BSE Tests on U.S. Cows Found Identical to Atypical Cases in France 06/05/06
07:55
OMAHA (DTN) -- A USDA official confirmed the positive BSE tests in two
U.S.-born cattle were indeed an "atypical" type of the disease.
A USDA spokesman acknowledged Friday positive BSE tests from two
domestic-born cattle were from a rare strain of the disease found in a small
number of European cases.
BSE, scientifically known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy and commonly
known as mad cow disease, is a degenerative, fatal disease affecting the
central nervous system of adult cattle.
USDA officials have declined in the past to provide such details, but
released information Friday after a French researcher revealed earlier this
week that the cases in Texas last year and Alabama last spring were
identical to "atypical" cases of BSE found in France.
Scientists from around the world are trying to quantify the significance of
these rare cases. They also want to know if these cases may be sporadic.
In an e-mail, a USDA spokesman said the cases raise "many unanswered
questions about these unusual findings, and additional research is needed to
help characterize the significance -- or lack of significance -- of any of
these findings."
The USDA spokesperson said nothing in the test results of the two cattle
justifies any changes in surveillance, disease control or public-health
measures already being taken in the U.S.
http://www.news.farmpage.com/index.cfm?show=4&id=16987
Cattle disease might be unknown strain of BSE
05/06/2006 09:00:00
Farmers Weekly
Scientists across Europe and the United States are following the emergence
of a new Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (TSE) in cattle that could
be a new strain of BSE.
Speaking last weekend at an international conference on prion diseases in
domestic livestock (such as BSE in cows and scrapie in sheep and goats)
scientists from France and Italy described how the disease had been detected
in a small number of cattle ranging from five to 15 years old.
The strain differs from BSE in that it has a longer incubation time and is
consequently being found in older cattle.
The new strain also demonstrates different characteristics from BSE in
laboratory tests and was originally detected through active surveillance of
live animals rather than during inspection of a suspect fallen animal.
Marion Simmons of the Veterinary Laboratory Agency at Weybridge urged
caution saying there are not yet sufficient supporting data to suggest that
the disease is a new strain of BSE.
http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/2006/06/0 ... f+BSE.html
BASE in cattle in Italy of Identification of a second bovine amyloidotic
spongiform encephalopathy: Molecular similarities with
sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0305777101v1
Singeltary et al
http://www.microbes.info/forums/index.p ... post&id=13
TSS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." <
[email protected]>
To: <
[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: BSE, BOVINE - USA: ATYPICAL STRAIN
> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
#####################
>
> I thought some might be interested in this ;
>
>
> Research Project: Study of Atypical Bse
>
> Location: Virus and Prion Diseases of Livestock
>
> Project Number: 3625-32000-073-07
> Project Type: Specific C/A
>
> Start Date: Sep 15, 2004
> End Date: Sep 14, 2007
>
> Objective:
> The objective of this cooperative research project with Dr. Maria
Caramelli
> from the Italian BSE Reference Laboratory in Turin, Italy, is to conduct
> comparative studies with the U.S. bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)
> isolate and the atypical BSE isolates identified in Italy. The studies
will
> cover the following areas: 1. Evaluation of present diagnostics tools used
> in the U.S. for the detection of atypical BSE cases. 2. Molecular
comparison
> of the U.S. BSE isolate and other typical BSE isolates with atypical BSE
> cases. 3. Studies on transmissibility and tissue distribution of atypical
> BSE isolates in cattle and other species.
>
> Approach:
> This project will be done as a Specific Cooperative Agreement with the
> Italian BSE Reference Laboratory, Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale
del
> Piemonte, in Turin, Italy. It is essential for the U.S. BSE surveillance
> program to analyze the effectiveness of the U.S diagnostic tools for
> detection of atypical cases of BSE. Molecular comparisons of the U.S. BSE
> isolate with atypical BSE isolates will provide further characterization
of
> the U.S. BSE isolate. Transmission studies are already underway using
brain
> homogenates from atypical BSE cases into mice, cattle and sheep. It will
be
> critical to see whether the atypical BSE isolates behave similarly to
> typical BSE isolates in terms of transmissibility and disease
pathogenesis.
> If transmission occurs, tissue distribution comparisons will be made
between
> cattle infected with the atypical BSE isolate and the U.S. BSE isolate.
