Health knowledge made personal
Join this community!
› Share page:
Go
Search posts:

BSE FEED RECALL Misbranding of product by partial label removal to hide original source of materials 2009

Posted Nov 12 2009 10:00pm
RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY - CLASS III

___________________________________

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

Recalling Firm: Tri Ag Supply Inc., Harvard, IL, by telephone on September 11, 2009. Manufacturer: Hubbard Feeds Inc. dba Ridley Feed Ingredients, Mendota, IL. Firm initiated recall is complete.

REASON

Misbranding of product by partial label removal to hide original source of materials. Removal of partial label also removed weight and BSE statement and in some cases may remove a portion of the ingredient statement.

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

95 bags

DISTRIBUTION

IL, OH and WI

END

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Safety/Recalls/EnforcementReports/UCM190289.pdf



Greetings,

I am wondering how others might be trying to comply with the BSE feed ban in 2009, AND OR NOT COMPLYING ??



Sam Kane Beef Processors P.O. Box 9254 CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78469


October 5, 2009


Dear Customer
Sam Kane Beef Processors has reviewed its procedures and protocols and reassessed its Hazard Analysis to ensure compliance with USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service’s (FSIS) Final Rule published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2007 and effective October 1, 2007. The following documents and regulatory requirements have been reviewed prior to our reassessment
Prohibition of the use of Specified Risk Materials in Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Animals; January 12, 2004; [Docket No. 03-025IF]; Meat Produced by Advanced Meat/Bone Separation Machinery and Meat Recovery (AMR) Systems; January 12, 2004; [Docket No. 03-038IF]; Prohibition of the Use of certain Stunning Devices Used to Immobilize Cattle During Slaughter; January 12, 2004; [Docket No. 01-033IF]; Awareness Meeting Regarding New Regulation that Prohibit Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle and the use of Certain Materials from Cattle for Human Food; FSIS Notice 4-04, January 9, 2004; Interim Guidance for Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle and Age determination; FSIS Notice 5-04, January 12, 2004; Questions and Answers for FSIS Notice 4-04 regarding FSIS’s BSE Regulations; FSIS Notice 7-04, January 14, 2004; Verification Instructions For The Interim Final Rule Regarding Specified Risk Materials (SRMs) In Cattle; FSIS Notice 9-04, January 23, 2004; Questions and Answers, Regarding the Age Determination of Cattle and Sanitation; FSIS Notice 10-2004, January 29, 2004; Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE); Issues Relating to Tonsils and Brain Collection; FSIS Notice 50-04, October 7, 2004; Verification Instructions for the SRM Amendment to 9 CFR 310.22(a)(3) Regarding Beef Small Intestines; FSIS Notice 58-05, September 14, 2005; Verification Activities at Establishments that Transport or Receive Cattle Carcasses or Parts with Vertebral Columns that Contain Specified Risk Materials (SRMs); FSIS Notice 68-05, October 6, 2005; Re-Examination of Bovine that become Non-Ambulatory after Passing Ante-Mortem Inspection; FSIS Notice 5-06, January 18, 2006; Final Regulations for Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle and Specified Risk Materials (SRMs); FSIS Notice 56-07, August 31, 2007; Sample collection from cattle under the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) ongoing surveillance program; FSIS Notice 103-08, December 31, 2008

Based on the information provided above and a review of our hazard analysis, we did consider BSE as a potential hazard, but determined that it is not reasonably likely to occur. This determination is supported by the fact that there has been only two positive native BSE animals, both if which were born before the FDA/USDA Feed Ban was placed in effect in 1997. Therefore, based on this information, and the ongoing USDA BSE Surveillance testing, we concluded that BSE is not reasonably likely to occur.

As requested, we also addressed Specified Risk Materials (SRM’s) in the hazard analysis, and determined that since BSE is not likely to occur that the SRM control programs are best addressed as stand alone plant policies, not in the HACCP program. Sam Kane does not currently employee advanced meat recovery (AMR) in any of its processes.

