What the ridiculous thing Ron is that it doesn't even matter if you eat a downed cow as long as you don't eat the nervous system tissue.
It's also ridiculous because ranchers like ourselves NEVER EVER in a million years would use the kind of crap they feed to cattle in Canada and in some of the feedlots in the US. And most of the lots don't feed it. Canada does not have our vast year round pastures, cheap corn, and massive hay production. They need something cheaper to feed to their cattle, just like the UK where this all started. Mind you there has NEVER been a confirmed case of Mad Cow disease from a US born animal. Now our wonderful USDA seems to think we need to make it our problem. US beef IS the safest beef in the world. Smaller producers like Mark and medium producers like ourselves fatten our cattle and grow our calves on good old USA pastures, hay, and corn. We don't use animal byproducts, never have. But yet we are going to be punished for the sins of others. That's why we've had it. You bust your tail your whole lives to build something up and some idiots looking for quick profits and a messed up USDA and other govt. screwups want to punish the small time guys for it. Well it's the small time herds that make up the cattle industry. It's just enough to make you mad.
Doc, given your medical background, I'm wondering if you could clear up a point for me regarding RonNY's query. Given our CURRENT understanding of the pathology of BSE and the incubation period, would the older animal also not be considered safe? I'd also be interested in your views on the prion vs. unconventional virus and a virino debate.
I'm not going to dispute the fact that feed mills here seem to be having a problem keeping animal byproducts out of feed. I'm sure that in light of the USDA report I cited in a previous post, you won't argue that the US seems to be having the same problem. As Egon pointed out, not feeding any animals to animals would go a long way to sorting this issue out. And I think this needs to be an all encompassing ban. It doesn't matter how careful the mills are, if some yahoo decides to give his cows some hog feed that is legally allowed to contain animal byproducts, we're back to square one.
I'm disappointed at your perception of our feeding and farming practices up here, Doc, but I know how fear and worry can change the way we see things. Contrary to what you might think, we don't live in a land of perpetual ice and snow, feeding our animals lichen, moss and other "crap." I'm sure you're aware of the fact that there's a marked difference in production of beef and dairy animals, and it's usually the dairy side (in both the US and Canada) that relies on the high protien feed "supplements" that appear to be causing us all so much grief. As you know, Canada and the US both instituted the feed ban in 1997. Until then, according to USDA numbers, 14 percent of all cattle slaughtered in the US were ground up and fed back to other animals. I'd also point out that we haven't had to deal with a BSE positive animal that was born after that date.
We farm 6 quarters and generally rent another. We run 80 to 90 stockers and background about 200 calves over the winter. We like to calve in February/March and our cows are on pasture from late April 'til early October. We produce all our own feed. We feed a combination of hay and rye/oat/triticale silage to the cows over the winter and the calves in the feedlot get the same silage with barley. We look for an average of 3 ppd gain. No, we don't have cheap corn, but government subsidy is something for a different thread. I might add, Doc, that when the (American) buyers come for our animals they certainly don't have any complaints about the quality we offer.
Just for the record here, I'm not in favor of opening the border either, Doc. I think one of the fundamental issues we're dealing with economically is the push by the packing industry to create a vertical structure to the industry. Their efforts to make a profit don't always fit well with the cattleman's effort to make a profit. In simpler terms for the folks that aren't in our business, Doc, the American packing industry got used to using Canadian feedlots to hold cattle so they could avoid price variances in the US. And please understand, when I say I think the border should be closed, I mean both ways.
I honestly think Canada has treated the U.S. beef industry fairly:
When the U.S. found BSE in Washington State, Canada did not close its borders to U.S. boneless beef products or animals for slaughter. Canada took this decision before the birthplace of the Washington State cow was known.
Canada has delivered on a long-standing U.S. cattle industry objective to gain year round access for U.S. feeder cattle into Canadian feedlots.
Canada has allowed all U.S. beef products to transit its territory enroute to Alaska. Canada has not withdrawn this privilege in the face of USDA's decision to halt transshipment of some Canadian products to Mexico.
After USDA's unexpected April 19 memo, Canada completed what is normally a 60 day regulatory process in 48 hours to reciprocate.
After the U.S. withdrew its April 19 memo, Canada did not roll back its access for U.S. products.
Canada has supported U.S. efforts to open the Mexican market to U.S. products.
My belief that the border should be closed both ways is based on the fact that we're finally getting our own packing and marketing industries developed and it's time for us to pursue new markets. I'm confident that the world is going to recognize Canadian beef as a safe, desireable product and I think the discovery of a homegrown US BSE case is just a matter of time.
