FSNET FEBRUARY 7 2001 -- II Fla. company recalls badia paprika The Canadian Food Inspection Agency needs to keep focussing on implementing key initiatives Dr. Sharon R. Thompson, D.V.M. Is appointed as the department of Health and Human services liaison to the Joint Institute for Food Safety Research Gov't moving forward with meat rule AMA, CDC leading the fight against foodborne illness For the want of a test. . . Testing times for BSE The madness spreads Concern over contaminated beef Countries banning EU meat due to mad cow fears-USDA Perspective: fighting BSE in the United States FSnet is produced by the Centre for Safe Food at the University of Guelph, and is supported by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Health Canada, Canadian Food Information Council, the U.S. National Pork Producers, the U.S. National Food Processors Association, Pfizer Animal Health Group, Ag-West Biotech, AGCare (Agricultural Groups Concerned About Resources and the Environment), Monsanto Canada, Pioneer Hi-Bred Limited (Canada), Canadian Animal Health Institute, Novartis Crop Protection Canada, Meat & Livestock Australia, Canadian On-Farm Food Safety Program, Ontario Pork, Unilever Research, Halton Regional Health Department, Ontario Egg Producers, Tyson Foods,Canadian Pork Council, the U.S. National Cattlemen's Beef Association, Maple Leaf Meats/Poultry, Caravelle Foods, CKE Restaurants Inc., the Rutgers Food Risk Analysis Initiative, Ontario Farm Animal Council, Fleishman-Hillard Canada, Food Safety Initiative at New England Medical Center, J.M. Schneider, University of Illinois, CLF Central Laboratories, Capital Health, ConAgra Refrigerated Prepared Foods, Parmalat Food, Tyson Foods, Freybe Sausage Ltd., the Ontario Soybean Growers Marketing Board, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, Food Industry Environmental Network, Canadian Poultry and Egg Processors, Adculture, Chicken Farmers of Canada, MDS Nordion, American Meat Institute, International Food Focus, 3M, Saskatchewan Nutraceutical Network, ABC Research, and the Agricultural Adaptation Council(CanAdapt Program). archived at: http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/safefood/archives/fsnet-archives.htm FLA. COMPANY RECALLS BADIA PAPRIKA Feb. 7/01 AP WASHINGTON -- For the second time in six months, a Florida company is, according to this story, recalling thousands of bottles of Badia brand paprika after health inspectors discovered they may be tainted with salmonella. Consumers should not eat the recalled paprika, but return it to where they bought it. No illnesses have been reported to date. THE CANADIAN FOOD INSPECTION AGENCY NEEDS TO KEEP FOCUSSING ON IMPLEMENTING KEY INITIATIVES February 6, 2001 Office of the Auditor General of Canada and the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development Food Inspection Programs Chapter 25 www.oag-bvg.gc.ca Ottawa - In his Report tabled today in the House of Commons, the Auditor General of Canada, Denis Desautels, says that since its creation in April 1997, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has made progress on a number of initiatives to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of federal food inspection. He points out, however, that progress has been varied and, in some cases, has faltered. "The Canadian Food Inspection Agency was created to develop and secure a more uniform and consistent approach to safety standards and risk-based inspection of food for Canadians," said Denis Desautels. "The Agency is working toward this goal but it needs to take greater action to ensure that its initiatives are successfully completed. " The Canadian Food Inspection Agency's key initiatives include the development of a system to promote greater consistency among inspection programs. This project has encountered setbacks. The Agency also introduced a tool to improve the safety of food through the assessment of hazards and the development of control systems. However, this project lacks a formal strategy for implementation. The audit found other initiatives where more effort is required: The Agency cannot demonstrate that it has appropriately resourced its food inspection programs based on risk; in addition, the actual levels of inspection activity are lower in some cases than the planned or designed levels. It has not assessed overall risks in the non-federally-registered sector or considered other available options for dealing with this sector. It needs to assess the sufficiency of its compliance actions. A review of 21 high-risk inspection files found 16 cases in which the same or similar compliance problems persisted for many months and, in some cases, years. The Agency is currently lacking important information on the incidence of food-borne illness in humans and the prevalence of pathogens in the food supply. It needs to improve its performance reporting to Parliament. Targets for improved reporting have been repeatedly missed and expectations have not boon met. ³it is important that the Agency continue work on its initiatives to accomplish the goals for which it was created," said the Auditor General. "Canadians have a right to expect an efficient and effective federal food inspection system - one that ensures compliance with food safety standards.