1. We have implemented a policy to condemn and dispose of all non ambulatory disabled cattle. We understand that all non-ambulatory disabled live stock, including cattle, are now defined in 9CFR 309.2(b) as livestock that cannot rise from a recumbent position or that cannot walk, including, but not limited to, those with broken appendages, severed tendons or ligaments, nerve paralysis, fractured vertebral columns or metabolic conditions. These non-ambulatory disabled cattle will be handled humanely and disposed of properly.

2. We have implemented a policy to ensure that cattle selected by APHIS for BSE surveillance testing that are not non-ambulatory disabled will be held until the results of the test are received and are negative or it will be completely and properly disposed of to ensure that no products from the tested cattle enter the food system. We understand that a negative test result must be received before FSIS will “inspect and pass” the carcass.

3. We will not use a captive bolt stunner that injects compressed air into the cranium at the end of the penetration cycle to stun cattle.

4. The dentition guidelines provided in FSIS Notice 5-04 will be used to determine the age of the cattle, and those cattle identified as 30 months or older will be segregated and processed appropriately to ensure that the SRM’s are properly removed and disposed.

5. The tonsils, and spinal cord of all cattle, regardless of age, will be removed on the slaughter floor and properly disposed of as inedible.

6. For cattle 30 months of age and older, the head, brain, skull, eyes, and trigeminal ganglia will be removed on the slaughter floor and properly disposed of as inedible.

7. Will remove (bone-out) the vertebral column (excluding the vertebra of the tail, the transverse processes of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae, and the wings of the sacrum) and the dorsal root ganglia of cattle 30 months of age and older on the processing floor before reaching the main production line, and properly dispose of as inedible.

8. No bone in product is produced from animals 30 months of age and older; no carcasses or carcass parts are shipped from animals 30 months of age and older

9. We will follow the guidelines set forth in FSIS Notice 58-05 regarding the complete removal of the Distal Ileum.

Additionally, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned the use of “prohibited mammalian protein” in cattle rations (i.e., ruminant meat & bone meal) for ruminant animals (CFR 589. 2000). The FDA ban was implemented to prevent Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) into the U.S. cattle supply. All cattle suppliers to Sam Kane Beef Processors are required to provide us with documentation of their compliance to the FDA ruminant feeding ban for “prohibited mammalian protein” (ruminant meat & bone meal) before these cattle will be allowed to be presented for slaughter.

As more information becomes available or as FSIS provides further clarification we will evaluate our decisions to determine if changes are required in our program or our policies. Should you have any further questions please contact the Regulatory Compliance office.

________________________

Brian Honigbaum Regulatory Compliance

http://www.samkanebeef.com/Compliance/BSE%20Customer%20Letter.pdf



SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM FROM DOWNER CATTLE UPDATE


http://downercattle.blogspot.com/2009/05/who-will-watch-children.html



http://downercattle.blogspot.com/



2009 and we are still discussing this $$$

I remember something long ago i.e. the enfamous August 4, 1997 partial and voluntary mad cow feed ban. Then I also remember what happened in the UK ;


STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 25, AUGUST 1995

snip...

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

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

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

snip...

THE FUTURE

4..........

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

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

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

SEE full text ;




http://web.archive.org/web/20010305223122/www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1995/08/24002001.pdf




THIS is what happens when you have the industry run the government. I suggest folks start downloading these documents, for those still interested. SADLY, with the O.I.E. and it's failed policies on BSE/TSE, and or lack of any at all still with TSE and some species, what about SRM control ??

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On December 12, 2005, after nearly two years of banning the export of beef from the United States, Japan resumed beef trade with the United States. On January 20, 2006, Japan government officials discovered 3 boxes of veal with vertebral column shipped from the United States. Vertebral column is not allowed under the specific trade agreement with Japan. The United States acknowledges this was unacceptable because it did not meet the terms of our agreement with Japan, but emphasized that the product did not present a health risk to the public.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/pdf/japan_export_investigation_report.pdf



http://www.fsc.go.jp/iinkai/i-dai132/dai132kai-siryou4_3.pdf



What about other SRM rules?

In addition to the vertebral column, the current list of SRM includes the skull, brain, eyes and spinal cord as matter which must be removed and destroyed from animals over 12 months, while the tonsils, intestines and mesentery of bovine animals must be removed in animals of all ages.

