Imported cow aged over 30 months not tested for BSE Thursday 29 October 2009
The Agency has been notified that a cow aged over 30 months and imported from the Czech Republic has not been tested for BSE.
The cow was slaughtered on 1 October at Alec Jarrett Ltd’s abattoir in Oldland Common, Bristol, aged one day short of 33 months.
The cow was born in the Czech Republic and was imported earlier this year. BSE testing is mandatory for cattle born there if slaughtered for human consumption at over 30 months of age.
On 8 October, Alec Jarrett Ltd realised there had been an error and acted quickly, preventing the carcass leaving the premises and recalling all associated material that had left the premises. All the recalled product and material still on site has since been disposed of under official supervision.
None of the affected product has reached the UK food supply. A small amount of product has been exported to France and the authorities there have been informed. Background to BSE testingCattle aged over 48 months must be BSE tested before entering the food supply if born in one of the following countries: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom.
Cattle aged over 30 months and born in any other country, including the Czech Republic, are only allowed to enter the food supply if they have first tested negative for BSE. If there is no BSE test, all parts of the carcass must be condemned.
http://www.food.gov.uk/news/newsarchive/2009/oct/cowover30
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, Czech Republic
Impact Worksheet, June 14, 2001
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/cei/taf/iw_2001_files/foreign/bse_cz0601.htm
EU-25 Sanitary/Phytosanitary/Food Safety EU Mid-Year 2005 BSE update 2005
http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200509/146130887.pdf
SEE BSE GBR
http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/ssc/out243_en.pdf
Archive Number 20021006.5480 Published Date 06-OCT-2002 Subject PRO/AH> BSE, fourth case - Czech Republic: suspected
http://www.promedmail.org/pls/otn/f?p=2400:1202:393649::NO::F2400_P1202_CHECK_DISPLAY,F2400_P1202_PUB_MAIL_ID:X,19481
2009
P.9.5
Monitoring of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in the Russian Federation using a kit TeSeE (Bio-Rad) and immunohistochemical method
Sergey Rybakov, Aleksander Yegorov, Andrey Pavlov, Asya Alyokhina, Anton Zhirkov FGI “Federal Centre for Animal Health”, Russian Federation
Background: A problem of prevention of bovine spongiform encephalopathy and other prion diseases of farm and wild animals is of current interest for the Russian Federation (RF). Since 2005 the Ministry of Agriculture of Russia put into practice the programs aimed at the increase of high-productive bovine animal population on the basis of an increase of a portion of pedigree cattle up to 13%. A rapid increase of pedigree cattle population can be achieved owing to the import of high-productive cattle breeds from other countries. Unfortunately, the Russian cattle-breeding enterprises are compelled to import animals from countries with indigenous BSE. For example, the import of pedigree cattle in 2007 has made 76385 animals; from them 95 % are imported from the counties of BSE controlled risk, mainly Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands and Austria, and 5% from a country of BSE negligible risk – Australia.
Objectives: From 2005 the main surveillance object is the cattle from risk groups (non-ambulatory, emergently slaughtered or dead cattle), imported from countries of BSE controlled risk.
Methods: Diagnostic investigations are conducted predominantly by ELISA using kits TeSeE (Bio-Rad). For the purpose of verification, fragments of brainstem of some samples are additionally tested following formalin fixation by an immunohistochemical method using polyclonal antibodies to synthetic peptides-fragments of bovine prion protein.
Results: The number of monitoring investigations among cattle of risk groups increased in 2006-2008; 634 samples were tested in 2006, 1187 samples – in 2007 and 3081 samples – in 2008. Previously, polyclonal antibodies to peptides-fragments of bovine prion protein from regions PrP(106-126), (108-126), (111-126) and PrP(206-230), (216-230), (214-233) have been received and tested with positive results. At present antigenic and immunogenic properties of peptide PrP(154-169) and constructs on its basis are studied.
http://www.prion2009.com/sites/default/files/Prion2009_Book_of_Abstracts.pdf
Saturday, April 25, 2009 Prague BSE Confirmed in a Cow in the Region of Liberec in the Czech Republic Voluntary - Public Clearance Office: Office of Scientific and Technical Affairs (OSTA) Date: 4/6/2009 GAIN Report Number: EZ9003
Czech Republic Post:
http://docket-aphis-2006-0041.blogspot.com/2009_04_01_archive.html
Mad cow disease could hit Russia, experts warn Thu, 2002-06-20 21:00 — admin Issue Number: 166 Author: By MARCIA VINHA / The Russia Journal Published: 2002-06-21 Source: The Russia Journal
The arrival of mad cow disease in Poland has led to warnings from Russian producers that shoddy controls at customs and in local meat production are putting Russian livestock at risk as well.
The Russian Agriculture Ministry banned bone-in meat and livestock imports from Poland in early May. While the ministry suggested checking Polish veterinary controls on meat producers, it was not a condition for continuing trade, said Aleksander Milota, consul for commercial issues at the Polish Embassy.
Russia's restrictions on Polish meat are less harsh than those used recently on American poultry, when Russian veterinarians spent a month checking American factories for additives and salmonella. Even so, Milota believes Russian authorities overreacted in responding to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Poland: "All our cattle are tested before being exported," he said. "There is a psychological factor, which is the fear of the disease, that makes the government make unnecessary decisions such as banning cattle imports." Russia used to import 8,000 tons of Polish beef per year.
Poland, expecting to become a EU member in 2004, follows European safety requirements, which demand parental records for all animals to allow genealogical tracing. Cows 30 months old must undergo veterinary testing for BSE, and feeding meat and bone meal to cattle, a practice believed to spread the disease, is also forbidden.
The Polish BSE case has not affected meat prices in Russia, according to the Institute for Studies of the Agrarian Market (IKAR). IKAR analyst Larisa Torogova said she believes that neither meat dealers nor consumers have become concerned about mad cow disease, since Russia has several supplying countries for the 2 million tons of red meat imported each year.
Torogova said Germany and Ukraine are the largest beef exporters to Russia. No mad cow disease has yet been detected in Ukraine, and Germany's controls are now stricter than those in the rest of Europe after struggling with 125 cases of BSE in 2001. Its last BSE case was detected in May, though it has had no reports of the human variant of the disease, Creutzfeld-Jacob, one form of which is believed transmitted by eating contaminated beef.
A State Customs Committee document shows imports of boneless beef are allowed from Austria, Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Ireland, Spain, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, Finland, France, the Czech Republic and Japan, as well as Poland. Beef from England, Greece, Portugal, Switzerland and South Korea is entirely prohibited.
Yury Kostenko, chief of the microbiology department at the V.M. Gorbatov Meat Research Institute of All Russia, said those restrictions are enough to decrease contamination risks. "Few remember it, but Russia was the first European country to ban British beef and cow imports in 1986," he said.
But official barriers aren't effective in practice, according to some meat-business insiders. Alexander Spiridonov, president of the St. Petersburg-based Northwestern Association of Meat Producers, accused the government of favoring a small protectorate of meat importers that, with the unofficial support of the customs and clearance control inspectors, could bring meat infected with mad cow or other diseases to Russia.
Spiridonov said previous agreements or bribes to veterinary inspectors allow goods to move freely across borders. And customs and clearance doesn't have the resources to test the safety of imported meat.
"The strict European control on meat production, which is in accordance with Russian veterinary requirements, should be enough to avoid another veterinary inspection at the ports. At the end, officials don't check the cargo," he said, adding that trade barriers against mad cow disease are a government attempt to soften relations with local farmers, many of whom are close to bankruptcy.
The association believes the licensing and import process, among other activities associated with veterinary controls, is unconstitutional and is organizing a lobby of parliament for change. It says a formal charge against the veterinary department of the Agriculture Ministry through the Antimonopoly Ministry and the General Procurator of Russia for their conduct is also on the way, though the Agriculture Ministry couldn't be reached for comment.
Private meat companies have also created a fund to assist farmers facing difficulties trying to supplying local demand.
Russia has not had any reported cases of BSE. But cattle producers complain there aren't enough veterinary inspections of their operations. And some say they doubt the enforcement of legislation regulating the use of animal and bone meal in feed. Its use in cattle feed has been prohibited in Russia since 1996 and even longer in Europe. But there is little to no supervision by veterinary inspectors, who are supposed to check feeding procedures and reasons for animals' deaths.
Meat and bone meal is still used for poultry and hogs, which are not believed to carry BSE.
That there is only one laboratory to analyze Russia's 27 million cows adds to suspicions of internal safety controls. That laboratory, the Russian Research Institute for the Protection of Animals, has tested the meat of 1,200 animals since its beginning in 1999, 15 years after the disease was first diagnosed in England. The laboratory, in the city of Vladimir, is supported by Moscow meat-processing factories interested in checking the quality of their raw product. But the lab doesn't have equipment to test live cows or track the disease's path of infection.
"We took cows from the majority of the regions in the country, and not a single case was discovered," said Alexander Yegorov, deputy chief of the Department of Rare Diseases. He said those tests should be sufficient to show that Russian livestock are free of BSE. But the analysis, at $20 per test, is not affordable for many farmers and so has a limited reach.
"It is impossible to exclude this possibility [of BSE] because it might have reached our territory from cows and meat and bone meal exported to Russia," he said.
The EU, which monitors the potential spread of the disease, warned in 2000 that Poland was likely to have a BSE case. The Brussels-based Press Service of the European Commission has reported that scientists are now evaluating countries' risks of exposure to BSE.
They said definitive conclusions about Russia have not yet been reached, but "certainly the risk of spreading [the disease to Russia] is not excluded."
http://www.russiajournal.com/node/6321
SEE BSE POLAND ;
http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200509/146130887.pdf
Docket APHIS-2007-0033 Docket Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2007-0033-0001 Document Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Public Submission APHIS-2007-0033-0002.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singeltary comment
http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=090000648027c28d&disposition=attachment&contentType=xml
TSS
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Thursday, November 15, 2007
EFSA opinion on the BSE related public health risks of certain animal proteins in animal feed
EFSA opinion on the BSE related public health risks of certain animal proteins in animal feed15/11/2007
It is widely accepted that BSE[1] was most likely spread in cattle because they were given feed that contained BSE-contaminated animal proteins. With limited exceptions, the practice of feeding animal protein to cattle or any other farmed livestock used for food has been banned since 2001 [2]. At the request of the European Parliament, EFSA has issued an opinion on the BSE related public health risks of certain animal proteins in animal feed, which will help inform any future consideration of amendments to the existing feed ban. EFSA’s BIOHAZ[3] Panel’s opinion particularly addressed feed containing pig protein being fed to poultry and feed containing poultry protein being fed to pigs. The concern relates to the risk of transmission of the BSE agent through animal feed and hence the risk of causing BSE related exposure in humans. The Panel has concluded, with certain qualifications, that the risks to public health would be negligible: up to now, BSE has not been identified in pigs or poultry under natural conditions, therefore the risk of transmitting BSE to pigs through feeding poultry processed proteins and vice-versa is considered negligible. Hence the Panel conclusion in relation to public health.Certain important qualifications are attached to this opinion. The Panel’s conclusions take into account the decline in the BSE epidemic and the current control measures in place. The Panel stressed that their opinion only remains valid in the context of the continued effective implementation of the other current BSE control measures. Whilst BSE has so far not been found to occur under natural conditions in either pigs or poultry, if a TSE were ever found to occur naturally there would be a need to reassess the risk. It is also noted that it is not yet possible, with the currently approved method, to distinguish the species origin of proteins in a feed product. The Panel also considered a further request from the Parliament on the public health risks in relation to introducing possible tolerance levels for small quantities of any animal protein in animal feed. The Panel concluded that it is not currently possible to define the parameters that would enable risk managers to establish such tolerance levels, due to the lack of internationally agreed scientific methodology. The Panel also noted that introducing any tolerance level would lead to an increase in the risk of transmission of BSE compared to the current EU situation. Given that it is not currently possible to quantify amounts of animal proteins in feed, it is not possible to determine whether the amounts would be above or below what may be considered as the tolerance level. The Panel recommended further studies on detection limits and techniques to quantify animal proteins in feed. Under the current protective measures, if a tolerance level for animal protein in feed was to be introduced, the risk of transmitting BSE to cattle or other ruminants cannot be excluded. The few infected animals that could arise would probably not be able to maintain the presence of BSE in the cattle population but would increase the potential risk of human exposure to BSE. However, the risk of transmitting BSE to non-ruminants, if a tolerance level was to be introduced, is lower than to ruminants, as long as intra-species recycling is avoided and so in this scenario the Panel concluded that any increase in the exposure risk of BSE for humans would be negligible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), which affects cattle, is the most well known Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (TSE). TSE’s are a family of transmissible progressive diseases that mainly affect the central nervous system. Other examples of TSEs include Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans and scrapie in sheep[2] Regulation EC No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council lays down rules for the prevention., control and eradication of certain TSEs[3] EFSA’s Scientific Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1178659674461.htm
EFSA holds discussions with the US FDA, 12 November in Parma12/11/2007
On 12 November, EFSA and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) met in Parma in order to reinforce information exchange on scientific work of mutual interest.
This follows up the agreement signed on 2 July between EFSA and the FDA to facilitate scientific co-operation in the area of food safety risk assessment. At the meeting EFSA and the FDA will exchange information and discuss a number of current topics including animal cloning, food additives and nanoscience. EFSA is looking to develop similar working arrangements with other authorities world wide in coming years
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1178659213795.htm
(Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 23 May 2006)11. Information published by the OIE is derived from appropriatedeclarations made by the official Veterinary Services of Member Countries.The OIE is notresponsible for inaccurate publication of country disease status based oninaccurate information orchanges in epidemiological status or other significant events that were notpromptlyreported to then Central Bureau............
http://www.oie.int/eng/Session2007/RF2006.pdf
USA MAD COW PROTEIN IN COMMERCE 2007 October 2007 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSEPosted by flounder on Friday October 5, 2007 at 10:02 am MDT October 3, 2007
October 2007 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE
To help prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalophathy (BSE) through feed in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) implemented a final rule that prohibits the use of most mammalian protein in feeds for ruminant animals. This rule, Title 21 Part 589.2000 of the Code of Federal Regulations, here called the Ruminant Feed Ban, became effective on August 4, 1997.
