FIVE TINY TOES AND TOENAILS

That's what an Ohio woman found in the hamburger meat she'd just bought. She "says she may become a vegetarian after finding what appeared to be a mouse's foot, complete with five tiny toes and toenails, in a package of ground beef purchased at a supermarket." Hope PETA's sent her a starter kit...

ONE MORE TIME: LAY OFF THE PREGNANT MARES' URINE

Apparently it wasn't clear when the government stopped trials of Premarin and progestin back in July 2003 for their dangerous side effects. Now the NIH has stopped a large trial of women taking estrogen alone "after finding the pills not only failed to improve their health but may have slightly raised the risk of strokes." The 11,000 women in this part of the trial were taking Wyeth Co.'s Premarin, an estrogen-only pill made from the urine of pregnant mares. Another version of the story says that the women "had a significantly increased risk of stroke, and possibly a higher risk of dementia too." It's always important to apply the what-goes-around-comes-around theory when abusing animals. In a story on the plight of the horses involved, one person observes, "They work for us. And they make so much money. Then they're just tossed as a by-product." The same could be said, to a lesser degree, of all the women who were played for chumps by Wyeth and its ilk.

2 CUTE 2 B 4 GOTTEN

The always-illuminating Vegan Porn points us to the erstwhile "Cool2BReal" site - the one that was supposed to trick young girls into thinking beef was cool, and which was laughed off the World Wide Web - but now it's back, as "ZIP4TWEENS!" That's right. You know how much tweens love being called "tweens." That right there is hipness in a bottle.

But it gets better on the Mad Cow Disease FAQ page, a masterpiece of patronizing obfuscation with such selections as:

Is it safe to eat beef?
Yes, it is safe to eat beef. U.S. beef is still the safest in the world. "Mad cow disease" does not affect the meat you eat such as steaks, roasts and ground beef.

and

In what type of beef is BSE found?
It's really important to remember that the beef you eat does not have BSE. Foods such as steaks, roasts and ground beef are safe.

and

Has anyone in the United States gotten sick from mad cow disease?
No American has gotten sick from this fatal disease. About 150 people in the United Kingdom and other countries have gotten sick.

Guess they think "tweens" are too stupid to notice how they don't answer the questions being asked. To the question, In what type of beef is BSE found? they give us an answer that screams "Let's change the subject!" with types of beef where it's not found - although that's a lie too, both in mentioning ground beef, the highest-risk form, and in saying "the beef you eat" is definitely safe - unless, of course, you eat hot dogs. And as to whether anyone has died... well, let's just say there are a hell of a lot of suspicious deaths that "tweens" oughta be informed about... especially if they wanna outlive their "tweens."

UPDATE 3/2: UPI picks up the story, headlining it "Pro-beef site for 'tweens' going too far?" and noting that "tucked in among the colorful links is one that explains why tweens shouldn't worry about mad cow disease, and why beef is good for them. Beef is an ingredient in several of the snack recipes -- but no other meat. The site also advocates eating cheese and drinking milk, another cow product. For the essay contest, one question asked what the entrant's favorite beef dish was." Though the article twice stresses that it's the marketing to kids that's the problem, not the beef thing, the parents who are "spooked" would doubtless have no problem with a site encouraging liberal consumption of green vegetables - and with good reason.

SCIENTISTS: STOP ANIMAL TESTING

Wow, what a piece of new this is - and how appropos that it comes from our slightly more civilized neighbors across the Atlantic. "Many animal experiments may be of little benefit to treating human disease, according to experts. Much of the research is poorly conducted and not thoroughly evaluated, say scientists at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. They are now urging a systematic review of all existing animal research before new experiments are carried out." - My emphasis, to say, this sounds like they're saying "Stop Animal Testing Now - we'll decide whether to take it up again later." That's pretty big. "In reaching their conclusions," the BBC continues, "the London team carried out a systematic review of all animal experiments which purported to have clinical relevance to humans. They found many weaknesses and believe animal testing needs to be reviewed." Fortunately, they may have an alternative: A plan for a national centre to research and develop alternatives to using animals in medical experiments was announced by the British government, to be "based on a facility at Johns Hopkins University in the US that coordinates research into the so-called three Rs: replacement, refinement and reduction of animals in research.

