Does anyone here think that Mad Cow is worse than what the media/govt. is already mentioning?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
You're more likely to die from salmonella, botulism, and e. coli than BSE (mad cow), so I'm not really worried about it. If I worried about everything in this world that has the possibility of killing me, I wouldn't have time for anything else.
True but the BSE-scare/downer cow issue is quite pertinent. One of the early Bush regulation "reforms" was to change the USDA standard for meat/poultry inspection. The old standard was a required # of specimen swipes to determine if carcasses were contaminated. The new standard was "visible" poo. Cheaper . . . yes. Increased risk to the food supply . . . yes. The "downer" cow was the same scenario. The economic argument superceded the health issue.

FoodNet from CDC
Some of the changes in rates of foodborne illnesses may reflect changes in meat and poultry processing as mandated by the USDA's "Pathogen Reduction and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point Systems" rule. The program was implemented in January 1998 in the largest plants.

early 2001 USDA revokes zero tolerance policy for salmonella in ground beef sold to school lunch program
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,470
6,104
126
We have government of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation and we have it in spades with Republican deregulation. Get the government off my back so I can f*ck the american people. Government is corrupt and dangerous only because the people that run it run everything else. Only you the people can protect youreselves against corruption by combatting your own greed. What we see out there is only a reflection of us. Basically you aren't worth protecting from disease because that's exactly how you feel regardless of what you think you feel. We are a reflection of our mass unconsciousness and we are each measured and responsible for it.
 

tcsenter

Lifer
Sep 7, 2001
18,356
264
126
"This is not conclusive. It is the most credible theory so far."

Isn't that just splitting hairs over the reluctant accepance of a fact ? Here you go, I'll use your 'quote' to take you to an informational link."
Not at all. When 'correcting' someone else's mistake, one need care to avoid their own. Asserting affirmatively "it's a rouge protein that is not killed by cooking. There are several of these 'Rouge Protien' diseases caused by what is referred to as a 'PRION'." as though it were conclusive FACT is itself so over-reaching that it becomes inaccurate.

Again, it is the most credible theory to date, but has not been proven conclusively.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,489
0
0
Originally posted by: tcsenter
"This is not conclusive. It is the most credible theory so far."

Isn't that just splitting hairs over the reluctant accepance of a fact ? Here you go, I'll use your 'quote' to take you to an informational link."
Not at all. When 'correcting' someone else's mistake, one need care to avoid their own. Asserting affirmatively "it's a rouge protein that is not killed by cooking. There are several of these 'Rouge Protien' diseases caused by what is referred to as a 'PRION'." as though it were conclusive FACT is itself so over-reaching that it becomes inaccurate.

Again, it is the most credible theory to date, but has not been proven conclusively.

Here's an alternate theory.

 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
US may pay farmers to test downer cows

I really think some people are missing the boat on this story.

CDC on BSE, vCJD
The spread of the BSE agent from the United Kingdom or potentially from other countries with BSE was most likely through the importation of infected live cattle or BSE-contaminated animal feed.

The current risk of acquiring vCJD from eating beef (muscle meat) and beef products produced from cattle in countries with or at possibly increased risk of BSE cannot be precisely determined. Among many uncertainties affecting this determination, for example, are the incubation period between exposure to the infective agent and onset of illness, the ultimate number and age distribution of vCJD cases in the United Kingdom that will result from earlier BSE exposures, the sensitivities of each country?s surveillance for BSE and vCJD, the compliance with and effectiveness of public health measures instituted in each country to prevent BSE contamination of human food, and details about cattle products from one country that were distributed and consumed in others. Nevertheless, in the United Kingdom, the current risk of acquiring vCJD from eating beef and beef products appears to be extremely small, perhaps about one case per 10 billion servings.

If the source of this Holstein's BSE was feed . . . then infection could have occurred from feed used AFTER the cow was imported in Sep 2001 (up until the ban on such feed later in 2001). Accordingly any animal exposed to that lot of feed may be at-risk. The USDA is trying to track herds likely exposed to the food source but notably (and most troubling) American authorities are trying to imply BSE in this animal was acquired in Canada. Although US/Canada banned animal product feed two years ago, it's nearly impossible to know if such a ban actually prevented exposure to animal products . . . in our country or Canada.

Considering the cow was over 6 years old (note: any animal over 30mo cannot be used for human consumption in the EU) the odds favor infection over the border. But that still means cattle receiving feed from the same lot could be infected . . . essentially any animal born before late 2001. Due to the substantial species barrier between cows and humans, the risk of vCJD is probably extremely low . . . not eating a bunch of brains, spinal cord, and bone marrow probably helps, too.