Release No. 0459.04
of
Technical Briefing and Webcast
On BSE with Government Officials
Jan. 5, 2004
ED CURLETT: Hello, I’d
like to welcome everybody to today's BSE update. Today we have Dr. Stephen
Sundlof with the Food and Drug Administration. We have Dr. Daniel Engeljohn
with the Food Safety and Inspection Service. And we have Dr. Ron DeHaven,
the chief veterinary officer for USDA. Dr. DeHaven will make some opening
remarks, and then we'll open it up for questions. We ask that you state
your name and affiliation prior to asking your question. And with that,
I will turn it over to Dr. DeHaven. Thanks.
DR. DEHAVEN: Thank you,
Ed. And happy New Year to everyone.
Just a brief opening statement, update
today, and then we'll go to the questions and answers, as Ed indicated.
The first item has to do with depopulation
of the bull calf operation. We have made a decision to depopulate those
bull calves. Those operations will proceed sometime this week, largely
dependent upon logistical issues as well as some weather concerns that
exist in the Yakima area. The calves will be transported to a slaughter
facility that currently is not being used. We will have animal care experts
on hand both at the farm where the calves are loaded, as well as the slaughter
facility, to ensure humane treatment and handling of those calves. In
total there are approximately 450 animals that will be sacrificed as part
of this overall effort. And none of the animals will enter the human food
chain; nor will any of the product from those animals go into a rendered
product. So, again, none of the materials from those materials will either
go into the human food chain, nor will they go into a rendered product.
I would just urge restraint on the part
of those in the media, and particularly in the Yakima area. We know that
there are a number of reporters that are watching this facility, and we
would again request that you respect the privacy and property rights of
both the owners of the farm in question, as well as not to interfere with
these operations once they get underway.
As far as the DNA testing results, that
has been proceeding at both of the laboratories, one in Canada and one
in the U.S., and we would hope to have some level of announcement later
this week once all of the laboratory tests are completed and analyzed,
and comparisons made between the results from the two laboratories. So,
again, that is still pending, but work is progressing in the laboratories.
In terms of our trace out of the 82 animals
that presumably entered the United States, including the positive cow,
one would be the index cow. Nine others are known to be part of the index
herd from which the positive cow departed immediately before she went
to slaughter. One is the animal that I mentioned last week, which is on
the Mabton dairy operation. And we believe that one still may be in Canada.
Nothing new significant to report at this point on the whereabouts of
the other 70 animals. Our epidemiological investigation on those animals
continued through the weekend. And while we have made significant progress
in terms of tracing where they may have gone subsequent to entering the
United States. Nothing confirmed that we can report to you at this point.
And then one last item, before we go to
the Qs and As. We are dispatching from Washington a high-level team going
to Mexico to have discussions relative to trade restrictions imposed by
Mexico subsequent to the finding of this positive case. And we have making
up that team Undersecretary Bill Hawks from Marketing Regulatory Programs.
And he is accompanied by Undersecretary J.B. Penn of the Farm and Foreign
Ag Services.
With that, let's, operator, go to the
first question, please.
OPERATOR: Yes, Our first
question today comes from Bob Bruin (sp). Please state your affiliation.
BOB BRUIN: Bob Bruin
(sp) from Computer World. I'd like to follow up on the national livestock
ID system. I'd like to find out where you folks are going to get the funding,
if you know what the funding is. Are you going to adhere to the USAIP
plan? And how soon can you get this in operation? USAIP calls for July
2004.
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. In terms of funding for the animal ID program, still yet
to be determined in terms of exactly where those monies would come from
and the speed with which we implement -- field and implement that whole
system certainly is somewhat dependent on the funding. In the meantime,
we are still progressing, developing that plan. We have species-specific
groups that will be making recommendations on appropriate means of identification
of animals based on the species and marketing patterns of those animals.