> Differences in tissue distribution could require new regulations regarding
> specific risk material (SRM) removal.
>
>
>
http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projec ... _NO=408490
>
>
>
> Research Project: Study of Atypical Bse
>
> Location: Virus and Prion Diseases of Livestock
>
> 2005 Annual Report
>
>
>
> This report serves to document research conducted under a specific
> cooperative agreement between ARS and the Italian Reference Centre for
> Animal TSE (CEA) at the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale, Turin,
Italy.
> Additional details of research can be found in then report for the parent
> project 3625-32000-073-00D, Transmission, Differentiation, and
Pathobiology
> of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies. The aim of the cooperative
> research project conducted by the CEA and ARS is to compare the U.S.
bovine
> spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) isolate and the bovine amyloidotic
> spongiform encephalopathy isolates (BASE) identified in Italy. The first
> objective was to determine whether diagnostic methods routinely used by
USDA
> are able to identify the Italian BASE cases. For this purpose, CEA
received
> the immunohistochemistry (IHC) protocol developed by APHIS-USDA. The IHC
> protocol was reproduced and standardized in the CEA laboratory and will be
> applied to the Italian BSE and BASE cases. Furthermore, fixed brainstem
> sections and frozen brainstem material from Italian BSE and BASE cases
will
> be sent to ARS for analysis using USDA IHC and Western blot (WB) methods.
> These studies will enable us to determine whether the present diagnostic
> tools (IHC and WB) employed at the USDA will be able to detect the Italian
> BASE cases and also enable us to compare Italian BSE and BASE with the
U.S.
> BSE cases.
>
>
>
http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projec ... 490&showpa
> rs=true&fy=2005
>
>
> Research Project: Transmission, Differentiation, and Pathobiology of
> Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies
>
> Location: Virus and Prion Diseases of Livestock
>
> Title: Where We've Been and Where We're Going with Bse Testing in the
United
> States
>
> Authors
> item Hall, Mark - NVSL-APHIS-USDA
> item Richt, Juergen
> item Davis, Arthur - NVSL-APHIS-USDA
> item Levings, Randall - NVSL-APHIS-USDA
>
> Submitted to: American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians
> Publication Type: Abstract
> Publication Acceptance Date: September 1, 2005
> Publication Date: November 3, 2005
> Citation: Hall, M.S., Richt, J.A., Davis, A.J., Levings, R.L. 2005. Where
> We've Been and Where We're Going with Bse Testing in the United States
> [abstract]. 48th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Veterinary
> Laboratory Diagnosticians. P. 20.
>
> Technical Abstract: A review of the laboratory aspects of the United
States
> Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
> Surveillance Program from its beginning to the present day will be
provided.
> Validated diagnostic tests for BSE require brain tissue. There are no ante
> mortem (blood/serum) tests for BSE available at present. From a historical
> perspective, diagnostic tests for BSE continue to evolve. The original
> diagnostic test method was histopathology in which sections of brain were
> examined under a microscope, and the classical vacuoles and spongiform
> change in specific areas of the brain would allow a diagnosis to be made.
> This method was accurate but only allowed a diagnosis to be made
relatively
> late in the course of the disease. In the mid-1990s, immunohistochemistry
> (IHC) and Western blotting were developed which allow the detection of the
> abnormal form of the prion protein (PrPSc) and a diagnosis could be made
> prior to the development of spongiform changes and clinical signs. In the
> past decade, so-called "rapid tests" have been introduced commercially for
> BSE. Five commercial tests are currently licensed/permitted in the United
> States for BSE. These licensed tests include the Prionics Western blot,
> Prionics ELISA, Enfer/Abbott ELISA, IDEXX ELISA, and the BioRad ELISA.
