Friday, April 23, 2010

Upcoming BSE Webinar on Thursday, April 22, 2010 a review

Upcoming Webinar on Thursday, April 22:

Safeguarding the U.S. Food Supply: Excellent Industry Compliance with the Final Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Rule

Do you have questions about BSE?

Did you know that FDA works to keep the food supply in the U.S. safe for people and animals?

Everyday, FDA is protecting people by making sure that the food they eat comes from healthy animals.

Learn more Thursday, April 22, at 2 p.m. ET, when FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine will host a 30-minute webinar on Excellent Compliance with the BSE Final Rule.

Featured speakers Shannon Jordre, Consumer Safety Officer and Burt Pritchett, Veterinary Medical Officer from the Division of Compliance, Center for Veterinary Medicine, will discuss animal feed controls FDA has put in place to keep BSE out of the U.S. cattle population, thereby ensuring the safety of the nation's food supply from BSE. After the presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions.

NOTE: Please note there will be a limited number of spots available for the webinar so please log-in prior to 2:00 pm. You will need computer speakers to listen to this webinar. Closed captioning will be available.

To join the meeting:

Web address:

Feedback: Please rate how helpful this information was.

1 2 3 4 5

Not Helpful Very Helpful

Didn't find what you were looking for? Please suggest additional questions.

Please limit your feedback to 1000 characters.

a total farce. ...

Please note that any information you submit may become public or subject to release under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). For more information, read about our privacy policies13 and the FOIA14.

Presentation Slide ;

Safeguarding The Food Supply Against BSE

Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 3:02 PM
Subject: bse web siminar a joke

this was a farce. nothing substantial, it was as if we had gone back in time to 1997. they are oblivious. science totally outdated. totally a imported uk thing. feed ban has been in place in the usa and working well. still going by science that is outdated by a decade or more. i posted my question to them about 1 hour before webinar began on their site, and my question was not answered. it was confirmed as recieved. funny thing was, there mikes were left opened for about 30 minutes (interesting), 1 hour or so before the proceedigs began, and when it did begin, my name was on the pdf page as the first one, you could see it with the beginning of my greetings, however, my name was spelled wrong, and so i know they recieved the question i sent. my question was recieved and NOT answered, again. this also happened at the infamous 2001 BSE emergency conference call, where they refused to answer my question then as well...

The chat history has been cleared.

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question):

Good Afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen. Thank you for allowing me to pose my questions. With reference to Atypical BSE and BSE, all documented in North America, the total failure of the BSE feed ban, where it still fails in 2010, and total failure of the Enhanced BSE surveillance program of 2004, where even Dr. Paul Brown of the CDC, said that he did not trust anything from the USDA et al testing after the TEXAS MAD COW blunder in 2005, the fact that the h-BSE will transmit to humans (Kong et al 2009), and the fact that the l-BSE is far more virulent than the typical c-BSE, of which all three have been documented in North America, and the trading of live cattle, cattle by-products, and feed for cattle, between Canada, Mexico and the USA has been like swapping spit between two lovers, the fact that CJD is rising in the USA (if you look at the math from year to year totals), and that indeed unknown sporadic CJD phenotypes growing in the USA, with all this, my question is, HOW CAN you guarantee that the USA cattle and any product there from is BSE/TSE free from the USA ? The O.I.E. and it's regulations have failed us at every point in the BSE blunder. most every country that went by the O.I.E. B.S.E. guidelines all came down with BSE, and now the OIE/WAHO assumes that the human and animal health standards set out in the BSE chapter for classical BSE (C-Type) applies to all forms of BSE which include the H-type and L-type atypical forms. This assumption is scientifically not completely justified and accumulating evidence suggests that this may in fact not be the case. Molecular characterization and the spatial distribution pattern of histopathologic lesions and immunohistochemistry (IHC) signals are used to identify and characterize atypical BSE. Both the L-type and H-type atypical cases display significant differences in the conformation and spatial accumulation of the disease associated prion protein (PrPSc) in brains of afflicted cattle. Transmission studies in bovine transgenic and wild type mouse models support that the atypical BSE types might be unique strains because they have different incubation times and lesion profiles when compared to C-type BSE. When L-type BSE was inoculated into ovine transgenic mice and Syrian hamster the resulting molecular fingerprint had changed, either in the first or a subsequent passage, from L-type into C-type BSE. In addition, non-human primates are specifically susceptible for atypical BSE as demonstrated by an approximately 50% shortened incubation time for L-type BSE as compared to C-type. Considering the current scientific information available, it cannot be assumed that these different BSE types pose the same human health risks as C-type BSE or that these risks are mitigated by the same protective measures.

see ;


(the above was my submitted question, in which i know they recieved, of which they refused to answer, see reply from USDA to me on Harvard BSE risk assessment, they would not answer to many questions there either, SEE LINKS AT BOTTOM). ...TSS

now some history on the BSE--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001 ;

Subject: BSE--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:49:00 -0800

From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy


######### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########

Greetings List Members,

I was lucky enough to sit in on this BSE conference call today and even managed to ask a question. that is when the trouble started.