² The chapter "Canadian Food Inspection Agency: Food Inspection Programs" is available on the Office of the Auditor General of Canada Web site (www.oag-bvg.gc.ca DR. SHARON R. THOMPSON, D.V.M. IS APPOINTED AS THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES LIAISON TO THE JOINT INSTITUTE FOR FOOD SAFETY RESEARCH Feb. 6/01 FDA press release The Food and Drug Administration¹s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (FDA/CFSAN) today announced the appointment of Dr. Sharon R. Thompson, D.V.M., as the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) liaison to the Joint Institute for Food Safety Research (JIFSR). The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and DHHS created JIFSR to coordinate planning and priority setting for food safety research among the two Departments, other government agencies, and the private sector. This coordination optimizes food safety research investments, by identifying research priorities and avoiding research redundancies. JIFSR also fosters the effective transfer of research results to those that will benefit along the farm-to-table continuum. Dr. Thompson will serve as a senior level consultant to the Executive Director, JIFSR (Dr. Jerry R. Gillespie, D.V.M., Ph.D.), providing in-depth knowledge of Federal research agencies and food safety, with particular emphasis on the needs and concerns of the participating HHS agencies (FDA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institutes for Health) and their stakeholders. She will work with the JIFSR Executive Director to identify knowledge gaps, research needs, and leveraging / partnering mechanisms to address the goals of the National Food Safety Strategic Plan. Dr. Thompson comes to her new position after serving as the Associate Director for Veterinary Medical and International Affairs in the Office of the Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine, FDA. She holds an A.B. degree, cum laude, in Biology from Harvard University and a D.V.M. degree from Virginia- Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine. GOV'T MOVING FORWARD WITH MEAT RULE The Associated Press Philip Brasher WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Agriculture Department is, according to this story, moving forward with new microbial testing requirements for meat processors that were proposed in the Clinton administration's last days, then put on hold by the incoming Bush administration. The story says that the rules would require makers of hot dogs, cold cuts and other ready-to-eat meat products to test plant equipment regularly for Listeria monocytogenes and allow the government to look at company records. But Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman was cited as saying Wednesday that her agency would release the rules for public comment "in a matter of days." Veneman was further cited as saying that the department could still change the rules after they are released for public comment and that any changes before then are likely to be small, adding, "We could make some alterations. Obviously, since we're going to do it (release the rules) in short order it wouldn't be much." Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of food safety for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group was quoted as saying, "It's great news that the secretary said that this was a priority," and that the listeria rules are "a good test case for the administration on its food safety policy. If they had sat on it, they would be headed for a failing grade." The National Food Processors Association, which represents companies such as Kraft, Hormel, and Campbell's, has not taken a position on the rules. But Rhona Applebaum, who monitors regulations for the association, was cited as saying the industry group is concerned they may require testing of products such as canned soups that the industry does not think pose a significant risk for microbial contamination, adding, "You're looking at a huge amount of proposed ruling on a vast array of products." The story says that the department has estimated that listeria testing will cost meat processors $12 million a year initially, less beyond that. AMA, CDC LEADING THE FIGHT AGAINST FOODBORNE ILLNESS : INCREASED RISK HAS TRIGGERED NEW EFFORTS TO EDUCATE PHYSICIANS REGARDING THIS PUBLIC HEALTH THREAT. February 12, 2001 AMNews Stephanie Stapleton http://www.ama-assn.org/sci-pubs/amnews/pick_01/hlsb0212.htm Washington -- In recognition of physicians' key role in disease surveillance, the AMA last month released a tool to be used by primary care doctors and other health professionals to help them better recognize, diagnose, treat