This
> presentation will discuss various attributes of the validated test methods
> available today. Both IHC and Western blot are considered confirmatory
tests
> for BSE by the World Organisation of Animal Health (OIE). IHC provides for
a
> specific immunological detection of PrPSc and enables the specific
> anatomical location to be determined. Western blot provides both
> immunological detection of PrPSc as well as specific molecular weight
> characterizations; certain Western blot procedures can be extremely
> sensitive due to various concentration procedures before analysis of the
> sample. The OIE recommended Western blot and IHC methods for confirmatory
> diagnosis of BSE used by USDA and the Veterinary Laboratories Agency in
> Weybridge, England, will be discussed. The overall enhanced testing plan
> that has been used for the past 18 months will be described including
> changes that have occurred during this time. The USDA's BSE enhanced
> surveillance plan has been a very successful national surveillance testing
> program that has been a shared effort between state veterinary diagnostic
> laboratories as part of the National Animal Health Laboratory Network and
> the National Veterinary Services Laboratories.
>
>
http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/public ... _NO_115=18
> 3829
>
>
>
> NEW STRAIN OF TSE USA CATTLE OR JUST INCOMPETENCE IN TESTING???
>
>
>
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments ... 5IFA-2.pdf
>
>
>
> Greetings again,
>
>
> I was going over the data from the 1st documented BSE/TSE cow
> in the USA and find it disturbing USDA thought it important enough
> to use WB to verify there immunohistochemistry test then ;
>
>
> TSEs Touch Off
> ARS Research
>
>
> A year ago this month, a group of ARS
> scientists and technicians gave up their Christmas time off and even
> delayed family vacations to provide characterization of the first case
> of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)-commonly called mad cow
> disease-to be found in the United States.
>
> On December 23, 2003, a Canadian cow shipped to slaughter from a farm in
> Mabton, Washington, had come up presumptively positive for BSE in
> testing by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS),
> which has diagnostic responsibility and regulatory oversight for BSE
> issues. APHIS had already used the "gold standard" diagnostic
> immunohistochemistry test, which was originally developed by ARS. But
> for the first U.S. case of BSE, APHIS wanted additional scientific
> information that could be provided by the Western blot test.
>
> So APHIS put in a high-priority call to veterinary medical officer
> Juergen Richt and his colleagues at the Virus and Prion Diseases of
> Livestock Laboratory, which is part of ARS's National Animal Disease
> Center (NADC) in Ames, Iowa.
>
> "We had experience with the Western blot test and we had all the
> reagents on hand," explains Richt. "So we put our holiday plans on hold
> and got everything ready so that APHIS would have verification of the
> results from the immunohistochemistry test." ........... snip
>
> full text;
>
>
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archive/dec04/tse1204.htm
>
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archive/dec04/
>
>
>
> HOWEVER, on the 2nd suspect Texas mad cow, not the stumbling and
staggering
> one they refused to test at all here ;
>
>
> FDA's investigation showed that the animal in question had already been
> rendered into "meat and bone meal" (a type of protein animal feed). Over
the
> weekend FDA was able to track down all the implicated material. That
> material is being held by the firm, which is cooperating fully with FDA.
>
> Cattle with central nervous system symptoms are of particular interest
> because cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, also known as
> "mad cow disease," can exhibit such symptoms. In this case, there is no
way
> now to test for BSE. But even if the cow had BSE, FDA's animal feed rule
> would prohibit the feeding of its rendered protein to other ruminant
animals
> (e.g., cows, goats, sheep, bison). ...
>
>
>
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html
>
>
> BUT, i am speaking of the suspect Texas mad cow where tissue samples sat
on
> the shelf for 7+ months and then it took an act of Congress, thanks to the
> Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG, and an end around Johanns, Dehaven et
al
> to get those samples to Weybridge for confirmation, where it was finally
> confirmed ;
>
>
> The animal was selected for testing because, as a non-ambulatory animal,
it
> was considered to be at higher risk for BSE. An initial screening test on
> the animal in November 2004 was inconclusive, triggering USDA to conduct
the
> internationally accepted confirmatory IHC tests. Those test results were
> negative. Earlier this month, USDA's Office of the Inspector General
> recommended further testing of the seven-month-old sample using another
> internationally recognized confirmatory test, the Western blot. Unlike the
> IHC, the Western blot was reactive, prompting USDA to send samples from
the
> animal to the Weybridge laboratory for further analysis. ...
>
>
>
> Last Modified: 06/24/2005
>
>
>
http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s ... sa.retriev
>
econtent/.c/6_2_1UH/.ce/7_2_5JM/.p/5_2_4TQ/.d/1/_th/J_2_9D/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?