I submitted a version of my notes to Sandra Blakeslee of the New York Times, whom seemed very upset, and rightly so.

"They tell me it is a closed meeting and they will release whatever information they deem fit. Rather infuriating."

and i would have been doing just fine, until i asked my question. i was surprised my time to ask a question so quick.

(understand, these are taken from my notes for now. the spelling of names and such could be off.)

[host Richard Barns] and now a question from Terry S. Singeltary of CJD Watch.

[TSS] yes, thank you, U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?

[no answer, you could hear in the back ground, mumbling and 'we can't. have him ask the question again.]

[host Richard] could you repeat the question?

[TSS] U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?

[not sure whom ask this] what group are you with?

[TSS] CJD Watch, my Mom died from hvCJD and we are tracking CJD world-wide.

[not sure who is speaking] could you please disconnect Mr. Singeltary

[TSS] you are not going to answer my question?

[not sure whom speaking] NO

from this point, i was still connected, got to listen and tape the whole conference. at one point someone came on, a woman, and ask again;

[unknown woman] what group are you with?

[TSS] CJD Watch and my Mom died from hvCJD we are trying to tract down CJD and other human TSE's world wide. i was invited to sit in on this from someone inside the USDA/APHIS and that is why i am here. do you intend on banning me from this conference now?

at this point the conference was turned back up, and i got to finish listening. They never answered or even addressed my one question, or even addressed the issue. BUT, i will try and give you a run-down for now, of the conference.

IF i were another Country, I would take heed to my notes, BUT PLEASE do not depend on them. ask for transcript from;

RBARNS@ORA.FDA.GOV 301-827-6906

he would be glad to give you one ;-)

Rockville Maryland, Richard Barns Host

BSE issues in the U.S., How they were labelling ruminant feed? Revising issues.

The conference opened up with the explaining of the U.K. BSE epidemic winding down with about 30 cases a week.

although new cases in other countries were now appearing.

Look at Germany whom said NO BSE and now have BSE.

BSE increasing across Europe.

Because of Temporary Ban on certain rendered product, heightened interest in U.S.

A recent statement in Washington Post, said the New Administration (old GW) has a list of issues. BSE is one of the issues.

BSE Risk is still low, minimal in U.S. with a greater interest in MBM not to enter U.S.

HOWEVER, if BSE were to enter the U.S. it would be economically disastrous to the render, feed, cattle, industries, and for human health.

(human health-they just threw that in cause i was listening. I will now jot down some figures in which they told you, 'no need to write them down'. just hope i have them correct. hmmm, maybe i hope i don't ???)

80% inspection of rendering

*Problem-Complete coverage of rendering HAS NOT occurred.

sizeable number of 1st time FAILED INITIAL INSPECTION, have not been reinspected (70% to 80%).

Compliance critical, Compliance poor in U.K. and other European Firms.

Gloria Dunason Major Assignment 1998 goal TOTAL compliance. This _did not_ occur. Mixed level of compliance, depending on firm.

Rendering FDA license and NON FDA license

system in place for home rendering & feed 76% in compliance 79% cross contamination 21% DID NOT have system 92% record keeping less than 60% total compliance

279 inspectors 185 handling prohibited materials

Renderer at top of pyramid, significant part of compliance. 84% compliance

failed to have caution statement render 72% compliance & cross contamination caution statement on feed, 'DO NOT FEED TO CATTLE'


1240 FDA license feed mills 846 inspected

"close to 400 feed mills have not been inspected"

80% compliance for feed.

10% don't have system.

NON-FDA licensed mills There is NO inventory on non licensed mills. approximately 6000 to 8000 Firms ??? 4,344 ever inspected. "FDA does not have a lot of experience with"

40% do NOT have caution statement 'DO NOT FEED'.

74% Commingling compliance

"This industry needs a lot of work and only half gotten to"

"700 Firms that were falitive, and need to be re-inspected, in addition to the 8,000 Firms."

