tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-88330573551670808802024-03-13T23:03:35.264-07:00FOIA MAD SHEEP MAD RIVER VALLEYTerry S. Singeltary Sr.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06986622967539963260noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8833057355167080880.post-1215449236239252462010-02-27T12:36:00.000-08:002010-02-27T13:09:40.136-08:00FINAL REPORT OF THE TESTING OF THE BELGIAN (VERMONT) SHEEP February 27, 2010Veterinary Laboratories Agency - Weybridge<br />New Haw, Addlestone, Surrey KT15 3NB United Kingdom<br />Telephone +44 (0)1932 341111 Facsimile +44 (0)1932 347046 '<br />Web site http://www.vla.gov.uk<br /><br />Veterinary Laboratories Agency<br /><br />Your ref: MPL-6197-7-37<br /><br />Our ref: FT1294<br /><br />This is the FINAL report for contract MPL-6197-7-37 The testing of the Belgian (Vermont) sheep.<br /><br />Background<br /><br />Brain homogenate (10% in normal saline) from each case was inoculated intracerebralty into panels of 20 Rlll and 20 Tg338 mice.<br /><br />FT1294/0001 (Sample 4677) was inoculated into mice on the 14/12/06<br /><br />FT1294/0011 (Sample 4703) was inoculated into mice on the 20/12/06<br /><br />Method<br /><br />The brain from each mouse was examined histologically for any evidence of TSE-related vacuolation, and immunolabelled using anti-PrP antibody Rb486 as described elsewhere1, All slide interpretation was undertaken blind with regard to the clinical status of the mouse, or the source of the inoculum.<br /><br />Final bioassay results<br /><br />FT1294/0001 (Sample 4677)<br /><br />Tg338 mice - All 20 mice are negative by histopathology, and immunohistochemistry<br /><br />Rlll mice - All 20 mice are negative negative by histopathology, and immunohistochemistry<br /><br />FT1294/0011 (Sample 4703)<br /><br />Tg338 mice - All 20 mice are negative by histopathology, and immunohistochemistry<br /><br />Rlll mice - All 20 mice are negative by histopathology, and immunohrstochernistry<br /><br />The survival times for these mice can be seen in the figures below. Additional data sets from positive and negative inocula (J Spiropoulos, pers. comm.) have been included for comparison._<br /><br />1 Beck KE, Chaplin M, Stack M: Sallis RE, Simonini S, Lockey R, Spiropoulos J. Lesion Profiling at Primary Isolation in Rlll Mice Is Insufficient in Distinguishing BSE from Classical Scrapie. Brain Pathol. 2009 epub ahead of print<br /><br />FINAL report for contract MPL-6197-7-37<br /><br />VLA is an Executive Agency of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)<br /><br /><br />snip... (2 pages of charts and graphs of survival and comparison of tg338 data NOT included here...TSS)<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />CONCLUSION<br /><br />These mice have survived for long enough to have demonstrated the presence of classical scrapie, atypical scrapie, or ovine BSE if any of these strains was present in the inoculum.<br /><br />Both samples are negative by bioassay.<br /><br />Dr. Marion M Simmons<br /><br />22nd October 2009<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />February 27, 2010, INVESTIGATION OF MAD SHEEP OF MAD RIVER VALLEY COMPLETE. THEY WERE NOT INFECTED WITH ANY TSE. ...TSS<br /><br /><br />Greetings again BSE list members,<br /><br />The investigation of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley may be complete now, but, I still have questions.<br /><br /><br />PLEASE SEE MY FINAL FOIA HERE ;<br /><br /><br />Monday, September 1, 2008<br />RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [No. 00-072-1] September 1, 2008<br /><br />Greetings again BSE-L members,<br /><br />I had a pleasant surprise this past Saturday. I got an unexpected package from O.I.G. on my old F.O.I.A. request, of the final test results of the infamous mad sheep of mad river valley. IF you all remember, back on Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:00:20 -0500 I wrote ;<br /><br />Greetings,<br /><br />With great disgust, I must report, that after years and years of wrangling over the infamous mad sheep of mad river valley, I have failed in getting an official answer via FOIA on the outcome of the TSE testing of those imported Belgium sheep. The USA Government refuses to tell the public, exactly what the testing outcome was, and in doing so, shows just how corrupt this administration has been. and the excuse given in their answer to my final appeal, which they have now officially denied, was bizarre to say the least ;<br /><br />"I am denying your FOIA appeal. This is the final agency decision. You may seek judicial review of this decision in the United States district court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business or in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. & 552(a)(4)(B)."<br /><br />FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1] ...snip...end...TSS<br /><br />NOW, out of the wild blue, AFTER them telling me they denied my FOIA appeal for the final time, any further action would have to be judicial review in the United States district court, I get 25+ pages, a lot of redacted names, etc, but this is the first time they sent me anything about this in the 6 years of waiting for my FOIA request. IT will take me a long time to get this online due to the fact you cannot hardly read it, very poor quality and eligibility of text. BUT, the just of it is, somebody (REDACTED) screwed those tests up. I will work to get all the data online next week or so, but it is odd how much they were concerned for human and animal health from an atypical scrapie of foreign origin back then, but yet when we document it here in the USA, you don't hear a word about it. it's a completely different story.<br /><br />IN SHORT ;<br /><br />August 15, 2000<br /><br />OIG case # NY-3399-56 REDACTED, VT<br /><br />''Enclosed is OIG's notification that they have scheduled an investigation of the following individual. REDACTED is alleged to have provided possibly inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep. However, because the results were determined to be inconclusive, no actual violation was actually committed.''<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />PLEASE SEE FULL TEXT HERE ;<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/">http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Subject: RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br />From: TERRY SINGELTARY <flounder9@verizon.net><br /><br />Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@lists.aegee.org><br /><br />Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 13:30:02 -0500<br /><br />Content-Type: text/plain<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://lists.aegee.org/">https://lists.aegee.org/</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />A FEW THINGS TO PONDER ;<br /><br /><br />again, which lab and test were used in the USA, and whom screwed those test up ? and why ?<br /><br />Was it the rubenstein lab staten Island (and where is that at) ?<br /><br />of which I have heard rumours of mice running around that lab loose, to a lab tech. getting needle stick from CJD, to they had to secretly shut it down, because they were not suppose to be working on CJD in the first place ?<br /><br />OR, was it the Schmeer test ?<br /><br />any follow ups on that would be much appreciated.<br /><br /><br />an old report here off Tom's page ;<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jul00_dont_eat_sheep.html#said">http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jul00_dont_eat_sheep.html#said</a><br /><br /><br /><br />Where and who is Staten Island?<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jul00_dont_eat_sheep.html#bbb">http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jul00_dont_eat_sheep.html#bbb</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />maybe this case is not closed yet ??? something still smells fishy to me. this just gets better and better.<br /><br /><br /><br />plus, in the end, it really did not matter, the Nor-98 was already here. ...TSS<br /><br /><br />Thursday, January 07, 2010<br /><br />Scrapie and Nor-98 Scrapie November 2009 Monthly Report Fiscal Year 2010 and FISCAL YEAR 2008<br /><br /><a href="http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/2010/01/scrapie-and-nor-98-scrapie-november.html">http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/2010/01/scrapie-and-nor-98-scrapie-november.html</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Monday, December 14, 2009<br /><br />Similarities between Forms of Sheep Scrapie and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Are Encoded by Distinct Prion Types<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2009/12/similarities-between-forms-of-sheep.html">http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2009/12/similarities-between-forms-of-sheep.html</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br />P.O. Box 42<br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518Terry S. Singeltary Sr.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06986622967539963260noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8833057355167080880.post-3960643399939739622008-09-01T11:01:00.000-07:002008-09-03T08:16:06.361-07:00RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [No. 00-072-1]September 1, 2008<br /><br />Greetings again BSE-L members,<br /><br />I had a pleasant surprise this past Saturday. I got an unexpected package from O.I.G. on my old F.O.I.A. request, of the final test results of the infamous mad sheep of mad river valley. IF you all remember, back on Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:00:20 -0500 I wrote ;<br /><br />Greetings,<br /><br />With great disgust, I must report, that after years and years of wrangling over the infamous mad sheep of mad river valley, I have failed in getting an official answer via FOIA on the outcome of the TSE testing of those imported Belgium sheep. The USA Government refuses to tell the public, exactly what the testing outcome was, and in doing so, shows just how corrupt this administration has been. and the excuse given in their answer to my final appeal, which they have now officially denied, was bizarre to say the least ;<br /><br />"I am denying your FOIA appeal. This is the final agency decision. You may seek judicial review of this decision in the United States district court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business or in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. & 552(a)(4)(B)."<br /><br />FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1] ...snip...end...TSS<br /><br />NOW, out of the wild blue, AFTER them telling me they denied my FOIA appeal for the final time, any further action would have to be judicial review in the United States district court, I get 25+ pages, a lot of redacted names, etc, but this is the first time they sent me anything about this in the 6 years of waiting for my FOIA request. IT will take me a long time to get this online due to the fact you cannot hardly read it, very poor quality and eligibility of text. BUT, the just of it is, somebody (REDACTED) screwed those tests up. I will work to get all the data online next week or so, but it is odd how much they were concerned for human and animal health from an atypical scrapie of foreign origin back then, but yet when we document it here in the USA, you don't hear a word about it. it's a completely different story.<br /><br />IN SHORT ;<br /><br />August 15, 2000<br /><br />OIG case # NY-3399-56 REDACTED, VT<br /><br />''Enclosed is OIG's notification that they have scheduled an investigation of the following individual. REDACTED is alleged to have provided possibly inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep. However, because the results were determined to be inconclusive, no actual violation was actually committed.''<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />[only bush et al could have interpreted it that way. don't all criminals wish this is the way the system worked. ...tss]<br /><br />JULY, 28, 2000<br /><br />Case Opening Memorandum<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />An investigation regarding the subject identified below will be conduced and a report submitted at the conclusion of the investigation. If you have or should later receive additional information concerning this matter, please forward it to this office.<br /><br />If you believe that administrative action should be taken before all criminal and other legal matters are completed, please coordinate that action with this office in order not to jeopardize the ongoing investigation.<br /><br />The fact that this subject is under investigation should not be discussed with anyone who does not have a need to know and all inquiries on the investigation should be referred to the office of Inspector General.<br /><br />snip...end<br /><br />FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FEBRUARY 7, 2002<br /><br />SUBJECT OIG CASE NY-3399-56 REDACTED VT HEALTH/SANITATION VIOLATION<br /><br />TO: William Buisch, Regional Director Eastern Region, VS Raleigh, NC<br /><br />Enclosed is the official investigation report on REDACTED. If you will recall, REDACTED is alleged to have provided possible inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep.<br /><br />OIG is closing their file upon issuance of the Report of Investigation (copy enclosed). We are, therefore, also closing our case file.<br /><br />REDACTED<br /><br />Resource Management Systems and Evaluation Staff<br /><br />Enclosure<br /><br />cc:<br /><br />REDACTED IES, Riverdale, MD (w/cy of incoming)<br /><br />APHIS:RMSES: REDACTED 2/7/02 "NY-3399-56-REDACTED Closure''<br /><br />END...TSS<br /><br />NOW, the question is, who screwed those test up, and was it done on purpose, just to cover someone's ass for letting those sheep in here in the first place ???<br /><br />WHICH tests were compromised, one of them, all of them, and, can we trust the outcome of any of these test under the circumstances here ???<br /><br />i.e.<br /><br />"It is significant that four of the sheep which first tested positive on REDACTED Western blot tests, thereby providing the type of confirmation the plaintiffs argue is lacking on the current record."<br /><br />UNDER what circumstances were these test compromised ???<br /><br />MY basic, simple question, was not answered in layman term, i.e. exactly what strain of TSE did those sheep have ???<br /><br />IS this the best we can do ???<br /><br />>>>"REDACTED is alleged to have provided possibly inaccurate test results involving diseased sheep. However, because the results were determined to be inconclusive, no actual violation was actually committed.''<<< <br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf">http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/sarc070619.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />OR ;<br /><br />FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />Statement May 4, 2004<br />Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242 Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA<br /><br />Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms<br /><br />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).<br /><br />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).<br /><br /><a href="http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/new01061.html">http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/new01061.html</a><br /><br /><br />OR ;<br /><br />BESIDES the Texas mad cow that sat on the shelf for 7+ months before the Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG finally did the end around Johanns et al and finally had Weybridge bring that negative cow back from the dead to finally being a confirmed mad cow (hint, hint, getting MRR implemented first), was this simply another bumbling of BSE protocol, or just same old same old; Jim Rogers (202) 690-4755 USDA Press Office (202) 720-4623 Statement by Chief Veterinary Medical Officer John Clifford Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Regarding Non-Definitive BSE Test Results July 27, 2005<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />Our laboratory ran the IHC test on the sample and received non-definitive results that suggest the need for further testing. As we have previously experienced, it is possible for an IHC test to yield differing results depending on the “slice” of tissue that is tested. Therefore, scientists at our laboratory and at Weybridge will run the IHC test on additional “slices” of tissue from this animal to determine whether or not it was infected with BSE. We will announce results as soon as they are compiled, which we expect to occur by next week. I would note that the sample was taken in April, at which time the protocols allowed for a preservative to be used (protocols changed in June 2005). The sample was not submitted to us until last week, because the veterinarian set aside the sample after preserving it and simply forgot to send it in. On that point, I would like to emphasize that while that time lag is not optimal, it has no implications in terms of the risk to human health. The carcass of this animal was destroyed, therefore there is absolutely no risk to human or animal health from this animal.<br /><br />snip...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/news/2005/07/bsestatement_vs.html">http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/news/2005/07/bsestatement_vs.html</a><br /><br />snip...<br /><br />please see full text ;<br /><br /><a href="http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/06/mad-cows-and-computer-models-us.html">http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/06/mad-cows-and-computer-models-us.html</a><br /><br /><br />OR ;<br /><br /><br />USDA: In 9,200 cases only one type of test could be used<br /><br />WASHINGTON (AP)--The U.S. Department of Agriculture acknowledged Aug. 17 that its testing options for bovine spongiform encephalopathy were limited in 9,200 cases despite its effort to expand surveillance throughout the U.S. herd.<br /><br />In those cases, only one type of test was used--one that failed to detect the disease in an infected Texas cow.<br /><br />The department posted the information on its website because of an inquiry from The Associated Press.<br /><br />Conducted over the past 14 months, the tests have not been included in the department's running tally of BSE tests since last summer. That total reached 439,126 on Aug. 17.<br />"There's no secret program," the department's chief veterinarian, John Clifford, said in an interview. "There has been no hiding, I can assure you of that."<br /><br />Officials intended to report the tests later in an annual report, Clifford said.<br /><br />These 9,200 cases were different because brain tissue samples were preserved with formalin, which makes them suitable for only one type of test--immunohistochemistry, or IHC.<br />In the Texas case, officials had declared the cow free of disease in November after an IHC test came back negative. The department's inspector general ordered an additional kind of test, which confirmed the animal was infected.<br /><br />Veterinarians in remote locations have used the preservative on tissue to keep it from degrading on its way to the department's laboratory in Ames, Iowa. Officials this year asked veterinarians to stop using preservative and send fresh or chilled samples within 48 hours.<br /><br />The department recently investigated a possible case of BSE that turned up in a preserved sample. Further testing ruled out the disease two weeks ago.<br /><br />Scientists used two additional tests--rapid screening and Western blot--to help detect BSE in the country's second confirmed case, in a Texas cow in June. They used IHC and Western blot to confirm the first case, in a Washington state cow in December 2003.<br /><br />"The IHC test is still an excellent test," Clifford said. "These are not simple tests, either."<br />Clifford pointed out that scientists reran the IHC several times and got conflicting results. That happened, too, with the Western blot test. Both tests are accepted by international animal health officials.<br /><br /><br />Date: 8/25/05<br /><br /><a href="http://www.hpj.com/archives/2005/aug05/aug29/BSEtestoptionswerelimited.cfm">http://www.hpj.com/archives/2005/aug05/aug29/BSEtestoptionswerelimited.cfm</a><br /><br /><br /><br />WELL, someone did call me from Bio-Rad about this, however it was not Susan Berg. but i had to just about take a blood oath not to reveal there name. IN fact they did not want me to even mention this, but i feel it is much much to important. I have omitted any I.D. of this person, but thought I must document this ;<br /><br />Bio-Rad, TSS phone conversation 12/28/04<br /><br />Finally spoke with ;<br /><br />Bio-Rad Laboratories 2000 Alfred Nobel Drive Hercules, CA 94547 Ph: 510-741-6720 Fax: 510-741-5630 Email: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX<br /><br />at approx. 14:00 hours 12/28/04, I had a very pleasant phone conversation with XXXX XXXXX about the USDA and the inconclusive BSE testing problems they seem to keep having. X was very very cautious as to speak directly about USDA and it's policy of not using WB. X was very concerned as a Bio-Rad official of retaliation of some sort. X would only speak of what other countries do, and that i should take that as an answer. I told X I understood that it was a very loaded question and X agreed several times over and even said a political one.<br /><br />my question;<br /><br />Does Bio-Rad believe USDA's final determination of False positive, without WB, and considering the new atypical TSEs not showing positive with -IHC and -HP ???<br /><br />ask if i was a reporter. i said no, i was with CJD Watch and that i had lost my mother to hvCJD. X did not want any of this recorded or repeated.<br /><br />again, very nervous, will not answer directly about USDA for fear of retaliation, but again said X tell me what other countries are doing and finding, and that i should take it from there. "very difficult to answer"<br /><br />"very political"<br /><br />"very loaded question"<br /><br />outside USA and Canada, they use many different confirmatory tech. in house WB, SAF, along with IHC, HP, several times etc. you should see at several talks meetings (TSE) of late Paris Dec 2, that IHC- DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NEGATIVE. again, look what the rest of the world is doing. said something about Dr. Houston stating; any screening assay, always a chance for human error. but with so many errors (i am assuming X meant inconclusive), why are there no investigations, just false positives? said something about ''just look at the sheep that tested IHC- but were positive''. ...<br /><br /><br />TSS<br /><br /><br />-------- Original Message --------<br /><br />Subject: Your questions<br />Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:58:11 -0800<br />From: To: <a href="mailto:flounder@wt.net">flounder@wt.net</a><br /><br /><br />Hi Terry:<br /><br />............................................snip<br /><br />Let me know your phone number so I can talk to you about the Bio-Rad BSE test.<br /><br />Thank you<br />Regards<br /><br /><br /><br />Bio-Rad Laboratories 2000 Alfred Nobel Drive Hercules, CA 94547 Ph: 510-741-6720 Fax: 510-741-5630 Email:<br /><br />=================================<br /><br />END...TSS<br /><br /><br />######### <a href="https://listserv.kaliv.uni-karlsruhe.de/warc/bse-l.html">https://listserv.kaliv.uni-karlsruhe.de/warc/bse-l.html</a> ##########<br /><br /><br />Executive Summary<br /><br />In June 2005, an inconclusive bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) sample from November 2004, that had originally been classified as negative on the immunohistochemistry test, was confirmed positive on SAF immunoblot (Western blot). The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) identified the herd of origin for the index cow in Texas; that identification was confirmed by DNA analysis. USDA, in close cooperation with the Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC), established an incident command post (ICP) and began response activities according to USDA’s BSE Response Plan of September 2004. Response personnel removed at-risk cattle and cattle of interest (COI) from the index herd, euthanized them, and tested them for BSE; all were negative. USDA and the State extensively traced all at-risk cattle and COI that left the index herd. The majority of these animals entered rendering and/or slaughter channels well before the investigation began. USDA’s response to the Texas finding was thorough and effective.<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/issues/bse/epi-updates/bse_final_epidemiology_report.pdf">http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/issues/bse/epi-updates/bse_final_epidemiology_report.pdf</a><br /><br /><br /><br />Wednesday, August 20, 2008 Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Mad Cow Disease typical and atypical strains, was there a cover-up ? August 20, 2008<br /><br /><a href="http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/08/bovine-spongiform-encephalopathy-mad.html">http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/08/bovine-spongiform-encephalopathy-mad.html</a><br /><br /><a href="http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2007/10/bse-base-mad-cow-testing-texas-usa-and.html">http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/2007/10/bse-base-mad-cow-testing-texas-usa-and.html</a><br /><br /><br />EXACTLY WHAT are they afraid of by sound testing ???<br /><br /><a href="http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/">http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />EXACTLY WHAT are these people capable of doing ???<br /><br />JUST HOW FAR will they go ???<br /><br />Mad Sheep The True Story Behind the USDA‚ War on a Family Farm Linda Faillace<br /><br />The page-turning account of a government cover-up, corporate greed, and a courageous family‚ fight to save their farm.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep">http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep</a><br /><br />got to read this months ago, and it is deeply disturbing how the feds handled this from the very beginning, and to this day we do not know the results of the mouse bio-assays, and what those sheep actually had. i don't necessarily agree with the TSE science in this book, but the book is a must read if your interested at all in human and animal TSEs. ...TSS<br /><br />Submitted by flounder on Thu, 09/07/2006 - 9:43pm.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2006/08/28/book-release-party-linda-faillaces-mad-sheep">http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2006/08/28/book-release-party-linda-faillaces-mad-sheep</a><br /><br />to be continued. ...TSS<br /><br />SOME HISTORY ON THIS ;<br /><br />Subject: RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1] From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." <flounder9@verizon.net>Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@lists.aegee.org>Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:00:20 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain Parts/Attachments: text/plain (488 lines)<br /><br />Greetings,<br /><br />With great disgust, I must report, that after years and years of wrangling over the infamous mad sheep of mad river valley, I have failed in getting an official answer via FOIA on the outcome of the TSE testing of those imported Belgium sheep. The USA Government refuses to tell the public, exactly what the testing outcome was, and in doing so, shows just how corrupt this administration has been. and the excuse given in their answer to my final appeal, which they have now officially denied, was bizarre to say the least ;<br /><br />"I am denying your FOIA appeal. This is the final agency decision. You may seek judicial review of this decision in the United States district court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business or in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. & 552(a)(4)(B)."<br /><br />FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br /><a href="http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/">http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />WITH great sadness and disgust, the USDA OIG has finally shot me down for good, and have refused my FOIA request officially. I got the letter around Jan. 1, 2008 and have just not been able to admit defeat until now. The Faillace's claim their sheep were TSE free, and they very well may have been, I dont know, and we now find out we will never know. does not matter I suppose, the TSE they were worried about in those imported Belgium sheep was documented in 2007 in the USA in 5 different states i.e. the NOR-98. UNLESS, those sheep from Belgium imported to the USA had BSE, and that may be why they did not give the test results via the FOIA?<br /><br />PLEASE NOTE, none of this answered my question and or FOIA request of what type TSE was finally diagnosed in those Vermont sheep, and or did they ever do mouse bio-assays, and if not, why not. none of these questions were ever answered, and probably never will be. also, the seven pages in question in hotline files. it was four pages of my old letter to them about BSE testing on top of the Sheep testing, two page letter from Ms MacNeil and one page of exemptions, and one page fax copy of my complaint sum on 'BSE Testing'. the one page of exemptions of the agencies reasons for not answering my question about those sheep and the mouse bio-assays, and the reason they law claim is because of individual privacy, adversely affect the individual, and or revealing their identify. which is nothing I was asking for. I was asking for the final results of the mouse-bioassays of the TSE in the Vermont sheep imported into the USA from Belgium. why is it they refuse to tell the public, what type Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy those sheep had ???<br /><br />copy of letter as follows ;<br /><br />UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL WASHINGTON D.C. 20250<br /><br />DEC 28, 2007<br /><br />Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas 77518<br /><br />Subject: FOIA Appeal-Log No. 08-00034 (No. 07-00060)<br /><br />Dear Mr. Singeltary:<br /><br />This is in response to your December 3, 2007, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. & 552, appeal of the November 20, 2007, decision of Ms. Deirdre MacNeil, FOIA/Privacy Act (PA) Attorney, Office of Inspector General (OIG), Department of Agriculture (USDA). As explained below, your FOIA appeal is denied.<br /><br />As background, on March 1, 2007, you requested the "final results of the TSE Mouse-bioassays of those Atypical TSE in the Vermont Sheep." FOIA requires the release of agency records except where one or more of the nine enumerated exceptions apply. On November 20, 2007, Ms. MacNeil responded to your request by sending you seven pages from Hotline files PS-3340-0024, which was responsive to your request. Ms. MacNeil withheld identifying information pursuant to Exceptions 6 and 7(C) of the FOIA. See 5. U.S.C.& 552(b)(6) and (7)(C). On December 3, 2007, you appealed Ms. MacNeils decision.<br /><br />12-3-07<br /><br />To The Honorable Inspector General USDA,<br /><br />I respectfully "APPEAL" the decision to withhold information I requested under the F.O.I.A. About the final results of the T.S.E. Mouse-bioassays of the Atypical T.S.E. in the Vermont Sheep imported from Belgium and later confiscated and slaughtered under a "Extra Ordinary Declaration of Emergency due to Atypical T.S.E. in U.S.A. sheep.<br /><br />Log Number 07-00060 FOIA 07-566<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br />Exemption 6 permits the Government to withhold information about individuals in "personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. & 552 (b)(6). To warrant protection under Exemption 6, information must first meet a threshold requirement by falling within the category of personnel and medical files and similar files. Id. Information fits into a "similar file" if it contains information regarding a particular individual. See United States Dept of State V. Washington Post Co., 456, 601-02 (1982). The threshold is met in this case, as the memorandum contains information regarding particular named individuals.<br /><br />Exemption 7(C) protects from disclosure law enforcement information, the disclosure of which "could reasonably be expected to constitute and unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. & 552(b)(7)(C. Under Exemption 7(C), it has been held that a protectible privacy interest exists in the identities of investigative agents. See Senate of<br /><br />Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. Page 2<br /><br />Puerto Rico v. United States Dep't of Justice, 823 F.2d 574, 588-89 (D.C. Cir. 1987); Nishnic v. United States Dep't of Justice, 671 F. Supp. 776, 789 (D.D.C. 1987). Such a privacy interest exists in this case, as the withheld information contains the identities, including names and identifying information, of investigative agents in the memorandum.