and H.L. wrote the paper.

A.L.D. and V.B. contributed equally to this work.

To whom correspondence should be addressed.

Hubert Laude, E-mail: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:laude@jouy.inra.fr



www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0502296102



http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0502296102v1





Like lambs to the slaughter

31 March 2001

Debora MacKenzie

Magazine issue 2284

What if you can catch old-fashioned CJD by eating meat from a sheep infected with scrapie?

FOUR years ago, Terry Singeltary watched his mother die horribly from a degenerative brain disease. Doctors told him it was Alzheimer's, but Singeltary was suspicious. The diagnosis didn't fit her violent symptoms, and he demanded an autopsy. It showed she had died of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.

Most doctors believe that sCJD is caused by a prion protein deforming by chance into a killer. But Singeltary thinks otherwise. He is one of a number of campaigners who say that some sCJD, like the variant CJD related to BSE, is caused by eating meat from infected animals. Their suspicions have focused on sheep carrying scrapie, a BSE-like disease that is widespread in flocks across Europe and North America.

Now scientists in France have stumbled across new evidence that adds weight to the campaigners' fears. To their complete surprise, the researchers found that one strain of scrapie causes the same brain damage in ...

The complete article is 889 words long.

full text;



http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg16922840.300





Neurobiology

Adaptation of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent to primates and comparison with Creutzfeldt- Jakob disease: Implications for human health Corinne Ida Lasmézas*,, Jean-Guy Fournier*, Virginie Nouvel*, Hermann Boe*, Domíníque Marcé*, François Lamoury*, Nicolas Kopp, Jean-Jacques Hauw§, James Ironside¶, Moira Bruce, Dominique Dormont*, and Jean-Philippe Deslys* * Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique, Service de Neurovirologie, Direction des Sciences du Vivant/Département de Recherche Medicale, Centre de Recherches du Service de Santé des Armées 60-68, Avenue du Général Leclerc, BP 6, 92 265 Fontenay-aux-Roses Cedex, France; Hôpital Neurologique Pierre Wertheimer, 59, Boulevard Pinel, 69003 Lyon, France; § Laboratoire de Neuropathologie, Hôpital de la Salpêtrière, 83, Boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France; ¶ Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Surveillance Unit, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, United Kingdom; and Institute for Animal Health, Neuropathogenesis Unit, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JF, United Kingdom

Edited by D. Carleton Gajdusek, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Gif-sur-Yvette, France, and approved December 7, 2000 (received for review October 16, 2000)

Abstract

There is substantial scientific evidence to support the notion that bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) has contaminated human beings, causing variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). This disease has raised concerns about the possibility of an iatrogenic secondary transmission to humans, because the biological properties of the primate-adapted BSE agent are unknown. We show that (i) BSE can be transmitted from primate to primate by intravenous route in 25 months, and (ii) an iatrogenic transmission of vCJD to humans could be readily recognized pathologically, whether it occurs by the central or peripheral route. Strain typing in mice demonstrates that the BSE agent adapts to macaques in the same way as it does to humans and confirms that the BSE agent is responsible for vCJD not only in the United Kingdom but also in France. The agent responsible for French iatrogenic growth hormone-linked CJD taken as a control is very different from vCJD but is similar to that found in one case of sporadic CJD and one sheep scrapie isolate. These data will be key in identifying the origin of human cases of prion disease, including accidental vCJD transmission, and could provide bases for vCJD risk assessment.




http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/041490898v1




http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2008/04/seac-spongiform-encephalopathy-advisory.html





CHAPTER 3 Animal Disease Eradication Programs and Control and Certification Programs

snip...

In FY 2007, two field cases, one validation study case, and two RSSS cases were consistent with a variant of the disease known as Nor98 scrapie.1 These five cases originated from flocks in California, Minnesota, Colorado, Wyoming, and Indiana, respectively.

snip...



http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/AHR_Web_PDF_07/D_Chapter_3.pdf




NOR-98 Scrapie FY 2008 to date 1



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





PLEASE NOTE the warning out by the CDC on CWD and nutritional supplements May 2009 ;

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Chronic Wasting Disease Prions in Elk Antler Velvet (Nutritional Supplements and CJD)

''Humans who consume antler velvet as a nutritional supplement are at risk for exposure to prions''



http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/03/chronic-wasting-disease-prions-in-elk.html





THEY ARE NOT RECALLING ALL THIS CWD POSITIVE ELK MEAT FOR THE WELL BEING OF THE DEAD ELK ;

