time for a change
On May 20th, 2003 mad cow disease became a real life nightmare for cattle producers across Canada when a single Canadian cow tested positive for the disease. That very day 34 nations including the United States closed their borders to Canadian beef. The past two decades have bore witness to the devastating repercussions bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) has had upon cattle industry in every nation where this brain wasting disease has been identified, and Canada has been no exception. Closed borders, restricted trade, plunging cattle prices, shattered consumer confidence, and the evaporated economic viability of both the family owned ranch and the large-scale feedlot operation are all consequences of a BSE. The Canadian BSE crisis is now approaching its second anniversary, the tally of Canadian born cases of mad cow has risen to four, and the current strategy for managing the effects of this disease continue to be unsuccessful as Canada’s reputation for safe beef in the international marketplace remains uncertain at best. A recent article in Meat Science concluded that Canada’s current testing practices are simply “not sufficient… to estimate the extent of the problem.”
Tainted beef is a cause for concern because it can lead to the variant form of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in human consumers. The outbreak of BSE in Britain has proven that contracting CJD from BSE infected meat is very rare. However this fact does not lessen the financial turmoil caused by the appearance of even one mad cow nor does it provide any comfort to the few individuals who could potentially contract CJD from eating an infected hamburger or steak. The time has come for producers and consumers to demand the immediate and significant expansion of testing for BSE in Canadian beef. The cost of testing is insignificant when compared to the price of borders closed to Canadian cattle. Other nations battling with BSE put Canada to shame with their efforts to ensure the integrity of their product, and newly developed tests are making widespread testing more commercially viable than ever before. The assurance of consumer safety and the reputation of Canadian beef in the international market will only be restored when it is said to be BSE free.
For economic reasons alone a significant increase in BSE testing is justifiable. As of February 2005 lost revenue from Canadian beef exports reached a staggering $5 billion. When compared to the $100 million price tag of testing all cattle slaughtered in Canada the expedient course of action is unmistakable. Additionally, widespread screening for BSE will likely lower the cost of testing, by some estimates even down to $10 per head. At these levels the cost of testing the 3 million cows slaughtered in Canada each year would be as low as $30 million. Opponents of universal BSE testing argue that this added expense will be downloaded to the producers and ultimately the consumer. This argument is nothing more than a fear tactic considering that the Canadian government has already committed $1.6 billion to ease the hardship of cash strapped producers. The government could spend far less money and completely pay for a universal testing system for BSE with no added cost to the producer whatsoever. Even if the consumer were to bear the full cost of testing it would only amount to a few cents for every pound of beef, isn’t that a small price to pay for assuring a safe product and open borders?
Current BSE testing standards in Canada fall far short of other nations that are enduring the nightmare of mad cow disease, this should not be the case. The European Union universally tests all cattle over the age of 30 months for BSE, Germany goes even further by testing all animals over the age of 24 months, and Japan leads the way by testing all beef that is destined for human consumption. In 2003 Canada tested only 5,490 cows for BSE; in 2005 this number was raised to 30,000 and still this is 17 times fewer tests for mad cow disease than the European Union. Pleas from the Canadian Health Coalition and Alberta Cattle Feeders for significantly increased and even universal testing for BSE have gone unheeded by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Instead the CFIA continues with the policy of selectively testing only the most high-risk animals. British microbiologist Steven Dealler’s evaluation of Canada’s current screening system puts the crisis into practical terms, in his estimation six to seven BSE infected cattle are consumed by Canadians for every one that displays symptoms of the disease.
Brain Evans, Canada’s chief veterinary officer, poses the most significant argument against universal BSE testing. He points out that most cattle are rendered between the ages of 18 and 24 months. Current BSE tests are only 100% reliable in cattle 24 months or older, thus the majority of tests would provide nothing more than a false sense of security. However this perspective fails to account for the significant advancements that are being made in both live and post mortem BSE tests. New rapid tests for detecting the BSE in younger cattle are being developed with increasing success, and a commercially viable test that detects heart variations in BSE infected cattle is expected in mid to late 2005. Furthermore, Japan’s detection of two BSE infected cows aged 21 and 23 months in 2003 makes it hard to argue against the testing of even the youngest of cattle slated for humans consumption. Stanley B. Prusiner, a 1997 Nobel Prize Laureate in the field of medicine for his research and discovery of the cause of BSE has come to the conclusion that “testing all slaughtered animals is the only rational policy.”
The failure of recent efforts to reopen lucrative international borders to Canadian beef indicates that current BSE screening practices are inadequate in reassuring the world of the safety of its product. Canadian cattle producers have suffered long enough as a result of the inadequate management of the BSE crisis and there is no hope of reprieve on their horizon as long as the status quo is maintained. The average farm income has dropped 30% in the first six months of the year since the outbreak of BSE, meanwhile the government is offering short term financial aid to the producers when it would take far less money simply test all Canadian cattle for BSE. If Canada is to ever regain the confidence of the international market it must at minimum adopt the policy of screening all bovine 24 months and older for BSE and younger animals must also be tested the moment new and reliable assays are developed. Only by meeting and exceeding all international standards will Canada regain its proud status as a great “BSE free” beef-producing nation.
Works Cited
Bergman, Brian. “It’s Mad Cow Madness.” Maclean’s 118:7 (14 February 2005): 38-39. Academic Search Premier (23 March 2005).
Calgary Herald Editorial Board. “Protectionist BS on BSE: Universal testing is the only way to keep the borders open.” Calgary Herald, 17 April 2004, sec. A, p.16. academic Search Premier (26 March 2005).
Charlebois, Sylvain. “Time for mandatory BSE tests.” Toronto Star, 30 September 2004, sec. A, p. 24. Academic Search Premier (23 March 2005).
Groves, Kevin. “Universal testing of beef won't work.” Standard - Freeholder, 14 March 2005, p. 5. Academic Search Premier (23 March 2005).
Heim, D. and E. Mumford. “The future of BSE from the global perspective.” Meat Science (15 July 2004):1-7. Science Direct (26 March 2005).
Kopala, Margret. “Comprehensive testing program needed for BSE.” The Vancouver Sun, 30 August 2004, sec. A, p. 8. Academic Search Premier (26 March 2005).
Long, Jonathan and Jonathan Riley. “Early BSE tests trialled.” Farmers Weekly 140:23 (4 June 2004): 9. Academic Search Premier (26 March 2005).
Prusiner, Stanley B. “Detecting MAD COW Disease.” Scientific American 291:1 (July 2004): 86-95. Academic Search Premier (26 March 2005).
Tainted beef is a cause for concern because it can lead to the variant form of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in human consumers. The outbreak of BSE in Britain has proven that contracting CJD from BSE infected meat is very rare. However this fact does not lessen the financial turmoil caused by the appearance of even one mad cow nor does it provide any comfort to the few individuals who could potentially contract CJD from eating an infected hamburger or steak. The time has come for producers and consumers to demand the immediate and significant expansion of testing for BSE in Canadian beef. The cost of testing is insignificant when compared to the price of borders closed to Canadian cattle. Other nations battling with BSE put Canada to shame with their efforts to ensure the integrity of their product, and newly developed tests are making widespread testing more commercially viable than ever before. The assurance of consumer safety and the reputation of Canadian beef in the international market will only be restored when it is said to be BSE free.
For economic reasons alone a significant increase in BSE testing is justifiable. As of February 2005 lost revenue from Canadian beef exports reached a staggering $5 billion. When compared to the $100 million price tag of testing all cattle slaughtered in Canada the expedient course of action is unmistakable. Additionally, widespread screening for BSE will likely lower the cost of testing, by some estimates even down to $10 per head. At these levels the cost of testing the 3 million cows slaughtered in Canada each year would be as low as $30 million. Opponents of universal BSE testing argue that this added expense will be downloaded to the producers and ultimately the consumer. This argument is nothing more than a fear tactic considering that the Canadian government has already committed $1.6 billion to ease the hardship of cash strapped producers. The government could spend far less money and completely pay for a universal testing system for BSE with no added cost to the producer whatsoever. Even if the consumer were to bear the full cost of testing it would only amount to a few cents for every pound of beef, isn’t that a small price to pay for assuring a safe product and open borders?
Current BSE testing standards in Canada fall far short of other nations that are enduring the nightmare of mad cow disease, this should not be the case. The European Union universally tests all cattle over the age of 30 months for BSE, Germany goes even further by testing all animals over the age of 24 months, and Japan leads the way by testing all beef that is destined for human consumption. In 2003 Canada tested only 5,490 cows for BSE; in 2005 this number was raised to 30,000 and still this is 17 times fewer tests for mad cow disease than the European Union. Pleas from the Canadian Health Coalition and Alberta Cattle Feeders for significantly increased and even universal testing for BSE have gone unheeded by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Instead the CFIA continues with the policy of selectively testing only the most high-risk animals. British microbiologist Steven Dealler’s evaluation of Canada’s current screening system puts the crisis into practical terms, in his estimation six to seven BSE infected cattle are consumed by Canadians for every one that displays symptoms of the disease.
Brain Evans, Canada’s chief veterinary officer, poses the most significant argument against universal BSE testing. He points out that most cattle are rendered between the ages of 18 and 24 months. Current BSE tests are only 100% reliable in cattle 24 months or older, thus the majority of tests would provide nothing more than a false sense of security. However this perspective fails to account for the significant advancements that are being made in both live and post mortem BSE tests. New rapid tests for detecting the BSE in younger cattle are being developed with increasing success, and a commercially viable test that detects heart variations in BSE infected cattle is expected in mid to late 2005. Furthermore, Japan’s detection of two BSE infected cows aged 21 and 23 months in 2003 makes it hard to argue against the testing of even the youngest of cattle slated for humans consumption. Stanley B. Prusiner, a 1997 Nobel Prize Laureate in the field of medicine for his research and discovery of the cause of BSE has come to the conclusion that “testing all slaughtered animals is the only rational policy.”
The failure of recent efforts to reopen lucrative international borders to Canadian beef indicates that current BSE screening practices are inadequate in reassuring the world of the safety of its product. Canadian cattle producers have suffered long enough as a result of the inadequate management of the BSE crisis and there is no hope of reprieve on their horizon as long as the status quo is maintained. The average farm income has dropped 30% in the first six months of the year since the outbreak of BSE, meanwhile the government is offering short term financial aid to the producers when it would take far less money simply test all Canadian cattle for BSE. If Canada is to ever regain the confidence of the international market it must at minimum adopt the policy of screening all bovine 24 months and older for BSE and younger animals must also be tested the moment new and reliable assays are developed. Only by meeting and exceeding all international standards will Canada regain its proud status as a great “BSE free” beef-producing nation.
Works Cited
Bergman, Brian. “It’s Mad Cow Madness.” Maclean’s 118:7 (14 February 2005): 38-39. Academic Search Premier (23 March 2005).
Calgary Herald Editorial Board. “Protectionist BS on BSE: Universal testing is the only way to keep the borders open.” Calgary Herald, 17 April 2004, sec. A, p.16. academic Search Premier (26 March 2005).
Charlebois, Sylvain. “Time for mandatory BSE tests.” Toronto Star, 30 September 2004, sec. A, p. 24. Academic Search Premier (23 March 2005).
Groves, Kevin. “Universal testing of beef won't work.” Standard - Freeholder, 14 March 2005, p. 5. Academic Search Premier (23 March 2005).
Heim, D. and E. Mumford. “The future of BSE from the global perspective.” Meat Science (15 July 2004):1-7. Science Direct (26 March 2005).
Kopala, Margret. “Comprehensive testing program needed for BSE.” The Vancouver Sun, 30 August 2004, sec. A, p. 8. Academic Search Premier (26 March 2005).
Long, Jonathan and Jonathan Riley. “Early BSE tests trialled.” Farmers Weekly 140:23 (4 June 2004): 9. Academic Search Premier (26 March 2005).
Prusiner, Stanley B. “Detecting MAD COW Disease.” Scientific American 291:1 (July 2004): 86-95. Academic Search Premier (26 March 2005).
posted by Jason at 7:45 p.m.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home