So, for example, with cattle for the most part and animals moved individually,
and as we are looking at appropriate means for individual animal ID, largely
based on radio frequency ID chip. For other species of animals, such as
poultry and swine that largely move in groups or lots, there could be
potentially a lot ID as opposed to individual animal ID. Conceptually,
ID would be put on the animals at the time that they leave the premises
of birth, and would follow those animals through slaughter, with a means
of tracking them electronically as they go through concentration points
such as feed lots, livestock markets, and of course to slaughter. So work
is progressing. We are still evaluating potential sources of funding to
fund that project.
Operator, next question please?
OPERATOR: Your next question
is from Seth Borenstein. Please state your affiliation.
SETH BORENSTEIN: Seth
Borenstein, Knight Ridder Newspapers. Dr. DeHaven, in terms of the 450
animal sacrifice, what's the compensation that the farm owner has gotten?
Has that been negotiated already? And who does it come from? And if it's
a USDA amount of money, where in the budget does it come from?
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. In fact, we have an indemnity program that is based on fair
market value of those animals. So before the depopulation would begin
there would be an agreement in terms of what is fair market value of those
animals. We would in essence take ownership of those animals prior to
the actual depopulation. There are operational funds that have been made
available for the indemnity purposes, so those dollars will come out of
USDA funds.
Operator, next question please?
OPERATOR: Our next question
is from Sally Schuff. Please state your affiliation.
SALLY SCHUFF: Yes, hi,
this is Sally Schuff. I'm with Feedstuffs. My question is there's been
quite a bit in the news media about the possibility of the U.S. being
termed "BSE free." Is that in fact a possibility? And, as a
follow up, can you tell us how soon you knew after the cow was diagnosed
that she might have been a Canadian cow?
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. In terms of whether or not the U.S. would be declared as
BSE free is just simply way too premature to make that kind of determination,
and for the most part while we may or may not make that declaration, if
we would it would be up to each importing country who might import animals
or products from the U.S. to do their own risk assessment and make that
evaluation. Clearly at the appropriate time in the future we would be
presenting a packet of dossier to the OIE, the international standard-setting
body, requesting country categorization. But, again, any efforts in that
regard would be way premature at this point to make that declaration.
Clearly our efforts to trace this particular
animal as well as any other animals that might have come with her from
the index herd -- or, excuse me, the birth herd -- would be critical in
terms of our being able to, at whatever point in the future, being able
to make some kind of determination -- or making our case, if you will,
in terms of a BSE free status for the U.S.
And I'm sorry, the second part of your
question again?
SALLY SCHUFF: The second
part of my question was: How soon after the diagnosis of this BSE cow
in the U.S. were you aware that she was a Canadian cow, or had at least
a Canadian ear tag?
DR. DEHAVEN: Well, I
would remind you that the confirmation was received on December 23rd.
And so it was a number of days -- I want to say three or four days where
we had some definitive paper trail back to Canada. We knew early on that
she had a tag in her ear that was consistent with what tags are applied
in Canada. But it wasn't until three or four days later that we had actually
established with our Canadian colleagues some paper trail, which would
suggest that she had been in, or come from Canada. And, as you will recall,
we had the age discrepancy issue, which we think we have subsequently
resolved. So it was four or five days, and again I would remind everyone
that in the middle of that we had Christmas; and for the Canadians we
had Boxing Day. So we were working through weekends and holidays to come
to that determination. And I think we announced that to the media very
shortly after having seen those documents and establishing a paper trail.
Next question, operator?
OPERATOR: Our next question
comes from Leah Beth Ward. Please state your affiliation.
LEAH BETH WARD: Yes,
Yakima Herald Republic. Explain to us what led you first to Eastport,
Idaho as the port of entry, and then to Oroville, Washington. And does
that at all change your confidence in the source of the cow?
