We need much more Mad Cow testing

[grey]

Although the USDA now excludes "downer" cattle from human
consumption in the US, it doesn't have significant plans to increase
testing for Mad Cow disease (BSE).

That's bad news--current testing, done on a random basis, is
very spotty and incomplete. If one infected cow is out there, there
are almost certainly others, especially because no one knows how that
cow got infected in the first place. I'd like to suggest that everyone
write USDA Secretary Ann Veneman (email: ***@usda.gov), as
well as the departments responsible for food safety
(***@usda.gov and ***@usda.gov) to request
greatly increased testing. Increased testing in France some years ago
doubled and then tripled the number of infected cows caught.

Only 20,000 cows are tested in the US each year, or less than
*one fiftieth of one percent* of the 120,000,000 cattle in the
country. With that kind of testing, what do you think the odds are
that all BSE has been caught? And if it's not caught, people are
certainly eating infected meat.

BSE is not a disease to fool around with--some 220,000 cattle
were infected in Britain before adequate testing caught up with the
problem, and many millions of cows had to be slaughtered. And the
incubation period in humans is 15 years, meaning that thousands may
have the disease and not know it.

By not significantly increasing BSE testing, by using a net
with huge holes, the US government is putting its citizens at serious
risk. Instead of waiting until large numbers of cattle--and
people--suddenly turn up infected, the USDA should do far more testing
than it does today. Japan now tests every cow, for example.

Please send email to the above addresses, asking for greatly
increased testing in cattle. If that testing reveals there's no
problem, it can certainly be scaled back, so the cost would be
minimal. But if there is a problem, we have to know about it.
It makes no sense to face BSE this blindly.

[wischef]

Post by grey
Although the USDA now excludes "downer" cattle from human
consumption in the US, it doesn't have significant plans to increase
testing for Mad Cow disease (BSE).
That's bad news--current testing, done on a random basis, is
very spotty and incomplete. If one infected cow is out there, there
are almost certainly others, especially because no one knows how that
cow got infected in the first place. I'd like to suggest that everyone
well as the departments responsible for food safety
greatly increased testing. Increased testing in France some years ago
doubled and then tripled the number of infected cows caught.
Only 20,000 cows are tested in the US each year, or less than
*one fiftieth of one percent* of the 120,000,000 cattle in the
country. With that kind of testing, what do you think the odds are
that all BSE has been caught? And if it's not caught, people are
certainly eating infected meat.
BSE is not a disease to fool around with--some 220,000 cattle
were infected in Britain before adequate testing caught up with the
problem, and many millions of cows had to be slaughtered. And the
incubation period in humans is 15 years, meaning that thousands may
have the disease and not know it.
By not significantly increasing BSE testing, by using a net
with huge holes, the US government is putting its citizens at serious
risk. Instead of waiting until large numbers of cattle--and
people--suddenly turn up infected, the USDA should do far more testing
than it does today. Japan now tests every cow, for example.
Please send email to the above addresses, asking for greatly
increased testing in cattle. If that testing reveals there's no
problem, it can certainly be scaled back, so the cost would be
minimal. But if there is a problem, we have to know about it.
It makes no sense to face BSE this blindly.

The problem is how we feed cattle. Change that and testing becomes
almost a non-issue. Also, educating ourselves about how this can be
transmitted to humans can prevent a panic. It can only be transmitted
through nerve tissue. Stay away from bone-in cuts which come from near
the spinal cord (ex. a bone-in prime rib is safe; the bones included in
that cut are ribs which do not contain nerve tissue. A bone-in NY Strip,
T-Bone, Porterhouse or a bone-in tenderloin all could possibly contain
nerve tissue) and you can keep yourself safer.

Saying that because there is one infected cow out there means there are
almost certainly others is faulty logic. As it has now been found that
the cow in question came from Canada, we should look to what we are
importing first and keep the level of testing as is. It's easy to say
that the cost of testing is minimal when you aren't paying it. Suffice
it to say that if the level of testing does increase, consumers will
definitely be paying it. Besides, what's to say that because we tested
more and found one that another didn't get through into the food supply?
Educate people and change the ways that animals are fed. Creating a
panic without presenting all the facts doesn't help anybody.

Last bit of advice: buy organic. The main way that mad cow is
transmitted amongst cattle is when they are fed parts of an infected
cow. Organic farmers will not engage in this particularly nasty little
practice.

[Jerry Avins]

Post by wischef

Post by grey
Although the USDA now excludes "downer" cattle from human
consumption in the US, it doesn't have significant plans to increase
testing for Mad Cow disease (BSE).
That's bad news--current testing, done on a random basis, is
very spotty and incomplete. If one infected cow is out there, there
are almost certainly others, especially because no one knows how that
cow got infected in the first place. I'd like to suggest that everyone
well as the departments responsible for food safety
greatly increased testing. Increased testing in France some years ago
doubled and then tripled the number of infected cows caught.
Only 20,000 cows are tested in the US each year, or less than
*one fiftieth of one percent* of the 120,000,000 cattle in the
country. With that kind of testing, what do you think the odds are
that all BSE has been caught? And if it's not caught, people are
certainly eating infected meat.
BSE is not a disease to fool around with--some 220,000 cattle
were infected in Britain before adequate testing caught up with the
problem, and many millions of cows had to be slaughtered. And the
incubation period in humans is 15 years, meaning that thousands may
have the disease and not know it.
By not significantly increasing BSE testing, by using a net
with huge holes, the US government is putting its citizens at serious
risk. Instead of waiting until large numbers of cattle--and
people--suddenly turn up infected, the USDA should do far more testing
than it does today. Japan now tests every cow, for example.
Please send email to the above addresses, asking for greatly
increased testing in cattle. If that testing reveals there's no
problem, it can certainly be scaled back, so the cost would be
minimal. But if there is a problem, we have to know about it.
It makes no sense to face BSE this blindly.

The problem is how we feed cattle. Change that and testing becomes
almost a non-issue. Also, educating ourselves about how this can be
transmitted to humans can prevent a panic. It can only be transmitted
through nerve tissue. Stay away from bone-in cuts which come from near
the spinal cord (ex. a bone-in prime rib is safe; the bones included in
that cut are ribs which do not contain nerve tissue. A bone-in NY Strip,
T-Bone, Porterhouse or a bone-in tenderloin all could possibly contain
nerve tissue) and you can keep yourself safer.

I remain unconvinced. Cattle become infected via feed, which goes into
the gut. For the prions to get from there to the central nervous system,
they exist in other tissues as well. A plausible explanation for what is
observed is that prions suffuse most of the tissues but multiply only in
the central nervous system, and so are found only there in easily
observable numbers. I hope someone can say that's not so, and say why.
No arm waving, slogans, or mantras, please.

Post by wischef
Saying that because there is one infected cow out there means there are
almost certainly others is faulty logic. As it has now been found that
the cow in question came from Canada, we should look to what we are
importing first and keep the level of testing as is. It's easy to say
that the cost of testing is minimal when you aren't paying it. Suffice
it to say that if the level of testing does increase, consumers will
definitely be paying it. Besides, what's to say that because we tested
more and found one that another didn't get through into the food supply?
Educate people and change the ways that animals are fed. Creating a
panic without presenting all the facts doesn't help anybody.

I think it's your logic that's faulty. Even if only cows from Canada are
infected, there are many of those here. This cow had been here over five
years. How many others came before or since? Moreover, feed laws in the
US and Canada have been essentially the same over that period. Although
the feeding of any cattle parts to cattle has just been banned (within
the past few weeks), downers and other ill animals may still be used for
pet food. Dogs and cats are rendered for cattle feed, so the cycle has
been lengthened, but not broken.

Post by wischef
Last bit of advice: buy organic. The main way that mad cow is
transmitted amongst cattle is when they are fed parts of an infected
cow. Organic farmers will not engage in this particularly nasty little
practice.

Good advice! All I really know is that the animal gets organic food
(technically, other cows are organic, but so are gasoline and
antibiotics) without antibiotics, and they don't get hormone injections.
Is there any guarantee that they've been raised that way from birth?

Prion diseases arise as spontaneous mutations in many species. In
humans, it is Kreutzfeld-Jakob disease. In sheep it is scrapie. It was
unknown in cattle until they were fed diseased sheep, a practice most
common in Argentina and England. It is known in laboratory rats. One
experiment I was told of third hand, rats inoculated with the BSE prion
showed bovine symptoms, but their offspring who "inherited" it showed
symptoms typical of the rodent mutation. Interesting, but scary if true:
what is the mechanism of inheritance?!

Here's an interesting bit quoted in
http://radio.weblogs.com/0107233/2004/01/01.html
I don't have the original news source: <quote> January 2003:

Cattle banned from market after exposure to pet food ...you don't
want to eat pet food either... UK In an effort to prevent the spread of
mad cow disease, two UK farmers who exposed their cattle to pet food are
forbidden to bring those cattle to market. 'Although pet food containing
processed animal proteins is permitted on farms - for domestic pet use
- [UK] regulations state that it must be securely packaged and stored to
prevent cattle and other livestock from gaining access to it...' [UK Pet
Industry News] (It isn't clear whether the cattle even ate the pet
food... but this regulation is alarming. What does it mean for pet
owners who buy pet food ... are Fluffy and Fido exposed to mad cow
disease from their pet food? What pet food is safe? ... </quote>

Actually feeding dog food to cows is OK here, but in Europe, even
letting them smell it is a no-no. Even safer than organic beef: import
from Europe.

A USDA official said for the record that, although they posed no health
risk, a few cattle herds would need to be destroyed "to maintain
consumer confidence". Yet our pet food continues to be part of a mad-cow
infection cycle. Apparently, it is so much cheaper to destroy a few
herds for show than it is to take real steps to break the cycle that the
cattle industry finds it worth trying to bury the problem in hoopla.

Jerry

[wischef]

Post by Jerry Avins

Post by wischef

Post by grey
Although the USDA now excludes "downer" cattle from human
consumption in the US, it doesn't have significant plans to increase
testing for Mad Cow disease (BSE).
That's bad news--current testing, done on a random basis, is
very spotty and incomplete. If one infected cow is out there, there
are almost certainly others, especially because no one knows how that
cow got infected in the first place. I'd like to suggest that
request greatly increased testing. Increased testing in France some
years ago doubled and then tripled the number of infected cows
caught.
Only 20,000 cows are tested in the US each year, or less than
*one fiftieth of one percent* of the 120,000,000 cattle in the
country. With that kind of testing, what do you think the odds are
that all BSE has been caught? And if it's not caught, people are
certainly eating infected meat.
BSE is not a disease to fool around with--some 220,000 cattle
were infected in Britain before adequate testing caught up with the
problem, and many millions of cows had to be slaughtered. And the
incubation period in humans is 15 years, meaning that thousands may
have the disease and not know it.
By not significantly increasing BSE testing, by using a net
with huge holes, the US government is putting its citizens at serious
risk. Instead of waiting until large numbers of cattle--and
people--suddenly turn up infected, the USDA should do far more
testing than it does today. Japan now tests every cow, for example.
Please send email to the above addresses, asking for greatly
increased testing in cattle. If that testing reveals there's no
problem, it can certainly be scaled back, so the cost would be
minimal. But if there is a problem, we have to know about it.
It makes no sense to face BSE this blindly.

The problem is how we feed cattle. Change that and testing becomes
almost a non-issue. Also, educating ourselves about how this can be
transmitted to humans can prevent a panic. It can only be transmitted
through nerve tissue. Stay away from bone-in cuts which come from
near the spinal cord (ex. a bone-in prime rib is safe; the bones
included in that cut are ribs which do not contain nerve tissue. A
bone-in NY Strip, T-Bone, Porterhouse or a bone-in tenderloin all
could possibly contain nerve tissue) and you can keep yourself safer.

I remain unconvinced. Cattle become infected via feed, which goes into
the gut. For the prions to get from there to the central nervous
system, they exist in other tissues as well. A plausible explanation
for what is observed is that prions suffuse most of the tissues but
multiply only in the central nervous system, and so are found only
there in easily observable numbers. I hope someone can say that's not
so, and say why. No arm waving, slogans, or mantras, please.

Post by wischef
Saying that because there is one infected cow out there means there
are almost certainly others is faulty logic. As it has now been found
that the cow in question came from Canada, we should look to what we
are importing first and keep the level of testing as is. It's easy to
say that the cost of testing is minimal when you aren't paying it.
Suffice it to say that if the level of testing does increase,
consumers will definitely be paying it. Besides, what's to say that
because we tested more and found one that another didn't get through
into the food supply? Educate people and change the ways that animals
are fed. Creating a panic without presenting all the facts doesn't
help anybody.

I think it's your logic that's faulty. Even if only cows from Canada
are infected, there are many of those here. This cow had been here
over five years. How many others came before or since? Moreover, feed
laws in the US and Canada have been essentially the same over that
period. Although the feeding of any cattle parts to cattle has just
been banned (within the past few weeks), downers and other ill animals
may still be used for pet food. Dogs and cats are rendered for cattle
feed, so the cycle has been lengthened, but not broken.

Post by wischef
Last bit of advice: buy organic. The main way that mad cow is
transmitted amongst cattle is when they are fed parts of an infected
cow. Organic farmers will not engage in this particularly nasty
little practice.

Good advice! All I really know is that the animal gets organic food
(technically, other cows are organic, but so are gasoline and
antibiotics) without antibiotics, and they don't get hormone
injections. Is there any guarantee that they've been raised that way
from birth?
Prion diseases arise as spontaneous mutations in many species. In
humans, it is Kreutzfeld-Jakob disease. In sheep it is scrapie. It was
unknown in cattle until they were fed diseased sheep, a practice most
common in Argentina and England. It is known in laboratory rats. One
experiment I was told of third hand, rats inoculated with the BSE
prion showed bovine symptoms, but their offspring who "inherited" it
showed symptoms typical of the rodent mutation. Interesting, but scary
if true: what is the mechanism of inheritance?!
Here's an interesting bit quoted in
http://radio.weblogs.com/0107233/2004/01/01.html
Cattle banned from market after exposure to pet food ...you don't
want to eat pet food either... UK In an effort to prevent the spread
of mad cow disease, two UK farmers who exposed their cattle to pet
food are forbidden to bring those cattle to market. 'Although pet food
containing processed animal proteins is permitted on farms - for
domestic pet use - [UK] regulations state that it must be securely
packaged and stored to prevent cattle and other livestock from gaining
access to it...' [UK Pet Industry News] (It isn't clear whether the
cattle even ate the pet food... but this regulation is alarming. What
does it mean for pet owners who buy pet food ... are Fluffy and Fido
exposed to mad cow disease from their pet food? What pet food is safe?
... </quote>
Actually feeding dog food to cows is OK here, but in Europe, even
letting them smell it is a no-no. Even safer than organic beef: import
from Europe.
A USDA official said for the record that, although they posed no
health risk, a few cattle herds would need to be destroyed "to
maintain consumer confidence". Yet our pet food continues to be part
of a mad-cow infection cycle. Apparently, it is so much cheaper to
destroy a few herds for show than it is to take real steps to break
the cycle that the cattle industry finds it worth trying to bury the
problem in hoopla.
Jerry

Thanks for expounding on areas where I was semi-informed or mis-
informed. I think one thing that can be agreed upon here is that more
testing is not the be-all, end-all. My main point is that we should be
more pro-active and eliminate the source of infection.

Regarding organic beef, I have a cousin that raises beef cattle
organically. For him, that means feeding the cows grain and grass only;
no animal by-products. That may or may not be what the law states for
certified organic, though. Also, you raise a good point regarding
whether cattle raised in this manner have been raised as such from
birth.