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/05/353&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN



2004

SRMs - In cattle 30 months and older

Brain Skull Eyes Trigeminal ganglia Spinal cord Dorsal root ganglia (DRG) Vertebral column, excluding Vertebrae of the tail Transverse process of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae Wings of the sacrum GRAPHIC - Cattle vertebral column: Fourth lumbar vertebra of ox, caudal view GRAPHIC - Cattle vertebral column: Sacrum of ox, dorsal and ventral views

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PPT/BSE_SRM_alt/index.asp



2009

Specified Risk Materials (SRMs) (con’t)

For cattle 30 months or older: Brain, skull, eyes, trigeminal ganglia, spinal cord, dorsal root ganglia (DRG), and vertebral column (excluding vertebrae of the tail, the transverse processes of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae, and the wings of the sacrum) For all cattle: Tonsils and distal ileum of the small intestine

http://www.aapfco.org/AM09/MILLNERPathogensPrionsLandAppl'.ppt



• Animal fats/oils certified with maximum insoluble impurities of less than 0.15% in weight (bovine origin animal fats imported for animal consumption must also come from animals that passed FSIS inspection, and must not be derived from the head, distal ileum, spinal cord, or vertebral column of cattle of any age);

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/background/bse_trade_ban_status.shtml




The EU has also updated its definition of SRM, which now permits bovine vertebral column from animals under 30 months of age. However, exporters must source their bones from Agricultural Marketing Service approved suppliers and go through a re-approval process to be eligible for export. Russia has implemented new requirements that the U.S. government submit a list of all approved facilities with the expectation that Russia will then come and inspect every facility. According to Bowling-Heyward, Russia is not looking for compliance with export certificates, but is looking for compliance with Russian standards that U.S. facilities have not had to meet in the past.

http://rendermagazine.com/articles/2009_issues/2009_june/2009_06_renderers_go_to_college




Market

Age restrictions

Specified risk material (SRM) definition

Com

OIE standard

None

Brains, eyes, spinal cord, skull, and vertebral column of cattle over 30 months, plus tonsils and distal ileum of all cattle

No mechanically separated meat from the skull and vertebral column of cattle over 30 months of age

Japan

20 months or younger

Head, tonsils, spinal cord and dura matter, distal ileum, vertebral column and dorsal root ganglia

No head meat, processed beef, ground beef, finely textured beef, or mechanically separated meat

Korea Under 30 months Brain, eyes, skull, tonsils, spinal cord, vertebral column, and distal ileum No mechanically recovered meat or mechanically separated meat

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/background/bse_trade_ban_status.shtml




TABLE ES.3 Beef: OIE standard and BSE-related restrictions on imports from the United States in selected markets

Market

Age restrictions

Specified risk material (SRM) definition

Commodity restriction

OIE standard

None

Brains, eyes, spinal cord, skull, and vertebral column of cattle over 30 months, plus tonsils and distal ileum of all cattle

No mechanically separated meat from the skull and vertebral column of cattle over 30 months of age

Japan

20 months or younger

Head, tonsils, spinal cord and dura matter, distal ileum, vertebral column and dorsal root ganglia No head meat, processed beef, ground beef, finely textured beef, or mechanically separated meat

Korea

Under 30 months

Brain, eyes, skull, tonsils, spinal cord, vertebral column, and distal ileum No mechanically recovered meat or mechanically separated meat

http://www.thebeefsite.com/articles/1708/global-beef-trade-effects-of-measures-on-us-beef-exports




O.I.E.

THE OIE has now shown they are nothing more than a National Trading Brokerage for all strains of animal TSE.