The following is an update on FDA enforcement activities regarding the ruminant feed ban. FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) has assembled data from the inspections that have been conducted AND whose final inspection report has been recorded in the FDA's inspection database as of September 29, 2007. As of September 29, 2007, FDA had received over 57,000 inspection reports. The majority of these inspections (around 69%) were conducted by State feed safety officials, with the remainder conducted by FDA officials.
Inspections conducted by FDA or State investigators are classified to reflect the compliance status at the time of the inspection based upon the objectionable conditions documented. These inspection conclusions are reported as Official Action Indicated (OAI), Voluntary Action Indicated (VAI), or No Action Indicated (NAI).
An OAI inspection classification occurs when significant objectionable conditions or practices were found and regulatory sanctions are warranted in order to address the establishment's lack of compliance with the regulation. An example of an OAI inspection classification would be findings of manufacturing procedures insufficient to ensure that ruminant feed is not contaminated with prohibited material. Inspections classified with OAI violations will be promptly re-inspected following the regulatory sanctions to determine whether adequate corrective actions have been implemented.
A VAI inspection classification occurs when objectionable conditions or practices were found that do not meet the threshold of regulatory significance, but do warrant advisory actions to inform the establishment of findings that should be voluntarily corrected. Inspections classified with VAI violations are more technical violations of the Ruminant Feed Ban. These include provisions such as minor recordkeeping lapses and conditions involving non-ruminant feeds.
An NAI inspection classification occurs when no objectionable conditions or practices were found during the inspection or the significance of the documented objectionable conditions found does not justify further actions. The results to date are reported here both by “segment of industry” and “in total”. NOTE – A single firm can operate as more than one firm type. As a result, the categories of the different industry segments are not mutually exclusive.
RENDERERS
These firms are the first to handle and process (i.e., render) animal proteins and to send these processed materials to feed mills and/or protein blenders for use as a feed ingredient.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 266
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 155 (58% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 155 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
6 firms (3.9%) were classified as VAI
LICENSED FEED MILLS
FDA licenses these feed mills to produce medicated feed products. The license is required to manufacture and distribute feed using certain potent drug products, usually those requiring some pre-slaughter withdrawal time. This licensing has nothing to do with handling prohibited materials under the feed ban regulation. A medicated feed license from FDA is not required to handle materials prohibited under the Ruminant Feed Ban.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 1,071
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 466 (44% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 466 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
8 firms (1.7%) were classified as VAI
FEED MILLS NOT LICENSED BY FDA
These feed mills are not licensed by the FDA to produce medicated feeds.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 5,163
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 2,481 (48% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 2481 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
46 firms (1.9%) were classified as VAI
PROTEIN BLENDERS
These firms blend rendered animal protein for the purpose of producing quality feed ingredients that will be used by feed mills.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 392
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 191 (49% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 191 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firm (0%) was classified as OAI
5 firms (2.6%) were classified as VAI
RENDERERS, FEED MILLS, AND PROTEIN BLENDERS MANUFACTURING WITH PROHIBITED MATERIAL
This category includes only those firms that actually use prohibited material to manufacture, process, or blend animal feed or feed ingredients.
Total number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 6,577
Number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials – 493 (7.5%)
Of the 493 active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
24 firms (4.9%) were classified as VAI
OTHER FIRMS INSPECTED
Examples of such firms include ruminant feeders, on-farm mixers, pet food manufacturers, animal feed salvagers, distributors, retailers, and animal feed transporters.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 18,358
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 5,911 (32% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 5911 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
177 firms (3.0%) were classified as VAI
TOTAL FIRMS
Note that a single firm can be reported under more than one firm category; therefore, the summation of the individual OAI/VAI firm categories will be more than the actual total number of OAI/VAI firms, as presented below.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 20,807
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 6,602 (32% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 6602 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
190 firms (2.9%) were classified as VAI
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issued by: FDA, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Communications Staff, HFV-12 7519 Standish Place, Rockville, MD 20855 Telephone: (240) 276-9300 FAX: (240) 276-9115 Internet Web Site: http://www.fda.gov/cvm
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/BSE1007.htm
What Do We Feed to Food-Production Animals? A Review of Animal Feed Ingredients and Their Potential Impacts on Human Health
Amy R. Sapkota,1,2 Lisa Y. Lefferts,1,3 Shawn McKenzie,1 and Polly Walker1 1Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; 2Maryland Institute for Applied Environmental Health, College of Health and Human Performance, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA; 3Lisa Y. Lefferts Consulting, Nellysford, Virginia, USA
snip...
Table 1. Animal feed ingredients that are legally used in U.S. animal feeds
Animal
Rendered animal protein from Meat meal, meat meal tankage, meat and bone meal, poultry meal, animal the slaughter of food by-product meal, dried animal blood, blood meal, feather meal, egg-shell production animals and other meal, hydrolyzed whole poultry, hydrolyzed hair, bone marrow, and animal animals digest from dead, dying, diseased, or disabled animals including deer and elk Animal waste Dried ruminant waste, dried swine waste, dried poultry litter, and undried processed animal waste products
snip...
Sapkota et al. 668 VOLUME 115 NUMBER 5 May 2007 • Environmental Health Perspectives
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1867957&blobtype=pdf
10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. 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
USA MAD COW PROTEIN IN COMMERCE 2006
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL USA SEPT 6, 2006 1961.72 TONS IN COMMERCE AL,TN, AND WVDate: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST
PRODUCTa) EVSRC Custom dairy feed, Recall # V-130-6;b) Performance Chick Starter, Recall # V-131-6;c) Performance Quail Grower, Recall # V-132-6;d) Performance Pheasant Finisher, Recall # V-133-6.CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERDonaldson & Hasenbein/dba J&R Feed Service, Inc., Cullman, AL, by telephoneon June 23, 2006 and by letter dated July 19, 2006. Firm initiated recall iscomplete.REASONDairy and poultry feeds were possibly contaminated with ruminant basedprotein.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE477.72 tonsDISTRIBUTIONAL______________________________PRODUCTa) Dairy feed, custom, Recall # V-134-6;b) Custom Dairy Feed with Monensin, Recall # V-135-6.CODENone. Bulk productRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERRecalling Firm: Burkmann Feed, Greeneville, TN, by Telephone beginning onJune 28, 2006.Manufacturer: H. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL. Firm initiatedrecall is complete.REASONPossible contamination of dairy feeds with ruminant derived meat and bonemeal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE1,484 tonsDISTRIBUTIONTN and WV
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00968.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALLS ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006 KY, LA,MS, AL, GA, AND TN 11,000+ TONSDate: August 16, 2006 at 9:19 am PST
RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE - CLASS II______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-115-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERHiseville Feed & Seed Co., Hiseville, KY, by telephone and letter on orabout July 14, 2006. FDA initiated recall is ongoing.REASONCustom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak which may containruminant derived meat and bone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCEApproximately 2,223 tonsDISTRIBUTIONKY
______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-116-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERRips Farm Center, Tollesboro, KY, by telephone and letter on July 14, 2006.FDA initiated recall is ongoing.REASONCustom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak which may containruminant derived meat and bone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE1,220 tonsDISTRIBUTIONKY
______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-117-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERKentwood Co-op, Kentwood, LA, by telephone on June 27, 2006. FDA initiatedrecall is completed.REASONPossible contamination of animal feed ingredients, including ingredientsthat are used in feed for dairy animals, with ruminant derived meat and bonemeal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE40 tonsDISTRIBUTIONLA and MS
______________________________PRODUCTBulk Dairy Feed, Recall V-118-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERCal Maine Foods, Inc., Edwards, MS, by telephone on June 26, 2006. FDAinitiated recall is complete.REASONPossible contamination of animal feed ingredients, including ingredientsthat are used in feed for dairy animals, with ruminant derived meat and bonemeal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE7,150 tonsDISTRIBUTIONMS
______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom dairy pre-mixes, Recall # V-119-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERWalthall County Co-op, Tylertown, MS, by telephone on June 26, 2006. Firminitiated recall is complete.REASONPossible contamination of dairy animal feeds with ruminant derived meat andbone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE87 tonsDISTRIBUTIONMS
______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom dairy pre-mixes, Recall # V-120-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERWare Milling Inc., Houston, MS, by telephone on June 23, 2006. Firminitiated recall is complete.REASONPossible contamination of dairy animal feeds with ruminant derived meat andbone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE350 tonsDISTRIBUTIONAL and MS
______________________________PRODUCTa) Tucker Milling, LLC Tm 32% Sinking Fish Grower, #2680-Pellet,50 lb. bags, Recall # V-121-6;b) Tucker Milling, LLC #31120, Game Bird Breeder Pellet,50 lb. bags, Recall # V-122-6;c) Tucker Milling, LLC #31232 Game Bird Grower,50 lb. bags, Recall # V-123-6;d) Tucker Milling, LLC 31227-Crumble, Game Bird Starter, BMDMedicated, 50 lb bags, Recall # V-124-6;e) Tucker Milling, LLC #31120, Game Bird Breeder, 50 lb bags,Recall # V-125-6;f) Tucker Milling, LLC #30230, 30 % Turkey Starter, 50 lb bags,Recall # V-126-6;g) Tucker Milling, LLC #30116, TM Broiler Finisher,50 lb bags, Recall # V-127-6CODEAll products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/20/2006RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERRecalling Firm: Tucker Milling LLC, Guntersville, AL, by telephone and visiton June 20, 2006, and by letter on June 23, 2006.Manufacturer: H. J. Baker and Brothers Inc., Stamford, CT. Firm initiatedrecall is ongoing.REASONPoultry and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant basedprotein were not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE7,541-50 lb bagsDISTRIBUTIONAL, GA, MS, and TN
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ENFORCE/2006/ENF00964.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL MI MAMMALIAN PROTEIN VOLUME OF PRODUCT INCOMMERCE 27,694,240 lbsDate: August 6, 2006 at 6:14 pm PSTPRODUCTBulk custom dairy feds manufactured from concentrates, Recall # V-113-6CODEAll dairy feeds produced between 2/1/05 and 6/16/06 and containing H. J.Baker recalled feed products.RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERVita Plus Corp., Gagetown, MI, by visit beginning on June 21, 2006. Firminitiated recall is complete.REASONThe feed was manufactured from materials that may have been contaminatedwith mammalian protein.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE27,694,240 lbsDISTRIBUTIONMI
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL AL AND FL VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 125TONS Products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:16 pm PSTPRODUCTa) CO-OP 32% Sinking Catfish, Recall # V-100-6;b) Performance Sheep Pell W/Decox/A/N, medicated,net wt. 50 lbs, Recall # V-101-6;c) Pro 40% Swine Conc Meal -- 50 lb, Recall # V-102-6;d) CO-OP 32% Sinking Catfish Food Medicated,Recall # V-103-6;e) "Big Jim's" BBB Deer Ration, Big Buck Blend,Recall # V-104-6;f) CO-OP 40% Hog Supplement Medicated Pelleted,Tylosin 100 grams/ton, 50 lb. bag, Recall # V-105-6;g) Pig Starter Pell II, 18% W/MCDX Medicated 282020,Carbadox -- 0.0055%, Recall # V-106-6;h) CO-OP STARTER-GROWER CRUMBLES, CompleteFeed for Chickens from Hatch to 20 Weeks, Medicated,Bacitracin Methylene Disalicylate, 25 and 50 Lbs,Recall # V-107-6;i) CO-OP LAYING PELLETS, Complete Feed for LayingChickens, Recall # 108-6;j) CO-OP LAYING CRUMBLES, Recall # V-109-6;k) CO-OP QUAIL FLIGHT CONDITIONER MEDICATED,net wt 50 Lbs, Recall # V-110-6;l) CO-OP QUAIL STARTER MEDICATED, Net Wt. 50 Lbs,Recall # V-111-6;m) CO-OP QUAIL GROWER MEDICATED, 50 Lbs,Recall # V-112-6CODEProduct manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERAlabama Farmers Cooperative, Inc., Decatur, AL, by telephone, fax, email andvisit on June 9, 2006. FDA initiated recall is complete.REASONAnimal and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant basedprotein not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE125 tonsDISTRIBUTIONAL and FL
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL KY VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE ?????Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:19 pm PSTPRODUCTBulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-114-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERBurkmann Feeds LLC, Glasgow, KY, by letter on July 14, 2006. Firm initiatedrecall is ongoing.REASONCustom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak, which may containruminant derived meat and bone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE?????tss
DISTRIBUTION
ND OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html
CJD WATCH MESSAGE BOARDTSSMAD COW FEED RECALL USA EQUALS 10,878.06 TONS NATIONWIDESun Jul 16, 2006 09:2271.248.128.67
RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE -- CLASS II______________________________PRODUCTa) PRO-LAK, bulk weight, Protein Concentrate for Lactating Dairy Animals,Recall # V-079-6;b) ProAmino II, FOR PREFRESH AND LACTATING COWS, net weight 50lb (22.6 kg),Recall # V-080-6;c) PRO-PAK, MARINE & ANIMAL PROTEIN CONCENTRATE FOR USE IN ANIMALFEED, Recall # V-081-6;d) Feather Meal, Recall # V-082-6CODEa) Bulkb) Nonec) Bulkd) BulkRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERH. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL, by telephone on June 15, 2006 andby press release on June 16, 2006. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.REASONPossible contamination of animal feeds with ruminent derived meat and bonemeal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE10,878.06 tonsDISTRIBUTIONNationwide
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR July 12, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00960.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED BAN WARNING LETTER ISSUED MAY 17, 2006Date: June 27, 2006 at 7:42 am PSTPublic Health ServiceFood and Drug Administration
New Orleans District297 Plus Park Blvd.Nashville, TN 37217
Telephone: 615-781-5380Fax: 615-781-5391
May 17, 2006
WARNING LETTER NO. 2006-NOL-06
FEDERAL EXPRESSOVERNIGHT DELIVERY
Mr. William Shirley, Jr., OwnerLouisiana.DBA Riegel By-Products2621 State StreetDallas, Texas 75204
Dear Mr. Shirley:
On February 12, 17, 21, and 22, 2006, a U.S. Food & Drug Administration(FDA) investigator inspected your rendering plant, located at 509 FortsonStreet, Shreveport, Louisiana. The inspection revealed significantdeviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of FederalRegulations, Part 589.2000 [21 CFR 589.2000], Animal Proteins Prohibited inRuminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment andamplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). You failed tofollow the requirements of this regulation; products being manufactured anddistributed by your facility are misbranded within the meaning of Section403(a)(1) [21 USC 343(a)(1)] of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act(the Act).