After saying that, Doc, I still think we need to work together to get this BSE issue sorted out. It's no longer a Canadian problem or an American problem, it's a North American problem. When the UK was having trouble we both just skipped along like we weren't part of the world. If we've learned one thing from their experience it should be that PR isn't the answer to the problem. We need, as two countries whether we trade or not, to agree on stringent controls to assure consumers that our product is safe.
I'll also point out that the worms are out of the can, Doc. You've had an identified case of BSE. (More to come, if you all have the belly to find them - we do.) I'm sorry the animal came from my country. And while I realize that under WHO the US can claim to be BSE free becuase it wasn't a home grown animal, the US beef supply is not the safest in the world. That distinction now, regretably, goes to Australia and New Zealand. They have not identified either an imported or homegrown case of the disease.
Sad thing, isn't it? Farmers kicking other farmers. But I guess that's what it's come to.
I really do wish you guys luck, Doc. We're all going to need it.
Given the current background you could eat the meat of a 10 year old cow who had BSE and not contract it. As far as the debate goes the predominance of the evidence favors the prion theory. It's just like AIDS. We think we know how the disease works but it's still just a theory. What isn't a theory is how the disease is transmitted. It's a very preventable disease on both fronts. Don't have sex and you won't get AIDS. Don't feed animal protein to cattle and you won't get BSE. Simple. Problem is greed, selfishness, and stupidity.
I do know in the US all of the major mfg. of protein for ANY animal do not use animal protein under any circumstances. As far as the USDA covering up any potential BSE cases I again think that's baloney too. There are too many whistle blowers in this country. It's kind of like the alien debate. Are there aliens living here. I highly doubt it. Just like I highly doubt there is anyway that a case of BSE could be covered up. There are too many people involved before the USDA gets involved. Most of the feedlots are doing their own checking and testing. The govt. here can't keep you from doing that.
As far as Canadian practices I only know what I've directly seen. I'm not saying there aren't some very fine ranches there that produce an excellent product. I don't think I've said that Canadian beef was inferior. If you look at my last post I said there were US feedlots doing stupid things as well. From what I've seen and from talking to friends we have who are ranchers in Canada it is more widespread and your government isn't stepping up like our government has to control it. The controls and enforcement according to them are too lax. Now that's straight from your fellow ranchers mouths not mine.
As far as the beef packers they are also against opening the borders. They have filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent this. This is done with the Cattlemens association, feedlot producers, and beef packers. It's a united front.
I'm not saying not to work together. BUT just opening the borders is not going to fix the problem. All of these problems should be worked out before the borders are even thought of being opened. All of the research should be completed, a PROPER plan of dealing with BSE should be enacted, and there should be animal tracing. Now that's just my opinion but right now none of these things are worked out.
As far as the US export to Canda right now it is near zero. The reason is because beef is ridiculously cheap in Canada right now. Nobody is going to export beef there and lose 50 cents a pound or more on it.
Look the problem is real. Opening the borders is not the solution. Working together is a viable option and I believe that is being done. Right now though is not the time to create economic hardship for the US for a blind policy. There is not one good thing but fear, price collapse, and economic hardship for producers and sellers that will come out of this.
Doc, I'm heartened to hear you say, "I do know in the US all of the major mfg. of protein for ANY animal do not use animal protein under any circumstances." I was under the misapprehension that poultry and hog feed could still contain animal protien products. For that matter, I was under the misapprehension that cattle feed could contain animal protien from hogs and horses. I am aware that the FDA, in their effort to bolster firewalls against BSE has made some changes to feed. I'll just quote directly from the memo issued on January 26, 2004:
"This interim final rule will implement four specific changes in FDA’s present animal feed rule. First, the rule will eliminate the present exemption in the feed rule that allows mammalian blood and blood products to be fed to other ruminants as a protein source. Recent scientific evidence suggests that blood can carry some infectivity for BSE.
Second, the rule will also ban the use of “poultry litter†as a feed ingredient for ruminant animals. Poultry litter consists of bedding, spilled feed, feathers, and fecal matter that are collected from living quarters where poultry is raised. This material is then used in cattle feed in some areas of the country where cattle and large poultry raising operations are located near each other. Poultry feed may legally contain protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed, such as bovine meat and bone meal. The concern is that spillage of poultry feed in the chicken house occurs and that poultry feed (which may contain protein prohibited in ruminant feed) is then collected as part of the “poultry litter†and added to ruminant feed.