Quote to do BSE inspection in 19 states by end of January or 30 days, and other states 60 days. to change feed status??? Contract check and ask questions and pass info.

At this time, we will take questions.

[I was about the third or fourth to ask question. then all B.S.eee broke loose, and i lost my train of thought for a few minutes. picked back up here]

someone asking about nutritional supplements and sourcing, did not get name. something about inspectors not knowing of BSE risk??? the conference person assuring that Steve Follum? and the TSE advisory Committee were handling that.

Some other Dr. Vet, whom were asking questions that did not know what to do???

[Dennis Wilson] California Food Agr. Imports, are they looking at imports?

[Conference person] they are looking at imports, FDA issued imports Bulletin.

[Linda Singeltary ??? this was a another phone in question, not related i don't think] Why do we have non-licensed facilities?

(conference person) other feed mills do not handle as potent drugs???

Dennis Blank, Ken Jackson licensed 400 non FDA 4400 inspected of a total of 6000 to 8000,

(they really don't know how many non licensed Firms in U.S. they guess 6000 to 8000??? TSS)

Linda Detwiler asking everyone (me) not to use emergency BSE number, unless last resort. (i thought of calling them today, and reporting the whole damn U.S. cattle herd ;-) 'not'

Warren-Maryland Dept. Agr. Prudent to re-inspect after 3 years. concerned of Firms that have changed owners.



############ ############


Subject: Re: BSE 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL thread from BSE List and FDA Posting of cut version...

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 22:02:47 -0700

From: "Sandy Blakeslee"

To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." References: 1

Hi terry -- thanks for all your help. I know it made a difference with the FDA getting out that release.

----- Original Message -----

From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."


Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 2:06 PM

Subject: BSE 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL thread from BSE List and FDA Posting of cut version...

hi sandy,

From the New York Times, January 11, 2001

Many Makers of Feed Fail to Heed Rules on Mad Cow Disease By SANDRA BLAKESLEE

Large numbers of companies involved in manufacturing animal feed are not complying with regulations meant to prevent the emergence and spread of mad cow disease in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration said yesterday.

The widespread failure of companies to follow the regulations, adopted in August 1997, does not mean that the American food supply is unsafe, Dr. Stephen Sundlof, director of the Center for Veterinary Medicine at the F.D.A., said in an interview.

But much more needs to be done to ensure that mad cow disease does not arise in this country, Dr. Sundlof said.

The regulations state that feed manufacturers and companies that render slaughtered animals into useful products generally may not feed mammals to cud-chewing animals, or ruminants, which can carry mad cow disease.

All products that contain rendered cattle or sheep must have a label that says, "Do not feed to ruminants," Dr. Sundlof said. Manufacturers must also have a system to prevent ruminant products from being commingled with other rendered material like that from chicken, fish or pork. Finally, all companies must keep records of where their products originated and where they were sold.

Under the regulations, F.D.A. district offices and state veterinary offices were required to inspect all rendering plants and feed mills to make sure companies complied. But results issued yesterday demonstrate that more than three years later, different segments of the feed industry show varying levels of compliance.

Among 180 large companies that render cattle and another ruminant, sheep, nearly a quarter were not properly labeling their products and did not have a system to prevent commingling, the F.D.A. said. And among 347 F.D.A.-licensed feed mills that handle ruminant materials - these tend to be large operators that mix drugs into their products - 20 percent were not using labels with the required caution statement, and 25 percent did not have a system to prevent commingling.

Then there are some 6,000 to 8,000 feed mills so small they do not require F.D.A. licenses. They are nonetheless subject to the regulations, and of 1,593 small feed producers that handle ruminant material and have been inspected, 40 percent were not using approved labels and 25 percent had no system in place to prevent commingling.

On the other hand, fewer than 10 percent of companies, big and small, were failing to comply with the record-keeping regulations.

The American Feed Industry Association in Arlington, Va., did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Subject: USDA/APHIS response to BSE-L--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:04:21 -0500

From: "Gomez, Thomas M."

Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy To:

######### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########

USDA/APHIS would like to provide clarification on the following point from Mr. Singeltary's 9 Jan posting regarding the 50 state conference call.