UPDATE 3/4: University of Virginia: Stop Dog Lab Teaching.

GOOD SLATE, BAD SLATE

Whether intentionally or not, Slate has a few wide-ranging stories on animal issues today, all of which are at least to be commended for bringing crucial issues to mainstream web surfers' attention. But they don't all do quite the same job - while "Whence the Beef?" proclaims "there's plenty about the way meat is raised in the United States that can turn the stomach of even the heartiest carnivore," and proceeds to present an eye-opening (for most readers) "guide to what happens to your meat - whether it's beef, pork, or poultry - on its way to the table," a related piece on CWD ("Oh, deer") dances around its own central point.

"These days," it begins, "every disease has its animal mascot: There's the civet for SARS, the chicken for the avian flu, the prairie dog for monkeypox, and, of course, the cow for mad cow disease (also known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy)." Awww. Isn't that cute? Animal mascots. Wonder why these diseases have animals as "mascots"? Then wayyyy down in the story (long after identifying deer as the "mascots" of CWD, the article mentions that the cause of CWD's spread was "the interstate traffic of live deer and elk to stock game farms, which increased in the '90s as a result of the high demand for game meat on upscale menus... In some states, too, transmission was likely encouraged by 'canned hunts,' where fences and a high concentration of animals ensure a shooter's success." Maybe idiot animal exploiters should be the mascots. Then we wouldn't need different ones for all these diseases with the same common cause.

Then there's Alex Frangos's coverage of Rynn Berry's new book "Hitler: Neither Vegetarian nor Animal Lover," which amplifies Berry's earlier work debunking the oft-repeated trope that "Hitler Was a Vegetarian." While it's good that the issue is getting aired at all, the writer dismisses the entire point as irrelevant, with such knowing quotes as "other than Berry, none of the vegetarian activists I spoke to could recall a specific example of being taunted with the 'Hitler was a vegetarian' line." Huh. Guess it was all in Berry's head, then - just some mysterious interior voices saying that over and over. That must be what happened to me too. But Frangos is of course a better expert than Berry or me both on what vegetarians encounter and what they eat: Reducing the book's premise to the idea that Hitler was a vegetarian who cheated, Frangos blithely adds, "After all, what vegetarian doesn't cheat?" and cites friends who, say, stay vegetarian for years, stop to have a ham and cheese sandwich, then go back to being veggie for years. Yep, that's the norm, all right. At least I assume it is: I've only met a hundred or so vegetarians - none of them Frangos's pals, apparently - so how can I judge?

A PATENT ON SUFFERING?

The American Anti-Vivisection Society and a patent watchdog group are fighting to revoke a University of Texas patent involving beagles, calling the patenting of animals for medical experiments "neither legally valid nor morally acceptable." They say the University is trying to patent beagles that have been modified to die from lung infections. The University claims the patent only covers a process, but Andrew Kimbrell, director of the International Center for Technology Assessment, said the patent's repeated use of the words "beagle" and "canine" indicate that it covers the use of the animals, not the method.

USDA'S FUZZY MATH

The Washington Post reports that "After doubling its testing for mad cow disease in response to the first case in the United States, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman says the government may expand its survey beyond the 40,000 animals now planned." Great. Obliquely addressing the Mad-Cow-Not-a-Downer issue, Veneman said the new plan "will include some apparently healthy animals," but ominously, "Veneman did not specify how many more animals might be tested."

Hmmm. Wonder how many more? Maybe something like negative 20,000? Because that's what they're on track for with January's numbers. Yes, immediately after the first Mad Cow was found in the US, "testing has plummeted," this Seattle Times piece tells us. Outside of the tests done specifically on herdmates as part of the 2003 investigation, "only 1,608 animals were tested in January, down from 3,064 in December." Eleven more months at that rate will bring us up short of even the 20,000 the USDA claims to have tested in 2003. Does that make sense?