and report the increasingly common and critical problem of foodborne illness. The guide, "Diagnosis and Management of Foodborne Illnesses: A Primer for Physicians," was developed by the AMA in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition at the Food and Drug Administration, and the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. Each year in the United States, an estimated 76 million people get sick as a result of foodborne pathogens. Of these, more than 300,000 are hospitalized and 5,000 die. These statistics trigger growing concern in the wake of societal changes. Americans' eating behaviors, international travel, cultural diversity and microbial adaptation have fueled the rise of new and emerging foodborne illnesses and created opportunities for existing culprits to expand their habitats. The primer is designed to help respond to current conditions and increase physician and patient awareness. "When many of [us] were in medical school, we didn't even know that Cyclospora, resistant Salmonella, and some strains of E. coli existed," said AMA Trustee J. Edward Hill, MD. "It's clear that with these new challenges in mind, both the public and the medical profession must reexamine foodborne illness more closely. This is a critical public health issue that belongs on everyone's radar screen." "Food is like air" The primer, which is worth three hours of category 1 CME credit and was published in the CDC's Jan. 26 MMWR, was created for primary care physicians because they are most likely to see the first case of an illness that could signal the outbreak of a food-related disease. According to the sponsoring organizations, the primer offers physicians a resource that will keep them up-to-date regarding the emerging bugs as well as a whole array of diagnostic and reporting information. It includes clinical considerations such as how to recognize, diagnose and treat foodborne illnesses. It also lays out foodborne illness tables that summarize diagnostic features and laboratory testing for bacterial, viral, parasitic and noninfectious causes. In addition, it offers patient scenarios and clinical vignettes to help prepare physicians for questions and patient interaction. Finally, it includes suggested food safety resources. The AMA and the government agencies hope its impact will give public health efforts an advantage in the continuing battle. The bottom line, though, is that the problem of foodborne illness is extremely common, explained Arthur P. Liang, MD, MPH, director of the CDC's National Food Safety Initiative. And safeguarding the food supply and people against it presents serious challenges. "[Food] is like air and water. We are always exposed to it," said Dr. Liang. And the risks are increasing. For starters, diets have changed, said Joseph A. Levitt, director of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. People are eating more fresh fruits and vegetables year round -- meaning that foods sometimes travel far distances. "Just go to your local supermarket," agreed Dr. Hill. "There are grapes and peaches from Chile, tomatoes from Israel." And sometimes, problems result, for example, the recent Cyclospora outbreaks linked to Guatemalan raspberries. It's a dynamic situation. New foodborne pathogens continue to emerge; the list gets longer and the consequences get more severe. "Physicians have a major role to play in helping us do more," said Levitt. An additional variable that contributes to the growing attention is the fact that those groups most vulnerable to foodborne illness -- the very young, elderly, immunocompromised and pregnant women -- now constitute 20% to 25% of the overall population. "The group at risk is growing," said Levitt. That explains another reason why doctors hold an important position in the effort. Those people in vulnerable populations are generally patients under the care of physician. "Physicians are in the best position to educate these people before they become sick," Levitt added. FOR THE WANT OF A TEST. . . February 8, 2001 Nature 409, 649 (2001) As Europe wrestles with its BSE crisis, the top priority is, according to this story, to develop a diagnostic test that can reliably identify animals incubating the disease and people incubating its human form. The story says that there is one important difference between AIDS in 1985 and BSE in 2001. In March 1985, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the first blood test for HIV infection. At a stroke, it became possible to screen donated blood for the virus. For those lucky enough to live in countries with well-regulated blood supplies, avoiding AIDS became primarily a matter of abstaining from risky sexual practices. By contrast, there is still no reliable way to identify cattle incubating BSE, or people infected with its human form, variant Creutzfeldt­Jakob disease (vCJD). In an attempt to put some figures to the BSE epidemic, the European Commission has, the story says, instituted