Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
NCBA, R-CALF, COOL, USDA (No Politics!)
BSE CASE CONFIRMED IN ALBERTA OTTAWA, February 26, 2008
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="flounder" data-source="post: 506538" data-attributes="member: 3519"><p>FACTS </p><p></p><p></p><p>10,000,000+ LBS. of PROHIBITED BANNED MAD COW FEED I.E. MBM IN COMMERCE USA </p><p>2007 </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Date: March 21, 2007 at 2:27 pm PST </p><p>RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINES -- CLASS II </p><p>___________________________________ </p><p></p><p>PRODUCT </p><p></p><p>Bulk cattle feed made with recalled Darling's 85% Blood Meal, Flash Dried, </p><p>Recall # V-024-2007 </p><p></p><p>CODE </p><p></p><p>Cattle feed delivered between 01/12/2007 and 01/26/2007 </p><p></p><p>RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER </p><p></p><p>Pfeiffer, Arno, Inc, Greenbush, WI. by conversation on February 5, 2007. </p><p></p><p>Firm initiated recall is ongoing. </p><p></p><p>REASON </p><p></p><p>Blood meal used to make cattle feed was recalled because it was </p><p>cross-contaminated with prohibited bovine meat and bone meal that had been </p><p>manufactured on common equipment and labeling did not bear cautionary BSE </p><p>statement. </p><p></p><p>VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE </p><p></p><p>42,090 lbs. </p><p></p><p>DISTRIBUTION </p><p></p><p>WI </p><p></p><p>___________________________________ </p><p></p><p>PRODUCT </p><p></p><p>Custom dairy premix products: MNM ALL PURPOSE Pellet, HILLSIDE/CDL </p><p>Prot-Buffer Meal, LEE, M.-CLOSE UP PX Pellet, HIGH DESERT/ GHC LACT Meal, </p><p>TATARKA, M CUST PROT Meal, SUNRIDGE/CDL PROTEIN Blend, LOURENZO, K PVM DAIRY </p><p>Meal, DOUBLE B DAIRY/GHC LAC Mineral, WEST PIONT/GHC CLOSEUP Mineral, WEST </p><p>POINT/GHC LACT Meal, JENKS, J/COMPASS PROTEIN Meal, COPPINI – 8# SPECIAL </p><p>DAIRY Mix, GULICK, L-LACT Meal (Bulk), TRIPLE J – PROTEIN/LACTATION, ROCK </p><p>CREEK/GHC MILK Mineral, BETTENCOURT/GHC S.SIDE MK-MN, BETTENCOURT #1/GHC </p><p>MILK MINR, V&C DAIRY/GHC LACT Meal, VEENSTRA, F/GHC LACT Meal, SMUTNY, </p><p>A-BYPASS ML W/SMARTA, Recall # V-025-2007 </p><p></p><p>CODE </p><p></p><p>The firm does not utilize a code - only shipping documentation with </p><p>commodity and weights identified. </p><p></p><p>RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER </p><p></p><p>Rangen, Inc, Buhl, ID, by letters on February 13 and 14, 2007. Firm </p><p>initiated recall is complete. </p><p></p><p>REASON </p><p></p><p>Products manufactured from bulk feed containing blood meal that was cross </p><p>contaminated with prohibited meat and bone meal and the labeling did not </p><p>bear cautionary BSE statement. </p><p></p><p>VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE </p><p></p><p>9,997,976 lbs. </p><p></p><p>DISTRIBUTION </p><p></p><p>ID and NV </p><p></p><p>END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR MARCH 21, 2007 </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2007/ENF00996.html" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2 ... 00996.html</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL USA SEPT 6, 2006 1961.72 TONS IN COMMERCE AL, </p><p>TN, AND WV </p><p></p><p>Date: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST </p><p></p><p>PRODUCT </p><p></p><p>a) EVSRC Custom dairy feed, Recall # V-130-6; </p><p>b) Performance Chick Starter, Recall # V-131-6; </p><p>c) Performance Quail Grower, Recall # V-132-6; </p><p>d) Performance Pheasant Finisher, Recall # V-133-6. </p><p></p><p>CODE </p><p>None </p><p></p><p>RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER </p><p></p><p>Donaldson & Hasenbein/dba J&R Feed Service, Inc., Cullman, AL, by telephone </p><p>on June 23, 2006 and by letter dated July 19, 2006. Firm initiated recall is </p><p>complete. </p><p></p><p>REASON </p><p></p><p>Dairy and poultry feeds were possibly contaminated with ruminant based </p><p>protein. </p><p></p><p>VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE </p><p></p><p>477.72 tons </p><p></p><p>DISTRIBUTION </p><p></p><p>AL </p><p>______________________________ </p><p></p><p>PRODUCT </p><p></p><p>a) Dairy feed, custom, Recall # V-134-6; </p><p>b) Custom Dairy Feed with Monensin, Recall # V-135-6. </p><p>CODE </p><p>None. Bulk product </p><p></p><p>RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER </p><p></p><p>Recalling Firm: Burkmann Feed, Greeneville, TN, by Telephone beginning on </p><p>June 28, 2006. </p><p></p><p>Manufacturer: H. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL. Firm initiated </p><p>recall is complete. </p><p></p><p>REASON </p><p></p><p>Possible contamination of dairy feeds with ruminant derived meat and bone </p><p>meal. </p><p></p><p>VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE </p><p></p><p>1,484 tons </p><p></p><p>DISTRIBUTION </p><p></p><p>TN and WV </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00968.html" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2 ... 00968.html</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALLS ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006 KY, LA, </p><p>MS, AL, GA, AND TN 11,000+ TONS </p><p></p><p>Date: August 16, 2006 at 9:19 am PST </p><p></p><p>RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE - CLASS II </p><p>______________________________ </p><p></p><p>SNIP...END </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>SEE FULL LIST OF enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform </p><p>Encephalopathy </p><p>and Specified Risk Material taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4. </p><p></p><p></p><p>SRM SPECIFIED RISK MATERIALS </p><p></p><p>RUMINANT TO RUMINANT ANIMAL PROTEIN IN COMMERCE 2006-2007 </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2008/02/specified-risk-materials-srm.html" target="_blank">http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.co ... s-srm.html</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>INK ON PAPER, the 8/4/97 mad cow feed ban was nothing but ink on paper. </p><p>...tss </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>FDA Statement </p><p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE </p><p>Statement </p><p>May 4, 2004 </p><p>Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242 </p><p>Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms </p><p>On Friday, April 30 th , the Food and Drug Administration learned that a cow </p><p>with central nervous system symptoms had been killed and shipped to a </p><p>processor for rendering into animal protein for use in animal feed. </p><p></p><p>FDA, which is responsible for the safety of animal feed, immediately began </p><p>an investigation. On Friday and throughout the weekend, FDA investigators </p><p>inspected the slaughterhouse, the rendering facility, the farm where the </p><p>animal came from, and the processor that initially received the cow from the </p><p>slaughterhouse. </p><p></p><p>FDA's investigation showed that the animal in question had already been </p><p>rendered into "meat and bone meal" (a type of protein animal feed). Over the </p><p>weekend FDA was able to track down all the implicated material. That </p><p>material is being held by the firm, which is cooperating fully with FDA. </p><p></p><p>Cattle with central nervous system symptoms are of particular interest </p><p>because cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, also known as </p><p>"mad cow disease," can exhibit such symptoms. In this case, there is no way </p><p>now to test for BSE. But even if the cow had BSE, FDA's animal feed rule </p><p>would prohibit the feeding of its rendered protein to other ruminant animals </p><p>(e.g., cows, goats, sheep, bison). </p><p></p><p>FDA is sending a letter to the firm summarizing its findings and informing </p><p>the firm that FDA will not object to use of this material in swine feed </p><p>only. If it is not used in swine feed, this material will be destroyed. Pigs </p><p>have been shown not to be susceptible to BSE. If the firm agrees to use the </p><p>material for swine feed only, FDA will track the material all the way </p><p>through the supply chain from the processor to the farm to ensure that the </p><p>feed is properly monitored and used only as feed for pigs. </p><p></p><p>To protect the U.S. against BSE, FDA works to keep certain mammalian protein </p><p>out of animal feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. FDA established </p><p>its animal feed rule in 1997 after the BSE epidemic in the U.K. showed that </p><p>the disease spreads by feeding infected ruminant protein to cattle. </p><p></p><p>Under the current regulation, the material from this Texas cow is not </p><p>allowed in feed for cattle or other ruminant animals. FDA's action </p><p>specifying that the material go only into swine feed means also that it will </p><p>not be fed to poultry. </p><p></p><p>FDA is committed to protecting the U.S. from BSE and collaborates closely </p><p>with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on all BSE issues. The animal feed </p><p>rule provides crucial protection against the spread of BSE, but it is only </p><p>one of several such firewalls. FDA will soon be improving the animal feed </p><p>rule, to make this strong system even stronger. </p><p></p><p>#### </p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Subject: USDA OIG SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS FY 2007 1st Half (bogus BSE </p><p>sampling FROM HEALTHY USDA CATTLE) </p><p>Date: June 21, 2007 at 2:49 pm PST </p><p></p><p>Owner and Corporation Plead Guilty </p><p>to Defrauding Bovine Spongiform </p><p>Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program </p><p></p><p></p><p>An Arizona meat processing company and its owner pled </p><p>guilty in February 2007 to charges of theft of Government </p><p>funds, mail fraud, and wire fraud. The owner and his </p><p>company defrauded the BSE Surveillance Program when </p><p>they falsified BSE Surveillance Data Collection Forms and </p><p>then submitted payment requests to USDA for the services. </p><p>In addition to the targeted sample population (those cattle </p><p>that were more than 30 months old or had other risk factors </p><p>for BSE), the owner submitted to USDA, or caused to be </p><p>submitted, BSE obex (brain stem) samples from healthy </p><p>USDA-inspected cattle. As a result, the owner fraudulently </p><p>received approximately $390,000. Sentencing is scheduled </p><p>for May 2007. </p><p></p><p></p><p>snip... </p><p></p><p></p><p>Topics that will be covered in ongoing or planned reviews under Goal 1 </p><p>include: </p><p></p><p>soundness of BSE maintenance sampling (APHIS), </p><p></p><p></p><p>implementation of Performance-Based Inspection System </p><p>enhancements for specified risk material (SRM) violations and </p><p>improved inspection controls over SRMs (FSIS and APHIS), </p><p></p><p></p><p>snip... </p><p></p><p></p><p>The findings and recommendations from these efforts will be covered in </p><p>future semiannual reports as the relevant audits and </p><p>investigations are completed. </p><p></p><p></p><p>4 USDA OIG SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS FY 2007 1st Half </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>THESE are just a few examples for DISEASED cattle that likely entered the food supply. </p><p>THE FDA has removed and or made so difficult, you cannot make a simple search for all </p><p>archived material. but here are a few i still had in my files. ...tss </p><p></p><p></p><p>On January 18, 2002, FDA's New Orleans District Office issued a Warning Letter to J. Randall Mayes, Pulaski, Tennessee, a dairy farmer. An FDA inspection conducted November 26 28, 2001, confirmed that the farmer sold a cow for use as human food containing gentamicin residues. USDA analysis of tissue samples from the cow sold by Mayes identified the presence of 7.12 ppm of gentamicin in the kidney tissue. There is no established tolerance for gentamicin in cattle. In addition, FDA's investigation found that the dairy farmer held animals under conditions which were so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues were likely to enter the food supply. </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/archive/2002/ch5/cvm1.htm" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/ ... 5/cvm1.htm</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>The Warning Letter also noted that the owner holds animals under conditions which are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/archive/2001/ch5/default.htm" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/ ... efault.htm</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Mr. Sturm was found to hold animals on his farm under conditions that are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. In addition, he failed to use the drug, Albon, containing sulfadimethoxine, in conformance with the labeling. </p><p></p><p>A warning letter was issued to the following firms for violations related to 21 CFR Part 589.2000—Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). </p><p></p><p>• Scott Nelson, Owner, Integra Fish Foods, Inc., Grand Junction, CO </p><p></p><p>• Bruce A. Burgett, General Manager, The Carrollton Farmers Exchange, Carrollton, OH </p><p></p><p>Violations included failure to label feeds that contain, or may contain, prohibited materials with the required cautionary statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants," insufficient customer records to track the distribution of products, and lack of written procedures for cleaning or flushing equipment after mixing feeds containing prohibited material. </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Sep_Oct01.htm" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Sep_Oct01.htm</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Mr. Van Dam was found to hold animals under improper conditions whereby diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. </p><p></p><p>Ms. Silveira was found to be adulterating the drug Mutual Pharmaceutical brand of sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim tablets, since she did not follow her veterinarian's prescribed withdrawal time of thirty days prior to slaughter. </p><p></p><p>Mr. Edwards did not properly identify treated animals to assure they are not sold for slaughter, did not maintain treatment records, and he did not follow labeling directions for medicated feed. </p><p></p><p>O & L Dairy was found to lack an adequate system for determining the medication status of animals offered for slaughter, and for assuring that animals which had been medicated had been withheld from slaughter for the appropriate periods of time to deplete potentially hazardous residues of drugs. </p><p></p><p>Mr. Sturm was found to hold animals on his farm under conditions that are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. In addition, he failed to use the drug, Albon, containing sulfadimethoxine, in conformance with the labeling. </p><p></p><p>A warning letter was issued to the following firms for violations related to 21 CFR Part 589.2000—Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). </p><p></p><p>• Scott Nelson, Owner, Integra Fish Foods, Inc., Grand Junction, CO </p><p></p><p>• Bruce A. Burgett, General Manager, The Carrollton Farmers Exchange, Carrollton, OH </p><p></p><p>Violations included failure to label feeds that contain, or may contain, prohibited materials with the required cautionary statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants," insufficient customer records to track the distribution of products, and lack of written procedures for cleaning or flushing equipment after mixing feeds containing prohibited material. </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Sep_Oct.htm" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Sep_Oct.htm</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Our investigation also found that you hold animals on your farm under conditions that are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. For example, you failed to maintain treatment records for bull calves fed medicated milk replacer, lack a system for assuring that the milk replacer is used in a manner not contrary to label instructions, and lack a system for assuring the medicated animals have been withheld from slaughter for appropriate periods of time to permit depletion of potentially hazardous drug residues from edible tissues. Foods from animals held under such conditions are adulterated under Section 402(a)(4) of the Act [21 U.S.C. Section 342(a)(4)]. </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl2.htm" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl2.htm</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Our investigation also found that you hold animals on your farm under conditions that are so inadequate that diseased animals and lormedicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. For example, you lack a system for assuring that drugs are used in a manner not contrary to label instructions, and for assuring animals medicated on your farrn have been withheld from slaughter for appropriate periods of time to permit depletion of potentially hazardous drug residues from edible tissues. Foods from animals held under such conditions are adulterated under Section 402(a)(4) of the Act. </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl6.htm" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl6.htm</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Our investigation also found that you hold animals which are ultimately offered for </p><p>slaughter as food, under conditions which are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or </p><p>John Weststeyn 2 </p><p>T & J Dairy </p><p>medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food </p><p>supply. </p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl130.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/ ... awl130.pdf</a> </p><p></p><p></p><p>TSS</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="flounder, post: 506538, member: 3519"] FACTS 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 [url=http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2007/ENF00996.html]http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2 ... 00996.html[/url] Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL USA SEPT 6, 2006 1961.72 TONS IN COMMERCE AL, TN, AND WV Date: September 6, 2006 at 7:58 am PST PRODUCT a) 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. CODE None RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Donaldson & Hasenbein/dba J&R Feed Service, Inc., Cullman, AL, by telephone on June 23, 2006 and by letter dated July 19, 2006. Firm initiated recall is complete. REASON Dairy and poultry feeds were possibly contaminated with ruminant based protein. VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 477.72 tons DISTRIBUTION AL ______________________________ PRODUCT a) Dairy feed, custom, Recall # V-134-6; b) Custom Dairy Feed with Monensin, Recall # V-135-6. CODE None. Bulk product RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Recalling Firm: Burkmann Feed, Greeneville, TN, by Telephone beginning on June 28, 2006. Manufacturer: H. J. Baker & Bro., Inc., Albertville, AL. Firm initiated recall is complete. REASON Possible contamination of dairy feeds with ruminant derived meat and bone meal. VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 1,484 tons DISTRIBUTION TN and WV [url=http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00968.html]http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2 ... 00968.html[/url] Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALLS ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 9, 2006 KY, LA, MS, AL, GA, AND TN 11,000+ TONS Date: August 16, 2006 at 9:19 am PST RECALLS AND FIELD CORRECTIONS: VETERINARY MEDICINE - CLASS II ______________________________ SNIP...END SEE FULL LIST OF enforcement action concerning Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Specified Risk Material taken in accordance with 9 CFR Part 500.4. SRM SPECIFIED RISK MATERIALS RUMINANT TO RUMINANT ANIMAL PROTEIN IN COMMERCE 2006-2007 [url=http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.com/2008/02/specified-risk-materials-srm.html]http://madcowspontaneousnot.blogspot.co ... s-srm.html[/url] INK ON PAPER, the 8/4/97 mad cow feed ban was nothing but ink on paper. ...tss FDA Statement FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Statement May 4, 2004 Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242 Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms On Friday, April 30 th , the Food and Drug Administration learned that a cow with central nervous system symptoms had been killed and shipped to a processor for rendering into animal protein for use in animal feed. FDA, which is responsible for the safety of animal feed, immediately began an investigation. On Friday and throughout the weekend, FDA investigators inspected the slaughterhouse, the rendering facility, the farm where the animal came from, and the processor that initially received the cow from the slaughterhouse. 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). FDA is sending a letter to the firm summarizing its findings and informing the firm that FDA will not object to use of this material in swine feed only. If it is not used in swine feed, this material will be destroyed. Pigs have been shown not to be susceptible to BSE. If the firm agrees to use the material for swine feed only, FDA will track the material all the way through the supply chain from the processor to the farm to ensure that the feed is properly monitored and used only as feed for pigs. To protect the U.S. against BSE, FDA works to keep certain mammalian protein out of animal feed for cattle and other ruminant animals. FDA established its animal feed rule in 1997 after the BSE epidemic in the U.K. showed that the disease spreads by feeding infected ruminant protein to cattle. Under the current regulation, the material from this Texas cow is not allowed in feed for cattle or other ruminant animals. FDA's action specifying that the material go only into swine feed means also that it will not be fed to poultry. FDA is committed to protecting the U.S. from BSE and collaborates closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on all BSE issues. The animal feed rule provides crucial protection against the spread of BSE, but it is only one of several such firewalls. FDA will soon be improving the animal feed rule, to make this strong system even stronger. #### [url=http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html]http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01061.html[/url] Subject: USDA OIG SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS FY 2007 1st Half (bogus BSE sampling FROM HEALTHY USDA CATTLE) Date: June 21, 2007 at 2:49 pm PST Owner and Corporation Plead Guilty to Defrauding Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program An Arizona meat processing company and its owner pled guilty in February 2007 to charges of theft of Government funds, mail fraud, and wire fraud. The owner and his company defrauded the BSE Surveillance Program when they falsified BSE Surveillance Data Collection Forms and then submitted payment requests to USDA for the services. In addition to the targeted sample population (those cattle that were more than 30 months old or had other risk factors for BSE), the owner submitted to USDA, or caused to be submitted, BSE obex (brain stem) samples from healthy USDA-inspected cattle. As a result, the owner fraudulently received approximately $390,000. Sentencing is scheduled for May 2007. snip... Topics that will be covered in ongoing or planned reviews under Goal 1 include: soundness of BSE maintenance sampling (APHIS), implementation of Performance-Based Inspection System enhancements for specified risk material (SRM) violations and improved inspection controls over SRMs (FSIS and APHIS), snip... The findings and recommendations from these efforts will be covered in future semiannual reports as the relevant audits and investigations are completed. 4 USDA OIG SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS FY 2007 1st Half [url=http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf]http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf[/url] THESE are just a few examples for DISEASED cattle that likely entered the food supply. THE FDA has removed and or made so difficult, you cannot make a simple search for all archived material. but here are a few i still had in my files. ...tss On January 18, 2002, FDA's New Orleans District Office issued a Warning Letter to J. Randall Mayes, Pulaski, Tennessee, a dairy farmer. An FDA inspection conducted November 26 28, 2001, confirmed that the farmer sold a cow for use as human food containing gentamicin residues. USDA analysis of tissue samples from the cow sold by Mayes identified the presence of 7.12 ppm of gentamicin in the kidney tissue. There is no established tolerance for gentamicin in cattle. In addition, FDA's investigation found that the dairy farmer held animals under conditions which were so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues were likely to enter the food supply. [url=http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/archive/2002/ch5/cvm1.htm]http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/ ... 5/cvm1.htm[/url] The Warning Letter also noted that the owner holds animals under conditions which are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. [url=http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/archive/2001/ch5/default.htm]http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/ ... efault.htm[/url] Mr. Sturm was found to hold animals on his farm under conditions that are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. In addition, he failed to use the drug, Albon, containing sulfadimethoxine, in conformance with the labeling. A warning letter was issued to the following firms for violations related to 21 CFR Part 589.2000—Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). • Scott Nelson, Owner, Integra Fish Foods, Inc., Grand Junction, CO • Bruce A. Burgett, General Manager, The Carrollton Farmers Exchange, Carrollton, OH Violations included failure to label feeds that contain, or may contain, prohibited materials with the required cautionary statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants," insufficient customer records to track the distribution of products, and lack of written procedures for cleaning or flushing equipment after mixing feeds containing prohibited material. [url=http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Sep_Oct01.htm]http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Sep_Oct01.htm[/url] Mr. Van Dam was found to hold animals under improper conditions whereby diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. Ms. Silveira was found to be adulterating the drug Mutual Pharmaceutical brand of sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim tablets, since she did not follow her veterinarian's prescribed withdrawal time of thirty days prior to slaughter. Mr. Edwards did not properly identify treated animals to assure they are not sold for slaughter, did not maintain treatment records, and he did not follow labeling directions for medicated feed. O & L Dairy was found to lack an adequate system for determining the medication status of animals offered for slaughter, and for assuring that animals which had been medicated had been withheld from slaughter for the appropriate periods of time to deplete potentially hazardous residues of drugs. Mr. Sturm was found to hold animals on his farm under conditions that are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. In addition, he failed to use the drug, Albon, containing sulfadimethoxine, in conformance with the labeling. A warning letter was issued to the following firms for violations related to 21 CFR Part 589.2000—Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). • Scott Nelson, Owner, Integra Fish Foods, Inc., Grand Junction, CO • Bruce A. Burgett, General Manager, The Carrollton Farmers Exchange, Carrollton, OH Violations included failure to label feeds that contain, or may contain, prohibited materials with the required cautionary statement "Do Not Feed to Cattle or Other Ruminants," insufficient customer records to track the distribution of products, and lack of written procedures for cleaning or flushing equipment after mixing feeds containing prohibited material. [url=http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Sep_Oct.htm]http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Sep_Oct.htm[/url] Our investigation also found that you hold animals on your farm under conditions that are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. For example, you failed to maintain treatment records for bull calves fed medicated milk replacer, lack a system for assuring that the milk replacer is used in a manner not contrary to label instructions, and lack a system for assuring the medicated animals have been withheld from slaughter for appropriate periods of time to permit depletion of potentially hazardous drug residues from edible tissues. Foods from animals held under such conditions are adulterated under Section 402(a)(4) of the Act [21 U.S.C. Section 342(a)(4)]. [url=http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl2.htm]http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl2.htm[/url] Our investigation also found that you hold animals on your farm under conditions that are so inadequate that diseased animals and lormedicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. For example, you lack a system for assuring that drugs are used in a manner not contrary to label instructions, and for assuring animals medicated on your farrn have been withheld from slaughter for appropriate periods of time to permit depletion of potentially hazardous drug residues from edible tissues. Foods from animals held under such conditions are adulterated under Section 402(a)(4) of the Act. [url=http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl6.htm]http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl6.htm[/url] Our investigation also found that you hold animals which are ultimately offered for slaughter as food, under conditions which are so inadequate that diseased animals and/or John Weststeyn 2 T & J Dairy medicated animals bearing potentially harmful drug residues are likely to enter the food supply. [url=http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/archive/awl130.pdf]http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/ ... awl130.pdf[/url] TSS [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
NCBA, R-CALF, COOL, USDA (No Politics!)
BSE CASE CONFIRMED IN ALBERTA OTTAWA, February 26, 2008
Top