Sure it does, if you're the USDA and don't want to find any more Mad Cows. "USDA requested us to stop taking samples," Tom Ellestad said in the same story, adding that he didn't know why they told him to stop. And I love this: "[USDA] spokesman Jim Rogers said he wasn't familiar with the situation at Vern's." Vern's? Nope, doesn't ring a bell. We have so very many plants we deal with, how can we keep track of them all?

Messing with the data to get the results they want (or lack thereof) seems to be the USDA's M.O., as a top scientist there just blew the whistle (to the New York Times) on the practice of fast-tracking "safety" approval before the science could back it up. The story, headlined Scientist pressured to OK meat, continues: "In particular, the scientist said, approval to resume importing Canadian beef was given in August before a study could be done confirming that it was safe." Subpar for the course.

UPDATE 2/26: However you add up all of the above, Japan ain't buyin' it, which is the bottom line. And it doesn't look so good that not only is the USDA itself resisting increased testing, the agency is willfully blocking small beef packing companies and ranchers from testing their own cattle for Mad Cow.

NATIONAL ZOO DIRECTOR QUITS OVER ANIMAL DEATHS

Finally, Lucy Spelman has taken responsibility for the absurd and cruel deaths of animals at the National Zoo that have occurred on her watch. After a report from the National Research Council pinned the blame for these needless deaths on bad management, Spelman stepped up to the plate and resigned - as of the end of the year. In typical public-resignation rhetoric, the zoo director complained that she'd become "a lightning rod for too much attention" without directly admitting that the attention was warranted. But her implication, at least, is right: Removing her doesn't remove the problem, which is a huge population of exotic wild animals being kept in close confinement in the middle of a city. The problem, in other words, is spelled Z-O-O.

POOR LITTLE OL' E.COLI...

Once feared and fought valiantly in the famous War on E.Coli, now still working hard, sickening people overseas eating last summer's American beef, but does anyone care about a recall of 45 tons of beef? They're too busy Not Being Worried about Mad Cow to notice.

NEW STUDY: EAT CARBS, STAY HEALTHY

"Diets high in plant-based fibers seem to stave off coronary problems," are the findings of a scientific survey headlined 'Good' Carbs Cut Heart Disease Risk. Data on 350,000 men and women from 10 different studies showed that for each 10 grams of fiber consumed a day, the risk of heart disease was reduced by 14 percent, and the risk of dying from heart disease by 27 percent. "If you are concerned about your risk for heart disease, one of the key features of your diet should be plant-based foods," says the author. "In order to include 25 to 30 grams of fiber per day, your diet has to be primarily high-quality carbohydrates."

UPDATE 2/25: Oh, and you know that short-term study where people on Atkins not only lost weight but increased their "good" cholesterol? One nutrition professor believes that's because the test subjects weren't really doing Atkins.

Dr. Carol Johnston, a professor of nutrition at Arizona State University, said the Foster study was fatally flawed, invalidating its "questionable" results.

The biggest problem, Johnston said, was that participants were not rigorously monitored, allowing them to cheat on the diets. Her suspicion was borne out when Johnston, who analyzed Foster's study, found that 40 percent of the Atkins dieters were not in ketosis, a condition in which the body burns fat because there are no energy stores supplied by carbohydrates. Atkins depends on ketosis for weight loss.

"The fact so many people were not in ketosis shows me they weren't following Atkins to the letter," Johnston said. "They were getting their carbs, making the study almost meaningless."

Another dietician adds that long-term effects from Atkins are probably not a concern because "Nearly everyone I know who started Atkins quit after a few months. They didn't like giving up so many carbs."

UPDATE 2/26: Good news about Atkins: Its popularity is a windfall for makers of laxatives. Hmmm, wonder why that is?