<br /><br />Once it is determined that a privacy interest exists, Exemptions 6 and 7(C), of FOIA require a balancing of interests between the public interest served by disclosure and an individual's right to privacy. See, e.g., Senate of Puerto Rico, 823 F.2d at 587; Dep't of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 372 (1976). Determination of whether disclosure is warranted turns not upon the particular purpose for which the document is requested, but upon the nature of the requested document and its relationship to the central purpose of FOIA, which is to "open agency action to the light of public scrutiny." United States Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 772-73 (1989) (quoting Rose, 425 U.S. at 372). I have determined that the release of the withheld information, of investigative agents in the memorandum, would not serve the public interest. Therefore, I am denying your appeal with respect to the withholdings pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C).<br /><br />In addition to appealing the exemptions pursuant to 6 and 7(C), you appear to take issue with USDA's Animal $ Plant Health Inspection Service's (APHIS) response to your FOIA requests with APHIS. You may contact APHIS regarding the status of any such requests by contacting Mr. Garfield Daley, Acting FOIA Officer, at (301)734-5273, 4700 River Road, Unit 50, Riverdale, MD, 20737-1232<br /><br />Finally, in your appeal, you seek answers to a series of questions posed to various USDA officials, including the Inspector General, However, FOIA allows requesters to access records only. It does not require Federal agencies to answer questions, render opinions, provide subjective evaluations, or create explanatory materials, See, e.g., NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 421 U.S. 132, 162 (1975); Zemansky v. Epa, 767 f2d 569, 574 (9th Cir. 1985); Flowers v. IRS, 307 F. Supp. 2d 60, 71 (D.D.C. 2004); Citizens Progressive Alliance v. U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 241 F. Supp. 2d 1342, 1364-65 (D.N.M. 2002); Hudgins v. IRS, 620 F. Supp. 19, 21 (D.D.C. 1985). As FOIA requires an agency only to produce responsive non-exempt records to a requester, OIG is not obligated to answer questions regarding the TSE occurrence as you requested. Therefore, I am denying your appeal with respect to your questions.<br /><br />Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. Page 3<br /><br />For these reasons, I am denying your FOIA appeal. This is the final agency decision. You may seek judicial review of this decision in the United States district court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business or in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. & 552(a)(4)(B).<br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br />David R. Gray<br /><br />FOR<br /><br />Phyllis K. Fong<br /><br />Inspector General<br /><br />=======END...TSS...4.24.08=======<br /><br />----- Original Message -----<br /><br />From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br /><br />To: Boyd.Rutherford@usda.gov<br /><br />Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:35 PM<br /><br />Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br /><br />Greetings USDA,<br /><br />I respectfully request the final results of the mouse bio-assays test that were to have supposedly began 2+ years late, 5 years ago, on the imported sheep from Belgium ?<br /><br />WHAT happened to the test results and MOUSE BIO-ASSAYS of those imported sheep from Belgium that were confiscated and slaughtered from the Faillace's, what sort of TSE did these animals have ?<br /><br />WERE they atypical scrapie, BSE, and or typical scrapie ?<br /><br />HOW much longer will you refuse to give us this information ? and for what reason ?<br /><br />WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley were quarantined for 5 years, but none of these farms from Texas and Alabama with Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not been quarantined for 5 years,why not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />full text ;<br /><br /><a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf">http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf</a><br /><br /><br /><a href="https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument">https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument</a><br /><br /><br />FURTHERMORE, I respectfully request up front, that any fees for this FOIA be wavered due to the fact this information should be free to the public and is in the best interest for the public to have these final results, no financial gain from this FOIA information is to be made either. ...<br /><br />Thank You,<br /><br />kind regards,<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br /><br />P.O. Box 42<br /><br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br />Imported<br /><br />Belgium/Netherlands<br /><br />Sheep Test Results<br /><br />Background<br /><br />Factsheet<br /><br />Veterinary Services April 2002<br /><br />APHIS<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />Additional tests will be conducted to determine exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie. These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals<br /><br />Page 15 of 98<br /><br />8/3/2006<br /><br />and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf">http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.<br /><br />(PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES<br /><br /><a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31">http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31</a><br /><br /><br />DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E<br /><br />(PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [2]<br /><br /><a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32">http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32</a><br /><br /><br />--- Original Message ---<br /><br />Subject: Sheep<br /><br />Date:Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:26:04 EDT<br /><br />From: LAVET22@aol.com<br /><br />To: flounder@wt.net<br /><br />Mr. Singeltary.<br /><br />I hope this finds you well. As you are aware I left the USDA last year. I can only update you on the sheep before that time. Contact was established with the UK on doing the bioassay studies. They agreed. However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay. I am aware that there are now additional labs in Europe running the mouse bioassay strain typing. You will have to contact USDA for further word.<br /><br />Linda Detwiler<br /><br />=========<br /><br /><br />My reply to Dr. Detwiler;<br /><br /><br />--- Original Message ---<br /><br />Subject: Re: Sheep<br /><br />Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:53:57 -0500<br /><br />From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."<br /><br />To: LAVET22@aol.com<br /><br />References:<br /><br />hello Dr. Detwiler,<br /><br />thanks for your kind reply.<br /><br />However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay.<br /><br />not sure i understand that?<br /><br />You will have to contact USDA for further word.<br /><br />already done that, and there answer was;<br /><br /><br />--- Original Message ---<br /><br />Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton.question please.scrapie.TSS<br /><br />Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400<br /><br />From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov<br /><br />To: flounder@wt.net<br /><br />Dear Mr. Singeltary,<br /><br />The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is 301-734-5941.<br /><br />Have a nice day,<br /><br />Jim Rogers<br /><br />APHIS LPA<br /><br /><br />--- Original Message ---<br /><br />Subject: re-85th Meeting of SEAC - 30.11.04<br /><br />Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:56:55 -0000<br /><br />From: "Barlow, Tom (SEAC)"<br /><br />To: "'flounder@wt.net'"<br /><br />Dear Mr Singeltary<br /><br />Thank you for you enquiry to the SEAC secretariat about mouse bioassays commissioned by the USDA to investigate TSE cases in imported sheep. After making a number of enquiries, it appears that Defra were notinvolved with this work. However, it is possible that a UK research laboratory was contacted by the USDA about such tests but I have been unable to find out any further information. You may wish to make further enquiries with the USDA.<br /><br />Yours sincerely<br /><br />Tom Barlow<br /><br />Dr Tom Barlow<br /><br />Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) Secretariat<br /><br />Area 108, 1A Page Street, London SW1P 4PQ<br /><br />Tel: 0207 904 6267<br /><br />===================<br /><br /><a href="https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d">https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d</a>?<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf">http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br /><br />P.O. Box 42<br /><br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br />PLEASE NOTE !<br /><br />I know Linda and Larry Faillace's {kinda}, we have corresponded over the years, and I even was asked by their Editor-in-Chief John Barstow, of Chelsea Green Publishing Company, to read the transcript of the Faillace's book before it was published, see how if I liked it, a proof read of sorts, they sent me the transcript i.e. MAD SHEEP, THE TRUE STORY BEHIND THE USDA'S WAR ON A FAMILY FARM by Linda Faillace.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep/Reviews">http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep/Reviews</a><br /><br /><br />BOOK RELEASE PARTY - Linda Faillace's MAD SHEEP<br /><br />got to read this months ago, and it is deeply disturbing how the feds handled this from the very beginning, and to this day we do not know the results of the mouse bio-assays, and what those sheep actually had. i don't necessarily agree with the TSE science in this book, but the book is a must read if your interested at all in human and animal TSEs. ...TSS Submitted by flounder on Thu, 09/07/2006 - 9:43pm.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2006/08/28/book-release-party-linda-faillaces-mad-sheep">http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2006/08/28/book-release-party-linda-faillaces-mad-sheep</a><br /><br /><br />OH, and the identifying information of investigative agents, i.e. Dr. Linda Detwiler, well, I {kinda} know her too, we have corresponded over the years as well. so this excuse to not give up the information of the FOIA on those mad sheep of mad river valley, and what the final mouse bio-assays showed, if any, atypical Scrapie, typical scrapie, or BSE, was bogus. It was one more of a long line of lies, deceit, and corruption by this Administration. I remember before this administration took office, i remember requesting for information i.e. hundreds and hundreds of pages of documents of the USA BSE surveillance plan, USDA emergency BSE response plan, the red book, yellow book, green book, and Dr. Detwiler sent to me with no problem. well, i might have complained a time or two about the slowness of response, and maybe sometimes when the information was not what i wanted, due to how i ask the question. but i would eventually get the data. I just looked at the date, and it was 1999. IT was 3 inches of paperwork in that one mailing. SO why is it, after some 5 years of asking and requesting, why i cannot get one question answered ;<br /><br />FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br /><a href="http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/">http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />WHAT STRAIN OF TSE DID THESE SHEEP HAVE, atypical NOR-98-like, typical scrapies, or BSE ???<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br />NOR-98 ATYPICAL SCRAPIE USA UPDATE AS AT OCT 2007<br /><br /><a href="http://nor-98.blogspot.com/">http://nor-98.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />Sunday, March 16, 2008<br /><br />MAD COW DISEASE terminology UK c-BSE (typical), atypical BSE H or L, and or Italian L-BASE<br /><br /><a href="http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/03/mad-cow-disease-terminology-uk-c-bse.html">http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/03/mad-cow-disease-terminology-uk-c-bse.html</a><br /><br /><br />DOWNER COW SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM<br /><br /><a href="http://downercattle.blogspot.com/">http://downercattle.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />Wednesday, April 23, 2008<br /><br />FDA Strengthens Safeguards for Consumers of Beef Issues Regulation on Animal Feeds with Added Safeguards Against BSE<br /><br /><a href="http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/">http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />Sunday, April 20, 2008<br /><br />Progress Report from the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center April 3, 2008<br /><br /><a href="http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/">http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />Thursday, April 24, 2008<br /><br />RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br /><a href="http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/2008/04/re-foia-of-declaration-of-extraordinary.html">http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/2008/04/re-foia-of-declaration-of-extraordinary.html</a><br /><br /><br />TSS...END...APRIL 24, 2008<br /><br /><a href="https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0804&L=BSE-L&T=0&F=&S=&X=06F577281C867A8623&Y=flounder9%40verizon.net&P=22793">https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0804&L=BSE-L&T=0&F=&S=&X=06F577281C867A8623&Y=flounder9%40verizon.net&P=22793</a><br /><br /><br />Subject: Re: Confiscation of Sheep in Vermont and testing results ? From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." <flounder@wt.net>Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@uni-karlsruhe.de>Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 10:13:49 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain Parts/Attachments: text/plain (1837 lines)<br /><br />######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@uni-karlsruhe.de>#########<br /><br />AgricultureLaw.com News - March 22, 2001 <http:>... testing, but Linda Detwiler, USDA senior staff veterinarian, said it would be at least two years before lab mice tests could determine if the sheep had BSE. ... www.agriculturelaw.com/headlines/mar01/mar22a.htm - 4k -<br /><br />CAN someone please, from the USDA sheep scrapie/TSE team, try to come up with another story besides the one sent to me about NOW going to start testing, on testing we were told 3+ years ago were to begin. YOU must please come up with a better one than that, and please do a better job than that of the blunder in TEXAS and that mad cow. The story about USDA NOW just being able to begin testing after them telling us for 14 years they have been doing just that, please come up with a better story for the Vermont sheep TSE to mice testing that should have started some 3+ years ago. THE next thing we will hear is that you have mixed there brains up with cow brains...<br /><br />TSS<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:<br /><br />Greetings again list members,<br /><br />This is very disturbing to me and others as well. All evidence (and it is mounting) points to another cover-up and more lies from the USDA about animal TSEs. How many more lies and cover-ups can this Administration put forth to the American (Tourists) consumers before they take a stand? The stupidity and or ignorance of the American consumer in relations to human/animal TSEs are simply amazing to me. I suppose in a way I am one of them as well. I still go out to eat, get sick, and simply accept it as another '24 hour stomach virus'.....NOT;<br /><br />The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated that known food borne pathogens account for 14 million illnesses, 60,000 hospitalizations and 1,800 deaths to humans in the United States each year.1 Total food borne illness from both known and unknown pathogens is likely to be responsible for 76 million cases, 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths annually.1<br /><br />Total food borne illness from both known and unknown pathogens<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.fda.gov/cvm/guidance/Guide122.pdf">http://www.fda.gov/cvm/guidance/Guide122.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />AND HOW MANY ARE TSEs ?<br /><br />I thought I might send a few threads through the list of other recent and old comments on this topic of the Vermont sheep;<br /><br />MAY 20, 2004<br /><br />Terry, I am so glad you wrote them and I am equally peaved by the answer-- so why did the western blot take 4 years? I guess they want us to think they had develop the test? Well why didn't they get it from the UK, or wait till the test were developed prior to 'taking the sheep'. This is stupid. It does not take 4 years to run western blot-- unless of course they didn't run it until you questioned them. I have the very big impression they want us to forget about the sheep. I asked Lisa Furgeson about the sheep in a public meeting and she go so angry, telling everyone it HAD to be done and the USDA was reasonable about it, only the land owners turned it into a circus. When asked about the test in this same public meeting, about 2.5 year ago, she said the mice test were already underway and it was too early to tell. (About Mar/April 2001)<br /><br />snip...END<br /><br />NEXT;<br /><br />Dear Terry, It's because they didn't find anything, and they knew they wouldn't. The whole thing had been fabricate after Belgium found BSE and Europe was unhappy about our hormone laced beef. Tit for tat. Those sheep were sacrificed as a straw dog to protect the beef industry, back when they thought the public would swear off beef forever over mad cow. Now they know that as far as the public is concerned, mad cow is something that gets talked about for a week or two and goes away. They are hoping to lie and stall and withhold results until people forget all about that little "incident" in Vermont, and for the most part, that's what's happened. There's no one to hold their little feet to the fire; not the scientific community, not Belgium Government, not the EU, and certainly not the US sheep industry or the American public. JMHO, but the whole thing stinks; it always has and it always will. Regards, XXXXXXXXXXXXX<br /><br />NEXT;<br /><br />Terry, I've been a member of an online sheep mailing list for several years. They can stall and backpedal forever, but they can't change the fact that long before the USDA clamed to have "discovered" an "abnormal" TSE in the Vermont sheep, they wanted them dead for political reasons. This and a following message written by Linda and Lawrence Faillace are from the archives at sheep-L.<br /><br />(November 1999)<br /><br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:14:42 -0500 Reply-To: Linda and Lawrence Faillace Sender: This is a list for people interested in sheep<br /><br />From: Linda and Lawrence Faillace Subject: Faillace Family Sheep Farm<br /><br />Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br /><br />First Linda and I would like to apologize for not keeping our fellow shepherds informed about this issue previously. We were under an unofficial "gag" order from USDA, but now that the story is in the media we are free to speak.<br /><br />For those of you who may not be familiar with the basic facts they are: 1)no sheep worldwide has ever contracted BSE outside of lab conditions, 2)our sheep and their ancestors are certified to never have been fed meat and bone meal, 3) all surveillance and testing has shown them to be free of TSE's (verified by several of the world's leading TSE pathologists), 4)sensitive and reliable live animal tests now exist for showing the absence of TSEs.<br /><br />The USDA began their crusade a full two years after our initial importation and immediately before the time we were due to receive our certified status in the VSFCP. In USDA's words, their efforts to have our sheep killed are in response to political pressure from the cattle and pharmaceutical industries.<br /><br />The saving grace for us in this whole situation is the phenomenal support we have received. Thank you Gene, Garry, Will, and other members of the Sheep-L community! The outrage and fury that this issue has raised is remarkable and we have been supported by not only shepherds and private citizens, but also local and state government officials, the Vermont State Grange, Dr. David Henderson, the Vermont Sheep Breeders Association, as well as other agricultural organizations, and members of the media. The media attention has been particularly helpful because the truth has been able to come out and has highlighted the hypocrisy of USDA's case.<br /><br />Our farm, a true family operation includes my wonderful wife Linda, our three children (Francis, Heather, and Jackie), and myself. We strive to do the best job possible and to make a real difference in the way that farming is practiced in Vermont and beyond.<br /><br />If you would like more details, please don't hesitate to contact us.<br /><br />Meanwhile the battle continues!<br /><br />Larry Faillace<br /><br />Dr. Larry and Linda Faillace Ag-Innovations, Inc/Three Shepherds of the Mad River Valley 565 Behn Road Warren, VT 05674 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br /><br />==============================================<br /><br />1)no sheep worldwide has ever contracted BSE outside of lab conditions,<br /><br />considering surveillance and strain typing, this is rather a hypithetical assessment (assumption, no proof). Plus, we have new evidence to date (2004) of atypical TSE showing up in sheep and cattle in many different Countries...TSS<br /><br />=========================================<br /><br />Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 20:19:12 -0500 Reply-To: Linda and Lawrence Faillace Sender: This is a list for people interested in sheep<br /><br />From: Linda and Lawrence Faillace Subject: BSE Content-Type:<br /><br />June Reed commented:<br /><br />BSE is terribly, terribly personal to me. For the same reason, so is<br /><br />shaping policy that will work. This country and its producers must NEVER experience BSE or what happened in UK. And that mandates a well articulated plan and response, not to mention guts. The US has had one for years.<br /><br />There is absolutely no question that the US should take strong efforts to try and verify its often stated claim of "BSE Free Status." The fact of the matter is the USDA's record of dealing with TSE diseases is hopelessly inadequate. Out of a cumulative cattle population since 1990 of 1.2 billion (yes, that's billion), less than 9,000 cattle have been tested for BSE in the United States. We were also the last western country to prohibit feeding ruminants to ruminants even though the science had long shown that this was a dangerous practice. In fact, even though scientists now worry about the human blood supply regarding CJD infection, and a USDA BLOOD TEST has now been developed which can detect the abnormal prion protein, US cattle continue to be fed cattle blood products. Furthermore, I don't think that I am telling anyone on this list that the US approach to dealing with scrapie leaves much to be desired. Worse yet, Chronic Wasting Disease, which plagues Western US elk and deer populations, continues to run rampant in both wild and farm raised populations, while government agencies argue over whose jurisdiction this falls under. The bottom line: Many potential vectors of BSE or a BSE-like disease remain and not enough action is being taken to prevent a repeat of what happened in the UK.<br /><br />In this country, we had cattle imports from UK. They were subject to<br /><br />surveillance/quarrantine as one option and slaughter/idemnity as another. Those not sold to USDA have about all died for one reason or another.<br /><br />There was not a mandatory cattle surveillance program in place, therefore these cattle could not be easily traced. In fact, 33 of the imported cattle were never located. This is quite unlike the situation that our sheep were imported under, where surveillance was a part of the import regulations.<br /><br />None were infected with BSE upon necropsy.USDA put a ban on imported<br /><br />feedstuffs/products in, I think, 1989.<br /><br />When USDA has been asked about the ban on imported feedstuffs, they could not in fact guarantee that no feeds containing meat and bone meal had crossed US borders from overseas. The USDA has to admit that although the documents show that no such feedstuffs were imported, the possibility exists that it did occur. (The same argument they are using against us when we show them documents verifying the diet of our animals.)<br /><br />No one KNOWs if Larry's sheep, before they came into his possession,<br /><br />consumed any illegal feed. And you can't prove a negative.<br /><br />Actually, we have many, many documents showing that no such feed was consumed. In addition, we have surveillance data on the source flocks going back to the early 90's which demonstrate a complete lack of TSE diseases, and for that matter, neurological symptoms of any kind. The surveillance of all the imported sheep and their offspring has shown them to be completely healthy.<br /><br />There is a possible chance, whether it is similiar to a meteor falling<br /><br />on someone, or as the UK government maintained while defending its polices from1989-1996 regarding danger from BSE, "vanishingly small".<br /><br />As everyone is aware, when government policy is formulated, relative risk assessment is what is normally employed, while on the other hand a "0 risk" policy is never achievable. In light of all of the previously mentioned facts, as well as the fact that several excellent live animal tests now are available for ruminants, it is completely possible for a protocol to be put together that would give everyone the assurances they need without destroying these healthy sheep. We have repeatedly offered for ALL our animals to be tested (tonsil test, eyelid test, blood test, etc.). However, since we are dealing with a politically motivated situation, all offers of a testing program by ourselves have been declined by USDA.<br /><br />But,<<> the KNOWN CONSEQUENCES if the sheep ever did develop BSE,<br /><br />and it was made public, consequences to our animal ag industries, to our consumer confidence in our product, to our multi-billion dollar trade in exported animal product....IS IT WORTH THE RISK???<br /><br />Interesting that the muti-billion dollar trade issue is referred to here. Trade sits at the center of this issue and the perception of the US "BSE free status" is a blue chip that is being protected with every means possible. There is nothing new about trade barriers being disguised as "health concerns," and we have certainly not seen the last of the battles between the US and EU over beef as well as other commodities.<br /><br />At the time he brought sheep in, the "science" had not demonstrated<br /><br />that sheep could get BSE yet<br /><br />A completely false statement. The research conducted in Edinburgh Scotland was published in the <italic>Veterinary Record </italic>in October, 1993. This was almost full three years prior to Linda and I importing the sheep, and five years before we were contacted by USDA on this issue. For those who may not be familiar, <italic>Veterinary Record</italic> is the preeminent British Veterinary Journal and can be easily found on the shelves of any University library.<br /><br />I support what USDA is doing. USDA cannot get the sheep if Larry<br /><br />doesn't want them to. Our government cannot seize livestock. USDA is doing everything by the book, I mean by the book. And this whole thing is hard for both Larry and the people who are visiting with him about buying/slaughtering the stock. Some of these folks are/have been sheep producers themselves.<br /><br />The USDA cannot seize our sheep without scientific evidence.<br /><br />Speaking of doing everything by the book, we went above and beyond the USDA's rules when we imported the sheep. We chose to follow stricter health requirements, particularly for scrapie. Linda and I are trying to help build an industry and wanted the best possible sheep. Our East Friesians, Beltex, and Charollais have all thrived and we are extremely pleased with their production.<br /><br />Furthermore, no one from USDA that is dealing with this issue has raised sheep to my knowledge. If they have, they haven't mentioned it. As for those from ASI who have supported USDA's position, we have never had contact from any of them regarding their stance or any other aspect of this issue. Since we have been members of ASI since 1994, we have found this treatment particularly unprofessional.<br /><br />Fortunately for us, June is the first person connected with sheep that has supported USDA's position. In fact, from the immense number of personal phone calls, numerous call-in listeners on many radio programs, and enormous numbers of e-mails and letters, the support for our position is truly remarkable. This issue has really uncovered a nerve and many people are feeling extremely passionate about the way we are being treated. We feel truly blessed by how many friends and supporters we have out there.<br /><br />We KNOW the pain too well that Larry might be feeling at this moment.<br /><br />But, put in the context of possible<br /><br />consequences, and of the risk these poor animals MIGHT represent to our entire nation, I think as an Industry we need to support Larry, not to fight USDA, but to co-operate with USDA. Politics is perception.<br /><br />Politics is perception, and the perception in our neck of the woods is that once again big business and big government are trying to squash the family farm. Vermonters, sheep farmers, regular citizens and consumers, elected officials, the Grange, etc., etc., they're all coming to same conclusion, enough is enough and it's time to take a stand against these tactics that have become all too familiar.<br /><br />can't lose sight of that; it marrys science in policy formation. In a<br /><br />way, all of us are at risk as producers, as long as Larry holds on to these sheep. And not just us, but dairy and beef industries as well. And not just US agriculture: this is also a public health issue, we now know that, based on science.<br /><br />Here, we are in partial agreement, all sheep producers are at risk, but not from BSE. The sheep industry has too long been the pawn in American agriculture. If we capitulate, where does it end? Since no sheep worldwide has contracted BSE outside of lab conditions, the needless slaughter of our sheep will certainly create the perception that sheep do in fact contract the disease. We can tell you that at every meeting with USDA, we have been asked for names of sheep producers who have imported genetics, especially those imported via Canada. Of course, we have never offered any names. The point is that this issue has been pitched by USDA as an isolated one, but you can be sure that it won't end with our sheep.<br /><br />Sorry for the length of our response, but the readers on this list deserve the truth.<br /><br />Larry and Linda Faillace<br /><br />Dr. Larry and Linda Faillace<br /><br />Ag-Innovations, Inc/Three Shepherds of the Mad River Valley<br /><br />565 Behn Road<br /><br />Warren, VT 05674 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br /><br /><br />==========================================<br /><br />Since no sheep worldwide has contracted BSE outside of lab conditions,<br /><br />AGAIN, Dr. Faillace is stating something that in fact, has never been proven. AGAIN, we have new atyipcal cases of TSE showing up in sheep and cattle that could very well be a BSE type TSE in sheep...TSS<br /><br /><br />==========================================<br /><br />Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 07:58:12 -0700 Reply-To: Jackie Watkins Sender: This is a list for people interested in sheep<br /><br />From: Jackie Watkins Subject: Fw: USDA SEEKS TO SLAUGHTER 365 East Friesian and Beltex SHEEP Content-Type:<br /><br />USDA SEEKS TO SLAUGHTER 365 SHEEP: MAD-COW DISEASE LINK FEARED Nov. 14/99 Dow Jones/ Washington Post NEW YORK -- These stories explained that the Agriculture Department wants to slaughter 365 sheep under quarantine at two Vermont farms because they may have come in contact with mad cow disease. Controversy over the sheep's fate underscores policy makers' continuing wariness over the family of degenerative brain afflictions believed to be spread by oddly shaped proteins called prions. There has, according to these stories, never been a case of mad cow disease, known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE, reported in the United States, but at least 16 people died in England in 1996 from a similar disease, apparently after eating contaminated beef. And while alarm has, these story say, subsided over the possibility that cows contract BSE from feed derived from sheep brains, unease lingers over whether sheep can carry BSE for years after ingesting feed derived from contaminated beef. George Beran, a veterinary professor at Iowa State University and author of a handbook on diseases that affect both humans and animals, was quoted as saying, "This is brand new," adding that rudimentary detection methods make "depopulating the herd" the only sure way to combat a prion disease outbreak. It was uneasiness over the science of BSE that prompted the Agriculture Department to keep a close watch on 65 East Friesian and Beltex milk-producing sheep imported by Vermont farmers Larry Faillace, of Warren, and Houghton Freeman, of Greensboro, from England in early 1996. The importers wanted to build a new cheese-making industry. Faillace was quoted as saying, "The average American sheep does 100 pounds of milk in a year, while ours do 1,000 pounds." The USDA was initially concerned about whether the sheep were infected with scrapie, the ovine equivalent of BSE, but the animals were quarantined and cleared both in Belgium and the United States. Faillace, who was cited as saying that he can sell all the cheese he can make, adding, "There's nothing wrong with our sheep, and the risk is theoretical," "We just want USDA to get off our backs." But Detwiler, senior staff veterinarian for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, was cited as saying that the Agriculture Department would persevere, even though the sheep were ostensibly disease-free: "We're just trying to be ultraconservative."<br /><br />========================================<br /><br /><br />IN 2004, we have documented BSE in the USA and Canada. WE have been feeding TSE infected animals back and forth to each other (BSE/CWD/SCRAPIE/not sure about much TME to do scent glands) for decades. SO what makes the USA sheep any different from these Belgium sheep?...TSS<br /><br /><br />=========================================<br /><br />Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 21:55:21 -0700 Reply-To: will verboven Sender: This is a list for people interested in sheep<br /><br />From: will verboven Organization: Subject: Re: vermont & bse Content-Type:<br /><br />Something about this matter bothers me, I quote a piece of the posting made by the Faillace family: "We have repeatedly offered for ALL our animals to be tested (tonsil test, eyelid test, blood test, etc.). However, since we are dealing with a politically motivated situation, all offers of a testing program by ourselves have been declined by USDA.<br /><br />Now what rationale would the USDA have for not having these sheep tested. Especially using tests, some of which the USDA not only invented but the researchers were awarded honors and prizes for innovative achievements. If the USDA does not have faith in these tests what message are they giving to producers. It seems to me the danger to the USDA in this case is that these tests may prove them wrong! Interesting how politics overrules science - well it wouldn't be the first time.<br /><br />Will Verboven Calgary, Alberta Canada<br /><br /><br />============================================<br /><br /><br />Interesting how politics overrules science - well it wouldn't be the first time.<br /><br />HOW correct Mr. Verboven was, and in fact, it will not be the last time either, in the USA in 2004, this policy of Politics overruling Science is very much alive and well, and the agent continues to spread...TSS<br /><br /><br />=============================================<br /><br />hello XXXX,<br /><br />Those sheep were sacrificed as a straw dog to protect the beef industry,<br /><br />i'll have to agree with you there for sure, but the threat of BSE/BASE/CWD back to sheep is very real, you may disagree there. also, (and you will probably disagree here), the threat of scrapie to human is very real as well. we could debate this all day with pros and cons, but the oral study by natural feeding and transmission of scrapie to primate is still disturbing to me, but none of us will know the answer to that until they do some serious strain typing of all TSEs and some serious transmission studies, not like the pro-longed and put off studies of these Vermont sheep. Kinda like the way the UK has put this off. I only hope that scrapie is a natural disease of sheep and goat that does not transmit to humans, but this has yet to be proven.<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />They are hoping to lie and stall and withhold results until people forget all about that little "incident" in Vermont,<br /><br />this will not happen, promise ;-)<br /><br />kindest regards, terry ======<br /><br />TSS<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:<br /><br />######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@uni-karlsruhe.de>#########<br /><br />-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton...question please...scrapie...TSS Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400 From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov To: flounder@wt.net<br /><br />Dear Mr. Singeltary,<br /><br />The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is 301-734-5941.<br /><br />Have a nice day,<br /><br />Jim Rogers APHIS LPA ==========<br /><br />Greetings List members,<br /><br />I do not understand this process of testing?<br /><br />IF we go back, and if I remember correctly;<br /><br />These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.<br /><br />this was some 3+ years ago, and the damn testing has not even started yet in mice???<br /><br />let's look further;<br /><br />Imported Belgium/Netherlands Sheep Test Results The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced that 2 sheep from a flock of 125 which were confiscated in March of 2001 from a farm in Vermont have tested positive for an atypical undifferentiated transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE). TSEs are a class of degenerative neurological diseases that are characterized by a very long incubation period and a 100-percent mortality rate. Two of the better known varieties of TSEs are bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in cattle and scrapie in sheep. Additional tests will be conducted to determine exactly what TSE the animals have—BSE or scrapie. These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete. This flock of 125 sheep was confiscated in March 2001 after 4 animals from an associated flock tested positive for an atypical TSE of foreign origin. In all, APHIS acquired 380 sheep from a total of three flocks. All of the animals were humanely euthanized, sampled, and disposed. The animals did not enter the animal or human food supply. The decision to confiscate the sheep was made after four sheep from one the of the flocks tested positive for an atypical undifferentiated TSE of foreign origin in July 2000. On July 14, 2000, USDA issued a declaration of emergency and extraordinary emergency to acquire the sheep. The first flock of 21 sheep were voluntarily sold to USDA on July 14, 2000. Those animals tested negative for a TSE. The owners of the other two flocks contested USDA’s action. A federal district court judge ruled in favor of USDA based on the merits of the case. The flock owners appealed to the Second Circuit Court requesting a stay, which was denied. After the request for a stay was denied, the flocks were confiscated by USDA in March 2001. The second flock of 234 animals was confiscated on March 21, 2001. Testing for TSEs is ongoing for this flock. The third flock of 125 sheep was confiscated on March 23, 2001. Background APHIS’ mission is to “Protect American Agriculture.” As part of that mission APHIS regulates the importation of animals and works with U.S. producers to eradicate animal diseases. To improve the genetic base of the domestic sheep population or to gain access to breeds not commonly found in the United States, there was a brief window of time in 1996 when USDA allowed the importation of sheep from certain countries. In August and November 1996, two importations of sheep from Belgium occurred. The sheep were primarily East Friesian milk sheep which originated from both Belgium and the Netherlands. A total of 65 sheep were imported. These sheep were used for milk production; milk from these sheep was used to produce cheese that was sold locally and nationally. This brief import window was shut in late 1996 after published research indicated that sheep that were orally infected with BSE had a wider tissue distribution of the agent than cattle with BSE. This raised the possibility that if sheep were naturally infected with BSE the disease may spread from one sheep to another. In late 1997, both Belgium and the Netherlands reported their first cases of BSE in native cattle. In 1998, the European Union’s Scientific Steering Committee issued an opinion that stated it is highly likely that European sheep were exposed to feed contaminated with the BSE agent. Based on these reports, the state of Vermont, in consultation with APHIS, imposed a quarantine on these sheep in October 1998. The two flocks of sheep and their progeny were prohibited, by the State quarantine, from entering either the human food or animal feed chains or being sold for breeding purposes. Subsequent to the quarantine, APHIS obtained information that the flocks of origin had been fed concentrates prepared at local mills. This practice has been shown as the most likely route of BSE exposure for the infected cattle in Belgium. If any of the quarantined sheep were to be culled or died, tissues from animals greater than 6 months of age were collected for diagnostic purposes and the carcasses were incinerated at APHIS’ expense. Based on four animals from one flock testing positive for an atypical undifferentiated TSE, USDA determined that an emergency and extraordinary emergency existed in Vermont. These declarations, which were effective July 14, 2000, provided funds and the authority to seize and dispose of these sheep. Factsheet Veterinary Services April 2002 APHIS The declaration of emergency provides authority for USDA to seize and destroy the sheep and authorizes payment of fair market value for the sheep. On October, 28, 2000, Congress provided the USDA with additional authority and funding ($2.4 million) to compensate the owners for economic losses incurred due to seizure and destruction of the Vermont sheep. This was in addition to fair market value funds that would have been provided for the sheep. This additional funding, which was available only if the sheep were destroyed on or before November 17, 2000, was declined by the owners. The owners of the other two flocks contested USDA’s action. A federal district court judge ruled in favor of USDA based on the merits of the case. The flock owners appealed to the Second Circuit Court requesting a stay, which was denied. TSE Testing Tissues from the sheep have been subjected to three tests; histopathology, immuno-histochemistry, and Western-blot. Histopathology examines brain tissue for microscopic changes indicative of a TSE. Immunohistochemistry examines the brain tissue for the abnormal prion protein, which is a marker for TSE disease. The Western-blot test also detects the abnormal form of prion protein in the brain tissue. All of these are recognized as official tests by APHIS. The abnormal prion protein was detected by the Western-blot test in all of the sheep that have tested positive for a TSE in these groups of animals. The method used for this test has been published in literature and is an accepted methodology. The tissue samples were from the obex, which is the best location in the brain to find the abnormal form of the prion protein (an indicator of TSE infection) if it is present. The Western-blot test however cannot differentiate between scrapie and BSE. The only known validated method to differentiate between these two diseases requires a series of mouse bioassay systems, which take at least 2–3 years for completion. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Safeguarding American Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • United States Department of Agriculture •<br /><br /><a href="http://cofcs66.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf">http://cofcs66.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />Q’s & A’s Regarding Vermont Sheep Test Results Q: What are the most recent developments concerning the sheep imported from Belgium and the Netherlands to Vermont that were confiscated last year? A: Two sheep from a flock of 125 that were confiscated in March of 2001 from a farm in Vermont have tested positive for an atypical undifferentiated transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE). In all, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) acquired 380 sheep from a total of three flocks. All of the animals were humanely euthanized, sampled, and disposed. These animals did not enter the animal or human food supply. Q: What do these tests mean? A: Tissues from the sheep have been subjected to three tests; histopathology, immunohistochemistry, and Western-blot. Histopathology examines brain tissue for microscopic changes indicative of a TSE. Immunohistochemistry examines the brain tissue for the abnormal prion protein which is a marker for TSE disease. The Western-blot test also detects the abnormal form of prion protein in the brain tissue. All of these are recognized as official tests by USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The abnormal prion protein was detected by the Western-blot test in all of the sheep that have tested positive for a TSE in these groups of animals. The method used for this test has been published in literature and is an accepted methodology. The tissue samples were from the obex, which is the best location in the brain to find the abnormal form of the prion protein (an indicator of TSE infection) if it is present. The Western-blot test however cannot differentiate between scrapie and BSE. The only known validated method to differentiate between these two diseases requires a mouse bioassay system, which takes at least 2-3 years for completion. Q: Will tests to strain-type this TSE be conducted? A: Yes. Additional tests will be conducted to determine exactly what TSE the animals have—BSE or scrapie. These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete. Q:Why did the USDA acquire three flocks of sheep in Vermont? A: APHIS regulates the importation of foreign animals and works with U.S. producers to contain and eradicate animal disease. On July 10, 2000, several sheep associated with this flock of 125 tested positive for a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE). In all, APHIS has acquired 380 sheep from a total of three flocks. All of the animals were humanely euthanized, sampled, and disposed. The animals did not enter the animal or human food supply. USDA acquired these sheep to prevent the spread of a TSE to other livestock. Q: What threat did these sheep pose? A: TSEs, a class of diseases, can hide in animals for a long time before the animals show signs of illness. TSEs are always fatal. Also, the type of TSE that was present in the Vermont sheep has not been determined. While it could have been the kind that affects only sheep, they could also have been carrying the TSE that affects cattle. Q: Where did these sheep come from? A: Two shipments of sheep were imported into the United States. These shipments included primarily East Friesian milk sheep originating from both Belgium and the Netherlands. A total of 65 sheep were imported. The imported sheep were originally consigned to two farms in Vermont. These sheep were in milk production flocks since their import, and at the time USDA acquired them were between 4-5 years of age. Most of the original sheep imports bore offspring. Since the sheep entered the United States, USDA tracked the movements of the original sheep and their progeny. All of the imported sheep and their offspring were accounted for. Q:Why did USDA allow importation of these animals? A: In the early 1990’s, there was significant interest from various sources in obtaining both live sheep and germplasm from overseas. This was intended either to improve the genetic base of the domestic sheep population or to gain access to breeds not commonly found in the United States. USDA-APHIS evaluated the situation and came to the conclusion that sheep Factsheet Veterinary Services April 2002 APHIS could be imported from certain countries with various restrictions that would reduce the risk of disease transmission. After this conclusion, there was a brief window of time in 1996 when imports were allowed from certain countries. This window was closed in late 1996, after information was published that outlined both the experimental transmission of BSE to sheep via oral inoculation and a wider tissue distribution of the agent than previously established. Q:Why was USDA concerned about the sheep imports? A: In 1993, the first indications about bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) infectivity in experimentally inoculated sheep were published. In 1996, additional research demonstrating wider tissue distribution of the agent was published. In late 1997, both Belgium and the Netherlands reported their first cases of BSE in native cattle. Subsequent to these findings, the European Union’s Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) issued an opinion in 1998 that stated it is likely that European sheep were exposed to feed contaminated with the BSE agent. The combination of all of these factors led USDA to the conclusion that the sheep in Vermont could possibly have been exposed to BSE while in Europe and therefore, as a precaution, the decision was made by the State of Vermont at the request of APHIS to quarantine them. Subsequent to the quarantine, APHIS obtained information that the flocks of origin had been fed concentrates prepared at local mills. This practice has been shown as the most likely route of BSE exposure for the infected cattle in Belgium. Q: How did USDA determine that the original four animals had a TSE? A: Each of the sheep that tested positive for a TSE underwent four separate tests. The first two tests were conducted in June 1999. The first of these was histopathology. Histopathology examines the brain of the subject for microscopic changes. The sheep tested did show some changes indicative of a degenerative neurological condition, but the changes were not diagnostic for a TSE. The second test in June 1999 was the immunohistochemistry. This test examined sections of the brain of the subject for the abnormal prion proteins that are an indicator of TSE infection. No abnormal prion protein was detected in this test. The third and fourth tests were conducted in June and July of 2000. The third, the Western-blot test, is another method of detecting the abnormal form of prion proteins in the brain tissue of a test subject. Abnormal prion protein was detected by this method in four of the sheep. Thus, the sheep tested positive for a TSE. The fourth test, capillary electrophoresis, detects the presence of abnormal prion protein in the blood of a subject. In this case, the same four sheep that tested positive for the Western-blot test also were positive with the capillary electrophoresis test. However, this test is still considered to be experimental; therefore, the USDA actions were not based on these test results. Q:Was more testing needed to be sure of the original TSE results? A: The test that was done —Western-blot analysis— is an approved test authorized by APHIS, and it was done at a USDA-cooperating laboratory. The method used for this test has been published in literature and is an accepted methodology. The tissue samples were from the best location in the brain to find PrPres (an indicator of TSE infection) if it is present. Q: If the sheep were in the country since 1996, why did USDA wait so long to take action? A: The flocks were placed under quarantine due to the possibility of exposure to BSE that could have occurred prior to their importation. The quarantine allowed for increased monitoring and surveillance of these animals. Although many animals had been examined from these flocks prior to this date, there had not been any definitive evidence of a TSE agent. USDA had been trying to negotiate with the flock owners to voluntarily sell the sheep to the USDA so that the risk could be removed. Without the definite TSE agent evidence, the USDA did not have authority to move forward. During this monitoring process, four sheep tested positive for an atypical TSE of foreign origin in July of 2000, triggering a USDA action to acquire the sheep. However, the owners of two of the flocks contested USDA’s action. A Federal district court judge ruled in favor of USDA based on the merits of the case. The flock owners appealed to the Second Circuit Court requesting a stay, which was denied. After the request for a stay was denied, the flocks were confiscated by USDA in March 2001. Q: How did USDA dispose of the sheep? A: USDA euthanized the sheep in a humane manner, took samples for further diagnostic studies, and incinerated their remains. No tissues entered either the human or animal food chain. Q: What is the difference between BSE in sheep and scrapie? A: Both BSE and scrapie are TSEs. TSEs are forms of progressive neurodegenerative disorders that affect both humans and animals and are caused by similar uncharacterized agents that generally produce spongiform changes in the brain. In addition to BSE and scrapie, other examples of TSEs include: transmissible mink encephalopathy; feline spongiform encephalopathy; chronic wasting disease of mule deer, white-tailed deer, black-tailed deer, and elk; and in humans, kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Gerstmann-Straussler syndrome, fatal familial insomnia, and variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). The common characteristics of the TSEs are long incubation periods of months to years, the presence of scrapie-associated fibrils in the brain, and the ability to transmit the disease to laboratory animals by an injection into the brain of brain tissue from the diseased animal. Scrapie was first recognized as a disease in sheep in Europe more than 250 years ago. It was first diagnosed in U.S. sheep in 1947. Scrapie is not known to be a human pathogen. BSE was first recognized in Great Britain in 1986 and has been considered primarily a disease of cattle. BSE has not been diagnosed in native cattle outside of Europe. There are various scientific hypotheses concerning the origin of BSE. BSE is thought to be the most likely cause of vCJD, which is a fatal human disease. There have been more than 117 vCJD cases in the UK, 5 in France, and 1 in the Republic of Ireland. BSE can be orally transmitted to sheep with as little as one-half gram of infected brain tissue. Sheep infected with BSE showed the same signs as scrapie and routine tests cannot differentiate between the two. There is one method of distinguishing between scrapie and BSE in the same species. This method involves conducting bioassay studies via the inoculation of infected material into mice. These mouse bioassay studies have been done to identify both BSE in cattle and strains of scrapie in sheep. When these studies were done on brain material from sheep experimentally infected with BSE, the study demonstrated that the agent was similar to the BSE agent as identified in cattle rather than the scrapie agents identified from sheep. BSE has not been diagnosed as a natural disease in sheep to date. However, it must be pointed out that the studies to differentiate between scrapie and BSE take years and not many samples have been completed. Q: What causes TSE? A: Little is known about the actual agent that causes TSEs. So far, scientists know that the TSE agent is smaller than most viral particles. It is highly resistant to heat, ultraviolet light, ionizing radiation, and common disinfectants that normally stop viruses or kill bacteria. Also, the agent does not cause the host’s immune system to create detectable antibodies. The TSE agent has not yet been observed under a microscope. Three main theories on the nature of the agent have been proposed: an unconventional virus; a prion or a partially protease-resistant protein that is rebuilt into an abnormal prion; an incomplete virus (i.e., a small piece of DNA) that protects itself by using a host protein (a virino). Currently, the abnormal prion theory has gained more acceptance in the scientific community. Q: Can BSE infect sheep? A: BSE has been transmitted experimentally to sheep through the feeding of small amounts (0.5 g) of infected cattle brain. This indicates a theoretical possibility that some sheep could have contracted BSE through the consumption of contaminated feed. Investigations on the feeding practices of sheep in Europe found that it was common practice in some countries to feed sheep meat and bone meal. Because continental Europe imported significant amounts of BSE-contaminated meat and bone meal from the United Kingdom, sheep in the European Union were most likely exposed to the BSE agent. Defining the natural occurrence of BSE in native European sheep will most likely take 2–3 years. BSE in sheep cannot be differentiated from scrapie though routine methods of diagnosis (current differentiation a mouse bioassay system and takes 2–3 years). BSE in sheep appears to cause infectivity in more tissues than BSE in cattle and may spread from one sheep to another, unlike BSE in cattle. If BSE occurs naturally in sheep and behaves like scrapie (i.e., transmits laterally), feed bans will not prevent the spread of disease. Q: Have natural cases of BSE in sheep been detected in any country? A: Currently, there have not been any naturally occurring cases of BSE in sheep reported in any country. However, testing to differentiate between scrapie and BSE in sheep has not been done routinely. Due to the length of time required for the differentiation studies, only a small number of samples have been completed. Some work has been started in Europe to determine if any of the recent cases diagnosed as scrapie could actually be BSE, but this will take some time. The definitive test to differentiate is a mouse bioassay system that takes several years to complete. Q: Do the sheep imported to the United States in 1996 have scrapie or BSE? A: There is no simple laboratory test that can definitively distinguish between BSE and scrapie in animals. Mouse inoculation studies, which take 2 or more years for completion, are necessary to define the disease agent. USDA will undertake such studies on samples from these sheep. Q: If the diseases look the same, how do we know if the U.S. sheep population has scrapie or BSE? A: We have no evidence of BSE in either our sheep or cattle populations. BSE would have to have been introduced into our sheep population through imports. Import restrictions based on both scrapie and BSE have limited the possibility of such exposure. The importation of sheep from countries affected with scrapie have been prohibited since a scrapie eradication program was started in the United States in 1952. Exceptions to this policy have been for Australia and New Zealand, countries known to be free of TSE, Canada, a country with a similar animal health status as our own, and animals for a research project for the brief period of time in 1996, when the policy was changed. Import restrictions due to BSE took effect in 1989, and BSE was not known to exist prior to 1986. Ten years of active surveillance of U.S. cattle has shown no evidence of BSE. The cattle population can be used as the best indicator of the possible presence of BSE in the United States, as this is the same species in which the disease naturally occurs. Our surveillance system in cattle includes a system of reporting from diagnostic laboratories, field investigations of central nervous system (CNS) disorders, testing of rabies-negative animals from public health laboratories, testing of CNS-condemned cases reported by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), testing of non-ambulatory cattle and adult cattle dying on farms from unknown causes. Q: If there is a possibility that the imported sheep have scrapie, why were sheep destroyed? A: Prior to the importation of these animals, efforts were made to determine that they were free of scrapie. After importation we received information that the flocks where the sheep originated in Belgium and the Netherlands may not have been monitored as closely for scrapie as previously indicated. In addition, enrollment in the Scrapie Flock Certification Program was required to ensure that monitoring continued for an extended period of time. Q: What assurances do we have for the American public to protect their health? A: The USDA policy regarding to BSE has been proactive and preventative. APHIS has taken measures in surveillance, prevention, education, and response to protect animal and public health. For example, import restrictions have been in place since 1989 and active surveillance efforts began in 1990. APHIS actively works with State and Federal agencies, including FSIS, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and stakeholders to assure we are taking the proper actions in response to changing knowledge and information concerning BSE. Additional information on public health issues can be provided by the following agencies: FSIS, FDA, and CDC. The CDC can provide details about surveillance efforts for vCJD. For further information on APHIS prevention, surveillance and response activities for BSE please see www.aphis.usda.gov/oa/bse. Q: Is BSE in sheep a risk to humans? A: The research on BSE in sheep is too new to provide an answer to this question. Q:Were meat products from these animals sold for human or animal consumption? A: No meat from the four sheep that tested positive in 2000 for abnormal prions was ever sold. Approximately 28 lambs went to slaughter in 1997 and another 28 lambs went to slaughter in 1998. The meat from these lambs, approximately 2,000 lbs., was sold to consumers in the Greensboro, VT, area. All the lamb meat was sold in the state of Vermont. No lamb product was ever exported or sold by mail. Q: Do genetics influence or contribute to the transmission of TSEs? A: Research has demonstrated links between genetic variations in sheep and the development of scrapie. Genetic variations among different breeds of sheep may play a role in whether sheep will become infected with scrapie and how quickly clinical signs may appear. At this time, it is not known whether genetics contributes to the development of BSE in cattle. Preliminary research involving BSE in sheep indicate that genetics may play a role in the development of clinical disease. Research into all of these subjects is ongoing. Q: What are the testing methods for TSEs? A: Histopathology: Bilaterally symmetrical degenerative changes are usually seen in the gray matter of the brain stem when a TSE is present. These changes are characterized by vacuolation or microcavitation of nerve cells in the brain stem nuclei. The neural perikarya and axons of certain brain stem nuclei contain intracytoplasmic vacuoles of various sizes, giving the impression of a spongy brain. Hypertrophy of astrocytes (astrocytosis) often accompanies the vacuolation. Electron Microscopy: A TSE diagnosis may also be made when scrapie-associated fibrils (SAF) are detected using negative stain electron microscopy. Supplemental tests: Supplemental tests are available to enhance the diagnostic capabilities for TSEs. Research shows the partially protease-resistant form of the prion protein (PrPres) is found in the brain of TSE-infected animals. Two tests that have been used routinely to detect PrPres in animals showing clinical signs of a TSE are immunohistochemistry and a Western-blot technique. In the past, if the brain tissue was not harvested shortly after the animal’s death, autolysis might make it very difficult to confirm a diagnosis by histopathology, but these tests permit a diagnosis of a TSE based on finding PrPres even if the brain has been frozen or if autolysis has occurred. Last year, the European Commission published a preliminary report on the evaluation of four companies’ tests for the diagnosis of TSE in cattle brain samples. These included a modified Western-blot test developed by Prionics A.G. of Switzerland; a chemiluminescent ELISA test using a polyclonalanti PrP antibody for detection developed by Enfer Technology, Ltd., of Ireland; a sandwich immunoassay for PrPres developed by Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique (CEA) of France; and a two-site noncompetitive immunometric procedure using monoclonal antibodies and DELFIA technology to generate a signal developed by E. G. & G.Wallace, Ltd., of the United Kingdom. The Prionics test is currently being used in Switzerland to test “fallen stock.” Other countries, such as Germany and France, are going to start using the Prionics test or one of the other three tests to increase surveillance for BSE in cattle. A number of tests have been proposed and are in the initial process of being validated for the preclinical diagnosis of TSEs in sheep. These include 1) immunohistochemistry testing of eyelid associated lymphoid tissue and tonsil biopsies, 2) use of capillary electrophoresis and fluorescent labeled peptides to detect PrPres in the blood of animals infected with a TSE, and 3) improved Western-blotting techniques with very good sensitivity to detect PrPres in blood, cerebrospinal fluid, or small pieces of biopsied tissues. Agent Isolation: As the agents that cause TSEs have not been fully characterized or isolated, one method used to detect infectivity in an animal is to inoculate laboratory animals with brain material from the affected animal and monitor them for evidence of disease. This method may take more than 2 years to produce results; hence, it is not practical for routine testing. The most common animal used for this type of bioassay is the mouse. Another problem with the mouse bioassay method when testing cattle or sheep samples is that the species barrier may prevent detection of low levels of infectivity. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Safeguarding American Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • United States Department of Agriculture •<br /><br /><a href="http://www.llamaresource.com/LR/acrobat/APHIS/APHIS.vtsheepherd.pdf">http://www.llamaresource.com/LR/acrobat/APHIS/APHIS.vtsheepherd.