[Linda Detwiler asking everyone (me) not to use emergency BSE number, unless last resort. (i thought of calling them today, and reporting the whole damn U.S. cattle herd ;-) 'not']

Dr. Detwiler was responding to an announcement made during the call to use the FDA emergency number if anyone wanted to report a cow with signs suspect for BSE. Mr. Singeltary is correct that Dr. Detwiler asked participants to use the FDA emergency number as a last resort to report cattle suspect for BSE. What Mr. Singeltary failed to do was provide the List with Dr. Detwiler's entire statement. Surveillance for BSE in the United States is a cooperative effort between states, producers, private veterinarians, veterinary hospitals and the USDA. The system has been in place for over 10 years. Each state has a system in place wherein cases are reported to either the State Veterinarian, the federal Veterinarian in Charge or through the veterinary diagnostic laboratory system. The states also have provisions with emergency numbers. Dr. Detwiler asked participants to use the systems currently in place to avoid the possibility of a BSE-suspect report falling through the cracks. Use of the FDA emergency number has not been established as a means to report diseased cattle of any nature.

############ ############

Subject: Re: USDA/APHIS response to BSE-L--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan.9, 2001

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:44:49 -0800

From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."

Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy To:

References: 1

######### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########

Hello Mr. Thomas,

What Mr. Singeltary failed to do was provide the List with Dr. Detwiler's entire statement.

would you and the USDA/APHIS be so kind as to supply this list with a full text version of the conference call and or post on your web-site? if so when, and thank you. if not, why not?

The system has been in place for over 10 years.

that seems to be a very long time for a system to be in place, and only test 10,700 cattle from some 1.5 BILLION head (including calf crop). Especially since French are testing some 20,000 weekly and the E.U. as a whole, are testing many many more than the U.S., with less cattle, same risk of BSE/TSEs.

Why does the U.S. insist on not doing massive testing with the tests which the E.U. are using? Why is this, please explain?

Please tell me why my question was not answered?

U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?

It was a very simple question, a very important question, one that pertained to the topic of BSE/feed, and asked in a very diplomatic way. why was it not answered?

If all these years, we have been hearing that pharmaceutical grade bovines were raised for pharmaceuticals vaccines etc. But yet the USA cannot comply with feed regulations of the ruminant feed ban, PLUS cannot even comply with the proper labelling of the feed, cross contamination etc. Then how in the world can you Guarantee the feed fed to pharmaceutical grade bovine, were actually non ruminant feed?

Before i was ask to be 'disconnected', i did hear someone in the background say 'we can't'-- have him ask the question again.

could you please be so kind, as to answer these questions?

thank you, Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Bacliff, Texas USA

P.S. if you will also notice, i did not post that emergency phone number and do not intend on passing it on to anyone. I was joking when i said i should call and report the whole damn U.S. Herd. So please pass that on to Dr. Detwiler, so she can rest easily.

BUT, they should be reported, some are infected with TSE. The U.S. is just acting as stupid as Germany and other Countries that insist they are free of BSE.


Subject: Report on the assessment of the Georgraphical BSE-risk of the USA July 2000 (not good)

Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 21:23:51 -0800

From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy


######### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy #########

Greetings List Members and ALL EU Countries,

Because of this report, and the recent findings of the 50-state BSE Conference call, I respectfully seriously suggest that these Countries and the SSC re-evaluate the U.S.A. G.B.R. to a risk factor of #3.

snip...full text ;


AS you can see on Jan. 9, 2001 U.S.A. 50 state emergency BSE conference call (above), which i was dumbfounded by the calls of absolute ignorance back in 2001 about the mad cow feed ban, in 2010 there was nothing any different, or any new data and concern about the atypical BSE strains, and ramifications of human consumption, and or feed issues, which i tried to bring to there attention, and ask a question pertaining to that and this 2010 BSE webinar. BUT no way were they gonna make the same mistake and allow me to ask a question or questions again, i did have more than one, or many others, there were not but 3 or 4 questions ask, that they allowed, and the audio was so bad you could not hear anything. so, now i have been through 3 Presidents, and 12+ years of this BSe, and nothing seems to have changed, it's all about the almighty dollar, to hell with human health. NOTHING BELOW was brought up at this token BSE webinar;

Sunday, April 18, 2010


Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question): as with cwd to humans ;

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question): Sunday, April 12, 2009

CWD UPDATE Infection Studies in Two Species of Non-Human Primates and one Environmental reservoir infectivity study and evidence of two strains

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question): Monday, April 5, 2010

Update on Feed Enforcement Activities to Limit the Spread of BSE April 5, 2010

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question): Monday, March 1, 2010





PRODUCT Bulk cattle feed made with recalled Darling's 85% Blood Meal, Flash Dried, Recall # V-024-2007 CODE Cattle feed delivered between 01/12/2007 and 01/26/2007 RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Pfeiffer, Arno, Inc, Greenbush, WI. by conversation on February 5, 2007. Firm initiated recall is ongoing. REASON Blood meal used to make cattle feed was recalled because it was cross- contaminated with prohibited bovine meat and bone meal that had been manufactured on common equipment and labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.




Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question):

PRODUCT Custom dairy premix products: MNM ALL PURPOSE Pellet, HILLSIDE/CDL Prot- Buffer Meal, LEE, M.-CLOSE UP PX Pellet, HIGH DESERT/ GHC LACT Meal, TATARKA, M CUST PROT Meal, SUNRIDGE/CDL PROTEIN Blend, LOURENZO, K PVM DAIRY Meal, DOUBLE B DAIRY/GHC LAC Mineral, WEST PIONT/GHC CLOSEUP Mineral, WEST POINT/GHC LACT Meal, JENKS, J/COMPASS PROTEIN Meal, COPPINI - 8# SPECIAL DAIRY Mix, GULICK, L-LACT Meal (Bulk), TRIPLE J - PROTEIN/LACTATION, ROCK CREEK/GHC MILK Mineral, BETTENCOURT/GHC S.SIDE MK-MN, BETTENCOURT #1/GHC MILK MINR, V&C DAIRY/GHC LACT Meal, VEENSTRA, F/GHC LACT Meal, SMUTNY, A- BYPASS ML W/SMARTA, Recall # V-025-2007 CODE The firm does not utilize a code - only shipping documentation with commodity and weights identified. RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER Rangen, Inc, Buhl, ID, by letters on February 13 and 14, 2007. Firm initiated recall is complete. REASON Products manufactured from bulk feed containing blood meal that was cross contaminated with prohibited meat and bone meal and the labeling did not b
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question): Products manufactured from bulk feed containing blood meal that was cross contaminated with prohibited meat and bone meal and the labeling did not bear cautionary BSE statement.


9,997,976 lbs.


ID and NV



Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question): Monday, March 8, 2010

UPDATE 429,128 lbs. feed for ruminant animals may have been contaminated with prohibited material Recall # V-258-2009

see canine spongiform encephalopathysee full text, and be sure to read the BSE Inquiry documents toward the bottom ;

Thursday, March 19, 2009


Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question):

>>>Up until about 6 years ago, the pt worked at Tyson foods where she worked on the assembly line, slaughtering cattle and preparing them for packaging. She was exposed to brain and spinal cord matter when she would euthanize the cattle. <<<


Terry S. Singeltary Sr. (Submitted question):


Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy

Subject: USDA OIG SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS FY 2007 1st Half (bogus BSE sampling FROM HEALTHY USDA CATTLE) Date: June 21, 2007 at 2:49 pm PST

Owner and Corporation Plead Guilty to Defrauding Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Surveillance Program

An Arizona meat processing company and its owner pled guilty in February 2007 to charges of theft of Government funds, mail fraud, and wire fraud. The owner and his company defrauded the BSE Surveillance Program when they falsified BSE Surveillance Data Collection Forms and then submitted payment requests to USDA for the services. In addition to the targeted sample population (those cattle that were more than 30 months old or had other risk factors for BSE), the owner submitted to USDA, or caused to be submitted, BSE obex (brain stem) samples from healthy USDA-inspected cattle. As a result, the owner fraudulently received approximately $390,000. Sentencing is scheduled for May 2007.


Topics that will be covered in ongoing or planned reviews under Goal 1 include:

soundness of BSE maintenance sampling (APHIS),

implementation of Performance-Based Inspection System enhancements for specified risk material (SRM) violations and improved inspection controls over SRMs (FSIS and APHIS),


The findings and recommendations from these efforts will be covered in future semiannual reports as the relevant audits and investigations are completed.