UPDATE 3/2: Bad news about Atkins: It puts you in a lousy mood. "A team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has found carbohydrates help to stimulate production of a key brain chemical called serotonin." And if someone craving carbohydrates "eats protein instead, he or she will become grumpy, irritable or restless. Filling up on fatty foods like bacon or cheese is no answer. That will just make you tired, lethargic and apathetic." Choice quote: "When you take away the carbohydrates, it's like taking away water from someone hiking in the desert."

USDA'S WEB OF LIES GROWS BIGGER, CLEARER

UPI's Steve Mitchell is once again rocking the house with new revelations - he's found documents showing that neither a test for illegal antibiotics nor a temperature reading - both required to be performed on all downer animals - were performed on the Mad Cow, which it's now quite clear was not a downer. Mitchell even spells it out for the slow-of-dot-connecting: "If the Washington cow was not a downer, it raises the question of how many other, seemingly healthy animals infected with mad cow went undetected and were approved for human consumption." Yes, it does.

Mitchell also identifies - or at least reports Louthan identifying - the USDA vet who inspected the cow in question: Rodney Thompson, who may be a) scapegoated by the USDA for neglect of duty or b) one of the organizers of this hoax, and thus due for a promotion. There's a strong case to be made, though, for "neglect of duty," and ex-USDA vets such as Lester Friedlander and Tom D'Amura go on record with it, using the phrase. In typical USDA fashion, Steve Cohen first evades questions about the discrepancies, then goes ahead with the outright lies: "It's not a requirement to get a temperature," Cohen said. But this is directly contradicted by a training course FSIS gives to its new meat inspectors to assist them in conducting inspection of live animals. "The course document, obtained by UPI, advises inspectors: 'You must take the temperature of all downers.'" Gosh, that seems pretty clear. The training documents also blow apart the No-Temp-Cause-the-Cow-Was-Lying-Down defense. To recap: USDA lied about cow being a downer, they lied about USDA procedure, they'll lie again tomorrow, most likely. What a country.
UPDATE 2/25: Now they're trying to fudge this crucial issue: DeHaven is floating the line that "both accounts [USDA's and Vern's] could in fact be true." Don't let him get away with that BS, Steve.

CUTTING THROUGH ATKINS P.R.

Michael Fumento, no friend of the Atkins plan, lays into the bloated-corpse issue like a hot knife through saturated fat in this latest column. First he echoes the incredulity of many respectable pathologists that someone could gain over 60 pounds in nine days, even from "fluid retention." Even the company's main apologist, Stuart Trager, seems to have a hard time believing this:

On "Larry King Live," King asked Trager incredulously, "You can have that much fluid retention, like, gaining 50, 60 pounds?" Trager faltered. "I know people don't gain that much weight in nine days," he said, whereupon he switched the topic to once again bashing the Physicians Committee [for Responsible Medicine].

Fumento then notes that the doctor's "real" weight at the time of his fall, 195 pounds, is

from an echocardiogram report, not admittance documents as one might expect. Conspicuously, the blood pressure numbers were covered. Trager lamely insisted it was to protect Atkins' privacy. Yet much of the media fuss over the M.E. report was its having said Atkins suffered hypertension. Atkins Nutritionals had squealed this was false, but then literally covered it up. The echocardiogram report did show Atkins' weight at 195, but the head of the echocardiography laboratory told me they don't even have a scale. "Sometimes we get the weight from ER, and sometimes we don't and don't put anything down," he said. "Do you ever just estimate?" I asked. "Yup," he replied.

Even fudging around with bogus BMI claims (which Fumento also blasts) can't change the fact that the man who was (supposedly) on the Atkins plan the longest ended his life as a big ol' fat guy.

UPDATE 3/3: Dr. John McDougall follows up on the Fumento piece with some observations of his own: "The man was grossly overweight for all of the 10 years that I knew him and I had met with him personally on several occasions. He looked very unhealthy to me every time we met - and his medical reports and the history that has been released by his organization confirm this. At the very least he suffered from severe heart damage known as cardiomyopathy. The Atkins organization says this was due to a virus - this is possible, but is an extremely rare cause for this condition. The most common reason for this severe loss of heart muscle is coronary artery disease due to a high-fat, high-cholesterol diet." And as to that amazing weight gain in his last nine days, McDougall says that would mean "60 to 80 pounds of fluid, equal to 8 to 10 gallons of water, would have been added to his body. Any medical doctor who allowed this much fluid accumulation in a patient in 9 days should have his medical practices reviewed."