a programme of diagnostic testing of brain tissue from slaughtered cattle (see page 658). But while the tests being used may have some value in picking up preclinical cases, they have not been validated for this purpose. Unfortunately, the equivalent of the HIV blood test ‹ a reliable diagnostic capable of identifying infected animals or people soon after they become infected ‹ is not yet available. TESTING TIMES FOR BSE February 8, 2001 Nature 409, 658 - 659 (2001) Quirin Schiermeier The spectre of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) is, according to this story, stalking continental Europe. France last year recorded 138 cases, and countries that had judged themselves BSE-free have been shocked out of their complacency. The story says that given widespread exports of potentially infective British animal feed1, the fact that BSE is now a pan-European problem should be no surprise. But for politicians who have been in denial, there is a new urgency to establish the scale of the epidemic. To find some answers, the European Union (EU) last December agreed to a programme of diagnostic testing of slaughtered cattle. Although the tests should put some figures on the extent of Europe's BSE problem, consumers anxious to avoid any risk of infection cannot rely on the testing regime. The tests being used perform well in identifying cows showing symptoms of BSE, but it is so far unclear whether they can reliably identify animals incubating the disease but showing no symptoms. The story explains that this has already caused controversy. On 6 December, Britain's Independent newspaper lambasted the European Commission for its reliance on a test that "has never been properly validated". Commission officials reacted angrily, arguing that the tests had only ever been presented as an additional safety measure. The story says that despite limitations, the EU's testing programme should allow epidemiologists to begin to assess the extent of BSE in mainland Europe. Until now, the only real certainty is that there has been widespread under-reporting of the disease. The story explains that the testing programme has two phases. From January this year, cattle that have shown suspicious symptoms must be tested with one of three approved diagnostic tests. From July, this requirement will be extended to all cows coming to slaughter aged 30 months or more. Several EU states have accelerated this timetable ‹ France and Germany, for instance, have been testing all 'over 30-month', or OTM, cattle since January; and Germany has in recent weeks extended its testing to all slaughtered cattle older than 24 months. The OTM rule has an empirical basis. Although there have been some 50 reported cases of BSE in animals younger than 30 months, 99.97% of the roughly 180,000 BSE cases recorded in Europe since 1986 ‹ the vast majority of them in Britain ‹ have fallen into this age group. In Britain, consumption of OTM cattle is banned. The story says that the tests approved by the EU have subtle differences, but all use antibodies to detect the 'prions' that accumulate in the brains of cattle with BSE. These rogue proteins are thought to cause the disease by converting a protein called PrP into their own, misshapen form ‹ known as PrPSc or PrPres. In 1999, Jim Moynagh of the European Commission's Consumer Policy and Health Protection Directorate General and Heinz Schimmel of the Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements in Geel, Belgium, subjected four diagnostic tests to validation studies. Each was put through its paces on 300 samples of brain tissue from cows with BSE and 1,000 samples from healthy New Zealand cows. Three of the tests ‹ made by Prionics of Zurich, Enfer Scientific in Tipperary, Ireland, and the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) ‹ emerged with a 100% record, recording neither false negatives nor false positives2. In practice, the tests do have a very small error rate when tested on tens of thousands of samples. But, the story says, the problem is that this validation did not assess the tests' ability to detect infection in cows incubating BSE ‹ which are, after all, those that the EU's testing programme hopes to identify. So far, the best way to detect preclinical BSE infection has been to take a sample of brain tissue from the cow in question and inject it into the brains of mice; if these animals later develop the disease, then the cow was incubating BSE. Because this bioassay takes many months to run, it is impractical as a working diagnostic tool. But new evidence suggests that at least one of the approved tests is similarly sensitive. The CEA test, produced commercially by Bio-Rad of Hercules, California, was recently tested against the mouse bioassay in its ability to detect PrPSc in diluted samples of brain from cattle with BSE. The story says that the results, published last month3, revealed that Bio-Rad's test and the mouse bioassay performed equally well, even