AS i said before, OIE should hang up there jock strap now, since it appears they will buckle every time a country makes some political hay about trade protocol, commodities and futures. IF they are not going to be science based, they should do everyone a favor and dissolve there organization. ...


http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009/05/oie-upgrades-japans-bse-status-to.html




http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=09000064801f8152&disposition=attachment&contentType=msw8




IN A NUT SHELL ;

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

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

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




Opinion of the Scientific Panel on biological hazards (BIOHAZ) on the “Quantitative assessment of the Human BSE risk posed by Bovine Vertebral Column including Dorsal Root Ganglia with respect to residual BSE risk” Question number: EFSA-Q-2003-099

Adopted: 18 May 2006

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/Scientific_Opinion/biohaz_op_ej359_qra_vertebral_column_en1,0.pdf?ssbinary=true




Opinion of the Scientific Panel on biological hazards (BIOHAZ) on on the assessment of the likelihood of the infectivity in SRM derived from cattle at different age groups estimated by back calculation modelling Question number: EFSA-Q-2006-002

Adopted: 19 April 2007

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/Scientific_Opinion/biohaz_op_ej476_srm_en.pdf?ssbinary=true




Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Biological Hazards Adopted on 19 April 2007 Question N° EFSA-Q-2006-002 Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Biological Hazards on the assessment of the likelihood of the infectivity in SRM derived from cattle at different age groups estimated by back calculation modelling 1

4. Conclusions Pathogenesis experiments 1. The situation has not changed despite some new information with regard to tissues comprised of, or containing, lymphoid tissue designated as SRM. 2. The medulla oblongata remains optimal for the initial detection of PrPTSE in the CNS. 3. While now more complete data of experimental pathogenesis studies have become available, the panel considers the earlier opinion of 28 April 2005 still valid, which concluded that the likely detectable infectivity in the CNS appears at about ¾ of the incubation time. 4. The results of experimental pathogenesis studies must be interpreted with caution with respect to the field situation. With regard to dose, however, epidemiological data is consistent with a low field exposure scenario (equivalent or similar to 1g of fresh brain material from clinical BSE cases rather than 100g in these experimental studies). 5. The shortest incubation period in bovines experimentally infected by 1g is 45 months. 6. If PrPTSE/infectivity is conservatively modelled as present in CNS at 75% of the incubation period, as in the previous opinion, it can be predicted that the infectivity would be sub-detectable or still absent in CNS in cattle aged 33 months. 7. When interpreting the significance of the experimental data the following points require to be considered: o At least one BSE infected case has been detected in animals aged 33 months or younger in EU cohorts born after 2000. o Pathogenesis studies show significantly different timing of PrPTSE detection between dose groups, and wide confidence intervals for the time point at 50% detection (in particular in the high dose model). o Infectivity may be more widely distributed prior to the time of detection of PrPTSE by routine testing in the CNS (medulla oblongata) after the animal was exposed to a low (1g) rather than high (100g) dose. o The cattle experiments of oral exposure to the BSE agent, in common with oral exposure studies in laboratory animals do not provide such consistent incubation times as those obtained with experimental TSE models in rodents using passaged agents, after parenteral exposures. o The sensitivity of PrPTSE detection is still lower than certain bioassays: failure to detect PrPTSE does not guarantee absence of infectivity in a tissue. Opinion on the likelihood of the infectivity in SRM derived from cattle at different age groups estimated by back calculation modelling

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/cs/BlobServer/Scientific_Opinion/biohaz_op_ej476_srm_en.pdf?ssbinary=true




Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Biological Hazards on the assessment of the age limit in cattle for the removal of certain Specified Risk Materials (SRM). Question N° EFSA-Q-2004-146 Adopted on 28 April 2005


http://www.efsa.europa.eu/cs/BlobServer/Scientific_Opinion/biohaz_opinion_ej220_srmremove_en1,3.pdf?ssbinary=true




Opinion of the Scientific Panel on biological hazards (BIOHAZ) on on the assessment of the likelihood of the infectivity in SRM derived from cattle at different age groups estimated by back calculation modelling Question number: EFSA-Q-2006-002

Adopted: 19 April 2007

There are now completed pathogenesis data available from the experimental low-dose scenario that appears now more likely to resemble the field situation than an exposure in the field with a high dose of BSE infectivity. If PrPTSE/infectivity is modelled as present in CNS at 75% of the incubation period, as in the previous opinion, it can be predicted that the infectivity would be sub-detectable or still absent in CNS in cattle aged 33 months.However, when interpreting the significance of the experimental data some points require to be considered, including the field occurrence of at least one BSE infected case in animals younger than 33 months in EU cohorts born after 2000, and the problem that failure to detect PrPTSE does not guarantee absence of infectivity in a tissue.


http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/Scientific_Opinion/biohaz_op_ej476_srm_summary_en.pdf?ssbinary=true




http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/Scientific_Opinion/biohaz_op_ej476_srm_en.pdf?ssbinary=true




Commission Regulation (EC) No 1974/2005

of 2 December 2005

amending Annexes X and XI to Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards national reference laboratories and specified risk material

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies [1], and in particular the first paragraph of Article 23 thereof,

Whereas
(1) Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 sets out a list of designated national reference laboratories for Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies (TSEs).