As to the ethics and relevance of looking so closely at the bloated corpse of this poor fellow, McDougall reminds us, "Atkins' image is alive and well on TV, radio, newspapers, fast food restaurant menus, and supermarket shelves - making $100 million a year for Atkins Nutritionals Inc., selling people worldwide a program that results in short term weight loss (at best), is nearly impossible to follow, and eventually causes extremely poor health - the diet's founder, Dr. Atkins, is one important piece of the proof. When the Atkins business stops promoting him, I will stop criticizing him."

BIRD FLU IN TEXAS 'FAR DEADLIER THAN ORIGINALLY THOUGHT'

The news that Texas had become the fourth US state this year to be harboring avian flu emerged late last week, but the USDA assured us there was only a "low threat" to human health. Today, though, it turns out the flu found on a chicken farm in Gonzales County, TX is "far deadlier than originally thought and it had spread to live bird markets in Houston." As always, the USDA's motto: "First, claim no harm." Then look at the facts.
UPDATE 2/24: Even though there's no threat to human health, U.S. watches Texas farmworkers for bird flu symptoms. Huh? How could they possibly get those? And the EU joins the list of those banning U.S. chicken.

THIS WEEK'S MAD COW ROUNDUP

Well, I've finished reading Tom Ellestad's affidavit (PDF), and there can be no doubt in anyone's mind who's gone through all of that evidence that, not only was the Mad Cow not a downer, but the USDA knew so from day one. In fact, Ellestad said so in print, if we'd been paying attention:

Federal officials have described the cow in question as a "downer" animal, meaning that it was unable to walk, which raises questions about whether it should have been slaughtered and put into the food supply. But Ellestad remembers seeing the animal. "It was not a downer cow," he said, trying to hold back his anger. "I saw it walking." Ellestad said that his slaughterhouse has a policy of refusing to slaughter cows that look too sick or injured. "There are some animals that we will not accept," he said. "This cow looked relatively healthy. I saw her up and walking." (Washington Post, Dec. 24, 2003)

Why the USDA decided to go ahead with this claim in the face of directly contradictory evidence both in a paper trail and eyewitness testimony is still a mystery to me. The Oregonian is also mystified, but not about the important conclusion: "We won't speculate as to the reasons for not sharing the information, but it hardly matters. If the department simply failed to understand the importance of giving the public correct, useful information, that's bad enough. If the department decided willfully to keep the information to itself, then those responsible -- including the secretary of agriculture -- should lose their jobs." Damn straight. In another piece on Ellestad, the GAP's Felicia Nestor said that they've been "analyzing USDA regulatory and enforcement activities, and found that the department focuses enforcement activities at the smallest plants, exempting larger facilities from testing. 'It's very understandable why they would want to do that,' she said. 'If you can marginalize the area of a food-safety incident, you can retain control and try to maintain confidence in the meat supply.' Nestor said that the GAP found this has been the way USDA tests for e. coli, and that they would analyze the data to see if this mirrors its BSE surveillance system as well." Well, in Ellestad's case there's certainly one mirror.

Other Mad Cow developments:

The Seattle Times reports that "15 companies in Washington state have been cited for failing to comply with a rule the government considers the best defense against mad cow disease, according to FDA inspection records." Although the article does a poor job of detailing how many of these violations are recent (they're all post-1997, and a few examples are given from 2002), Larry Bohlen, a spokesman with Friends of the Earth environmental advocacy group, states what should be, but apparently isn't, obvious to everybody: "It's significant because failure to follow mad cow prevention rules in the past could result in the disease occurring today." Well, yeah.

A fearmongering TV station tries to nail down the other end of the equation: Horrifying Illness Killing At Higher Rate In Washington! Omigod! That's the smoking gun! Except... after a couple heart-rending anecdotes, here's the evidence: "[CJD] only happens to about one in a million people. But our investigation shows CJD is killing people at a much higher rate in Washington State: 35 deaths between 1997-2003. That's in a state with less than 6 million people." Riiiiight. So, 1 per million per year is six, times six years is... 36 deaths. Huh? Where's the beef?

In more serious scientific news, the Journal of Applied Microbiology has proof that "current commercial methods of captive bolt stunning may induce widespread and significant mobilization of central nervous system tissue within beef carcasses. This may lead to the widespread dissemination of such ["high-risk"] materials within meat destined for human consumption." So can we lay to rest that "no brain, no spine, no risk" equation now?

And finally, "three state Senate committees have asked [California] Department of Health officials to explain why they signed a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Department of Agriculture that prevents public access to details of beef recalls. Dr. Stanley Prusiner, the Nobel Prize winner who explained what causes mad cow, is scheduled to speak at the 9:30 a.m. Tuesday hearing at the Capitol." Get this, though: No USDA representative will attend the hearing because it conflicts with another mad cow hearing in Washington, D.C., department officials said." Boy, Tuesday's gonna be a big day, huh?

LI'L HUNTERS

Ken Perrotte, an "outdoors" columnist, spins a new study showing twice as many youngsters as adults disapproving of hunting: In the survey, "33 percent of youth disapproved of hunting compared to 17 percent of adults" - but that's because kids naturally grow to like hunting as they reach adulthood, not because the adults of the future will disapprove of hunting. Right. Whatever. The fun part is the call for more inculcation of our nation's youth into the joys of hunting, so they'll be sure to preserve this wonderful tradition.

That's what 16-year-old Jon William Romano was apparently doing when he strolled into Columbia High School earlier this month with a new shotgun and 20 rounds of ammunition. He shot at and missed two students, then shot a special-ed teacher in the leg while being tackled by an assistant principal. Gosh, where'd he get a new shotgun? "Over the weekend, Romano and his mother drove to the Pistol Parlor gun shop in East Greenbush where she bought him a Winchester Model 1300 pump-action shotgun. Barde allegedly filled out a federal gun-purchase application indicating that the weapon was for her son, who was too young to buy it but who intended to take up hunting." If only he had waited to take a hunting course before he started shooting... he could've been sure to hit and kill those first two students! Not surprisingly, the Fund for Animals is calling this a "Wake-Up Call" for New York to raise the minimum hunting age to 18.
UPDATE 2/25: In related news, Mr. NRA Family Values, Ted Nugent, is a deadbeat dad. How will this son ever grow up macho and morally correct if Ted's never even met the boy, let alone taken him hunting? Tsk, tsk.

MORE EVIDENCE VEGETARIANISM FIGHTS CANCER

Hey, that "more evidence" isn't my phrasing - it's the headline for this Reuters story on a large, long-term study in the British Journal of Cancer: "After following more than 10,000 people for 17 years, investigators found that vegetarians were 15 percent less likely to develop colorectal cancer than meat-eaters. This study adds to the 'increasing scientific evidence' that a diet rich in fruit, vegetables and fiber and low in meat--especially red and processed meat--can prevent colorectal cancer, said study author Dr. Miguel Sanjoaquin of the University of Oxford." The article goes on with some specifics - "The fat in red meat increases the excretion of substances called bile acids, he explained, which in turn produce other substances that encourage tumor growth. Furthermore, meat contains natural compounds and substances formed during processing and high-temperature cooking that can disrupt the normal balance of cell growth in the colon, potentially triggering the cancer, Sanjoaquin noted."
UPDATE 2/19: Fruit & vegetables also build strong bones, sez the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
UPDATE 2/20: A new multi-country study shows animal products increase the risk of prostate cancer, while veggies, especially onions and garlic, fight it. The study also points to the infamous insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) - which Monsanto's milk additive rBGH increases - as another contributor to prostate cancer. (From the abstract: "The strongest risk factor for prostate cancer mortality was animal products, with the nonfat portion of milk and alcohol being somewhat weaker; the strongest risk reduction factors were onions, other protective vegetable products (excluding alcohol, oils, and sweeteners), and solar UV-B radiation."