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: FOODS CLASS II

___________________________________

PRODUCT

a) Elk Meat, Elk Tenderloin, Frozen in plastic vacuum packaging. Each package is approximately 2 lbs., and each case is approximately 16 lbs.; Item number 755125, Recall # F-129-9;

b) Elk Meat, Elk Trim, Frozen; Item number 755155, Recall # F-130-9;

c) Elk Meat, French Rack, Chilled. Item number 755132, Recall # F-131-9;

d) Elk Meat, Nude Denver Leg. Item number 755122, Recall # F-132-9;

e) Elk Meat, New York Strip Steak, Chilled. Item number 755128, Recall # F-133-9;

f) Elk Meat, Flank Steak Frozen. Item number 755131, Recall # F-134-9;

CODE

Elk Meats with production dates of December 29, 30, and 31

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Recalling Firm: Sierra Meats, Reno, NV, by telephone on January 29, 2009 and press release on February 9, 2009.

Manufacturer: Noah's Ark Holding, LLC, Dawson, MN. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.

REASON

Elk products contain meat derived from an elk confirmed to have Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD).

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

Unknown

DISTRIBUTION

NV, CA, TX, CO, NY, UT, FL, OK

___________________________________




http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ENFORCE/2009/ENF01099.html





Monday, February 09, 2009

Exotic Meats USA Announces Urgent Statewide Recall of Elk Tenderloin Because It May Contain Meat Derived From An Elk Confirmed To Have CWD

snip...

Cross-sequence transmission of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease creates a new prion strain

Date: August 25, 2007 at 12:42 pm PST

our results raise the possibility that CJD cases classified as VV1 may include cases caused by iatrogenic transmission of sCJD-MM1 prions or food-borne infection by type 1 prions from animals, e.g., chronic wasting disease prions in cervid. In fact, two CJD-VV1 patients who hunted deer or consumed venison have been reported (40, 41). The results of the present study emphasize the need for traceback studies and careful re-examination of the biochemical properties of sCJD-VV1 prions.



http://www.jbc.org/




snip...


Clearly, it is premature to draw firm conclusions about CWD passing naturally into humans, cattle and sheep, but the present results suggest that CWD transmissions to humans would be as limited by PrP incompatibility as transmissions of BSE or sheep scrapie to humans. Although there is no evidence that sheep scrapie has affected humans, it is likely that BSE has caused variant CJD in 74 people (definite and probable variant CJD cases to date according to the UK CJD Surveillance Unit). Given the presumably large number of people exposed to BSE infectivity, the susceptibility of humans may still be very low compared with cattle, which would be consistent with the relatively inefficient conversion of human PrP-sen by PrPBSE. Nonetheless, since humans have apparently been infected by BSE, it would seem prudent to take reasonable measures to limit exposure of humans (as well as sheep and cattle) to CWD infectivity as has been recommended for other animal TSEs.


snip...



http://www.emboj.org/current.shtml




snip




http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol10no6/03-1082.htm





From: TSS (216-119-163-189.ipset45.wt.net)

Subject: CWD aka MAD DEER/ELK TO HUMANS ???

Date: September 30, 2002 at 7:06 am PST

From: "Belay, Ermias" To: Cc: "Race, Richard (NIH)" ; ; "Belay, Ermias" Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 9:22 AM Subject: RE: TO CDC AND NIH - PUB MED- 3 MORE DEATHS - CWD - YOUNG HUNTERS

Dear Sir/Madam, In the Archives of Neurology you quoted (the abstract of which was attached to your email), we did not say CWD in humans will present like variant CJD.

That assumption would be wrong. I encourage you to read the whole article and call me if you have questions or need more clarification (phone: 404-639-3091). Also, we do not claim that "no-one has ever been infected with prion disease from eating venison." Our conclusion stating that we found no strong evidence of CWD transmission to humans in the article you quoted or in any other forum is limited to the patients we investigated.