on samples diluted to one in 1,000. "The results were at least as accurate as those provided by the mouse bioassay," says Moynagh. THE MADNESS SPREADS New Scientist February 10, 2001 Mad cow scandals, according to this story, just don't stop. In a week when Britain recorded six new cases of vCJD, the biggest real monthly increase so far, it has become clear that it has almost certainly inflicted this curse on the rest of the world. The story says that Britain continued to export animal feed made from the ground-up remains of infected cattle long after it knew that the pellets spread BSE to other cattle. The rest of the European Union, which caught BSE from Britain, was still exporting it until last month. Now the likes of Indonesia and Thailand face a disease that even the richest countries can barely afford to control (see p 10). Britain insists that the feed was meant only for pigs and chickens. Importers and farmers in Europe might have known not to give the feed to cattle, but you can bet this message didn't reach farmers in South-East Asia. It seems, the story says, incredible. In 1990, Britain declared that the most infectious organs had to be removed from cattle carcasses destined for feed in the EU. Yet for feed sold elsewhere, this rule was not brought in for another year. Did nobody think of the consequences of sending this stuff to farmers in the developing world? Even restricting the feed to pigs and chickens may not be safe. These animals too end up in cattle feed, and could pass the infection on. The newly industrialising nations that bought the tainted feed all have booming livestock industries, and rendering plants that will recycle the infection in feed for local consumption and export. What's a poor country to do? Germany plans to throw 400,000 cattle onto the scrap heap. Can a country where the children are going short of protein afford to do that? The story says that despite the current worries in Britain and across Europe, the greatest damage will not be from vCJD. Unless the disease turns out to be extremely widespread, it will barely show up beside malnutrition, malaria and AIDS. The real harm will be to food production. Carcasses are cheap protein, and if BSE means poor countries can't use them for fodder, they will not be able to produce as much of the meat and milk their people crave. CONCERN OVER CONTAMINATED BEEF February 7, 2001 PA News/Reuters/AP/ Agence France Presse English UK Peers today were cited as condemning the "deplorable import" of German meat contaminated with spinal cord tissue over the past month. Conservative peer Lord Luke expressed concern during Lords questions that meat still attached to the spinal cord had been brought into the country in the wake of a scare over a BSE outbreak. He feared that less discernible contamination might also have occurred to recently shipped meat. Junior health minister Lord Hunt acknowledged the seriousness of the contamination but said that the fact that the Meat Hygiene Service had been able to detect the contamination through their sample inspections showed that the system was "working well in this country". British Agriculture Minister Nick Brown told farmers on Wednesday scientific evidence and not political pressure would determine whether the Labour government bans German beef over fears of mad cow disease. "I am not going to take advice on food safety from the Conservative Party," Brown told the National Farmers' Union. "What we will not do is invent health risks as cover for trade protectionism and get us involved in a Tory trade war." He spoke a day after an opposition Conservative politician told farmers Britain must be prepared to ban German beef imports unilaterally on health grounds to stop the spread of mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). The Irish government tonight said it would take up "as a matter of urgency" with the German authorities the discovery of spinal cord in a consignment of beef. The Department of Agriculture in Dublin reported that the spinal cord had been detected during ongoing BSE control measures. The beef involved had been imported from Germany for cutting and deboning by a firm at Carrickcacross, Co Monaghan. The European Union moved closer Wednesday to banning some of the most popular cuts of beef as part of a package of measures to quell public fear over mad cow disease. The European Commission approved a ban on meat attached to the back bones of cows that are more than a year old, which would rule out the sales of T-bone steaks and cuts such as Italy's bisteca fiorentina and Spain's chuleta de buey. National veterinary experts will discuss the proposals, already backed by agriculture ministers from the 15 EU nations, later Wednesday. If approved, the measures could become effective March 31. "With today's proposals, we add an additional layer of protection for consumers," EU Health Commissioner David Byrne said. Britain has been told to test an extra 65,000 cattle