(2) Certain Member States have notified to the Commission changes in the name or address of their national reference laboratories, therefore the list of those laboratories should be updated.

(3) Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 designates certain bovine tissues as specified risk materials and lays down the rules for its removal.

(4) Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 provides that export of specified risk material is prohibited but can be authorised only with view to their final destruction. Transitional measures set out in Annex XI to that Regulation provide that carcases, half-carcases or quarters containing no specified risk material other than vertebral column, may be dispatched to another Member State, where the vertebral column is to be removed in accordance with Community legislation. Such removal is not certain in case of exports to third countries. For food safety reasons, such an exception should not be allowed for exports of specified risk material to third countries.

(5) In its opinion of 9 December 1997 the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) suggested a list of specified risk materials (SRM) in bovine animals to be excluded from human and animal consumption on the basis of relative tissue infectivity, species and age. This opinion was revised and updated by SSC opinions on Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) risk on February 1998, on the human exposure risk via food with respect to BSE in December 1999, on the oral exposure of humans to the BSE agent in April 2000 and on TSE infectivity distribution in ruminant tissues in January 2002.

(6) The SSC considered extremely unlikely that the central nervous system was detectably infected below the age of 30 months even in cattle exposed to infection as calves. However, the exceptional detection of young animals with clinical signs of BSE supported a cautious approach and, therefore, the SSC recommended the removal of various SRM from cattle 12 months of age or older. That recommendation led to the management decision to set the age limit for the removal of certain SRM in bovine animals at 12 months.

(7) Different factors indicate a favourable trend in the BSE epidemic and a clear improvement of the situation in recent years due to the risk-reducing measures in place, in particular the total feed ban and the removal and destruction of SRM. Furthermore inspection reports indicate that implementation of BSE requirements in the Member States has improved. Taking into account the favourable evolution of the BSE epidemic and new data available from BSE pathogenesis studies, the European Commission submitted a new mandate to the European Food Safety Authority in October 2004 for an assessment of the age limit for the removal of SRM in bovines.

(8) The average age of BSE positive cases reported in the EU increased from 86 to 108 months between 2001 and 2004. Only four BSE cases under the age of 35 months of a total of 6520 BSE cases on a total of close to 41 million animals tested since 2001 have been reported.

(9) In its opinion of 28 April 2005 the EFSA concluded that on the basis of the current scientific knowledge likely detectable infectivity appears at about three quarters of the incubation period.

(10) Therefore a scientific basis exists to review the age limit for the removal of certain SRM in bovine animals, in particular as regards the vertebral column. In view of the development of the infectivity in the central nervous system during the incubation period, the age structure of positive BSE cases and the decrease in exposure of cattle born after 1 January 2001 the age limit for removing vertebral column, including dorsal root ganglia of bovine animals as specified risk material can be increased to 24 months. This age limit can be reviewed in the light of the evaluation of the BSE epidemic.

(11) Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(12) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee of the Food Chain and Animal Health,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION
Article 1

Annexes X and XI to Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 are amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from 1 January 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 2 December 2005.

For the Commission

Markos Kyprianou

Member of the Commission

[1] OJ L 147, 31.5.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1292/2005 (OJ L 205, 6.8.2005, p. 3).

