I do have a question about this. Why are they retesting previously cleared samples?
"Earlier this week, USDA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG), which has been partnering with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, the Food Safety and Inspection Service, and the Agricultural Research Service by impartially reviewing BSE-related activities and making recommendations for improvement, recommended that all three of these samples be subjected to a second internationally recognized confirmatory test, the OIE-recognized SAF immunoblot test, often referred to as the Western blot test. We received final results a short time ago. Of the three samples, two were negative, but the third came back reactive.
I am way more interested in knowing why we are retesting than over the possible positive test result. Is there a problem in testing procedures that is causing this or what?
If I was a real conspiracy theorist I would say the USDA is purposely doing this and making sure it comes back positive to show the Judiciary that there is BSE in this country so that they will open the border with Canada for live cattle trade again.
I, of course, will keep a close eye on this situation to see what happens.
The question you're not supposed to ask is the important one. Mason Cooley
You may want to check out this article around testing procedures - http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/04/12/usbse050412.html - that appeared in April 2005. I don't know if it was covered in the American press - I never saw it if it was.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/index.php?feed=Science&article=UPI-1-20050415-18493700-bc-us-madcow-2ndcase.xml
Doi said new information discovered about the May case by UPI persuaded him that the cow was negative for BSE. He still wonders what type of disorder afflicted the August cow, but said it did not appear to be BSE.
In response to recent media accounts that have implied he was suggesting mad cow cases have been covered up by the USDA, Doi said, "I don't think you have enough to say that BSE is being covered up in the United States."
Another good article on this issue is here:
http://washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20050415-124715-6918r.htm
I will also point out these allegations hark from 1997 and the cases involved in the retesting now are only a year old. I am not sure there is a connection. Nice try though.