Our investigation found you failed to provide measures, including sufficientwritten procedures, to prevent commingling or cross-contamination and tomaintain sufficient written procedures [21 CFR 589.2000(e)] because:
You failed to use clean-out procedures or other means adequate to preventcarryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into animal protein orfeeds which may be used for ruminants. For example, your facility uses thesame equipment to process mammalian and poultry tissues. However, you useonly hot water to clean the cookers between processing tissues from eachspecies. You do not clean the auger, hammer mill, grinder, and spouts afterprocessing mammalian tissues.
You failed to maintain written procedures specifying the clean-outprocedures or other means to prevent carryover of protein derived frommammalian tissues into feeds which may be used for ruminants.
As a result . the poultry meal you manufacture may contain protein derivedfrom mammalian tissues prohibited in ruminant feed. Pursuant to 21 CFR589.2000(e)(1)(i), any products containing or may contain protein derivedfrom mammalian tissues must be labeled, "Do not feed to cattle or otherruminants." Since you failed to label a product which may contain proteinderived from mammalian tissues with the required cautionary statement. thepoultry meal is misbranded under Section 403(a)(1) [21 USC 343(a)(1)] of theAct.
This letter is not intended as an all-inclusive list of violations at yourfacility. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, youare responsible for ensuring your overall operation and the products youmanufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should takeprompt action to correct these violations, and you should establish a systemwhereby violations do not recur. Failure to promptly correct theseviolations may result in regulatory action, such as seizure and/orinjunction, without further notice.
You should notify this office in writing within 15 working days of receivingthis letter, outlining the specific steps you have taken to bring your firminto compliance with the law. Your response should include an explanation ofeach step taken to correct the violations and prevent their recurrence. Ifcorrective action cannot be completed within 15 working days, state thereason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will becompleted. Include copies of any available documentation demonstratingcorrections have been made.
Your reply should be directed to Mark W. Rivero, Compliance Officer, U.S.Food and Drug Administration, 2424 Edenborn Avenue, Suite 410, Metairie,Louisiana 70001. If you have questions regarding any issue in this letter,please contact Mr. Rivero at (504) 219-8818, extension 103.
Sincerely,
/S
Carol S. SanchezActing District DirectorNew Orleans District
http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g5883d.htm
Subject: USDA FSIS SRM TSE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT UPDATEDate: February 17, 2007 at 7:03 pm PST Greetings,
I thought I might update you on the USDA FSIS QUARTERLY REPORTS ON THE TOPIC OF SRMs and MAD COW DISEASE I.E. BSE/BASE ETC.
REMEMBER WHAT OLD RON SAID;
Johanns stressed that the testing program is not a food safety program but rather a way to assess the prevalence of BSE. The key to protecting food safety is removing the specified risk materials (SRM)—cattle parts such as the brain and spinal cord, which are likely to carry the BSE agent if an animal is infected, he said. Removal of SRM from carcasses of cattle older than 30 months has been required since early 2004. ...
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/other/bse/news/jul2006bse.html
SINCE THE LAST TIME I REPORTED :
Subject: USDA FSIS QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT (BSE) July 1, 2005 through September 30, 2005 Date: March 20, 2006 at 12:58 pm PST
YOU can see that report at the bottom of this update.
UPDATEs AS FOLLOWS ;
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2006
snip...
Table 5. Administrative Actions: Large HACCP Plants (7/01/06 to 9/30/06)
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Large HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS 00086K M DODGE CITY, KS
On 6/15/06, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
EXCEL CORP 00086R M FORT MORGAN, CO
On 8/11/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8. On 12/22/04, plant appealed the withholding action. Appeal was denied on 1/25/05.
snip...
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 09268 M PASCO, WA X X On 7/28/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245D M EMPORIA, KS X X On 12/23/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245L M LEXINGTON, NE X X On 3/10/05, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
Table 6. Administrative Actions: Small HACCP Plants (7/01/06 to 9/30/06)
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
SSOP HACCP SPS INH INT Other LOI LOW
BOOKER PACKING COMPANY 07162 M BOOKER, TX 6/2/06 6/5/06 X X 9/19/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
SSOP HACCP SPS INH INT Other LOI LOW
GULF PACKING COMPANY 00696 M00696 P SAN BENITO, TX 2/25/06 2/26/06 X X 8/31/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
HI COUNTRY BEEF JERKY 01248 M01248 P LINCOLN, MT 3/24/06 4/14/06 X X X X 8/31/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
NORTHERN PACKING COMPANY INC. 00571 M BRIAR HILL, NY 12/9/05 12/23/05 X X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
WEST MISSOURI BEEF 05821 M ROCKVILLE, MO 3/2/06 3/16/06 4/13/06 4/17/06 X X X 8/15/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
GIBSON PACKING COMPANY 05843 M05843 P SEYMOUR, MO 9/21/06 X X X X Plant failed to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E. coli). The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
SSOP HACCP SPS INH INT Other LOI LOW
HORMANN MEAT COMPANY 05544 M05544 P FAIR GROVE, MO 6/15/06 6/22/06 X X X 9/26/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
ROCK CREEK SLAUGHTER CO. 09150 M09150 P LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN, GA 3/16/06 4/14/06 6/30/06 7/5/06 X X X X 8/11/06 On 3/16/06, an enforcement action concerning failure to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E.coli) was issued. The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, INC. 31647 M31647 P LEWISTON, UT 7/25/05 7/29/05 X X 7/25/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q4_FY2006.pdf
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT April 1, 2006 through June 30, 2006
Table 5. Administrative Actions: Large HACCP Plants (4/01/06 to 6/30/06)
CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS 00086K M DODGE CITY, KS X X On 6/15/06, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
EXCEL CORP 00086R M FORT MORGAN, CO 2/22/05 X X On 8/11/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8. On
12/22/04, plant appealed the withholding action. Appeal was denied on 1/25/05.
snip...
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC 00245L M LEXINGTON, NE X X On 3/10/05, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
SSOP HACCP SPS INH INT Other LOI LOW
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 09268 M PASCO, WA X X On 7/28/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245D M EMPORIA, KS X X On 12/23/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
BOOKER PACKING COMPANY 07162 M BOOKER, TX 4/13/06 4/19/06 X X Plant failed to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E. coli).
6/2/06 6/5/06 X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
GULF PACKING COMPANY 00696 M00696 P SAN BENITO, TX 2/25/06 2/26/06 X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
???
3/24/06 4/14/06
X X X
The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
NORTHERN PACKING COMPANY INC. 00571 M BRIAR HILL, NY 12/9/05 12/23/05 X X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
WEST MISSOURI BEEF 05821 M ROCKVILLE, MO 3/2/06 3/16/06 4/13/06 4/17/06 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
C & C MEAT SALES, INC., 18494 M18494 P, DURHAM, NC ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL.
snip...
FRESH FARMS BEEF 18579 M RUTLAND, VT 12/16/05 12/28/05 X X X 4/13/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
FRONTIER FOODS & COLD STORAGE, INC 20741 M20741 P EL PASO, TX 5/31/06 X X On 6/8/06, DM closed case by firm’s requested voluntary withdrawal. The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
HORMANN MEAT COMPANY 05544 M05544 P FAIR GROVE, MO 6/15/06 6/22/06 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
RANDALL MEAT COMPANY 10669 M HOT SPRINGS, AR 7/1/05 7/28/05 10/12/05 10/24/05 X X X 5/19/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
ROCK CREEK SLAUGHTER CO. 09150 M09150 P LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN, GA 3/16/06 4/14/06 6/30/06 X X X X On 3/16/06, an enforcement action concerning failure to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E.coli) was issued. The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
SAVORY CONNECTION, INC., 31764 M31764 P, SELINGSGROVE, PA. ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL.
snip...
STEAK MASTER, 21159 M21159 P, ELWOOD, NE. ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL.
snip...
THE MEAT SHOP 31561 M BENSON, VT 8/18/05 9/6/05 9/9/05 X X X X X 4/4/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, INC. 31647 M31647 P LEWISTON, UT 7/25/05 7/29/05 X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
WALNUT VALLEY PACKING L.L.C. 32007 M32007 P EL DORADO, KS 12/15/05 12/30/05 X X X 5/4/06 The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q3_FY2006.pdf
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT January 1, 2006 through March 31, 2006
Table 5. Administrative Actions: Large HACCP Plants (1/01/06 to 3/31/06)
CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS 00086K M DODGE CITY, KS X X 3/13/06 On 10/11/05, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
EXCEL CORP. 00086R M FORT MORGAN, CO 8/11/04 2/22/05 X X On 8/11/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
On 12/22/04, plant appealed the withholding action. Appeal was denied on 1/25/05.
snip...
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245L M 3/12/04 3/18/04 X
LEXINGTON, NE
X X On 3/10/05, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 09268 M PASCO, WA X X On 7/28/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245D M EMPORIA, KS X X On 12/23/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
GULF PACKING COMPANY, 00696 M00696 P, SAN BENITO, TX, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
HI COUNTRY BEEF JERKY, 01248 M01248 P, LINCOLN, MT, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
HITCHIN POST STEAK COMPANY, 20773 M20773 P, KANSAS CITY, KS, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
NORTHERN PACKING COMPANY INC. 00571 M BRIAR HILL, NY 12/9/05 12/23/05 X X X X The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
ROCK CREEK SLAUGHTER CO., 09150 M09150 P, FAIRBURY, NE, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
WEST MISSOURI BEEF 05821 M ROCKVILLE, MO 3/2/06 3/16/06 X X X The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
Table 7. Administrative Actions: Very Small HACCP Plants (1/01/06 to 3/31/06)
A.J. CEKAK'S MEAT MARKET 21562 M ORD. NE, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
ALTA VISTA LOCKER 31931 M ALTA VISTA, KS, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
C&C MEAT SALES, INC. 18494 M18494 P UPPER MARLBORO, MD 2/27/06 3/16/06 X X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
FRESH FARMS BEEF 18579 M RUTLAND, VT 12/16/05 12/28/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
H AND P MEATS 21352 M SOUTH PITTSBURG, TN 7/28/05 8/8/05 8/17/05 8/19/05 X X 3/6/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
PARADISE LOCKER MEATS 31865 M31865 P TRIMBLE, MO 9/21/05 10/7/05 X X 1/13/06 The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
PARAGON SPRAY DRYING, L.L.C. 31762 M31762 P WAUKON, IA 9/6/05 9/12/05 X X X 2/9/06 The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
RANDALL MEAT COMPANY 10669 M HOT SPRINGS, AR 7/1/05 7/28/05 10/12/05 10/24/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
SAVORY CONNECTION, INC. 31764 M31764 P SELINGSGROVE, PA 3/14/06 3/31/06 X X X The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
STEAK MASTER, 21159 M21159 P, ELWOOD, NW, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
TEARS MARKET, 04535 M04535 P, PENN YAN, NY, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
THE MEAT SHOP, 31561 M BENSON, VT, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, INC. 31647 M31647 P, LEWISTON, UT, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
TOOELE VALLEY MEATS 20594 M20594 P, GRANTSVILLE, UT, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
WALNUT VALLEY PACKING L.L.C. 32007 M32007 P EL DORADO, KS 12/15/05 12/30/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
WILLIAM. G. MEST PACKING CO. 04431 M STRYKERSVILLE, NY 2/2/06 2/23/06 X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material. On 3/21/06, NOIE was modified and
reissued. On 6/29/06, NOIE was
rescinded.
YODER BROTHERS MEAT PROCESSING 17301 M PARIS, TN 10/3/05 10/12/05 X X 2/23/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q1_FY2006.pdf
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT October 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005
SRM REMOVAL USA
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICEQUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT October 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005
snip....
CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS 00086K M DODGE CITY, KS X X On 10/11/05, awithholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery Systemproduct was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
EXCEL CORP 00086R M FORT MORGAN, CO 2/22/05 X X On 8/11/04, a withholdingaction concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was takenin accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8. On 12/22/04, plant appealed thewithholding action. Appeal was denied on 1/25/05.
00245L M LEXINGTON, NE 3/12/04 3/18/04 X 5/4/05 X X On 3/10/05, awithholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery Systemproduct was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
9/16/05 9/29/05 X X TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 09268 M PASCO, WA X X On 7/28/04,a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery Systemproduct was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. X X 00245D M EMPORIA, KS On 12/23/04, a withholdingaction concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was takenin accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
DESERET MEAT 04852 M SPANISH FORK, UT 7/20/05 8/1/05 X X 12/29/05 Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
NORTHERN PACKING COMPANY INC. 00571 M BRIAR HILL, NY 12/9/05 12/23/05 X X XX The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishmentto comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
A.J. CEKAK'S MEAT MARKET 9/1/05 9/20/05 X X X On 9/1/05, an enforcementaction21562 Mconcerning failure to meet regulatory ORD, NE requirements for Escherichiacoli Biotype 1 (E. coli) was taken. The enforcement action included, as abasis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirementsconcerning specified risk material.
ALTA VISTA LOCKER10/5/05 10/26/05 X X The enforcement action included, as a 31931 M basis,failure of the establishment toALTA VISTA, KS comply with Agencyrequirementsconcerning specified risk material.
BROWN'S PROCESSING 13100 M13100 P ELSBERRY, MO 8/8/05 8/16/05 X X X 11/16/05The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
CHAMPLAIN BEEF INC 2/28/05 3/4/05 3/8/05 X X X08547 MWHITEHALL, NY10/17/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of theestablishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified riskmaterial.
FIVE STAR PACK INC. 9/1/05 9/9/05 X X 12/29/05 On 9/1/05, an enforcementaction08725 M08725 Pconcerning failure to meet regulatory GOLDEN CITY, MO requirements forEscherichia coli Biotype 1 (E. coli) was taken. The enforcement actionincluded, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agencyrequirements concerning specified risk material. FRESH FARMS BEEF 12/16/0512/28/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a 18579 M basis, failureof the establishment toRUTLAND, VT comply with Agency requirementsconcerning specified risk material.