>
PC_7_2_5JM_contentid=2005%2F06%2F0232.xml&PC_7_2_5JM_navtype=RT&PC_7_2_5JM_p
> arentnav=LATEST_RELEASES&PC_7_2_5JM_navid=NEWS_RELEASE#7_2_5JM
>
>
>
> EVEN more disturbing is the fact that Dr. Detwiler, former top TSE expert
at
> USDA, tried to tell this Administration this in 2003, and they refused to
> listen, this just before she left USDA ;
>
>
> USDA 2003
>
> We have to be careful that we don't get so set in the way we do things
that
> we forget to look for different emerging variations of disease. We've
gotten
> away from collecting the whole brain in our systems. We're using the brain
> stem and we're looking in only one area. In Norway, they were doing a
> project and looking at cases of Scrapie, and they found this where they
did
> not find lesions or PRP in the area of the obex. They found it in the
> cerebellum and the cerebrum. It's a good lesson for us. Ames had to go
> back and change the procedure for looking at Scrapie samples. In the USDA,
> we had routinely looked at all the sections of the brain, and then we got
> away from it. They've recently gone back.
> Dr. Keller: Tissues are routinely tested, based on which tissue provides
an
> 'official' test result as recognized by APHIS
> .
>
> Dr. Detwiler: That's on the slaughter. But on the clinical cases, aren't
> they still asking for the brain? But even on the slaughter, they're
looking
> only at the brainstem. We may be missing certain things if we confine
> ourselves to one area.
>
>
> snip.............
>
>
> Dr. Detwiler: It seems a good idea, but I'm not aware of it.
> Another important thing to get across to the public is that the negatives
> do not guarantee absence of infectivity. The animal could be early in the
> disease and the incubation period. Even sample collection is so important.
> If you're not collecting the right area of the brain in sheep, or if
> collecting lymphoreticular tissue, and you don't get a good biopsy, you
> could miss the area with the PRP in it and come up with a negative test.
> There's a new, unusual form of Scrapie that's been detected in Norway. We
> have to be careful that we don't get so set in the way we do things that
we
> forget to look for different emerging variations of disease. We've gotten
> away from collecting the whole brain in our systems. We're using the brain
> stem and we're looking in only one area. In Norway, they were doing a
> project and looking at cases of Scrapie, and they found this where they
did
> not find lesions or PRP in the area of the obex. They found it in the
> cerebellum and the cerebrum. It's a good lesson for us. Ames had to go
> back and change the procedure for looking at Scrapie samples. In the USDA,
> we had routinely looked at all the sections of the brain, and then we got
> away from it. They've recently gone back.
>
> Dr. Keller: Tissues are routinely tested, based on which tissue provides
an
> 'official' test result as recognized by APHIS
> .
>
> Dr. Detwiler: That's on the slaughter. But on the clinical cases, aren't
> they still asking for the brain? But even on the slaughter, they're
looking
> only at the brainstem. We may be missing certain things if we confine
> ourselves to one area.
>
>
> snip...
>
>
> FULL TEXT;
>
>
> Completely Edited Version
> PRION ROUNDTABLE
>
>
> Accomplished this day, Wednesday, December 11, 2003, Denver, Colorado
> ====================================================
>
>
>
> Taking a Quality Sample
>
> Too Little Tissue Submitted Too Little Tissue Submitted
>
> NOTE: The samples in these photos are suitable for ELISA testing and if
> negative by ELISA there would not be a problem, but if the results were
> inconclusive then it would be difficult to process for IHC and additional
> testing.
>
> August 24, 2004 Taking a Quality Sample: E4
>
> snip...end
>
>
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/nvsl/BSE/M ... endixe.pdf
>
>
>
> Getting a Sample of Sufficient Quality
> Unless the sample is of sufficient quality, it will be unusable and
> not count towards the survey. Please see Appendix E for
> guidance on collecting a quality sample. If the sample is not of
> sufficient quality, STOP: DO NOT TAKE THE SAMPLE. This
> does NOT apply to samples taken from:
>
> . animals that are highly suspicious for BSE or that
> involve an FAD investigation
>
> . animals that were condemned in an antemortem
> inspection BSE sampling using a spoon
>
> Step 1
>
> . Place head upright
>
> - On head rack or barrel
> - On table edge
> - On the ground facing down if no other option
>
> snip...
>
>
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/nvsl/BSE/p ... manual.pdf
>
>
>
> NOW, if we go back further, is this really any surprise ;
>
>
> >> Differences in tissue distribution could require new regulations
> >> regarding specific risk material (SRM) removal.
>
> snip...end
>
> full text ;
>
>
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11b/tab01.pdf
>
>
> 3.57 The experiment which might have determined whether BSE and scrapie
were
> caused by the same agent (ie, the feeding of natural scrapie to cattle)
was
> never undertaken in the UK. It was, however, performed in the USA in 1979,
> when it was shown that cattle inoculated with the scrapie agent endemic in
> the flock of Suffolk sheep at the United States Department of Agriculture
in
> Mission, Texas, developed a TSE quite unlike BSE. 32 The findings of the
> initial transmission, though not of the clinical or neurohistological
> examination, were communicated in October 1988 to Dr Watson, Director of
the
> CVL, following a visit by Dr Wrathall, one of the project leaders in the
> Pathology Department of the CVL, to the United States Department of
> Agriculture. 33 The results were not published at this point, since the
> attempted transmission to mice from the experimental cow brain had been
> inconclusive. The results of the clinical and histological differences
> between scrapie-affected sheep and cattle were published in 1995. Similar
> studies in which cattle were inoculated intracerebrally with scrapie
inocula
> derived from a number of scrapie-affected sheep of different breeds and
from
> different States, were carried out at the US National Animal Disease
Centre.
> 34 The results, published in 1994, showed that this source of scrapie
agent,
> though pathogenic for cattle, did not produce the same clinical signs of
> brain lesions characteristic of BSE.
>
>
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/report/vol ... htm#820543
>
>
>
> The findings of the initial transmission, though not of the clinical or
> neurohistological examination, were communicated in October 1988 to Dr
> Watson, Director of the CVL, following a visit by Dr Wrathall, one of the
> project leaders in the Pathology Department of the CVL, to the United
States
> Department of Agriculture. 33
>
>
>
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1 ... 001001.pdf
>
>
>
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/report/vol ... htm#820546
>
>
>
> The results were not published at this point, since the attempted
> transmission to mice from the experimental cow brain had been
inconclusive.
> The results of the clinical and histological differences between
> scrapie-affected sheep and cattle were published in 1995. Similar studies
in
> which cattle were inoculated intracerebrally with scrapie inocula derived
> from a number of scrapie-affected sheep of different breeds and from
> different States, were carried out at the US National Animal Disease
Centre.
> 34 <http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/report/volume2/chaptea3.htm#820549> The
> results, published in 1994, showed that this source of scrapie agent,
though
> pathogenic for cattle, did not produce the same clinical signs of brain
> lesions characteristic of BSE.
>
> 3.58 There are several possible reasons why the experiment was not
performed
> in the UK. It had been recommended by Sir Richard Southwood (Chairman of
the
> Working Party on Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) in his letter to the
> Permanent Secretary of MAFF, Mr (now Sir) Derek Andrews, on 21 June 1988,
35
> though it was not specifically recommended in the Working Party Report or
> indeed in the Tyrrell Committee Report (details of the Southwood Working
> Party and the Tyrell Committee can be found in vol. 4: The Southwood
Working
> Party, 1988-89 and vol. 11: Scientists after Southwood respectively). The
> direct inoculation of scrapie into calves was given low priority, because
of
> its high cost and because it was known that it had already taken place in
> the USA. 36 It was also felt that the results of such an experiment would
be
> hard to interpret. While a negative result would be informative, a
positive
> result would need to demonstrate that when scrapie was transmitted to
> cattle, the disease which developed in cattle was the same as BSE. 37
Given
> the large number of strains of scrapie and the possibility that BSE was
one
> of them, it would be necessary to transmit every scrapie strain to cattle
> separately, to test the hypothesis properly. Such an experiment would be
> expensive. Secondly, as measures to control the epidemic took hold, the
need
> for the experiment from the policy viewpoint was not considered so urgent.
> It was felt that the results would be mainly of academic interest. 38
>
>
>
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/report/vol ... htm#820550
>
>
>
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/report/vol ... aptea3.htm
>
>
>