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />NEWS UPDATES<br /><br />------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />USDA continues testing Vermont sheep<br /><br />The Department of Agriculture recently announced that tests have confirmed that two of the 125 sheep confiscated from a Vermont farm last year tested positive for an atypical undifferentiated transmissible spongiform encephalopathy of foreign origin.<br /><br />The flock of 125 sheep was confiscated in March 2001 after four related animals from another flock tested positive for TSE in July 2000. All the sheep were the progeny of 65 sheep imported from Belgium and the Netherlands in 1996.<br /><br />"These tests confirm our previous conclusions were correct and that we took the appropriate preventative actions in confiscating these animals," said Bobby Acord, administrator of the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. "USDA's actions to confiscate, sample, and destroy these sheep were on target. As a result of our vigilance, none of these animals entered the animal or human food supply."<br /><br />The agency is conducting additional tests to determine the type of TSE in these sheep. Agency officials said those tests could take two to three years to complete.<br /><br />Three Vermont flocks, mostly East Friesian milk sheep imported from Belgium and the Netherlands in 1996, were quarantined in 1998 after the European Union's Scientific Steering Committee declared it was highly likely that European sheep had been exposed to BSE-contaminated feed. The sheep had been closely monitored since their arrival in the United States as part of the USDA's scrapie control efforts.<br /><br />After four sheep from the flocks tested positive for a TSE in July 2000, the USDA took measures to purchase and euthanatize all three flocks. The owner of one flock of 21 sheep sold them to the USDA voluntarily; however, owners of the other two flocks—which, combined, totaled more than 350 sheep—took legal action to stop the USDA.<br /><br />A federal court judge ruled in favor of the USDA, and the Second Circuit Court denied the flock owners' appeal for a stay. In March 2001, the USDA confiscated the sheep and transported them to the agency's National Veterinary Services Laboratories in Ames, Iowa where they were euthanatized and tissues samples were collected.<br /><br />"Our goal continues to be to prevent, detect, and eradicate foreign animal diseases to protect American agriculture, natural resources, and consumers," Acord said. "We will continue to utilize the scientific results of these and other tests conducted during the last several years to strengthen our extensive surveillance, monitoring and prevention efforts."<br /><br />For more information, visit www.aphis.usda.gov/oa/tse/index.html <http:>.<br /><br /><br />------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br /><a href="http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/jul02/020701n.asp">http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/jul02/020701n.asp</a><br /><br /><br />I do not understand this process of waiting almost 4 years to start the testing that was said to have started almost 4 years ago?<br /><br />These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.<br /><br />SO, we must now start over and wait another 2 to 3 years, some 3+ years later?<br /><br />I have herd of filibustering before, but this takes the cake.<br /><br />WE are speaking of human health here!<br /><br />WHAT about UK BSE being in the USA (and other Countries) from exporting UK sheep?<br /><br /><a href="https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A0=BSE-L">https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A0=BSE-L</a><br /><br /><br />Subject: Sheep test positive for form of mad cow From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." <flounder@wt.net>Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@uni-karlsruhe.de>Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 09:42:02 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain Parts/Attachments: text/plain (131 lines)<br /><br />######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@uni-karlsruhe.de>#########<br /><br />Sheep test positive for form of mad cow<br /><br />By Marcella S. Kreiter UPI Regional Editor From the Washington Politics & Policy Desk Published 4/11/2002 4:23 PM<br /><br />Tests on 125 sheep confiscated from a Vermont farm one year ago indicate two of the animals may have been suffering from a form of mad cow disease, but further tests will be required to confirm the results, the U.S. Agriculture Department said Thursday.<br /><br />USDA officials seized 125 East Fresian sheep from Linda and Larry Faillace of Warren, Vt., and Houghton Freeman of Stowe, Vt., in March 2001 because it was believed they had been exposed to feed that had been contaminated with bone meal from animals afflicted with bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease, before they were imported from Belgium and the Netherlands in 1996.<br /><br />The USDA said two of the sheep tested positive for atypical undifferentiated transmissible spongiform encephalopathy but it could not immediately be determined whether the disease was the more common scrapie or mad cow. Further tests were to be conducted and expected to take as long as another year.<br /><br />Neither the Faillaces nor their attorney returned phone calls seeking comment.<br /><br />"These results confirm our previous conclusions were correct and that we took the appropriate preventative actions in confiscating these animals," said Bobby Acord, administrator of USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. "USDA's actions to confiscate, sample and destroy these sheep were on target. As a result of our vigilance, none of these confiscated animals entered the animal or human food supply."<br /><br />The sheep had been under quarantine for two years before they were seized. Four had died in July 2000 and senior USDA veterinarian Linda Detwiler said two had tested positive for transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, prompting the USDA to seek an emergency order to seize the rest of the sheep.<br /><br />Both scrapie and mad cow are neurological disorders that cause infected animals to waste away and die. Mad cow devastated the British cattle industry during the 1990s.<br /><br />Scrapie has no known human variant while mad cow disease is suspected of causing a variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans, which has affected about 100 people in Europe.<br /><br />Long prevalent in Europe, scrapie was first reported in the United States in 1947 in a Michigan flock. It creates lesions in a sheep's brain that are believed spread by an abnormal form of a prion protein. The incubation period can last five years or longer. Finally, the central nervous system of the infected animal degenerates into dementia and the animal dies.<br /><br />Scientists are not sure how scrapie is transmitted. One theory holds the scrapie agent spreads from a ewe to its offspring through the placenta or placenta fluids. Unlike mad cow disease, scrapie is not considered a human health risk.<br /><br />Another related malady is chronic wasting disease in deer and elk. It was first recognized in 1967 in northern Colorado and has since been detected in Wyoming and Nebraska. It is not believed that the wasting disease spreads to other animals.<br /><br />In addition to Britain, mad cow has been detected in native cattle in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Switzerland. While there is a decline in the number of cases of BSE in the United Kingdom, confirmed cases of BSE have risen in other European countries. Oman, the Falkland Islands, Germany, Denmark, Ireland, Canada, Italy, and the Azores have also detected BSE in cattle imports from other countries.<br /><br />There have been no cases of BSE in native cattle in North America. The one case of BSE in a single cow in Canada in 1993 imported from Great Britain was dealt with by destroying the affected cow and the rest of the herd, as well as other cattle determined to be at risk by animal health officials in Canada.<br /><br />No treatment exists for either mad cow disease or scrapie and there is no way to test live animals for either disease. The only way to verify mad cow disease or scrapie is a postmortem examination of the animal's brain tissue.<br /><br />The government began taking precautionary measures against mad cow in 1989, banning the import of live cattle from Britain. In 1997, the government outlawed meat and bone meal from countries affected by the disease and last year declared some 1 million Americans who lived in Britain during the mad cow crisis could not donate blood.<br /><br />In addition, the government kept careful track of more than 300 cattle imported from Europe since 1996. As of March 8, only five -- two each in Minnesota and Texas and one in Illinois -- remained alive. None of the dead animals exhibited any signs of mad cow.<br /><br />Copyright © 2002 United Press International<br /><br /><a href="http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=11042002-040516-1769r">http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=11042002-040516-1769r</a><br /><br /><br /><br />Greetings List Members,<br /><br />none of these confiscated animals entered<br /><br />the animal or human food supply."<br /><br />again, this is strange to me. if the USDA is going to confiscate and slaughter the Fallice's sheep, then what about the many other scrapie infected flocks in the USA? why do they not confiscate and slaughter them? and what about the land? why not condem it, instead of repopulating? scrapie infected sheep have entered the food chain for many years in the USA. sCJDs in OHIO very high, OHIO full of Scrapies, and other states infected with Scrapies, documented Scrapies transmitting to primates. why aren't more folks concerned by this? sure, no _documented_ case of CJD by one of the 20+ strains of Scrapie, but there was no documented case of BSE transmitting to humans, until they documented one. and what about that work in France and the one strain of Scrapie's identical to the sporadic CJD case? i think by the USDA/APHIS and others ignoring these facts, they have missed the boat, and the disease will continue to spread (my opinion)...<br /><br />kind regards, Terry S. Singeltary Sr., Bacliff, Texas USA<br /><br />########### http://mailhost.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/warc/bse-l.html ############<br /><br /><a href="https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A0=BSE-L">https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A0=BSE-L</a><br /><br /><br />Subject: Vermont sheep get all-clear from England From: tom <tom@cyber-dyne.com>Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@uni-karlsruhe.de>Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 13:33:49 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain Parts/Attachments: text/plain (250 lines)<br /><br />######### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <bse-l@uni-karlsruhe.de>#########<br /><br />Until Monday, the government said the cheese and milk was safe. Yesterday US marshalls seized 17 wheels of chees at the farmhouse as Level III biohazard. CDC issued some nonsensical statement without checking the scientific literature that was soon contradicted by something from FDA. Vermont Dept of Health issued a chilling warning yesterday, naming the brands and plant manufacturing it. But now "As of today, there is no recall," their official said. "This is intended as a recommendation for the public".<br /><br />The USDA is says below additional tests of an unspecified nature were run at an unspecified lab in England, saying "the British experts concluded there was evidence that the lesions could have TSE."<br /><br />But I was told an hour ago by a well-known laboratory in England that "the lab here has not yet received samples from these Vermont sheep but molecular strain typing would be very interesting and quick."<br /><br />A respected individual at the second of the three well-known facilities in England did in fact examine the slides of sheep brain. His report to USDA (received _after_ the USDA had concluded an atypical for of TSE likely BSE had been found) says, 'no vacuoles, no Prp-res, but maybe a proliferation of glial cells, suggesting a neurological condition that might or might not develop later into neurological disease and might or might not be infectious but that did not resemble any case of BSE in sheep or TSE in sheep that anyone there had ever seen.'<br /><br />USDA is welcome to read this as saying "British experts concluded there was evidence that the lesions could have TSE" but in my opinion it is strongly contra-indicative of a diagnosis of any TSE in the Vermont sheep, reducing the USDA claim to reliance on a single uncontrolled, unblinded western blot from a hay mite lab.<br /><br />The sheep have already been on the ground for 4 years (208 weeks). In 4 weeks (total 212 weeks), responsible testing could be completed and repeated. There has been a rush to judgement here. It is not fair to the sheep nor to the farmers.<br /><br />Let's take the time to find out what is really going on with these sheep. America has had far too many lynching parties already.<br /><br />tom<br /><br />=-=-=- Sheep cheese seized at farmhouse but left on shelves By John Dillon TIMES ARGUS STAFF 19 Jul 00<br /><br />WARREN - State health officials are warning the public not to eat cheese made from the milk of sheep the federal government claims are infected with a form of mad cow disease.<br /><br />Health Commissioner Dr. Jan Carney issued the warning notice Tuesday after consulting with the federal Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta about the safety of milk from the infected animals.<br /><br />The Health Department warning is the latest move in an ongoing battle over the fate of 376 sheep on two Vermont farms. The U.S. Department of Agriculture last week announced it would seize and destroy the animals because a test had shown four were infected with a form of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, or TSE.<br /><br />TSE is a class of degenerative, always fatal, brain diseases that includes mad cow disease, a mysterious ailment that ravaged the British beef industry and led to 53 deaths in the United Kingdom. The USDA is concerned that the Vermont sheep or their forebears were exposed to the disease before they were imported from Europe in the mid-1990s.<br /><br />Federal officials had maintained until Monday that the cheese made from the Vermont sheep's milk was safe to consume. However, the CDC has now told Carney there is a risk that humans could contract the disease from eating the cheese, she said.<br /><br />Carney noted, however, that the risk is very slight because studies have not shown that people contracted the illness through eating dairy products during an outbreak of mad cow disease in the United Kingdom.<br /><br />"The emphasis is on the word precaution," Carney said. The CDC "characterized the risk (of eating the cheese) as theoretical, meaning to date no one has ever become ill from eating milk or milk products from cows exposed" to the disease.<br /><br />The Health Department warning applies to cheese sold under the name Three Shepherds of the Mad River Valley and Northeast Kingdom Sheep Milk Cheese.<br /><br />Carney said officials - despite Tuesday's warning - are not ordering the cheese to be taken off store shelves.<br /><br />"As of today, there is no recall," she said. "This is intended as a recommendation for the public."<br /><br />At the Warren farm where the Three Shepherds cheese is made, owners Larry and Linda Faillace handed out cheese to friends and neighbors Tuesday. The Faillaces maintain the cheese is safe to eat and are considering going to court to block the federal seizure of their flock.<br /><br />"This (Health Department warning) is just another example of pseudo-science. It's another example of them trying to put us out of business," Linda Faillace said.<br /><br />In addition to the Warren flock, about 200 sheep owned by Stowe philanthropist Houghton Freeman is also subject to the seizure order and state Health Department warning. Freeman's Greensboro farm produces the Northeast Kingdom Sheep Milk Cheese.<br /><br />Freeman's attorney, Thomas Amidon of Stowe, said he will likely use a two-fold argument against the seizure. "We will discuss whether the USDA followed its own rules and regulations, and whether this extraordinary measure is justified given that it is based on results from one test," he said.<br /><br />However, Dr. Linda Detwiler, a USDA veterinarian dealing with the Faillace case, said two lab tests have shown the Greensboro flock has TSE. She said the tests are scientifically valid and must be taken seriously. Both the Warren and Greensboro sheep may have been exposed to TSE through the placenta material at birth, she said.<br /><br />Detwiler said Tuesday the tests found an abnormal protein used as a marker that indicates a form of TSE. "This is what prompted this action," she said. "We actually had a confirmatory test in these animals."<br /><br />She said the tests cannot differentiate whether the sheep have a form of scrapie - a fairly common TSE sheep disease - or a version of mad cow disease. "We can say now there is infection (in the animals)," she said. "This marker would indicate an infectious agent in sheep."<br /><br />But Thomas Pringle, an Oregon molecular biologist and TSE expert, said the USDA should have done a double-blind study - one in which the samples were not identified - before condemning the sheep. He said instead the samples were labeled as coming from the controversial Vermont herd, which could have prejudiced the results.<br /><br />"This is high-school science fair stuff," he said.<br /><br />Pringle noted that the Vermont sheep do not display any outward signs of illness. He said there would be no harm to the public or to the U.S. livestock industry if the government waited while the tests on the Vermont sheep were compared to tissue slides of TSE in British sheep. But the USDA is rushing to judgment, he said, because it wants to impress the European Union - which has banned imports of U.S. beef - that it is doing everything possible to curb the spread of mad cow disease.<br /><br />"From the point of view of the U.S. beef industry, these Vermont sheep farms had to go. They were pawns in a larger game," he said. "This is high profile image-buffing to demonstrate our resolve to deal with any whiff of BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) in American livestock. The intended target is not the American consumer. The intended target is European authorities" who control U.S. beef imports.<br /><br />-=-=-= X-From_: stauber@compuserve.com Wed Jul 19 11:50:24 2000 Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:49:44 -0400 From: "John C. Stauber" <stauber@compuserve.com>Subject: Vermont farmers go to court in mad sheep dispute Sender: "John C. Stauber" <stauber@compuserve.com>To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com MIME-Version: 1.0<br /><br />--------------- Forwarded Story ---------------<br /><br />Headline: Vermont farmers go to court in mad sheep dispute Wire Service: RTbr (Reuters Business Report) Date: Wed, Jul 19, 2000<br /><br />Copyright 2000 Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. The following news report may not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of Reuters Ltd.<br /><br />By Randy Fabi WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Disgruntled Vermont farmers went to court on Wednesday in an attempt to prevent the U.S. Agriculture Department from destroying their sheep because they may carry an ailment similar to "mad cow" disease in cattle. The USDA, which has been closely monitoring all American livestock since the 1996 outbreak of mad cow disease in Europe, wants to destroy sheep on three Vermont farms as a precaution. Four of the sheep on farms near Warren, Vermont tested positive earlier this month for a disease known as TSE or transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, according to USDA officials. TSE can cause scrapie, a fatal disease in sheep that leads to a progressive degeneration of the central nervous system. It is part of a family of diseases that includes the deadly BSE, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease. The federal government wants to purchase all 376 sheep on the three farms and incinerate them as a safety measure. No cases of BSE or mad cow disease have ever been found in the United States. "In the interest of protecting other livestock, we have to act," said Andy Solomon, a USDA spokesman. "I know this is extremely difficult for farmers involved, but we are working with independent appraisers on how to fairly compensate them." All the animals are offspring of sheep imported from Belgium and the Netherlands in 1996, before the outbreak of mad cow disease swept Europe and claimed at least 75 lives in Britain. Britain's outbreak dating back to 1986 may have been caused by feeding meat-and-bonemeal made from scrapie-infected sheep to cattle. Lawyers for the farmers went to court in Montpelier, Vermont on Wednesday to try and get a restraining order stopping the USDA.<br /><br />FARMERS SEEK SECOND OPINION "This is going to ruin us if the USDA goes through with this," Heather Faillace, a spokeswoman and member of one of the farming families, told Reuters in a telephone interview. "We are going to have to start a whole new business over again." Faillace said her family was trying to bring Belgian scientists to Vermont to get a second opinion on the flock of sheep. In Brussels, EU officials said they were watching developments with the Vermont sheep. "We will be monitoring developments very closely," said Beate Gminder, spokeswoman for EU Food Safety Commissioner David Byrne. She said it was possible that EU scientists would be involved at some stage. EU officials said BSE had never been found in sheep living in the wild. But under laboratory conditions, it has been shown that sheep can carry the disease if they are injected with it. All tests on diseased animals in the wild have eventually shown them to be suffering from scrapie. The four sheep that tested positive for TSE were not located at the 30-acre Faillace farm, Faillace said. But, some animals in their flock of 150 sheep were among those imported from Belgium. The USDA has informed the three farms that they must sell their sheep to the department, or the government will declare a state of emergency for the area, Faillace said. "They also threatened to take away our cheese license and only pay for the sheep by market value," Faillace said. Owners of the two biggest flocks said they deserved millions of dollars for the loss of their livelihood.<br /><br />LOCAL RESIDENTS OFFER SUPPORT Three U.S. Marshalls, two independent appraisers, two USDA veterinarians and several health specialists from the U.S. and Canada were at the Faillace farm on Wednesday to examine the animals. Area residents, who support the three farmers, have threatened to hold a demonstration at the farms and block the USDA from taking the sheep to be incinerated. The USDA asked British scientists to examine samples from the four sheep suspected of carrying TSE. The British experts concluded there was evidence that the lesions could have TSE, Solomon said. "We have done very thorough and comprehensive testing," said the USDA's Solomon. "We hope most farmers in the area understand that we are taking this action to protect American livestock." Mad cow disease or BSE in England was spread through contaminated animal feed, and resulted in a worldwide ban on British beef exports in 1996. The ban was lifted last year. There is no known cure for the disease, which is known as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans, that slowly eats holes in the brain.<br /><br />############ http://mailhost.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/warc/bse-l.html ############<br /><br /><a href="https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A0=BSE-L">https://lists.aegee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A0=BSE-L</a><br /><br /><br />017941 2007-11-13 16:45 87 FOIA MAD SHEEP MAD RIVER VALLEY UPDATE NOVEMBER 13, 2007<br /><br />017940 2007-11-13 15:15 620 Re: FOIA APPEAL 07-566 DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br />017839 2007-08-12 11:23 1813 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br /><br />017839 2007-08-12 11:23 1813 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br /><br />017799 2007-07-11 16:11 1610 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br /><br />017798 2007-07-10 15:43 1066 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br /><br />017788 2007-07-02 09:48 921 FOIA, MAD COW DISEASE, AND OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S SECRECY<br /><br />017672 2007-04-02 14:37 2129 Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br /><br /><br /><br />2008<br /><br /><br />Research article<br /><br /><br />A descriptive study of the prevalence of atypical and classical scrapie in sheep in 20 European countries<br /><br />Alexandre Fediaevsky , Sue C Tongue , Maria Noremark , Didier Calavas , Giuseppe Ru and Petter Hopp<br /><br />BMC Veterinary Research 2008, 4:19doi:10.1186/1746-6148-4-19<br /><br />Published: 10 June 2008<br /><br />Abstract (provisional) Background The development of active surveillance programmes for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies of small ruminants across Europe has led to the recent identification of a previously undetected form of ovine prion disease, 'atypical' scrapie. Knowledge of the epidemiology of this disease is still limited, as is whether it represents a risk for animal and/or public health. The detection of atypical scrapie has been related to the use of only some of the EU agreed rapid tests. Information about the rapid tests used is not, as yet, available from public reports on the surveillance of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies in small ruminants. We collected detailed results of active surveillance from European countries to estimate and to compare the prevalence of atypical scrapie and classical scrapie in sheep for each country stratified by each surveillance stream; healthy slaughtered and found dead adult sheep.<br /><br />Results From the 20 participating countries, it appeared that atypical scrapie was detected in Europe wherever the conditions necessary for its diagnosis were present. In most countries, atypical scrapie and classical scrapie occurred at low prevalence level. The classical scrapie prevalence estimates were more variable than those for atypical scrapie, which appeared remarkably homogeneous across countries, surveillance streams and calendar years of surveillance. Differences were observed in the age and genotype of atypical scrapie and classical scrapie cases that are consistent with previous published findings.<br /><br />Conclusions This work suggests that atypical scrapie is not rare compared to classical scrapie. The homogeneity of its prevalence, whatever the country, stream of surveillance or year of detection, contrasts with the epidemiological pattern of classical scrapie. This suggests that the aetiology of atypical scrapie differs from that of classical scrapie.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1746-6148/4/19/abstract">http://www.biomedcentral.com/1746-6148/4/19/abstract</a><br /><br /><br />full text ;<br /><br /><a href="http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1746-6148-4-19.pdf">http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1746-6148-4-19.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />INFECTED AND SOURCE FLOCKS<br /><br />There were 20 scrapie infected and source flocks with open statuses (Figure 3) as of April, 30, 2008. Twenty eight new infected and source flocks have been designated in FY 2008 (Figure 4); three source flocks were reported in April. ...snip<br /><br />POSITIVE SCRAPIE CASES<br /><br />As of April 30, 2008, 122 new scrapie cases have been confirmed and reported by the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in FY 2008 (Figure 6). Of these, 103 were field cases and 19* were Regulatory Scrapie Slaughter Surveillance (RSSS) cases (collected in FY 2008 and reported by May 20, 2008). Positive cases reported for April 2008 are depicted in Figure 7. Eighteen cases of scrapie in goats have been confirmed by NVSL since implementation of the regulatory changes in FY 2002 (Figure 8). The most recent positive goat case was confirmed in February 2008 and originated from the same herd in Michigan as the other FY 2008 goat cases.<br /><br />...snip<br /><br />CAPRINE SCRAPIE PREVALENCE STUDY (CSPS)<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />However, four positive goats have been identified this fiscal year through field investigations. One was a clinical suspect submitted for testing and the other three originated from the birth herd of the clinical case.<br /><br />ANIMALS SAMPLED FOR SCRAPIE TESTING<br /><br />As of April 30, 2008, 26,703 animals have been sampled for scrapie testing: 23,378 RSSS, 1,517 goats for the CSPS study, 1,466 regulatory field cases, 270 regulatory third eyelid biopsies, and 72 regulatory rectal biopsies (chart 8).<br /><br />TESTING OF LYMPHOID TISSUE OBTAINED BY RECTAL BIOPSY WAS APPROVED BY USDA AS AN OFFICIAL LIVE-ANIMAL TEST ON JANUARY 11, 2008. ...<br /><br />PLEASE NOTE, (FIGURE 6), Scrapie Confirmed Cases in FY 2008 MAP, PA 3, 1**, Two cases-state of ID UNKNOWN, 1 case Nor98-like**<br /><br /><a href="http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/animal_diseases/scrapie/downloads/monthly_scrapie_rpt.pps">http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/animal_diseases/scrapie/downloads/monthly_scrapie_rpt.pps</a><br /><br /><br />NOT to forget the 5 cases of the NOR-98 atypical scrapie documented in the USA in 2007, in five different states. WHICH pathologically looks like some sub-types of sporadic CJD, of which Stanely Prusiner warns of a public health risk ;<br /><br />***The pathology features of Nor98 in the cerebellum of the affected sheep showed similarities with those of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf">http://www.prion2007.com/pdf/Prion%20Book%20of%20Abstracts.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />Here we report that both Nor98 and discordant cases, including three sheep homozygous for the resistant PrPARR allele (A136R154R171), efficiently transmitted the disease to transgenic mice expressing ovine PrP, and that they shared unique biological and biochemical features upon propagation in mice. These observations support the view that a truly infectious TSE agent, unrecognized until recently, infects sheep and goat flocks and may have important implications in terms of scrapie control and public health.<br /><br />Edited by Stanley B. Prusiner, University of California, San Francisco, CA, and approved September 12, 2005 (received for review March 21, 2005)<br /><br /><a href="http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0502296102v1">http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0502296102v1</a><br /><br /><br />Tuesday, June 3, 2008 SCRAPIE USA UPDATE JUNE 2008 NOR-98 REPORTED PA<br /><br /><a href="http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2008/06/scrapie-usa-update-june-2008-nor-98.html">http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2008/06/scrapie-usa-update-june-2008-nor-98.html</a><br /><br /><br />NOR-98 ATYPICAL SCRAPIE 5 cases documented in USA in 5 different states USA 007<br /><br /><a href="http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2008/04/seac-spongiform-encephalopathy-advisory.html">http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2008/04/seac-spongiform-encephalopathy-advisory.html</a><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://nor-98.blogspot.com/">http://nor-98.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />SCRAPIE USA<br /><br /><a href="http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/">http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />Sunday, June 15, 2008<br /><br />A descriptive study of the prevalence of atypical and classical scrapie in sheep in 20 European countries<br /><br />Research article<br /><br /><a href="http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2008/06/descriptive-study-of-prevalence-of.html">http://nor-98.blogspot.com/2008/06/descriptive-study-of-prevalence-of.html</a><br /><br /><br />TSSTerry S. Singeltary Sr.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06986622967539963260noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8833057355167080880.post-87561972993853716872008-04-24T12:33:00.000-07:002008-04-24T12:38:51.735-07:00RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]RE-FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br /><br />Greetings,<br /><br />With great disgust, I must report, that after years and years of wrangling over the infamous mad sheep of mad river valley, I have failed in getting an official answer via FOIA on the outcome of the TSE testing of those imported Belgium sheep. The USA Government refuses to tell the public, exactly what the testing outcome was, and in doing so, shows just how corrupt this administration has been. and the excuse given in their answer to my final appeal, which they have now officially denied, was bizarre to say the least ;<br /><br />"I am denying your FOIA appeal. This is the final agency decision. You may seek judicial review of this decision in the United States district court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business or in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. & 552(a)(4)(B)."