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

ANNEX

Annexes X and XI to Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 are amended as follows
1. In Annex X, Chapter A, point 3 is replaced by the following
"3. The national reference laboratories are
Austria: Österreichische Agentur für Gesundheit und Ernährungssicherheit GmbH, Institut für veterinärmedizinische Untersuchungen Mödling Robert Koch Gasse 17 A-2340 Mödling

Belgium: CERVA -CODA-VAR Centre d'Étude et de Recherches Vétérinaires et Agrochimiques Centrum voor Onderzoek in Diergeneeskunde en Agrochemie Veterinary and Agrochemical Research Centre Groeselenberg 99 B-1180 Bruxelles

Cyprus: State Veterinary Laboratories Veterinary Services CY-1417 Athalassa Nicosia

Czech Republic: Státní veterinární ústav Jihlava Rantírovská 93 586 05 Jihlava

Denmark: Danmarks Fødevareforskning Bülowsvej 27 DK-1790 København V

Estonia: Veterinaar- ja Toidulaboratoorium Kreutzwaldi 30 Tartu 51006

Finland: Eläinlääkintä- ja elintarvikelaitos Hämeentie 57 FIN-00550 Helsinki

France: Agence française de sécurité sanitaire des aliments Laboratoire de pathologie bovine 31, avenue Tony Garnier 69 364 LYON CEDEX 07

Germany: Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Bundesforschungsinstitut für Tiergesundheit Anstaltsteil Insel Riems Boddenblick 5A D-17498 Insel Riems

Greece: Ministry of Agriculture — Veterinary Laboratory of Larisa 7th km of Larisa — Trikala Highway GR-411 10 Larisa

Hungary: Országos Állategészségügyi Intézet (OÁI) Pf. 2. Tábornok u. 2. H-1581 Budapest

Ireland: Central Veterinary Research Laboratory Young's Cross Celbridge Co. Kildare

Italy: Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale del Piemonte, Liguria e Valle d’Aosta — CEA Via Bologna, 148 I-10154 Torino

Latvia: State Veterinary Medicine Diagnostic Centre Lejupes Str. 3 Riga LV 1076

Lithuania: Nacionaline veterinarijos laboratorija J. Kairiukšcio g. 10 LT-08409 Vilnius

Luxembourg: CERVA -CODA-VAR Centre d'Étude et de Recherches Vétérinaires et Agrochimiques Centrum voor Onderzoek in Diergeneeskunde en Agrochemie Veterinary and Agrochemical Research Centre Groeselenberg 99 B-1180 Bruxelles

Malta: National Veterinary Laboratory Albert Town Marsa

Netherlands: Centraal Instituut voor Dierziektecontrole-Lelystad Houtribweg 3g 8221 RA Lelystad Postbus 2004 8203 AA Lelystad

Poland: Panstwowy Instytut Weterynaryjny (PIWet) 24-100 Pulawy al. Partyzantów 57

Portugal: Laboratório Nacional de Investigação Veterinária Estrada de Benfica 701 P-1500 Lisboa

Slovakia: State Veterinary Institute Zvolen Pod dráhami 918 SK-960 86, Zvolen

Slovenia: National Veterinary Institute Gerbiceva 60 1000 Ljubljana

Spain: Laboratorio Central de Veterinaria (Algete) Ctra. de Algete km. 8 28110 Algete (Madrid)

Sweden: National Veterinary Institute S-751 89 Uppsala

United Kingdom: Veterinary Laboratories Agency Woodham Lane New Haw Addlestone Surrey KT15 3NB"

2. Annex XI, Part A is amended as follows
(a) point 1(a)(i) is replaced by the following
"(i) the skull excluding the mandible and including the brain and eyes, and the spinal cord of bovine animals aged over 12 months, the vertebral column excluding the vertebrae of the tail, the spinous and transverse processes of the cervical, thoracic and lumbar vertebrae and the median sacral crest and wings of the sacrum, but including the dorsal root ganglia of bovine animals aged over 24 months, and the tonsils, the intestines from the duodenum to the rectum and the mesentery of bovine animals of all ages;"

(b) point 13 is replaced by the following
"13. Member States may decide to allow dispatch of heads or of un-split carcases containing specified risk material to another Member State, only after that other Member State has agreed to receive the material and has approved the specific dispatching conditions applicable to such transport.

However, carcases, half carcases or half carcases cut into no more than three wholesale cuts, and quarters containing no specified risk material other than the vertebral column, including dorsal root ganglia, may be imported from a third country into a Member State, or may be dispatched to another Member State without the latter's prior agreement.

Exports outside the Community of heads and of fresh meat of bovine, ovine or caprine animals containing specified risk materials shall be prohibited."