GOETZ AND SONS WESTERN 11/15/05 11/23/05 12/1/05 X XMEATS INC06245 M06245 PEVERETT, WA12/17/05 12/28/05 X X X On 12/17/05, firm violated a regulatory controlaction by selling U.S.D.A retained product.
H AND P MEATS 21352 M SOUTH PITTSBURG, TN 7/28/05 8/8/05 8/17/05 8/19/05 X XThe enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
HOPKINS PACKING COMPANY 11069 M BLACKFOOT, ID 7/28/05 8/1/05 X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
NORTHWEST PREMIUM MEATS LLC 11032 M11032 P NAMPA, ID 7/26/05 7/29/05 X X11/15/05 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of theestablishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified riskmaterial.
PARADISE LOCKER MEATS 31865 M31865 P TRIMBLE, MO 9/21/05 10/7/05 X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material. PARAGONSPRAY DRYING, LLC 31762 M31762 P WAUKON, IA 9/6/05 9/12/05 X X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
RANDALL MEAT COMPANY 10669 M HOT SPRINGS, AR 7/1/05 7/28/05 10/12/0510/24/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of theestablishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified riskmaterial.
S & S MEAT COMPANY 01046 M01046 P KANSAS CITY, MO 8/4/05 8/19/05 X X11/16/05 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of theestablishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified riskmaterial.
STEAK MASTER 21159 M21159 P ELWOOD, NE 11/4/05 11/17/05 X X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
THE MEAT SHOP 31561 M BENSON, VT 8/18/05 9/6/05 9/9/05 X X X X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, INC 31647 M31647 P LEWISTON, UT 7/27/05 7/29/05 X XThe enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
TOOELE VALLEY MEATS 20594 M20594 P GRANTSVILLE, UT 7/25/05 8/1/05 X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
WALNUT VALLEY PACKING LLC 32007 M32007 P EL DORADO, KS 12/15/05 12/30/05 X XX The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishmentto comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
YODER BROTHERS MEAT PROCESSING 17301 M PARIS, TN 10/3/05 10/12/05 X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
full text 54 pages ;
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q1_FY2006.pdf
Subject: USDA FSIS QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT (BSE) July 1, 2005 through September 30, 2005 Date: March 20, 2006 at 12:58 pm PST
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT July 1, 2005 through September 30, 2005
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
DESERET MEAT 04852 M SPANISH FORK, UT 07/27/05 08/01/05 X X On 7/27/05, a suspension action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
MONTEBELLO MEAT PROCESSING, INC 19075 M19075 P MANATI, PR 08/01/05 08/18/05 X X X 09/26/05 On 8/1/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Table 7. Administrative Actions: Very Small HACCP Plants (7/01/05 to 9/30/05)
snip...
A.J. CEKAK'S MEAT MARKET 09/01/05 09/20/05 On 9/1/05, an enforcement action
21562 M
concerning failure to meet regulatory ORD, NE requirements for Escherichia coli X X X Biotype 1 (E. coli) and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy/Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
BROWN'S PROCESSING 13100 M13100 P ELSBERRY, MO 08/08/05 08/16/05 X X X On 8/8/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
FIVE STAR PACK INC. 08725 M08725 P GOLDEN CITY, MO 09/01/05 09/09/05 X X On 9/1/05, an enforcement action concerning failure to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E. coli) and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy/Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
H AND P MEATS 21352 M SOUTH PITTSBURG, TN 07/28/05 08/08/05 08/17/05 08/19/05 X X On 8/17/05, a suspension action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
HOPKINS PACKING COMPANY 11069 M BLACKFOOT, ID 07/28/05 08/01/05 X X On 7/28/05, a suspension action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
NORTHWEST PREMIUM MEATS LLC 11032 M11032 P NAMPA, ID 07/26/05 07/29/05 X X On 7/26/05, a suspension action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
PARADISE LOCKER MEATS 31865 M31865 P TRIMBLE, MO 09/21/05 X X On 9/21/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
PARAGON SPRAY DRYING, LLC 31792 M31792 P WAUKON, IA 09/06/05 09/12/05 X X X On 9/6/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
RANDALL MEAT COMPANY 10669 M HOT SPRINGS, AR 07/01/05 07/28/05 X X X On 7/1/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
08/04/05
08/19/05
On 8/4/05,
an enforcement action 01046 M01046 P concerning Bovine SpongiformKANSAS CITY, MO X X Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
THE MEAT SHOP 08/18/05 09/06/05
09/09/05
On 9/6/05, a suspension action 31561 M concerning Bovine SpongiformBENSON, VT Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3. XX X X X
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, 07/27/05 07/29/05
On 7/27/05, a suspension action INC concerning Bovine Spongiform31647 M31647 P Encephalopathy and Specified Risk X X
LEWISTON, UT Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
TOOELE VALLEY MEATS 07/25/05 08/01/05
On 7/25/05, a suspension action 20594 M20594 Pconcerning Bovine Spongiform
GRANTSVILLE, UT X X Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
52 pages
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q4_FY2005.pdf
PREVIOUS
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q3_FY2005.pdf
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q2_FY2005.pdf
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q1_FY2005.pdf
IF i remember correctly, the infamous PURINA FEED MILL incident in Gonzales TEXAS, where at one feeding, those cows could not have consumed more than......or no more than 5.5 grams...etc. so, how many feedings does a feeder and or dairy calf have in there lifespan ? wouldn't you multiply that by those figures by that ??? be a lot of potential mad cow protein IN COMMERCE, and still is in 2006......tss FDA has determined that each animal could have consumed, at most and in total, five-and-one-half grams - approximately a quarter ounce -- of prohibited material. These animals weigh approximately 600 pounds.
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2001/NEW00752.html
http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/archive/2001/ch5/default.htm
1: J Infect Dis 1980 Aug;142(2):205-8
Oral transmission of kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and scrapie to nonhuman primates.
Gibbs CJ Jr, Amyx HL, Bacote A, Masters CL, Gajdusek DC.
Kuru and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease of humans and scrapie disease of sheep and goats were transmitted to squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) that were exposed to the infectious agents only by their nonforced consumption of known infectious tissues. The asymptomatic incubation period in the one monkey exposed to the virus of kuru was 36 months; that in the two monkeys exposed to the virus of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was 23 and 27 months, respectively; and that in the two monkeys exposed to the virus of scrapie was 25 and 32 months, respectively. Careful physical examination of the buccal cavities of all of the monkeys failed to reveal signs or oral lesions. One additional monkey similarly exposed to kuru has remained asymptomatic during the 39 months that it has been under observation.
PMID: 6997404 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6997404&dopt=Abstract
look at the table and you'll see that as little as 1 mg (or 0.001 gm) caused 7% (1 of 14) of the cows to come down with BSE;
Risk of oral infection with bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent in primates
Corinne Ida Lasmézas, Emmanuel Comoy, Stephen Hawkins, Christian Herzog, Franck Mouthon, Timm Konold, Frédéric Auvré, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie Lescoutra-Etchegaray, Nicole Salès, Gerald Wells, Paul Brown, Jean-Philippe Deslys Summary The uncertain extent of human exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)--which can lead to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD)--is compounded by incomplete knowledge about the efficiency of oral infection and the magnitude of any bovine-to-human biological barrier to transmission. We therefore investigated oral transmission of BSE to non-human primates. We gave two macaques a 5 g oral dose of brain homogenate from a BSE-infected cow. One macaque developed vCJD-like neurological disease 60 months after exposure, whereas the other remained free of disease at 76 months. On the basis of these findings and data from other studies, we made a preliminary estimate of the food exposure risk for man, which provides additional assurance that existing public health measures can prevent transmission of BSE to man.
snip...
BSE bovine brain inoculum
100 g 10 g 5 g 1 g 100 mg 10 mg 1 mg 0·1 mg 0·01 mg
Primate (oral route)* 1/2 (50%)
Cattle (oral route)* 10/10 (100%) 7/9 (78%) 7/10 (70%) 3/15 (20%) 1/15 (7%) 1/15 (7%)
RIII mice (ic ip route)* 17/18 (94%) 15/17 (88%) 1/14 (7%)
PrPres biochemical detection
The comparison is made on the basis of calibration of the bovine inoculum used in our study with primates against a bovine brain inoculum with a similar PrPres concentration that was
inoculated into mice and cattle.8 *Data are number of animals positive/number of animals surviving at the time of clinical onset of disease in the first positive animal (%). The accuracy of
bioassays is generally judged to be about plus or minus 1 log. ic ip=intracerebral and intraperitoneal.
Table 1: Comparison of transmission rates in primates and cattle infected orally with similar BSE brain inocula
Published online January 27, 2005
http://www.thelancet.com/journal/journal.isa
It is clear that the designing scientists must also have shared Mr Bradley’s surprise at the results because all the dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s145d.pdf
6. It also appears to me that Mr Bradley’s answer (that it would take less than say 100
grams) was probably given with the benefit of hindsight; particularly if one
considers that later in the same answer Mr Bradley expresses his surprise that it
could take as little of 1 gram of brain to cause BSE by the oral route within the
same species. This information did not become available until the "attack rate"
experiment had been completed in 1995/96. This was a titration experiment
designed to ascertain the infective dose. A range of dosages was used to ensure
that the actual result was within both a lower and an upper limit within the study
and the designing scientists would not have expected all the dose levels to trigger
infection. The dose ranges chosen by the most informed scientists at that time
ranged from 1 gram to three times one hundred grams. It is clear that the designing
scientists must have also shared Mr Bradley’s surprise at the results because all the
dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s147f.pdf
2) Infectious dose:
To cattle: 1 gram of infected brain material (by oral ingestion)
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/sci/bio/bseesbe.shtml
Subject: Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the Oral Route Date: September 29, 2007 at 12:50 pm PST
P04.27
Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the Oral Route
Holznagel, E1; Yutzy, B1; Deslys, J-P2; Lasmézas, C2; Pocchiari, M3; Ingrosso, L3; Bierke, P4; Schulz-Schaeffer, W5; Motzkus, D6; Hunsmann, G6; Löwer, J1 1Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Germany; 2Commissariat à l´Energie Atomique, France; 3Instituto Superiore di Sanità, Italy; 4Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease control, Sweden; 5Georg August University, Germany; 6German Primate Center, Germany
Background:
In 2001, a study was initiated in primates to assess the risk for humans to contract BSE through contaminated food. For this purpose, BSE brain was titrated in cynomolgus monkeys.
Aims:
The primary objective is the determination of the minimal infectious dose (MID50) for oral exposure to BSE in a simian model, and, by in doing this, to assess the risk for humans. Secondly, we aimed at examining the course of the disease to identify possible biomarkers.
Methods:
Groups with six monkeys each were orally dosed with lowering amounts of BSE brain: 16g, 5g, 0.5g, 0.05g, and 0.005g. In a second titration study, animals were intracerebrally (i.c.) dosed (50, 5, 0.5, 0.05, and 0.005 mg).
Results:
In an ongoing study, a considerable number of high-dosed macaques already developed simian vCJD upon oral or intracerebral exposure or are at the onset of the clinical phase. However, there are differences in the clinical course between orally and intracerebrally infected animals that may influence the detection of biomarkers.
Conclusions:
Simian vCJD can be easily triggered in cynomolgus monkeys on the oral route using less than 5 g BSE brain homogenate. The difference in the incubation period between 5 g oral and 5 mg i.c. is only 1 year (5 years versus 4 years). However, there are rapid progressors among orally dosed monkeys that develop simian v CJD as fast as intracerebrally inoculated animals.
The work referenced was performed in partial fulfilment of the study “BSE in primates“ supported by the EU (QLK1-2002-01096).
http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf
THE FDA MAD COW FEED BAN I.E. RUMINANT TO RUMINANT AUGUST 4, 1997 PARTIAL, AND VOLUNTARY AT THAT, WAS NOTHING MORE THAN INK ON PAPER. ...tss
Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION]
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt
Docket Management Docket: 02N-0273 - Substances Prohibited From Use in
Animal Food or Feed; Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed
Comment Number: EC -10
Accepted - Volume 2
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be07.html
PART 2
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be09.html
PDF]Freas, William TSS SUBMISSION
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat -
Page 1. J Freas, William From: Sent: To: Subject: Terry S. Singeltary
Sr. [flounder@wt.net] Monday, January 08,200l 3:03 PM freas ...
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3681s2_09.pdf
Asante/Collinge et al, 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;
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/slides/3923s1_OPH.htm
Docket Management Docket: 96N-0417 - Current Good Manufacturing Practicein Manufacturing, Packing, or Holding Dietary Ingredients aComment Number: EC -2Accepted - Volume 7
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Mar03/031403/96N-0417-EC-2.htm
[Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified RiskMaterials for Human Food and Requirement for the Disposition ofNon-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle
9/13/2005
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/03-025IFA/03-025IFA-2.pdf
[Docket No. FSIS-2006-0011] FSIS Harvard Risk Assessment of BovineSpongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMALIMPORTS FROM CANADA
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed
Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No.05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSIONDate: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PSTAugust 24, 2005
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1]RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings APHIS ET AL,
My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;
snip...
THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances withhuman and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in differentspecies to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE incattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with differentstrains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typicalscrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to havepassed to sheep. all of which have beenrendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, afrightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with humanlife around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from theUSA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, withpotential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot beundone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily andextensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97.I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue tobelieve in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only thisone strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, willonly lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from allstrains of TSE, and possibly manymore needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sourcesvia many studies with primates and rodents and other species.
MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, butthe USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than adrum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100%sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animalconsumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK didwith there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, allthe while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing morethan a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE andGW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???
go figure. ...