Ermias Belay, M.D. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

-----Original Message----- From: Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 10:15 AM To: [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask] Subject: TO CDC AND NIH - PUB MED- 3 MORE DEATHS - CWD - YOUNG HUNTERS

Sunday, November 10, 2002 6:26 PM ......snip........end..............TSS

snip...

full text ;




http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/02/exotic-meats-usa-announces-urgent.html





Wednesday, March 18, 2009 Noah's Ark Holding, LLC, Dawson, MN RECALL Elk products contain meat derived from an elk confirmed to have CWD NV, CA, TX, CO, NY, UT, FL, OK RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: FOODS CLASS II




http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/03/noahs-ark-holding-llc-dawson-mn-recall.html





Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease presenting as severe depression: a case report




http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2009/02/creutzfeldt-jacob-disease-presenting-as.html




USA WRITTEN CJD QUESTIONNAIRE ???



http://cjdquestionnaire.blogspot.com/



The statistical incidence of CJD cases in the United States has been revised to reflect that there is one case per 9000 in adults age 55 and older. Eighty-five percent of the cases are sporadic, meaning there is no known cause at present.



http://www.cjdfoundation.org/fact.html





Attending Dr.: Date / Time Admitted : 12/14/97 1228

UTMB University of Texas Medical Branch Galveston, Texas 77555-0543 (409) 772-1238 Fax (409) 772-5683 Pathology Report

FINAL AUTOPSY DIAGNOSIS Autopsy' Office (409)772-2858

FINAL AUTOPSY DIAGNOSIS

I. Brain: Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Heidenhain variant.



http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2008/07/heidenhain-variant-creutzfeldt-jakob.html





WE NEED ACTION NOW, NO MORE TALKING !!!


IF the industry does not want to comply now, then shut them down $$$


IF you do not believe a lay person such as myself, then read you own scientists concerns ;


see Dr. Paul Brown and Seven Scientists comments here ;


Signatories: Paul W. Brown, M.D. Medical Director, USPHS, and Senior Investigator, NIH (retired) Consultant, TSE Risk Management 7815 Exeter Rd. Bethesda, MD 20814 Fax 301-652-4312 Email: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:paulwbrown@comcast.net Neil R. Cashman MD Professor, Department of Medicine (Neurology) Diener Chair of Neurodegenerative Diseases Centre for Research in Neurodegenerative Diseases 6 Queen's Park Crescent West Toronto Ontario M5S3H2 Ph: 416-978-1875 Fax: 416-978-1878 e-mail: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:neil.cashman@utoronto.ca Linda A. Detwiler, DVM Consultant, TSE Risk Management 225 Hwy 35 Red Bank, NJ 07701 Ph 732-741-2290 Fax 732-741-7751 Email: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:LAVet22@aol.com Laura Manuelidis, MD Professor and Head of Neuropathology, Department of Surgery and Faculty of Neurosciences Yale Medical School 333 Cedar St. New Haven, CT 06510 email: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:laura.manuelidis@yale.edu Tel: 203-785-4442 Deleted: p Deleted: 14 Formatted FDA Proposed Rule December 20, 2005 Jason C. Bartz, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology Creighton University 2500 California Plaza Omaha, NE 68178 (402) 280-1811 voice (402) 280-1875 fax mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:jbartz@creighton.edu Robert B. Petersen, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology and Neuroscience Case Western Reserve University 5-123 Wolstein Building 2103 Cornell Road Cleveland, OH 44106-2622 Phone 216-368-6709 FAX 360-838-9226 Email mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:rbp@cwru.edu Robert G. Rohwer, Ph.D. Director, Molecular Neurovirology Laboratory Veterans Affairs Medical Center Medical Research Service 151 Assoc. Professor of Neurology School of Medicine University of Maryland at Baltimore 10 N. Greene St. Baltimore, MD 21201 ph. 410-605-7000 x6462 Fax 410-605-7959 email: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000056/!x-usc:mailto:rrohwer@umaryland.edu

FDA-2002-N-0031-0131 Paul W. Brown, et al - Comment 02/23/2009 PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS FDA-2002-N-0031-0131.1 Paul W. Brown, et al - Comment 02/23/2009 PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS



http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=09000064808b3843&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf



http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/custom/jsp/search/searchresult/docketDetail.jsp#



THE SEVEN SCIENTIST REPORT ***



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



http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=FDA-2002-N-0031



December 19, 2005 Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 Re: Docket No: 2002N-0273 (formerly Docket No. 02N-0273) Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food and Feed Dear Sir or Madame: The McDonald’s Corporation buys more beef than any other restaurant in the United States.

snip...

SRMs, as defined by the USDA, are tissues which, in a BSE infected animal, are known to either harbor BSE infectivity or to be closely associated with infectivity. If SRMs are not removed, they may introduce BSE infectivity and continue to provide a source of animal feed contamination. Rendering will reduce infectivity but it will not totally eliminate it. This is significant, as research in the United Kingdom has shown that a calf may be infected with BSE by the ingestion of as little as .001 gram of untreated brain. The current proposed rule falls short of this and would still leave a potential source of infectivity in the system. In fact by the FDA’s own statement the exempted tissues which are known to have infectivity (such as distal ileum, DRGs, etc) would cumulatively amount to approximately 10% of the infectivity in an infected animal. Leaving approximately 10% of the infectious tissues in the system is not good enough.

snip...