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. There was more than one health certificate involved, and
I can't -- I don't have the specific records that led us initially to
Eastport, Idaho and then subsequently to Oroville, Washington, but I think
it's a matter of having multiple documents. And while we have preliminary
information, and as I said repeatedly our primary line of inquiry takes
us back to a dairy herd in Alberta, Canada, and we know that the animal
ended up in the herd in Mabton, Washington, the exact route on how she
got between those two points was in question, initially because of multiple
documents that had some conflicting information. So I think the most relevant
points are that we at least have a primary line of inquiry that would
take us back to what we at least at this point in time think is the likely
birth herd. We know where she ended up. We know what animals accompanied
her. So those are the most important pieces of information -- not the
exact port from which she entered the U.S. So the short answer to your
question is no, it really doesn't shake our confidence in terms of our
tracing ability as it relates to this investigation.
Operator, next question please?
OPERATOR: The next question
is from Beth Gorman (sp). Please state your affiliation.
BETH GORMAN: Hi, Beth
Gorman from the Canadian Press. Dr. DeHaven today is the deadline for
public comment on reopening the border to Canadian live cattle. When do
you expect to have or to see some kind of a decision on that? And will
those public comments be reopened at some point in the future?
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. Thanks for the question. Indeed our public comment period
on the proposed rule does close today. We have at this point decided that
we will not take any action at this point on that proposed rule, pending
the outcome of the epidemiological investigation. After we have all of
the relevant information from that investigation, as well as the consideration
of the comments that are received by the close of business today, then
at the appropriate time in the future we'll make a decision on how to
proceed from there. And that decision obviously has not been made yet.
Whether it would proceed to a final rule, proceed with the new proposal;
proceed with an additional comment period on the existing proposal. There's
been no limit in terms of the options that might be considered, or at
what point we would make those determinations. We'll make that decision
subsequent to completing this epidemiological investigation, and take
all of that relevant information into account when we decide on how to
proceed with the proposed rule.
Next question, please, operator?
OPERATOR: Okay, next
question comes from Elizabeth Weise. Please state your affiliation.
ELIZABETH WEISE: Yes,
It's Elizabeth Weise with USA Today. Just a background question on the
DNA testing. Seeing as you're testing the sire's semen and the offspring,
is there a percentage of likelihood that you found the right cow, or is
it 100 percent? Is it somewhere below that?
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. In terms of what will be disclosed in the DNA testing could
be anywhere in between I think the range that you said, and most likely
a probability rating. Without getting too technical, in doing the DNA
testing what they are looking at is specific points along the DNA chain,
and looking for similarities between the different samples that have been
submitted, and based on the number of points along that chain that are
similar between the different samples; then attaching a probability to
that. So it won't be -- more than likely will not be something that we
can absolutely 100 percent guarantee, but rather as you are suggesting
some probability based on the numbers of points along the DNA molecule
where there are identical results, or where the molecule is identical
between the different samples.
We are, as you said, running a number
of samples, the two most important of which would be the DNA from the
semen from what we think is the sire of the infected cow, as well as DNA
from the brain of the positive cow. But we also have gotten samples from
progeny from the cow in question, as well as semen from sires from those
progeny.
Operator, next question?
OPERATOR: Our next question
comes from Harry Siemans (sp). Please state your affiliation.
HARRY SIEMENS: Yes, this
is Harry Siemens, and I'm from Farm Watch, the Manitoba Cooperator. If
indeed that cow is identified as being from Canada that obviously raised
our cow number with BSE from one to two. Does that in your opinion raise
our risk level a substantial amount? I know it's 50 percent, but what
do you have on -- what's your take on that?
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. I think it's too early to make that kind of determination,
because there's too many other factors that we don't yet have -- or too
many other pieces of information that we don't yet have in terms of what
would be, if any, epidemiological link between those two cases. And you
know the closer the epidemiology might be in terms of linking those two
situations could result in different conclusions being drawn, or I should
say the level of epidemiological connection or lack thereof could have
a significant bearing on our overall evaluation of the prevalence of the
disease in Canada, which of course is important.
Having said that, I would just echo what
I have been saying in terms of the fact that the two markets between the
U.S. and Canada we know are highly integrated. Second, we know a lot about
the firewalls and safeguards that had been in place both in the United
States and Canada. So all of those things would be taken into consideration
as well.