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.P.O. Box 42Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Comment SubmittedComment Receipt
Thank you. Your comment on Document ID: APHIS-2006-0041-0001 has beensent. Comment Tracking Number: APHIS-2006-0041-DRAFT-0028
Attachments: C:\My Music\My Documents\APHIS-2006-0041_January 28.doc
If you wish to retain a copy of the receipt, use the following link toprint a copy for your files. Print
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main
THE only difference between the UK poisoning the globe, and the USA, it isnow legal with GWs and OIEs BSE MRR policy ;
IT's O.K. to poison 3rd world countries ;
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1994/05/20002001.pdf
On 20 February 1990, Dr Pickles wrote to Ms Verity(APS/CMO). Dr Picklesí minute included the following: 1. Mr Meldrum is arguing that MAFF have already taken all thenecessary and responsible steps to warn importing countries of the BSE dangers in UK meat and bone meal. Yet the action takenso far overseas suggest the message has not got through, or where it has this has been late. The first nationthat woke up to the danger did so a year after our own feed ban. It seems even now several EC countries neither ban ourimports or the general feeding of ruminant protein. It also seems the OIE and CVO have yet to inform the rest of the world. 2. I do not see how this can be claimed to be responsibleí. Wedo not need an expert group of the Scientific Veterinary Committee to tell us British meat and bone meal is unsafe forruminants. I fail to understand why this cannot be tackled from the British end which seems to be the only sure way of doingit, preferably by banning exports. As CMO says in his letter of 3 January surely it is short sighted for us to riskbeing seen in future as having been responsible for the introduction of BSE to the food chain in other countries.íí[79]
http://www.bse.org.uk/dfa/dfa25.htm
http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jul00_dont_eat_sheep.html#hhh
Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease inthe United States
http://cjdusa.blogspot.com/
i am reminded of a few things deep throat (high ranking official at usda)told me years ago;
==========================================
The most frightening thing I have read all day is thereport of Gambetti's finding of a new strain ofsporadic cjd in young people.........Dear God,
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7842737484277562285&postID=5759550357128128100
BSE BASE MAD COW TESTING TEXAS, USA, AND CANADA, A REVIEW OF SORTS
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/
MADCOW USDA the untold story
http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/
MADCOW USDA the untold story continued
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6472149427883113751&postID=4829467681293855400
USA NOR-98 SCRAPIE UPDATE AUGUST 31, 2007 RISES TO 5 DOCUMENTED CASES
http://nor-98.blogspot.com/
Government Accountability Project
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3995372399492420922&postID=295754279213239559
Transmissible Mink Encephalopathy TME
http://transmissible-mink-encephalopathy.blogspot.com/
TME hyper/drowsy, INTER-SPECIES TRANSMISSION CWD and strainproperties
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=37955408&postID=116577315153980667
USA NVCJD BLOOD RECALLS ONLY ;
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=CJD+BLOOD+RECALLS+TSS&btnG=Search
vCJD case study highlights blood transfusion risk
http://vcjdblood.blogspot.com/
CREUTZFELDT JAKOB DISEASE MAD COW BASE, CWD, SCRAPIE UPDATE OCT 2007
http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/
TSEAC MEETINGS
http://tseac.blogspot.com/
MRSA
http://staphmrsa.blogspot.com/
ABSTRACTS SPORADIC CJD AND H BASE MAD COW ALABAMA AND TEXAS SEPTEMBER 2007
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 21:31:55 -0500
I suggest that you all read the data out about h-BASE and sporadic CJD, GSS,blood, and some of the other abstracts from the PRION2007. ...
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&F=&S=&P=19744
*** PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS !!! THE PRICE OFPOKER INDEED GOES UP. ...TSS
USA BASE CASE, (ATYPICAL BSE), AND OR TSE (whatever they are calling ittoday), please note that both the ALABAMA COW, AND THE TEXAS COW, both were''H-TYPE'', personal communication Detwiler et al Wednesday, August 22, 200711:52 PM. ...TSS
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0708&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=19779
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."Subject: CWD UPDATE 88 AUGUST 31, 2007
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=450
PLEASE NOTE IN USA CJD UPDATE AS AT JUNE 2007, please note steady increasein ''TYPE UNKNOWN''. ...TSS
1 Acquired in the United Kingdom; 2 Acquired in Saudi Arabia; 3 Includes 17inconclusive and 9 pending (1 from 2006, 8from 2007); 4 Includes 17 non-vCJD type unknown (2 from 1996, 2 from 1997, 1from 2001, 1 from 2003, 4 from 2004, 3from 2005, 4 from 2006) and 36 type pending (2 from 2005, 8 from 2006,
*** 26 from 2007)
http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/pdf/case-table.pdf
Terry S. Singeltary SR.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
It is widely accepted that BSE[1] was most likely spread in cattle because they were given feed that contained BSE-contaminated animal proteins. With limited exceptions, the practice of feeding animal protein to cattle or any other farmed livestock used for food has been banned since 2001 [2]. At the request of the European Parliament, EFSA has issued an opinion on the BSE related public health risks of certain animal proteins in animal feed, which will help inform any future consideration of amendments to the existing feed ban. EFSA’s BIOHAZ[3] Panel’s opinion particularly addressed feed containing pig protein being fed to poultry and feed containing poultry protein being fed to pigs. The concern relates to the risk of transmission of the BSE agent through animal feed and hence the risk of causing BSE related exposure in humans. The Panel has concluded, with certain qualifications, that the risks to public health would be negligible: up to now, BSE has not been identified in pigs or poultry under natural conditions, therefore the risk of transmitting BSE to pigs through feeding poultry processed proteins and vice-versa is considered negligible. Hence the Panel conclusion in relation to public health.Certain important qualifications are attached to this opinion. The Panel’s conclusions take into account the decline in the BSE epidemic and the current control measures in place. The Panel stressed that their opinion only remains valid in the context of the continued effective implementation of the other current BSE control measures. Whilst BSE has so far not been found to occur under natural conditions in either pigs or poultry, if a TSE were ever found to occur naturally there would be a need to reassess the risk. It is also noted that it is not yet possible, with the currently approved method, to distinguish the species origin of proteins in a feed product. The Panel also considered a further request from the Parliament on the public health risks in relation to introducing possible tolerance levels for small quantities of any animal protein in animal feed. The Panel concluded that it is not currently possible to define the parameters that would enable risk managers to establish such tolerance levels, due to the lack of internationally agreed scientific methodology. The Panel also noted that introducing any tolerance level would lead to an increase in the risk of transmission of BSE compared to the current EU situation. Given that it is not currently possible to quantify amounts of animal proteins in feed, it is not possible to determine whether the amounts would be above or below what may be considered as the tolerance level. The Panel recommended further studies on detection limits and techniques to quantify animal proteins in feed. Under the current protective measures, if a tolerance level for animal protein in feed was to be introduced, the risk of transmitting BSE to cattle or other ruminants cannot be excluded. The few infected animals that could arise would probably not be able to maintain the presence of BSE in the cattle population but would increase the potential risk of human exposure to BSE. However, the risk of transmitting BSE to non-ruminants, if a tolerance level was to be introduced, is lower than to ruminants, as long as intra-species recycling is avoided and so in this scenario the Panel concluded that any increase in the exposure risk of BSE for humans would be negligible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), which affects cattle, is the most well known Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (TSE). TSE’s are a family of transmissible progressive diseases that mainly affect the central nervous system. Other examples of TSEs include Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans and scrapie in sheep[2] Regulation EC No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council lays down rules for the prevention., control and eradication of certain TSEs[3] EFSA’s Scientific Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1178659674461.htm
EFSA holds discussions with the US FDA, 12 November in Parma12/11/2007
On 12 November, EFSA and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) met in Parma in order to reinforce information exchange on scientific work of mutual interest.
This follows up the agreement signed on 2 July between EFSA and the FDA to facilitate scientific co-operation in the area of food safety risk assessment. At the meeting EFSA and the FDA will exchange information and discuss a number of current topics including animal cloning, food additives and nanoscience. EFSA is looking to develop similar working arrangements with other authorities world wide in coming years
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1178659213795.htm
(Adopted by the International Committee of the OIE on 23 May 2006)11. Information published by the OIE is derived from appropriatedeclarations made by the official Veterinary Services of Member Countries.The OIE is notresponsible for inaccurate publication of country disease status based oninaccurate information orchanges in epidemiological status or other significant events that were notpromptlyreported to then Central Bureau............
http://www.oie.int/eng/Session2007/RF2006.pdf
USA MAD COW PROTEIN IN COMMERCE 2007 October 2007 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSEPosted by flounder on Friday October 5, 2007 at 10:02 am MDT October 3, 2007
October 2007 Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE
To help prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalophathy (BSE) through feed in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) implemented a final rule that prohibits the use of most mammalian protein in feeds for ruminant animals. This rule, Title 21 Part 589.2000 of the Code of Federal Regulations, here called the Ruminant Feed Ban, became effective on August 4, 1997.
The following is an update on FDA enforcement activities regarding the ruminant feed ban. FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) has assembled data from the inspections that have been conducted AND whose final inspection report has been recorded in the FDA's inspection database as of September 29, 2007. As of September 29, 2007, FDA had received over 57,000 inspection reports. The majority of these inspections (around 69%) were conducted by State feed safety officials, with the remainder conducted by FDA officials.
Inspections conducted by FDA or State investigators are classified to reflect the compliance status at the time of the inspection based upon the objectionable conditions documented. These inspection conclusions are reported as Official Action Indicated (OAI), Voluntary Action Indicated (VAI), or No Action Indicated (NAI).
An OAI inspection classification occurs when significant objectionable conditions or practices were found and regulatory sanctions are warranted in order to address the establishment's lack of compliance with the regulation. An example of an OAI inspection classification would be findings of manufacturing procedures insufficient to ensure that ruminant feed is not contaminated with prohibited material. Inspections classified with OAI violations will be promptly re-inspected following the regulatory sanctions to determine whether adequate corrective actions have been implemented.
A VAI inspection classification occurs when objectionable conditions or practices were found that do not meet the threshold of regulatory significance, but do warrant advisory actions to inform the establishment of findings that should be voluntarily corrected. Inspections classified with VAI violations are more technical violations of the Ruminant Feed Ban. These include provisions such as minor recordkeeping lapses and conditions involving non-ruminant feeds.
An NAI inspection classification occurs when no objectionable conditions or practices were found during the inspection or the significance of the documented objectionable conditions found does not justify further actions. The results to date are reported here both by “segment of industry” and “in total”. NOTE – A single firm can operate as more than one firm type. As a result, the categories of the different industry segments are not mutually exclusive.
RENDERERS
These firms are the first to handle and process (i.e., render) animal proteins and to send these processed materials to feed mills and/or protein blenders for use as a feed ingredient.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 266
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 155 (58% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 155 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
6 firms (3.9%) were classified as VAI
LICENSED FEED MILLS
FDA licenses these feed mills to produce medicated feed products. The license is required to manufacture and distribute feed using certain potent drug products, usually those requiring some pre-slaughter withdrawal time. This licensing has nothing to do with handling prohibited materials under the feed ban regulation. A medicated feed license from FDA is not required to handle materials prohibited under the Ruminant Feed Ban.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 1,071
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 466 (44% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 466 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
8 firms (1.7%) were classified as VAI
FEED MILLS NOT LICENSED BY FDA
These feed mills are not licensed by the FDA to produce medicated feeds.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 5,163
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 2,481 (48% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 2481 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
46 firms (1.9%) were classified as VAI
PROTEIN BLENDERS
These firms blend rendered animal protein for the purpose of producing quality feed ingredients that will be used by feed mills.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 392
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 191 (49% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 191 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firm (0%) was classified as OAI
5 firms (2.6%) were classified as VAI
RENDERERS, FEED MILLS, AND PROTEIN BLENDERS MANUFACTURING WITH PROHIBITED MATERIAL
This category includes only those firms that actually use prohibited material to manufacture, process, or blend animal feed or feed ingredients.
Total number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 6,577
Number of active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials – 493 (7.5%)
Of the 493 active renderers, feed mills, and protein blenders processing with prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
24 firms (4.9%) were classified as VAI
OTHER FIRMS INSPECTED
Examples of such firms include ruminant feeders, on-farm mixers, pet food manufacturers, animal feed salvagers, distributors, retailers, and animal feed transporters.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 18,358
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 5,911 (32% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 5911 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
177 firms (3.0%) were classified as VAI
TOTAL FIRMS
Note that a single firm can be reported under more than one firm category; therefore, the summation of the individual OAI/VAI firm categories will be more than the actual total number of OAI/VAI firms, as presented below.
Number of active firms whose initial inspection has been reported to FDA – 20,807
Number of active firms handling materials prohibited from use in ruminant feed – 6,602 (32% of those active firms inspected)
Of the 6602 active firms handling prohibited materials, their most recent inspection revealed that:
0 firms (0%) were classified as OAI
190 firms (2.9%) were classified as VAI
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issued by: FDA, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Communications Staff, HFV-12 7519 Standish Place, Rockville, MD 20855 Telephone: (240) 276-9300 FAX: (240) 276-9115 Internet Web Site: http://www.fda.gov/cvm
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/BSE1007.htm
What Do We Feed to Food-Production Animals? A Review of Animal Feed Ingredients and Their Potential Impacts on Human Health
Amy R. Sapkota,1,2 Lisa Y. Lefferts,1,3 Shawn McKenzie,1 and Polly Walker1 1Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; 2Maryland Institute for Applied Environmental Health, College of Health and Human Performance, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA; 3Lisa Y. Lefferts Consulting, Nellysford, Virginia, USA
snip...
Table 1. Animal feed ingredients that are legally used in U.S. animal feeds
Animal
Rendered animal protein from Meat meal, meat meal tankage, meat and bone meal, poultry meal, animal the slaughter of food by-product meal, dried animal blood, blood meal, feather meal, egg-shell production animals and other meal, hydrolyzed whole poultry, hydrolyzed hair, bone marrow, and animal animals digest from dead, dying, diseased, or disabled animals including deer and elk Animal waste Dried ruminant waste, dried swine waste, dried poultry litter, and undried processed animal waste products
snip...