<br /><br />FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br /><a href="http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/">http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />WITH great sadness and disgust, the USDA OIG has finally shot me down for good, and have refused my FOIA request officially. I got the letter around Jan. 1, 2008 and have just not been able to admit defeat until now. The Faillace's claim their sheep were TSE free, and they very well may have been, I dont know, and we now find out we will never know. does not matter I suppose, the TSE they were worried about in those imported Belgium sheep was documented in 2007 in the USA in 5 different states i.e. the NOR-98. UNLESS, those sheep from Belgium imported to the USA had BSE, and that may be why they did not give the test results via the FOIA?<br /><br />PLEASE NOTE, none of this answered my question and or FOIA request of what type TSE was finally diagnosed in those Vermont sheep, and or did they ever do mouse bio-assays, and if not, why not. none of these questions were ever answered, and probably never will be. also, the seven pages in question in hotline files. it was four pages of my old letter to them about BSE testing on top of the Sheep testing, two page letter from Ms MacNeil and one page of exemptions, and one page fax copy of my complaint sum on 'BSE Testing'. the one page of exemptions of the agencies reasons for not answering my question about those sheep and the mouse bio-assays, and the reason they law claim is because of individual privacy, adversely affect the individual, and or revealing their identify. which is nothing I was asking for. I was asking for the final results of the mouse-bioassays of the TSE in the Vermont sheep imported into the USA from Belgium. why is it they refuse to tell the public, what type Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy those sheep had ???<br /><br />copy of letter as follows ;<br /><br />UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL WASHINGTON D.C. 20250<br /><br />DEC 28, 2007<br /><br />Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas 77518<br /><br />Subject: FOIA Appeal-Log No. 08-00034 (No. 07-00060)<br /><br />Dear Mr. Singeltary:<br /><br />This is in response to your December 3, 2007, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. & 552, appeal of the November 20, 2007, decision of Ms. Deirdre MacNeil, FOIA/Privacy Act (PA) Attorney, Office of Inspector General (OIG), Department of Agriculture (USDA). As explained below, your FOIA appeal is denied.<br /><br />As background, on March 1, 2007, you requested the "final results of the TSE Mouse-bioassays of those Atypical TSE in the Vermont Sheep." FOIA requires the release of agency records except where one or more of the nine enumerated exceptions apply. On November 20, 2007, Ms. MacNeil responded to your request by sending you seven pages from Hotline files PS-3340-0024, which was responsive to your request. Ms. MacNeil withheld identifying information pursuant to Exceptions 6 and 7(C) of the FOIA. See 5. U.S.C.& 552(b)(6) and (7)(C). On December 3, 2007, you appealed Ms. MacNeils decision.<br /><br />12-3-07<br /><br />To The Honorable Inspector General USDA,<br /><br />I respectfully "APPEAL" the decision to withhold information I requested under the F.O.I.A. About the final results of the T.S.E. Mouse-bioassays of the Atypical T.S.E. in the Vermont Sheep imported from Belgium and later confiscated and slaughtered under a "Extra Ordinary Declaration of Emergency due to Atypical T.S.E. in U.S.A. sheep.<br /><br />Log Number 07-00060 FOIA 07-566<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br />Exemption 6 permits the Government to withhold information about individuals in "personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. & 552 (b)(6). To warrant protection under Exemption 6, information must first meet a threshold requirement by falling within the category of personnel and medical files and similar files. Id. Information fits into a "similar file" if it contains information regarding a particular individual. See United States Dept of State V. Washington Post Co., 456, 601-02 (1982). The threshold is met in this case, as the memorandum contains information regarding particular named individuals.<br /><br />Exemption 7(C) protects from disclosure law enforcement information, the disclosure of which "could reasonably be expected to constitute and unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. & 552(b)(7)(C. Under Exemption 7(C), it has been held that a protectible privacy interest exists in the identities of investigative agents. See Senate of<br /><br />Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. Page 2<br /><br />Puerto Rico v. United States Dep't of Justice, 823 F.2d 574, 588-89 (D.C. Cir. 1987); Nishnic v. United States Dep't of Justice, 671 F. Supp. 776, 789 (D.D.C. 1987). Such a privacy interest exists in this case, as the withheld information contains the identities, including names and identifying information, of investigative agents in the memorandum.<br /><br />Once it is determined that a privacy interest exists, Exemptions 6 and 7(C), of FOIA require a balancing of interests between the public interest served by disclosure and an individual's right to privacy. See, e.g., Senate of Puerto Rico, 823 F.2d at 587; Dep't of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 372 (1976). Determination of whether disclosure is warranted turns not upon the particular purpose for which the document is requested, but upon the nature of the requested document and its relationship to the central purpose of FOIA, which is to "open agency action to the light of public scrutiny." United States Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 772-73 (1989) (quoting Rose, 425 U.S. at 372). I have determined that the release of the withheld information, of investigative agents in the memorandum, would not serve the public interest. Therefore, I am denying your appeal with respect to the withholdings pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C).<br /><br />In addition to appealing the exemptions pursuant to 6 and 7(C), you appear to take issue with USDA's Animal $ Plant Health Inspection Service's (APHIS) response to your FOIA requests with APHIS. You may contact APHIS regarding the status of any such requests by contacting Mr. Garfield Daley, Acting FOIA Officer, at (301)734-5273, 4700 River Road, Unit 50, Riverdale, MD, 20737-1232<br /><br />Finally, in your appeal, you seek answers to a series of questions posed to various USDA officials, including the Inspector General, However, FOIA allows requesters to access records only. It does not require Federal agencies to answer questions, render opinions, provide subjective evaluations, or create explanatory materials, See, e.g., NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 421 U.S. 132, 162 (1975); Zemansky v. Epa, 767 f2d 569, 574 (9th Cir. 1985); Flowers v. IRS, 307 F. Supp. 2d 60, 71 (D.D.C. 2004); Citizens Progressive Alliance v. U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 241 F. Supp. 2d 1342, 1364-65 (D.N.M. 2002); Hudgins v. IRS, 620 F. Supp. 19, 21 (D.D.C. 1985). As FOIA requires an agency only to produce responsive non-exempt records to a requester, OIG is not obligated to answer questions regarding the TSE occurrence as you requested. Therefore, I am denying your appeal with respect to your questions.<br /><br />Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr. Page 3<br /><br />For these reasons, I am denying your FOIA appeal. This is the final agency decision. You may seek judicial review of this decision in the United States district court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business or in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. & 552(a)(4)(B).<br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br />David R. Gray<br /><br />FOR<br /><br />Phyllis K. Fong<br /><br />Inspector General<br /><br />=======END...TSS...4.24.08=======<br /><br />----- Original Message -----<br /><br />From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br /><br />To: Boyd.Rutherford@usda.gov<br /><br />Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:35 PM<br /><br />Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br /><br />Greetings USDA,<br /><br />I respectfully request the final results of the mouse bio-assays test that were to have supposedly began 2+ years late, 5 years ago, on the imported sheep from Belgium ?<br /><br />WHAT happened to the test results and MOUSE BIO-ASSAYS of those imported sheep from Belgium that were confiscated and slaughtered from the Faillace's, what sort of TSE did these animals have ?<br /><br />WERE they atypical scrapie, BSE, and or typical scrapie ?<br /><br />HOW much longer will you refuse to give us this information ? and for what reason ?<br /><br />WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley were quarantined for 5 years, but none of these farms from Texas and Alabama with Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not been quarantined for 5 years,why not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />full text ;<br /><br /><a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf">http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf</a><br /><br /><br /><a href="https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument">https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument</a><br /><br /><br />FURTHERMORE, I respectfully request up front, that any fees for this FOIA be wavered due to the fact this information should be free to the public and is in the best interest for the public to have these final results, no financial gain from this FOIA information is to be made either. ...<br /><br />Thank You,<br /><br />kind regards,<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br /><br />P.O. Box 42<br /><br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br />Imported<br /><br />Belgium/Netherlands<br /><br />Sheep Test Results<br /><br />Background<br /><br />Factsheet<br /><br />Veterinary Services April 2002<br /><br />APHIS<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />Additional tests will be conducted to determine exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie. These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals<br /><br />Page 15 of 98<br /><br />8/3/2006<br /><br />and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf">http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.<br /><br />(PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES<br /><br /><a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31">http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31</a><br /><br /><br />DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E<br /><br />(PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [2]<br /><br /><a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32">http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32</a><br /><br /><br />--- Original Message ---<br /><br />Subject: Sheep<br /><br />Date:Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:26:04 EDT<br /><br />From: LAVET22@aol.com<br /><br />To: flounder@wt.net<br /><br />Mr. Singeltary.<br /><br />I hope this finds you well. As you are aware I left the USDA last year. I can only update you on the sheep before that time. Contact was established with the UK on doing the bioassay studies. They agreed. However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay. I am aware that there are now additional labs in Europe running the mouse bioassay strain typing. You will have to contact USDA for further word.<br /><br />Linda Detwiler<br /><br />=========<br /><br />My reply to Dr. Detwiler;<br /><br />--- Original Message ---<br /><br />Subject: Re: Sheep<br /><br />Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:53:57 -0500<br /><br />From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."<br /><br />To: LAVET22@aol.com<br /><br />References:<br /><br />hello Dr. Detwiler,<br /><br />thanks for your kind reply.<br /><br />However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay.<br /><br />not sure i understand that?<br /><br />You will have to contact USDA for further word.<br /><br />already done that, and there answer was;<br /><br />--- Original Message ---<br /><br />Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton.question please.scrapie.TSS<br /><br />Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400<br /><br />From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov<br /><br />To: flounder@wt.net<br /><br />Dear Mr. Singeltary,<br /><br />The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is 301-734-5941.<br /><br />Have a nice day,<br /><br />Jim Rogers<br /><br />APHIS LPA<br /><br />--- Original Message ---<br /><br />Subject: re-85th Meeting of SEAC - 30.11.04<br /><br />Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:56:55 -0000<br /><br />From: "Barlow, Tom (SEAC)"<br /><br />To: "'flounder@wt.net'"<br /><br />Dear Mr Singeltary<br /><br />Thank you for you enquiry to the SEAC secretariat about mouse bioassays commissioned by the USDA to investigate TSE cases in imported sheep. After making a number of enquiries, it appears that Defra were notinvolved with this work. However, it is possible that a UK research laboratory was contacted by the USDA about such tests but I have been unable to find out any further information. You may wish to make further enquiries with the USDA.<br /><br />Yours sincerely<br /><br />Tom Barlow<br /><br />Dr Tom Barlow<br /><br />Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) Secretariat<br /><br />Area 108, 1A Page Street, London SW1P 4PQ<br /><br />Tel: 0207 904 6267<br /><br />===================<br /><br /><a href="https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d">https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d</a>?<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf">http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf</a><br /><br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br /><br />P.O. Box 42<br /><br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br />PLEASE NOTE !<br /><br />I know Linda and Larry Faillace's {kinda}, we have corresponded over the years, and I even was asked by their Editor-in-Chief John Barstow, of Chelsea Green Publishing Company, to read the transcript of the Faillace's book before it was published, see how if I liked it, a proof read of sorts, they sent me the transcript i.e. MAD SHEEP, THE TRUE STORY BEHIND THE USDA'S WAR ON A FAMILY FARM by Linda Faillace.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep/Reviews">http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep/Reviews</a><br /><br /><br />BOOK RELEASE PARTY - Linda Faillace's MAD SHEEP<br /><br />got to read this months ago, and it is deeply disturbing how the feds handled this from the very beginning, and to this day we do not know the results of the mouse bio-assays, and what those sheep actually had. i don't necessarily agree with the TSE science in this book, but the book is a must read if your interested at all in human and animal TSEs. ...<br /><br />TSS Submitted by flounder on Thu, 09/07/2006 - 9:43pm.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2006/08/28/book-release-party-linda-faillaces-mad-sheep">http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2006/08/28/book-release-party-linda-faillaces-mad-sheep</a><br /><br /><br />OH, and the identifying information of investigative agents, i.e. Dr. Linda Detwiler, well, I {kinda} know her too, we have corresponded over the years as well. so this excuse to not give up the information of the FOIA on those mad sheep of mad river valley, and what the final mouse bio-assays showed, if any, atypical Scrapie, typical scrapie, or BSE, was bogus. It was one more of a long line of lies, deceit, and corruption by this Administration. I remember before this administration took office, i remember requesting for information i.e. hundreds and hundreds of pages of documents of the USA BSE surveillance plan, USDA emergency BSE response plan, the red book, yellow book, green book, and Dr. Detwiler sent to me with no problem. well, i might have complained a time or two about the slowness of response, and maybe sometimes when the information was not what i wanted, due to how i ask the question. but i would eventually get the data. I just looked at the date, and it was 1999. IT was 3 inches of paperwork in that one mailing. SO why is it, after some 5 years of asking and requesting, why i cannot get one question answered ;<br /><br />FOIA OF DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br /><a href="http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/">http://foiamadsheepmadrivervalley.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />WHAT STRAIN OF TSE DID THESE SHEEP HAVE, atypical NOR-98-like, typical scrapies, or BSE ???<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br /><br />NOR-98 ATYPICAL SCRAPIE USA UPDATE AS AT OCT 2007<br /><br /><a href="http://nor-98.blogspot.com/">http://nor-98.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />Sunday, March 16, 2008<br /><br />MAD COW DISEASE terminology UK c-BSE (typical), atypical BSE H or L, and or Italian L-BASE<br /><br /><a href="http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/03/mad-cow-disease-terminology-uk-c-bse.html">http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/03/mad-cow-disease-terminology-uk-c-bse.html</a><br /><br /><br />DOWNER COW SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM<br /><br /><a href="http://downercattle.blogspot.com/">http://downercattle.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />Wednesday, April 23, 2008<br /><br />FDA Strengthens Safeguards for Consumers of Beef Issues Regulation on Animal Feeds with Added Safeguards Against BSE<br /><br /><a href="http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/">http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />Sunday, April 20, 2008<br /><br />Progress Report from the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center April 3, 2008<br /><br /><a href="http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/">http://prionunitusaupdate2008.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />TSS...END...APRIL 24, 2008Terry S. Singeltary Sr.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06986622967539963260noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8833057355167080880.post-78136002151494798742007-11-13T12:32:00.000-08:002008-09-01T09:08:36.082-07:00DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]To: Garfield.O.Daley@aphis.usda.gov<br /><br /><br />CC: phyllis.Fong@usda.gov; bse-L@aegee.org;<br /><br /><br />Re: FOIA APPEAL 07-566 DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br /><br /><br />November 13, 2007<br /><br /><br />Greetings Garfield O. Daley, Acting FOIA Director, and USDA et al,<br /><br /><br />I recieved the following from my FOIA appeal # 07-566 today ;<br /><br /><br />USDA<br /><br />Nov. 7, 2007<br /><br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary, Sr.<br />Post Office Box 42<br />Bacliff, Texas 77518<br /><br /><br />Dear Mr. Singeltary:<br /><br /><br />This is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) appeal under FOIA number 07-566 that you filed on July 11, 2007, for records relating to bio-assays of sheep imported from Belgium (copy enclosed).<br /><br /><br />Our records indicate that further processing may be necessary. Frequently, we find that requesters' needs for records change. Please let us know if you wish to continue with the FOIA appeal that was filed with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) on July 11, 2007. I regret that we have been unable to reply sooner and appreciate your patience and understanding.<br /><br /><br />Please indicate below if you wish to withdraw your appeal or to continue by checking one of the blocks.<br /><br /><br />Withdraw appeal<br /><br /><br />XXX Continue appeal<br /><br /><br />Please return with a box checked to the address below no later than 15 days from the date of this correspondence:<br /><br /><br />Gardield O. Daley<br />APHIS Acting FOIA Director<br />4700 River Road, Unit 50<br />Riverdale, MD 20737-1232<br /><br /><br />Or you may email me your response no later than 15 days from the date of this correspondence at: Garfield.O.Daley@aphis.usda.gov or by fax at: 301-734-5941<br /><br /><br />If we do not receive a response from you pertaining to the continuance of this appeal our office will close the file on November 30, 2007.<br /><br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br />xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br /><br />Garfield O. Daley<br />Acting FOIA Director<br />Freedom of Information & Privacy Act Staff<br />Legislative and Public Affairs<br /><br />Enclosure<br /><br /><br />END<br />=====<br /><br /><br />Greetings Garfield Daley, Acting FOIA Director,<br /><br /><br />PLEASE CONTINUE MY APPEAL!<br /><br /><br />WHY, may I ask after 3+ years from my original FOIA request on this (I understand you have no say in this, and this is not your fault), and after 5+ years from telling the public the testing would be run, after waiting patiently all this time, why would I now want to stop the process without my FOIA being answered?<br /><br /><br />This is beyond outrageous. This is disgusting, but typical of this administration, and pray tell, what other choice do I have but to wait further and be as patient and diplomatic as possible. But this is becoming more and more difficult. I simply cannot understand what the hold up is on a simple question. I know you have the answer at hand. In fact, I think I know the answer, but I would like it confirmed by the USDA. It's a very simple question and answer. I will review below ;<br /><br /><br />Question<br /><br /><br />The infamous mad sheep of mad river valley, the sheep that were imported from Belgium, the sheep that were confiscated and taken in a tactical, covert, clandestine, draconian, manor, the sheep that were supposed to have been infected with an atypical TSE (possibly the NOR-98 atypical type, like the ones we now have documented in 5 different states in the USA i.e. ATYPICAL NOR-98 SCRAPIE, LOCATION UPDATE ON 5 DOCUMENTED CASES THIS YEAR ; The flocks of origin are WY, CO, CA, IN, and MN., personal communication USDA et al. ...TSS), the sheep that there was a ''Declaration of Extraordinary Emergency Because of an Atypical T.S.E. of Foreign Origin in the United States'' declared in the Federal register, the sheep that were slaughtered and to have had testing done, including the mouse bio-assays to confirm this Atypical TSE of Foreign Origin in the US. These studies were put off once after announcing they would be run, then we were assured they would be run, and in fact, they were in progress, and in two years we would have the answer. times up, it's been up for years, now, was it an atypical TSE or not? yes or no? IF so, what strain, what was the pathology? but i would be happy with just a simple yes or no, for now, i'm growing old and tired. We are tired of waiting, it's been 7 years from the time of the declaration, and it was suppose to take 2 years for mouse bio-assays, or will this be just more BSe this Administration passes on to the next, or will we get answers before then? i'm loosing, in fact, i have lost hope. I apologize if this is not a diplomatic letter, but diplomacy does not seem to work here. ...<br /><br /><br />Sincerely disgusted,<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br />P.O. Box 42<br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br /><br /><br />FOIA APPEAL<br />Reference FOIA 07-566<br /><br />DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.<br />(PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br /><br /><br />Mouse Bio-Assays<br /><br />July 11, 2007<br /><br /><br />TO:<br /><br />Administrator<br />Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service<br />Ag Box 3401<br />Washington, DC 20250-3401<br /><br />C.C.<br /><br />USDA OIG FOIA<br />Honorable Phyllis Fong<br />1400 Independence Ave., SW, Mail Stop 2308<br />Washington, D.C. 20250<br /><br />C.C.<br /><br />Honorable Chairman Henry Waxman<br />Committee on Oversight and Government Reform<br />U.S. House of Representatives<br />2157 Rayburn House Office Building<br />Washington, D.C. 20515<br /><br />Reference FOIA 07-566<br /><br /><br />To Whom it may concern,<br /><br />I respectfully wish to appeal the following answer I got from FOIA 07-566<br />request, see letter that i am appealing and reasons to follow ;<br /><br />================================<br /><br />USDA<br /><br />JULY 3, 2007<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br />P.O. Box 42<br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br />Dear Mr. Singeltary:<br /><br /><br />This is in response to your March 15, 2007, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records related to bio-assays of sheep imported from Belgium. Your request was received in this office on March 27, 2007, and assigned case number FOIA 07-566. We apologize for the delay of this response.<br /><br />For your information, the FOIA is designed to allow the public access to agency records, not to answer questions. After consulting with agency staff, we were informed up to two years is required for a final result on the bio-assay. Therefore, we did not locate any records responsive to your request. You may appeal our no records determination. If you choose to appeal, your appeal must be in writing and must be sent within 45 days of the date of this letter to:<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />To assist the Administrator in reviewing your appeal, provide specific reasons why you believe modification of the determination is warranted.<br /><br /><br />If you have any questions, please contact..............<br /><br /><br /><br />Sincerely<br /><br /><br />Cheri A. Oswalt<br />Acting Director<br />Freedom of Information $ Privacy Act Staff<br />Legislative and Public Affairs<br /><br />=========================<br /><br /><br />SPECIFIC REASONS<br /><br /><br />> For your information, the FOIA is designed to allow the public access to<br /><br />> agency records, not to answer questions.<br /><br /><br />IF the pubic is consistantly told that the agency has done said mouse bio-assay or any other request,<br />but yet the agency in question, consistantly lies about said mouse bio-assay, or any other request,<br />are you saying we cannot question these actions via FIOA, this is the public last resort ???<br /><br /><br />> After consulting with agency staff, we were informed up to two years is<br /><br />> required for a final result on the bio-assay.<br /><br />> Therefore, we did not locate any records responsive to your request.<br /><br />OVER 3 years ago, on May 20, 2004, I was told ;<br /><br /><br />> --- Original Message ---<br />><br />><br />> Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton.question please.scrapie.TSS<br />> Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400<br />> From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov<br />> To: flounder@wt.net<br />><br />> Dear Mr. Singeltary,<br />><br />> The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this<br />> year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the<br />> results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of<br />> Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is<br />> 301-734-5941.<br />><br />> Have a nice day,<br />><br />> Jim Rogers<br />> APHIS LPA<br /><br /><br />=========================================================<br /><br /><br />OVER 5 YEARS AGO WE WERE ALL TOLD THIS ;<br /><br /><br />>> Imported<br />>> Belgium/Netherlands<br />>> Sheep Test Results<br />>> Background<br />>> Factsheet<br />>> Veterinary Services April 2002<br />>> APHIS<br />><br />><br />><br />> snip...<br />><br />>> Additional tests will be conducted to determine<br />>> exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie.<br />>> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist<br />>> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals<br />>> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing<br />>> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.<br />><br />><br />><br />> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf<br /><br /><br />=====================================================<br /><br /><br />What are the results of those mouse bio-assays ???<br /><br />Have they even started ???<br /><br />IF not, when will they begin ???<br /><br />IF so, when did they begin this time ???<br /><br />IF these mouse bio-assays have not yet started, and have been put off for 5 years, this<br />being the 3rd time, now going beyond 7 years when finished, will the agency please explain<br />this delay on such an important animal and human health matter ???<br /><br /><br />Thank You,<br />kind regards,<br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br />P.O. Box 42<br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br /><br />SOURCES for concern ;<br /><br /><br />Recently the question has again been brought up as to whether<br />scrapie is transmissible to man. This has followed reports that the<br />disease has been transmitted to primates. One particularly lurid<br />speculation (Gajdusek 1977) conjectures that the agents of scrapie,<br />kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and transmissible encephalopathy of<br />mink are varieties of a single "virus". The U.S. Department of<br />Agriculture concluded that it could "no longer justify or permit<br />scrapie-blood line and scrapie-exposed sheep and goats to be processed<br />for human or animal food at slaughter or rendering plants" (ARC 84/77)"<br />The problem is emphasised by the finding that some strains of scrapie<br />produce lesions identical to the once which characterise the human<br />dementias"<br /><br />Whether true or not. the hypothesis that these agents might be<br />transmissible to man raises two considerations. First, the safety<br />of laboratory personnel requires prompt attention. Second, action<br />such as the "scorched meat" policy of USDA makes the solution of the<br />acrapie problem urgent if the sheep industry is not to suffer<br />grievously.<br /><br />snip...<br /><br />76/10.12/4.6<br /><br /><br />http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1976/10/12004001.pdf<br /><br /><br /><br />J Infect Dis 1980 Aug;142(2):205-8<br /><br />Oral transmission of kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and scrapie to<br />nonhuman primates.<br /><br />Gibbs CJ Jr, Amyx HL, Bacote A, Masters CL, Gajdusek DC.<br /><br />Kuru and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease of humans and scrapie disease of sheep<br />and goats were transmitted to squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) that were<br />exposed to the infectious agents only by their nonforced consumption of<br />known infectious tissues. The asymptomatic incubation period in the one<br />monkey exposed to the virus of kuru was 36 months; that in the two monkeys<br />exposed to the virus of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was 23 and 27 months,<br />respectively; and that in the two monkeys exposed to the virus of scrapie<br />was 25 and 32 months, respectively. Careful physical examination of the<br />buccal cavities of all of the monkeys failed to reveal signs or oral<br />lesions. One additional monkey similarly exposed to kuru has remained<br />asymptomatic during the 39 months that it has been under observation.<br /><br />PMID: 6997404<br /><br /><br />http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6997404&dopt=Abstract<br /><br /><br />EVIDENCE OF SCRAPIE IN SHEEP AS A RESULT OF FOOD BORNE EXPOSURE<br /><br />This is provided by the statistically significant increase in the incidence<br />of sheep scrape from 1985, as determined from analyses of the submissions<br />made to VI Centres, and from individual case and flock incident studies.<br />........<br /><br /><br /><br />http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1994/02/07002001.pdf<br /><br /><br /><br />AS implied in the Inset 25 we must not _ASSUME_ that<br />transmission of BSE to other species will invariably<br />present pathology typical of a scrapie-like disease.<br /><br />snip...<br /><br /><br /><br />http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1991/01/04004001.pdf<br /><br /><br /><br />Published online before print October 20, 2005<br /><br />Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 10.1073/pnas.0502296102<br />Medical Sciences<br /><br />A newly identified type of scrapie agent can naturally infect sheep with<br />resistant PrP genotypes<br /><br />( sheep prion transgenic mice )<br /><br />Annick Le Dur *, Vincent Béringue *, Olivier Andréoletti , Fabienne Reine *,<br />Thanh Lan Laï *, Thierry Baron , Bjørn Bratberg ¶, Jean-Luc Vilotte ,<br />Pierre Sarradin **, Sylvie L. Benestad ¶, and Hubert Laude *<br />*Virologie Immunologie Moléculaires and Génétique Biochimique et<br />Cytogénétique, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 78350<br />Jouy-en-Josas, France; Unité Mixte de Recherche, Institut National de la<br />Recherche Agronomique-Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, Interactions<br />Hôte Agent Pathogène, 31066 Toulouse, France; Agence Française de Sécurité<br />Sanitaire des Aliments, Unité Agents Transmissibles Non Conventionnels,<br />69364 Lyon, France; **Pathologie Infectieuse et Immunologie, Institut<br />National de la Recherche Agronomique, 37380 Nouzilly, France; and<br />¶Department of Pathology, National Veterinary Institute, 0033 Oslo, Norway<br /><br /><br />Edited by Stanley B. Prusiner, University of California, San Francisco, CA,<br />and approved September 12, 2005 (received for review March 21, 2005)<br /><br />Scrapie in small ruminants belongs to transmissible spongiform<br />encephalopathies (TSEs), or prion diseases, a family of fatal<br />neurodegenerative disorders that affect humans and animals and can transmit<br />within and between species by ingestion or inoculation. Conversion of the<br />host-encoded prion protein (PrP), normal cellular PrP (PrPc), into a<br />misfolded form, abnormal PrP (PrPSc), plays a key role in TSE transmission<br />and pathogenesis. The intensified surveillance of scrapie in the European<br />Union, together with the improvement of PrPSc detection techniques, has led<br />to the discovery of a growing number of so-called atypical scrapie cases.<br />These include clinical Nor98 cases first identified in Norwegian sheep on<br />the basis of unusual pathological and PrPSc molecular features and "cases"<br />that produced discordant responses in the rapid tests currently applied to<br />the large-scale random screening of slaughtered or fallen animals.<br />Worryingly, a substantial proportion of such cases involved sheep with PrP<br />genotypes known until now to confer natural resistance to conventional<br />scrapie. Here we report that both Nor98 and discordant cases, including<br />three sheep homozygous for the resistant PrPARR allele (A136R154R171),<br />efficiently transmitted the disease to transgenic mice expressing ovine PrP,<br />and that they shared unique biological and biochemical features upon<br />propagation in mice. These observations support the view that a truly<br />infectious TSE agent, unrecognized until recently, infects sheep and goat<br />flocks and may have important implications in terms of scrapie control and<br />public health.<br /><br /><br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br /><br />Author contributions: H.L. designed research; A.L.D., V.B., O.A., F.R.,<br />T.L.L., J.-L.V., and H.L. performed research; T.B., B.B., P.S., and S.L.B.<br />contributed new reagents/analytic tools; V.B., O.A., and H.L. analyzed data;<br />and H.L. wrote the paper.<br /><br />A.L.D. and V.B. contributed equally to this work.<br /><br />To whom correspondence should be addressed.<br /><br />Hubert Laude, E-mail: laude@jouy.inra.fr<br /><br />www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0502296102<br /><br /><br />http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0502296102v1<br /><br /><br />Dormont*, and Jean-Philippe Deslys* et al, that The agent responsible<br />for French iatrogenic growth hormone-linked CJD taken as a control is<br />very different from vCJD but is similar to that found in one case of<br />sporadic CJD and one sheep scrapie isolate;<br /><br /><br /><br />http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/041490898v1<br /><br /><br />SCRAPIE UPDATE USA AS OF MARCH 2007 NOR98 INCLUDED<br /><br /><br />http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/animal_diseases/scrapie/downloads/monthly_scrapie_rpt.pps<br /><br /><br />DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.<br />> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES<br />> ><br /><br /><br />http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31<br /><br /><br /><br />> > DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E<br />> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [2]<br />> ><br />><br /><br /><br />http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32<br /><br /><br />><br />> > or if those old urls dont work, go here;<br />> ><br />> > DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E<br />> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES<br />> > - Terry S.<br />> > Singeltary Sr. 7/20/00 (0)<br />> ><br />><br />> > [Federal Register: July 20, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 140)] [Notices]<br />> > [Page 45018] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access<br />> > [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy00-32]<br />> ><br />> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />> ><br />> > DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE<br />> ><br />> > Office of the Secretary<br />> ><br />> > [Docket No. 00-072-1]<br />> ><br />> > Declaration of Extraordinary Emergency Because of an Atypical<br />> > Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (Prion Disease) of Foreign Origin<br />> ><br />> > A transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) (prion disease) of<br />> > foreign origin has been detected in the United States. It is different<br />> > from TSE's previously diagnosed in the United States. The TSE was<br />> > detected in the progeny of imported sheep. The imported sheep and<br />> > their progeny are under quarantine in Vermont. Transmissible<br />> > spongiform encephalopathies are degenerative fatal diseases that can<br />> > affect livestock. TSE's are caused by similar, as yet uncharacterized,<br />> > agents that usually produce spongiform changes in the brain.<br />> > Post-mortem analysis has indicated positive results for an atypical<br />> > TSE of foreign origin in four sheep in Vermont. Because of the<br />> > potentially serious consequences of allowing the disease to spread to<br />> > other livestock in the United States, it is necessary to seize and<br />> > dispose of those flocks of sheep in Vermont that are affected with or<br />> > exposed to the disease, and their germ plasm. The existence of the<br />> > atypical TSE of foreign origin represents a threat to U.S. livestock.<br />> > It constitutes a real danger to the national economy and a potential<br />> > serious burden on interstate and foreign commerce. The Department has<br />> > reviewed the measures being taken by Vermont to quarantine and<br />> > regulate the flocks in question and has consulted with appropriate<br />> > officials in the State of Vermont. Based on such review and<br />> > consultation, the Department has determined that Vermont does not have<br />> > the funds to compensate flock owners for the seizure and disposal of<br />> > flocks affected with or exposed to the disease, and their germ plasm.<br />> > Without such funds, it will be unlikely to achieve expeditious<br />> > disposal of the flocks and germ plasm. Therefore, the Department has<br />> > determined that an extraordinary emergency exists because of the<br />> > existence of the atypical TSE in Vermont. This declaration of<br />> > extraordinary emergency authorizes the Secretary to seize, quarantine,<br />> > and dispose of, in such manner as he deems necessary, any animals that<br />> > he finds are affected with or exposed to the disease in question, and<br />> > their germ plasm, and otherwise to carry out the provisions and<br />> > purposes of the Act of July 2, 1962 (21 U.S.C. 134-134h). The State of<br />> > Vermont has been informed of these facts.<br />> ><br />> > Dated: This declaration of extraordinary emergency shall become<br />> > effective July 14, 2000. Dan Glickman, Secretary of Agriculture. [FR<br />> > Doc. 00-18367 Filed 7-19-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P<br /><br /><br /><br />http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32<br /><br /><br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br />P.O. Box 42<br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br /><br />=========================================<br /><br /><br /><br />Subject: Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEPDate: July 10, 2007 at 1:14 pm PST<br />Greetings,<br />latest response to my FOIA request about those mad sheep from mad river valley is simply unbelievable and inexcusable ;<br />================================<br />USDA<br />JULY 3, 2007<br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.P.O. Box 42Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br />Dear Mr. Singeltary:<br />This is in response to your March 15, 2007, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink0" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">records</a> related to bio-assays of sheep imported from Belgium. Your request was received in this office on March 27, 2007, and assigned case number FOIA 07-566. We apologize for the delay of this response.<br />For your information, the FOIA is designed to allow the public access to agency records, not to <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink1" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">answer questions</a>. After consulting with agency staff, we were informed up to two years is required for a final result on the bio-assay. Therefore, we did not locate any records responsive to your request. You may appeal our no records determination. If you choose to appeal, your appeal must be in writing and must be sent within 45 days of the date of this letter to:<br />snip...<br />To assist the Administrator in reviewing your appeal, provide specific reasons why you believe modification of the determination is warranted.<br />If you have any questions, please contact..............<br />Sincerely<br />Cheri A. Oswalt<a class="kLink" id="KonaLink2" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">Acting</a> DirectorFreedom of Information $ Privacy Act StaffLegislative and Public Affairs<br />=========================<br />> After consulting with agency staff, we were informed up to two years is required for a final result on the bio-assay.<br />> Therefore, we did not locate any records responsive to your request.<br />Unbelievable !<br />OVER 3 years ago, on May 20, 2004, I was told ;<br />> --- Original Message --->>> Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton.question please.scrapie.TSS> Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400> From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov> To: flounder@wt.net>> Dear Mr. Singeltary,>> The Western blot tests on these <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink3" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">animals</a> were completed in April of this> year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the> results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of> Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is> 301-734-5941.>> Have a nice day,>> Jim Rogers> APHIS LPA<br />=========================================================<br />OVER 5 YEARS AGO WE WERE ALL TOLD THIS ;<br />>> Imported>> Belgium/Netherlands>> Sheep Test Results>> Background>> Factsheet>> Veterinary Services April 2002>> APHIS>>>> snip...>>> Additional tests will be conducted to determine>> exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie.>> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist>> of injecting <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink4" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">mice</a> with tissue from the infected animals>> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing>> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.>>>> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf<br />=====================================================<br />NOT to forget the 'atypical' <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink5" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">VERMONT USA</a>' sheep scrapie/BSE/TSE?back in 2000 with the testing conveniently ignored and put off once again with animal TSEs. Why I ask?<br />SCRAPIE ''ATYPICAL'' TSE IN SHEEP VERMONT UPDATE 2004<br />Greetings,<br />IN the year 2000, some sheep in Vermont were confiscated due to whatthe USDA/APHIS said was an 'atypical TSE'.<br />WE were told there would be additional testing to confirm exactly whatTSE we were dealing with;<br />Release No. 0141.02<br />Ed Curlett (301) 734-3256Jerry Redding (202) 720-6959<br />TESTING TO CONTINUE ON IMPORTED SHEEP CONFISCATED LAST YEAR<br />WASHINGTON, April 11, 2002 -- The U.S. <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink6" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">Department of Agriculture</a> today announced that tests conducted on a flock of sheep confiscated last year from a farm in Vermont confirm that two of the 125 sheep tested positive for an atypical undifferentiated transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) of foreign origin. The flock of 125 sheep was confiscated in March 2001 after four animals from an associated flock tested positive for TSE in July 2000. USDA will continue to conduct additional tests to determine the type of TSE in these sheep.<br />"These results confirm our previous conclusions were correct and that we took the appropriate preventative actions in confiscating these animals," said Bobby Acord, administrator of USDA s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. "USDA s actions to confiscate, sample and destroy these sheep were on target. As a result of our vigilance, none of these confiscated animals entered the animal or human food supply."<br />The sheep, imported from <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink7" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">Belgium</a> and the Netherlands in 1996, were placed under certain federal restrictions when they entered the country as part of USDA's scrapie control efforts. In 1998, USDA learned that it was likely that sheep from <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink14" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">Europe</a> were exposed to feed contaminated with <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink8" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">bovine spongiform encephalopathy</a>. At that time, the state of Vermont, at the request of USDA, imposed a quarantine on these flocks, which prohibited slaughter or sale for breeding purposes.<br />On July 10, 2000, several sheep from the flock tested positive for a TSE, a class of degenerative neurological diseases that is characterized by a very long incubation period and a 100 percent mortality rate in infected sheep. Two of the better known varieties of TSE are scrapie in sheep and BSE in <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink9" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">cattle</a>. There is no evidence that scrapie poses a risk to human health.<br />On July 14, 2000, USDA issued a declaration of extraordinary emergency to acquire the sheep. This action was contested by the flock owners. A federal <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink10" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">district court</a> judge ruled in favor of USDA based on the merits of the case. The flock owners appealed to the Second Circuit Court requesting a stay, which was denied. The sheep were confiscated by USDA in March 2001 and transported to USDA's National Veterinary Services Laboratories in Ames, Iowa, where they were humanely euthanized. Tissue samples were collected from the sheep for <a class="kLink" id="KonaLink11" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" href="http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/messages/1001466.html#" target="_top">diagnostic</a> testing and USDA will continue with additional tests which could take up to 2 - 3 years to complete. In all, USDA has acquired 380 sheep from a total of three flocks. All of the animals were humanely euthanized, sampled and disposed and did not enter the animal or human food supply.<br />Our goal continues to be to prevent, detect and eradicate foreign animal diseases to protect American agriculture, natural resources and consumers," said Acord. "We will continue to utilize the scientific results of these and other tests conducted during the last several years to strengthen our extensive surveillance, monitoring and prevention efforts."<br />For more information about USDA s ongoing surveillance, monitoring and prevention efforts as it relates to this situation, please visit www.aphis.usda.gov/oa/tse/index.html<br />#<br />NOW, June 2004 those same test that we were told would start in2002, have yet to be started. THE TSE those VERMONT sheepwas supposedly to have had, has yet to be confirmed.<br />WHY?<br />===============================================<br />snip...<br />you would have thought that this would have been at the top of someone'spriority list. However, it does not look that way.<br />I ask again, WHY?<br />I wish to submit the following;<br />-------- Original Message --------Subject: Re: AW: [BSE-L] USDA did not test possible mad cows - Dr. Detwiler, what about those sheep?Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:27:24 -0500From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy To: BSE-L@uni-karlsruhe.deReferences: <13.2d20eaae.2df84fb9@aol.com> <40c8c7a0.1080107@wt.net><br />######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########<br />Greetings list members,<br />Thought I should let the list know that Dr. Detwiler kindly replied to myquestion about the delayed 'atypical' TSE testing in the Vermont sheep andtried to explain what caused the delay. If I interpreted it correctly,seems it was the fault of the U.K. ;<br />-------- Original Message --------Subject: SheepDate: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:26:04 EDTFrom: LAVET22@aol.comTo: flounder@wt.net<br />Mr. Singeltary.<br />I hope this finds you well. As you are aware I left the USDA lastyear. I can only update you on the sheep before that time. Contact wasestablished with the UK on doing the bioassay studies. They agreed.However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay. Iam aware that there are now additional labs in Europe running the mousebioassay strain typing. You will have to contact USDA for further word.<br />Linda Detwiler=========<br />My reply to Dr. Detwiler;<br />-------- Original Message --------Subject: Re: SheepDate: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:53:57 -0500From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." To: LAVET22@aol.comReferences: <54.2bd2ac1e.2dfca4bc@aol.com><br />hello Dr. Detwiler,<br />thanks for your kind reply.<br />> However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay.<br />not sure i understand that?<br />> You will have to contact USDA for further word.<br />already done that, and there answer was;<br />>5/20/04><br />>Dear Mr. Singeltary,>>The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this>year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the>results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of>Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is>301-734-5941.>>Have a nice day,>>Jim Rogers>APHIS LPA><br />and with my previous attempts for information via the FOIA throughthis administration (as you are probably very well aware of) they haveall been ignored/refused. so any further attempts would be fruitless i amsure.<br />thanks anyway...<br />kindest regards,Terry<br />LAVET22@aol.com wrote:<br />> Mr. Singeltary.<br />snip...<br />TSS<br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:<br />> ######## Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy > #########>> Greetings Dr. Detwiler,>> glad to see you are still with us, you had become very silent lately.> hope you are enjoying semi retirement.>> recently, i inquired through the BSE-L and via USDA official about> those Vermont sheep via belgium which there was an Extraordinary> Declaration of Emergency declared here in the USA due to> atypical scrapie. The thread is;>> Confiscation of Sheep in Vermont and testing results ? Thu, 20 May 2004> 12:10:03 -0500 "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." Bovine> Spongiform Encephalopathy BSE-L>>>>> Imported>> Belgium/Netherlands>> Sheep Test Results>> Background>> Factsheet>> Veterinary Services April 2002>> APHIS>>>> snip...>>> Additional tests will be conducted to determine>> exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie.>> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist>> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals>> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing>> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.>>>> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf<br />snip...full text ;<br />https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/0/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument<br />i'm still waiting, and apparently I am not the only one ;<br />Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:03:09 -0500Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion GroupSubject: Agencies slow in responding to FOIA requests<br />http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0707&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=2679<br />TSS/July, 10, 2007===============<br />----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." To: Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 2:37 PMSubject: Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br />Greetings BSE-L Members,<br />I thought I might update you on the latest BSeee from USDA on my endlessattempts to find the truth as to what those mad sheep of mad river valleyreally had, either typical scrapie, atypical scrapie, BSE, and or nothing.My endeavors to get this information via FOIA and through every other avenuehas failed it seems. YOU will see in this latest letter from the USDA, thestalling continues. This latest letter says that the USDA will not be ableto comply with the twenty-working-day time limit, as well they will not beable to comply with the ten additional days provided by the statute. This 20day thing, and the additional 10 days thing to comply by any statute is ahoot to say the least. I have been waiting to get this data for almost 4+years, only to be turned down at every corner. seems to be just another in along line of cover ups on TSE in the USA. ALSO, the USDA does not seem to besure even if they can request a waiver fee I made due to my disability andfinancial situation from that. all in all, seems to be the same old BSeee. Ionly ponder if this recent discovery of the first case of atypical scrapiein the USA (NOR98), and the announcement of that, has anything to do withthe delay in my FOIA request on mad sheep of mad river valley ???<br />Lot of things to ponder here, as the question I raised below also, why thequarantine of land for 4 to 5 years and slaughter of all the Faillacesanimals, but yet we have heard nothing about this with this recent NOR98case ??? AS with the atypical TSE in the Tejas bovine and the Alabamabovine, why no quarantine of land and slaughter of animals there ??? Manythings about this case has been very disturbing from the start of this mess.I will post the additional letters below (have to print, scanner shot, andcomputer is about loaded up), but on my end around Johanns et al, I did gothrough the OIG with all this too, and I will post that letter I recieved aswell. Then some links to all this from way back, for anyone interested. ...<br />IF you remember correctly, my latest letter requesting this information wentout to ;<br />----- Original Message ----- From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.To: Boyd.Rutherford@usda.govSent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 1:35 PMSubject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br />Greetings USDA,<br />I respectfully request the final results of the mouse bio-assays test thatwere to have supposedly began 2+ years late, 5 years ago, on the importedsheep from Belgium ?<br />WHAT happened to the test results and MOUSE BIO-ASSAYS of those importedsheep from Belgium that were confiscated and slaughtered from theFaillace's, what sort of TSE did these animals have ?<br />WERE they atypical scrapie, BSE, and or typical scrapie ?<br />HOW much longer will you refuse to give us this information ? and for whatreason ?<br />WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley werequarantined for 5 years, but none of these farms from Texas and Alabama withAtypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not been quarantined for 5 years, whynot, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?<br />snip.<br />full text ;<br />http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf<br />https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument<br />FURTHERMORE, I respectfully request up front, that any fees for this FOIA bewavered due to the fact this information should be free to the public and isin the best interest for the public to have these final results, nofinancial gain from this FOIA information is to be made either. ...<br />Thank You,<br />kind regards,<br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.P.O. Box 42Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br />snip...full text is at bottom of this email.<br />==============================<br />THEN, when i figured they were going to ignore me again, I sent this to theOIG and the Honorable Phyllis Fong ;<br />----- Original Message ----- From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.To: FOIASTAFF@oig.usda.govCc: Phyllis.Fong@usda.govSent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 3:09 PMSubject: Fw: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br />Dear O.I.G. F.O.I.A.,<br />A kind greetings from Texas.<br />Maybe you can help me out. I have tried relentlessly to find out the finalresults of the TSE Mouse-bioassays of those Atypical TSE in the Vermontsheep where there was a Declaration of Emergency announced. I have beenunable to get any answer on those test and cannot figure out why not. OH, ihave my guess on what they were.but my guess is not good enough.<br />Could you please help find out for me ??? please see emails below on thismatter.<br />many thanks, and keep up the good work in regards to trying to police theUSDA/FSIS/APHIS et al on TSE.it's indeed a full time job. ...<br />with kindest regards,<br />I am sincerely,<br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.P.O. Box 42Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br />snip...end<br />=============================<br />LOW and behold, the OIG responds March 7, 2007 ;<br />UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREOFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL1400 INDEPENDENCE AVE., SW, MAIL STOP 2308WASHINGTON, D.C. 20250<br />DATE: MARCH 7, 2007<br />TO: Terry SingeltaryP.O. Box 42Bacliff, Texas 77518<br />Your request has been received. For your information, this office currentlyhas a considerable backlog of requests for information, which we manage inaccordance with USDA's Regulations and Department of Justice Freedom ofInformation Act (FOIA) policy. The FOIA Staff processes requests on afirst-in, first-out basis using ''multitracks.'' There are four tracks: anexpedited track if the request involves a matter of imminent threat to life;a simple track for relatively simple requests; a complex track for morecomplex and lengthy requests; and a remanded track, when a FOIA appeal isgranted. Please be assured that your request will be categorized andprocessed in turn.<br />Should you have questions, you may call the FOIA staff at (202) 720-5677 andrefer to Log. No. 07-00060.<br />FOIA/PA StaffLegal Staff<br />==============================<br />THEN, LOW and behold, on March 15, 2007, I finally receive acknowledgementfrom USDA on this matter (i.e. Fong syndrome takes effect again) ;<br />USDA<br />March 15, 2007<br />Mr. Terry S. SingeltaryP.O. Box 42Bacliff, TX 77518<br />Dear Mr. Singeltary,<br />This letter acknowledges receipt by the USDA Freedom of Information ActService Center of your FOIA request dated February 25, 2007, for recordsrelated to bio-assays of sheep imported from Belgium. Your request has beenreferred to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) forprocessing.<br />You will receive a response directly from APHIS.<br />Contact the APHIS FOIA Service Center at 301-734-5267 regarding any questionon the status of your request.<br />Sincerely,<br />Rita MorganActing USDA Freedom of Information Act OfficerAdministration<br />==============================<br />NOW, with reality setting in, I receive this letter from USDA on March 28,2007 ;<br />USDA<br />March 28, 2007<br />Terry S. Singeltary, Sr.P.O. Box 42Bacliff, TX 77518<br />Re: FOIA 07-566<br />Dear Mr. Singeltary:<br />This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated March 15, 2007, whichwas received in this Office on March 27, 2007, in which you requestedatypical TSE information on Vermont Sheep.<br />The records you seek are maintained outside of this Office and we have notyet been able to complete a search to determine whether there are recordswithin the scope of your request. Additionally, all Freedom of InformationAct (FOIA) requests are processed on a ''first-in, first-out'' basis,according to track. Due to the large number of FOIA requests our Agency hasbeen receiving, we have a considerable backlog, and unfortunately a numberof requests still remain in the queue (TRASH...TSS). Accordingly, we will beUNABLE TO COMPLY with the twenty-working-day time limit in THIS CASE, aswell AS THE TEN ADDITIONAL DAYS provided by the statute (and is anyonesurprised by this from this administration, i'm not. ...TSS). Please beadvised; however, responding to all FOIA requests as promptly as possible isa high priority for out Agency. (not...tss)<br />We have not yet made a decision on your request for a fee waiver. We will doso after we determine whether fees will be assessed for this request.<br />I regret the necessity of this delay, but I assure you that your requestwill be processed as soon as possible. If you have any questions or wish todiscuss reformulation or an alternative time frame for processing of yourrequest, you may contact me at (301-734-3755).<br />Sincerely,<br />Celeste CampProgram Specialist<br />APHIS Safeguarding American Agriculture<br />==============================<br />News FocusINFECTIOUS DISEASES:Is the U.S. Doing Enough to Prevent Mad Cow Disease?Martin Enserink<br />U.S. officials say they're taking every reasonable step to keep mad cowdisease out. But critics still see chinks in the country's armorOn a cold spring morning, when the hills in East Warren, Vermont, werecovered with a fresh pack of snow, the Faillace family lost its livelihood.It happened in a government action that--if you hear Larry Faillace recountit--was every bit as dramatic as the one that wrenched Elián González fromhis Miami relatives last year. At 5:30 a.m. on 23 March, says Faillace,armed federal agents in flak jackets entered the family farm and ordered histhree children to stop feeding the sheep. Shortly after, an enormous truckpulled up, and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) agents began loadingall of the Faillaces' 126 sheep. A few hours later, the truck was gone,leaving the family, the town, and several dozen protesters behind in angerand shock.The early morning raid is perhaps the most dramatic example of the U.S.government's efforts to keep "mad cow disease," or bovine spongiformencephalopathy (BSE), out of the country. USDA suspected that the sheep,which the Faillaces had imported from Belgium and the Netherlands in 1996,were infected with a sheep version of BSE. So they took no chances: Theentire herd was destroyed days after the animals were seized.<br />To prevent a BSE outbreak, USDA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), theU.S. Customs Service, and other government agencies have put in place a longlist of safeguards--from barricading the borders to analyzing brains ofpeople suspected of having died from the human form of mad cow disease,called variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). Yet public interest groupsand others have long argued that the government's response has been toolittle, too late. Because of this lax response, the critics say, the diseasemay well be among us. And if it is, the government is not vigilant enough todetect it, they warn, nor tough enough on the meat industry to keep it outof the human food chain.<br />Government agencies say they've taken "aggressive" measures to prevent thedisease, and many scientists agree. They admit that the precautions are notfailsafe and that the disease could emerge in the country--but say the riskis vanishingly small. Even so, the concerns are reverberating on CapitolHill, where House and Senate committees have summoned officials to discussthe risks. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) announced recently that he willintroduce a bill that would beef up border inspections and other controls tokeep BSE out of the food chain.<br />But underlying the argument is a broader question: How much prevention isenough? Scientists point out that the U.S. defense against BSE consists ofmultiple tiers, each of which would have to break down for an outbreak tooccur. Although the risk could be reduced further, the necessary controlmeasures would become increasingly costly and draconian. "You don't gospending half the budget to reduce the risk to zero," says Paul Brown, asenior scientist at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders andStroke (NINDS) in Bethesda, Maryland, "especially in view of much moreserious public health problems that afflict us."<br />Multitiered containmentBSE is one of the so-called transmissible spongiform encephalopathies(TSEs), a mysterious class of fatal brain diseases. Scientists are stilldebating their etiology, but the leading theory is that they're caused byabnormal forms of proteins, called prions. Several TSEs have the scaryability to jump the species barrier; in Britain, for instance, 99 people areknown to have died or are presumed to be dying of vCJD, most likelycontracted after eating meat products from infected cattle. Epidemiologistsexpect more cases in the United Kingdom, but they're not sure how many;there could be tens of thousands.<br />In the United States, the first line of defense is to block entry of the BSEagent, and most people agree that the government has been thorough. As earlyas 1989, USDA banned the importation of all ruminants (cattle, goats, andsheep) and many animal products from the United Kingdom and other countrieswith BSE. In 1997, when BSE cases started showing up in several othercountries, that ban was extended to all of Europe. The 500 or so animalsthat were imported from those countries before 1997--such as the Vermontsheep--have almost all been quarantined or purchased and killed.<br />But closed borders offer no guarantees. Researchers still don't know how BSEarose in Britain, but whatever the process, it could happen here, too. Oneprominent theory is that the agent that causes scrapie, a TSE in sheep,crossed the species barrier and ignited the cattle epidemic inBritain--specifically, when cattle were fed meal that contained infectedsheep tissue. That practice is now banned in the United States, making sucha scenario unlikely.<br />But BSE could also arise out of nowhere. Each year about one in everymillion humans worldwide gets CJD spontaneously, and it's possible that thesame happens in cattle--or indeed all mammals. Last year a U.K. panelchaired by Lord Andrew Phillips supported the theory that such a "sporadic"case may have started the British outbreak.<br />Work by Richard Marsh, a veterinary virologist at the University ofWisconsin, Madison, who died in 1997, suggests that sporadic cases of acattle TSE may have already arisen in the United States. Five times between1947 and 1985, a disease called transmissible mink encephalopathy decimatedpopulations on U.S. mink farms. After investigating the last outbreak, Marshconcluded that cow carcasses fed to the mink were the most likely source ofthe disease agent. He speculated that at least one of the cows must have hada TSE.<br />Another potential source of BSE is a homegrown prion disease that afflictsdeer and elk. Conceivably, this ailment, called chronic wasting disease,could jump to cattle or sicken people who eat infected venison (seesidebar).<br />But would anybody have noticed if the United States had a couple of cases ofBSE? Probably not, say some critics. USDA now tests some 50 suspect cows aweek. The test program pales in comparison to the massive effort startedlast year in the European Union, where every cow over 30 months old istested after slaughtering. The United States should do something similar,says Thomas Pringle, a molecular biologist with the Sperling BiomedicalFoundation in Eugene, Oregon, who maintains a Web site about BSE. "You cantry all these containment measures, but at the end of the day the questionis: How much BSE do you have?" he says. "The way to find out is to runhundreds of thousands of tests."<br />Testing at that level would be silly, replies Linda Detwiler, a senior staffveterinarian at the USDA, because BSE has never been found in the country.Even so, she says, this year the agency will double the number of tests itperforms.<br />Cows eating cowsEven if a cow got BSE and it went undetected, that wouldn't spell doom forthe rest of the nation's livestock. The only plausible way for an outbreakto occur would be if that cow were fed to other cows, thereby passing on theinfectious agent. For decades, cows did eat other cows, when they were fedmeat-and-bone meal, a protein concoction produced by milling and boiling (or"rendering") the carcasses of, say, sick farm animals, road kill, and deadpets. The epidemic in Britain is believed to have been fueled after infectedcattle were recycled on a large scale.<br />But this route is now cut off in the United States, at least in theory: FDAbanned feeding most mammalian protein to all ruminants in 1997. Those sameproteins can still be fed to pigs and poultry, however, so FDA has orderedrendering plants and feed mills to prevent commingling of the two types offeed. Enforcing this separation has proven difficult, however. A March 2001FDA inspection report showed that about one in seven feed mills andrendering plants didn't have adequate procedures to prevent commingling;many haven't been inspected yet.<br />Indeed, Purina Mills in Texas discovered in January that a new employee hadmistakenly let cattle protein slip into a batch of cow feed. After 1222animals that had been given the suspect feed were quarantined, Purina paidfor the entire herd to be destroyed. "Who knows how many other cases havebeen swept under the rug?" asks Peter Lurie, a researcher at Public Citizen,a consumer watchdog group in Washington, D.C., and a member of FDA'sadvisory committee on TSEs. Lurie would like to see the FDA get much tougheron the feed industry.<br />Although that may not be a bad idea, others say, the current situation ishardly a recipe for disaster. Suppose a BSE-infected animal did end up incattle feed, says NINDS's Brown, and a few cows became infected and went tothe slaughterhouse undiagnosed. For the outbreak to continue, they wouldhave to be rendered themselves and mistakenly turned into cattle feed again."A regulatory breakdown of this magnitude is virtually impossible," Brownwrote recently in Emerging Infectious Diseases. Similarly, Will Hueston, aveterinary epidemiologist at the University of Maryland, College Park, saysthe risk of even a single case of BSE is "pretty darn small."<br />The chance that humans might get vCJD from eating infected cattle is evensmaller. But here, too, critics see loopholes that they would like closed.European countries now require brains and spinal cords to be removed from acarcass directly after slaughter; no such safeguard exists in the UnitedStates.<br />Another route of infection could come from the local health food store. In1994, Congress deregulated dietary supplements. Many of these contain animalparts-- including brain tissue. Although the FDA has asked manufacturers notto use such materials from countries known to have BSE, it can't ensure thatno cow brains make it in, says Lurie. Supplements are a problem as long asFDA lacks jurisdiction over them, agrees Brown, who chaired FDA's advisorypanel on TSEs until last January.<br />PRION DISEASES FOUND IN THE U.S.Scrapie. First case diagnosed in 1947; now 40 to 60 infected sheep farms arereported per year.Chronic wasting disease (CWD). Afflicts wild deer and elk in Colorado,Wyoming, and Nebraska; also found on elk farms in other states and inCanada.Transmissible mink encephalopathy (TME). Five outbreaks reported at minkfarms in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Idaho between 1947 and 1985.Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). An estimated 250 to 300 cases per year;about 85% "sporadic," 15% genetic.Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker disease and fatal familial insomnia. Twoextremely rare genetic human diseases.NOT FOUND IN THE U.S.Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or "mad cow disease"Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD), the human form of BSE<br />How much is enough?In the end, nobody disputes that more can be done to prevent BSE; thequestion is how much the country is willing to invest. For instance, banningthe use of all animal proteins in livestock feed would all but eliminate anyrisk, says Brown. But it would be the end of the $2.5 billion renderingindustry, and it might make meat more expensive, he says.<br />In his recent commentary, Brown summed up seven holes in the safety net thatcritics are sure to pounce on if a BSE case were ever to occur. Even so,Brown thinks the current safeguards earn "high marks." Rather than closingeach and every hole, he suggests that the money could be better spent onother public health issues, such as diabetes, hypertension, or caraccidents.<br />George Gray, a risk analyst at Harvard School of Public Health in Boston,agrees. "Every bit of attention and effort we put into [BSE] takes away fromsomething else," says Gray. "And I think there are considerably bigger risksout there in the food supply." An estimated 5000 people a year die frommicrobial contamination in food alone--many more than would be harmed by BSEin any plausible scenario, he asserts. At USDA's request, Gray is studyingthe risks of BSE and related diseases in the United States. The study, whichwill guide future policy, will be presented to the agency within the next 2months.<br />Lurie dismisses such comparisons. "By that argument, we should not worryabout microbial contamination because many more people die from cancer," hesays. Although the risk may be low, he says, the worst-case scenario wouldhave such disastrous public health and economic consequences that extremecaution is warranted.<br />That's the argument that led USDA to kill the Faillaces' sheep and anothernearby flock, says Detwiler. Tests carried out last year on four slaughteredanimals showed signs of a BSE-like disease, although it wasn't clear whetherit was scrapie or a sheep version of BSE. Sheep have been infected with BSEin the lab, but no natural cases have been found in the world. If theVermont sheep did have a form of BSE, they would be the first. Better to erron the side of caution, says Detwiler, than for the United States to havethat dubious honor.<br />The Faillaces, who fought the seizure in a long legal battle, claim thesheep were healthy and the tests were sloppy. Additional tests of theFaillaces' sheep are now being performed at the National Animal Diseasecenter in Ames, Iowa. The results, says Detwiler, will be available in a fewmonths--about the time that Gray's risk assessment is due.<br />http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/292/5522/1639<br />Dr. Tom Pringle, founder, Sperling Foundation"[Mad Sheep] shows how far a corrupt government agency will go to protectindustry. This is a truly Kafkaesque story."<br />http://www.amazon.com/Mad-Sheep-Story-Behind-Family/dp/1933392096<br />Mad SheepThe True Story Behind the USDA’s War on a Family FarmLinda FaillaceThe page-turning account of a government cover-up, corporate greed, and acourageous family’s fight to save their farm.http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheepgot to read this months ago, and it is deeply disturbing how the fedshandled this from the very beginning, and to this day we do not know theresults of the mouse bio-assays, and what those sheep actually had. i don'tnecessarily agree with the TSE science in this book, but the book is a mustread if your interested at all in human and animal TSEs. ...TSSSubmitted by flounder on Thu, 09/07/2006 - 9:43pm.<br />http://vtcommons.org/node/568<br />FULL TEXT AND THREAD BETWEEN TSS, MAFF, USDA AND DR. DETWILER HERE ;<br />https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?<br />OpenDocument<br />7. WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley werequarantined for 5 years, but none of these<br />farms from Texas and Alabama with Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have notbeen quarantined for 5 years, why<br />not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?<br />snip...<br />full text ;<br />http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf<br />NOW the Faillaces' claim there sheep were disease free ;<br />When Linda Faillace sat down to write a memoir about the events in 2001 thatled to the federal seizure of her family’s sheep, she wasn’t motivated byfame or fortune. Her impetus was purely personal.<br />“Basically, Larry (my husband) had said I’d gotten too difficult to livewith,” Faillace recalled. “He said, ‘You really gotta do something.’”<br />So she set to work putting their story on paper, as much for her own peaceof mind as for posterity. And now, just five years after the USDA forciblyremoved the couple’s 125 sheep on their 90-acre homestead in East Warren,Faillace has a book in hand that details the family’s struggle for answers.<br />In “Mad Sheep,” Faillace writes that they still don’t know why their flockwas targeted by the USDA for testing for the rare brain-wasting diseaseknown as transmissible spongiform encephalopathy. Since the seizure andsubsequent liquidation of the flock at a laboratory in Ames, Iowa,government scientists have determined that none of the sheep had TSE, acondition related to mad cow disease. The Faillaces meanwhile, lost all hopeof fulfilling their dream of sheep farming and producing artisanalsheep-milk cheese.-Times Argus<br />http://nonais.org/index.php/2006/09/25/fallice-sheep-disease-free/<br />some history here ;<br />Subject: Re: CONFUSIOUS ASKS, WHY were the Faillaces of mad river valley andthere farm quarantined for 5 years ...Date: July 3, 2006 at 9:23 am PST<br />In Reply to: CONFUSIOUS ASKS, WHY were the Faillaces of mad river valley andthere farm quarantined for 5 years ... posted by TSS on June 28, 2006 at11:16 am:<br />##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #####################<br />Greetings,<br />there are over 20 documented strains of typical scrapie to date. however, weare talking atypical TSE of foreign origin is what the declaration ofextraordinary emergency was ordered for. if it was just regular scrapie,then why not all other scrapie infected farms, why were they not treated thesame way, scrapie is and has been out of control in the USA for decades,it's rampant? if it was atypical TSE in either cattle or sheep, they do notknow SRMs and or horizontal/vertical transmissions. if it were BSE, then whythe fuss of vertical and lateral transmission? so again, were not talkingregular scrapie with those sheep, and were not talking regular BSE with themad cows in Alabama and Texas. so confusious is confused still. why not thesame treatment$ ...tss<br />MAD SHEEP OF MAD RIVER VALLEY<br />THE TRUE STORY BEHIND THE USDA'S WAR ON A FAMILY FARM<br />LINDA FAILLACE<br />The video is available as either a Windows Media Player file or QuickTimefile.<br />View QuickTime clip<br />View Windows Media Clip<br />http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/lambslow.mov<br />http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/lambslow.wmv<br />http://www.chelseagreen.com/2006/items/madsheep/FilmClip<br />I have the book transcript, and wept several times through the course ofreading. ITwill blow you away. I was at a crossroads of being mad because of a 'oh mypoor sheep blah blah blah, to what about my poor mom, mentality', toFrancis and Heather and there plight with there animals, heathers remarkabledear leon speech, to francis and his true grit, and honorable strong youngman indeed, to 'what about a farmers rights and how far can the gov gomentality'. i would argue with some parts of the book about atypical TSE andBSE to sheep and the fact i still believe that not only atypical scrapie andor BSE in sheep, but some and or all of the 20+ strains of typical scrapieare transmissible to humans, and the fact in my opinion it was USDA's faultfor ever letting those sheep into the USA in the first place. They knewEurope was infected with BSE. But USDA got caught up in a bunch of lies anddeceit here with the Faillaces'. The testing is very very questionable todate.I guess i might now have my answer as to those infamous 'mouse bio-assays',but the book is remarkable, i received a copy from the publisher. everyonein the world of TSE pro/con needs to read this book. .....TSS<br />----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."To:Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 1:44 PMSubject: Re: DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICALT.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES<br />> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy#####################>> Greetings list members,>> confusious is confused again. confusious asks;>> WHY were the Faillaces of mad river valley and there farm quarantined for5> years, all animals slaughtered, and that either the top six inches of> topsoil removed where manure and or compost had been and or multiple> hypochlorite treatments of the surface soil to take place from fear ofthere> sheep having BSE, when none of this takes place for BSE cattle in the USAof> the typical strain and or the atypical strain as in Texas and Alabama???>> SINCE the Texas mad cow and the mad cow in Alabama was atypical BSE, why> then were there no quarantine for 5 years, no removal of top soil, and all> animals were not slaughtered???>> confusious still confused in sunny, hot, Bacliff, Texas. ...TSS>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."> To:> Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 9:33 PM> Subject: DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL> T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES>>> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy> #####################>> Subject: DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL> T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES> Date: June 17, 2006 at 6:56 pm PST> Greetings list members,>> here i go again. i must bring those mad sheep of mad river valley upagain.> what about those mouse bio-assays? can one of the aphis/usda lurkers onthis> list, can one of them please comment please?> a declaration of emergency was announced ;>>> >> Imported> >> Belgium/Netherlands> >> Sheep Test Results> >> Background> >> Factsheet> >> Veterinary Services April 2002> >> APHIS> >> >> >> > snip...> >> >> Additional tests will be conducted to determine> >> exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie.> >> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist> >> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals> >> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing> >> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.> >> >> >> > http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf>>> >> > DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES> >> >>http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31>>>> >> >> > DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [2]> >> >>http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32>>>> >> >> > or if those old urls dont work, go here;> >> > DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E> > (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES> > - Terry S.> > Singeltary Sr. 7/20/00 (0)> >>> > [Federal Register: July 20, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 140)] [Notices]> > [Page 45018] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access> > [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy00-32]> >> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------<br />> >> > DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE> >> > Office of the Secretary> >> > [Docket No. 00-072-1]> >> > Declaration of Extraordinary Emergency Because of an Atypical> > Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (Prion Disease) of ForeignOrigin> >> > A transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) (prion disease) of> > foreign origin has been detected in the United States. It is different> > from TSE's previously diagnosed in the United States. The TSE was> > detected in the progeny of imported sheep. The imported sheep and> > their progeny are under quarantine in Vermont. Transmissible> > spongiform encephalopathies are degenerative fatal diseases that can> > affect livestock. TSE's are caused by similar, as yet uncharacterized,> > agents that usually produce spongiform changes in the brain.> > Post-mortem analysis has indicated positive results for an atypical> > TSE of foreign origin in four sheep in Vermont. Because of the> > potentially serious consequences of allowing the disease to spread to> > other livestock in the United States, it is necessary to seize and> > dispose of those flocks of sheep in Vermont that are affected with or> > exposed to the disease, and their germ plasm. The existence of the> > atypical TSE of foreign origin represents a threat to U.S. livestock.> > It constitutes a real danger to the national economy and a potential> > serious burden on interstate and foreign commerce. The Department has> > reviewed the measures being taken by Vermont to quarantine and> > regulate the flocks in question and has consulted with appropriate> > officials in the State of Vermont. Based on such review and> > consultation, the Department has determined that Vermont does not have> > the funds to compensate flock owners for the seizure and disposal of> > flocks affected with or exposed to the disease, and their germ plasm.> > Without such funds, it will be unlikely to achieve expeditious> > disposal of the flocks and germ plasm. Therefore, the Department has> > determined that an extraordinary emergency exists because of the> > existence of the atypical TSE in Vermont. This declaration of> > extraordinary emergency authorizes the Secretary to seize, quarantine,> > and dispose of, in such manner as he deems necessary, any animals that> > he finds are affected with or exposed to the disease in question, and> > their germ plasm, and otherwise to carry out the provisions and> > purposes of the Act of July 2, 1962 (21 U.S.C. 134-134h). The State of> > Vermont has been informed of these facts.> >> > Dated: This declaration of extraordinary emergency shall become> > effective July 14, 2000. Dan Glickman, Secretary of Agriculture. [FR> > Doc. 00-18367 Filed 7-19-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P> >> >>http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32>> ================================> > [Federal Register: July 20, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 140)] [Notices]> > [Page 45018] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access> > [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy00-31]> >> > ========================================================================> > Notices Federal Register> > ________________________________________________________________________> >> > This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than> > rules or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of> > hearings and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and> > rulings, delegations of authority, filing of petitions and> > applications and agency statements of organization and functions are> > examples of documents appearing in this section.> >> > ========================================================================> >> > [[Page 45018]]> >> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------> >> > DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE> >> > Office of the Secretary> >> > [Docket No. 00-072-2]> >> > Declaration of Emergency Because of an Atypical Transmissible> > Spongiform Encephalopathy (Prion Disease) of Foreign Origin> >> > A transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) (prion disease) of> > foreign origin has been detected in the United States. It is different> > from TSE's previously diagnosed in the United States. The TSE was> > detected in the progeny of imported sheep. The imported sheep and> > their progeny are under quarantine in Vermont. Transmissible> > spongiform encephalopathies are degenerative fatal diseases that can> > affect livestock. TSE's are caused by similar, as yet uncharacterized,> > agents that usually produce spongiform changes in the brain.> > Post-mortem analysis has indicated positive results for an atypical> > TSE of foreign origin in four sheep in Vermont. Because of the> > potentially serious consequences of allowing the disease to spread to> > other livestock in the United States, it is necessary to seize and> > dispose of those flocks of sheep in Vermont that are affected with or> > exposed to the disease, and their germ plasm. The existence of the> > atypical TSE of foreign origin represents a threat to U.S. livestock.> > It constitutes a real danger to the national economy and a potential> > serious burden on interstate and foreign commerce. APHIS has> > insufficient funds to carry out the seizure and disposal of animals> > and germ plasm necessary to eliminate this disease risk. These funds> > would be used to compensate the owners of the animals and germ plasm> > for their seizure and disposal in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 134a.> > Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the Act of September> > 25, 1981, as amended (7 U.S.C. 147b), I declare that there is an> > emergency that threatens the livestock industry of this country and> > hereby authorize the transfer and use of such funds as may be> > necessary from appropriations or other funds available to agencies or> > corporations of the United States Department of Agriculture to seize> > and dispose of animals that are affected with or exposed to this TSE,> > and their germplasm, in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 134a.> >> > Dated: This declaration of emergency shall become effective July 14,> > 2000. Dan Glickman, Secretary of Agriculture. [FR Doc. 00-18368 Filed> > 7-19-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P>>> >> > I was told that ;> >> >> > -------- Original Message --------> > Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton...question please...scrapie...TSS> > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400> > From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov> > To: flounder@wt.net>>> snip...>>> FULL TEXT AND THREAD BETWEEN TSS, MAFF, USDA AND DR. DETWILER HERE ;>>>https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument>>>>> Greetings again BSE-L members,>>> NOW, i cannot for the life of me figure out why we have not heard anything> about those mouse bio-assays of those mad sheep of mad river valley, and> atypical TSE ? i mean hell, there was a DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY> EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGININ> THE UNITED STATES and we never hear of final results, is this not another> case of the TEXAS BSE PROTOCOLS of just never confirming anything unlessthe> GAO gets involved? maybe USDA could comment on this now? or is this toolike> those WMD, just something that never existed? i know Dr. Detwiler is outof> the loop on this now, but there are others here that could answer this> question if they wanted too and or could???>>> QUOTE ;>> 1998>> Dr. Detwiler replied. "There is new research which shows that sheep can> contract BSE" ......"information I can't divulge".....end>>> WHY, after some 7 years, do we still not have any answers ???>> WHERE are those mouse bio-assays ???>> PLEASE look on every shelf, maybe same one that those TEXAS MAD COW tissue> samples were left on for 7+ months before finally confirming after a> Congressional order and or end around, they could be there. ...>>> still disgusted in sunny Bacliff, Texas>> Terry S. Singeltary Sr.>>> FSA 06/06/03 AGENDA 3.1, 15 JUNE 2006>> ATYPICAL SCRAPIE IN SMALL RUMINANTS: CONSIDERATION OF THE>> CURRENT PRECAUTIONARY RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES>> Executive Summary>> 1. This paper provides information on atypical scrapie (a transmissible> spongiform>> encephalopathy (TSE)) in sheep and goats and the precautionary measures>> currently in place to protect consumers from the possible risks from TSEsin>> these species. There are a great many unknowns about atypical scrapie,>> including the potential implications, if any, for human health.>> 2. It also reports on the views of stakeholders and consumer focus groups> who>> were asked whether, in the light of this uncertainty, additional> precautionary>> measures were needed and for their views on the Agency’s advice on this>> subject.>> 3. The Board is asked to:>> • note that the Agency’s advice has been reworded to take account of the> views>> of stakeholders and the consumer focus groups and will be tested further>> • note that the background information on sheep TSEs on the Agency’swebsite>> will be reviewed>> • note that the agricultural departments are planning to review the Ram>> Genotyping Scheme>> • note that surveillance for atypical scrapie will be maintained in orderto> detect>> any changes in prevalence.>> • agree that the Agency’s advice and recommendations on precautionary>> measures should be kept under review and be brought back to the Board if>> there are significant changes in the understanding of the risk.>> • agree that developments on atypical scrapie be kept under review toenable>> contingency policy to be refined as new information emerges.>> • agree that the Agency should open discussions with the European>> Commission on the issue of the identification of meat from older sheep or>> goats and natural sausage casings made from sheep intestines to enable>> consumer choice.>> 2>> TSE DIVISION>> Contacts:>> Alison Gleadle Tel: 020 7276 8303>> Email: alison.gleadle@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk>> Irene Hill Tel: 020 7276 8324>> Email: irene.hill@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk>> 3>> FSA 06/06/03 AGENDA ITEM 3.1, 15 JUNE 2006>> ATYPICAL SCRAPIE IN SHEEP AND GOATS: CONSIDERATION OF THE>> CURRENT PRECAUTIONARY RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES>> Issue>> 1. To consider whether the Agency should recommend, on the basis ofcurrent>> evidence, that additional precautionary measures are needed to reduce the>> possible risk to consumers from atypical scrapie.......>>> snip...>>> Conclusions>> 27. Atypical scrapie is definitely present in the UK flock, and in the> flocks of other>> Member States (MS), and animals with atypical scrapie have, and will be,>> entering the food supply. However it is not known if this constitutes any> risk to>> human health. Unlike the situation when BSE was first discovered incattle,>> precautionary measures are already in place. Based on the limitedknowledge> of>> the distribution of infectivity in atypical scrapie, the SEAC Subgroup> concluded>> that the SRM requirements that were put in place on a precautionary basis> for>> BSE in sheep may provide at least a similar level of protection againstthe>> possible risk from atypical scrapie.>> 28. The consideration of the proportionality of any additionalprecautionary> measures>> is very difficult when the human health risk is unknown, and, as reportedby>> SEAC, there is insufficient data to carry out a risk assessment.>> 29. Any additional precautionary measures that could be put in place havea> high>> economic cost, are currently highly impractical (see Annex 1 for details)> and>> would impose a cost on industry that would, according to industry> stakeholders,>> be likely to bring into question the economic viability of sheep farming.> ...>>> snip...>>> full text ;>>> http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/fsa060603.pdf>>>>> FSA 06/06/04 AGENDA ITEM 3.2, 15 JUNE 2006>> BSE AND SHEEP CONTINGENCY POLICY>> Executive Summary>> 1. This paper asks the Board to agree, for purposes of contingencyplanning,> a>> possible approach to a graduated strengthening of measures to protect>> consumers in response to one or more findings of BSE in the current UKsheep>> flock.>> 2. The paper also notes the high level of uncertainty around estimates of> the>> possible risk from BSE in sheep and that, if BSE were ever found in a UK> sheep,>> the estimate of the risk to consumers would depend on the accumulated> results>> of surveillance for BSE in sheep up to that time. It therefore recommends> that the>> policy be kept under review and that any policy agreed now on acontingency>> basis should urgently be reconfirmed taking into account the circumstances> at the>> time of any finding of BSE in a UK sheep.>> 3. The Board is invited to:>> • note that, in the event of confirmation of BSE in a sheep, targeted> testing of>> animals in the affected flock or flocks would be carried out to assist in>> determining the potential spread of the disease and whether it may have>> entered the food supply (paragraph 9).>> • agree that an expert group be set up to advise on what additional> surveillance>> should be put in place, if BSE were to be found in a UK sheep, to improve>> estimates of prevalence of BSE in UK sheep (paragraph 13).>> • agree that, on current knowledge, it would advise the followinggraduated>> response to one or more findings of BSE in the current UK sheep flock:>> • one finding of BSE in sheep - remove additional SRM;>> • two findings of BSE in unrelated flocks - exclude sheep aged over 12>> months from the food supply and remove the additional SRM from the>> remaining sheep;>> • three findings of BSE in unrelated flocks - allow into the food supply> only>> sheep that were either genetically resistant to BSE or semi-resistant and>> aged under 12 months and remove the additional SRM from those sheep>> (paragraph 20).>> 2>> • agree that its contingency policy for a finding of BSE in sheep shouldbe> kept>> under review and be urgently reconfirmed should BSE actually be found in a>> UK sheep (paragraph 22).>> • comment on the outline handling plan at Annex F and the strategy for the>> external communication that would be needed (paragraph 30).>> TSE Division>> Contacts:>> Alison Gleadle Tel: 020 7276 8303 (GTN 7276 8303)>> Email: alison.gleadle@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk>> David Carruthers Tel: 020 7276 8305 (GTN 7276 8305)>> Email: david.carruthers@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk>> snip...>>> http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/fsa060604.pdf>>>>> Subject: REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCRAPIE November 9, 2005 USAHA> Date: February 12, 2006 at 1:03 pm PST>> REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCRAPIE>> Chair: Dr. Jim Logan, Cheyenne, WY>> Vice Chair: Dr. Joe D. Ross, Sonora, TX>> Dr. Deborah L. Brennan, MS; Dr. Beth Carlson, ND; Dr. John R. Clifford,DC;> Dr. Thomas F. Conner, OH; Dr. Walter E. Cook, WY; Dr. Wayne E. Cunningham,> CO; Dr. Jerry W. Diemer, TX; Dr. Anita J. Edmondson, CA; Dr. Dee Ellis,TX;> Dr. Lisa A. Ferguson, MD; Dr. Keith R. Forbes, NY; Dr. R. David Glauer,OH;> Dr. James R. Grady, CO; Dr. William L. Hartmann, MN; Dr. Carolyn Inch,CAN;> Dr. Susan J. Keller, ND; Dr. Allen M. Knowles, TN; Dr. Thomas F. Linfield,> MT; Dr. Michael R. Marshall, UT; Dr. Cheryl A. Miller, In; Dr. Brian V.> Noland, CO; Dr. Charles Palmer, CA; Dr. Kristine R. Petrini, MN; Mr. Stan> Potratz, IA; Mr. Paul E. Rodgers, CO; Dr. Joan D. Rowe, CA; Dr. Pamela L.> Smith, IA; Dr. Diane L. Sutton, MD; Dr. Lynn Anne Tesar, SD; Dr. Delwin D.> Wilmot, NE; Dr. Nora E. Wineland, CO; Dr. Cindy B. Wolf, MN.>> The Committee met on November 9, 2005, from 8:00am until 11:55am, Hershey> Lodge and Convention Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania. The meeting was called> to order by Dr. Jim Logan, chair, with vice chairman Dr. Joe D. Ross> attending. There were 74 people in attendance.>> The Scrapie Program Update was provided by Dr. Diane Sutton, National> Scrapie Program Coordinator, United States Department of Agriculture(USDA),> Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services (APHIS), Veterinary Services> (VS). The complete text of the Status Report is included in these> Proceedings.>> Dr. Patricia Meinhardt, USDA-APHIS-VS-National Veterinary Services> Laboratory (NVSL) gave the Update on Genotyping Labs and Discrepancies in> Results. NVSL conducts investigations into discrepancies on genotypetesting> results associated with the Scrapie Eradication Program. It is the policyof> the Program to conduct a second genotype test at a second laboratory on> certain individual animals. Occasionally, there are discrepancies in those> results. The NVSL conducts follow-up on these situations throughadditional> testing on additional samples from the field and archive samples from the> testing laboratories.>> For the period of time from January 1, 2005, until October 15, 2005, there> were 23 instances of discrepancies in results from 35 flocks. Of those 23> instances, 14 were caused by laboratory error (paperwork or samplemix-up),> 3 results from field error, 5 were not completely resolved, and 1originated> from the use of a non-approved laboratory for the first test. As a resultof> inconsistencies, one laboratory’s certification was revoked by APHIS-VS.>> To reduce/eliminate these problems, the Program has placed additional> quality requirements on the testing laboratories: additional review offinal> reports, additional coding systems for testing operations, strictfollow-up> and reports to NVSL on corrective actions, dual data entry systems, andmore> frequent inspections.>> The Agricultural Research Services (ARS) Scrapie Research Update was given> by Janet Alverson, USDA- ARS. Dr. Alverson reported on the effect of> multiple births and fetal position within the uterus on PrP-Scaccumulation> in fetal cotyledons. Fetal cotyledons of fetuses with>> resistant genotypes can accumulate PrP-Sc when positioned next to a fetusof> susceptible genotype with cotyledons positive for PrP-Sc accumulation.>> Scrapie Surveillance Evaluation Working Group Update was presented byTracey> Lynn, Epidemiologist with the National Surveillance Unit, Center for> Epidemiology and Animal Health (CEAH). The presentation provided a> background on evaluation, a quick review of analyses completed to date by> the scrapie surveillance evaluation working group, and some of the> preliminary findings. The process of surveillance system evaluation is> undertaken to assist a disease control program with identifying possible> improvements to their surveillance system, and includes an assessment ofthe> overall utility of the system, identification of potential gaps incoverage,> and an evaluation of the overall performance of the system. The scrapie> surveillance evaluation working group reviewed the structure and processes> of the scrapie surveillance program, as well as various quality and> effectiveness measures.>> Overall, 98-99% of surveillance samples come from the Regulatory Scrapie> Surveillance System (RSSS), so the RSSS system has been the primary focusof> the evaluation process. The working group developed a flow chartindicating> the flow of sheep through RSSS, which identified potential gaps in> surveillance coverage, including custom kill plants and sheep beingexported> to Mexico. Spatial analyses can assist in identifying areas with high> density sheep populations with lower levels of RSSS sampling.Identification> compliance is being evaluated by reviewing reports from slaughter plantson> the proportion of animals with appropriate identification. Additional> analyses remain, including defining the most appropriate economicanalyses,> and comparing the surveillance system with developing surveillance> standards. The working group hopes to have a draft written report forreview> by the end of the year.>> Giving the Update on Scrapie Diagnostics and Susceptibility was KatherineO’> Roarke, Research Microbiologist, USDA-ARS. "What’s New in Scrapie" -- Biopsy> sampling of the third eyelid or tonsillar lymphoid tissue is a useful live> animal test for scrapie. The biopsy sample is examined for accumulation of> the abnormal prion protein using immunohistochemistry. A joint project> conducted by the Veterinary Laboratory Agencies and the Moredun Institutein> the United Kingdom has developed an alternative technique in which tissueis> collected from the narrow band of lymphoid tissue near the rectal-anal> junction. The morphology of the lymphoid follicles is similar in thetonsil,> retropharyngeal lymph nodes, third eyelid, and rectal-anal mucosal tissue.A> report on more than 300 sheep in the United Kingdom (UK), prepared by Drs.> Lorenzo Gonzalez and Jeffrey Martin, will describe the sensitivity,> specificity, and optimal collection interval for this technique in avariety> of breeds of British sheep. ARS has done a preliminary evaluation of the> technique in US sheep. Samples of third eyelid and rectal-mucosal tissue> were collected from 56 sheep. Forty-two (42) sheep had negative biopsiesat> both sites; most of these sheep have been necropsied and no PrP-d wasfound> in retropharyngeal lymph node or tonsil, showing good agreement with the> antemortem biopsies. Fourteen (14) sheep had positive rectal biopsysamples;> of those, only 12 had positive eyelid biopsies. These sheep will be> monitored for disease development. However, the protocol is identical for> all samples and it is probable that these sheep represent false negative> third eyelid results. Abstracts of reports on the UK studies indicate that> sensitivity of the test was 70% in the UK; similar large scale testing onUS> sheep is necessary. The biopsy tissue is somewhat difficult to handle inthe> tissue processing laboratory and adaptation to an ELISA format may improve> test performance.>> Alexia McKnight, Assistant Professor of Radiology, University of> Pennsylvania, reviewed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnostics before> the committee. A synopsis containing references is attached at the end of> this report. Dr. McKnight asked the question, "could MRI be acost-effective> screening test, estimated at $25-30 each with results immediately> available." The committee feels that it is not practical as compared to> other alternatives currently available. However, the committee expressed> interest in future reference to this technology.>> Dr. Diane Sutton lead the Uniform Methods and Rules (UM&R) and Regulatory> Issues Discussion. Several modifications to the UM&R were discussed. Eight> issues were identified and communicated to the APHIS scrapie program> coordinator. The committee acknowledged that APHIS and the industry is> adequately addressing the year-to-year industry concerns.>> Dr. Kris Petrini representing the North Central United States AnimalHealth> Association District presented five recommendations to the Committee.During> the discussions regarding these recommendations it was evident that allfive> issues had been addressed during the year at this Committee meeting.>> The Committee approved a recommendation that USDA-APHIS-VS continue to> provide indemnity funds for animals that have been designated for testingin> Flocks Under Investigation as an alternative to third eyelid testing after> consultation with the designated Scrapie Epidemiologist (DSE) and the> Regional Area Epidemiologist (RAE).>> The 2004 Resolutions along with their responses were reviewed by the> Committee.>> A Resolution concerning premises registration and identification was> approved by the Committee and forwarded to the Committee on Nominationsand> Resolutions.>> Committee on Scrapie>> Status Report-Fiscal Year 2005: Cooperative State-Federal Scrapie> Eradication Program>> Submitted by Diane Sutton, DVM and Gary Ross, DVM>> National Center for Animal Health Programs, APHIS, USDA>> In Fiscal Year 2005 the Scrapie Eradication Program focused on: (1)> utilization of a genetic based approach to flock clean-up plans; (2)> cleaning up infected and source flocks; (3) tracing and testing exposed> animals and flocks; (4) expansion of regulatory slaughter surveillance> (RSSS); (5) conducting considtent state reviews, (6) producer education;(7)> upgrading of the Scrapie National Generic Database and (8) publishing the> updated Scrapie Eradication Uniform Methods and Rules (UM&R). The current> Scrapie Eradication UM&R is posted at> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/nahps/scrapie/umr-scrapie-erad.pdf.>> Consistent State Reviews>> States must meet the requirements in 9 CFR 79.6 in order to move sheep and> goats in interstate commerce with minimal restrictions. Twenty sevenstates> have enacted the required identification rules, the remaining states have> submitted a work plan that describes the steps that will be taken tocomply> and provided a timeline for completing significant milestones. USDA is> conducting onsite scrapie program consistent state reviews and hascompleted> reviews in 12 states. States must be in full compliance by the end oftheir> current rule making cycle. States not in full compliance at that time will> be removed from the consistent state list. Removal from the list would> create a significant impact on the interstate movement of sheep and goats> from those States.>> Scrapie Flock Certification Program>> As of September 30, 2005, there were 1,961 flocks participating in the> Scrapie Flock Certification Program (SFCP). Of these flocks 188 were> certified flocks, 1,770 were complete monitored flocks, and 3 wereselective> monitored flocks (figure 2). There were 209 flocks newly enrolled and 53> newly certified (13 with status dates in FY 2005 and 40 with status datesin> previous years) in FY 2005 (figure 3).>> Infected and Source Flocks>> As of September 30, 2005, there were 105 scrapie infected and sourceflocks.> There were a total of 165** new infected and source flocks reported for FY> 2005. The total infected and source flocks that have been released in FY> 2005 was 128. The ratio of infected and source flocks cleaned up or placed> on clean up plans vs. new infected and source flocks discovered in FY 2005> was 1.03 : 1*. In addition 622 scrapie cases were confirmed and reportedby> the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in FY 2005, of which> 130 were RSSS cases. Fifteen cases of scrapie in goats have been reported> since 1990. The last goat case was reported in May 2005. Approximately5,626> animals were indemnified comprised of 49% non-registered sheep, 45%> registered sheep, 1.4% non-registered goats and 4.6% registered goats.>> Regulatory Scrapie Slaughter Surveillance (RSSS)>> RSSS was designed to utilize the findings of the Center for Epidemiologyand> Animal Health (CEAH) Scrapie: Ovine Slaughter Surveillance (SOSS) study.The> results of SOSS can be found at> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/cahm/Sheep/sheep.htm . RSSS startedApril> 1,>> 2003. It is a targeted slaughter surveillance program which is designed to> identify infected flocks for clean-up. During FY 2005 collectionsincreased> by 32% overall and by 90% for black and mottled faced sheep improving> overall program effectiveness and efficiency as demonstrated by the 26%> decrease in percent positive black faced sheep compared to FY 2004.Samples> have been collected from 62,864 sheep since April 1, 2003, of whichresults> have been reported for 59,105 of which 209 were confirmed positive. DuringF> Y 2005, 33,137 samples were collected from 81 plants. There have been 130> NVSL confirmed positive cases (30 collected in FY 2004 and confirmed in FY> 2005 and 100 collected and confirmed in FY 2005) in FY 2005. Face colorsof> these positives were 114 black, 14 mottled, 1 white and 1 unknown. The> percent positive by face color is shown in the chart below.>> Scrapie Testing>> In FY 2005, 35,845 animals have been tested for scrapie: 30,192 RSSS;4,742> regulatory field cases; 772 regulatory third eyelid biopsies; 10 third> eyelid validations; and 129 necropsy validations (chart 9).>> Animal ID>> As of October 04, 2005, 103,580 sheep and goat premises have been assigned<br />> identification numbers in the Scrapie National Generic Database. Official> eartags have been issued to 73,807 of these premises.>> *This number based on an adjusted 12 month interval to accommodate the 60> day period for setting up flock plans.>>>> http://www.usaha.org/committees/reports/2005/report-scr-2005.pdf>>>>>> Subject: SCRAPIE USA UPDATE AS of March 31, 2006 2 NEW CASES IN GOAT, 82> INFECTED SOURCE FLOCKS, 19 INFECTED RSSS>> Date: April 30, 2006 at 4:49 pm PST> SCRAPIE USA UPDATE AS of March 31, 2006>>> 2 NEW CASES IN GOAT, 82 INFECTED SOURCE FLOCKS, WITH 4 NEW INFECTED SOURCE> FLOCKS IN MARCH, WITH 19 SCRAPIE INFECTED RSSS REPORTED BY NVSL>>>http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/nahps/scrapie/monthly_report/monthly-report.html>>>>> 12/10/76> AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COUNCIL> REPORT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTE ON SCRAPIE> Office Note> CHAIRMAN: PROFESSOR PETER WILDY>> snip...>> A The Present Position with respect to Scrapie> A] The Problem>> Scrapie is a natural disease of sheep and goats. It is a slow> and inexorably progressive degenerative disorder of the nervous system> and it ia fatal. It is enzootic in the United Kingdom but not in all> countries.>> The field problem has been reviewed by a MAFF working group> (ARC 35/77). It is difficult to assess the incidence in Britain for> a variety of reasons but the disease causes serious financial loss;> it is estimated that it cost Swaledale breeders alone $l.7 M during> the five years 1971-1975. A further inestimable loss arises from the> closure of certain export markets, in particular those of the United> States, to British sheep.>> It is clear that scrapie in sheep is important commercially and> for that reason alone effective measures to control it should be> devised as quickly as possible.>> Recently the question has again been brought up as to whether> scrapie is transmissible to man. This has followed reports that the> disease has been transmitted to primates. One particularly lurid> speculation (Gajdusek 1977) conjectures that the agents of scrapie,> kuru, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and transmissible encephalopathy of> mink are varieties of a single "virus". The U.S. Department of> Agriculture concluded that it could "no longer justify or permit> scrapie-blood line and scrapie-exposed sheep and goats to be processed> for human or animal food at slaughter or rendering plants" (ARC 84/77)"> The problem is emphasised by the finding that some strains of scrapie> produce lesions identical to the once which characterise the human> dementias">> Whether true or not. the hypothesis that these agents might be> transmissible to man raises two considerations. First, the safety> of laboratory personnel requires prompt attention. Second, action> such as the "scorched meat" policy of USDA makes the solution of the> acrapie problem urgent if the sheep industry is not to suffer> grievously.>> snip...>>> 76/10.12/4.6>>> http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1976/10/12004001.pdf>>>>> Published online before print October 20, 2005>> Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 10.1073/pnas.0502296102> Medical Sciences>> A newly identified type of scrapie agent can naturally infect sheep with> resistant PrP genotypes>> ( sheep prion transgenic mice )>> Annick Le Dur *, Vincent Béringue *, Olivier Andréoletti , Fabienne Reine*,> Thanh Lan Laï *, Thierry Baron , Bjørn Bratberg ¶, Jean-Luc Vilotte ,> Pierre Sarradin **, Sylvie L. Benestad ¶, and Hubert Laude *> *Virologie Immunologie Moléculaires and Génétique Biochimique et> Cytogénétique, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 78350> Jouy-en-Josas, France; Unité Mixte de Recherche, Institut National de la> Recherche Agronomique-Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse,Interactions> Hôte Agent Pathogène, 31066 Toulouse, France; Agence Française de Sécurité> Sanitaire des Aliments, Unité Agents Transmissibles Non Conventionnels,> 69364 Lyon, France; **Pathologie Infectieuse et Immunologie, Institut> National de la Recherche Agronomique, 37380 Nouzilly, France; and> ¶Department of Pathology, National Veterinary Institute, 0033 Oslo, Norway>>> Edited by Stanley B. Prusiner, University of California, San Francisco,CA,> and approved September 12, 2005 (received for review March 21, 2005)>> Scrapie in small ruminants belongs to transmissible spongiform> encephalopathies (TSEs), or prion diseases, a family of fatal> neurodegenerative disorders that affect humans and animals and cantransmit> within and between species by ingestion or inoculation. Conversion of the> host-encoded prion protein (PrP), normal cellular PrP (PrPc), into a> misfolded form, abnormal PrP (PrPSc), plays a key role in TSE transmission> and pathogenesis. The intensified surveillance of scrapie in the European> Union, together with the improvement of PrPSc detection techniques, hasled> to the discovery of a growing number of so-called atypical scrapie cases.> These include clinical Nor98 cases first identified in Norwegian sheep on> the basis of unusual pathological and PrPSc molecular features and "cases"> that produced discordant responses in the rapid tests currently applied to> the large-scale random screening of slaughtered or fallen animals.> Worryingly, a substantial proportion of such cases involved sheep with PrP> genotypes known until now to confer natural resistance to conventional> scrapie. Here we report that both Nor98 and discordant cases, including> three sheep homozygous for the resistant PrPARR allele (A136R154R171),> efficiently transmitted the disease to transgenic mice expressing ovinePrP,> and that they shared unique biological and biochemical features upon> propagation in mice. These observations support the view that a truly> infectious TSE agent, unrecognized until recently, infects sheep and goat> flocks and may have important implications in terms of scrapie control and> public health.>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------> ---- >> Author contributions: H.L. designed research; A.L.D., V.B., O.A., F.R.,> T.L.L., J.-L.V., and H.L. performed research; T.B., B.B., P.S., and S.L.B.> contributed new reagents/analytic tools; V.B., O.A., and H.L. analyzeddata;> and H.L. wrote the paper.>> A.L.D. and V.B. contributed equally to this work.>> To whom correspondence should be addressed.>> Hubert Laude, E-mail: laude@jouy.inra.fr>>>> www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0502296102>>>>> http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0502296102v1>>>>>> Of greatest interest today is the BSE agent because it is the presumptive> cause of new variant CJD and must be considered a demonstrated risk tohuman> health. The scrapie agent poses a theoretical risk to human health.>> Today we ask you to consider the implications of two theoretical> possibilities: the first, that sheep and goats in BSE countries> theoretically might be infected with the BSE agent, and Professor Almond,> who headed a subcommittee of the United Kingdom's SpongiformEncephalopathy> Advisory Committee, has agreed to review that topic for us today.>> Then scrapie, which theoretically might be a human pathogen, thoughthere's> no hard evidence for that, and of course, some number of sheep and goatsin> many countries, including the United States, are infected with the scrapie> agent.>> Now, let me say now that no U.S. government regulatory authority wouldever> knowingly permit humans or animals to be exposed to a product containingthe> scrapie agent, but considering the nature of the scrapie agent and the> disease, we are not so naive as to think that such exposures have not> already occurred. ...>>> FULL TEXT ;>>>>> http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/99/transcpt/3518t2.rtf>>>>http://72.14.209.104/searchq=cache:pKJPlLI2R44J:www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/99/transcpt/3518t2.rtf+scrapie+strains+breed+east+friesian&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=23>>>>>> TSS>> #################### https://lists.aegee.org/bse-l.html> ####################><br />still disgustedly mad in Bacliff, Texas and pondering my next move. ...<br />TSS<br />----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." To: Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 12:39 PMSubject: Re: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP<br />> Greetings BSE-L,>> I am sorry to say, but confusious is confused again about something.> IF you remember correctly, we had a DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY> BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E. (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE> UNITED STATES, and this was about those VERMONT sheep from Belgium, of mad> river valley. IF you remember correctly, all those sheep were confiscated> and slaughtered, supposedly with immediate mouse bioassays to begin. 7years> later, were still waiting for an answer that should have taken 2 yearswith> mouse bio-assays. THE farm was quarantined for years. SO, why nodeclaration> of emergency, why no sheep slaughter, why no farm quarantined about thisnew> atypical TSE sheep case in Wyoming i.e. nor98 case ???>> ALSO, about my FOIA request. USDA would never answer, so i turned to theOIG> about this, and they HAVE opened a FOIA request case for me about this.you> call this the 'end around'. now whether or not we get an answer of what> exact phenotype of TSE those mad sheep of mad river valley really had,well> have to wait and see. but rest assured i will let you know if and when i> find out. ...>> kind regards,> terry>>> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." > To: > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 10:00 AM> Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.> To: Boyd.Rutherford@usda.gov> Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:35 PM> Subject: FOIA REQUEST FOR ATYPICAL TSE INFORMATION ON VERMONT SHEEP>>> Greetings USDA,>>> I respectfully request the final results of the mouse bio-assays test that> were to have supposedly began 2+ years late, 5 years ago, on the imported> sheep from Belgium ?>>> WHAT happened to the test results and MOUSE BIO-ASSAYS of those imported> sheep from Belgium that were confiscated and slaughtered from the> Faillace's, what sort of TSE did these animals have ?>>> WERE they atypical scrapie, BSE, and or typical scrapie ?>>> HOW much longer will you refuse to give us this information ? and for what> reason ?>>> WHY is it that the Farm of the Mad Sheep of Mad River Valley were> quarantined for 5 years, but none of these farms from Texas and Alabamawith> Atypical TSE in the Bovine, they have not been quarantined for 5 years,why> not, with the real risk of BSE to sheep, whom is to say this was not BSE ?>>> snip.>> full text ;>>> http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf>>>>>https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?OpenDocument>>>>> FURTHERMORE, I respectfully request up front, that any fees for this FOIAbe> wavered due to the fact this information should be free to the public andis> in the best interest for the public to have these final results, no> financial gain from this FOIA information is to be made either. ...>>> Thank You,>>> kind regards,>> Terry S. Singeltary Sr.> P.O. Box 42> Bacliff, Texas USA 77518>>> Imported>> Belgium/Netherlands>> Sheep Test Results>> Background>> Factsheet>> Veterinary Services April 2002>> APHIS>> snip.>> Additional tests will be conducted to determine>> exactly what TSE the animals have BSE or scrapie.>> These tests involve the use of bioassays that consist>> of injecting mice with tissue from the infected animals>> Page 15 of 98>> 8/3/2006>> and waiting for them to develop disease. This testing>> may take at least 2 to 3 years to complete.>> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/fsheet_faq_notice/fs_ahvtsheeptr.pdf>>>> DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E.>> (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES>>>>http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-31>>>> DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY BECAUSE OF AN ATYPICAL T.S.E>> (PRION DISEASE) OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE UNITED STATES [2]>>>>http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2000_register&docid=fr20jy00-32>>>> --- Original Message --->>> Subject: Sheep> Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:26:04 EDT> From: LAVET22@aol.com> To: flounder@wt.net>> Mr. Singeltary.>> I hope this finds you well. As you are aware I left the USDA last> year. I can only update you on the sheep before that time. Contact was> established with the UK on doing the bioassay studies. They agreed.> However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay. I> am aware that there are now additional labs in Europe running the mouse> bioassay strain typing. You will have to contact USDA for further word.>> Linda Detwiler> =========>> My reply to Dr. Detwiler;>> --- Original Message ---> Subject: Re: Sheep> Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:53:57 -0500> From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."> To: LAVET22@aol.com> References:>> hello Dr. Detwiler,>> thanks for your kind reply.>> > However, we were prioritized after their own needs, hence the delay.>> not sure i understand that?>> > You will have to contact USDA for further word.>> already done that, and there answer was;>>> --- Original Message --->>> Subject: Re: hello Dr. Sutton.question please.scrapie.TSS> Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:36:09 -0400> From: Jim.D.Rogers@aphis.usda.gov> To: flounder@wt.net>> Dear Mr. Singeltary,>> The Western blot tests on these animals were completed in April of this> year. That means that we can begin the mouse inoculations. To get the> results of the Western blot tests, you will need to submit a Freedom of> Information Act request through our FOIA office. The FAX number there is> 301-734-5941.>> Have a nice day,>> Jim Rogers> APHIS LPA>> --- Original Message --->>> Subject: re-85th Meeting of SEAC - 30.11.04> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:56:55 -0000> From: "Barlow, Tom (SEAC)"> To: "'flounder@wt.net'">> Dear Mr Singeltary>> Thank you for you enquiry to the SEAC secretariat about mouse bioassays> commissioned by the USDA to investigate TSE cases in imported sheep.>> After making a number of enquiries, it appears that Defra were notinvolved> with this work. However, it is possible that a UK research laboratory was> contacted by the USDA about such tests but I have been unable to find out> any further information. You may wish to make further enquiries with the> USDA.>> Yours sincerely>> Tom Barlow>> Dr Tom Barlow> Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) Secretariat> Area 108, 1A Page Street, London SW1P 4PQ>> Tel: 0207 904 6267>>> ===================>>>>>https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic.nsf/168556f5aa7a82ba85256ed00044eb1f/eff9eff1f7c5cf2b87256ecf000df08d?>>>> http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf>>>> Terry S. Singeltary Sr.> P.O. Box 42> Bacliff, Texas USA 77518<br /><br /><br />Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease inthe United States<br /><br /><a href="http://cjdusa.blogspot.com/">http://cjdusa.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br />i am reminded of a few things deep throat (high ranking official at usda)told me years ago;<br /><br />==========================================<br /><br />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,<br /><br /><a href="https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7842737484277562285&postID=5759550357128128100">https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7842737484277562285&postID=5759550357128128100</a><br /><br />BSE BASE MAD COW TESTING TEXAS, USA, AND CANADA, A REVIEW OF SORTS<br /><br /><a href="http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/">http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><a href="http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/">http://usdameatexport.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />MADCOW USDA the untold story<br /><br /><a href="http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/">http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />MADCOW USDA the untold story continued<br /><br /><a href="https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6472149427883113751&postID=4829467681293855400">https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6472149427883113751&postID=4829467681293855400</a><br /><br />USA NOR-98 SCRAPIE UPDATE AUGUST 31, 2007 RISES TO 5 DOCUMENTED CASES<br /><br /><a href="http://nor-98.blogspot.com/">http://nor-98.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br />Government Accountability Project<br /><br /><a href="https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3995372399492420922&postID=295754279213239559">https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3995372399492420922&postID=295754279213239559</a><br /><br />Transmissible Mink Encephalopathy TME<br /><br /><a href="http://transmissible-mink-encephalopathy.blogspot.com/">http://transmissible-mink-encephalopathy.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br />TME hyper/drowsy, INTER-SPECIES TRANSMISSION CWD and strainproperties<br /><br /><a href="https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=37955408&postID=116577315153980667">https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=37955408&postID=116577315153980667</a><br /><br />USA NVCJD BLOOD RECALLS ONLY ;<br /><br /><a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=CJD+BLOOD+RECALLS+TSS&btnG=Search">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=CJD+BLOOD+RECALLS+TSS&btnG=Search</a><br /><br />vCJD case study highlights blood transfusion risk<br /><br /><a href="http://vcjdblood.blogspot.com/">http://vcjdblood.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />CREUTZFELDT JAKOB DISEASE MAD COW BASE, CWD, SCRAPIE UPDATE OCT 2007<br /><br /><a href="http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/">http://cjdmadcowbaseoct2007.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />TSEAC MEETINGS<br /><br /><a href="http://tseac.blogspot.com/">http://tseac.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br />ABSTRACTS SPORADIC CJD AND H BASE MAD COW ALABAMA AND TEXAS SEPTEMBER 2007Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 21:31:55 -0500I 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. ...<br /><br /><a href="http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&F=&S=&P=19744">http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&F=&S=&P=19744</a><br /><br /><br />*** PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS !!! THE PRICE OFPOKER INDEED GOES UP. ...TSSUSA 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<br /><br /><a href="http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0708&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=19779">http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0708&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=19779</a><br /><br /><br />From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."Subject: CWD UPDATE 88 AUGUST 31, 2007<br /><br /><a href="http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=450">http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0709&L=sanet-mg&T=0&P=450</a><br /><br /><br />PLEASE NOTE IN USA CJD UPDATE AS AT JUNE 2007, please note steady increasein ''TYPE UNKNOWN''. ...TSS1 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)<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/pdf/case-table.pdf">http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/pdf/case-table.pdf</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://pro-med.blogspot.com/2007/11/proahedr-prion-disease-update-2007-07.html">http://pro-med.blogspot.com/2007/11/proahedr-prion-disease-update-2007-07.html</a><br /><br /><br /><br />Terry S. Singeltary Sr.<br />P.O. Box 42<br />Bacliff, Texas USA 77518Terry S. Singeltary Sr.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06986622967539963260noreply@blogger.com0