for mad cow disease in the latest round of European Union measures to crack down on BSE. Animals targeted are those born in the 12 months from August 1 1997 - the year following the introduction of a total ban on meat and bonemeal in feed for cows. Although such animals are not in danger of entering the food chain, the Commission says such tests will give valuable new information in to the origins of BSE. The move comes as part of another attempt by the Brussels Commission to halt the spread of BSE in the face of increasing outbreaks of the disease in Germany and Spain. The Commission has exempted the UK from a new requirement to remove the entire spinal column from cattle. Post-Soviet Russia is a zoo, according to some Western critics, but it is also a farm whose levels of productivity and hygiene have declined steeply in the 10 years since the fall of Communism. Yet there are signs of a revival sparked by the uproar in Europe over "mad cow" disease and other recent contamination scares, which have given Russia's farmers food for thought and whetted the appetite for urgent reform. The World Trade Organisation is due this month to step up efforts to coax Russia into meeting international food standards, while a visiting EU official told AFP that only a "vast change of attitude" could avert a catastrophe. "The idea of the consumer is late in developing in the Russian mind, and that is a hazard because Russian consumers already exist in practice," said Cecil McMurray, chief scientific officer at Northern Ireland's department of agriculture. "They are entitled to, but don't enjoy, the same standards of choice, quality and public health as shoppers in the rest of Europe because the control process in Russia has completely broken down," he added. McMurray, a gifted scientist and entrepreneur, delivered his gloomy prognosis on the sidelines of a conference jointly organised by the Russian department of agriculture and the European Union's TACIS programme. A Danish charter airline said Dominican Republic airport authorities fearing mad cow disease refused to accept its food leftovers, forcing the firm to fly back to Copenhagen with 800 kgs (1,764 lb) of extra rubbish Egyptian Health Minister Ismail Sallam said in remarks published on Wednesday that Egypt had re-exported blood products from British men carrying the human version of mad cow disease. "A total of 144 ampules of imported plasma were sent back abroad," the official daily Al-Ahram quoted Sallam as saying. He did not say whether the blood products were re-exported to Britain or to a third country. Germany's handling of the mad cow crisis came under fire on Wednesday from the country's biggest farmers union and the Bavarian Catholic Church. Speaking on Wednesday during a demonstration of 3,500 farmers in Munich, DBV farmers' union President Gerd Sonnleitner said: "This policy (over mad cow) has no credibility." The policies of the coalition Social Democrat and Greens parties were not coherent, with government officials promoting organic farming, eastward expansion of the European Union and further liberalisation of world markets, he said. Authorities will offer hermetically-sealed protective suits to German workers set to slaughter some 400,000 cows inorder to fight mad cow disease hermetic suits, Bil newspaper reported Wednesday. The special suits, with hoods and visors, are intended to help avoid contamination, the report said. Spain's biggest agricultural association, ASAJA, was cited as saying on Wednesday it was considering legal action against the British government for alleged negligence in the spread of mad cow disease. It follows a similar announcement by Spanish farm association COAG, which last week said it might file a lawsuit against Britain over the export of animal feed that the group said may have been tainted by brain-wasting bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Spain on Tuesday confirmed five new cases of mad cow disease, raising to 17 the number of cattle affected by the illness that first surfaced in Britain in 1986 and has recently spread across Europe. Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman said Wednesday there was no need to pull Brazilian beef products from U.S. stores while her department reviews Brazil's controls for mad cow disease. There is no evidence of the brain-wasting disease in Brazil, but the United States joined Canada and Mexico last week in suspending imports of Brazilian beef products until the review was completed. So far, the disease is believed to be confined to Europe. "There is just no evidence of risk at this time to the consumer," Veneman said. "We felt the hold order (on imports) was sufficient." Brazilians ranging from ranchers to lawmakers lashed out at Canada on Wednesday for imposing a NAFTA-wide trade ban on Brazil's beef, as mad cow fears cost the country's exporters $1 million in lost sales this week alone. Brazil's Congress passed a resolution Wednesday suspending