Sapkota et al. 668 VOLUME 115 NUMBER 5 May 2007 • Environmental Health Perspectives
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1867957&blobtype=pdf
10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. 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
USA MAD COW PROTEIN IN COMMERCE 2006
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL USA SEPT 6, 2006 1961.72 TONS IN COMMERCE AL,TN, AND WVDate: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST
PRODUCTa) EVSRC Custom dairy feed, Recall # V-130-6;b) Performance Chick Starter, Recall # V-131-6;c) Performance Quail Grower, Recall # V-132-6;d) Performance Pheasant Finisher, Recall # V-133-6.CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERDonaldson & Hasenbein/dba J&R Feed Service, Inc., Cullman, AL, by telephoneon June 23, 2006 and by letter dated July 19, 2006. Firm initiated recall iscomplete.REASONDairy and poultry feeds were possibly contaminated with ruminant basedprotein.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE477.72 tonsDISTRIBUTIONAL______________________________PRODUCTa) Dairy feed, custom, Recall # V-134-6;b) Custom Dairy Feed with Monensin, Recall # V-135-6.CODENone. Bulk productRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERRecalling Firm: Burkmann Feed, Greeneville, TN, by Telephone beginning onJune 28, 2006.Manufacturer: H. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL. Firm initiatedrecall is complete.REASONPossible contamination of dairy feeds with ruminant derived meat and bonemeal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE1,484 tonsDISTRIBUTIONTN and WV
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00968.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALLS ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006 KY, LA,MS, AL, GA, AND TN 11,000+ TONSDate: August 16, 2006 at 9:19 am PST
RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE - CLASS II______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-115-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERHiseville Feed & Seed Co., Hiseville, KY, by telephone and letter on orabout July 14, 2006. FDA initiated recall is ongoing.REASONCustom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak which may containruminant derived meat and bone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCEApproximately 2,223 tonsDISTRIBUTIONKY
______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-116-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERRips Farm Center, Tollesboro, KY, by telephone and letter on July 14, 2006.FDA initiated recall is ongoing.REASONCustom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak which may containruminant derived meat and bone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE1,220 tonsDISTRIBUTIONKY
______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-117-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERKentwood Co-op, Kentwood, LA, by telephone on June 27, 2006. FDA initiatedrecall is completed.REASONPossible contamination of animal feed ingredients, including ingredientsthat are used in feed for dairy animals, with ruminant derived meat and bonemeal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE40 tonsDISTRIBUTIONLA and MS
______________________________PRODUCTBulk Dairy Feed, Recall V-118-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERCal Maine Foods, Inc., Edwards, MS, by telephone on June 26, 2006. FDAinitiated recall is complete.REASONPossible contamination of animal feed ingredients, including ingredientsthat are used in feed for dairy animals, with ruminant derived meat and bonemeal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE7,150 tonsDISTRIBUTIONMS
______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom dairy pre-mixes, Recall # V-119-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERWalthall County Co-op, Tylertown, MS, by telephone on June 26, 2006. Firminitiated recall is complete.REASONPossible contamination of dairy animal feeds with ruminant derived meat andbone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE87 tonsDISTRIBUTIONMS
______________________________PRODUCTBulk custom dairy pre-mixes, Recall # V-120-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERWare Milling Inc., Houston, MS, by telephone on June 23, 2006. Firminitiated recall is complete.REASONPossible contamination of dairy animal feeds with ruminant derived meat andbone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE350 tonsDISTRIBUTIONAL and MS
______________________________PRODUCTa) Tucker Milling, LLC Tm 32% Sinking Fish Grower, #2680-Pellet,50 lb. bags, Recall # V-121-6;b) Tucker Milling, LLC #31120, Game Bird Breeder Pellet,50 lb. bags, Recall # V-122-6;c) Tucker Milling, LLC #31232 Game Bird Grower,50 lb. bags, Recall # V-123-6;d) Tucker Milling, LLC 31227-Crumble, Game Bird Starter, BMDMedicated, 50 lb bags, Recall # V-124-6;e) Tucker Milling, LLC #31120, Game Bird Breeder, 50 lb bags,Recall # V-125-6;f) Tucker Milling, LLC #30230, 30 % Turkey Starter, 50 lb bags,Recall # V-126-6;g) Tucker Milling, LLC #30116, TM Broiler Finisher,50 lb bags, Recall # V-127-6CODEAll products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/20/2006RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERRecalling Firm: Tucker Milling LLC, Guntersville, AL, by telephone and visiton June 20, 2006, and by letter on June 23, 2006.Manufacturer: H. J. Baker and Brothers Inc., Stamford, CT. Firm initiatedrecall is ongoing.REASONPoultry and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant basedprotein were not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE7,541-50 lb bagsDISTRIBUTIONAL, GA, MS, and TN
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ENFORCE/2006/ENF00964.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL MI MAMMALIAN PROTEIN VOLUME OF PRODUCT INCOMMERCE 27,694,240 lbsDate: August 6, 2006 at 6:14 pm PSTPRODUCTBulk custom dairy feds manufactured from concentrates, Recall # V-113-6CODEAll dairy feeds produced between 2/1/05 and 6/16/06 and containing H. J.Baker recalled feed products.RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERVita Plus Corp., Gagetown, MI, by visit beginning on June 21, 2006. Firminitiated recall is complete.REASONThe feed was manufactured from materials that may have been contaminatedwith mammalian protein.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE27,694,240 lbsDISTRIBUTIONMI
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL AL AND FL VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 125TONS Products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:16 pm PSTPRODUCTa) CO-OP 32% Sinking Catfish, Recall # V-100-6;b) Performance Sheep Pell W/Decox/A/N, medicated,net wt. 50 lbs, Recall # V-101-6;c) Pro 40% Swine Conc Meal -- 50 lb, Recall # V-102-6;d) CO-OP 32% Sinking Catfish Food Medicated,Recall # V-103-6;e) "Big Jim's" BBB Deer Ration, Big Buck Blend,Recall # V-104-6;f) CO-OP 40% Hog Supplement Medicated Pelleted,Tylosin 100 grams/ton, 50 lb. bag, Recall # V-105-6;g) Pig Starter Pell II, 18% W/MCDX Medicated 282020,Carbadox -- 0.0055%, Recall # V-106-6;h) CO-OP STARTER-GROWER CRUMBLES, CompleteFeed for Chickens from Hatch to 20 Weeks, Medicated,Bacitracin Methylene Disalicylate, 25 and 50 Lbs,Recall # V-107-6;i) CO-OP LAYING PELLETS, Complete Feed for LayingChickens, Recall # 108-6;j) CO-OP LAYING CRUMBLES, Recall # V-109-6;k) CO-OP QUAIL FLIGHT CONDITIONER MEDICATED,net wt 50 Lbs, Recall # V-110-6;l) CO-OP QUAIL STARTER MEDICATED, Net Wt. 50 Lbs,Recall # V-111-6;m) CO-OP QUAIL GROWER MEDICATED, 50 Lbs,Recall # V-112-6CODEProduct manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERAlabama Farmers Cooperative, Inc., Decatur, AL, by telephone, fax, email andvisit on June 9, 2006. FDA initiated recall is complete.REASONAnimal and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant basedprotein not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE125 tonsDISTRIBUTIONAL and FL
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL KY VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE ?????Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:19 pm PSTPRODUCTBulk custom made dairy feed, Recall # V-114-6CODENoneRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERBurkmann Feeds LLC, Glasgow, KY, by letter on July 14, 2006. Firm initiatedrecall is ongoing.REASONCustom made feeds contain ingredient called Pro-Lak, which may containruminant derived meat and bone meal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE?????tss
DISTRIBUTION
ND OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html
CJD WATCH MESSAGE BOARDTSSMAD COW FEED RECALL USA EQUALS 10,878.06 TONS NATIONWIDESun Jul 16, 2006 09:2271.248.128.67
RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE -- CLASS II______________________________PRODUCTa) PRO-LAK, bulk weight, Protein Concentrate for Lactating Dairy Animals,Recall # V-079-6;b) ProAmino II, FOR PREFRESH AND LACTATING COWS, net weight 50lb (22.6 kg),Recall # V-080-6;c) PRO-PAK, MARINE & ANIMAL PROTEIN CONCENTRATE FOR USE IN ANIMALFEED, Recall # V-081-6;d) Feather Meal, Recall # V-082-6CODEa) Bulkb) Nonec) Bulkd) BulkRECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURERH. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL, by telephone on June 15, 2006 andby press release on June 16, 2006. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.REASONPossible contamination of animal feeds with ruminent derived meat and bonemeal.VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE10,878.06 tonsDISTRIBUTIONNationwide
END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR July 12, 2006
###
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00960.html
Subject: MAD COW FEED BAN WARNING LETTER ISSUED MAY 17, 2006Date: June 27, 2006 at 7:42 am PSTPublic Health ServiceFood and Drug Administration
New Orleans District297 Plus Park Blvd.Nashville, TN 37217
Telephone: 615-781-5380Fax: 615-781-5391
May 17, 2006
WARNING LETTER NO. 2006-NOL-06
FEDERAL EXPRESSOVERNIGHT DELIVERY
Mr. William Shirley, Jr., OwnerLouisiana.DBA Riegel By-Products2621 State StreetDallas, Texas 75204
Dear Mr. Shirley:
On February 12, 17, 21, and 22, 2006, a U.S. Food & Drug Administration(FDA) investigator inspected your rendering plant, located at 509 FortsonStreet, Shreveport, Louisiana. The inspection revealed significantdeviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of FederalRegulations, Part 589.2000 [21 CFR 589.2000], Animal Proteins Prohibited inRuminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment andamplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). You failed tofollow the requirements of this regulation; products being manufactured anddistributed by your facility are misbranded within the meaning of Section403(a)(1) [21 USC 343(a)(1)] of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act(the Act).
Our investigation found you failed to provide measures, including sufficientwritten procedures, to prevent commingling or cross-contamination and tomaintain sufficient written procedures [21 CFR 589.2000(e)] because:
You failed to use clean-out procedures or other means adequate to preventcarryover of protein derived from mammalian tissues into animal protein orfeeds which may be used for ruminants. For example, your facility uses thesame equipment to process mammalian and poultry tissues. However, you useonly hot water to clean the cookers between processing tissues from eachspecies. You do not clean the auger, hammer mill, grinder, and spouts afterprocessing mammalian tissues.
You failed to maintain written procedures specifying the clean-outprocedures or other means to prevent carryover of protein derived frommammalian tissues into feeds which may be used for ruminants.
As a result . the poultry meal you manufacture may contain protein derivedfrom mammalian tissues prohibited in ruminant feed. Pursuant to 21 CFR589.2000(e)(1)(i), any products containing or may contain protein derivedfrom mammalian tissues must be labeled, "Do not feed to cattle or otherruminants." Since you failed to label a product which may contain proteinderived from mammalian tissues with the required cautionary statement. thepoultry meal is misbranded under Section 403(a)(1) [21 USC 343(a)(1)] of theAct.
This letter is not intended as an all-inclusive list of violations at yourfacility. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, youare responsible for ensuring your overall operation and the products youmanufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should takeprompt action to correct these violations, and you should establish a systemwhereby violations do not recur. Failure to promptly correct theseviolations may result in regulatory action, such as seizure and/orinjunction, without further notice.
You should notify this office in writing within 15 working days of receivingthis letter, outlining the specific steps you have taken to bring your firminto compliance with the law. Your response should include an explanation ofeach step taken to correct the violations and prevent their recurrence. Ifcorrective action cannot be completed within 15 working days, state thereason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will becompleted. Include copies of any available documentation demonstratingcorrections have been made.
Your reply should be directed to Mark W. Rivero, Compliance Officer, U.S.Food and Drug Administration, 2424 Edenborn Avenue, Suite 410, Metairie,Louisiana 70001. If you have questions regarding any issue in this letter,please contact Mr. Rivero at (504) 219-8818, extension 103.
Sincerely,
/S
Carol S. SanchezActing District DirectorNew Orleans District
http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g5883d.htm
Subject: USDA FSIS SRM TSE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT UPDATEDate: February 17, 2007 at 7:03 pm PST Greetings,
I thought I might update you on the USDA FSIS QUARTERLY REPORTS ON THE TOPIC OF SRMs and MAD COW DISEASE I.E. BSE/BASE ETC.
REMEMBER WHAT OLD RON SAID;
Johanns stressed that the testing program is not a food safety program but rather a way to assess the prevalence of BSE. The key to protecting food safety is removing the specified risk materials (SRM)—cattle parts such as the brain and spinal cord, which are likely to carry the BSE agent if an animal is infected, he said. Removal of SRM from carcasses of cattle older than 30 months has been required since early 2004. ...
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/other/bse/news/jul2006bse.html
SINCE THE LAST TIME I REPORTED :
Subject: USDA FSIS QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT (BSE) July 1, 2005 through September 30, 2005 Date: March 20, 2006 at 12:58 pm PST
YOU can see that report at the bottom of this update.
UPDATEs AS FOLLOWS ;
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2006
snip...
Table 5. Administrative Actions: Large HACCP Plants (7/01/06 to 9/30/06)
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Large HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS 00086K M DODGE CITY, KS
On 6/15/06, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
EXCEL CORP 00086R M FORT MORGAN, CO
On 8/11/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8. On 12/22/04, plant appealed the withholding action. Appeal was denied on 1/25/05.
snip...
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 09268 M PASCO, WA X X On 7/28/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245D M EMPORIA, KS X X On 12/23/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245L M LEXINGTON, NE X X On 3/10/05, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
Table 6. Administrative Actions: Small HACCP Plants (7/01/06 to 9/30/06)
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
SSOP HACCP SPS INH INT Other LOI LOW
BOOKER PACKING COMPANY 07162 M BOOKER, TX 6/2/06 6/5/06 X X 9/19/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
SSOP HACCP SPS INH INT Other LOI LOW
GULF PACKING COMPANY 00696 M00696 P SAN BENITO, TX 2/25/06 2/26/06 X X 8/31/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
HI COUNTRY BEEF JERKY 01248 M01248 P LINCOLN, MT 3/24/06 4/14/06 X X X X 8/31/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
NORTHERN PACKING COMPANY INC. 00571 M BRIAR HILL, NY 12/9/05 12/23/05 X X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
WEST MISSOURI BEEF 05821 M ROCKVILLE, MO 3/2/06 3/16/06 4/13/06 4/17/06 X X X 8/15/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
GIBSON PACKING COMPANY 05843 M05843 P SEYMOUR, MO 9/21/06 X X X X Plant failed to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E. coli). The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
SSOP HACCP SPS INH INT Other LOI LOW
HORMANN MEAT COMPANY 05544 M05544 P FAIR GROVE, MO 6/15/06 6/22/06 X X X 9/26/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
ROCK CREEK SLAUGHTER CO. 09150 M09150 P LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN, GA 3/16/06 4/14/06 6/30/06 7/5/06 X X X X 8/11/06 On 3/16/06, an enforcement action concerning failure to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E.coli) was issued. The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, INC. 31647 M31647 P LEWISTON, UT 7/25/05 7/29/05 X X 7/25/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q4_FY2006.pdf
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT April 1, 2006 through June 30, 2006
Table 5. Administrative Actions: Large HACCP Plants (4/01/06 to 6/30/06)
CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS 00086K M DODGE CITY, KS X X On 6/15/06, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
EXCEL CORP 00086R M FORT MORGAN, CO 2/22/05 X X On 8/11/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8. On
12/22/04, plant appealed the withholding action. Appeal was denied on 1/25/05.
snip...
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC 00245L M LEXINGTON, NE X X On 3/10/05, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
SSOP HACCP SPS INH INT Other LOI LOW
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 09268 M PASCO, WA X X On 7/28/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245D M EMPORIA, KS X X On 12/23/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
BOOKER PACKING COMPANY 07162 M BOOKER, TX 4/13/06 4/19/06 X X Plant failed to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E. coli).
6/2/06 6/5/06 X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
GULF PACKING COMPANY 00696 M00696 P SAN BENITO, TX 2/25/06 2/26/06 X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
???
3/24/06 4/14/06
X X X
The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
NORTHERN PACKING COMPANY INC. 00571 M BRIAR HILL, NY 12/9/05 12/23/05 X X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
WEST MISSOURI BEEF 05821 M ROCKVILLE, MO 3/2/06 3/16/06 4/13/06 4/17/06 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
C & C MEAT SALES, INC., 18494 M18494 P, DURHAM, NC ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL.
snip...
FRESH FARMS BEEF 18579 M RUTLAND, VT 12/16/05 12/28/05 X X X 4/13/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
FRONTIER FOODS & COLD STORAGE, INC 20741 M20741 P EL PASO, TX 5/31/06 X X On 6/8/06, DM closed case by firm’s requested voluntary withdrawal. The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
HORMANN MEAT COMPANY 05544 M05544 P FAIR GROVE, MO 6/15/06 6/22/06 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
RANDALL MEAT COMPANY 10669 M HOT SPRINGS, AR 7/1/05 7/28/05 10/12/05 10/24/05 X X X 5/19/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
ROCK CREEK SLAUGHTER CO. 09150 M09150 P LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN, GA 3/16/06 4/14/06 6/30/06 X X X X On 3/16/06, an enforcement action concerning failure to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E.coli) was issued. The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
SAVORY CONNECTION, INC., 31764 M31764 P, SELINGSGROVE, PA. ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL.
snip...
STEAK MASTER, 21159 M21159 P, ELWOOD, NE. ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL.
snip...
THE MEAT SHOP 31561 M BENSON, VT 8/18/05 9/6/05 9/9/05 X X X X X 4/4/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, INC. 31647 M31647 P LEWISTON, UT 7/25/05 7/29/05 X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
WALNUT VALLEY PACKING L.L.C. 32007 M32007 P EL DORADO, KS 12/15/05 12/30/05 X X X 5/4/06 The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q3_FY2006.pdf
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT January 1, 2006 through March 31, 2006
Table 5. Administrative Actions: Large HACCP Plants (1/01/06 to 3/31/06)
CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS 00086K M DODGE CITY, KS X X 3/13/06 On 10/11/05, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
EXCEL CORP. 00086R M FORT MORGAN, CO 8/11/04 2/22/05 X X On 8/11/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
On 12/22/04, plant appealed the withholding action. Appeal was denied on 1/25/05.
snip...
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245L M 3/12/04 3/18/04 X
LEXINGTON, NE
X X On 3/10/05, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 09268 M PASCO, WA X X On 7/28/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 00245D M EMPORIA, KS X X On 12/23/04, a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
GULF PACKING COMPANY, 00696 M00696 P, SAN BENITO, TX, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
HI COUNTRY BEEF JERKY, 01248 M01248 P, LINCOLN, MT, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
HITCHIN POST STEAK COMPANY, 20773 M20773 P, KANSAS CITY, KS, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
NORTHERN PACKING COMPANY INC. 00571 M BRIAR HILL, NY 12/9/05 12/23/05 X X X X The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
ROCK CREEK SLAUGHTER CO., 09150 M09150 P, FAIRBURY, NE, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
WEST MISSOURI BEEF 05821 M ROCKVILLE, MO 3/2/06 3/16/06 X X X The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
Table 7. Administrative Actions: Very Small HACCP Plants (1/01/06 to 3/31/06)
A.J. CEKAK'S MEAT MARKET 21562 M ORD. NE, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
ALTA VISTA LOCKER 31931 M ALTA VISTA, KS, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
C&C MEAT SALES, INC. 18494 M18494 P UPPER MARLBORO, MD 2/27/06 3/16/06 X X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
FRESH FARMS BEEF 18579 M RUTLAND, VT 12/16/05 12/28/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
H AND P MEATS 21352 M SOUTH PITTSBURG, TN 7/28/05 8/8/05 8/17/05 8/19/05 X X 3/6/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
PARADISE LOCKER MEATS 31865 M31865 P TRIMBLE, MO 9/21/05 10/7/05 X X 1/13/06 The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
PARAGON SPRAY DRYING, L.L.C. 31762 M31762 P WAUKON, IA 9/6/05 9/12/05 X X X 2/9/06 The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
RANDALL MEAT COMPANY 10669 M HOT SPRINGS, AR 7/1/05 7/28/05 10/12/05 10/24/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
SAVORY CONNECTION, INC. 31764 M31764 P SELINGSGROVE, PA 3/14/06 3/31/06 X X X The enforcement action included, as basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
STEAK MASTER, 21159 M21159 P, ELWOOD, NW, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
TEARS MARKET, 04535 M04535 P, PENN YAN, NY, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
THE MEAT SHOP, 31561 M BENSON, VT, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, INC. 31647 M31647 P, LEWISTON, UT, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
TOOELE VALLEY MEATS 20594 M20594 P, GRANTSVILLE, UT, ... FAILURE TO COMPLY CONCERNING SRM MATERIAL
snip...
WALNUT VALLEY PACKING L.L.C. 32007 M32007 P EL DORADO, KS 12/15/05 12/30/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
WILLIAM. G. MEST PACKING CO. 04431 M STRYKERSVILLE, NY 2/2/06 2/23/06 X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material. On 3/21/06, NOIE was modified and
reissued. On 6/29/06, NOIE was
rescinded.
YODER BROTHERS MEAT PROCESSING 17301 M PARIS, TN 10/3/05 10/12/05 X X 2/23/06 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
snip...
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q1_FY2006.pdf
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT October 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005
SRM REMOVAL USA
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICEQUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT October 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005
snip....
CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS 00086K M DODGE CITY, KS X X On 10/11/05, awithholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery Systemproduct was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
EXCEL CORP 00086R M FORT MORGAN, CO 2/22/05 X X On 8/11/04, a withholdingaction concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was takenin accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8. On 12/22/04, plant appealed thewithholding action. Appeal was denied on 1/25/05.
00245L M LEXINGTON, NE 3/12/04 3/18/04 X 5/4/05 X X On 3/10/05, awithholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery Systemproduct was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
9/16/05 9/29/05 X X TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. 09268 M PASCO, WA X X On 7/28/04,a withholding action concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery Systemproduct was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
TYSON FRESH MEATS INC. X X 00245D M EMPORIA, KS On 12/23/04, a withholdingaction concerning labels for Advanced Meat Recovery System product was takenin accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.8.
DESERET MEAT 04852 M SPANISH FORK, UT 7/20/05 8/1/05 X X 12/29/05 Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
NORTHERN PACKING COMPANY INC. 00571 M BRIAR HILL, NY 12/9/05 12/23/05 X X XX The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishmentto comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
A.J. CEKAK'S MEAT MARKET 9/1/05 9/20/05 X X X On 9/1/05, an enforcementaction21562 Mconcerning failure to meet regulatory ORD, NE requirements for Escherichiacoli Biotype 1 (E. coli) was taken. The enforcement action included, as abasis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agency requirementsconcerning specified risk material.
ALTA VISTA LOCKER10/5/05 10/26/05 X X The enforcement action included, as a 31931 M basis,failure of the establishment toALTA VISTA, KS comply with Agencyrequirementsconcerning specified risk material.
BROWN'S PROCESSING 13100 M13100 P ELSBERRY, MO 8/8/05 8/16/05 X X X 11/16/05The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
CHAMPLAIN BEEF INC 2/28/05 3/4/05 3/8/05 X X X08547 MWHITEHALL, NY10/17/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of theestablishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified riskmaterial.
FIVE STAR PACK INC. 9/1/05 9/9/05 X X 12/29/05 On 9/1/05, an enforcementaction08725 M08725 Pconcerning failure to meet regulatory GOLDEN CITY, MO requirements forEscherichia coli Biotype 1 (E. coli) was taken. The enforcement actionincluded, as a basis, failure of the establishment to comply with Agencyrequirements concerning specified risk material. FRESH FARMS BEEF 12/16/0512/28/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a 18579 M basis, failureof the establishment toRUTLAND, VT comply with Agency requirementsconcerning specified risk material.
GOETZ AND SONS WESTERN 11/15/05 11/23/05 12/1/05 X XMEATS INC06245 M06245 PEVERETT, WA12/17/05 12/28/05 X X X On 12/17/05, firm violated a regulatory controlaction by selling U.S.D.A retained product.
H AND P MEATS 21352 M SOUTH PITTSBURG, TN 7/28/05 8/8/05 8/17/05 8/19/05 X XThe enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
HOPKINS PACKING COMPANY 11069 M BLACKFOOT, ID 7/28/05 8/1/05 X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
NORTHWEST PREMIUM MEATS LLC 11032 M11032 P NAMPA, ID 7/26/05 7/29/05 X X11/15/05 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of theestablishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified riskmaterial.
PARADISE LOCKER MEATS 31865 M31865 P TRIMBLE, MO 9/21/05 10/7/05 X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material. PARAGONSPRAY DRYING, LLC 31762 M31762 P WAUKON, IA 9/6/05 9/12/05 X X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
RANDALL MEAT COMPANY 10669 M HOT SPRINGS, AR 7/1/05 7/28/05 10/12/0510/24/05 X X X The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of theestablishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified riskmaterial.
S & S MEAT COMPANY 01046 M01046 P KANSAS CITY, MO 8/4/05 8/19/05 X X11/16/05 The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of theestablishment to comply with Agency requirements concerning specified riskmaterial.
STEAK MASTER 21159 M21159 P ELWOOD, NE 11/4/05 11/17/05 X X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
THE MEAT SHOP 31561 M BENSON, VT 8/18/05 9/6/05 9/9/05 X X X X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, INC 31647 M31647 P LEWISTON, UT 7/27/05 7/29/05 X XThe enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
TOOELE VALLEY MEATS 20594 M20594 P GRANTSVILLE, UT 7/25/05 8/1/05 X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
WALNUT VALLEY PACKING LLC 32007 M32007 P EL DORADO, KS 12/15/05 12/30/05 X XX The enforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishmentto comply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
YODER BROTHERS MEAT PROCESSING 17301 M PARIS, TN 10/3/05 10/12/05 X X Theenforcement action included, as a basis, failure of the establishment tocomply with Agency requirements concerning specified risk material.
full text 54 pages ;
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q1_FY2006.pdf
Subject: USDA FSIS QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT (BSE) July 1, 2005 through September 30, 2005 Date: March 20, 2006 at 12:58 pm PST
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT REPORT July 1, 2005 through September 30, 2005
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
DESERET MEAT 04852 M SPANISH FORK, UT 07/27/05 08/01/05 X X On 7/27/05, a suspension action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
MONTEBELLO MEAT PROCESSING, INC 19075 M19075 P MANATI, PR 08/01/05 08/18/05 X X X 09/26/05 On 8/1/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Table 7. Administrative Actions: Very Small HACCP Plants (7/01/05 to 9/30/05)
snip...
A.J. CEKAK'S MEAT MARKET 09/01/05 09/20/05 On 9/1/05, an enforcement action
21562 M
concerning failure to meet regulatory ORD, NE requirements for Escherichia coli X X X Biotype 1 (E. coli) and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy/Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
BROWN'S PROCESSING 13100 M13100 P ELSBERRY, MO 08/08/05 08/16/05 X X X On 8/8/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
FIVE STAR PACK INC. 08725 M08725 P GOLDEN CITY, MO 09/01/05 09/09/05 X X On 9/1/05, an enforcement action concerning failure to meet regulatory requirements for Escherichia coli Biotype 1 (E. coli) and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy/Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
H AND P MEATS 21352 M SOUTH PITTSBURG, TN 07/28/05 08/08/05 08/17/05 08/19/05 X X On 8/17/05, a suspension action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
HOPKINS PACKING COMPANY 11069 M BLACKFOOT, ID 07/28/05 08/01/05 X X On 7/28/05, a suspension action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
NORTHWEST PREMIUM MEATS LLC 11032 M11032 P NAMPA, ID 07/26/05 07/29/05 X X On 7/26/05, a suspension action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
PARADISE LOCKER MEATS 31865 M31865 P TRIMBLE, MO 09/21/05 X X On 9/21/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
PARAGON SPRAY DRYING, LLC 31792 M31792 P WAUKON, IA 09/06/05 09/12/05 X X X On 9/6/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
RANDALL MEAT COMPANY 10669 M HOT SPRINGS, AR 07/01/05 07/28/05 X X X On 7/1/05, an enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
snip...
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
08/04/05
08/19/05
On 8/4/05,
an enforcement action 01046 M01046 P concerning Bovine SpongiformKANSAS CITY, MO X X Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4.
Administrative Actions Pending or Taken at Very Small HACCP Plants [includes actions initiated in prior quarters]
snip...
THE MEAT SHOP 08/18/05 09/06/05
09/09/05
On 9/6/05, a suspension action 31561 M concerning Bovine SpongiformBENSON, VT Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3. XX X X X
THEURER'S QUALITY MEATS, 07/27/05 07/29/05
On 7/27/05, a suspension action INC concerning Bovine Spongiform31647 M31647 P Encephalopathy and Specified Risk X X
LEWISTON, UT Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
TOOELE VALLEY MEATS 07/25/05 08/01/05
On 7/25/05, a suspension action 20594 M20594 Pconcerning Bovine Spongiform
GRANTSVILLE, UT X X Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material was taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.3.
snip...
52 pages
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q4_FY2005.pdf
PREVIOUS
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q3_FY2005.pdf
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q2_FY2005.pdf
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/QER_Q1_FY2005.pdf
IF i remember correctly, the infamous PURINA FEED MILL incident in Gonzales TEXAS, where at one feeding, those cows could not have consumed more than......or no more than 5.5 grams...etc. so, how many feedings does a feeder and or dairy calf have in there lifespan ? wouldn't you multiply that by those figures by that ??? be a lot of potential mad cow protein IN COMMERCE, and still is in 2006......tss FDA has determined that each animal could have consumed, at most and in total, five-and-one-half grams - approximately a quarter ounce -- of prohibited material. These animals weigh approximately 600 pounds.
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2001/NEW00752.html
http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/archive/2001/ch5/default.htm
1: J Infect Dis 1980 Aug;142(2):205-8
Oral transmission of kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and scrapie to nonhuman primates.
Gibbs CJ Jr, Amyx HL, Bacote A, Masters CL, Gajdusek DC.
Kuru and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease of humans and scrapie disease of sheep and goats were transmitted to squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) that were exposed to the infectious agents only by their nonforced consumption of known infectious tissues. The asymptomatic incubation period in the one monkey exposed to the virus of kuru was 36 months; that in the two monkeys exposed to the virus of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was 23 and 27 months, respectively; and that in the two monkeys exposed to the virus of scrapie was 25 and 32 months, respectively. Careful physical examination of the buccal cavities of all of the monkeys failed to reveal signs or oral lesions. One additional monkey similarly exposed to kuru has remained asymptomatic during the 39 months that it has been under observation.
PMID: 6997404 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6997404&dopt=Abstract
look at the table and you'll see that as little as 1 mg (or 0.001 gm) caused 7% (1 of 14) of the cows to come down with BSE;
Risk of oral infection with bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent in primates
Corinne Ida Lasmézas, Emmanuel Comoy, Stephen Hawkins, Christian Herzog, Franck Mouthon, Timm Konold, Frédéric Auvré, Evelyne Correia, Nathalie Lescoutra-Etchegaray, Nicole Salès, Gerald Wells, Paul Brown, Jean-Philippe Deslys Summary The uncertain extent of human exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)--which can lead to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD)--is compounded by incomplete knowledge about the efficiency of oral infection and the magnitude of any bovine-to-human biological barrier to transmission. We therefore investigated oral transmission of BSE to non-human primates. We gave two macaques a 5 g oral dose of brain homogenate from a BSE-infected cow. One macaque developed vCJD-like neurological disease 60 months after exposure, whereas the other remained free of disease at 76 months. On the basis of these findings and data from other studies, we made a preliminary estimate of the food exposure risk for man, which provides additional assurance that existing public health measures can prevent transmission of BSE to man.
snip...
BSE bovine brain inoculum
100 g 10 g 5 g 1 g 100 mg 10 mg 1 mg 0·1 mg 0·01 mg
Primate (oral route)* 1/2 (50%)
Cattle (oral route)* 10/10 (100%) 7/9 (78%) 7/10 (70%) 3/15 (20%) 1/15 (7%) 1/15 (7%)
RIII mice (ic ip route)* 17/18 (94%) 15/17 (88%) 1/14 (7%)
PrPres biochemical detection
The comparison is made on the basis of calibration of the bovine inoculum used in our study with primates against a bovine brain inoculum with a similar PrPres concentration that was
inoculated into mice and cattle.8 *Data are number of animals positive/number of animals surviving at the time of clinical onset of disease in the first positive animal (%). The accuracy of
bioassays is generally judged to be about plus or minus 1 log. ic ip=intracerebral and intraperitoneal.
Table 1: Comparison of transmission rates in primates and cattle infected orally with similar BSE brain inocula
Published online January 27, 2005
http://www.thelancet.com/journal/journal.isa
It is clear that the designing scientists must also have shared Mr Bradley’s surprise at the results because all the dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s145d.pdf
6. It also appears to me that Mr Bradley’s answer (that it would take less than say 100
grams) was probably given with the benefit of hindsight; particularly if one
considers that later in the same answer Mr Bradley expresses his surprise that it
could take as little of 1 gram of brain to cause BSE by the oral route within the
same species. This information did not become available until the "attack rate"
experiment had been completed in 1995/96. This was a titration experiment
designed to ascertain the infective dose. A range of dosages was used to ensure
that the actual result was within both a lower and an upper limit within the study
and the designing scientists would not have expected all the dose levels to trigger
infection. The dose ranges chosen by the most informed scientists at that time
ranged from 1 gram to three times one hundred grams. It is clear that the designing
scientists must have also shared Mr Bradley’s surprise at the results because all the
dose levels right down to 1 gram triggered infection.
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s147f.pdf
2) Infectious dose:
To cattle: 1 gram of infected brain material (by oral ingestion)
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/sci/bio/bseesbe.shtml
Subject: Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the Oral Route Date: September 29, 2007 at 12:50 pm PST
P04.27
Experimental BSE Infection of Non-human Primates: Efficacy of the Oral Route
Holznagel, E1; Yutzy, B1; Deslys, J-P2; Lasmézas, C2; Pocchiari, M3; Ingrosso, L3; Bierke, P4; Schulz-Schaeffer, W5; Motzkus, D6; Hunsmann, G6; Löwer, J1 1Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Germany; 2Commissariat à l´Energie Atomique, France; 3Instituto Superiore di Sanità, Italy; 4Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease control, Sweden; 5Georg August University, Germany; 6German Primate Center, Germany
Background:
In 2001, a study was initiated in primates to assess the risk for humans to contract BSE through contaminated food. For this purpose, BSE brain was titrated in cynomolgus monkeys.
Aims:
The primary objective is the determination of the minimal infectious dose (MID50) for oral exposure to BSE in a simian model, and, by in doing this, to assess the risk for humans. Secondly, we aimed at examining the course of the disease to identify possible biomarkers.
Methods:
Groups with six monkeys each were orally dosed with lowering amounts of BSE brain: 16g, 5g, 0.5g, 0.05g, and 0.005g. In a second titration study, animals were intracerebrally (i.c.) dosed (50, 5, 0.5, 0.05, and 0.005 mg).
Results:
In an ongoing study, a considerable number of high-dosed macaques already developed simian vCJD upon oral or intracerebral exposure or are at the onset of the clinical phase. However, there are differences in the clinical course between orally and intracerebrally infected animals that may influence the detection of biomarkers.
Conclusions:
Simian vCJD can be easily triggered in cynomolgus monkeys on the oral route using less than 5 g BSE brain homogenate. The difference in the incubation period between 5 g oral and 5 mg i.c. is only 1 year (5 years versus 4 years). However, there are rapid progressors among orally dosed monkeys that develop simian v CJD as fast as intracerebrally inoculated animals.
The work referenced was performed in partial fulfilment of the study “BSE in primates“ supported by the EU (QLK1-2002-01096).
http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf
THE FDA MAD COW FEED BAN I.E. RUMINANT TO RUMINANT AUGUST 4, 1997 PARTIAL, AND VOLUNTARY AT THAT, WAS NOTHING MORE THAN INK ON PAPER. ...tss
Docket No. 2003N-0312 Animal Feed Safety System [TSS SUBMISSION]
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03n0312/03N-0312_emc-000001.txt
Docket Management Docket: 02N-0273 - Substances Prohibited From Use in
Animal Food or Feed; Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed
Comment Number: EC -10
Accepted - Volume 2
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be07.html
PART 2
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012403/8004be09.html
PDF]Freas, William TSS SUBMISSION
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat -
Page 1. J Freas, William From: Sent: To: Subject: Terry S. Singeltary
Sr. [flounder@wt.net] Monday, January 08,200l 3:03 PM freas ...
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3681s2_09.pdf
Asante/Collinge et al, 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;
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/slides/3923s1_OPH.htm
Docket Management Docket: 96N-0417 - Current Good Manufacturing Practicein Manufacturing, Packing, or Holding Dietary Ingredients aComment Number: EC -2Accepted - Volume 7
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Mar03/031403/96N-0417-EC-2.htm
[Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified RiskMaterials for Human Food and Requirement for the Disposition ofNon-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle
9/13/2005
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/03-025IFA/03-025IFA-2.pdf
[Docket No. FSIS-2006-0011] FSIS Harvard Risk Assessment of BovineSpongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf
Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMALIMPORTS FROM CANADA
https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed
Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No.05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSIONDate: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PSTAugust 24, 2005
Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1]RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Greetings APHIS ET AL,
My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;
snip...
THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances withhuman and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in differentspecies to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE incattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with differentstrains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typicalscrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to havepassed to sheep. all of which have beenrendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, afrightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with humanlife around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from theUSA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, withpotential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot beundone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily andextensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97.I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue tobelieve in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only thisone strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, willonly lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from allstrains of TSE, and possibly manymore needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sourcesvia many studies with primates and rodents and other species.
MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, butthe USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than adrum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100%sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animalconsumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK didwith there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, allthe while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing morethan a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE andGW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???
go figure. ...
Terry S. Singeltary Sr.P.O. Box 42Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Comment SubmittedComment Receipt
Thank you. Your comment on Document ID: APHIS-2006-0041-0001 has beensent. Comment Tracking Number: APHIS-2006-0041-DRAFT-0028
Attachments: C:\My Music\My Documents\APHIS-2006-0041_January 28.doc
If you wish to retain a copy of the receipt, use the following link toprint a copy for your files. Print
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main
THE only difference between the UK poisoning the globe, and the USA, it isnow legal with GWs and OIEs BSE MRR policy ;
IT's O.K. to poison 3rd world countries ;
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1994/05/20002001.pdf
On 20 February 1990, Dr Pickles wrote to Ms Verity(APS/CMO). Dr Picklesí minute included the following: 1. Mr Meldrum is arguing that MAFF have already taken all thenecessary and responsible steps to warn importing countries of the BSE dangers in UK meat and bone meal. Yet the action takenso far overseas suggest the message has not got through, or where it has this has been late. The first nationthat woke up to the danger did so a year after our own feed ban. It seems even now several EC countries neither ban ourimports or the general feeding of ruminant protein. It also seems the OIE and CVO have yet to inform the rest of the world. 2. I do not see how this can be claimed to be responsibleí. Wedo not need an expert group of the Scientific Veterinary Committee to tell us British meat and bone meal is unsafe forruminants. I fail to understand why this cannot be tackled from the British end which seems to be the only sure way of doingit, preferably by banning exports. As CMO says in his letter of 3 January surely it is short sighted for us to riskbeing seen in future as having been responsible for the introduction of BSE to the food chain in other countries.íí[79]
http://www.bse.org.uk/dfa/dfa25.htm
http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jul00_dont_eat_sheep.html#hhh
Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease inthe United States
http://cjdusa.blogspot.com/
i am reminded of a few things deep throat (high ranking official at usda)told me years ago;
==========================================
The most frightening thing I have read all day is thereport of Gambetti's finding of a new strain ofsporadic cjd in young people.........Dear God,
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7842737484277562285&postID=5759550357128128100
BSE BASE MAD COW TESTING TEXAS, USA, AND CANADA, A REVIEW OF SORTS
http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/
MADCOW USDA the untold story
http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/
http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/
MADCOW USDA the untold story continued
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6472149427883113751&postID=4829467681293855400
USA NOR-98 SCRAPIE UPDATE AUGUST 31, 2007 RISES TO 5 DOCUMENTED CASES
http://nor-98.blogspot.com/
Government Accountability Project
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3995372399492420922&postID=295754279213239559
Transmissible Mink Encephalopathy TME
http://transmissible-mink-encephalopathy.blogspot.com/
TME hyper/drowsy, INTER-SPECIES TRANSMISSION CWD and strainproperties
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=37955408&postID=116577315153980667
USA NVCJD BLOOD RECALLS ONLY ;
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=CJD+BLOOD+RECALLS+TSS&btnG=Search
vCJD case study highlights blood transfusion risk
http://vcjdblood.blogspot.com/
CREUTZFELDT JAKOB DISEASE MAD COW BASE, CWD, SCRAPIE UPDATE OCT 2007
http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/
TSEAC MEETINGS
http://tseac.blogspot.com/
MRSA
http://staphmrsa.blogspot.com/
ABSTRACTS SPORADIC CJD AND H BASE MAD COW ALABAMA AND TEXAS SEPTEMBER 2007
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 21:31:55 -0500
I suggest that you all read the data out about h-BASE and sporadic CJD, GSS,blood, and some of the other abstracts from the PRION2007. ...
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&F=&S=&P=19744
*** PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS !!! THE PRICE OFPOKER INDEED GOES UP. ...TSS
USA BASE CASE, (ATYPICAL BSE), AND OR TSE (whatever they are calling ittoday), please note that both the ALABAMA COW, AND THE TEXAS COW, both were''H-TYPE'', personal communication Detwiler et al Wednesday, August 22, 200711:52 PM. ...TSS
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0708&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=19779
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."Subject: CWD UPDATE 88 AUGUST 31, 2007
http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=450
PLEASE NOTE IN USA CJD UPDATE AS AT JUNE 2007, please note steady increasein ''TYPE UNKNOWN''. ...TSS
1 Acquired in the United Kingdom; 2 Acquired in Saudi Arabia; 3 Includes 17inconclusive and 9 pending (1 from 2006, 8from 2007); 4 Includes 17 non-vCJD type unknown (2 from 1996, 2 from 1997, 1from 2001, 1 from 2003, 4 from 2004, 3from 2005, 4 from 2006) and 36 type pending (2 from 2005, 8 from 2006,
*** 26 from 2007)
http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/pdf/case-table.pdf
Terry S. Singeltary SR.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)