Third, the rule will ban the use of “plate waste†as a feed ingredient for ruminants. Plate waste consists of uneaten meat and other meat scraps that are currently collected from some large restaurant operations and rendered into meat and bone meal for animal feed. The use of "plate waste" confounds FDA's ability to analyze ruminant feeds for the presence of prohibited proteins, compromising the Agency's ability to fully enforce the animal feed rule.
Fourth, the rule will further minimize the possibility of cross-contamination of ruminant and non-ruminant animal feed by requiring equipment, facilities or production lines to be dedicated to non-ruminant animal feeds if they use protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed. Currently, some equipment, facilities and production lines process or handle prohibited and non-prohibited materials and make both ruminant and non-ruminant feed -- a practice which could lead to cross-contamination."
Of course, their reference to the fact that: "Recent scientific evidence suggests that blood can carry some infectivity for BSE." kind of blows the argument that it's safe to eat downers and their direct reference to the fact that: "Poultry feed may legally contain protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed, such as bovine meat and bone meal." makes me wonder why all the feed producers who were legally using animal protiens suddenly stopped. If the FDA passed some legislation since the publication of this memo that I missed prohibiting this type of feed, I'd really appreciate a reference to it so I can study up. It's exactly the kind of law that's needed.
I don't know if there are any whistle blowers that will expose BSE, Doc. After all, there are creditable reports that I noted in a previous post that, "The U.S. Department of Agriculture has pressured its veterinarians into falsifying official documents for as long as 20 years,..." This doesn't instill me with the confidence to believe a cover up couldn't happen.
You also say that, "Most of the feedlots are doing their own checking and testing. The govt. here can't keep you from doing that." Once again, things have apparantly changed. I was under the impression that the USDA was not allowing people to do their own testing as evidenced by a letter that John Stewart, C.E.O. of Creekstone Farms Premium Beef sent
to Undersecretary J.B. Penn United States Department of Agriculture dated April 13,2004. In the letter, Mr. Stewart says, "On behalf of Creekstone Farms I want to thank you for the opportunity to have met with you in Washington, D.C. last Thursday, April 8. We had hoped for a different outcome to the meeting, however, and are very disappointed with USDA’s decision not to allow Creekstone Farms to voluntarily test all of the cattle we process for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). As we have discussed in the various meetings held with the USDA over the past several weeks, BSE testing of our cattle is something our export customers and consumers are asking for, and we feel we should be able to provide it to them."
It surprises me that you would say Canadian ranchers and farmers don't feel enough is being done to combat BSE. Given the proportionate size of our respective herds, I think we've instituted an excellent testing regime that exceeded our target by over 7,000 head in 2004. I would also point out that unlike the US, we're testing ALL 4D cattle. I'm assuming this is based on the theory that if you're looking for a fire, the best place to start is where there's smoke.
It surprises me as well, Doc, to hear that Tyson Foods, Cargil, Farmland National and others have filed a suit to stop the border opening. I was under the impression that they were laying people off and closing plants in an effort to force the US Government to open the border. The argument, I believe, was that they didn't have enough volume to sustain these plants/jobs without Canadian beef.
I'm also concerned about what kind of perception people might have of this "united front" you mention. I believe on May 28, 2004, 'Beef Magazine' took strong exeption to some of R-Calf's strategies when they said, "While the industry reaction to R-CALF's earlier attacks on the safety of U.S. beef were widely condemned, most critics considered them unfortunate lapses in judgment that some organizations make in the heat of the battle. R-CALF made it clear this week, however, that the organization believes that the end does justify any means.
The group held a press conference on Thursday, hand in hand with radical anti-beef activist groups, to denounce USDA's handling of the BSE situation. The press event in Washington, D.C., questioned the safety of beef, and called for government hearings on the matter.
The decision to align with such radical anti-beef groups seems all the more surprising considering that many within R-CALF hope to make the organization mainstream and represent producers on a wide spectrum of issues. Instead, this latest R-CALF blunder seems to push them more in the direction of radical activism than mainstream representation.
As could be expected, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and other groups issued blistering press releases questioning R-CALF's decision and motives. It's shocking, following the disastrous statements regarding beef safety just a few weeks ago, that rather than issue an apology, the organization confirms to all that it is willing to destroy beef demand in order to further its isolationist, protectionist, anti-trade policies.
For a moment, consider the caliber of groups R-CALF publicly aligned itself with this week:
The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) is famous for opposing irradiation, and pushing for the reduction of beef in the school lunch program among other things. CFA's leader, Carol Tucker Foreman, is famous for her anti-beef rhetoric and efforts to stir up the hysteria about the safety of our product.