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02n0273/02n-0273_emc-000134-02.pdf



9 December 2005 Division of Dockets Management (RFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 Re: Docket No: 2002N-0273 (formerly Docket No. 02N-0273) Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food and Feed Dear Sir or Madame: Serologicals Corporation is a global provider of biological products to life science companies.

We feel that for the FDA to provide a more comprehensive and protective feed ban, specified risk materials (SRMs) and deadstock must be removed from all animal feed and that legal exemptions which allow ruminant protein to be fed back to ruminants (with the exception of milk) should be discontinued. SRMs, as defined by the USDA, are tissues which, in a BSE infected animal, are known to either harbor BSE infectivity or to be closely associated with infectivity. If SRMs are not removed, they may introduce BSE infectivity and continue to provide a source of animal feed contamination. Rendering will reduce infectivity but it will not totally eliminate it. This is significant as research in the United Kingdom has shown that a calf may be infected with BSE by the ingestion of as little as .OOl gram of untreated brain. The current proposed rule falls short of this and would still leave a potential source of infectivity in the system. In fact by the FDA’s own statement the exempted tissues which are known to have infectivity (such as distal ileum, DRGs, etc) would cumulatively amount to 10% of the infectivity in an infected animal, This proposed rule would still allow for the possibility that cattle could be exposed to BSE through:



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02n0273/02n-0273-c000383-01-vol35.pdf



2002N-0273 Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed

FDA Comment Number : EC240

Submitter : Mr. Masahiro Mori Date & Time: 01/04/2006 05:01:26

Organization : Embassy of Japan

Category : International Government

Issue Areas/Comments

GENERAL

GENERAL

Comments of Japan on the United States? WTO/SPS Notification (G/SPS/N/USA/1141)

The Government of Japan welcomes the opportunity to comment on the United States? notification (G/SPS/N/USA/1141) on substances prohibited from use in Animal food or feed.

The Food safety risk assessment related to the import of beef and beef offal from the U.S.A. and Canada by the Food Safety Commission of Japan (FSC) was completed on December 8, 2005. Regarding the feed ban, the following was noted as an addendum to the conclusion on the risk assessment report of FSC:

?To prevent BSE exposure and amplification in U.S.A and Canada, the use of SRM must be prohibited completely. The ban must be applied not only to cattle feed but also to all other animal food/feed that may cause cross-contamination.?

To accomplish the effectively enforced feed ban requested in the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (CHAPTER 2.3.13, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy), whole SRM should be excluded as high risk material from animal feed chain as the above-mentioned addendum points out. The U.S. Government should also carry out continuous BSE surveillance sufficient to verify the efficacy of U.S. feed ban and make necessary revision of its feed regulations on a basis of its results.

The Government of Japan would like to request that the U.S. Government take account of the above comments in implementing its animal food and feed regulations.



http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02n0273/02N-0273-EC240.htm



Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed Delay of Effective Date - Notice of Final Rule Send a Comment or Submission Notification

...No. 2002N-0273) RIN 0910-AF46 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed Delay of Effective Date AGENCY: Food... …

Agency: FDA Document Type: NOTICES Comments Due: Apr 16, 2009 11:59:59 PM EDT Docket ID: FDA-2002-N-0031 Document ID: FDA-2002-N-0031-0132 Date Posted: Apr 9, 2009 View this Document:




http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648094bc24&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf




http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentViewer?objectId=090000648094bc24&disposition=attachment&contentType=html




http://www.regulations.gov/search/search_results.jsp?css=0&&Ntk=All&Ntx=mode+matchall&Ne=2+8+11+8053+8054+8098+8074+8066+8084+8055&N=0&Ntt=Substances%20Prohibited%20From%20Use%20in%20Animal%20Food%20or%20Feed%3B%20Final%20Rule%3A%20Proposed&sid=1208CC5B88DF




submit here ;




http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=SubmitComment&o=090000648094bc24




Mr. President, the time to act is now Sir, we have floundered too long, many people have become exposed needlessly, people are dying and or have died. ...



Thank You,

with kindest regards,


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



Comment Submitted Receipt

Thank you. Your comment on Document ID: FDA-2002-N-0031-0132 has been sent.

Your Comment tracking number is XXXXXXXX .