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

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:317:0004:01:EN:HTML





Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Surveillance On the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and rabies in Taiwan


http://usdavskorea.blogspot.com/2009/11/surveillance-on-bovine-spongiform.html





Tuesday, November 3, 2009

re-FOIA REQUEST ON FEED RECALL PRODUCT contaminated with prohibited material Recall # V-258-2009 and Recall # V-256-2009

Neither of these documents contained the cautionary statement, "DO NOT FEED TO CATTLE OR OTHER RUMINANTS"

Bulk ground corn used as feed for ruminant animals may have been contaminated with prohibited material. Firm received barley from Mars Pet Care, Clinton, OK that had inadvertently been cross contaminated with dog food containing prohibited material. A shipment of the contaminated barley............snip...end

I will try and post a bit more thorough report, and get this scanned asap. maybe FDA will post beforehand.

BUT, I must say, from what I have read so far, this FOIA request documents, and history of these two investigations by FDA et al, seem to be a great step forward. as far as the initial FDA report of these two violations on the FDA site, they could be more informative, and simply state if they are BSE related, and the reasons why. It would have saved them a lot of work, and me a great big headache...............

Kind Regards, Terry


http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/11/re-foia-request-on-feed-recall-product.html




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

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/09/foia-request-on-feed-recall-product.html




Saturday, August 29, 2009

FOIA REQUEST FEED RECALL 2009 Product may have contained prohibited materials Bulk Whole Barley, Recall # V-256-2009


http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2009/08/foia-request-feed-recall-2009-product.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




PAST HISTORY OF ENFAMOUS AUGUST 4, 1997 PARTIAL AND VOLUNTARY MAD COW FEED BAN IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

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

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

RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINES -- CLASS II

___________________________________

PRODUCT

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

CODE

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

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

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

Firm initiated recall is ongoing.

REASON

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

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

42,090 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

WI

___________________________________

PRODUCT

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

CODE

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

RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER

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

REASON

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

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE

9,997,976 lbs.

DISTRIBUTION

ID and NV

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR MARCH 21, 2007


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



NEW URL


http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/EnforcementReports/2007/ucm120446.htm




Thursday, March 19, 2009

MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF POUNDS OF MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE USA WITH ONGOING 12 YEARS OF DENIAL


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




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




Project Number: 3625-32000-086-05 Project Type: Specific Cooperative Agreement

Start Date: Sep 15, 2004 End Date: Sep 14, 2009

Objective: The objective of this cooperative research project with Dr. Maria Caramelli from the Italian BSE Reference Laboratory in Turin, Italy, is to conduct comparative studies with the U.S. bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) isolate and the atypical BSE isolates identified in Italy. The studies will cover the following areas: 1. Evaluation of present diagnostics tools used in the U.S. for the detection of atypical BSE cases. 2. Molecular comparison of the U.S. BSE isolate and other typical BSE isolates with atypical BSE cases. 3. Studies on transmissibility and tissue distribution of atypical BSE isolates in cattle and other species.

Approach: This project will be done as a Specific Cooperative Agreement with the Italian BSE Reference Laboratory, Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale del Piemonte, in Turin, Italy. It is essential for the U.S. BSE surveillance program to analyze the effectiveness of the U.S diagnostic tools for detection of atypical cases of BSE. Molecular comparisons of the U.S. BSE isolate with atypical BSE isolates will provide further characterization of the U.S. BSE isolate. Transmission studies are already underway using brain homogenates from atypical BSE cases into mice, cattle and sheep. It will be critical to see whether the atypical BSE isolates behave similarly to typical BSE isolates in terms of transmissibility and disease pathogenesis. If transmission occurs, tissue distribution comparisons will be made between cattle infected with the atypical BSE isolate and the U.S. BSE isolate. Differences in tissue distribution could require new regulations regarding specific risk material (SRM) removal.


http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?accn_no=408490




Sunday, April 12, 2009

TRANSMISSION OF ATYPICAL BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY (BSE) IN HUMANIZED MOUSE MODELS


http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2009/04/transmission-of-atypical-bovine.html




TSS
Post a comment
Write a comment: