It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mad Cow Disease Tests Being Cut By 90%

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 08:31 PM
link   
The Agricultural Department has announced they are cutting testing for Mad Cow Disease by about 90%. They currently test 1,000 cattle a day. Although that may sound like a great deal of cattle, it turns out otherwise. The current testing of cattle is only 1% of the 35 million cattle slaughtered each year. The Agricultural Department has decided to cut testing down to .1%. This sparks tension amoung consumer groups.
 



www.chron.com
WASHINGTON — The Agriculture Department is cutting its tests for mad cow disease by about 90 percent, drawing protests from consumer groups.

The current testing level _ 1,000 each day _ reflects the heightened concern that followed the discovery in December 2003 of mad cow disease in the United States.

The current level of 1,000 tests each day represents about 1 percent of the 35 million cattle slaughtered annually in this country. Beginning around late August, the new level will be about 110 tests per day.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Now I strongly suggest everyone read the entire article because there are many things we MUST look into being that there are a great deal of things here that wreak of conspiracy.

First we will start off with Mike Johann. He is the Secretary of Agricultural Department. Lets take a look on Mikes history, shall we.



Secretary Johanns' strong agricultural roots stretch back to his childhood. He was born in Iowa and grew up doing chores on his family's dairy farm. As the son of a dairy farmer, he developed a deep respect for the land and the people who work it.


we see his connection to the cattle industry at a young age here. Next,



Days after he took office, he began working with U.S. trading partners to reopen their markets to U.S. beef. Nearly 119 countries had closed their markets after a single finding of a BSE-infected cow in the U.S. in 2003. Within his first year, Johanns convinced nearly half that number to reopen markets.


Now what we see is his aim to get markets back open for the cattle industry in world trade. He basically was aiming to widen the cattle industries market. Well we can see why he would want to do this, but why were they closed in the first place? Why did countries close the cattle trade with the US, because the US found a case of BSE in a cattle.

Now lets think for a moment. The US found a case of BSE, causing countries to close the importation of US cattle. So what solution could there be to improve on the test results of Mad Cow Disease? Well to Mike, its cutting the tests to a 10th of 1 percent, or about 40,000 of the 35 Million cattle in the United States slaughtered a year.

Next topic: Claims Of Safety
Mike wants to claim-


Original Source
"Those who are trying to convince their consumers that universal testing or 100 percent testing somehow solves the problem really are misleading you," he said.

"Consumers should feel better than ever about the meat that they are buying," Johanns said.


Why is that Mike? Well its because they have only found 2 cases since 2003, which compared to Japan is great! Or is it? Well Mike says so. He says that-


Original Source
Johanns said Japan, which has found 27 cases of mad cow disease, definitely has a problem with mad cow disease.

In contrast, the United States has a much larger herd of cattle and has found three cases of the disease: In December 2003, in a Washington state cow imported from Canada; last June, in a Texas-born cow; and in March, in an Alabama cow.


So like Mike said, the US has a MUCH bigger amount of cattle and a lower percent of positive Tests. So the US meat MUST be safe right? Hmmm, I don't know about that Mike. What to know why Mike? Because the tests are practically worthless, thats why mike. Your "Tests" only work with cattle that are close to developing the symptoms, so the young cattle, well they could have it and your tests wouldnt prove it.

Its sad because they will constantly say "Those who are trying to convince their consumers that universal testing or 100 percent testing somehow solves the problem really are misleading you," but they don't say why. The real reason why is because the tests don't work. 100% doesn't solve the problems, and neither did 1% or even 1/10th a percent. In truth they just don't want to say the truth "We have no real way to insure our meat is safe"

So next time you eat your beef, remember, they have no way to test for Mad Cow Disease since a majority of the cattle they slaughter are too young to show any symptoms, thus no test to provide you with safe meat. You never going to hear that on your news station though.

www.bloomberg.com...


[edit on 20-7-2006 by grimreaper797]




posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 11:29 AM
link   
.

Good work.



Interesting find - the Senate also is criticizing the lack of testing and monitoring for bird flu in commercial poultry.




Senators Slam Voluntary Bird Flu Testing in the USA

Senators on Friday criticized the Agriculture Department's planning for deadly bird flu, saying the voluntary nature of its testing program threatens the U.S. poultry industry.