HARRY SIEMENS: Do you
think it matters to Japan as far as it being from Canada or the U.S.?
DR. DEHAVEN: I wouldn't
at this point speculate with regard to what Japan -- or speak on behalf
of what Japan may think at this point.
MR. CURLETT: This is
Ed Curlett, and I would ask that everyone keep their questions just to
one. We've got a lot of people on the call, so we want to try to get in
as many as we can. So, thanks. And, operator, next question please?
OPERATOR: Okay, next
question is from Marion Aka (sp). Please state your affiliation.
MARION AKA: Hi, I'm from
CNN. And if you could just clarify, because I missed the top because I
was disconnected, where the depopulation will take place, what exactly
the relationship is to the index cow? And my question is I know that the
food from or meat from that cow never entered the food chain. What about
the saw, the equipment that was used to cut up the index cow. Has that
been removed? Since prions can't be sanitized off, you made a point to
make clear that where the depopulation will take place will be in a currently
unused facility. But what about the facility that originally chopped up
the index cow? How is it not being spread that way?
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. I'll take your first question, and defer to Dr. Engeljohn
from FSIS for the second question. Actually I didn't by intent state an
exact location where the depopulation will take place. The calves will
be loaded from their current location, the calf feeding operation. They
will then be moved to a location, which is a slaughter plant that is not
currently being used, where they will be properly euthanized. So just
out of the interest of ensuring lack of interference with our operation,
as well as the privacy and property rights of the owners of those different
facilities, we are not going to disclose the exact locations.
MARION AKA: But it's
--
DR. DEHAVEN: Dr. Engeljohn,
do you want to take the second question?
DR. ENGELJOHN: Yes. This
is Dr. Engeljohn with the Food Safety Inspection Service. With regards
to the slaughter and processing of the animal, this was an animal that
was initially identified as a suspect, so it was handled specially in
the sense that it was handled separately from the other cattle that were
processed that day.
But with regard to overall sanitation,
we know from the best available science and expert opinion that good sanitation
is our best preventative measure that we have in place of prevention of
cross-contamination. And so we have sanitation occurring in that plant
for which we monitor well. We also know that on that particular day that
we did in fact monitor the sanitation there as well. So we have confidence
that the sanitation was effective.
MR. CURLETT: Operator,
next question please?
OPERATOR: The next question
comes from Scott Kilman. Please state your affiliation.
SCOTT KILMAN: Scott Kilman
with the Wall Street Journal. Dr. DeHaven, in the first part of your presentation
it was hard to hear, so I was going to ask really two questions -- one
a clarification. Did you say whether the cattle, the bull calves, the
brains of those bull calves, would be tested for BSE? And then my question
is: Why are the precautions that Secretary Veneman announced last week
different from what the FSIS was considering in their thinking paper a
year ago? If I remember, the FSIS was talking about targeting cattle that
were 24 months. And last week we heard a lot about 30 months.
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. I'll take your first question, and then again refer to Dr.
Engeljohn for response to the second part of your question. In terms of
testing the brain, we know from the science and the research involved
with this particular disease that it doesn't show up -- the prion doesn't
show up, and therefore tests would not be positive, even in infected animals,
until typically after 30 months of age. And in fact the most accepted
and broadly quoted studies being done in Britain would suggest that even
in animals experimentally infected with a high dose, you don't find the
prion or the infectious agent even in brain tissue until typically at
the earliest 32 months of age. So there would be no purpose in testing
all of these animals, because even in the unlikely event that there had
been maternal transmission to this single bull calf, the calf would not
test positive at this point in time.
Having said that, just as a precaution,
we will be collecting blood samples from the appropriate subpopulation
or subgroup of animals that are going to be euthanized, so if we should
need to do some DNA testing or other type of testing we would have those
materials in the future. But, again, the science would say that to test
all of those brains would not be fruitful, in that you wouldn't expect,
even if there had been transmission of the disease, which is unlikely,
but even if there had been the animal would not test positive.
Dr. Engeljohn?
DR. ENGELJOHN: Yes, this
is Dr. Engeljohn with the Food Safety Inspection Service. On the question
about why 30 months in the policy issued last week versus 24 months in
the current thinking paper that we issued in February of 2002, the reason
is that when we first commissioned Harvard to conduct a risk assessment
for us at that time, we were considering a range of months in terms of
infectivity to consider. And 24 months was what was modeled back in 1998.
We received that report just before
February of 2002. And so it was based on the best available information
that we had at that time. I think since then, in terms of the international
community, 30 months is the marker for which typically is used for modeling
age of onset.
MR. CURLETT: Operator,
we have time for two more questions.
OPERATOR: Okay, our next
question comes from Lauri Struve. Please state your affiliation.
LAURI STRUVE: This is
Lauri Struve with the Brownfield Network. And, Dr. DeHaven, my question
is on the non-ambulatory rules does include, if I understand it correctly,
that does include animals injured in transport. What kind of compensation
will producers have for those animals? We could be talking about a 1,200-pound
steer that would grade out choice. That's over $1,000.
DR. DEHAVEN: This is
Dr. DeHaven. You are right in terms of the fact that animals that might
be injured en route to slaughter, if they meet the FSIS definition of
non-ambulatory disabled at the time that they are received at slaughter,
they would not enter the food chain. We are as we speak developing our
surveillance-testing plan, and so I am just not in a position at this
point to respond to what if any compensation might go to the owner of
such an animal. It's just premature to speculate if that would even happen
at all. We are developing the plan, and I can assure you that all of those
kinds of considerations will be taken into account as we make those decisions,
but no decision has been made yet.
So, operator, last question please.
OPERATOR: Okay, our last
question comes from Andy Dworkin. Please state your affiliation.
ANDY DWORKIN: Yes, with
the Oregonian. I was wondering in terms of disposal of these cattle once
they are taking to the slaughter facility and killed how you guys are
going to deal with this. I know at least for chronic wasting some of the
states have debated high-temperature incinerators or processing with high
alkaline fluids and things. Have you guys figured out what you are going
to do with the carcasses yet?
DR. DEHAVEN: And let
me clarify you are talking about the bull calves?
ANDY DWORKIN: These are
the bull calves, yeah, that you guys are going to depopulate.
DR. DEHAVEN: Well, again,
I would go back to the science of the situation. We are talking about
one bull calf that we know is from the positive cow. We know that that
calf is just slightly over a month in age. We know that the likelihood
of the disease being transmitted from the cow to this calf is very remote.
And we know that even if the transmission did occur that the infectious
agent wouldn't be found in this animal until probably 30 months of age
or older. So, one, even if the calf is infected, there would be no infectious
agent at this point for which we would be concerned about, and so no reason
to go to the extreme measures that you are describing. So we do not plan
at this point to do the alkaline digester or any other extreme measure,
such as incineration, simply because what we know about the disease and
the research of the disease would suggest that those types of measures
in this situation are not warranted. Those are the kinds of actions that
we would take in a population that would be of the appropriate age and
appropriate level of exposure that those would be necessary.
With that, again, before I pass it back
to Ed, let me thank everyone for participating, and we will do our best
to keep you informed through these kinds of briefings. Ed?
MR. CURLETT: Yes, this
is Ed. Just want to let you know for follow-up questions call 202-720-4623.
And also from this point forward we are going to be doing these technical
briefings on an as-needed basis. As information becomes available to us,
we will pass it along. Look for the announcement on the USDA homepage
for these technical briefings. So, again, from this point forward we will
be doing these as needed. Transcripts will be available on the USDA website.
And we will be sending out a note to reporters when those technical briefings
will occur. And, with that, I would like to thank everyone again. And
thank you very much.
OPERATOR: Thank you.
That concludes today's conference call.
|