HOUSE COMMITTEE CHALLENGES USDA'S DOWNER CLAIM

The BSE-infected brains are hitting the fan now as the news hits our nation's capital that witnesses agree the Mad Cow was a walker. "The new information raises questions about USDA's credibility," said Tom Davis and Henry Waxman, who followed up with "If this cow was not a downer cow, then their sample is too narrow." In what's become a vaudeville-type formula, Steve Cohen makes a blanket denial, then pretends to be clueless about some relevant issue (in this case whether the plant had a particular USDA contract for BSE testing) in the hopes they'll forget about it by next time... which, it seems, the press usually does. Hope they're gonna pay attention this time.

UPDATE 2/18: Day-after coverage has more info, including the apparent first naming of the anonymous "third witness": "The House committee also received an affidavit from livestock hauler Randy Hull Jr., who said the cow had walked onto the trailer when he picked it up at a dairy in Mabton, Yakima County." Washington Post mentions that Hull provided a contract saying that he did not haul downer cows. This seems to contradict Louthan's earlier statement that the other cows in the truck were downers, but we'll see how that shakes out. The Seattle Times also calls into question the USDA's commitment to even doing the paltry "expanded" testing it's already promised: "The goal is to test 40,000 animals this year, double last year's efforts. In January, though, only 1,608 animals were tested nationwide, short of the more than 3,000 a month required to meet the goal."

ALSO: several new details cast Cohen's fiegned cluelessness into extreme doubt (my italics here): "For the past year, Ellestad said, the slaughterhouse had a policy of refusing downer cattle, though it would slaughter animals unable to walk because they'd been injured in transit. He said USDA officials knew that. But last fall, before the mad-cow case was discovered, Ellestad said, the agency asked him to collect samples from slaughtered cattle for mad-cow testing anyway, because other slaughterhouses in the region refused to do so. Ellestad also said that shortly after the cow tested positive, the USDA ordered the slaughterhouse to stop collecting brain samples for mad-cow testing.

AND: UPI's Steve Mitchell follows up with more damning detail: "Ellestad's affidavit also detailed a conversation he had on Jan. 19 with an unnamed Washington State official involved in USDA's BSE surveillance program, who said the cow in question had gone through a milking shed for three or four days after giving birth on Nov. 29, 2003. Ellestad said that means the cow was walking, which disputes USDA's contention the animal was injured during the birthing process. 'There would be no other way for her to go through the milking shed,' Ellestad said." And here's the specifics on the testing deal: "Ellestad said in June of 2003 USDA offered his company $10 for every brain sample from a downer animal it could deliver. Ellestad declined because his policy on downers had gone into effect and he no longer processed those animals. The USDA ultimately changed its offer to omit any reference in its purchase order form requiring the brains originate from downer animals, the affidavit said. Ellestad agreed to participate in the brain sampling program in October of 2003 and provided the committee with a copy of the USDA purchase order, which stated, "For each animal from which a BSE surveillance sample is collected, Vern's will be reimbursed $10." I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but it's pretty clear the USDA knew exactly what was going on at Vern's Moses Lake, and these facts suggest they may have been purposely setting up the plant to take the fall for the "lone downer cow from Canada."

STILL MORE: c/o VegSource, We find on Dave Louthan's Web page a little more detail about how the truck could be full of downers if they didn't take downers; unfortunately, it doesn't quite make things crystal clear... "The USDA vet asks the driver why are these cows down? Well Doc they fell down on the way over here. That's fine says Doc. Go ahead. No downers will be killed today. Just some cows who can't get up. The butcher says should we test these downers for BSE? Doc says what downers?" Huh? Is he saying the workers were routinely violating Moses Lake's policy? Or the vet was violating USDA policy? Sometimes colloquial language isn't the best choice. But this much is clear: "You people have got to stop buying beef. You have got to stop feeding that stuff to your kids. If you don't give them any money I guarantee you they will start testing in short order. Vote with your checkbook." Got that right. Also, here's the full Affidavit mentioned above (Large PDF), which looks to have lots of good specifics.