At issue is a federal audit that found the government lacks a comprehensive plan for testing and monitoring bird flu in commercial poultry.




Kinda makes you wonder. No test, no find.

Well - it's a strategy.





posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 02:35 PM
link   
well soficrow, I did researching on it an found that the tests they use only work if the animal is about to or already showing symptoms. Cattle under a certian amount of months wont show any symptoms even if it has it.

check this out:

extension.usu.edu...



The incubation period in cattle is usually 2 1/2 to 6 years, so the peak of disease
occurs in cattle 4-5 years old.
.....
Because of the long incubation period, infected cattle have rarely been found at
less than 30 months of age.
....
Most cattle are slaughtered at 12-18 months of age.


so honestly, it doesnt matter if we tested them because they could be positive and we wouldn't be able to tell with or without the tests.

check this out though:
www.meatnews.com...


However, the United States argued that the testing of young cattle – less than 20 months of age was unnecessary. BSE does not infect young animals.


Take a look at this though:
tokyo.usembassy.gov...


One estimate is that current test methodology would have a false negative test rate of 92% for clinically normal adult cattle because prion accumulation is lower than the detection threshold (i.e., if 100 BSE-infected adult cattle were tested while clinically normal, 92% of them would test negative even though they were, in fact, infected).


sorry I must stop here for now, although I am hoping to get the information to make the point I wanted to here, very little information is avalible for it. I'll get back to you when I can.



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 03:24 PM
link   
I'm thinking this looks like one more way that the feds are hoodwinking the public. I can see the point to not testing if cattle are killed at 18 months or so, since the test wouldn't work at that young age. However, it also looks like the govt has figured that since we have no accurate tests and no cure for BSE, they want to forget about it and have the numbers look better for foreign markets so they will buy our beef. Also, if no positives are found due to no testing, then the media will forget about it and so will the People. It can take up to 50 years for symtpms to appear in humans and during that time, alot of other BSE people could die. Our government has a policy (called "Global 2000) that looks for ways to reduce the population. Looks like one more time the American public has been abandoned, i.e. Katrina and now Lebanon by the feds who are supposed to be watchdogs for this type of thing.
I don't think the feds care any longer about the well-being of the American People, we're on our own here.



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
However, it also looks like the govt has figured that since we have no accurate tests....


But see thats the thing, according to the man who proposed that Prions are the cause for BSE, Dr. Stanley Prusiner, there are tests.



Newer tests, by a variety of companies, are more sensitive, cheaper and faster. Dr. Prusiner said that his test could even detect extremely small amounts of infectious prion in very young animals with no symptoms. Sold by InPro Biotechnology in South San Francisco, a single testing operation could process 8,000 samples in 24 hours, he said.

query.nytimes.com...

so as you can see, there seem to be such tests. So why aren't they using them?



It can take up to 50 years for symtpms to appear in humans....


Not exactly. its between 8-10, but there have been rare cases of up to 20 years.



were on our own here


yep



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797



Newer tests, by a variety of companies, are more sensitive, cheaper and faster. Dr. Prusiner said that his test could even detect extremely small amounts of infectious prion in very young animals with no symptoms. Sold by InPro Biotechnology in South San Francisco, a single testing operation could process 8,000 samples in 24 hours, he said.

query.nytimes.com...




You beat me to it - was looking for my file on the newer tests. And there are several - ALL more sensitive, cheaper and faster.






so as you can see, there seem to be such tests. So why aren't they using them?




HMMMM. I wonder.







It can take up to 50 years for symtpms to appear in humans....


Not exactly. its between 8-10, but there have been rare cases of up to 20 years.




My info says progression is extremely variable, and depends on numerous factors including:

- amount of exposure (Ie., actual # of prions that enter the body),
- point of entry,
- other triggers/exposures (esp. flu and infections that crank up the immune system, because prions use the immune system to spread through the body)


...but 50 years is legit. Darn though - had something recent on progression referring back to the Papua New Guinea cannibals and can't find it as quickly as I need to here...


.

format

[edit on 21-7-2006 by soficrow]



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow




so as you can see, there seem to be such tests. So why aren't they using them?




HMMMM. I wonder.






Oh yeah. Maybe for the same reasons vaccine manufacturers don't test for prion
contamination even though cattle products are used in the vaccine-manufacturing process:

1. There are too many different prion strains;

2. Existent prions morph into new strains at the drop of a hat, like with a shift in temperature;

3. Vaccine manufacturing and food processing actually create new prions;


SO

4. There is no point - you'd identify 3 or 4 known strains, but you'd miss the rest -
Mad Cow/BSE is just one of Gawd-knows-how-many prion strains now loose in the world.




(And yes, I do have a reference for this info, somewhere - but try Googling
*Mad Cow *FDA *committee *vaccines)



.


readability


[edit on 21-7-2006 by soficrow]



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

Oh yeah. Maybe for the same reasons vaccine manufacturers don't test for prion
contamination even though cattle products are used in the vaccine-manufacturing process:

1. There are too many different prion strains;

2. Existent prions morph into new strains at the drop of a hat, like with a shift in temperature;

3. Vaccine manufacturing and food processing actually create new prions;


SO

4. There is no point - you'd identify 3 or 4 known strains, but you'd miss the rest -
Mad Cow/BSE is just one of Gawd-knows-how-many prion strains now loose in the world.




(And yes, I do have a reference for this info, somewhere - but try Googling
*Mad Cow *FDA *committee *vaccines)



.


readability


[edit on 21-7-2006 by soficrow]


What we should be focusing on is not a vaccine, but detection to just get rid of it. Isolation is a way to avoid it spreading. A vaccine to me is not worth pursuing. Detection is.



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 04:37 PM
link   


Stanley B. Prusiner, who won a Nobel Prize for discovering that prions cause transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (diseases such as BSE and CJD), also argues that all cattle carcasses should be tested for BSE. The disease is generally thought to arise from eating infected meat and bone meal, he explains, but isolated cases could occur spontaneously, just as prion diseases arise spontaneously in many mammals--humans and sheep, for example. He also claims that 30 months is an arbitrary cutoff age for testing. Although BSE symptoms do not appear until after 30 months, the animal may be infective long before then, he explains.

The cost of testing all cattle would be very low, only a few cents per pound, compared with the danger of not testing, Prusiner says. At a May hearing before the California Senate agriculture committee, he used an analogy: If there were two ticket lines at an airport and one guaranteed you would get to your destination safely for $1.00 extra while the other line offered no guarantee, most consumers would pay the extra dollar. Similarly, he expects that most consumers would be willing to pay a few extra cents per pound for BSE-tested beef.

Prusiner notes that he has studied prion diseases for two decades, but there is still a great deal that isn't understood about them. At any time, a new strain of BSE prions could develop that is more infective for humans. "Only the Japanese solution of testing every slaughtered cow or bull will eliminate prions from the food supply and restore consumer confidence," he says.

But what Prusiner believes is that an acceptable expense is considered unacceptable by NCBA. NCBA argues that the cost of testing every slaughtered animal would be "huge"--about $30 per animal. Since about 35 million cattle are slaughtered each year in the U.S., the total cost of a universal testing program would be more than $1 billion and would increase beef prices by about 5 cents per lb, NCBA claims.

pubs.acs.org...

This article gives a great insight as to what we are talking about.

O no 5more cents per pound!!!! thats a damn tragedy isn't it?! You would not pay 5 more cents per pound to have meat that was safe? Maybe you wouldn't but I sure as hell would. But guess what, they are using you as an excuse.



John Stewart, chief executive officer of the meatpacker Creekstone Farms, says the major meat processors--the four corporations that process more than 80% of U.S. beef--don't want to test all their beef because 4 or 5 cents per lb to a commodity packer is big money. "Commodity packers basically believe they can't move extra costs up the food chain to the consumer," he says. "So they end up doing one of two things: reducing their profits or moving those costs down the food chain to the cattle producer," he observes.


they are saying "well we cant move this 5 cents to the consumer (and you know they won't lose profits) so the only way is to move the costs to the cattle producer(which isn't going to happen)." Stop playing toward big businesses benefit, and demand this 5 cents per pound for safer meat.

There is no doubt it seems the InPro Biotechnologies tests seem to be the most sensitive of them all. The EU has accepted it, but the FDA hasn't. Like I said, Stanley Prusiner himself said that InPro Biotechnology tests were the best way to probably go. They were cheap effective and such. But that 5 cent per pound damnit...just too costly for human safety.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797

Originally posted by soficrow

Oh yeah. Maybe for the same reasons vaccine manufacturers don't test for prion
contamination even though cattle products are used in the vaccine-manufacturing process:

1. There are too many different prion strains;

2. Existent prions morph into new strains at the drop of a hat, like with a shift in temperature;

3. Vaccine manufacturing and food processing actually create new prions;


SO

4. There is no point - you'd identify 3 or 4 known strains, but you'd miss the rest -
Mad Cow/BSE is just one of Gawd-knows-how-many prion strains now loose in the world.



What we should be focusing on is not a vaccine, but detection to just get rid of it. Isolation is a way to avoid it spreading. A vaccine to me is not worth pursuing. Detection is.



My point here is that vaccine manufacturing and other industrial processes create prions - and prion diseases.
Then spread them.




Ed to add: Cutting Mad Cow testing, not testing vaccines for prions like Mad Cow, not testing for bird flu - all reflect the results of insider horse trading. Nobody wants to get caught holding the hot potato, so they pretend it does not exist.



.






[edit on 22-7-2006 by soficrow]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 08:54 PM
link   
yes but I mean like screening test, not test to rid the prions. Dont create anything that modifies it, just spots it better. To the point where as soon as it appears, we can see it and isolate that animal so it doesnt infect others. That isn't the same is it?



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Fascinating thread, thanks folks.

The British government took all kinds of stick for its attitude to BSE... and I know that people are still coming down with CJD even now. So I guess Americans have to look forward to an increasing number of CJD cases in their own country now. And they eat a LOT of hamburger.

BSE in the beef, BGH in the milk, GM vegetables... soon there'll be nothing safe left to eat. Organic is definitely the way to go.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797

yes but I mean like screening test, not test to rid the prions. Dont create anything that modifies it, just spots it better. To the point where as soon as it appears, we can see it and isolate that animal so it doesnt infect others.




Authorities are afraid that if the FDA enforces universal testing using sensitive tests then everyone will know that Mad Cow is everywhere. Same with bird flu.

Points being:

1. Mad Cow did not start with cows, just like bird flu did not start with birds;

2. There no longer is any point isolating the "infected animal" - because prions don't just cross species barriers, they cross kingdom barriers.


.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Testing was only smoke an mirrors anyway. The source of the disease is everywhere, even in your carrots and cabage. The entire food supply is contaminated beyond repair. From milk, to fish, to the apple in your lunchbag.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis
Testing was only smoke an mirrors anyway. The source of the disease is everywhere, even in your carrots and cabage. The entire food supply is contaminated beyond repair. From milk, to fish, to the apple in your lunchbag.


got any source to back that up because I know its not true. Prion diseases aren't in everything, even my carrots. Sure there is a disease for everything, but you not going to get brain wasting disease from a carrot is my bet.

rich:
chance are that brain wasting disease is actually big in the US. I was reading an article about how doctors can misclassify cases of it with older people as Alzheimers disease. The cattle/beef industry is a HUGE industry, and the last thing they can afford is a positive ID of BSE. So their solution is to make the positive tests disappear. A doctor is just another word for medical billboard/medical salesmen now anyway. Chances are alot of people have it and we just dont hear about it.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Authorities are afraid that if the FDA enforces universal testing using sensitive tests then everyone will know that Mad Cow is everywhere. Same with bird flu.

Points being:

1. Mad Cow did not start with cows, just like bird flu did not start with birds;

2. There no longer is any point isolating the "infected animal" - because prions don't just cross species barriers, they cross kingdom barriers.


.

pretty much. Except I disagree with the isolating bit. When I say isolate I mean remove completely from the food chain, kill it, and treat it like nuclear waste.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis

The source of the disease is everywhere, even in your carrots and cabage. The entire food supply is contaminated beyond repair. From milk, to fish, to the apple in your lunchbag.




That's what my research says too.

So what's the solution?

IMHO - we are mutating and adapting, and hopefully, will evolve to survive as a species. I honestly do NOT see any other way around this.

What do you think?





new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join