Attachments:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The electronic comments you submit directly through the Regulations.gov Web site are transmitted to the proper Department or Agency. The Department or Agency receiving your comment is considered the official custodian of the comment. Your comment will not be considered until it has been properly received by that Department or Agency in accordance with the requirements described in the Federal Register document. Users who want to verify that a Department or Agency has received their comment are urged to check directly with that Department or Agency.

Federal Departments and Agencies generally do not acknowledge that they have received specific public comments. However, when a Department or Agency establishes a public docket for a specific rulemaking, public comments are placed in that docket. The Department or Agency will process your comments upon receipt, but the availability of your comments in the public docket will depend on the particular Department or Agency's process.

Once the Agency has posted your comment on Regulations.gov, you can find it by clicking on 'Search for Documents' on the main navigation bar and type your Comment Tracking Number indicated above in the 'Comment Tracking Number' field and click the Submit button.

If you wish to retain a copy of this receipt, click on the Print button below to print a copy for your files.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Action




http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=SubmitComment&o=090000648094bc24





TSS

1 comment:

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. said...

-------------------- BSE-L@LISTS.AEGEE.ORG --------------------


TSS COMMENT SUBMISSION # 5


Docket ID FDA-2002-N-0031 Docket Title Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed Document ID FDA-2002-N-0031-0132 Document Title Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed Delay of Effective Date




Completely Edited Version

PRION ROUNDTABLE

2003

page 29

Dr. Linda Detwiler

The UK imports into the US.

There were 496 total, and 173 of the UK imports could have entered the US feed system. People don't like to hear this, but it's possible that one of the UK imports in the US entered the animal feed system and was exported to Canada. That's a possibility, because they import 50% of their feed from the US.

From 1994, we imported 11 million head of cattle from Canada. Most of these were feedlot animals for slaughter, but there were about 500,000 breeding animals. A number of Canada's cull cows were slaughtered here and could have introduced infectivity into our system. Even today we have Canadian imports in the country, breeding animals that were brought in prior to the ban and reside here.

We have feed ban exemptions: plate waste, poultry litter. We still allow that if it comes off a human plate, or if it's trimmings, it can be palletized and fed to ruminants. That might be a small amount, but it could allow spinal cord in certain cuts to be fed back to ruminants. Poultry litter or feather meal could be significant. Poultry is getting quite a bit of ruminant material in the US because it cannot go back to ruminants. Poultry and pigs are getting a substantial amount. Poultry litter is not only what passes through the chicken, but think about how chickens eat. They spill a lot on the floor. That stuff is still allowed to be fed back to cattle. That's a direct break in the ban, except that it's legal. Ruminants are getting ruminant material.

Unfiltered tallow: tallow is a lipid material. However, if it's not filtered, there are protein residues. That's meat and bone meal. That's allowed to be fed, so that's another legal exception where you can feed ruminant meat and bone meal through unfiltered tallow. We don't have an SRM ban and the 40 animals are the ones that if you have the agent, they introduce the most infectivity back into the animal food chain when they're rendered.

What's our on-farm compliance? We really don't know. ...snip...end...Dr. Linda Detwiler



UK EXPORTS OF MBM TO WORLD

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11g/tab05.pdf

OTHERS

BEEF AND VEAL

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab08.pdf

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab09.pdf

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab10.pdf

LIVE CATTLE

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab11.pdf

FATS

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11g/tab01.pdf

EMBRYOS

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11g/tab03.pdf

GELATIN ETC

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11g/tab02.pdf

SEMEN

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11g/tab04.pdf

MEAT

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11g/tab05.pdf

CANADA

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/563/sr02_biohaz02_canada_report_annex_en1.pdf

USA

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/574/sr03_biohaz02_usa_report_annex_en1.pdf

MEXICO

http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/efsa_scientific_reports/gbr_assessments/scr_annexes/566/sr04_biohaz02_mexico_report_annex_en1.pdf

Wednesday, April 16, 2008 MBM, greaves, meat offal, live cattle, imports from UK to USA vs Canada "Three of four possible manufacturers supplying a protein supplement likely fed to the animal could have included meat and bone meal (MBM) as an ingredient in its formulation. One of these manufacturers was able to confirm usage of meat and bone meal in supplements and confirm a source of MBM to be one common to previous BSE investigations."