NEW FORM OF MAD COW MIMICS SPORADIC CJD

Scientists in Italy have discovered a new form of Mad Cow disease which could explain a lot of current irregularities, and spell Big Trouble for the head-in-the-sand crowd.

The brains of cattle with the new variation look different from cows with the classic form of mad cow disease, called bovine spongiform encephalopathy, the researchers said. They look much more like the brains of people with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease or CJD -- not the kind that people catch from eating infected beef, but the kind that arises mysteriously in about one in a million people worldwide. More worrying, although the cattle were old, they had no visible symptoms of BSE and were only diagnosed after routine slaughter.

OK, so already here, we're talking about the fact that there may well be Mad Cow in our food supply that wouldn't even be detected if we were testing all animals and could count on the testing lab. But note this, from the UPI version: "The new finding increases the possibility some cases of sporadic CJD also could be due to mad cow-infected meat, said Salvatore Monaco, a co-author of the study." Jeez, don't tell this woman! UPI (i.e. Steve Mitchell) dutifully reports, along with everyone else, Paul Brown's breezy dismissal of the possbility that people are getting sporadic CJD from Mad Cow meat, but then hits back with CU's Michael Hansen: "Hansen disputed the assessment and pointed out there actually have been increases in sporadic CJD in both the United Kingdom and Switzerland in recent years." Mitchell is, of course, also the only reporter I've found who matches up this bombshell to the CJD clusters in the US.
ALSO: The AP version of the story concludes with this little gem: "An investigation seeking other cattle from the same herd ended last week with Agriculture officials saying they had located all but 11 suspect animals and concluding the rest could not be found." All but 11, huh? Nice that we've reclassified that other 41 after the fact. We were looking for them, but since we didn't find them, turns out we weren't really looking for them after all!

HARVARD RISK STUDY BLASTED AGAIN

Re: That famous Harvard Risk Analysis of whether BSE would enter the US and/or spread, Tony Corbo of Public Citizen says "There is a disconnect between the Harvard study and the facts." But he doesn't just mean the fact that the Harvard folks said there was a very low risk of... er... what wound up happening, happening - the whole methodology of their study is being called into question. "One example is the Harvard study's assumption that a cow would have to eat 1 gram of infected material to come down with the disease. Kihm said most scientists now believe a cow would have to eat only 10 milligrams of infected material, a piece the size of a peppercorn, to catch the disease. That's 100 times smaller than the assumption in the Harvard study. Recent British studies suggest the infectious dose could be 400 micrograms, which is 25 times smaller than 10 milligrams."

Gee, it's funny they would err on the side of a rosy outlook for the beef industry. The story also notes that "among the dozens of individuals the authors acknowledge provided scientific input and support were some with ties to ConAgra Beef, the National Cattleman's Beef Association, the National Renderers Association and the American Feed Industry Association."

Meanwhile, if you're eating any of "a variety of products, from taco filling to pizza toppings, hot dogs and some types of sausage and beef jerky," you may be eating BSE-infused "meat paste," as the Seattle Times warns us that Dangerous cow parts still enter food supply. "Brains can also be used in headcheese and some other processed meat products, as long as they're listed on the label. No label is necessary when brains and spinal cords are cooked along with other ingredients to make beef broth, beef flavoring and beef extracts." Mmmmmm... meat paste...

SECOND TIME AS FARCE?

Losses at the Japanese unit of McDonald's tripled last year, notes SignOnSanDiego. "McDonald's Holdings Co.'s said it lost 7.12 billion yen ($67.6 million) for the year ended Dec. 31, far worse than the 2.34 billion yen loss the Tokyo-based chain chalked up in 2002." 2002... 2002... wasn't that the last time McDonald's entire operation went into a financial tailspin right after the Japan unit's troubles? Hmmmmm....