Sent: Sat, Oct 19, 2019 8:44 am
Subject: Departmental Freedom of Information Act Regulations FOIA under Trump Regime
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 203 / Monday, October 21, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
[[Page 56097]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Part 1
RIN 0503-AA61
Departmental Freedom of Information Act Regulations
AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Officer, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule revises the U.S. Department of Agriculture (``USDA or the Department'') Freedom of Information Act (``FOIA'') regulations. The revisions clarify and update procedures for requesting information from USDA, as well as procedures that USDA follows in responding to requests from the public. The revisions also incorporate clarifications and updates resulting from changes to the FOIA and case law.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective October 21, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alexis R. Graves, Departmental FOIA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, United States Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, South Building, Room 4101, Washington, DC 20250. You may also contact the Departmental FOIA Officer by phone at 202-690-3318 or USDAFOIA@usda.gov.
snip...
(l) Aggregating requests.
When a component reasonably believes that a requester or a group of requesters acting in concert is attempting to divide a single request into a series of requests for the purpose of avoiding fees, the component may aggregate those requests and charge accordingly. Components may presume that multiple requests of this type made within a 30 calendar day period have been made in order to avoid fees. For requests separated by a longer period, components will aggregate them only where there is a reasonable basis for determining that aggregation is warranted in view of all the circumstances involves. Multiple requests involving unrelated matters will not be aggregated for fee purposes.
(m) Payment of FOIA fees. Requesters must pay FOIA fees by check or money order made payable to the Treasury of the United States. Components are not required to accept payments in installments.
(n) Failure to pay properly charged fees. When a requester has previously failed to pay a properly charged FOIA fee to any component within 30 calendar days of the billing date, a component may require that the requester pay the full amount due, plus any applicable interest on that prior request, and the component may require that the requester make an advance payment of the full amount of any anticipated fee before the component begins to process a new request or continues to process a pending request or any pending appeal. Where a component has a reasonable basis to believe that a requester has misrepresented the requester's identity in order to avoid paying outstanding fees, it may require that the requester provide proof of identity.
(o) Restrictions on charging fees.
(1) If a component fails to comply with the statutory time limits in which to respond to a request, as provided in Sec. 1.6(b), and if unusual circumstances, as that term is defined by the FOIA, apply to the processing of the request, as discussed in Sec. 1.6(d), it may not charge search fees for the processing of the request, or duplication fees for the processing of the request if the requester is classified as an educational institution requester, a noncommercial scientific institution requester, or a representative of the news media, as defined in appendix A of this subpart, unless:
(i) The component notifies the requester, in writing, within the statutory 20-working day time period, that unusual circumstances, as that term is defined by the FOIA, apply to the processing of the request; (
ii) More than 5,000 pages are necessary to respond to the request; and
(iii) The component has discussed with the requester by means of written mail, electronic mail, or by telephone (or has made not less than three good-faith attempts to do so) how the requester could effectively limit the scope of the request.
(2) If a court has determined that exceptional circumstances exist, as defined by the FOIA, a failure to comply with the time limits shall be excused for the length of time provided by the court order.
(p) Waivers of chargeable fees. (1) In general. Records responsive to a request will be furnished without charge or at a reduced rate below that established in Table 1 of appendix A of this subpart, where a component determines, based on available evidence, that the requester has demonstrated that:
(i) Disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest as defined in paragraph (p)(3) of this section, because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government, and;
(ii) Disclosure of the information is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester as defined in paragraph (p)(4) of this section.
(2) Adjudication of fee waivers. Each fee waiver request is judged on its own merit.
(3) Factors for consideration of public interest. In deciding whether disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government, components will consider all four of the following factors:
(i) The subject of the request must concern identifiable operations or activities of the Federal government, with a connection that is direct and clear, not remote or attenuated.
(ii) Disclosure of the requested records must be meaningfully informative about government operations or activities to be ``likely to contribute'' to an increased public understanding of those operations or activities. The disclosure of information that already is in the public domain, in either the same or a substantially identical form, would not contribute to such understanding where nothing new would be added to the public's understanding.
(iii) The disclosure must contribute to the understanding of a reasonably broad audience of persons interested in the subject, as opposed to the requester's individual understanding. A requester's expertise in the subject area as well as his or her ability and intention to effectively convey information to the public will be considered. It will be presumed that a representative of the news media, as defined in appendix A of this subpart, will satisfy this consideration.
(iv) The public's understanding of the subject in question must be enhanced by the disclosure to a significant degree. However, components will not make value judgments about whether the information at issue is ``important'' enough to be made public.
(4) Factors for consideration of commercial interest. In deciding whether disclosure of the requested information is in the requester's commercial interest, components will consider the following two factors:
(i) Components will identify any commercial interest of the requester, as defined in appendix A of this subpart. Requesters may be given an opportunity to provide explanatory information regarding this consideration.
(ii) A waiver or reduction of fees is justified where the public interest is greater than any identified commercial interest in disclosure. Components ordinarily will presume that where a news media requester has satisfied the public interest standard, the public
[[Page 56106]]
interest will be the interest primarily served by disclosure to that requester. Disclosure to data brokers or others who merely compile and market government information for direct economic return will not be presumed to primarily serve the public interest.
(5) Partial fee waivers. Where only some of the records to be released satisfy the requirements for a waiver of fees, a waiver will be granted for those records only.
(6) Timing of requests for fee waivers. Requests for a waiver or reduction of fees should be made when the request is first submitted to the component and should address the criteria referenced in paragraph (p)(3) of this section. A requester may submit a fee waiver request later so long as the underlying record request is pending or on administrative appeal. When a requester who has committed to pay fees subsequently asks for a waiver of those fees and that waiver is denied, the requester will be required to pay any costs incurred up to the date the fee waiver request was received.
Appendix A to Subpart A--Fee Schedule
Snip...
(2) Review fees.
(i) Reviewing is the process of examining records located in response to a request in order to determine whether any portion of the records is exempt from disclosure. The process of review also includes the process of preparing records for disclosure, for example, doing all that is necessary to redact them and prepare them for release. Review time also includes time spent considering any formal objection to disclosure of responsive records made by a business submitter as discussed in 7 CFR 1.8 Requirements for processing requests seeking business information. However, it does not include time spent resolving general legal or policy issues regarding the application of the nine FOIA exemptions.
(ii) Review time is charged in quarter-hour increments within the USDA, and includes the direct costs incurred by a component in preparing records responsive to a request for disclosure. It does not include overhead expenses such as the costs of space and heating or lighting of the facility in which the records are maintained.
(iii) USDA components may charge for time spent reviewing requested records even if they determine that the records reviewed are entirely exempt from disclosure.
(iv) USDA components will charge for review time at the actual salary rate of the individual who conducts the review, plus 16 percent of the salary rate (to cover benefits). This rate was adopted for consistency with the OMB Fee Guidelines that state that agencies should charge fees that recoup the full allowable direct costs that they incur in reviewing records for disclosure.
(v) Review time also includes the direct costs associated with the cost of computer programming designed to facilitate a manual review of the records, or to perform electronic redaction of responsive records, particularly when records are maintained in electronic form. Components will notify requesters of the costs performing such programming, and requesters must agree to pay the associated costs before these costs may be incurred. snip...see full text;
i am fairly familiar with the F.O.I.A. and it's endless bureaucracy of BS, all in the name of protecting industry.
but what happens when the very people that are responsible for governing the industry, is the industry?
i will tell you what happens, people die, and trump just made it worse than it was, with trying to find the truth via the F.O.I.A.
here's your sign.
10 years, 1 decade, of BULL SHIT i.e. BS, VIA the U.S.D.A., F.O.I.A., and more, i don't make this stuff up...terry
History Singeltary FOIA request on mad cow disease, a review
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2015
APHIS Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal Mouse Bio-Assays 2007-00030-A Sheep Imported From Belgium and the Presence of TSE Prion Disease Kevin Shea to Singeltary 2015
APHIS Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal Mouse Bio-Assays 2007-00030-A Sheep Imported From Belgium and the Presence of TSE Prion Disease Kevin Shea to Singeltary 2015
Greetings BSE-L Members et al,
you can’t believe what I got in the US Postal mail today. the wife would not pick it up yesterday, because there was a $6.00 charge for a certified letter from USDA Kevin Shea for about 5 pages. I went to the PO today, told the girls in the back that if it’s an affidavit, a warrant, summons, I don’t want it, send it back. but it was certified. scared me. but the curiosity got to me, so i coughed up 6 bucks, and took a chance. low and behold, after my last appeal to this decade plus old quest was turned down, even though I already had the answer from another source, APHIS et al finally stumbled across those old mouse bio-assays. they had them all along.
what the industry sent me first was better, because it had some of the good stuff i.e. redacted.
this all started way back around the year 2,000, when in my opinion, the USDA et al let these sheep in the USA from Belgium, when they should not have because of atypical BSE in Belgium. I started asking for the these mouse bio-assays back in or around 2003 or before, then I had to get official with FOIA, because no one would answer my questions.
well, it’s February 20, 2015, over a decade later, and I don’t know how many denials, here’s what was in the mail yesterday, February 19, 2015 ;
United States Department of Agriculture
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Marketing and Regulatory Programs Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Legislative and Public Affairs Freedom of Information 4700 River Road Unit 50 Riverdale, MD. 20737-1232
FEB 10 2015
Terry S. Singletary Sr. P.O. Box Bacliff, Texas 77518
Re: FOIA Appeal # 2007-00030-A
Dear Mr. Singletary:
This letter is in response to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) appeal that you submitted regarding FOIA request 07-566. Your appeal challenged the APHIS FOIA Office's search for the "Mouse Bio-Assays" on the sheep imported from Belgium. We apologize for the delayed response.
The APHIS FOIA Office received your appeal, on July 7, 2007 and assigned it FOIA case number 2007-00030-A.
In response to your appeal, the APHIS FOIA Office performed a second search of records responsive to your initial request. The Agency has since found four (4) pages of responsive records for the "Mouse Bio-Assays" dated October 22,2009. Although these records postdate both your initial request and subsequent appeal by approximately two years; we enclose them in the interest of responsiveness to your request.
We now consider this appeal closed and will take no further action. If you are dissatisfied with this decision, you have the right to judicial review in an appropriate United States District Court in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552, (2)(4)(B).
Prior to seeking judicial review, you may contact the Office of Government Information Services (OGlS). OGIS was created within the National Archives and Records Administration when the Open Government Act of 2007 amended the FOIA. OGIS provides mediation of FOIA disputes between appellants and federal agencies. Participation in mediation does not affect your right to judicial review. Contact information for OGIS can be found at http:/www.archives.gov/ogis.
Sincerely,
Kevin Shea Administrator Enclosure
snip...end
the next 4 pages is exactly what I received from an industry source way back on Saturday, February 27, 2010. see ;
Saturday, February 27, 2010
FINAL REPORT OF THE TESTING OF THE BELGIAN (VERMONT) SHEEP February 27, 2010
see history below ;
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 10:04 PM
To: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
Subject: mad sheep mad river valley...NOT...never was
Veterinary Laboratories Agency – Weybridge
New Haw, Addlestone, Surrey KT15 3NB United Kingdom
Telephone +44 (0)1932 341111 Facsimile +44 (0)1932 347046 '
Web site http://www.vla.gov.uk
Veterinary Laboratories Agency
Your ref: MPL-6197-7-37
Our ref: FT1294
This is the FINAL report for contract MPL-6197-7-37 The testing of the Belgian (Vermont) sheep.
Background
Brain homogenate (10% in normal saline) from each case was inoculated intracerebralty into panels of 20 Rlll and 20 Tg338 mice.
FT1294/0001 (Sample 4677) was inoculated into mice on the 14/12/06
FT1294/0011 (Sample 4703) was inoculated into mice on the 20/12/06
Method
The brain from each mouse was examined histologically for any evidence of TSE-related vacuolation, and immunolabelled using anti-PrP antibody Rb486 as described elsewhere1, All slide interpretation was undertaken blind with regard to the clinical status of the mouse, or the source of the inoculum.
Final bioassay results
FT1294/0001 (Sample 4677)
Tg338 mice - All 20 mice are negative by histopathology, and immunohistochemistry
Rlll mice - All 20 mice are negative negative by histopathology, and immunohistochemistry
FT1294/0011 (Sample 4703)
Tg338 mice - All 20 mice are negative by histopathology, and immunohistochemistry
Rlll mice - All 20 mice are negative by histopathology, and immunohrstochernistry
The survival times for these mice can be seen in the figures below. Additional data sets from positive and negative inocula (J Spiropoulos, pers. comm.) have been included for comparison._
1 Beck KE, Chaplin M, Stack M: Sallis RE, Simonini S, Lockey R, Spiropoulos J. Lesion Profiling at Primary Isolation in Rlll Mice Is Insufficient in Distinguishing BSE from Classical Scrapie. Brain Pathol. 2009 epub ahead of print
FINAL report for contract MPL-6197-7-37
VLA is an Executive Agency of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)
snip... (2 pages of charts and graphs of survival and comparison of tg338 data NOT included here...TSS)
CONCLUSION
These mice have survived for long enough to have demonstrated the presence of classical scrapie, atypical scrapie, or ovine BSE if any of these strains was present in the inoculum.
Both samples are negative by bioassay.
Dr. Marion M Simmons
22nd October 2009
February 27, 2010, INVESTIGATION OF MAD SHEEP OF MAD RIVER VALLEY COMPLETE. THEY WERE NOT INFECTED WITH ANY TSE. ...TSS
Greetings again BSE list members,
The investigation of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley may be complete now, but, I still have questions.
PLEASE SEE MY FINAL FOIA HERE ;
Monday, September 1, 2008
RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [No. 00-072-1] September 1, 2008
Greetings again BSE-L members,
I had a pleasant surprise this past Saturday. I got an unexpected package from O.I.G. on my old F.O.I.A. request, of the final test results of the infamous mad sheep of mad river valley. IF you all remember, back on Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:00:20 -0500 I wrote ;
Greetings,
With great disgust, I must report, that after years and years of wrangling over the infamous mad sheep of mad river valley, I have failed in getting an official answer via FOIA on the outcome of the TSE testing of those imported Belgium sheep. The USA Government refuses to tell the public, exactly what the testing outcome was, and in doing so, shows just how corrupt this administration has been. and the excuse given in their answer to my final appeal, which they have now officially denied, was bizarre to say the least ;
"I am denying your FOIA appeal. This is the final agency decision. You may seek judicial review of this decision in the United States district court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business or in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. & 552(a)(4)(B)."
FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1] ...snip...end...TSS
NOW, out of the wild blue, AFTER them telling me they denied my FOIA appeal for the final time, any further action would have to be judicial review in the United States district court, I get 25+ pages, a lot of redacted names, etc, but this is the first time they sent me anything about this in the 6 years of waiting for my FOIA request. IT will take me a long time to get this online due to the fact you cannot hardly read it, very poor quality and eligibility of text. BUT, the just of it is, somebody (REDACTED) screwed those tests up. I will work to get all the data online next week or so, but it is odd how much they were concerned for human and animal health from an atypical scrapie of foreign origin back then, but yet when we document it here in the USA, you don't hear a word about it. it's a completely different story.
IN SHORT ;
August 15, 2000
OIG case # NY-3399-56 REDACTED, VT
''Enclosed is OIG's notification that they have scheduled an investigation of the following individual. REDACTED is alleged to have provided possibly inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep. However, because the results were determined to be inconclusive, no actual violation was actually committed.''
snip...
IN SHORT ;
August 15, 2000
OIG case # NY-3399-56 REDACTED, VT
''Enclosed is OIG's notification that they have scheduled an investigation of the following individual. REDACTED is alleged to have provided possibly inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep. However, because the results were determined to be inconclusive, no actual violation was actually committed.''
snip...
[only bush et al could have interpreted it that way. don't all criminals wish this is the way the system worked. ...tss]
JULY, 28, 2000
Case Opening Memorandum
snip...
An investigation regarding the subject identified below will be conduced and a report submitted at the conclusion of the investigation. If you have or should later receive additional information concerning this matter, please forward it to this office.
If you believe that administrative action should be taken before all criminal and other legal matters are completed, please coordinate that action with this office in order not to jeopardize the ongoing investigation.
The fact that this subject is under investigation should not be discussed with anyone who does not have a need to know and all inquiries on the investigation should be referred to the office of Inspector General.
snip...end
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FEBRUARY 7, 2002
SUBJECT OIG CASE NY-3399-56 REDACTED VT HEALTH/SANITATION VIOLATION
TO: William Buisch, Regional Director Eastern Region, VS Raleigh, NC
Enclosed is the official investigation report on REDACTED. If you will recall, REDACTED is alleged to have provided possible inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep.
OIG is closing their file upon issuance of the Report of Investigation (copy enclosed). We are, therefore, also closing our case file.
REDACTED
Resource Management Systems and Evaluation Staff
Enclosure
cc:
REDACTED IES, Riverdale, MD (w/cy of incoming)
APHIS:RMSES: REDACTED 2/7/02 "NY-3399-56-REDACTED Closure''
END...TSS
NOW, the question is, who screwed those test up, and was it done on purpose, just to cover someone's ass for letting those sheep in here in the first place ???
WHICH tests were compromised, one of them, all of them, and, can we trust the outcome of any of these test under the circumstances here ???
i.e.
"It is significant that four of the sheep which first tested positive on REDACTED Western blot tests, thereby providing the type of confirmation the plaintiffs argue is lacking on the current record."
UNDER what circumstances were these test compromised ???
MY basic, simple question, was not answered in layman term, i.e. exactly what strain of TSE did those sheep have ???
IS this the best we can do ???
>>>"REDACTED is alleged to have provided possibly inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep. However, because the results were determined to be inconclusive, no actual violation was actually committed.''<<<
PLEASE SEE FULL TEXT HERE ;
Saturday, February 27, 2010
*** FINAL REPORT OF THE TESTING OF THE BELGIAN (VERMONT) SHEEP February 27, 2010
IN SHORT ; August 15, 2000 OIG case # NY-3399-56 REDACTED, VT ''Enclosed is OIG's notification that they have scheduled an investigation of the following individual. REDACTED is alleged to have provided possibly inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep. However, because the results were determined to be inconclusive, no actual violation was actually committed.''
FINAL REPORT OF THE TESTING OF THE BELGIAN (VERMONT) SHEEP February 27, 2010
(10 YEARS LATER, FOIA, none of the sheep had any TSE at all...tss)
Thursday, April 24, 2008
RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]
Monday, September 1, 2008
RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [No. 00-072-1]
FOIA MAD SHEEP MAD RIVER VALLEY
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]
To: Garfield.O.Daley@aphis.usda.gov
CC: phyllis.Fong@usda.gov; bse-L@aegee.org;
Re: FOIA APPEAL 07-566 DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]
November 13, 2007
Greetings Garfield O. Daley, Acting FOIA Director, and USDA et al,
SNIP
for those interested, please see full text answer below received from USDA et al below on latest appeal ;
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]
To: Garfield.O.Daley@aphis.usda.gov
CC: phyllis.Fong@usda.gov; bse-L@aegee.org;
Re: FOIA APPEAL 07-566 DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]
EXACTLY WHAT are these people capable of doing ???
JUST HOW FAR will they go ???
Mad Sheep The True Story Behind the USDA‚ War on a Family Farm Linda Faillace
The page-turning account of a government cover-up, corporate greed, and a courageous family‚ fight to save their farm.
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
To: Boyd.Rutherford@usda.gov
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:35 PM
Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
Greetings USDA,
I respectfully request the final results of the mouse bio-assays test that were to have supposedly began 2+ years late, 5 years ago, on the imported sheep from Belgium ?
WHAT happened to the test results and MOUSE BIO-ASSAYS of those imported sheep from Belgium that were confiscated and slaughtered from the Faillace's, what sort of TSE did these animals have ?
WERE they atypical scrapie, BSE, and or typical scrapie ?
HOW much longer will you refuse to give us this information ? and for what reason ?
WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley were quarantined for 5 years, but none of these farms from Texas and Alabama with Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not been quarantined for 5 years, why not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?
snip.
full text ;
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL WASHINGTON D.C. 20250
DEC 28, 2007
Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. P.O. Box Bacliff, Texas 77518
Subject: FOIA Appeal-Log No. 08-00034 (No. 07-00060)
Dear Mr. Singeltary:
This is in response to your December 3, 2007, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. & 552, appeal of the November 20, 2007, decision of Ms. Deirdre MacNeil, FOIA/Privacy Act (PA) Attorney, Office of Inspector General (OIG), Department of Agriculture (USDA). As explained below, your FOIA appeal is denied.
As background, on March 1, 2007, you requested the "final results of the TSE Mouse-bioassays of those Atypical TSE in the Vermont Sheep." FOIA requires the release of agency records except where one or more of the nine enumerated exceptions apply. On November 20, 2007, Ms. MacNeil responded to your request by sending you seven pages from Hotline files PS-3340-0024, which was responsive to your request. Ms. MacNeil withheld identifying information pursuant to Exceptions 6 and 7(C) of the FOIA. See 5. U.S.C.& 552(b)(6) and (7)(C). On December 3, 2007, you appealed Ms. MacNeils decision.
12-3-07
To The Honorable Inspector General USDA,
I respectfully "APPEAL" the decision to withhold information I requested under the F.O.I.A. About the final results of the T.S.E. Mouse-bioassays of the Atypical T.S.E. in the Vermont Sheep imported from Belgium and later confiscated and slaughtered under a "Extra Ordinary Declaration of Emergency due to Atypical T.S.E. in U.S.A. sheep.
Log Number 07-00060 FOIA 07-566
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Exemption 6 permits the Government to withhold information about individuals in "personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. & 552 (b)(6). To warrant protection under Exemption 6, information must first meet a threshold requirement by falling within the category of personnel and medical files and similar files. Id. Information fits into a "similar file" if it contains information regarding a particular individual. See United States Dept of State V. Washington Post Co., 456, 601-02 (1982). The threshold is met in this case, as the memorandum contains information regarding particular named individuals.
Exemption 7(C) protects from disclosure law enforcement information, the disclosure of which "could reasonably be expected to constitute and unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. & 552(b)(7)(C. Under Exemption 7(C), it has been held that a protectible privacy interest exists in the identities of investigative agents. See Senate of
Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. Page 2
Puerto Rico v. United States Dep't of Justice, 823 F.2d 574, 588-89 (D.C. Cir. 1987); Nishnic v. United States Dep't of Justice, 671 F. Supp. 776, 789 (D.D.C. 1987). Such a privacy interest exists in this case, as the withheld information contains the identities, including names and identifying information, of investigative agents in the memorandum.
Once it is determined that a privacy interest exists, Exemptions 6 and 7(C), of FOIA require a balancing of interests between the public interest served by disclosure and an individual's right to privacy. See, e.g., Senate of Puerto Rico, 823 F.2d at 587; Dep't of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 372 (1976). Determination of whether disclosure is warranted turns not upon the particular purpose for which the document is requested, but upon the nature of the requested document and its relationship to the central purpose of FOIA, which is to "open agency action to the light of public scrutiny." United States Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 772-73 (1989) (quoting Rose, 425 U.S. at 372). I have determined that the release of the withheld information, of investigative agents in the memorandum, would not serve the public interest. Therefore, I am denying your appeal with respect to the withholdings pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C).
In addition to appealing the exemptions pursuant to 6 and 7(C), you appear to take issue with USDA's Animal $ Plant Health Inspection Service's (APHIS) response to your FOIA requests with APHIS. You may contact APHIS regarding the status of any such requests by contacting Mr. Garfield Daley, Acting FOIA Officer, at (301)734-5273, 4700 River Road, Unit 50, Riverdale, MD, 20737-1232
Finally, in your appeal, you seek answers to a series of questions posed to various USDA officials, including the Inspector General, However, FOIA allows requesters to access records only. It does not require Federal agencies to answer questions, render opinions, provide subjective evaluations, or create explanatory materials, See, e.g., NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 421 U.S. 132, 162 (1975); Zemansky v. Epa, 767 f2d 569, 574 (9th Cir. 1985); Flowers v. IRS, 307 F. Supp. 2d 60, 71 (D.D.C. 2004); Citizens Progressive Alliance v. U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 241 F. Supp. 2d 1342, 1364-65 (D.N.M. 2002); Hudgins v. IRS, 620 F. Supp. 19, 21 (D.D.C. 1985). As FOIA requires an agency only to produce responsive non-exempt records to a requester, OIG is not obligated to answer questions regarding the TSE occurrence as you requested. Therefore, I am denying your appeal with respect to your questions.
Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. Page 3
For these reasons, I am denying your FOIA appeal. This is the final agency decision. You may seek judicial review of this decision in the United States district court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business or in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. & 552(a)(4)(B).
Sincerely,
David R. Gray
FOR
Phyllis K. Fong
Inspector General
=======END...TSS...4.24.08=======
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
To: Boyd.Rutherford@usda.gov
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:35 PM
Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
Greetings USDA,
I respectfully request the final results of the mouse bio-assays test that were to have supposedly began 2+ years late, 5 years ago, on the imported sheep from Belgium ?
WHAT happened to the test results and MOUSE BIO-ASSAYS of those imported sheep from Belgium that were confiscated and slaughtered from the Faillace's, what sort of TSE did these animals have ?
WERE they atypical scrapie, BSE, and or typical scrapie ?
HOW much longer will you refuse to give us this information ? and for what reason ?
WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley were quarantined for 5 years, but none of these farms from Texas and Alabama with Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not been quarantined for 5 years,why not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?
snip...
full text ;
FURTHERMORE, I respectfully request up front, that any fees for this FOIA be wavered due to the fact this information should be free to the public and is in the best interest for the public to have these final results, no financial gain from this FOIA information is to be made either. ...
Thank You,
kind regards,
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Imported
Belgium/Netherlands
Sheep Test Results
Background
Factsheet
Veterinary Services April 2002
APHIS
snip...
Additional tests will be conducted to determine exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie. These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals
Page 15 of 98
8/3/2006
and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.
DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.
(PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES
DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E
(PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [2]
Imported Belgium/Netherlands Sheep Test Results Background Factsheet Veterinary Services April 2002 APHIS
snip...See full text;
--- Original Message ---
Subject: Sheep
Date:Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:26:04 EDT
From: LAVET22@aol.com
To: flounder@wt.net
Mr. Singeltary.
I hope this finds you well. As you are aware I left the USDA last year. I can only update you on the sheep before that time. Contact was established with the UK on doing the bioassay studies. They agreed. However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay. I am aware that there are now additional labs in Europe running the mouse bioassay strain typing. You will have to contact USDA for further word.
Linda Detwiler
=========
My reply to Dr. Detwiler;
--- Original Message ---
Subject: Re: Sheep
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:53:57 -0500
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To: LAVET22@aol.com
References:
hello Dr. Detwiler,
thanks for your kind reply.
However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay.
not sure i understand that?
You will have to contact USDA for further word.
already done that, and there answer was;
--- Original Message ---
Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton.question please.scrapie.TSS
Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400
From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov
To: flounder@wt.net
Dear Mr. Singeltary,
The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is 301-734-5941.
Have a nice day,
Jim Rogers
APHIS LPA
--- Original Message ---
Subject: re-85th Meeting of SEAC - 30.11.04
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:56:55 -0000
From: "Barlow, Tom (SEAC)"
To: "'flounder@wt.net'"
Dear Mr Singeltary
Thank you for you enquiry to the SEAC secretariat about mouse bioassays commissioned by the USDA to investigate TSE cases in imported sheep. After making a number of enquiries, it appears that Defra were notinvolved with this work. However, it is possible that a UK research laboratory was contacted by the USDA about such tests but I have been unable to find out any further information. You may wish to make further enquiries with the USDA.
Yours sincerely
Tom Barlow
Dr Tom Barlow
Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) Secretariat
Area 108, 1A Page Street, London SW1P 4PQ
Tel: 0207 904 6267
===================
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
PLEASE NOTE !
I know Linda and Larry Faillace's {kinda}, we have corresponded over the years, and I even was asked by their Editor-in-Chief John Barstow, of Chelsea Green Publishing Company, to read the transcript of the Faillace's book before it was published, see how if I liked it, a proof read of sorts, they sent me the transcript i.e. MAD SHEEP, THE TRUE STORY BEHIND THE USDA'S WAR ON A FAMILY FARM by Linda Faillace.
BOOK RELEASE PARTY - Linda Faillace's MAD SHEEP
got to read this months ago, and it is deeply disturbing how the feds handled this from the very beginning, and to this day we do not know the results of the mouse bio-assays, and what those sheep actually had. i don't necessarily agree with the TSE science in this book, but the book is a must read if your interested at all in human and animal TSEs. ...TSS Submitted by flounder on Thu, 09/07/2006 - 9:43pm.
OH, and the identifying information of investigative agents, i.e. Dr. Linda Detwiler, well, I {kinda} know her too, we have corresponded over the years as well. so this excuse to not give up the information of the FOIA on those mad sheep of mad river valley, and what the final mouse bio-assays showed, if any, atypical Scrapie, typical scrapie, or BSE, was bogus. It was one more of a long line of lies, deceit, and corruption by this Administration. I remember before this administration took office, i remember requesting for information i.e. hundreds and hundreds of pages of documents of the USA BSE surveillance plan, USDA emergency BSE response plan, the red book, yellow book, green book, and Dr. Detwiler sent to me with no problem. well, i might have complained a time or two about the slowness of response, and maybe sometimes when the information was not what i wanted, due to how i ask the question. but i would eventually get the data. I just looked at the date, and it was 1999. IT was 3 inches of paperwork in that one mailing. SO why is it, after some 5 years of asking and requesting, why i cannot get one question answered ;
FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]
Subject: Re: Confiscation of Sheep in Vermont and testing results ?
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 10:13:49 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain Parts/Attachments: text/plain (1837 lines)
######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########
AgricultureLaw.com News - March 22, 2001 ... testing, but Linda Detwiler, USDA senior staff veterinarian, said it would be at least two years before lab mice tests could determine if the sheep had BSE. ... www.agriculturelaw.com/headlines/mar01/mar22a.htm - 4k -
CAN someone please, from the USDA sheep scrapie/TSE team, try to come up with another story besides the one sent to me about NOW going to start testing, on testing we were told 3+ years ago were to begin. YOU must please come up with a better one than that, and please do a better job than that of the blunder in TEXAS and that mad cow. The story about USDA NOW just being able to begin testing after them telling us for 14 years they have been doing just that, please come up with a better story for the Vermont sheep TSE to mice testing that should have started some 3+ years ago. THE next thing we will hear is that you have mixed there brains up with cow brains...
TSS
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:
Greetings again list members,
This is very disturbing to me and others as well. All evidence (and it is mounting) points to another cover-up and more lies from the USDA about animal TSEs. How many more lies and cover-ups can this Administration put forth to the American (Tourists) consumers before they take a stand? The stupidity and or ignorance of the American consumer in relations to human/animal TSEs are simply amazing to me. I suppose in a way I am one of them as well. I still go out to eat, get sick, and simply accept it as another '24 hour stomach virus'.....NOT;
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated that known food borne pathogens account for 14 million illnesses, 60,000 hospitalizations and 1,800 deaths to humans in the United States each year.1 Total food borne illness from both known and unknown pathogens is likely to be responsible for 76 million cases, 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths annually.1
Total food borne illness from both known and unknown pathogens
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/guidance/Guide122.pdf
AND HOW MANY ARE TSEs ?
I thought I might send a few threads through the list of other recent and old comments on this topic of the Vermont sheep;
MAY 20, 2004
Terry, I am so glad you wrote them and I am equally peaved by the answer-- so why did the western blot take 4 years? I guess they want us to think they had develop the test? Well why didn't they get it from the UK, or wait till the test were developed prior to 'taking the sheep'. This is stupid. It does not take 4 years to run western blot-- unless of course they didn't run it until you questioned them. I have the very big impression they want us to forget about the sheep. I asked Lisa Furgeson about the sheep in a public meeting and she go so angry, telling everyone it HAD to be done and the USDA was reasonable about it, only the land owners turned it into a circus. When asked about the test in this same public meeting, about 2.5 year ago, she said the mice test were already underway and it was too early to tell. (About Mar/April 2001)
snip...END
NEXT;
Dear Terry, It's because they didn't find anything, and they knew they wouldn't. The whole thing had been fabricate after Belgium found BSE and Europe was unhappy about our hormone laced beef. Tit for tat. Those sheep were sacrificed as a straw dog to protect the beef industry, back when they thought the public would swear off beef forever over mad cow. Now they know that as far as the public is concerned, mad cow is something that gets talked about for a week or two and goes away. They are hoping to lie and stall and withhold results until people forget all about that little "incident" in Vermont, and for the most part, that's what's happened. There's no one to hold their little feet to the fire; not the scientific community, not Belgium Government, not the EU, and certainly not the US sheep industry or the American public. JMHO, but the whole thing stinks; it always has and it always will. Regards, XXXXXXXXXXXXX
NEXT;
Terry, I've been a member of an online sheep mailing list for several years. They can stall and backpedal forever, but they can't change the fact that long before the USDA clamed to have "discovered" an "abnormal" TSE in the Vermont sheep, they wanted them dead for political reasons. This and a following message written by Linda and Lawrence Faillace are from the archives at sheep-L.
(November 1999)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:14:42 -0500
Reply-To: Linda and Lawrence Faillace
Sender: This is a list for people interested in sheep
From: Linda and Lawrence Faillace
Subject: Faillace Family Sheep Farm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
First Linda and I would like to apologize for not keeping our fellow shepherds informed about this issue previously. We were under an unofficial "gag" order from USDA, but now that the story is in the media we are free to speak.
For those of you who may not be familiar with the basic facts they are: 1)no sheep worldwide has ever contracted BSE outside of lab conditions, 2)our sheep and their ancestors are certified to never have been fed meat and bone meal, 3) all surveillance and testing has shown them to be free of TSE's (verified by several of the world's leading TSE pathologists), 4)sensitive and reliable live animal tests now exist for showing the absence of TSEs.
The USDA began their crusade a full two years after our initial importation and immediately before the time we were due to receive our certified status in the VSFCP. In USDA's words, their efforts to have our sheep killed are in response to political pressure from the cattle and pharmaceutical industries.
The saving grace for us in this whole situation is the phenomenal support we have received. Thank you Gene, Garry, Will, and other members of the Sheep-L community! The outrage and fury that this issue has raised is remarkable and we have been supported by not only shepherds and private citizens, but also local and state government officials, the Vermont State Grange, Dr. David Henderson, the Vermont Sheep Breeders Association, as well as other agricultural organizations, and members of the media. The media attention has been particularly helpful because the truth has been able to come out and has highlighted the hypocrisy of USDA's case.
Our farm, a true family operation includes my wonderful wife Linda, our three children (Francis, Heather, and Jackie), and myself. We strive to do the best job possible and to make a real difference in the way that farming is practiced in Vermont and beyond.
If you would like more details, please don't hesitate to contact us.
Meanwhile the battle continues!
Larry Faillace
Dr. Larry and Linda Faillace Ag-Innovations, Inc/Three Shepherds of the Mad River Valley 565 Behn Road Warren, VT 05674 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
1)no sheep worldwide has ever contracted BSE outside of lab conditions,
considering surveillance and strain typing, this is rather a hypithetical assessment (assumption, no proof). Plus, we have new evidence to date (2004) of atypical TSE showing up in sheep and cattle in many different Countries...TSS
=========================================
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 20:19:12 -0500 Reply-To: Linda and Lawrence Faillace Sender: This is a list for people interested in sheep
From: Linda and Lawrence Faillace Subject: BSE Content-Type:
June Reed commented:
BSE is terribly, terribly personal to me. For the same reason, so is
shaping policy that will work. This country and its producers must NEVER experience BSE or what happened in UK. And that mandates a well articulated plan and response, not to mention guts. The US has had one for years.
There is absolutely no question that the US should take strong efforts to try and verify its often stated claim of "BSE Free Status." The fact of the matter is the USDA's record of dealing with TSE diseases is hopelessly inadequate. Out of a cumulative cattle population since 1990 of 1.2 billion (yes, that's billion), less than 9,000 cattle have been tested for BSE in the United States. We were also the last western country to prohibit feeding ruminants to ruminants even though the science had long shown that this was a dangerous practice. In fact, even though scientists now worry about the human blood supply regarding CJD infection, and a USDA BLOOD TEST has now been developed which can detect the abnormal prion protein, US cattle continue to be fed cattle blood products. Furthermore, I don't think that I am telling anyone on this list that the US approach to dealing with scrapie leaves much to be desired. Worse yet, Chronic Wasting Disease, which plagues Western US elk and deer populations, continues to run rampant in both wild and farm raised populations, while government agencies argue over whose jurisdiction this falls under. The bottom line: Many potential vectors of BSE or a BSE-like disease remain and not enough action is being taken to prevent a repeat of what happened in the UK.
In this country, we had cattle imports from UK. They were subject to
surveillance/quarrantine as one option and slaughter/idemnity as another. Those not sold to USDA have about all died for one reason or another.
There was not a mandatory cattle surveillance program in place, therefore these cattle could not be easily traced. In fact, 33 of the imported cattle were never located. This is quite unlike the situation that our sheep were imported under, where surveillance was a part of the import regulations.
None were infected with BSE upon necropsy.USDA put a ban on imported
feedstuffs/products in, I think, 1989.
When USDA has been asked about the ban on imported feedstuffs, they could not in fact guarantee that no feeds containing meat and bone meal had crossed US borders from overseas. The USDA has to admit that although the documents show that no such feedstuffs were imported, the possibility exists that it did occur. (The same argument they are using against us when we show them documents verifying the diet of our animals.)
No one KNOWs if Larry's sheep, before they came into his possession,
consumed any illegal feed. And you can't prove a negative.
Actually, we have many, many documents showing that no such feed was consumed. In addition, we have surveillance data on the source flocks going back to the early 90's which demonstrate a complete lack of TSE diseases, and for that matter, neurological symptoms of any kind. The surveillance of all the imported sheep and their offspring has shown them to be completely healthy.
There is a possible chance, whether it is similiar to a meteor falling
on someone, or as the UK government maintained while defending its polices from1989-1996 regarding danger from BSE, "vanishingly small".
As everyone is aware, when government policy is formulated, relative risk assessment is what is normally employed, while on the other hand a "0 risk" policy is never achievable. In light of all of the previously mentioned facts, as well as the fact that several excellent live animal tests now are available for ruminants, it is completely possible for a protocol to be put together that would give everyone the assurances they need without destroying these healthy sheep. We have repeatedly offered for ALL our animals to be tested (tonsil test, eyelid test, blood test, etc.). However, since we are dealing with a politically motivated situation, all offers of a testing program by ourselves have been declined by USDA.
But,<<> the KNOWN CONSEQUENCES if the sheep ever did develop BSE,
and it was made public, consequences to our animal ag industries, to our consumer confidence in our product, to our multi-billion dollar trade in exported animal product....IS IT WORTH THE RISK???
Interesting that the muti-billion dollar trade issue is referred to here. Trade sits at the center of this issue and the perception of the US "BSE free status" is a blue chip that is being protected with every means possible. There is nothing new about trade barriers being disguised as "health concerns," and we have certainly not seen the last of the battles between the US and EU over beef as well as other commodities.
At the time he brought sheep in, the "science" had not demonstrated
that sheep could get BSE yet
A completely false statement. The research conducted in Edinburgh Scotland was published in the Veterinary Record in October, 1993. This was almost full three years prior to Linda and I importing the sheep, and five years before we were contacted by USDA on this issue. For those who may not be familiar, Veterinary Record is the preeminent British Veterinary Journal and can be easily found on the shelves of any University library.
I support what USDA is doing. USDA cannot get the sheep if Larry
doesn't want them to. Our government cannot seize livestock. USDA is doing everything by the book, I mean by the book. And this whole thing is hard for both Larry and the people who are visiting with him about buying/slaughtering the stock. Some of these folks are/have been sheep producers themselves.
The USDA cannot seize our sheep without scientific evidence.
Speaking of doing everything by the book, we went above and beyond the USDA's rules when we imported the sheep. We chose to follow stricter health requirements, particularly for scrapie. Linda and I are trying to help build an industry and wanted the best possible sheep. Our East Friesians, Beltex, and Charollais have all thrived and we are extremely pleased with their production.
Furthermore, no one from USDA that is dealing with this issue has raised sheep to my knowledge. If they have, they haven't mentioned it. As for those from ASI who have supported USDA's position, we have never had contact from any of them regarding their stance or any other aspect of this issue. Since we have been members of ASI since 1994, we have found this treatment particularly unprofessional.
Fortunately for us, June is the first person connected with sheep that has supported USDA's position. In fact, from the immense number of personal phone calls, numerous call-in listeners on many radio programs, and enormous numbers of e-mails and letters, the support for our position is truly remarkable. This issue has really uncovered a nerve and many people are feeling extremely passionate about the way we are being treated. We feel truly blessed by how many friends and supporters we have out there.
We KNOW the pain too well that Larry might be feeling at this moment.
But, put in the context of possible
consequences, and of the risk these poor animals MIGHT represent to our entire nation, I think as an Industry we need to support Larry, not to fight USDA, but to co-operate with USDA. Politics is perception.
Politics is perception, and the perception in our neck of the woods is that once again big business and big government are trying to squash the family farm. Vermonters, sheep farmers, regular citizens and consumers, elected officials, the Grange, etc., etc., they're all coming to same conclusion, enough is enough and it's time to take a stand against these tactics that have become all too familiar.
can't lose sight of that; it marrys science in policy formation. In a
way, all of us are at risk as producers, as long as Larry holds on to these sheep. And not just us, but dairy and beef industries as well. And not just US agriculture: this is also a public health issue, we now know that, based on science.
Here, we are in partial agreement, all sheep producers are at risk, but not from BSE. The sheep industry has too long been the pawn in American agriculture. If we capitulate, where does it end? Since no sheep worldwide has contracted BSE outside of lab conditions, the needless slaughter of our sheep will certainly create the perception that sheep do in fact contract the disease. We can tell you that at every meeting with USDA, we have been asked for names of sheep producers who have imported genetics, especially those imported via Canada. Of course, we have never offered any names. The point is that this issue has been pitched by USDA as an isolated one, but you can be sure that it won't end with our sheep.
Sorry for the length of our response, but the readers on this list deserve the truth.
Larry and Linda Faillace
Dr. Larry and Linda Faillace
Ag-Innovations, Inc/Three Shepherds of the Mad River Valley
565 Behn Road
Warren, VT 05674 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
==========================================
Since no sheep worldwide has contracted BSE outside of lab conditions,
AGAIN, Dr. Faillace is stating something that in fact, has never been proven. AGAIN, we have new atyipcal cases of TSE showing up in sheep and cattle that could very well be a BSE type TSE in sheep...TSS
==========================================
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 07:58:12 -0700 Reply-To: Jackie Watkins Sender: This is a list for people interested in sheep
From: Jackie Watkins Subject: Fw: USDA SEEKS TO SLAUGHTER 365 East Friesian and Beltex SHEEP Content-Type:
USDA SEEKS TO SLAUGHTER 365 SHEEP: MAD-COW DISEASE LINK FEARED Nov. 14/99 Dow Jones/ Washington Post NEW YORK -- These stories explained that the Agriculture Department wants to slaughter 365 sheep under quarantine at two Vermont farms because they may have come in contact with mad cow disease. Controversy over the sheep's fate underscores policy makers' continuing wariness over the family of degenerative brain afflictions believed to be spread by oddly shaped proteins called prions. There has, according to these stories, never been a case of mad cow disease, known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE, reported in the United States, but at least 16 people died in England in 1996 from a similar disease, apparently after eating contaminated beef. And while alarm has, these story say, subsided over the possibility that cows contract BSE from feed derived from sheep brains, unease lingers over whether sheep can carry BSE for years after ingesting feed derived from contaminated beef. George Beran, a veterinary professor at Iowa State University and author of a handbook on diseases that affect both humans and animals, was quoted as saying, "This is brand new," adding that rudimentary detection methods make "depopulating the herd" the only sure way to combat a prion disease outbreak. It was uneasiness over the science of BSE that prompted the Agriculture Department to keep a close watch on 65 East Friesian and Beltex milk-producing sheep imported by Vermont farmers Larry Faillace, of Warren, and Houghton Freeman, of Greensboro, from England in early 1996. The importers wanted to build a new cheese-making industry. Faillace was quoted as saying, "The average American sheep does 100 pounds of milk in a year, while ours do 1,000 pounds." The USDA was initially concerned about whether the sheep were infected with scrapie, the ovine equivalent of BSE, but the animals were quarantined and cleared both in Belgium and the United States. Faillace, who was cited as saying that he can sell all the cheese he can make, adding, "There's nothing wrong with our sheep, and the risk is theoretical," "We just want USDA to get off our backs." But Detwiler, senior staff veterinarian for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, was cited as saying that the Agriculture Department would persevere, even though the sheep were ostensibly disease-free: "We're just trying to be ultraconservative."
========================================
IN 2004, we have documented BSE in the USA and Canada. WE have been feeding TSE infected animals back and forth to each other (BSE/CWD/SCRAPIE/not sure about much TME to do scent glands) for decades. SO what makes the USA sheep any different from these Belgium sheep?...TSS
=========================================
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 21:55:21 -0700 Reply-To: will verboven Sender: This is a list for people interested in sheep
From: will verboven Organization: Subject: Re: vermont & bse Content-Type:
Something about this matter bothers me, I quote a piece of the posting made by the Faillace family: "We have repeatedly offered for ALL our animals to be tested (tonsil test, eyelid test, blood test, etc.). However, since we are dealing with a politically motivated situation, all offers of a testing program by ourselves have been declined by USDA.
Now what rationale would the USDA have for not having these sheep tested. Especially using tests, some of which the USDA not only invented but the researchers were awarded honors and prizes for innovative achievements. If the USDA does not have faith in these tests what message are they giving to producers. It seems to me the danger to the USDA in this case is that these tests may prove them wrong! Interesting how politics overrules science - well it wouldn't be the first time.
Will Verboven Calgary, Alberta Canada
============================================
Interesting how politics overrules science - well it wouldn't be the first time.
HOW correct Mr. Verboven was, and in fact, it will not be the last time either, in the USA in 2004, this policy of Politics overruling Science is very much alive and well, and the agent continues to spread...TSS
=============================================
hello XXXX,
Those sheep were sacrificed as a straw dog to protect the beef industry,
i'll have to agree with you there for sure, but the threat of BSE/BASE/CWD back to sheep is very real, you may disagree there. also, (and you will probably disagree here), the threat of scrapie to human is very real as well. we could debate this all day with pros and cons, but the oral study by natural feeding and transmission of scrapie to primate is still disturbing to me, but none of us will know the answer to that until they do some serious strain typing of all TSEs and some serious transmission studies, not like the pro-longed and put off studies of these Vermont sheep. Kinda like the way the UK has put this off. I only hope that scrapie is a natural disease of sheep and goat that does not transmit to humans, but this has yet to be proven.
snip...
They are hoping to lie and stall and withhold results until people forget all about that little "incident" in Vermont,
this will not happen, promise ;-)
kindest regards, terry ======
TSS
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:
######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton...question please...scrapie...TSS
Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400
From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov
To: flounder@wt.net
Dear Mr. Singeltary,
The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is 301-734-5941.
Have a nice day,
Jim Rogers APHIS LPA ==========
Greetings List members,
I do not understand this process of testing?
IF we go back, and if I remember correctly;
These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.
this was some 3+ years ago, and the damn testing has not even started yet in mice???
let's look further;
## http://mailhost.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/warc/bse-l.html ############
https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A0=BSE-L
017941 2007-11-13 16:45 87 FOIA MAD SHEEP MAD RIVER VALLEY UPDATE NOVEMBER 13, 2007
017940 2007-11-13 15:15 620 Re: FOIA APPEAL 07-566 DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]
017839 2007-08-12 11:23 1813 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
017839 2007-08-12 11:23 1813 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
017799 2007-07-11 16:11 1610 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
017798 2007-07-10 15:43 1066 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
017788 2007-07-02 09:48 921 FOIA, MAD COW DISEASE, AND OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S SECRECY
017672 2007-04-02 14:37 2129 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP
SATURDAY, JUNE 12, 2010
PUBLICATION REQUEST AND FOIA REQUEST Project Number:
3625-32000-086-05 Study of Atypical Bse
Subject: PUBLICATION REQUEST AND FOIA REQUEST Project Number: 3625-32000-086-05 Study of Atypical Bse
ALSO, I have requested via FOIA numerous mad cow feed ban violations over the past decade ;
09/10/2009
Dear Requester:
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records regarding:
FEED FOR RUMINANT ANIMALS - RECALL #V-258-2009
We will respond as soon as possible and may charge you a fee for processing your request. If your informational needs change, and you no longer need the requested records, please contact the undersigned to cancel your request, as charges may be incurred once processing of your request has begun.
For more information on processing fees, please see
If you have any questions about your request, please call Rochelle A. Coleman, Information Technician, at (301) 827- 6554 or write to us at:
Food and Drug Administration Division of Freedom of Information 5600 Fishers Lane, HFI-35 Rockville, MD 20857
If you call or write, use the reference number above which will help us to answer your questions more quickly.
TERRY S SINGELTARY P.O. BOX BACLIFF TX 77518
In Reply refer to: 2009-7430 Sincerely, Rochelle A. Coleman, Information Technician,
Friday, September 4, 2009
FOIA REQUEST ON FEED RECALL PRODUCT 429,128 lbs. feed for ruminant animals may have been contaminated with prohibited material Recall # V-258-2009
Saturday, August 29, 2009
FOIA REQUEST FEED RECALL 2009 Product may have contained prohibited materials Bulk Whole Barley, Recall # V-256-2009
C O N F I R M E D
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To:
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 9:25 PM
Subject: [BSE-L] re-FOIA REQUEST ON FEED RECALL PRODUCT contaminated with prohibited material Recall # V-258-2009 and Recall # V-256-2009
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/11/re-foia-request-on-feed-recall-product.html
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857
Terry Singeltary P.O. box Bacliff, TX USA 77518
Dear Requestor
In reply refer to: F2009-7430
This is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request received by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on September 10,2009 which you ask for Recall V-258-2009. I apologize for the delay in our response to you. Enclosed you will find the records you requested. The following charges will be included in a monthly invoice:
Reproduction Search Review Total 5 Pages hour $.50 $ $.50
The above charges may not reflect final charges for this request. Please DO NOT send any payment until you receive an invoice from the Agency's Freedom of Information Staff (HFI-35).
Sincerely yours,
Sandy McGeehan
Paralegal Specialist Communications Staff Center for Veterinary Medicine
end...TSS
Memorandum
Date August 26, 2009
From CVM Animal Health Hazard Evaluation Committee
Subject Problem:
Fargam Land & Grain recalled 429,128 pounds of ground corn because it may have been contaminated with prohibited material (material prohibited for use in ruminant feed by the 1997 BSE feed regulation) and was not labeled with the cautionary statement.
The feed mill received two semi trailer loads of barley that had been recalled by Mars Petcare US because it had been contaminated by dog food, some of which is formulated to contain bovine origin meat and bone meal.
The auger used to receive the barley was used to receive two truck loads of corn before the feed mill became aware of the problem with the barley. This potentially allowed some of the dog food in the barley to be carried over into the corn.
Recall Event IDIRES #: 52103
DAF/Surveillance #: 09234
CVM Recall and Emergency Coordinator (Kathy Hemming-Thompson), HFV -234
Field/RES Report Data:
Recalling firm: Fargam Land & Grain 505 Burlington Rd Saginaw, TX 76179
Manufacturer: Mars Petcare US 1 Doane Rd Clinton, OK 73601
Product & Code: Bulk ground corn; 70AY -02
Quantity Manufactured: 429,128 pounds
Quantity Distributed: 429,128 pounds
Recall Contact: Phil Farr, Owner, Fargam Land & Grain, Saginaw, TX
FDA District: Dallas
Field Recommended Classification: Class III
Effectiveness Check Level: Direct Accounts
Page 2 of 4 - DAF 09234 - Health Hazard Evaluation
Background:
snip...
please see full text ;
As some of you might remember, this was not the first time i had to request via the FOIA for the USA madcow feed ban warning letters. years back i had to as well. so i thought some of you may be interested in an update on this matter.
so here it is;
Subject: Request to FDA via FOIA of ALL USA Ruminant-to-Ruminant Feed Ban Violations Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 08:32:43 -0600 From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy To: BSE-L
Food and Drug Administration Office of Information Resources Management Division of Freedom of Information (HFI-35) 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857
Or requests may be sent via fax to: (301) 443-1726. If there are problems sending a fax, call (301) 443-2414.
1/6/03
Request to FDA via FOIA of ALL USA Ruminant-to-Ruminant Feed Ban Violations Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003
Greetings FDA and To Whom it may concern,
i wish to request all ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban violations from Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003. it seems none has been posted since May 2001 on the FDA site. I also kindly request that all fees be wavered due to the fact this is public information, public health is at risk, and this will be distributed 'freely' to the public...
thank you, kind regards,
I am sincerely,
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box Bacliff, Texas USA 77518 CJD Watch
==========================================================
now since then, just this past Friday 1/10/03, i get this from FDA;
REPLY FROM DPH/FDA to TSS;
PLEASE note, my request was for all R-T-R feed ban violations from Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003. BUT in the reply, they posted Jan. 2002 to Jan. 2003. i called and this is to be corrected. hopefully this FOIA request will ignite some enthusiasm from the FDA into posting to the public any R-T-R MAD COW FEED BAN violations, since GW et al new policy on secrecy took effect on this matter in May of 2002 (correcting my below 'since May 2001).
TSS
Department of Health & Human Services
Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857
1/7/03
In reply refer to;
xxxxxxx
Dear Requester,
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records regarding;
RUMINANT-TO-RUMINANT FEED - BAN VIOLATIONS 1/02 - 1/03
We will respond as soon as possible and may charge you a fee for processing your request. If you have any questions about your request, please call Edna G. Wilkerson, Information Technician, at 301-827-6564 or write to us at;
Food and Drug Administration Division of Freedom of Information 5600 Fishers Lance, HFI - 35 Rockville, MD 20857
If you call or write, use the reference number above which will help us to answer your questions more quickly...
===========================================================
now, Sunday, i read this in the Houston Chronicle 1/12/03;
SENATOR AIMS TO UPGRADE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
TEXAS Sen. John Cornyn says he wants to improve public access to government records in Washington, a position that appears to put him at odds with the Bush administration.
Cornyn, a moderate Republican who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he'll work on legislation in the coming weeks to improve the Freedom of Information Act.
"FOIA needs to be strenghened," he said, "We need to quicken the turnaround time and create a mechanism that allows an indepentent, third party to decide whether a record should be kept secret."
Echoing sentiments he expressed while serving as Texas attorney general, Cornyn added: "I believe in a system of governement that allows consent of the people. And people can't consent if they don't what their elected officials are doing."
Since taking office two years ago, the Bush Administration has taken steps to restrict access to governement information, an effort that was accelerated in the name of national security following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks......
Greetings again BSE-L list members,
how would _USA_ ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban warning letters have anything to do with terrorism and National Security?
snip...
FYI, please see a bit of history on this topic;
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 09:04:42 -0700
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Sender: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Subject: MAD COW FEED BAN WARNING LETTERS USA 'update' (where did all Terry's MAD COW warning letters go?)
snip...
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
re-Freedom of Information Act Project Number 3625-32000-086-05, Study of Atypical BSE UPDATE July 28, 2010
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:42 AM
Subject: re-Freedom of Information Act Project Number 3625-32000-086-05, Study of Atypical BSE UPDATE
Greetings again Ms Williams et al at FOIA USDA,
Thank You again for your kind reply on this important information. However, I am concerned that you may not be aware of new transmission studies. You (USDA et al) state Ma'am ;
================================================
The SCA with Italy was mainly to confirm our respective country’s diagnostic tests would detect the various atypical BSE cases as seen in each country), in the meantime, the Italians have published their transmissibility and pathogenesis work on their BASE cases in the following article:
Lombardi G, Casalone C, A DA, Gelmetti D, Torcoli G, Barbieri I, Corona C, Fasoli E, Farinazzo A, Fiorini M, Gelati M, Iulini B, Tagliavini F, Ferrari S, Caramelli M, Monaco S, Capucci L, Zanusso G (2008) Intraspecies transmission of BASE induces clinical dullness and amyotrophic changes. PLoS Pathog 4:e1000075
The above mentioned paper concludes, “In all experimentally infected animals, no PrP**TSE was detected in peripheral tissues, including cervical and mesenteric lymph nodes, spleen, thymus, liver, lung, peripheral nerves and forelimb and limb muscles, either by standard Western blot analysis or following phosphotungstic acid precipitation.“
It is not necessary to change SRM removal due to any different tissue infectivity distribution between classical BSE and atypical BSE. At this time, there is no scientific evidence to suggest a need for expanding the list of tissues included in the Specified Risk Material (SRM) ban as a result of published studies on atypical BSE. snip...
Moreover, in the paper by Buschmann A, Groschup MH (2005,) Highly bovine spongiform encephalopathy-sensitive transgenic mice confirm the essential restriction of infectivity to the nervous system in clinically diseased cattle. J Infect Dis 192:934-942; the authors, when speaking about the classical BSE food-borne epidemic in Europe, concluded their “results provide further indication that the pathogenesis of BSE in cattle is fundamentally different from that in sheep and mice, due to an exclusive intraneuronal spread of infectivity from the gut to the central nervous system.”
end...
================================================
Again, in my opinion, the USDA is cherry picking the science they want to use, and in doing so, I believe they are putting human lives at risk. I disagree for the following reasons. New studies indeed show that ;
July 10, 2010
see full text ;
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
re-Freedom of Information Act Project Number 3625-32000-086-05, Study of Atypical BSE UPDATE July 28, 2010
Subject: Request to FDA via FOIA of ALL USA Ruminant-to-Ruminant Feed Ban Violations Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 08:32:43 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy To: BSE-L
Food and Drug Administration Office of Information Resources Management Division of Freedom of Information (HFI-35) 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857
Or requests may be sent via fax to: (301) 443-1726. If there are problems sending a fax, call (301) 443-2414.
1/6/03
Request to FDA via FOIA of ALL USA Ruminant-to-Ruminant Feed Ban Violations Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003
Greetings FDA and To Whom it may concern,
i wish to request all ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban violations from Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003. it seems none has been posted since May 2001 on the FDA site. I also kindly request that all fees be wavered due to the fact this is public information, public health is at risk, and this will be distributed 'freely' to the public...
thank you, kind regards,
I am sincerely,
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
CJD Watch
http://www.fortunecity.com/healthclub/cpr/349/part1cjd.htm
==========================================================
now since then, just this past Friday 1/10/03, i get this from FDA;
REPLY FROM DPH/FDA to TSS;
PLEASE note, my request was for all R-T-R feed ban violations from Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003. BUT in the reply, they posted Jan. 2002 to Jan. 2003. i called and this is to be corrected. hopefully this FOIA request will ignite some enthusiasm from the FDA into posting to the public any R-T-R MAD COW FEED BAN violations, since GW et al new policy on secrecy took effect on this matter in May of 2002 (correcting my below 'since May 2001).
TSS
Department of Health & Human Services
Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857
1/7/03
In reply refer to;
xxxxxxx
Dear Requester,
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records regarding;
RUMINANT-TO-RUMINANT FEED - BAN VIOLATIONS 1/02 - 1/03
We will respond as soon as possible and may charge you a fee for processing your request. If you have any questions about your request, please call Edna G. Wilkerson, Information Technician, at 301-827-6564 or write to us at;
Food and Drug Administration Division of Freedom of Information 5600 Fishers Lance, HFI - 35 Rockville, MD 20857
If you call or write, use the reference number above which will help us to answer your questions more quickly...
===========================================================
now, Sunday, i read this in the Houston Chronicle 1/12/03;
SENATOR AIMS TO UPGRADE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
TEXAS Sen. John Coprnyn says he wants to improve public access to government records in Washington, a position that appears to put him at odds with the Bush administration.
Cornyn, a moderate Republican who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he'll work on legislation in the coming weeks to improve the Freedom of Information Act.
"FOIA needs to be strenghened," he said, "We need to quicken the turnaround time and create a mechanism that allows an indepentent, third party to decide whether a record should be kept secret."
Echoing sentiments he expressed while serving as Texas attorney general, Cornyn added: "I believe in a system of governement that allows consent of the people. And people can't consent if they don't what their elected officials are doing."
Since taking office two years ago, the Bush Administration has taken steps to restrict access to governement information, an effort that was accelerated in the name of national security following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks......
Greetings again BSE-L list members,
how would _USA_ ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban warning letters have anything to do with terrorism and National Security?
snip...
FYI, please see a bit of history on this topic;
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 09:04:42 -0700
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Sender: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Subject: MAD COW FEED BAN WARNING LETTERS USA 'update' (where did all Terry's MAD COW warning letters go?)
snip...
Food and Drug Administration Kansas City District Southwest Region 11630 West 60 Street P.O. Box 15905 Lenexa, Kansas 66265-4905 Telephone: (913) 752-2100
July 29, 2002 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED WARNING LETTER Ref. KAN 2002-09
Jerry Behimer, Owner Bakery Trading Company/Ingredient Exchange 401 N. Lindbergh Blvd., Suite 315 St. Louis, MO 63141-7816
Dear Mr. Behimer:
An inspection of your animal feed premix-manufacturing operations, located at 14521 2nd Ave., Ottumwa, Iowa, was conducted by an Investigator from our office on June 18 & 19, 2002. During this inspection, a significant deviation from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 589.2000 - Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed was identified. The regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Under 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(g)(2), such a deviation causes products being manufactured and/or distributed by your facility to be deemed misbranded within the meaning of Section 403(a)(l) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act), and these products may not be lawfully introduced, or delivered for introduction, into interstate commerce.
Our investigation found a failure to label your Powdered Cooked Beef, Product No. 5013, produced during the period of 2/13/02 to approximately 4/18/02, with the cautionary statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants," as required by 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(d). The FDA suggests the statement be distinguished by different type size or color, or other means of highlighting the statement so that it is easily noticed by a purchaser.
The above is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of deviations from the regulations. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you are responsible for assuring that your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law.
You should take prompt action to correct this violation, and you should establish a system whereby such violations do not recur. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in regulatory action without further notice, such as seizure and/or injunction.
It is necessary for you to take action on this matter now. We request you provide our office documentation of corrective action and final disposition for Lot 030402, approximately 21 tons, which was on hand during the inspection. Let this office know in writing within fifteen (15) working days from the date you received this letter what steps you are taking to correct the problem.
Your reply should be sent to Nadine Nanko Johnson, Compliance Officer, at the above address.
Sincerely,
/s/
Charles W. Sedgwick
District Director
Kansas City District
http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g3430d.htm
Food and Drug Administration Seattle District Pacific Region 22201 23rd Drive SE Bothell, WA 98021-4421 Telephone: 425-466-6766 FAX: 426-483-4996
May 7, 2002 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED In reply refer to Warning Letter SEA 02-46 WARNING LETTER
Mr. Philip C. Anderson, General Manager Darling International, Inc. 2041 Marc Avenue Tacoma, Washington 98401
Dear Mr. Anderson:
An inspection of your rendering operation conducted by Investigator Donald B. McKechnie, on February 22 and 26, 2002, found a significant deviation from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 589.2000 - Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. The regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Such deviation causes products being manufactured and/or distributed by your facility to be misbranded within the meaning of Section 403(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act).
Our investigation found a failure to consistently label your meat and bone meal product shipped to [redacted], with the required cautionary statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants". The meat and bone meal contains beef offal along with other ingredients including chicken, fish, and pork. The FDA suggests the statement be distinguished by different type size or color or other means of highlighting the statement so that it is easily noticed by a purchaser.
The above is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of deviations from the regulations. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you are responsible for assuring that your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. We have enclosed a copy of the FDA?s Small Entity Compliance Guide to assist you with complying with the regulation.
You should take prompt action to correct this violation, and you should establish a system whereby such violation does not recur. Failure to promptly correct this violation may result in regulatory action without further notice, such as seizure and/or injunction.
You should notify this office in writing within 15 working days of receipt of this letter, of the steps you have taken to bring your firm into compliance with the law. Your response should include an explanation of each step being taken to correct the violation, and to prevent its recurrence. If corrective action cannot be completed in 15 working days, state the reason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will be completed. Include copies of any available documentation demonstrating that corrections have been made.
Please send your reply to the Food and Drug Administration, Attention: Thomas S. Piekarski, Compliance Officer, 22201 23rd Drive SE, Bothell, Washington 98021. If you have questions regarding any issue in this letter, please contact Mr. Piekarski at (425) 483-4975. Sincerely, Charles Breen District Director
http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g3276d.htm
where, oh where, did all Terry's mad cow feed ban warning letters go $
FDA Cuts Back on Warnings
10/01/02
WASHINGTON -- The Food and Drug Administration has substantially cut back on warnings sent to companies that run afoul of its rules, a move the agency contends will result in more-effective enforcement but that critics say lets violators off the hook.
The drop results from a policy change in late February that requires the FDA chief counsel's office to clear all warning letters to ensure they are legally sound. Before the change, division and district offices around the country issued such letters unilaterally. In the six months since, the agency issued 279 warning letters, a drop of 64% from the same period last year, a review of agency records shows. The FDA says the chief counsel's office rejected only 6% of the 699 warning letters and other citations it reviewed. At the same time, division and district enforcers may be holding back letters they once would have sent.
SEE FULL STORY
http://online.wsj.com/
snip...
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:21:00 -0700
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Sender: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Subject: 'TONNAGE' OF TAINTED FEED $ what's up with the mad cow warning letters
Greetings,
since the FDA has apparently stopped issuing some warning letters;
10/7/02
Senate Questions FDA Commissioner Nominee
In testimony today before the U.S. Senate, Dr. Mark McClellan, the Bush administration nominee for Commissioner of Food and Drugs, said that under his leadership, the FDA would uphold its enforcement authority to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the products it regulates and to ensure that accurate and truthful information is conveyed to the public.
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, expressed concern at the start of the hearing that the FDA may be backing away from its regulatory authority, noting a drop in the number of Warning Letters issued by the agency, rumors that the FDA may regulate certain contact lenses as cosmetics rather than as devices and the agency's re-examination of its policies in light of First Amendment challenges.
Although McClellan did not comment directly on any of the specific examples cited by Kennedy, the nominee said that he sees "no intent on FDA's part to retreat from its mission" of protecting the public health...
snip...
http://www.thompson.com/fda
maybe i was not too far off when i acting in haste on the previous thread on BSE-L, see archived thread;
Subject: USA/THOMPSON TURNS TO COMMUNISM TACTICS, FDA TURNS TO SECRECY ON MAD COW FEED WARNING LETTERS
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 12:07:02 -0700
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: BSE-L
so, i was nosing around the FDA warning letters and other files, came across these and thought since 1/2 to 1 GRAM is lethal to a cow, i thought these TONNAGE in some of these violations i ran across most interesting. no telling how many dead road-kill CWD infected carcasses were rendered into this, along with whatever type TSE in USA cattle, and we can't forget about all the scrapie infected sheep that may have been added to the soup. with a combination of CWD, SCRAPIE, TME and all the different variants that may have come from them over the years, what in the world would you call the TSEs in USA cattle, once they test to find, and then find? could be a nasty one. or maybe none at all? doubtful though (just my opinion, if i still allowed one here);
PRODUCT BioFlavor F2425, BioFlavor F21002 and BioFlavor C20058. The product, packaged in 50 lb. bags, is labeled in part, " *** PALATABILITY ENHANCER INTENDED FOR CAT FOOD USE AT LESS THAN 10% *** INGREDIENT LISTING: *** Beef Broth *** ". Recall # V-140-2 CODE Product Codes F2425 107B-RB-1 107B-RB-2 149C 201D 202C 205D 210A F21002 143B 143D 146D 144B 144D 139D 142D 150D 151D 152C 152D 201C 205C 206C 208A 211A C20058 143D 144C 146C 208B RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Recalling Firm: Bioproducts, Inc., Fairlawn, OH, by telephone and letter on April 5, 2002. Manufacturer: Bioproducts, Inc., Aurora, MO. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON Animal feed product with beef protein does not contain required BSE statement on labels.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 354,150 lbs.
DISTRIBUTION TX, KS, MO and MI.
_______________________
PRODUCT Steamed Bonemeal in 50-lb. bags, product code C# 13581, packaged under two different labels: Premium Steamed Bonemeal Manufactured by Buchheit Premium Feeds, Perryville, MO, and Steamed Bonemeal Manufactured for Siemer's Enterprises Inc., Teutopolis, IL. Recall # V-141-2. CODE Not coded. RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Buchheit, Inc., Perryville, MO, by telephone on May 14, 2002.
FDA initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON Label lacks BSE warning statement.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
Approx. 902/50-lb. bags.
DISTRIBUTION MO and IL.
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR JUNE 5, 2002
####
PRODUCT
The following custom mixed animal feeds are recalled --- a) [non-ruminant]: Horse Feed, Hog Feed, and 14% Pig Feed. Recall # V-157-2; b) [ruminant]: Dairy Feed, Steer Feed, New Goat Feed, Cattle Feed, and Beef Feed. Recall # V-158-2. CODE The product is coded only with the manufacturing date and invoice numbers. All feed products manufactured and shipped since July 9, 2001 are affected by this recall. RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Recalling Firm: Shepard Grain Company, Inc., Urbana, OH, by telephone on January 11, 2002. Manufacturer: Shepard Grain Company, Inc., W. Liberty, OH.
FDA initiated recall is complete.
REASON Ruminant and non-ruminant animal feeds contain BSE prohibited material, and are either misbranded or adulterated.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
41,129 LBS (20.5 tons).
DISTRIBUTION OH.
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 28, 2002 ####
PRODUCT:
Buckeye 40% Poultry Concentrate. Recall #V-016-1. CODES: The bags are uncoded. Firm is recalling product manufactured since December 1998; however, they are only completing field corrections on product manufactured within the last six months (November 2000). MANUFACTURER: Yachere Feed, Inc. Rockwood, Pennsylvania. RECALLED BY: Manufacturer, by visit on 3/19/01 and 3/20/01.
Firm-initiated recall complete.
DISTRIBUTION:
Pennsylvania.
QUANTITY:
Nine containers, each weighing 100 pounds.
REASON: The animal feed contains product derived from mammalian tissues and must bear the statement "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants" on the label to prevent the establishment and amplification of BSE through feed. This statement does not appear on the label.
________
PRODUCT:
"Our Own Pig & Hog Grower" hog feed, packaged in 50 pound bags, with paperboard tags sewn onto the bags. Recall #V-017-1. CODES: The bags are uncoded. MANUFACTURER: The Perry Coal and Feed Company, Perry, Ohio. RECALLED BY: Manufacturer, by telephone on March 22, 2001.
Firm-initiated recall complete.
DISTRIBUTION:
Ohio.
QUANTITY:
Approximately 350 pounds of hog feed (7/50 pound bags).
REASON: The animal feed contains protein derived from mammalian tissues and must bear the statement "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants" on the label to prevent the establishment and amplification of BSE through feed. This statement does not appear on the label.
________
PRODUCT
Loweís 40% Hog Concentrate - swine feed for mixing grower and finisher rations, in 50-pound bulk bags. Recall #V-057-0. CODE All codes between August 1, 1999 and November 23, 1999. MANUFACTURER Lowe's Feed & Grain, Inc., Bowling Green, Kentucky. RECALLED BY Manufacturer, by letter dated November 18, 1999, and by telephone.
Firm-initiated recall complete.
DISTRIBUTION
Ohio.
QUANTITY
12.46 tons were distributed.
REASON Product contained protein derived from mammalian tissue and according to regulation must bear the statement "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants" on the label. This regulation is designed to prevent the establishment and amplification of BSE through feed. This statement does not appear on the label.
________
RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETMED -- CLASS II
________
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 08:32:43 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy To: BSE-L
Food and Drug Administration Office of Information Resources Management Division of Freedom of Information (HFI-35) 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857
Or requests may be sent via fax to: (301) 443-1726. If there are problems sending a fax, call (301) 443-2414.
1/6/03
Request to FDA via FOIA of ALL USA Ruminant-to-Ruminant Feed Ban Violations Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003
Greetings FDA and To Whom it may concern,
i wish to request all ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban violations from Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003. it seems none has been posted since May 2001 on the FDA site. I also kindly request that all fees be wavered due to the fact this is public information, public health is at risk, and this will be distributed 'freely' to the public...
thank you, kind regards,
I am sincerely,
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
CJD Watch
http://www.fortunecity.com/healthclub/cpr/349/part1cjd.htm
==========================================================
now since then, just this past Friday 1/10/03, i get this from FDA;
REPLY FROM DPH/FDA to TSS;
PLEASE note, my request was for all R-T-R feed ban violations from Jan. 2001 to Jan. 2003. BUT in the reply, they posted Jan. 2002 to Jan. 2003. i called and this is to be corrected. hopefully this FOIA request will ignite some enthusiasm from the FDA into posting to the public any R-T-R MAD COW FEED BAN violations, since GW et al new policy on secrecy took effect on this matter in May of 2002 (correcting my below 'since May 2001).
TSS
Department of Health & Human Services
Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857
1/7/03
In reply refer to;
xxxxxxx
Dear Requester,
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records regarding;
RUMINANT-TO-RUMINANT FEED - BAN VIOLATIONS 1/02 - 1/03
We will respond as soon as possible and may charge you a fee for processing your request. If you have any questions about your request, please call Edna G. Wilkerson, Information Technician, at 301-827-6564 or write to us at;
Food and Drug Administration Division of Freedom of Information 5600 Fishers Lance, HFI - 35 Rockville, MD 20857
If you call or write, use the reference number above which will help us to answer your questions more quickly...
===========================================================
now, Sunday, i read this in the Houston Chronicle 1/12/03;
SENATOR AIMS TO UPGRADE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
TEXAS Sen. John Coprnyn says he wants to improve public access to government records in Washington, a position that appears to put him at odds with the Bush administration.
Cornyn, a moderate Republican who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he'll work on legislation in the coming weeks to improve the Freedom of Information Act.
"FOIA needs to be strenghened," he said, "We need to quicken the turnaround time and create a mechanism that allows an indepentent, third party to decide whether a record should be kept secret."
Echoing sentiments he expressed while serving as Texas attorney general, Cornyn added: "I believe in a system of governement that allows consent of the people. And people can't consent if they don't what their elected officials are doing."
Since taking office two years ago, the Bush Administration has taken steps to restrict access to governement information, an effort that was accelerated in the name of national security following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks......
Greetings again BSE-L list members,
how would _USA_ ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban warning letters have anything to do with terrorism and National Security?
snip...
FYI, please see a bit of history on this topic;
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 09:04:42 -0700
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Sender: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Subject: MAD COW FEED BAN WARNING LETTERS USA 'update' (where did all Terry's MAD COW warning letters go?)
snip...
Food and Drug Administration Kansas City District Southwest Region 11630 West 60 Street P.O. Box 15905 Lenexa, Kansas 66265-4905 Telephone: (913) 752-2100
July 29, 2002 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED WARNING LETTER Ref. KAN 2002-09
Jerry Behimer, Owner Bakery Trading Company/Ingredient Exchange 401 N. Lindbergh Blvd., Suite 315 St. Louis, MO 63141-7816
Dear Mr. Behimer:
An inspection of your animal feed premix-manufacturing operations, located at 14521 2nd Ave., Ottumwa, Iowa, was conducted by an Investigator from our office on June 18 & 19, 2002. During this inspection, a significant deviation from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 589.2000 - Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed was identified. The regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Under 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(g)(2), such a deviation causes products being manufactured and/or distributed by your facility to be deemed misbranded within the meaning of Section 403(a)(l) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act), and these products may not be lawfully introduced, or delivered for introduction, into interstate commerce.
Our investigation found a failure to label your Powdered Cooked Beef, Product No. 5013, produced during the period of 2/13/02 to approximately 4/18/02, with the cautionary statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants," as required by 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(d). The FDA suggests the statement be distinguished by different type size or color, or other means of highlighting the statement so that it is easily noticed by a purchaser.
The above is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of deviations from the regulations. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you are responsible for assuring that your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law.
You should take prompt action to correct this violation, and you should establish a system whereby such violations do not recur. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in regulatory action without further notice, such as seizure and/or injunction.
It is necessary for you to take action on this matter now. We request you provide our office documentation of corrective action and final disposition for Lot 030402, approximately 21 tons, which was on hand during the inspection. Let this office know in writing within fifteen (15) working days from the date you received this letter what steps you are taking to correct the problem.
Your reply should be sent to Nadine Nanko Johnson, Compliance Officer, at the above address.
Sincerely,
/s/
Charles W. Sedgwick
District Director
Kansas City District
http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g3430d.htm
Food and Drug Administration Seattle District Pacific Region 22201 23rd Drive SE Bothell, WA 98021-4421 Telephone: 425-466-6766 FAX: 426-483-4996
May 7, 2002 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED In reply refer to Warning Letter SEA 02-46 WARNING LETTER
Mr. Philip C. Anderson, General Manager Darling International, Inc. 2041 Marc Avenue Tacoma, Washington 98401
Dear Mr. Anderson:
An inspection of your rendering operation conducted by Investigator Donald B. McKechnie, on February 22 and 26, 2002, found a significant deviation from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 589.2000 - Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. The regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Such deviation causes products being manufactured and/or distributed by your facility to be misbranded within the meaning of Section 403(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act).
Our investigation found a failure to consistently label your meat and bone meal product shipped to [redacted], with the required cautionary statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants". The meat and bone meal contains beef offal along with other ingredients including chicken, fish, and pork. The FDA suggests the statement be distinguished by different type size or color or other means of highlighting the statement so that it is easily noticed by a purchaser.
The above is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of deviations from the regulations. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you are responsible for assuring that your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. We have enclosed a copy of the FDA?s Small Entity Compliance Guide to assist you with complying with the regulation.
You should take prompt action to correct this violation, and you should establish a system whereby such violation does not recur. Failure to promptly correct this violation may result in regulatory action without further notice, such as seizure and/or injunction.
You should notify this office in writing within 15 working days of receipt of this letter, of the steps you have taken to bring your firm into compliance with the law. Your response should include an explanation of each step being taken to correct the violation, and to prevent its recurrence. If corrective action cannot be completed in 15 working days, state the reason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will be completed. Include copies of any available documentation demonstrating that corrections have been made.
Please send your reply to the Food and Drug Administration, Attention: Thomas S. Piekarski, Compliance Officer, 22201 23rd Drive SE, Bothell, Washington 98021. If you have questions regarding any issue in this letter, please contact Mr. Piekarski at (425) 483-4975. Sincerely, Charles Breen District Director
http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g3276d.htm
where, oh where, did all Terry's mad cow feed ban warning letters go $
FDA Cuts Back on Warnings
10/01/02
WASHINGTON -- The Food and Drug Administration has substantially cut back on warnings sent to companies that run afoul of its rules, a move the agency contends will result in more-effective enforcement but that critics say lets violators off the hook.
The drop results from a policy change in late February that requires the FDA chief counsel's office to clear all warning letters to ensure they are legally sound. Before the change, division and district offices around the country issued such letters unilaterally. In the six months since, the agency issued 279 warning letters, a drop of 64% from the same period last year, a review of agency records shows. The FDA says the chief counsel's office rejected only 6% of the 699 warning letters and other citations it reviewed. At the same time, division and district enforcers may be holding back letters they once would have sent.
SEE FULL STORY
http://online.wsj.com/
snip...
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:21:00 -0700
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Sender: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Subject: 'TONNAGE' OF TAINTED FEED $ what's up with the mad cow warning letters
Greetings,
since the FDA has apparently stopped issuing some warning letters;
10/7/02
Senate Questions FDA Commissioner Nominee
In testimony today before the U.S. Senate, Dr. Mark McClellan, the Bush administration nominee for Commissioner of Food and Drugs, said that under his leadership, the FDA would uphold its enforcement authority to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the products it regulates and to ensure that accurate and truthful information is conveyed to the public.
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, expressed concern at the start of the hearing that the FDA may be backing away from its regulatory authority, noting a drop in the number of Warning Letters issued by the agency, rumors that the FDA may regulate certain contact lenses as cosmetics rather than as devices and the agency's re-examination of its policies in light of First Amendment challenges.
Although McClellan did not comment directly on any of the specific examples cited by Kennedy, the nominee said that he sees "no intent on FDA's part to retreat from its mission" of protecting the public health...
snip...
http://www.thompson.com/fda
maybe i was not too far off when i acting in haste on the previous thread on BSE-L, see archived thread;
Subject: USA/THOMPSON TURNS TO COMMUNISM TACTICS, FDA TURNS TO SECRECY ON MAD COW FEED WARNING LETTERS
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 12:07:02 -0700
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: BSE-L
so, i was nosing around the FDA warning letters and other files, came across these and thought since 1/2 to 1 GRAM is lethal to a cow, i thought these TONNAGE in some of these violations i ran across most interesting. no telling how many dead road-kill CWD infected carcasses were rendered into this, along with whatever type TSE in USA cattle, and we can't forget about all the scrapie infected sheep that may have been added to the soup. with a combination of CWD, SCRAPIE, TME and all the different variants that may have come from them over the years, what in the world would you call the TSEs in USA cattle, once they test to find, and then find? could be a nasty one. or maybe none at all? doubtful though (just my opinion, if i still allowed one here);
PRODUCT BioFlavor F2425, BioFlavor F21002 and BioFlavor C20058. The product, packaged in 50 lb. bags, is labeled in part, " *** PALATABILITY ENHANCER INTENDED FOR CAT FOOD USE AT LESS THAN 10% *** INGREDIENT LISTING: *** Beef Broth *** ". Recall # V-140-2 CODE Product Codes F2425 107B-RB-1 107B-RB-2 149C 201D 202C 205D 210A F21002 143B 143D 146D 144B 144D 139D 142D 150D 151D 152C 152D 201C 205C 206C 208A 211A C20058 143D 144C 146C 208B RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Recalling Firm: Bioproducts, Inc., Fairlawn, OH, by telephone and letter on April 5, 2002. Manufacturer: Bioproducts, Inc., Aurora, MO. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON Animal feed product with beef protein does not contain required BSE statement on labels.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 354,150 lbs.
DISTRIBUTION TX, KS, MO and MI.
_______________________
PRODUCT Steamed Bonemeal in 50-lb. bags, product code C# 13581, packaged under two different labels: Premium Steamed Bonemeal Manufactured by Buchheit Premium Feeds, Perryville, MO, and Steamed Bonemeal Manufactured for Siemer's Enterprises Inc., Teutopolis, IL. Recall # V-141-2. CODE Not coded. RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Buchheit, Inc., Perryville, MO, by telephone on May 14, 2002.
FDA initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON Label lacks BSE warning statement.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
Approx. 902/50-lb. bags.
DISTRIBUTION MO and IL.
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR JUNE 5, 2002
####
PRODUCT
The following custom mixed animal feeds are recalled --- a) [non-ruminant]: Horse Feed, Hog Feed, and 14% Pig Feed. Recall # V-157-2; b) [ruminant]: Dairy Feed, Steer Feed, New Goat Feed, Cattle Feed, and Beef Feed. Recall # V-158-2. CODE The product is coded only with the manufacturing date and invoice numbers. All feed products manufactured and shipped since July 9, 2001 are affected by this recall. RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Recalling Firm: Shepard Grain Company, Inc., Urbana, OH, by telephone on January 11, 2002. Manufacturer: Shepard Grain Company, Inc., W. Liberty, OH.
FDA initiated recall is complete.
REASON Ruminant and non-ruminant animal feeds contain BSE prohibited material, and are either misbranded or adulterated.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
41,129 LBS (20.5 tons).
DISTRIBUTION OH.
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 28, 2002 ####
PRODUCT:
Buckeye 40% Poultry Concentrate. Recall #V-016-1. CODES: The bags are uncoded. Firm is recalling product manufactured since December 1998; however, they are only completing field corrections on product manufactured within the last six months (November 2000). MANUFACTURER: Yachere Feed, Inc. Rockwood, Pennsylvania. RECALLED BY: Manufacturer, by visit on 3/19/01 and 3/20/01.
Firm-initiated recall complete.
DISTRIBUTION:
Pennsylvania.
QUANTITY:
Nine containers, each weighing 100 pounds.
REASON: The animal feed contains product derived from mammalian tissues and must bear the statement "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants" on the label to prevent the establishment and amplification of BSE through feed. This statement does not appear on the label.
________
PRODUCT:
"Our Own Pig & Hog Grower" hog feed, packaged in 50 pound bags, with paperboard tags sewn onto the bags. Recall #V-017-1. CODES: The bags are uncoded. MANUFACTURER: The Perry Coal and Feed Company, Perry, Ohio. RECALLED BY: Manufacturer, by telephone on March 22, 2001.
Firm-initiated recall complete.
DISTRIBUTION:
Ohio.
QUANTITY:
Approximately 350 pounds of hog feed (7/50 pound bags).
REASON: The animal feed contains protein derived from mammalian tissues and must bear the statement "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants" on the label to prevent the establishment and amplification of BSE through feed. This statement does not appear on the label.
________
PRODUCT
Loweís 40% Hog Concentrate - swine feed for mixing grower and finisher rations, in 50-pound bulk bags. Recall #V-057-0. CODE All codes between August 1, 1999 and November 23, 1999. MANUFACTURER Lowe's Feed & Grain, Inc., Bowling Green, Kentucky. RECALLED BY Manufacturer, by letter dated November 18, 1999, and by telephone.
Firm-initiated recall complete.
DISTRIBUTION
Ohio.
QUANTITY
12.46 tons were distributed.
REASON Product contained protein derived from mammalian tissue and according to regulation must bear the statement "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants" on the label. This regulation is designed to prevent the establishment and amplification of BSE through feed. This statement does not appear on the label.
________
RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETMED -- CLASS II
________
RECALL NUMBER, PRODUCT AND CODE: V-353-1 through V-370-1, Chicken feed products: Recall # Tag # Product V-353-1 587 B. Challenger Scratch Feed V-354-1 588 B. 18% Gamebird Conditioner V-355-1 2060 B. Kickin' Chicken Premium Game Cock Feed V-356-1 2066 B. Kickin' Chicken Premium Gamebird 16% V-357-1 586 B. Scratch Grain V-358-1 2051 B. Pit Performer 17% V-359-1 575 B. Classic Yard Feed V-360-1 576 Eliminator Maintainer V-361-1 578 Eliminator Conditioner V-362-1 586 Producer Scratch Grain V-363-1 4587 Producer 12% Gamebird Yard Feed V-364-1 2065 Cleveland Trophy Cock Feed V-365-1 80181AAA Consolidated Hen Scratch V-366-1 2051 B&B Maintenance 12 V-367-1 2052 B&B Conditioner 14 V-368-1 2050 B&B Scratch 10 V-369-1 4590 Kingsport Original Prater Mix V-370-1 2062 PC 10 (unlabeled bags) ALL CODES The "B" indicates that the Burkmann Feeds brand name is listed on the tag labels. The suspect products are also bagged and distributed under the following private labels:
Producer Feeds, Louisville, Kentucky Kingsport Milling, Kingsport, Tennessee Consolidated Nutrition, L.C., Omaha, Nebraska B&B Feeds, Knoxville, Tennessee Eagle Roller Mill Co., Inc., Shelby, North Carolina Central Farm Supply of Kentucky, Inc., Louisville, Kentucky
REASON: The chicken feed products may contain proteins derived from mammalian tissues. The products are not labeled with the required BSE caution statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants."
MANUFACTURER/RECALLING FIRM: Burkmann Feeds, London, Kentucky
RECALLED BY: On May 5, 2001, the firm mailed recall letters with attached BSE sticker-labels to all customers outside the state of Kentucky. The recall notices were hand- delivered to customers within the state of Kentucky by Burkmann's Sales Representatives. Customers were asked to complete and return a recall response form that was included with each letter documenting the numbers of bags and varieties of products for which the customers affixed the BSE sticker-labels. The firm expanded their recall on May 10, 2001, and mailed recall letters with BSE labels and response forms to the affected customers.
FIRM INITIATED RECALL: Ongoing
DISTRIBUTION: KY, GA, NC, TN, VA
QUANTITY:
933 tons
_______________________________
RECALL NUMBER, PRODUCT AND CODE: V-377-1, Renner's brand 45% meat and bone meal, packed in 100 pound bags. REASON: The product contained protein material derived from bovine mammalian tissues; however, the bags are not labeled with the required BSE cautionary statement. MANUFACTURER/RECALLING FIRM: F. W. Renner & Sons, Inc., Canton, Ohio RECALLED BY: The recalling firm contacted the consignees by telephone on June 19, 2001.
FIRM INITIATED RECALL: Complete
DISTRIBUTION: OH
QUANTITY: 2,500 lbs
_______________________________
RECALL NUMBER, PRODUCT AND CODE: V-378-1 to V-384-1, RenPro 58% (brand name) swine and poultry feeds in bulk, as follows: V-378-1 - Poultry Layer #215 - guaranteed analysis 15% crude protein, 3% crude fat, and 3.5% crude fiber. V-379-1 - Poultry Layer #216 - guaranteed analysis 16% crude protein, 3% crude fat, and 3.5% crude fiber. V-380-1 - Poultry Layer #217 - guaranteed analysis 17% crude protein, 3% crude fat, and 3.5% crude fiber. V-381-1 - Poultry Layer #218 - guaranteed analysis 18% crude protein, 3% crude fat, and 3.5% crude fiber. V-382-1 - Poultry Layer #219 - guaranteed analysis 19% crude protein, 3.5% crude fat, and 4% crude fiber. V-383-1 - Poultry Prelay #115 - guaranteed analysis 16% crude protein, 3% crude fat, and 5% crude fiber. V-384-1 - Poultry Developer #110 - guaranteed analysis 14% crude protein, 3% crude fat, and 5.5% crude fiber. MANFACTURER: Esbenshade Mills, Mount Joy, PA RECALLED BY: On 5/24/01, the manufacturer notified their customers of the labeling requirement via letter.
FIRM INITIATED RECALL: Complete
DISTRIBUTION: PA
QUANTITY: None. The product turn over is two weeks or less.
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR July 25, 2001.
http://www.fda.gov/
on second thought, i now see why they are cutting back on these warning letters of the infamous 8/4/97 ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban in the USA, that never was. same reason they are not testing cows in sufficient numbers to find any TSEs.
they simply don't want to know, and don't want the public to know either, thus keep the gold card 'BSE FREE'.
one more time, to all EU/SEAC members please re-evaluate the current GBR of the USA, and change from GBR II to GBR III. the complete GBR assessment should be changed to include _all_ TSEs...
P.S. i wonder how deer/elk feed would be listed on FDA site? odd with all the products i sent through the list on deer/elk feed with _animal protein_, i have not seen any warning letters on deer/elk feed. course, it could be filed with the infamous and very handy 'non-species coding system' that is used on imports (i documented here many times).
still disgusted in Bacliff, Texas USA Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:
######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########
Greetings and Happy Holidays,
hi Linda,
many thanks for this reply, was just checking in to see if anything new had happened since our last correspondence. i thought i had missed something?
Unfortunately, the new database is much more complicated than
the old one, and it does not lend itself to presenting data in
a simple spreadsheet as we did in the past.
how convenient;-) i had no problems with the old one...
Please be assured that CVM is working to solve this problem,
and we do plan to post this data in the future.
thank you, if USDA/APHIS are lucky, i will hold my breath until that time;-)
nothing personal Linda, take care, and may the New Year bring
PEACE...
TSS
CVM HomePage wrote:
Dear Mr. Singeltary:
As mentioned in my e-mail of December 4, FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine never posted the Warning Letters for ruminant feed violations on our "BSE" page -- http://www.fda.gov/cvm/index/bse/bsetoc.html. However, these Warning Letters have been included on the FDA "Warning Letters" page -- http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning.htm that is located on the FDA's "Electronic Freedom of Information Reading Room" page. But, not as a separate category of Warning Letters for violations of the ruminant feed rules.
I checked the Warning Letter page, and found that quite a few Warning Letters have been posted since May; however, I did not find any more recent than May 7, 2002, regarding "Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed/Misbranded" (ruminant feed rule violations.) You may wish to file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to determine if more recent Warning Letters have been issued, but not posted on the FDA Home Page. Information about filing a FOIA request may be found at: http://www.fda.gov/opacom/backgrounders/foiahand.html
As mentioned on the "CVM and Ruminant Feed (BSE) Inspections" site --
"After March 11, 2002, FDA discontinued the database that was used to compile these listings. The Agency started a new database on April 15, 2002, and future updates on BSE enforcement and inspectional findings will draw from it. The format of the information presented here may change, due to design changes of the new database. This site will be updated after a period of time that allows for transition into the new database system."
Unfortunately, the new database is much more complicated than the old one, and it does not lend itself to presenting data in a simple spreadsheet as we did in the past. Please be assured that CVM is working to solve this problem, and we do plan to post this data in the future.
We have nothing new to report at this time.
I hope that this information is helpful.
Sincerely yours,
Linda A. Grassie for the FDA Home Page
-----Original Message-----
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr. [mailto:flounder@wt.net]
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 4:03 PM
To: CVMHomeP@cvm.fda.gov
Subject: USA ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban warning letters ???
Greetings,
i have noticed the inspections and warning letters from firms not complying with the ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban violations has not been updated since (March 11, 2002)?
2) Firms Currently Considered as Not in Compliance with the BSE Feed Rule
The following spreadsheet is a subset of Spreadsheet 1 and contains the name, address, and firm identifier of all firms that were considered as not being in compliance with the BSE feed regulation at their most recent inspection, according to the BSE inspection database. Compliance status was determined by examination of the BSE Inspection Checklist. The dates of the inspections and the specific BSE provision violations for each inspection are also included. The listing is organized alphabetically first by the FDA District and then by the state in which the inspected facility is located.
Most Recent BSE Inspections, Firms Not in Compliance
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/efoi/InpectionListDescriptionforHP.htm
i would be interested to know if all firms are now complying and that no warning letters have been issued since may of 2002, or have they just not been posted?
if so, how can i locate them?
thank you, kind regards, terry
=======================================================
TRIPLE FIRE WALLS OF WHAT ???
NOW about those triple fire walls and imports and what about these potential biological 'TSE/FMD SUITCASE BOMBS'. omitting the 44 tons of MBM/GREAVES we imported from the UK;
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
Simon as discussed thanks Julie --- Forwarded message: Sent: Fri Feb 04 21:47:01 2000 Received: Fri Feb 04 21:45:15 2000
=========================================
or what about these potential BSE/TSE imports;
Bovine anmls bnlss ex prcssd frozen/U.S. Imports for Consumption 1997 year to date (custom value, in thousands of dollars) (units of quantity: kilograms)
United Kingdom 37,122 kilograms, 43 thousand dollars Netherlands 56,260 kilograms, 413 thousand dollars Canada 18,141,481 kilograms, 23,914 million dollars
http://mad-cow.org/~tom/sept_mid_98_news.html#offals
BSE/TSE MADCOW SUITCASE BOMBS
USCS=UNSPECIFIED SPECIES CODING SYSTEM=ANYTHING GOES THE USA SEALED BORDERS ARE LEAKING, AND HAVE BEEN FOR DECADES...TSS
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 08:42:56 -0800
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Sender: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." S
ubject: USA SEALED BORDERS AND THE ''USCS'' (unspecified species coding system) MORE POTENTIAL B.S.eee
snip...
http://www.agobservatory.org/library.cfm?refID=30390
2010 USA mad cow feed ban ???
Monday, April 5, 2010
Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE April 5, 2010
http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/04/update-on-feed-enforcement-activities.html
In 1999 I also requested information on the USA BSE EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN via FOIA ;
Subject: U.S. Emergency Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Response Plan Summary
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 18:25:12 -0500
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
To: mhtml:%7B33B38F65-8D2E-434D-8F9B-8BDCD77D3066%7Dmid://00000265/!x-usc:mailto:BSE-L@uni-karlsruhe.de
Tuesday, July 14, 2009 U.S. Emergency Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Response Plan Summary and BSE Red Book
Date: February 14, 2000 at 8:56 am PST
WHERE did we go wrong $$$
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2009/07/us-emergency-bovine-spongiform.html
IN 2000 I went through the F.O.I.A. process for the following as well ;
Saturday, August 16, 2008
F.O.I.A. Qualitative Analysis of BSE Risk Factors in the United States February 13, 2000 at 3:37 pm PST (BSE red book)
http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2008/08/qualitative-analysis-of-bse-risk.html
Monday, October 19, 2009
Atypical BSE, BSE, and other human and animal TSE in North America Update October 2009
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/10/atypical-bse-bse-and-other-human-and.html
Topic: Emerging Infectious Diseases Preferred type of presentation:
International Scientific Exchange
This abstract has been ACCEPTED. #0670:
Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009
Authors: T. Singeltary; Bacliff, TX/US
Title: Transmissible Spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) animal and human TSE in North America update October 2009
Body: Background An update on atypical BSE and other TSE in North America.
Please remember, the typical U.K. c-BSE, the atypical l-BSE (BASE), and h-BSE have all been documented in North America, along with the typical scrapie's, and atypical Nor-98 Scrapie, and to date, 2 different strains of CWD, and also TME. All these TSE in different species have been rendered and fed to food producing animals for humans and animals in North America (TSE in cats and dogs ?), and that the trading of these TSEs via animals and products via the USA and Canada has been immense over the years, decades.
Methods 12 years independent research of available data
Results 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 2009. With all the science to date refuting it, to continue to validate this old myth, will only spread this TSE agent through a multitude of potential routes and sources i.e. consumption, medical i.e., surgical, blood, dental, endoscopy, optical, nutritional supplements, cosmetics etc.
Conclusion I would like to submit a review of past CJD surveillance in the USA, and the urgent need to make all human TSE in the USA a reportable disease, in every state, of every age group, and to make this mandatory immediately without further delay. The ramifications of not doing so will only allow this agent to spread further in the medical, dental, surgical arena's. Restricting the reporting of CJD and or any human TSE is NOT scientific. Iatrogenic CJD knows NO age group, TSE knows no boundaries. I propose as with Aguzzi, Asante, Collinge, Caughey, Deslys, Dormont, Gibbs, Gajdusek, Ironside, Manuelidis, Marsh, et al and many more, that the world of TSE Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy is far from an exact science, but there is enough proven science to date that this myth should be put to rest once and for all, and that we move forward with a new classification for human and animal TSE that would properly identify the infected species, the source species, and then the route.
Keywords: Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease Prion
see page 114 ;
http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/14th_ICID_ISE_Abstracts.pdf
http://www.isid.org/14th_icid/
http://www.isid.org/publications/ICID_Archive.shtml
http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/IMED2009_AbstrAuth.pdf
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 3:23 PM
Subject: 14th International Congress on Infectious Diseases H-type and L-type Atypical BSE January 2010
(special pre-congress edition) 18.173 page 189
Experimental Challenge of Cattle with H-type and L-type Atypical BSE
A. Buschmann1, U. Ziegler1, M. Keller1, R. Rogers2, B. Hills3, M.H. Groschup1. 1Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany, 2Health Canada, Bureau of Microbial Hazards, Health Products & Food Branch, Ottawa, Canada, 3Health Canada, Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Secretariat, Ottawa, Canada
Background: After the detection of two novel BSE forms designated H-type and L-type atypical BSE the question of the pathogenesis and the agent distribution of these two types in cattle was fully open. From initial studies of the brain pathology, it was already known that the anatomical distribution of L-type BSE differs from that of the classical type where the obex region in the brainstem always displays the highest PrPSc concentrations. In contrast in L-type BSE cases, the thalamus and frontal cortex regions showed the highest levels of the pathological prion protein, while the obex region was only weakly involved.
Methods:We performed intracranial inoculations of cattle (five and six per group) using 10%brainstemhomogenates of the two German H- and L-type atypical BSE isolates. The animals were inoculated under narcosis and then kept in a free-ranging stable under appropriate biosafety conditions.At least one animal per group was killed and sectioned in the preclinical stage and the remaining animals were kept until they developed clinical symptoms. The animals were examined for behavioural changes every four weeks throughout the experiment following a protocol that had been established during earlier BSE pathogenesis studies with classical BSE.
Results and Discussion: All animals of both groups developed clinical symptoms and had to be euthanized within 16 months. The clinical picture differed from that of classical BSE, as the earliest signs of illness were loss of body weight and depression. However, the animals later developed hind limb ataxia and hyperesthesia predominantly and the head. Analysis of brain samples from these animals confirmed the BSE infection and the atypical Western blot profile was maintained in all animals. Samples from these animals are now being examined in order to be able to describe the pathogenesis and agent distribution for these novel BSE types.
Conclusions: A pilot study using a commercially avaialble BSE rapid test ELISA revealed an essential restriction of PrPSc to the central nervous system for both atypical BSE forms. A much more detailed analysis for PrPSc and infectivity is still ongoing.
http://www.isid.org/14th_icid/
http://ww2.isid.org/Downloads/IMED2009_AbstrAuth.pdf
http://www.isid.org/publications/ICID_Archive.shtml
please see full text ;
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Atypical BSE in Cattle
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/03/atypical-bse-in-cattle-position-post.html
2009 UPDATE ON ALABAMA AND TEXAS MAD COWS 2005 and 2006
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2006/08/bse-atypical-texas-and-alabama-update.html
2019
***> cattle, pigs, sheep, cwd, tse, prion, oh my!
***> In contrast, cattle are highly susceptible to white-tailed deer CWD and mule deer CWD in experimental conditions but no natural CWD infections in cattle have been reported (Sigurdson, 2008; Hamir et al., 2006).
Sheep and cattle may be exposed to CWD via common grazing areas with affected deer but so far, appear to be poorly susceptible to mule deer CWD (Sigurdson, 2008). In contrast, cattle are highly susceptible to white-tailed deer CWD and mule deer CWD in experimental conditions but no natural CWD infections in cattle have been reported (Sigurdson, 2008; Hamir et al., 2006). It is not known how susceptible humans are to CWD but given that the prion can be present in muscle, it is likely that humans have been exposed to the agent via consumption of venison (Sigurdson, 2008). Initial experimental research suggests that human susceptibility to CWD is low and there may be a robust species barrier for CWD transmission to humans (Sigurdson, 2008), however the risk appetite for a public health threat may still find this level unacceptable.
cwd scrapie pigs oral routes
***> However, at 51 months of incubation or greater, 5 animals were positive by one or more diagnostic methods. Furthermore, positive bioassay results were obtained from all inoculated groups (oral and intracranial; market weight and end of study) suggesting that swine are potential hosts for the agent of scrapie. <***
>*** Although the current U.S. feed ban is based on keeping tissues from TSE infected cattle from contaminating animal feed, swine rations in the U.S. could contain animal derived components including materials from scrapie infected sheep and goats. These results indicating the susceptibility of pigs to sheep scrapie, coupled with the limitations of the current feed ban, indicates that a revision of the feed ban may be necessary to protect swine production and potentially human health. <***
***> Results: PrPSc was not detected by EIA and IHC in any RPLNs. All tonsils and MLNs were negative by IHC, though the MLN from one pig in the oral <6 5="" 6="" at="" by="" detected="" eia.="" examined="" group="" in="" intracranial="" least="" lymphoid="" month="" months="" of="" one="" pigs="" positive="" prpsc="" quic="" the="" tissues="" was="">6 months group, 5/6 pigs in the oral <6 4="" and="" group="" months="" oral="">6 months group. Overall, the MLN was positive in 14/19 (74%) of samples examined, the RPLN in 8/18 (44%), and the tonsil in 10/25 (40%).
***> Conclusions: This study demonstrates that PrPSc accumulates in lymphoid tissues from pigs challenged intracranially or orally with the CWD agent, and can be detected as early as 4 months after challenge. CWD-infected pigs rarely develop clinical disease and if they do, they do so after a long incubation period.
This raises the possibility that CWD-infected pigs could shed prions into their environment long before they develop clinical disease.
Furthermore, lymphoid tissues from CWD-infected pigs could present a potential source of CWD infectivity in the animal and human food chains.
Friday, December 14, 2012
DEFRA U.K. What is the risk of Chronic Wasting Disease CWD being introduced into Great Britain? A Qualitative Risk Assessment October 2012
snip.....
In the USA, under the Food and Drug Administration's BSE Feed Regulation (21 CFR 589.2000) most material (exceptions include milk, tallow, and gelatin) from deer and elk is prohibited for use in feed for ruminant animals. With regards to feed for non-ruminant animals, under FDA law, CWD positive deer may not be used for any animal feed or feed ingredients. For elk and deer considered at high risk for CWD, the FDA recommends that these animals do not enter the animal feed system. However, this recommendation is guidance and not a requirement by law.
Animals considered at high risk for CWD include:
1) animals from areas declared to be endemic for CWD and/or to be CWD eradication zones and
2) deer and elk that at some time during the 60-month period prior to slaughter were in a captive herd that contained a CWD-positive animal.
Therefore, in the USA, materials from cervids other than CWD positive animals may be used in animal feed and feed ingredients for non-ruminants.
The amount of animal PAP that is of deer and/or elk origin imported from the USA to GB can not be determined, however, as it is not specified in TRACES. It may constitute a small percentage of the 8412 kilos of non-fish origin processed animal proteins that were imported from US into GB in 2011.
Overall, therefore, it is considered there is a __greater than negligible risk___ that (nonruminant) animal feed and pet food containing deer and/or elk protein is imported into GB.
There is uncertainty associated with this estimate given the lack of data on the amount of deer and/or elk protein possibly being imported in these products.
snip.....
36% in 2007 (Almberg et al., 2011). In such areas, population declines of deer of up to 30 to 50% have been observed (Almberg et al., 2011). In areas of Colorado, the prevalence can be as high as 30% (EFSA, 2011).
The clinical signs of CWD in affected adults are weight loss and behavioural changes that can span weeks or months (Williams, 2005). In addition, signs might include excessive salivation, behavioural alterations including a fixed stare and changes in interaction with other animals in the herd, and an altered stance (Williams, 2005). These signs are indistinguishable from cervids experimentally infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
Given this, if CWD was to be introduced into countries with BSE such as GB, for example, infected deer populations would need to be tested to differentiate if they were infected with CWD or BSE to minimise the risk of BSE entering the human food-chain via affected venison.
snip.....
The rate of transmission of CWD has been reported to be as high as 30% and can approach 100% among captive animals in endemic areas (Safar et al., 2008).
snip.....
In summary, in endemic areas, there is a medium probability that the soil and surrounding environment is contaminated with CWD prions and in a bioavailable form. In rural areas where CWD has not been reported and deer are present, there is a greater than negligible risk the soil is contaminated with CWD prion.
snip.....
In summary, given the volume of tourists, hunters and servicemen moving between GB and North America, the probability of at least one person travelling to/from a CWD affected area and, in doing so, contaminating their clothing, footwear and/or equipment prior to arriving in GB is greater than negligible... For deer hunters, specifically, the risk is likely to be greater given the increased contact with deer and their environment. However, there is significant uncertainty associated with these estimates.
snip.....
Therefore, it is considered that farmed and park deer may have a higher probability of exposure to CWD transferred to the environment than wild deer given the restricted habitat range and higher frequency of contact with tourists and returning GB residents.
snip.....
PEOPLE, PLEASE READ THIS NEXT STATE VERY CAREFULLY, AND SEE WHERE WHAT THEY SAY, VALIDATES WHAT I HAVE SAID ALL ALONG ABOUT THE MAD COW FEED BAN, ...IT NEVER WAS FOLKS, THE AUGUST 1997 MAD COW FEED BAN NEVER REALLY WAS ENFORCED, THUS, THE 3 THINGS THAT WE WERE ALWAYS TOLD, BSE SURVEILLANCE, BSE TESTING, AND BSE MAD COW FEED BAN, ALL THREE WERE NOTHING BUT INK ON PAPER, AND ALL THREE FAILED TERRIBLY. THESE ARE THE FACTs, now, with the trump regime dumbing down science even further, ...i will leave it to your own judgement...terry
READ THIS VERY, VERY, CAREFULLY;
John Maday
August 30, 2019 09:46 AM VFD-Form 007 (640x427)
Before and after the current Veterinary Feed Directive rules took full effect in January, 2017, the FDA focused primarily on education and outreach. ( John Maday )
Before and after the current Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) rules took full effect in January, 2017, the FDA focused primarily on education and outreach to help feed mills, veterinarians and producers understand and comply with the requirements. Since then, FDA has gradually increased the number of VFD inspections and initiated enforcement actions when necessary.
snip...
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2019
***> FDA Reports on VFD Compliance
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
*** Singeltary reply ; Molecular, Biochemical and Genetic Characteristics of BSE in Canada Singeltary reply
IBNC BSE TSE Prion mad cow disease
***however in 1 C-type challenged animal, Prion 2015 Poster Abstracts S67 PrPsc was not detected using rapid tests for BSE.
***Subsequent testing resulted in the detection of pathologic lesion in unusual brain location and PrPsc detection by PMCA only.
*** IBNC Tauopathy or TSE Prion disease, it appears, no one is sure ***
Posted by Terry S. Singeltary Sr. on 03 Jul 2015 at 16:53 GMT
P98 The agent of H-type bovine spongiform encephalopathy associated with E211K prion protein polymorphism transmits after oronasal challenge
Greenlee JJ (1), Moore SJ (1), and West Greenlee MH (2) (1) United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Animal Disease Center, Virus and Prion Research Unit, Ames, IA, United States (2) Department of Biomedical Sciences, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, United States.
reading up on this study from Prion 2018 Conference, very important findings ;
***> This study demonstrates that the H-type BSE agent is transmissible by the oronasal route.
***> These results reinforce the need for ongoing surveillance for classical and atypical BSE to minimize the risk of potentially infectious tissues entering the animal or human food chains.
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15, 2018
The agent of H-type bovine spongiform encephalopathy associated with E211K prion protein polymorphism transmits after oronasal challenge
Detection of PrPBSE and prion infectivity in the ileal Peyer’s patch of young calves as early as 2 months after oral challenge with classical bovine spongiform encephalopathy
Ivett Ackermann1 , Anne Balkema‑Buschmann1 , Reiner Ulrich2 , Kerstin Tauscher2 , James C. Shawulu1 , Markus Keller1 , Olanrewaju I. Fatola1 , Paul Brown3 and Martin H. Groschup1*
Abstract
In classical bovine spongiform encephalopathy (C-BSE), an orally acquired prion disease of cattle, the ileal Peyer’s patch (IPP) represents the main entry port for the BSE agent. In earlier C-BSE pathogenesis studies, cattle at 4–6 months of age were orally challenged, while there are strong indications that the risk of infection is highest in young animals. In the present study, unweaned calves aged 4–6 weeks were orally challenged to determine the earli‑ est time point at which newly formed PrPBSE and BSE infectivity are detectable in the IPP. For this purpose, calves were culled 1 week as well as 2, 4, 6 and 8 months post-infection (mpi) and IPPs were examined for BSE infectivity using a bovine PrP transgenic mouse bioassay, and for PrPBSE by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and protein misfolding cyclic amplifcation (PMCA) assays. For the frst time, BSE prions were detected in the IPP as early as 2 mpi by transgenic mouse bioassay and PMCA and 4 mpi by IHC in the follicular dendritic cells (FDCs) of the IPP follicles. These data indi‑ cate that BSE prions propagate in the IPP of unweaned calves within 2 months of oral uptake of the agent.
In summary, our study demonstrates for the frst time PrPBSE (by PMCA) and prion infectivity (by mouse bioassay) in the ileal Peyer’s patch (IPP) of young calves as early as 2 months after infection. From 4 mpi nearly all calves showed PrPBSE positive IPP follicles (by IHC), even with PrPBSE accumulation detectable in FDCs in some animals. Finally, our results confrm the IPP as the early port of entry for the BSE agent and a site of initial propagation of PrPBSE and infectivity during the early pathogenesis of the disease. Terefore, our study supports the recommendation to remove the last four metres of the small intestine (distal ileum) at slaughter, as designated by current legal requirements for countries with a controlled BSE risk status, as an essential measure for consumer and public health protection.
A study comparing preclinical cattle infected naturally with BSE to clinically affected cattle either naturally or experimentally infected with BSE by the oral route found the most abundant PrPSc in the brainstem area (39), which is consistent with ascension to the brain from the gut by sympathetic and parasympathetic projections (40). In our experiment, abundant prions were observed in the brainstem of cattle with clinical signs of BSE, which is similar to the amount in their thalamus or midbrain regions. Interestingly, prions in the brainstem of cattle with clinical evidence of BSE seeded the RT-QuIC reactions faster than any other brain region despite the brainstem area having lower EIA OD values (Table 2) in comparison to other brain regions. This suggests that higher concentrations of prions do not necessarily seed the reaction faster. Perhaps prions of the brainstem exist in a preferred conformation for better conversion despite being present in lower concentrations.
snip...
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 02, 2010
BSE - ATYPICAL LESION DISTRIBUTION (RBSE 92-21367) statutory (obex only) diagnostic criteria CVL 1992
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
Additional BSE TSE prion testing detects pathologic lesion in unusual brain location and PrPsc by PMCA only, how many cases have we missed?
TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2017
*** EXTREME USA FDA PART 589 TSE PRION FEED LOOP HOLE STILL EXIST, AND PRICE OF POKER GOES UP ***
THURSDAY, AUGUST 08, 2019
Raccoons accumulate PrPSc after intracranial inoculation with the agents of chronic wasting disease (CWD) or transmissible mink encephalopathy (TME) but not atypical scrapie
atypical and typical BSE and Scrapie Zoonosis
O.05: Transmission of prions to primates after extended silent incubation periods: Implications for BSE and scrapie risk assessment in human populations
Emmanuel Comoy, Jacqueline Mikol, Valerie Durand, Sophie Luccantoni, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie Lescoutra, Capucine Dehen, and Jean-Philippe Deslys Atomic Energy Commission; Fontenay-aux-Roses, France
Prion diseases (PD) are the unique neurodegenerative proteinopathies reputed to be transmissible under field conditions since decades. The transmission of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) to humans evidenced that an animal PD might be zoonotic under appropriate conditions. Contrarily, in the absence of obvious (epidemiological or experimental) elements supporting a transmission or genetic predispositions, PD, like the other proteinopathies, are reputed to occur spontaneously (atpical animal prion strains, sporadic CJD summing 80% of human prion cases).
Non-human primate models provided the first evidences supporting the transmissibiity of human prion strains and the zoonotic potential of BSE. Among them, cynomolgus macaques brought major information for BSE risk assessment for human health (Chen, 2014), according to their phylogenetic proximity to humans and extended lifetime. We used this model to assess the zoonotic potential of other animal PD from bovine, ovine and cervid origins even after very long silent incubation periods.
*** We recently observed the direct transmission of a natural classical scrapie isolate to macaque after a 10-year silent incubation period,
***with features similar to some reported for human cases of sporadic CJD, albeit requiring fourfold long incubation than BSE. Scrapie, as recently evoked in humanized mice (Cassard, 2014),
***is the third potentially zoonotic PD (with BSE and L-type BSE),
***thus questioning the origin of human sporadic cases.
We will present an updated panorama of our different transmission studies and discuss the implications of such extended incubation periods on risk assessment of animal PD for human health.
===============
***thus questioning the origin of human sporadic cases***
===============
***our findings suggest that possible transmission risk of H-type BSE to sheep and human. Bioassay will be required to determine whether the PMCA products are infectious to these animals.
==============
***Transmission data also revealed that several scrapie prions propagate in HuPrP-Tg mice with efficiency comparable to that of cattle BSE. While the efficiency of transmission at primary passage was low, subsequent passages resulted in a highly virulent prion disease in both Met129 and Val129 mice.
***Transmission of the different scrapie isolates in these mice leads to the emergence of prion strain phenotypes that showed similar characteristics to those displayed by MM1 or VV2 sCJD prion.
***These results demonstrate that scrapie prions have a zoonotic potential and raise new questions about the possible link between animal and human prions.
PRION 2016 TOKYO
Saturday, April 23, 2016
SCRAPIE WS-01: Prion diseases in animals and zoonotic potential 2016
Prion. 10:S15-S21. 2016 ISSN: 1933-6896 printl 1933-690X online
Taylor & Francis
Prion 2016 Animal Prion Disease Workshop Abstracts
WS-01: Prion diseases in animals and zoonotic potential
Juan Maria Torres a, Olivier Andreoletti b, J uan-Carlos Espinosa a. Vincent Beringue c. Patricia Aguilar a,
Natalia Fernandez-Borges a. and Alba Marin-Moreno a
"Centro de Investigacion en Sanidad Animal ( CISA-INIA ). Valdeolmos, Madrid. Spain; b UMR INRA -ENVT 1225 Interactions Holes Agents Pathogenes. ENVT. Toulouse. France: "UR892. Virologie lmmunologie MolécuIaires, Jouy-en-Josas. France
Dietary exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) contaminated bovine tissues is considered as the origin of variant Creutzfeldt Jakob (vCJD) disease in human. To date, BSE agent is the only recognized zoonotic prion... Despite the variety of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (TSE) agents that have been circulating for centuries in farmed ruminants there is no apparent epidemiological link between exposure to ruminant products and the occurrence of other form of TSE in human like sporadic Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease (sCJD). However, the zoonotic potential of the diversity of circulating TSE agents has never been systematically assessed. The major issue in experimental assessment of TSEs zoonotic potential lies in the modeling of the ‘species barrier‘, the biological phenomenon that limits TSE agents’ propagation from a species to another. In the last decade, mice genetically engineered to express normal forms of the human prion protein has proved essential in studying human prions pathogenesis and modeling the capacity of TSEs to cross the human species barrier.
To assess the zoonotic potential of prions circulating in farmed ruminants, we study their transmission ability in transgenic mice expressing human PrPC (HuPrP-Tg). Two lines of mice expressing different forms of the human PrPC (129Met or 129Val) are used to determine the role of the Met129Val dimorphism in susceptibility/resistance to the different agents.
These transmission experiments confirm the ability of BSE prions to propagate in 129M- HuPrP-Tg mice and demonstrate that Met129 homozygotes may be susceptible to BSE in sheep or goat to a greater degree than the BSE agent in cattle and that these agents can convey molecular properties and neuropathological indistinguishable from vCJD. However homozygous 129V mice are resistant to all tested BSE derived prions independently of the originating species suggesting a higher transmission barrier for 129V-PrP variant.
Transmission data also revealed that several scrapie prions propagate in HuPrP-Tg mice with efficiency comparable to that of cattle BSE. While the efficiency of transmission at primary passage was low, subsequent passages resulted in a highly virulent prion disease in both Met129 and Val129 mice.
Transmission of the different scrapie isolates in these mice leads to the emergence of prion strain phenotypes that showed similar characteristics to those displayed by MM1 or VV2 sCJD prion.
These results demonstrate that scrapie prions have a zoonotic potential and raise new questions about the possible link between animal and human prions.
***> why do we not want to do TSE transmission studies on chimpanzees $
5. A positive result from a chimpanzee challenged severly would likely create alarm in some circles even if the result could not be interpreted for man.
***> I have a view that all these agents could be transmitted provided a large enough dose by appropriate routes was given and the animals kept long enough.
***> Until the mechanisms of the species barrier are more clearly understood it might be best to retain that hypothesis.
snip...
R. BRADLEY
Title: Transmission of scrapie prions to primate after an extended silent incubation period)
*** In complement to the recent demonstration that humanized mice are susceptible to scrapie, we report here the first observation of direct transmission of a natural classical scrapie isolate to a macaque after a 10-year incubation period. Neuropathologic examination revealed all of the features of a prion disease: spongiform change, neuronal loss, and accumulation of PrPres throughout the CNS.
*** This observation strengthens the questioning of the harmlessness of scrapie to humans, at a time when protective measures for human and animal health are being dismantled and reduced as c-BSE is considered controlled and being eradicated.
*** Our results underscore the importance of precautionary and protective measures and the necessity for long-term experimental transmission studies to assess the zoonotic potential of other animal prion strains.
***> Moreover, sporadic disease has never been observed in breeding colonies or primate research laboratories, most notably among hundreds of animals over several decades of study at the National Institutes of Health25, and in nearly twenty older animals continuously housed in our own facility. <***
Transmission of scrapie prions to primate after an extended silent incubation period
Emmanuel E. Comoy, Jacqueline Mikol, Sophie Luccantoni-Freire, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie Lescoutra-Etchegaray, Valérie Durand, Capucine Dehen, Olivier Andreoletti, Cristina Casalone, Juergen A. Richt, Justin J. Greenlee, Thierry Baron, Sylvie L. Benestad, Paul Brown & Jean-Philippe Deslys Scientific Reports volume 5, Article number: 11573 (2015) | Download Citation
Abstract
Classical bovine spongiform encephalopathy (c-BSE) is the only animal prion disease reputed to be zoonotic, causing variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) in humans and having guided protective measures for animal and human health against animal prion diseases. Recently, partial transmissions to humanized mice showed that the zoonotic potential of scrapie might be similar to c-BSE. We here report the direct transmission of a natural classical scrapie isolate to cynomolgus macaque, a highly relevant model for human prion diseases, after a 10-year silent incubation period, with features similar to those reported for human cases of sporadic CJD. Scrapie is thus actually transmissible to primates with incubation periods compatible with their life expectancy, although fourfold longer than BSE. Long-term experimental transmission studies are necessary to better assess the zoonotic potential of other prion diseases with high prevalence, notably Chronic Wasting Disease of deer and elk and atypical/Nor98 scrapie.
SNIP...
Discussion We describe the transmission of spongiform encephalopathy in a non-human primate inoculated 10 years earlier with a strain of sheep c-scrapie. Because of this extended incubation period in a facility in which other prion diseases are under study, we are obliged to consider two alternative possibilities that might explain its occurrence. We first considered the possibility of a sporadic origin (like CJD in humans). Such an event is extremely improbable because the inoculated animal was 14 years old when the clinical signs appeared, i.e. about 40% through the expected natural lifetime of this species, compared to a peak age incidence of 60–65 years in human sporadic CJD, or about 80% through their expected lifetimes. Moreover, sporadic disease has never been observed in breeding colonies or primate research laboratories, most notably among hundreds of animals over several decades of study at the National Institutes of Health25, and in nearly twenty older animals continuously housed in our own facility.
The second possibility is a laboratory cross-contamination. Three facts make this possibility equally unlikely. First, handling of specimens in our laboratory is performed with fastidious attention to the avoidance of any such cross-contamination. Second, no laboratory cross-contamination has ever been documented in other primate laboratories, including the NIH, even between infected and uninfected animals housed in the same or adjacent cages with daily intimate contact (P. Brown, personal communication). Third, the cerebral lesion profile is different from all the other prion diseases we have studied in this model19, with a correlation between cerebellar lesions (massive spongiform change of Purkinje cells, intense PrPres staining and reactive gliosis26) and ataxia. The iron deposits present in the globus pallidus are a non specific finding that have been reported previously in neurodegenerative diseases and aging27. Conversely, the thalamic lesion was reminiscent of a metabolic disease due to thiamine deficiency28 but blood thiamine levels were within normal limits (data not shown). The preferential distribution of spongiform change in cortex associated with a limited distribution in the brainstem is reminiscent of the lesion profile in MM2c and VV1 sCJD patients29, but interspecies comparison of lesion profiles should be interpreted with caution. It is of note that the same classical scrapie isolate induced TSE in C57Bl/6 mice with similar incubation periods and lesional profiles as a sample derived from a MM1 sCJD patient30.
We are therefore confident that the illness in this cynomolgus macaque represents a true transmission of a sheep c-scrapie isolate directly to an old-world monkey, which taxonomically resides in the primate subdivision (parvorder of catarrhini) that includes humans. With an homology of its PrP protein with humans of 96.4%31, cynomolgus macaque constitutes a highly relevant model for assessing zoonotic risk of prion diseases. Since our initial aim was to show the absence of transmission of scrapie to macaques in the worst-case scenario, we obtained materials from a flock of naturally-infected sheep, affecting animals with different genotypes32. This c-scrapie isolate exhibited complete transmission in ARQ/ARQ sheep (332 ± 56 days) and Tg338 transgenic mice expressing ovine VRQ/VRQ prion protein (220 ± 5 days) (O. Andreoletti, personal communication). From the standpoint of zoonotic risk, it is important to note that sheep with c-scrapie (including the isolate used in our study) have demonstrable infectivity throughout their lymphoreticular system early in the incubation period of the disease (3 months-old for all the lymphoid organs, and as early as 2 months-old in gut-associated lymph nodes)33. In addition, scrapie infectivity has been identified in blood34, milk35 and skeletal muscle36 from asymptomatic but scrapie infected small ruminants which implies a potential dietary exposure for consumers.
Two earlier studies have reported the occurrence of clinical TSE in cynomolgus macaques after exposures to scrapie isolates. In the first study, the “Compton” scrapie isolate (derived from an English sheep) and serially propagated for 9 passages in goats did not transmit TSE in cynomolgus macaque, rhesus macaque or chimpanzee within 7 years following intracerebral challenge1; conversely, after 8 supplementary passages in conventional mice, this “Compton” isolate induced TSE in a cynomolgus macaque 5 years after intracerebral challenge, but rhesus macaques and chimpanzee remained asymptomatic 8.5 years post-exposure8. However, multiple successive passages that are classically used to select laboratory-adapted prion strains can significantly modify the initial properties of a scrapie isolate, thus questioning the relevance of zoonotic potential for the initial sheep-derived isolate. The same isolate had also induced disease into squirrel monkeys (new-world monkey)9. A second historical observation reported that a cynomolgus macaque developed TSE 6 years post-inoculation with brain homogenate from a scrapie-infected Suffolk ewe (derived from USA), whereas a rhesus macaque and a chimpanzee exposed to the same inoculum remained healthy 9 years post-exposure1. This inoculum also induced TSE in squirrel monkeys after 4 passages in mice. Other scrapie transmission attempts in macaque failed but had more shorter periods of observation in comparison to the current study. Further, it is possible that there are differences in the zoonotic potential of different scrapie strains.
The most striking observation in our study is the extended incubation period of scrapie in the macaque model, which has several implications. Firstly, our observations constitute experimental evidence in favor of the zoonotic potential of c-scrapie, at least for this isolate that has been extensively studied32,33,34,35,36. The cross-species zoonotic ability of this isolate should be confirmed by performing duplicate intracerebral exposures and assessing the transmissibility by the oral route (a successful transmission of prion strains through the intracerebral route may not necessarily indicate the potential for oral transmission37). However, such confirmatory experiments may require more than one decade, which is hardly compatible with current general management and support of scientific projects; thus this study should be rather considered as a case report.
Secondly, transmission of c-BSE to primates occurred within 8 years post exposure for the lowest doses able to transmit the disease (the survival period after inoculation is inversely proportional to the initial amount of infectious inoculum). The occurrence of scrapie 10 years after exposure to a high dose (25 mg) of scrapie-infected sheep brain suggests that the macaque has a higher species barrier for sheep c-scrapie than c-BSE, although it is notable that previous studies based on in vitro conversion of PrP suggested that BSE and scrapie prions would have a similar conversion potential for human PrP38.
Thirdly, prion diseases typically have longer incubation periods after oral exposure than after intracerebral inoculations: since humans can develop Kuru 47 years after oral exposure39, an incubation time of several decades after oral exposure to scrapie would therefore be expected, leading the disease to occur in older adults, i.e. the peak age for cases considered to be sporadic disease, and making a distinction between scrapie-associated and truly sporadic disease extremely difficult to appreciate.
Fourthly, epidemiologic evidence is necessary to confirm the zoonotic potential of an animal disease suggested by experimental studies. A relatively short incubation period and a peculiar epidemiological situation (e.g., all the first vCJD cases occurring in the country with the most important ongoing c-BSE epizootic) led to a high degree of suspicion that c-BSE was the cause of vCJD. Sporadic CJD are considered spontaneous diseases with an almost stable and constant worldwide prevalence (0.5–2 cases per million inhabitants per year), and previous epidemiological studies were unable to draw a link between sCJD and classical scrapie6,7,40,41, even though external causes were hypothesized to explain the occurrence of some sCJD clusters42,43,44. However, extended incubation periods exceeding several decades would impair the predictive values of epidemiological surveillance for prion diseases, already weakened by a limited prevalence of prion diseases and the multiplicity of isolates gathered under the phenotypes of “scrapie” and “sporadic CJD”.
Fifthly, considering this 10 year-long incubation period, together with both laboratory and epidemiological evidence of decade or longer intervals between infection and clinical onset of disease, no premature conclusions should be drawn from negative transmission studies in cynomolgus macaques with less than a decade of observation, as in the aforementioned historical transmission studies of scrapie to primates1,8,9. Our observations and those of others45,46 to date are unable to provide definitive evidence regarding the zoonotic potential of CWD, atypical/Nor98 scrapie or H-type BSE. The extended incubation period of the scrapie-affected macaque in the current study also underscores the limitations of rodent models expressing human PrP for assessing the zoonotic potential of some prion diseases since their lifespan remains limited to approximately two years21,47,48. This point is illustrated by the fact that the recently reported transmission of scrapie to humanized mice was not associated with clinical signs for up to 750 days and occurred in an extreme minority of mice with only a marginal increase in attack rate upon second passage13. The low attack rate in these studies is certainly linked to the limited lifespan of mice compared to the very long periods of observation necessary to demonstrate the development of scrapie. Alternatively, one could estimate that a successful second passage is the result of strain adaptation to the species barrier, thus poorly relevant of the real zoonotic potential of the original scrapie isolate of sheep origin49. The development of scrapie in this primate after an incubation period compatible with its lifespan complements the study conducted in transgenic (humanized) mice; taken together these studies suggest that some isolates of sheep scrapie can promote misfolding of the human prion protein and that scrapie can develop within the lifespan of some primate species.
In addition to previous studies on scrapie transmission to primate1,8,9 and the recently published study on transgenic humanized mice13, our results constitute new evidence for recommending that the potential risk of scrapie for human health should not be dismissed. Indeed, human PrP transgenic mice and primates are the most relevant models for investigating the human transmission barrier. To what extent such models are informative for measuring the zoonotic potential of an animal TSE under field exposure conditions is unknown. During the past decades, many protective measures have been successfully implemented to protect cattle from the spread of c-BSE, and some of these measures have been extended to sheep and goats to protect from scrapie according to the principle of precaution. Since cases of c-BSE have greatly reduced in number, those protective measures are currently being challenged and relaxed in the absence of other known zoonotic animal prion disease. We recommend that risk managers should be aware of the long term potential risk to human health of at least certain scrapie isolates, notably for lymphotropic strains like the classical scrapie strain used in the current study. Relatively high amounts of infectivity in peripheral lymphoid organs in animals infected with these strains could lead to contamination of food products produced for human consumption. Efforts should also be maintained to further assess the zoonotic potential of other animal prion strains in long-term studies, notably lymphotropic strains with high prevalence like CWD, which is spreading across North America, and atypical/Nor98 scrapie (Nor98)50 that was first detected in the past two decades and now represents approximately half of all reported cases of prion diseases in small ruminants worldwide, including territories previously considered as scrapie free... Even if the prevailing view is that sporadic CJD is due to the spontaneous formation of CJD prions, it remains possible that its apparent sporadic nature may, at least in part, result from our limited capacity to identify an environmental origin.
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2019
CattleTrace to Host First-Ever Industry Symposium
U.S.A. 50 STATE BSE MAD COW CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001
Subject: BSE--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:49:00 -0800
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
snip...
[host Richard Barns] and now a question from Terry S. Singeltary of CJD Watch.
[TSS] yes, thank you, U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?
[no answer, you could hear in the back ground, mumbling and 'we can't. have him ask the question again.]
[host Richard] could you repeat the question?
[TSS] U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?
[not sure whom ask this] what group are you with?
[TSS] CJD Watch, my Mom died from hvCJD and we are tracking CJD world-wide.
[not sure who is speaking] could you please disconnect Mr. Singeltary
[TSS] you are not going to answer my question?
[not sure whom speaking] NO
snip...see full archive and more of this;
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2019
Veterinary Biologics Guideline 3.32E: Guideline for minimising the risk of introducing transmissible spongiform encephalopathy prions and other infectious agents through veterinary biologics
Tuesday, September 10, 2019
FSIS [Docket No. FSIS–2019–0021] Notice of Request To Renew an Approved Information Collection: Specified Risk Materials Singeltary Submission
MONDAY, JUNE 24, 2019
APHIS, FSIS, USDA, FDA, Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy TSE, BSE, CWD, Scrapie, Camel TSE Prion Disease, CJD Humans
FRIDAY, JULY 26, 2019
Chronic Wasting Disease in Cervids: Implications for Prion Transmission to Humans and Other Animal Species
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2019
***> MAD DOGS AND ENGLISHMEN BSE, SCRAPIE, CWD, CJD, TSE PRION A REVIEW 2019
MONDAY, MAY 20, 2019
Tracking and clarifying differential traits of classical- and atypical L-type bovine spongiform encephalopathy prions after transmission from cattle to cynomolgus monkeys
SUNDAY, APRIL 14, 2019
Estimation of prion infectivity in tissues of cattle infected with atypical BSE by real time-quaking induced conversion assay
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2019
USDA Announces Atypical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Detection Aug 29, 2018 A Review of Science 2019
WEDNESDAY, JULY 31, 2019
The agent of transmissible mink encephalopathy passaged in sheep is similar to BSE-L
TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 2019
Joint Statement from President Donald J. Trump USA and President Jair Bolsonaro Brazil FOREIGN POLICY BSE TSE Prion aka mad cow disease
SATURDAY, JUNE 01, 2019
Brazil reports another cases of mad cow disease atypical BSE TSE Prion
PLEASE BE ADVISED THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT ANY ATYPICAL BSE TSE PRION IS OF A SPONTANEOUS OLD AGE DISEASE, NOT CAUSED BY FEED, THIS IS FALSE AND UNPROVEN, IN FACT, ATYPICAL BSE OF THE L AND H TYPE ARE TRANSMISSIBLE BY ORAL ROUTE. THIS STATEMENT THAT ATYPICAL BSE IS A SPONTANEOUS EVENT CAUSED BY OLD AGE, CAUSED BY NOTHING, IS ABSOLUTELY A LIE, AND THE GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL, AND OTHER GOVERNMENTS THAT PRODUCE SUCH STATEMENTS, KNOWS THIS IS AN UNPROVEN STATEMENT...TERRY SINGELTARY SR.
TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 2019 USDA ARS 2018 USAHA RESOLUTIONS TWO PRONGED APPROACH NEEDED FOR ADVANCING CATTLE TRACEABILITY
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 34 APPROVED
SOURCE: COMMITTEE ON CATTLE AND BISON
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2019
CattleTrace to Host First-Ever Industry Symposium
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2019
Australia Assessment of bulk wheat from Canada Part B: Animal biosecurity risk advice, CWD TSE Prion concerns are mounting
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2019
Europe's uneven laws threaten scavengers and Spread Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy TSE Prion
MONDAY, OCTOBER 07, 2019
Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) and Government Response Congressional Research Service May 17, 2019
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 02, 2019
Chronic Wasting Disease In Cervids: Prevalence, Impact And Management Strategies
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26, 2019
Subcommittee Hearing: Chronic Wasting Disease: The Threats to Wildlife, Public Lands, Hunting, and Health
video
CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE CONGRESS Serial No. 107-117 May 16, 2002
CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE
JOINT OVERSIGHT HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON FORESTS AND FOREST HEALTH JOINT WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISHERIES CONSERVATION, WILDLIFE AND OCEANS OF THE COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION
May 16, 2002
Serial No. 107-117
snip...
Mr. MCINNIS. Today, this joint Subcommittee hearing will explore an issue of immeasurable importance to the growing number of communities in wide-ranging parts of this country, the growing incidence of Chronic Wasting Disease in North America’s wild and captive deer and elk populations. In a matter of just a few months, this once parochial concern has grown into something much larger and much more insidious than anyone could have imagined or predicted.
As each day passes, this problem grows in its size, scope, and consequence. One thing becomes clear. Chronic Wasting Disease is not a Colorado problem. It is a Wisconsin problem or a Nebraska or Wyoming problem. It is a national problem and anything short of a fully integrated, systematic national assault on this simply will not do, which is precisely why we brought our group together here today.
snip...
So this is a disease that is spreading throughout the continent and it is going to require a national response as well as the efforts that are currently taking place in States like Wisconsin, Colorado, Nebraska, Wyoming, the interest they now have down in Texas and some of the neighboring States that have large white-tailed deer population and also elk.
This is a huge issue for us, Mr. Chairman, in the State of Wisconsin. I want to commend Governor McCallum and your staff and the various agencies for the rapid response that you have shown, given the early detection of CWD after the last deer hunting season. The problem that we have, though, is just a lack of information, good science in regards to what is the best response, how dangerous is this disease. We cannot close the door, quite frankly, with the paucity of scientific research that is out there right now in regards to how the disease spreads, the exposure of other livestock herds—given the importance of our dairy industry in the State, that is a big issue—and also the human health effects.
MONDAY, APRIL 11, 2016
DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY DUE TO A FOREIGN ANIMAL DISEASE TRANSMISSIBLE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY TSE PRION CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE CWD IN THE UNITED STATES AND NORTH AMERICA
TUESDAY, JULY 23, 2019
APHIS USDA Administrator Announces Several Senior Leadership Changes As Trump Prepares Apparently To Fire 100's of Scientists That Don't Agree With Him, what about mad cow type disease tse prion?
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2019
USDA Scientific Integrity Policy Departmental Regulation 1074-001 Breached
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2019
National Variability in Prion Disease–Related Safety Policies for Neurologic Procedures
Wednesday, September 11, 2019
Is the re-use of sterilized implant abutments safe enough? (Implant abutment safety) iatrogenic TSE Prion
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2018
CDC Eyes of CJD patients show evidence of prions concerns for iatrogenic transmission
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 06, 2019
Disinfection of Multi-Use Ocular Equipment for Ophthalmological Procedures: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness, and Guidelines
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 05, 2019
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) biannual update (August 2019) Health Protection Report Volume 13 Number 28 9 August 2019
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.
doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(03)00715-1 Copyright © 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Newsdesk
Tracking spongiform encephalopathies in North America
Xavier Bosch
Available online 29 July 2003.
Volume 3, Issue 8, August 2003, Page 463
“My name is Terry S Singeltary Sr, and I live in Bacliff, Texas. I lost my mom to hvCJD (Heidenhain variant CJD) and have been searching for answers ever since. What I have found is that we have not been told the truth. CWD in deer and elk is a small portion of a much bigger problem..” ...
January 28, 2003; 60 (2) VIEWS & REVIEWS
Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in the United States
Ermias D. Belay, Ryan A. Maddox, Pierluigi Gambetti, Lawrence B. Schonberger
First published January 28, 2003, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/01.WNL.0000036913.87823.D6
Abstract
Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) attracted increased attention in the mid-1980s because of the emergence among UK cattle of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), which has been shown to be transmitted to humans, causing a variant form of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). The BSE outbreak has been reported in 19 European countries, Israel, and Japan, and human cases have so far been identified in four European countries, and more recently in a Canadian resident and a US resident who each lived in Britain during the BSE outbreak. To monitor the occurrence of emerging forms of CJD, such as vCJD, in the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been conducting surveillance for human TSEs through several mechanisms, including the establishment of the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center. Physicians are encouraged to maintain a high index of suspicion for vCJD and use the free services of the pathology center to assess the neuropathology of clinically diagnosed and suspected cases of CJD or other TSEs.
Received May 7, 2002. Accepted August 28, 2002.
RE-Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in the United States
Terry S. Singeltary, retired (medically)
Published March 26, 2003
26 March 2003
Terry S. Singeltary, retired (medically) CJD WATCH
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?
Reply to Singletary Ryan A. Maddox, MPH Other Contributors: Published March 26, 2003
Mr. Singletary raises several issues related to current Creutzfeldt- Jakob disease (CJD) surveillance activities. Although CJD is not a notifiable disease in most states, its unique characteristics, particularly its invariably fatal outcome within usually a year of onset, make routine mortality surveillance a useful surrogate for ongoing CJD surveillance.[1] In addition, because CJD is least accurately diagnosed early in the course of illness, notifiable-disease surveillance could be less accurate than, if not duplicative of, current mortality surveillance.[1] However, in states where making CJD officially notifiable would meaningfully facilitate the collection of data to monitor for variant CJD (vCJD) or other emerging prion diseases, CDC encourages the designation of CJD as a notifiable disease.[1] Moreover, CDC encourages physicians to report any diagnosed or suspected CJD cases that may be of special public health importance (e.g...., vCJD, iatrogenic CJD, unusual CJD clusters).
As noted in our article, strong evidence is lacking for a causal link between chronic wasting disease (CWD) of deer and elk and human disease,[2] but only limited data seeking such evidence exist. Overall, the previously published case-control studies that have evaluated environmental sources of infection for sporadic CJD have not consistently identified strong evidence for a common risk factor.[3] However, the power of a case-control study to detect a rare cause of CJD is limited, particularly given the relatively small number of subjects generally involved and its long incubation period, which may last for decades. Because only a very small proportion of the US population has been exposed to CWD, a targeted surveillance and investigation of unusual cases or case clusters of prion diseases among persons at increased risk of exposure to CWD is a more efficient approach to detecting the possible transmission of CWD to humans. In collaboration with appropriate local and state health departments and the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center, CDC is facilitating or conducting such surveillance and case- investigations, including related laboratory studies to characterize CJD and CWD prions.
Mr. Singletary also expresses concern over a recent publication by Asante and colleagues indicating the possibility that some sporadic CJD cases may be attributable to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).[4] The authors reported that transgenic mice expressing human prion protein homozygous for methionine at codon 129, when inoculated with BSE prions, developed a molecular phenotype consistent with a subtype of sporadic CJD. Although the authors implied that BSE might cause a sporadic CJD-like illness among persons homozygous for methionine, the results of their research with mice do not necessarily directly apply to the transmission of BSE to humans. If BSE causes a sporadic CJD-like illness in humans, an increase in sporadic CJD cases would be expected to first occur in the United Kingdom, where the vast majority of vCJD cases have been reported. In the United Kingdom during 1997 through 2002, however, the overall average annual mortality rate for sporadic CJD was not elevated; it was about 1 case per million population per year. In addition, during this most recent 6-year period following the first published description of vCJD in 1996, there was no increasing trend in the reported annual number of UK sporadic CJD deaths.[3, 5] Furthermore, surveillance in the UK has shown no increase in the proportion of sporadic CJD cases that are homozygous for methionine (Will RG, National CJD Surveillance Unit, United Kingdom, 2003; personal communication)..
References
1. Gibbons RV, Holman RC, Belay ED, Schonberger LB. Diagnosis and reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. JAMA 2001;285:733-734.
2. Belay ED, Maddox RA, Gambetti P, Schonberger LB. Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in the United States. Neurology 2003;60:176-181.
3. Belay ED. Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies in humans. Annu Rev Microbiol 1999;53:283-314.
4. Asante EA, Linehan JM, Desbruslais M, et al. BSE prions propagate as either variant CJD-like or sporadic CJD-like prion strains in transgenic mice expressing human prion protein. EMBO J 2002;21:6358-6366.
5. The UK Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Surveillance Unit. CJD statistics. Available at: http://www.cjd.ed.ac.uk/figures.htm. Accessed February 18, 2003.
Competing Interests: None declared.
Volume 2: Science
4. The link between BSE and vCJD
Summary 4.29 The evidence discussed above that vCJD is caused by BSE seems overwhelming. Uncertainties exist about the cause of CJD in farmers, their wives and in several abattoir workers. It seems that farmers at least might be at higher risk than others in the general population. 1 Increased ascertainment (ie, increased identification of cases as a result of greater awareness of the condition) seems unlikely, as other groups exposed to risk, such as butchers and veterinarians, do not appear to have been affected. The CJD in farmers seems to be similar to other sporadic CJD in age of onset, in respect to glycosylation patterns, and in strain-typing in experimental mice. Some farmers are heterozygous for the methionine/valine variant at codon 129, and their lymphoreticular system (LRS) does not contain the high levels of PrPSc found in vCJD.
***>It remains a remote possibility that when older people contract CJD from BSE the resulting phenotype is like sporadic CJD and is distinct from the vCJD phenotype in younger people...end
BSE INQUIRY
SATURDAY, JUNE 23, 2018
CDC
***> Diagnosis of Methionine/Valine Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease by Protein Misfolding Cyclic Amplification
Volume 24, Number 7—July 2018 Dispatch
Diagnosis and Reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease
2 January 2000 British Medical Journal U.S.
Scientist should be concerned with a CJD epidemic in the U.S., as well
15 November 1999 British Medical Journal hvCJD in the USA * BSE in U.S.
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
No comments:
Post a Comment