-MORE Office of the United States Attorney District of Arizona FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For Information Contact Public Affairs February 16, 2007 WYN HORNBUCKLE Telephone: (602) 514-7625 Cell: (602) 525-2681


PHOENIX -- Farm Fresh Meats, Inc. and Roland Emerson Farabee, 55, of Maricopa, Arizona, pleaded guilty to stealing $390,000 in government funds, mail fraud and wire fraud, in federal district court in Phoenix. U.S. Attorney Daniel Knauss stated, “The integrity of the system that tests for mad cow disease relies upon the honest cooperation of enterprises like Farm Fresh Meats. Without that honest cooperation, consumers both in the U.S. and internationally are at risk. We want to thank the USDA’s Office of Inspector General for their continuing efforts to safeguard the public health and enforce the law.” Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee were charged by Information with theft of government funds, mail fraud and wire fraud. According to the Information, on June 7, 2004, Farabee, on behalf of Farm Fresh Meats, signed a contract with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (the “USDA Agreement”) to collect obex samples from cattle at high risk of mad cow disease (the “Targeted Cattle Population”). The Targeted Cattle Population consisted of the following cattle: cattle over thirty months of age; nonambulatory cattle; cattle exhibiting signs of central nervous system disorders; cattle exhibiting signs of mad cow disease; and dead cattle. Pursuant to the USDA Agreement, the USDA agreed to pay Farm Fresh Meats $150 per obex sample for collecting obex samples from cattle within the Targeted Cattle Population, and submitting the obex samples to a USDA laboratory for mad cow disease testing. Farm Fresh Meats further agreed to maintain in cold storage the sampled cattle carcasses and heads until the test results were received by Farm Fresh Meats.

Evidence uncovered during the government’s investigation established that Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee submitted samples from cattle outside the Targeted Cattle Population. Specifically, Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee submitted, or caused to be submitted, obex samples from healthy, USDA inspected cattle, in order to steal government moneys.

Evidence collected also demonstrated that Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee failed to maintain cattle carcasses and heads pending test results and falsified corporate books and records to conceal their malfeasance. Such actions, to the extent an obex sample tested positive (fortunately, none did), could have jeopardized the USDA’s ability to identify the diseased animal and pinpoint its place of origin. On Wednesday, February 14, 2007, Farm Fresh Meats and Farabee pleaded guilty to stealing government funds and using the mails and wires to effect the scheme. According to their guilty pleas:

(a) Farm Fresh Meats collected, and Farabee directed others to collect, obex samples from cattle outside the Targeted Cattle Population, which were not subject to payment by the USDA;

(b) Farm Fresh Meats 2 and Farabee caused to be submitted payment requests to the USDA knowing that the requests were based on obex samples that were not subject to payment under the USDA Agreement;

(c) Farm Fresh Meats completed and submitted, and Farabee directed others to complete and submit, BSE Surveillance Data Collection Forms to the USDA’s testing laboratory that were false and misleading;

(d) Farm Fresh Meats completed and submitted, and Farabee directed others to complete and submit, BSE Surveillance Submission Forms filed with the USDA that were false and misleading;

(e) Farm Fresh Meats falsified, and Farabee directed others to falsify, internal Farm Fresh Meats documents to conceal the fact that Farm Fresh Meats was seeking and obtaining payment from the USDA for obex samples obtained from cattle outside the Targeted Cattle Population; and

(f) Farm Fresh Meats failed to comply with, and Farabee directed others to fail to comply with, the USDA Agreement by discarding cattle carcasses and heads prior to receiving BSE test results. A conviction for theft of government funds carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Mail fraud and wire fraud convictions carry a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment. Convictions for the above referenced violations also carry a maximum fine of $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for organizations. In determining an actual sentence, Judge Earl H. Carroll will consult the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, which provide appropriate sentencing ranges. The judge, however, is not bound by those guidelines in determining a sentence.

Sentencing is set before Judge Earl H. Carroll on May 14, 2007. The investigation in this case was conducted by Assistant Special Agent in Charge Alejandro Quintero, United States Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General. The prosecution is being handled by Robert Long, Assistant U.S. Attorney, District of Arizona, Phoenix. CASE NUMBER: CR-07-00160-PHX-EHC RELEASE NUMBER: 2007-051(Farabee) # # #

Saturday, April 10, 2010


Monday, April 12, 2010

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison says NO to safer food and S. 510 FDA Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009

Harvard BSE Risk Assessment

MY comments/questions are as follows ;

1. SINCE the first Harvard BSE Risk Assessment was so flawed and fraught with error after the PEER REVIEW assessment assessed this fact, how do you plan on stopping this from happening again, will there be another peer review with top TSE Scientist, an impartial jury so-to-speak, to assess this new and updated Harvard BSE/TSE risk assessment and will this assessment include the Atypical TSE and SRM issues ?

*** Suppressed peer review of Harvard study October 31, 2002 ***

Sunday, February 14, 2010

[Docket No. FSIS-2006-0011] FSIS Harvard Risk Assessment of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)

Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518

No comments: