Click on text below to see the vid

Test EVERY Cow in the Food Chain

Test EVERY Cow in the Food Chain
Like Other Countries Do

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

MadCow USA: The Cover-Up Continues


BSE ATYPICAL USA blog, August 20, 2008
Straight to the Source

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Mad Cow Disease typical and atypical strains, was there a cover-up ?

MAD COW DISEASE, WHO STARTED IT, when and where did it start first ?

WAS/IS there a cover-up attempt ?

WILL the next administration here in the USA hold any sort of Congressional hearings or have a BSE Inquiry of sorts into the Bush Administrations handling of BSE in the USA (any and all strains of TSE) ?

OR, will it be the same old O.I.E. B.S.E. M.R.R. nonsense of 'don't look, don't find, mentality $$$


I am puzzled by several things. IF I remember correctly, the last two mad cows _documented_ in the U.S.A., this was before the surveillance and testing for BSE was shut down to almost nothing, for obvious reasons i.e. the findings back to back of the two atypical BSE cases, but I am puzzled by the fact that no detailed pathology of _both_ the Texas and the Alabama cow have been released, that I am aware of?

I am also puzzled by the fact that no more attention has been given to the fact of several statements and facts that in fact have come about, to simply go ignored? kind of reminded me of the infamous sporadic CJD in farmers and their wives with BSE herds.

But Confucius is confused again. my questions, who really started mad cow disease and or when and where did it really start? IT seems to me that this is not a questions that has been answered. ONE could look at the U.K. BSE epidemic as the point of origin, but if you go back, typical and atypical TSE in the bovine seems to have started way back. It could go all the way back to the U.S.

HAS the continuous rendering U.K. first theory (continuous rendering technology shipped to U.K. some 5 years and used there first before the U.S.A. started using) been proven, as the key to the start, or just an enhancement of sorts i.e. low temps, minus the oils, and was it true that the U.S. did NOT start using it before the U.K. ? and does it really matter ? could the TSE agent have survived and spread regardless ??? seems from the latest study on the TSE agent surviving the Biodiesel Production process, seems then it would not matter.

Click title above to go to MadCow Homepage;

Monday, September 22, 2008

Duh,.."New" USDA Reg. for BSE a "US-Duh-A" No-Brainer

I stumbled upon this old "new" USDA reg established in 2003 but I got such a kick out of its "logic" that I just had to share.....

Product Holding; USDA is publishing a notice (PDF) announcing that FSIS inspectors are no longer marking cattle tested for BSE as "inspected and passed" until confirmation is received that the cattle have, in fact, tested negative for BSE. FSIS will be issuing a directive to inspection program personnel outlining this policy.

Apparently, prior to the enactment of this "new" reg, our USDuhA inspectors were "certifying" meat as "passed" inspection before the test results were in!


Click title above for full article from the USDA website.

Tell USDA No Slaughter for Downer Cows! Comments due by Sept 26

Tell the USDA To Close the Downer Loophole!

As a result of HSUS's investigation at the Hallmark/Westland slaughter plant, followed by the largest ever meat recall in U.S. history, the USDA is finally considering closing a loophole in federal slaughter regulations that hurts downed cattle. If USDA's proposal moves forward, cattle who are too sick or injured even to stand or walk will no longer be slaughtered for human food, so there will be no incentive to drag them with chains, shove them by forklift, shock them, blast them with high-pressure water hoses to simulate drowning, or otherwise torment downed cattle to try to get them on their feet.

Please speak up for these crippled animals, now! Submit your comments to the USDA by September 26, 2008, to let the agency know that the public will not tolerate the cruel treatment of animals who cannot even stand or walk.

Click title above to read full article and send your comments to the USDA from there.

Sunday, September 21, 2008

Farm Groups Worried About COOL Laws

"Country of Origin Laws" Provide Loop-hole for Meat-packers

By MARY CLARE JALONICK Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press - Wednesday, September 17, 2008


Farm groups are protesting the Agriculture Department's use of a new food labeling law, saying it has loopholes that could confuse consumers about where their meat comes from.

National Farmers Union President Tom Buis and other farm groups said Wednesday the department has written the law - which passed with widespread support in the federal farm bill earlier this year - in a way that will allow meatpackers to avoid labeling packages of meat as an exclusively U.S. products.

The law is scheduled to take effect at the end of the month.

At issue are the new country of origin labels on fresh meats, an issue long debated by Congress.

The labels are favored by High Plains ranchers who own small operations and compete with Canadian beef. The leading opponents have been grocery stores and large meatpacking companies - many of whom mix U.S. and Mexican beef - and other businesses involved in getting products to supermarkets.

Those groups have said the tracking and the paperwork needed to comply with the law is would be too burdensome and would lead to higher prices. They agreed to a compromise that ended up in this year's farm law after days of negotiations.

The compromise laid out different types of labels, including one that would tag meat from animals that are born, raised and slaughtered in the United States as products of this country. Another label would spell out multiple countries of origin, such as "Product of U.S., Mexico and Canada."

Farm groups say the new law as written by the Agriculture Department would allow meatpackers to label all beef and pork with multiple countries of origin - even meat that was born, raised and slaughtered in the United States. That could make it easier and cheaper for the meatpackers but eliminate the competitive advantage for ranchers who raise the U.S. meat.

"USDA has created a loophole big enough to drive a truck through, violating the spirit, letter and intent of the law and deceiving consumers who have consistently shown support for buying U.S. products," Buis said. "This is about truth in labeling."
Billy Cox, a spokesman for the Agriculture Department's Agricultural Marketing Service, said the law is still under discussion.

"We do take it seriously," he said of the farm groups' complaints.

Senate Agriculture Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said the department "seems to be taking liberty with their interpretation" of the law passed by Congress.

"That goes against the spirit of the law and the negotiated settlement between producer and packing industry representatives," Harkin said.

Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., has written Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer to ask him to fix the problem.

Schafer, a former North Dakota governor, also has some pressure from his home state, where the labeling law is popular.
"Surely Secretary Schafer knows farmers, ranchers, and consumers all have worked hard to secure (country of origin labeling) as a way to clearly identify food products, whether those products are from overseas sources, specifically U.S. in origin, or a blend," said North Dakota Farmers Union President Robert Carlson. "To allow meat packers to exploit this loophole means USDA is catering to the packers, rather than following the intent of Congress, consumers, farmers and ranchers."

AP Article;

Saturday, September 20, 2008

Fed Ct.Sides with USDA-Says "No" to Private Testing for Mad Cow Disease

USA Today 8/08

Because the Agriculture Department tests only a small percentage of cows for the deadly disease, Kansas meatpacker Creekstone Farms Premium Beef wants to test all of its cows. The government says it can't.

Click on title above for full article;

Revolving Door Between Meat Industry & USDA Raises Meat Safety Concerns

July 2008
Click title above for full article;

Mad Cow Disease & US Imports / The Latest Report

Congressional Report June 2008

Click title above to read full report;

Whats the Beef? S. Koreans Protest Over Lifting of Ban

South Korea Citizens Protest Over Lifting of Bann on American Beef Imports

Eversince the first case of mad cow disease was discovered in the US
over four years ago, many foriegn countries banned the import of US
beef because of "inadequate testing" methods. S. Korea, once the third
largest imported of US beef, was one of those nations and hasent
allowed any US meat into its country ever since. However, the S. Korean
government is now lifting the bann despite the opposition of nearly
10,000 S. Korean citizens. This is just another "unholy alliance"
between "godless, uncaring, self-serving government officials" at the
expense of public safety....and a giant step up for the European Union
and globalization of US (private) interests.

Click on title above for full article;

Friday, September 19, 2008

Cattlemen, Beef Industry, USDA;"Cant Beat Our Meat"

Mad Cow a "Non-Issue" Says Beef Industry in 2004

This is all really a nonissue," insists Dan Murphy, a spokesman for the American Meat Institute, the meatpacking industry's trade group, which has also been busy downplaying public fears. "There is no threat to public health. Beef is safe. The flames have been fanned by misguided media coverage, and by activists with agendas - the kind of people who want to turn us all into vegetarians or denounce corporate globalization and the WTO or whatever."

Click on title for full article

The Meat-Industrys Influence on Capitol Hill

The Politics of Meat by Steve Johnson

A Look at the Meat Industrys Influence on Capital Hill

The meat industry in the United States is a powerful political force,
both in the legislative and the regulatory arena, even though the way
they wield that power is different from many industries on Capitol
Hill. Instead of spreading lots of money around to many different
lawmakers in an attempt to gain access and influence -- the traditional
method used by many large corporations -- the meat industry targets
their approach to a small number of key lawmakers and regulators that
have a direct impact on their business interests. Yet despite the
relatively low level of financial contributions, the industry has
succeeded in weakening or preventing many new meat-safety initiatives
in recent years.

Click title for full article;


Meet the Meat Guys . The AMI

Click title above to meet the meat-guys

More On Mad Cow in 05' / A Pathologist Prospective

At the end of the day, no country can consider itself immune to mad-cow disease, and the book has a few suggestions of tougher controls for American regulators to consider. Prion diseases are not just bad luck, concludes Mr Yam, but a warning that 'something is out of balance, that the excessive unnaturalness we force on livestock could be catching up with us.'"

Click title for full article;

2nd Mad Cow Case in US 2005

The second US case where US tested positive and was sent to UK for confimation, and some very good questions & concerns posed by pathologists

U.S. Testing Inadequate / Brits Catch U.S.False Neg 2005

But still, USDA Big-Whigs say US beef "the safest."

Click title for full article

Thursday, September 18, 2008

In the Beginning... 2001

Horsemeat sales soar as mad cow disease spreads across europe;

Click title above for full article;