all voting on trade accords with Canada, while a small political party announced it would deliver a "mad cow" on Thursday to Canada's embassy in Brasilia. By suspending imports of Brazilian beef over concerns about mad cow disease, Canada has hacked more than 10 percent off Brazil's beef export market and has pushed the two countries closer than ever to an all-out trade war. Canada announced last Friday it would stop imports until the risk of mad cow disease in Brazil was fully assessed, fueling tensions between the two countries that started as a trade spat over aircraft subsidies. The United States and Mexico, Canada's partners in the North American Free Trade Agreement, were quickly obliged to follow suit on the beef ban. Brazil was outraged. On Wednesday, the congress unanimously asked the government to suspend all trade agreements with Canada until it lifts the ban. COUNTRIES BANNING EU MEAT DUE TO MAD COW FEARS-USDA Feb 7/01 Reuters WASHINGTON - The U.S. Agriculture Department on Wednesday updated its list of countries with import restrictions on livestock and products from European Union member states due to concerns over mad cow disease and its deadly human variation. The information is based on USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service Attache reports and other sources deemed reliable, the department said. Australia All EU beef and beef products Belarus All EU feed additives containing animal proteins. All EU beef and beef products. Brazil All beef from France, Spain, Portugal, Germany and Britain. All cattle from France, Spain, Portugal and Germany Bulgaria All meat-and-bone meal from Britain, Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium, Portugal, France, Netherlands and Denmark. All tallow, fats and greases for feed from Britain, Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium, Portugal, France, Netherlands and Denmark. All beef and cattle from Britain, Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium, Portugal, France, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Spain and Italy. Cameroon All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU "suspended beef and animal feed." All EU beef. China All EU meat-and-bone meal. Colombia All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU tallow, fats and greases for feed. Croatia All EU meat-and-bone meal, beef, cattle and pet food. Czech Republic All EU meat-and-bone meal, beef, cattle and pet food. Egypt All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU tallow, fats and greases for feed. All EU beef and cattle. Equatorial Guinea All EU "meat and meat products." Estonia All EU beef. EU (intra) All EU meat-and-bone meal. Ghana All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU "suspended beef and animal feed." All EU beef. Gabon All beef from France. All "meat and meat products" from Britain. Hungary All EU meat-and-bone meal. All beef from Ireland, Britain, France, Portugal, Switzerland. Beef from Germany is under consideration. India All meat-and-bone meal from BSE/TSE countries. Japan All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU tallow, fats and greases for feed. All EU beef Jordan All meat-and-bone meal from Germany and Spain. All beef from Germany, France, Belgium, Denmark, Britain, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Switzerland and Spain. All cattle from Germany and Spain. Kuwait All beef from France, Ireland, Portugal and Switzerland. All EU cattle and other ruminant animals. Lithuania All beef and beef products from Germany, Spain, Portugal, France, Britain, Belgium and Denmark. All cattle from Germany, Spain and Portugal. Mexico All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU tallow, fats and greases for feed. Malaysia All EU beef and beef products Mexico All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU tallow/fats and greases for feed. Morocco All meat-and-bone meal from Britain, Switzerland, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands and Belgium. All tallow, fats and greases for feed from same countries as meat-and-bone meal. All beef from same countries as meat-and bone-meal. All cattle from Britain and Switzerland. New Zealand All EU beef and beef products. Pet food must demonstrate that meat in product came from countries free from BSE. Nicaragua All meat-and-bone meal from countries with confirmed/suspected BSE cases. All tallow/fats and greases for feed from countries with confirmed/suspected BSE cases. All beef, cattle, pet food, milk products, lamb, mutton and goat meat from countries with confirmed/suspected BSE cases. Oman All beef and cattle from France, Ireland, Portugal and Switzerland. All milk products from France, Ireland, Portugal and Switzerland. Peru All meat-and-bone meal from Britain, Ireland, France, Portugal, Switzerland, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark, Spain, Germany and Italy. All tallow/fats and greases for feed from same countries as meat-and-bone meal. All beef, lamb, mutton and goat meat from same countries as meat-and-bone meal. Poland All meat-and-bone meal from Italy, Austria, Greece, Sweden and Finland. All beef from Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Denmark, France, Britain, Ireland, Switzerland and Portugal. Philippines All meat-and-bone meal from Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland and Britain. All tallow, fats and greases for feed from same countries as meat-and-bone meal. All beef, cattle and pet food from same countries as meat-and-bone meal. Russia All beef from Portugal, Ireland, Switzerland, Britain and certain regions in France. All cattle from Netherlands. Saudi Arabia All EU "beef derivatives." All EU "beef and mutton." Singapore All beef from Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Switzerland and Britain. Thailand All beef from Britain, Portugal, France, Ireland, Switzerland, Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Denmark and Italy. Turkey All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU "meat products" and pet food. UAE All "frozen beef" from France, Portugal and Switzerland. All beef from Britain. United States All EU meat-and-bone meal. All EU tallow, fats and greases for feed. All EU beef, cattle and pet food. PERSPECTIVE: FIGHTING BSE IN THE UNITED STATES February 6, 2001 Meatnews Steve Bjerklie Steve Bjerklie, a contributing editor to MeatNews.com, advises a level-headed, consistent approach to preventing BSE from entering the United States and to maintaining consumer confidence The world's afire these days with new BSE discoveries, herd culls, trade restrictions, and, let's face it, plain ol' rumor-mongering. One by one, it seems, European nations slide from the "no BSE" column to "yes BSE." Germany, which until last November hadn't found a single mad cow within its borders and didn't mind letting Britain and France know that, sheepishly admitted several weeks ago to finding two positive cases and now plans to cull 400,000 head in an effort to ensure the safety of German beef beyond the shadow of a doubt. Asia's now restricting the import of European-sourced beef. Last week, Canada cast doubts on Brazilian beef (because of some poorly prepared paperwork, to be sure), followed by the U.S. And then there's Texas. No BSE was found in Texas, but even the hint that a few head may have eaten some feed processed with ruminant-based bonemeal, resulted in the designation of the herd as unfit for human consumption. All of last week you couldn't miss the story on the network news. Beef industry executives, from cattle producers to beef packers to processors, would be justified in feeling under siege. But they'd be making a big mistake by responding to the situation from a siege mentality. It is critical that level heads prevail now. Consumer concerns with beef safety are justified: What could be scarier than a disease that lies dormant in your body for years and years, then awakes to eat your brain full of holes? "Star Trek" couldn't come up with a weirder scenario. It doesn't matter that bovine spongiform encephelopathy has not yet been diagnosed in the U.S. or Canadian cattle herds; just the idea that people can lose their minds from eating government-inspected beef is frightening. We're not talking about poison blowfish in Japanese restaurants here; we're talking beef -- Big Macs, Mom's meatloaf, and Dad's steaks smoking on the grill. Every segment of the beef chain in North America needs to reassure consumers by describing in plain, unemotional language the efforts that are now underway to keep BSE away from our shores, and this campaign must be constant. At the same time, it would be foolish to denigrate European beef. Some European nations operate better inspection programs, arguably, than our own FSIS program; BSE got by them, and could get by FSIS, too. I don't think we've yet seen the worst BSE will cause to the world's beef industry. But I don't think the worst has to happen here. We need to acknowledge the extent of the situation, what we are doing now to prevent BSE in North America, and what we will do if that situation changes. To subscribe to FSnet, send mail to: listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca leave subject line blank in the body of the message type: subscribe fsnet-L firstname lastname i.e. subscribe fsnet-L Doug Powell To unsubscribe to FSnet, send mail to: listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca leave subject line blank in the body of the message type: signoff fsnet-L For more information about the FSnet research program, please contact: Dr. Douglas Powell dept. of plant agriculture University of Guelph Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1 tel: 519-824-4120 x2506 fax: 519-763-8933 dpowell@uoguelph.ca http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/safefood archived at: http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/safefood/archives/fsnet-archives.htm