USA AND CANADA IMPORTS OF UK CATTLE BETWEEN 1981 - 1989

USA = 496

CANADA = 198

*add 14 to 198 as last UK import to Canada, 14 in 1990

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/sci/ahra/bseris/bserise.pdf

HERE is another look at all the imports for both the USA and Canada of UK live cattle and greaves exports ;

UK Exports of Live Cattle by Value 1986-96

USA 697 LIVE CATTLE

CANADA 299 LIVE CATTLE

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab11.pdf

UK TABLE of Exports of meal of meat and meat offal; greaves 1979 - 1995

USA 24 TONS

CANADA 83 TONS

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m12/tab12.pdf

HOWEVER, my files show 44 tons of greaves for USA. ...TSS

Subject: Re: exports from the U.K. of it's MBM to U.S.??? From: S.J.Pearsall@esg.maff.gsi.gov.uk Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:03:16 +0000 To: flounder@wt.net (Receipt Notification Requested) (Non Receipt Notification Requested)

Terry

Meat and bonemeal is not specifically classified for overseas trade purposes. The nearest equivalent is listed as flours and meals of meat or offals (including tankage), unfit for human consumption; greaves. UK exports of this to the US are listed below:

Country Tonnes

1980 1981 12 1982 1983 1984 10 1985 2 1986 1987 1988 1989 20 1990

Data for exports between 1975 and 1979 are not readily available. These can be obtained (at a charge) from data retailers appointed by HM Customs and Excise: BTSL (Tel: 01372 463121) or Abacus (01245 252222). Best wishes Simon Pearsall Overseas trade statistics Stats (C&F)C

============ END...TSS...2008============

P04.27

Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the Oral Route

Holznagel, E1; Yutzy, B1; Deslys, J-P2; Lasmézas, C2; Pocchiari, M3; Ingrosso, L3; Bierke, P4; Schulz-Schaeffer, W5; Motzkus, D6; Hunsmann, G6; Löwer, J1 1Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Germany; 2Commissariat à l´Energie Atomique, France; 3Instituto Superiore di Sanità, Italy; 4Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease control, Sweden; 5Georg August University, Germany; 6German Primate Center, Germany

Background:

In 2001, a study was initiated in primates to assess the risk for humans to contract BSE through contaminated food. For this purpose, BSE brain was titrated in cynomolgus monkeys.

Aims:

The primary objective is the determination of the minimal infectious dose (MID50) for oral exposure to BSE in a simian model, and, by in doing this, to assess the risk for humans. Secondly, we aimed at examining the course of the disease to identify possible biomarkers.

Methods:

Groups with six monkeys each were orally dosed with lowering amounts of BSE brain: 16g, 5g, 0.5g, 0.05g, and 0.005g. In a second titration study, animals were intracerebrally (i.c.) dosed (50, 5, 0.5, 0.05, and 0.005 mg).

Results:

In an ongoing study, a considerable number of high-dosed macaques already developed simian vCJD upon oral or intracerebral exposure or are at the onset of the clinical phase. However, there are differences in the clinical course between orally and intracerebrally infected animals that may influence the detection of biomarkers.

Conclusions:

Simian vCJD can be easily triggered in cynomolgus monkeys on the oral route using less than 5 g BSE brain homogenate. The difference in the incubation period between 5 g oral and 5 mg i.c. is only 1 year (5 years versus 4 years). However, there are rapid progressors among orally dosed monkeys that develop simian vCJD as fast as intracerebrally inoculated animals.

The work referenced was performed in partial fulfilment of the study "BSE in primates" supported by the EU (QLK1-2002-01096).

http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf

look at the table and you'll see that as little as 1 mg (or 0.001 gm) caused 7% (1 of 14) of the cows to come down with BSE;

Risk of oral infection with bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent in primates

Corinne Ida Lasmézas, Emmanuel Comoy, Stephen Hawkins, Christian Herzog, Franck Mouthon, Timm Konold, Frédéric Auvré, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie Lescoutra-Etchegaray, Nicole Salès, Gerald Wells, Paul Brown, Jean-Philippe Deslys Summary The uncertain extent of human exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)--which can lead to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD)--is compounded by incomplete knowledge about the efficiency of oral infection and the magnitude of any bovine-to-human biological barrier to transmission. We therefore investigated oral transmission of BSE to non-human primates. We gave two macaques a 5 g oral dose of brain homogenate from a BSE-infected cow. One macaque developed vCJD-like neurological disease 60 months after exposure, whereas the other remained free of disease at 76 months. On the basis of these findings and data from other studies, we made a preliminary estimate of the food exposure risk for man, which provides additional assurance that existing public health measures can prevent transmission of BSE to man.

snip...

BSE bovine brain inoculum

100 g 10 g 5 g 1 g 100 mg 10 mg 1 mg 0·1 mg 0·01 mg

Primate (oral route)* 1/2 (50%)

Cattle (oral route)* 10/10 (100%) 7/9 (78%) 7/10 (70%) 3/15 (20%) 1/15 (7%) 1/15 (7%)

RIII mice (ic ip route)* 17/18 (94%) 15/17 (88%) 1/14 (7%)

PrPres biochemical detection

The comparison is made on the basis of calibration of the bovine inoculum used in our study with primates against a bovine brain inoculum with a similar PrPres concentration that was

inoculated into mice and cattle.8 *Data are number of animals positive/number of animals surviving at the time of clinical onset of disease in the first positive animal (%). The accuracy of

bioassays is generally judged to be about plus or minus 1 log. ic ip=intracerebral and intraperitoneal.

Table 1: Comparison of transmission rates in primates and cattle infected orally with similar BSE brain inocula

Published online January 27, 2005

http://www.thelancet.com/journal/journal.isa

It is clear that the designing scientists must

also have shared Mr Bradley's surprise at the results because all the dose

levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s145d.pdf

6. It also appears to me that Mr Bradley's answer (that it would take less than say 100 grams) was probably given with the benefit of hindsight; particularly if one considers that later in the same answer Mr Bradley expresses his surprise that it could take as little of 1 gram of brain to cause BSE by the oral route within the same species. This information did not become available until the "attack rate"

experiment had been completed in 1995/96. This was a titration experiment designed to ascertain the infective dose. A range of dosages was used to ensure that the actual result was within both a lower and an upper limit within the study and the designing scientists would not have expected all the dose levels to trigger infection. The dose ranges chosen by the most informed scientists at that time ranged from 1 gram to three times one hundred grams. It is clear that the designing scientists must have also shared Mr Bradley's surprise at the results because all the dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s147f.pdf

TSS

http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2008/04/mbm-greaves-meat-offal-live-cattle.html



Thursday, April 09, 2009

Docket No. FDA2002N0031 (formerly Docket No. 2002N0273) RIN 0910AF46 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed

burt.pritchett@fda.hhs.gov

Greetings FDA et al,

I lost my Mother to the Heidenhain Variant Creutzfeldt Jakob disease (confirmed see autopsy below).

I kindly wish to comment on the following ;

[Docket No. FDA-2002-N-0031] (formerly Docket No. 2002N-0273) RIN 0910-AF46

[Federal Register: April 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 67)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 16160-16161] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ap09-18]

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 589

[Docket No. FDA-2002-N-0031] (formerly Docket No. 2002N-0273) RIN 0910-AF46 TSS SUBMISSION # 5


Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed Delay of Effective Date

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed delay of effective date.

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-8127.htm

MY COMMENT AS FOLLOWS ;

I find it deeply disturbing, that with the science to date, especially with the science to date, transmission studies, the more virulent atypical strains of the BSE i.e. h-BSE and l-BSE, both of which have now been documented in North America, that we are even still discussing this most important topic. The industry involved has beat this mad cow feed ban to death, and still refuse to comply. IF they would have adhered to policy, rules and regulations put forth August 4th, 1997, when the partial, and voluntary ruminant to ruminant feed ban was first put in place, they would not still be crying the same tune. WE need not only to enforce the present ban, but strengthen it, especially to include blood in the ban. WE (the consumer), was promised this would happen years ago. For Pete's sake, this will be the third president to have to address these same questions, and I pray that this one has the guts to finally do something. We need NOT discuss this for one more second. We had 8 years that President Bush literally covered up mad cow disease, and let literally millions and millions of pounds of mad cow feed into commerce to be fed out. IN one feed ban recall alone in 2007, 10 MILLION PLUS POUNDS was fed out into commerce. and under this same President, we now millions of kids across our Nation that have been needlessly exposed to the mad cow agent via the infamous USDA CERTIFIED DOWNER COW DEAD STOCK SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM. if you think for one moment that the largest meat recall in the history of the USA was because a few animals were filmed being abused, your only kidding yourself. that meat was recalled because dead stock downer cows are at the highest risk to carry mad cow disease, and they had been feeding our children this stuff for years. AND then had the nerve to lie to us about THE GREAT BSE FIREWALL IN THE USA THAT WOULD PROTECT THE CONSUMER I.E. THE BSE FEED BAN, that never was nothing more than ink on paper. who will monitor these children in the years and decades to come for a human form of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy? who can with a CJD/TSE surveillance system and CJD Questionnaire set up the way it is now? you can't.

R-CALF and the CJD Foundation, seem oblivious to the fact that the USA has a mad cow problem. THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE CANADIAN BORDER. this is about feeding cows to cows in the USA, USA RUMINANT MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE, and the fact the USA has had a mad cow problem for years.

all R-CALF wants to do is blame it on Canada, close the border, and then continue to feed ruminant feed to USA cattle, and ignore the TSE problem in the USA bovine, read closely what Bullard says from R-CALF ;

"We either implement this feed ban without any further delay or we stop the source of this problem by removing and reversing the Canadian cattle that continues to enter this country" said Bullard

http://www.montanasnewsstation.com/Global/story.asp?S=10171123

ENOUGH already $ NO MORE DISCUSSION PLEASE, WE NEED ACTION !

STOP ALL MAD COW FEED REGARDLESS !!!

I strenuously urge President Obama to NOT discuss this for one more moment, actions must be put forth now, and enforce such actions.

I strenuously urge President Obama to ENHANCE the feed ban to include blood, and enforce said regulations, based on sound science.

I strenuously urge President Obama to ban the use of "poultry litter" and the use of all mammalian and poultry protein in ruminant feed,as a feed ingredient for ruminant animals, and enforce said regulations, based on sound science.

I strenuously urge President Obama to ban the use of "plate waste" as a feed ingredient for ruminants, and enforce said regulations, based on sound science.

I strenuously urge President Obama to ban from human food (including dietary supplements please see latest May 2009 CDC warning on these type supplements, CWD, and Elk Antler Velvet), and cosmetics a wide range of bovine- derived material so that the same safeguards that protect Americans from exposure to the agent of BSE through meat products regulated by USDA also apply to food products that FDA regulates, and enforce such actions, based on sound science.

I strenuously urge President Obama to further minimize the possibility of cross- contamination of ruminant and non-ruminant animal feed by requiring equipment, facilities or production lines to be dedicated to non-ruminant animal feeds if they use protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed. Currently, some equipment, facilities and production lines process or handle prohibited and non-prohibited materials and make both ruminant and non-ruminant feed -- a practice which could lead to cross-contamination, and enforce said regulations, based on sound science.

Sunday, April 12, 2009

BSE MAD COW TESTING USA 2009 FIGURES

Month Number of Tests

Feb 2009 -- 1,891

Jan 2009 -- 4,620

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/surveillance/ongoing_surv_results.shtml

http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/04/bse-mad-cow-testing-usa-2009-figures.html



PLEASE SEE MY FULL COMMENT SUBMISSION IN THE PDF ATTACHMENT, OR GO HERE


Thursday, April 9, 2009

Docket No. FDA2002N0031 (formerly Docket No. 2002N0273) RIN 0910AF46 Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Final Rule: Proposed

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/04/docket-no-fda2002n0031-formerly-docket.html

http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/r-calf-and-usa-mad-cow-problem-dont.html#comments

Sunday, April 12, 2009 r-calf and the USA mad cow problem, don't look, don't find, and then blame Canada

http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/r-calf-and-usa-mad-cow-problem-dont.html

http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/2009/04/cjd-foundation-sides-with-r-calfers-no.html#comments





Thank you. Your comment on Document ID: FDA-2002-N-0031-0132 has been sent.

Your Comment tracking number is XXXXX

Attachments:

C:\Users\flounder\Documents\FDA2002N0031.pdf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The electronic comments you submit directly through the Regulations.gov Web site are transmitted to the proper Department or Agency. The Department or Agency receiving your comment is considered the official custodian of the comment. Your comment will not be considered until it has been properly received by that Department or Agency in accordance with the requirements described in the Federal Register document. Users who want to verify that a Department or Agency has received their comment are urged to check directly with that Department or Agency.

Federal Departments and Agencies generally do not acknowledge that they have received specific public comments. However, when a Department or Agency establishes a public docket for a specific rulemaking, public comments are placed in that docket. The Department or Agency will process your comments upon receipt, but the availability of your comments in the public docket will depend on the particular Department or Agency's process.

Once the Agency has posted your comment on Regulations.gov, you can find it by clicking on 'Search for Documents' on the main navigation bar and type your Comment Tracking Number indicated above in the 'Comment Tracking Number' field and click the Submit button.

If you wish to retain a copy of this receipt, click on the Print button below to print a copy for your files.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



-------------------- BSE-L@LISTS.AEGEE.ORG --------------------