The Consumer Union (CU), along with CFA, have been two of the leading groups pushing since Dec. 23, 2003, the message that beef is unsafe. You've probably read the multitude of inaccurate statements by CU "leader" Michael Hansen in the popular press. Hansen and the CU have also led the crusade against biotechnology and GMOs.
The following is a quote from former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop in regard to Hansen's rhetoric: "Unfortunately, a few fringe groups are using misleading statements and blatant falsehoods as part of a long-running campaign to scare consumers about a perfectly safe food ... it is necessary to condemn these attacks ... for what they are: baseless, manipulative and completely irresponsible."
Then there's Public Citizen (PC), which gains its supposed credibility through founder Ralph Nader. But PC is best known for its membership in the Global Safe Food Alliance, formed by such animal rights organizations as Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, the Western Organization of Resource Councils, Farm Sanctuary, etc., to put out anti-meat messages. "
I don't know aobut you, Doc, but these aren't exactly the kinds of people I want to stand shoulder to shoulder with in my fight to save the beef industry.
I note with some interest a report published in the East Texa News on August 05, 2004. Again, I'll just quote directly and let the article speak for itself:
"August 5, 2004 - In mid-July, Canadian feedyards reported to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that R-CALF USA members have cattle in their feedyards - a situation the feedyard owners opposed.
"On one hand, they (R-CALF) are saying to the American public that our beef is unsafe and unfit for the American public to consume," said Mike Sears with Chinook Feeders, one of the feedyards where R-CALF members have cattle.
"And, on the other hand, they're up here buying cattle, trying to profit from that same situation. They're being fairly hypocritical, as far as we're concerned."
Sears' comments were reported in the July 23 Texas Cattle Feeders Association (TCFA) newsletter, which also reported Canadians are threatening to prevent shipment of fed cattle, owned by an R-CALF USA director, from going to slaughter.
Imports of cattle from Canada were suspended following the determination a cow with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), found in the United States in December 2003, came from a Canadian herd.
Bill Bullard, R-CALF CEO, said the organization has "no membership criteria" that delves in the members' personal business matters.
He also pointed out the current focus should be on the BSE testing protocol, rather than who owns cattle in Canadian feedyards.
"Several recent reports from Canada suggest that members of R-CALF USA have thousands of cattle in Canadian feedlots," Bullard said on July 28. "Supposedly, these R-CALF members bought Canadian cattle cheap, in a market depressed by export restrictions imposed by the U.S. and other nations, seeking to realize inflated profits when prices are expected to jump once exports to the U.S. resume.
"It is possible that some individual R-CALF members have cattle in Canadian feedlots. They could lose money if exports to the U.S. don't resume quickly enough," Bullard said."
We do agree completely on the issue of animal tracing, Doc. And while the US system is still voluntary, I am pleased to tell you that Canada has had a mandatory system in place since January 01, 2001.
And yes, I realize there haven't been a lot of cattle coming across the border to us from the US, Doc. Not much point if you can't fatten 'em up on the cheap and then ship 'em back across the boarder.
I think you might get your wish, fellas. We've got another.
at 14:50 on January 11, 2005, EST.
OTTAWA (CP) - There's another confirmed case of mad cow disease in Canada but this time it involves an animal infected after a feed ban meant to prevent further cases.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency says it confirmed Tuesday a case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in an Alberta beef cow just under seven years of age. It's the third Canadian case in just over a year and the second since Christmas. All involve Alberta cows.
Officials said no part of the animal has entered the human food or animal feed systems.
Agriculture Minister Andy Mitchell said he has ordered six measures, including determining how the animal became infected and reassuring trade partners that Canadian beef is safe.
"This is not unexpected," he told a news conference. "Although this animal was born after the feed ban was put in place (in 1997) preliminary information indicates the likely source is contaminated feed and this will be the focus of our investigations."
"I am directing the CFIA to conduct an examination of what this animal may have been fed early in its life and the potential feed source."
A ruminant to ruminant feed ban was introduced in 1997 to stop the spread of the disease through infected tissue. But officials said some infected feed may have been consumed shortly after the ban.
The U.S. banned Canadian beef imports last year, but has slowly allowed more material in and is set to lift the import ban in March. After the last case, the U.S. Agriculture Department said it still planned to reopen the border.
The American ban has cost the Canadian beef industry an estimated $5 billion.
Officials warned that more BSE cases are expected, but the number of cases is expected to be low and will likely fade as older animals most at risk for the disease die or are culled from herds.
World Health Organization guidelines allow for a certain number of BSE cases even in minimal-risk countries. Under those guidelines, Canada could have 11 cases of mad cow during a consecutive 12-month period and still be considered a minimal risk country.
BSE has no cure or vaccine. Humans who eat infected meat products can develop a variant known as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, a fatal brain-wasting illness.
Since the BSE surveillance program was enhanced in January 2004, Canada has tested more than 24,000 high-risk cattle.
Al WA,
You have a greater chance of catching the Flesh eating disease from Africa than the human equivalent of MAD Cow Disease. You would have to eat the infected nervous system parts like spinal cords, etc. These parts are not even used in potted meat or other processed beef products. Downers are tested and destroyed in the USA. Downers from other mishaps such as birthing problems are destroyed as well. There is no accidental way BSE could enter the USA food chain system. Even a terrorist could not plant it here because it is not communicable disease to humans or animals.
This is an economic issue and the non-factual Dan Rather's, Oprah Winfrey's and PETA members should never get a chance to tell their lies about our USA BEEF. Extend the Canadian Ban 30 months
<font color="blue">BSE
Flesh Eating disease from Africa
Snuffed in a plane crash </font color>
I'll take mine "snuffed in a plane crash"
Looks like the US was handed the hammer (Canada BSE) and we will keep it as long as we can but for different reasons. (economic advantage) Consider what happens when the next BSE case shows up in the US.
This is ridiculous. The fact that we're even talking about still opening borders is nonsense. If this was the US there wouldn't even be talk of it on your governments side.
As far as your "thesis" projects on news articles that are usually an article because of the inflammatory nature of them I could post just as many rebuttals from the opposite side. But let's just stick to the facts and not "alien" like theories. The fact is the US has NEVER had a confirmed or otherwise case of BSE for US born cattle. The fact is that I do not know of one single mfg. that still uses any sort of animal byproducts for ruminants or horses. If there is you prove it. You give me the name and mfg. that uses anything like that. The fact is Canada now has THREE confirmed cases and from your own governments admission that infection came from the feed!!! Yet you want to post all this garbage about how great your government is controlling the feed in your country? Give me a break. I'll take the ranchers word for it that your government has turned a blind eye to it. The proof is right there in the cattle and the fact that your government says there are even more cases to be expected!!!!
My goodness this whole thing is utterly ridiculous that we are even having this conversation. The airwaves in the my area on talk rado are full of this thing. Caller after caller calling in saying no way they are going to buy beef or eat it anymore. The scare of having Canadian cattle is going to have it's own effect whether or not the stupid USDA keeps the ban or not. Great job USDA and Canada you've successfully more than likely crippled the beef market once again. [img]/forums/images/icons/mad.gif[/img]
<font color="red">Consider what happens when the next BSE case shows up in the US </font color>
<font color="red"> IF </font color> it ever shows up we deserve the same market collapse that Canada has had and we deserve no help to open any border. If we are stupid enough as producers as a whole to do anything to let any cow get the disease then we deserve economic disaster. It's a completely preventable disease if we just do the right things.
I don't think it's ridiculous that we're having this dialogue, Doc. I think we need to be talking openly about all the facts AND all the misconceptions about BSE.
I'm sorry you find documented stories about things like the USDA forcing inspectors to sign on off on false reports, the fact that the BSE infected cow in Washington was NOT a downer and the like inflamatory. I'd prefer to hear all sides of the story.
Now, you say you "could post just as many rebuttals from the opposite side." Well, Doc, why aren't you posting these rebuttals then? I've been pretty careful to point out what was my opinion and to cite the sources of all the material I've quoted. Haven't heard much from you but "he said, she said." Let's hear the facts from the other side.
My response to your statement of 01/10/05 and I quote:
"I do know in the US all of the major mfg. of protein for ANY animal do not use animal protein under any circumstances." (the caps on ANY were yours, Doc) was to illustrate that animal protien is still being used in poultry, and I believe hog feed. The ruling from the FDA over not using poultry litter in cattle feed is designed specifically to prevent spilled poultry feed from getting into cattle feed. You might recall that I said I think we need an all encompassing ban on feeding animals to animals. I believe my point was that it doesn't matter how careful the mills are, if some yahoo decides to give his cows some hog feed that is legally allowed to contain animal byproducts, we're back to square one. I also stated without equivocation that: "...feed mills here seem to be having a problem keeping animal byproducts out of feed."
And in response to to the post you made to Al Wa., I really do, honestly, hope you fellas never have to face the problem, Doc. It's awful.
Reply With Quote
