|
Transcript of Technical Briefing with
Dr. John Clifford, DVM, Deputy Administrator for APHIS Veterinary Services -
June 25, 2004
|
MR. JIM ROGERS:"On the line this evening I have Dr. John Clifford. He is the deputy administrator of APHIS's Veterinary Services Program. At this time, I'm going to turn it over to Dr. Clifford. Shortly thereafter we will have a brief question and answer period.
"Dr. Clifford?
DR. JOHN CLIFFORD (APHIS Veterinary Services): "Thank you, Jim.
"At approximately 5:30 this evening we received notice that an inconclusive BSE test result was received on a screening test used as part of our enhanced BSE surveillance program. The inconclusive result does not in and of itself mean that we have found another case of BSE in this country. Inconclusive results are a normal component of most screening tests which are designed to be extremely sensitive so they will detect any sample that could possibly be positive.
"Tissue samples are now being sent to USDA's National Veterinary Services Laboratories, the National BSE Reference Lab which will render additional testing on this sample.
"The animal in question did not enter the food chain, and the carcass is being held. I know there will be great interest in the statistics surrounding this inconclusive test result, such as what type of animal was tested, where the animal was from, and which lab did the testing. Because this test is only an inconclusive test result and because the test may very well turn out to be negative, we are not going to disclose this information at this time.
"APHIS is beginning internal steps to identify the animal to be prepared in the event that the test comes back positive for BSE.
"Again, confirmatory tests are expected back from NVSL within the next 4 to 7 days, and we will announce the test results then. And if the test comes back positive for BSE, we'll of course provide additional information about the animal and its origin.
"In the meantime, there are two particular points I would like to make. First and foremost, this is not at all unexpected. Screening tests as I said are designed to be extremely sensitive. They are often used in both human and animal health. They are designed to cast a very wide net in order to catch any possible animal that may have a condition, which will end up negative during further testing.
"In humans, glucose testing for diabetes is a good example of that. This is the type of screening test that we are using for BSE surveillance testing.
"Second, no matter how the additional testing comes back, USDA remains confident in the safety of the U.S. beef supply. Again, in the case of this particular animal it did not enter the human food chain, and of course our ban on specified risk materials from the human food chain provides the utmost protection to public health should another case of BSE ever be detected in the U.S.
"By banning specified risk materials, USDA has ensured that those materials most likely to contain the BSE agent are removed from a suspect animal. Additional measures to strengthen public health safeguards include the longstanding ban on imports of live cattle, other ruminants, and most ruminant products from high-risk countries.
"FDA's 1997 prohibition on the use of most mammalian protein in cattle feed; an aggressive surveillance program that has been in place for more than a decade; and the banning of nonambulatory cattle from the human food chain; process control requirement for establishments using advanced meat recovery systems; prohibiting the air injection stunning of cattle; and if an animal presented for slaughter is sampled for BSE, holding the carcasses until the test results have been confirmed negative.
"In 2001 and again 2003, Harvard University conducted an independent assessment that affirmed USDA's BSE control and prevention measures. This assessment further affirmed that even with one or more detections of BSE in this country, U.S. control efforts will minimize any possible spread of the disease and ultimately eliminate it from the U.S. cattle population.
MR. ROGERS: "At this time, Operator, we'd like to open up the floor to questions.
OPERATOR: "Once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press *1. To withdraw your question you can press #2.
"Ira Dreyfus, your line is open, and please state your organization.
QUESTION: "Hi. I'm with the Associated Press, and I'm going to see if I can get two questions in here.
"The first one being, could you please give us the odds that this test is not a false positive? What I'm interested in is, as specifically as you can, the sensitivity and specificity of this test.
"Also, just to be clear on it, this was probably taken at a slaughterhouse. And I'm curious to see if the company that had the animal was given advance notice. Was this in fact at a slaughterhouse, and was this company given early notice before you went public with it -- as to the results?
DR. CLIFFORD: "The exact statistical analysis, we wouldn't want to provide that type of information or make those kind of conclusions at this point in time with regard to that-- only to say that the screening test such as this is very likely to have negative samples that show "inconclusive."
"And with regards to any particular location, the company actually was called to confirm the disposition of the animal and to assure that the carcass was being held.
"Again, it's not in the food supply or the animal feed supply.
MR. ROGERS: "Next question, Operator?
OPERATOR: "Bill Tomson, your line is open. Please state your organization.
QUESTION: "Yeah, hi. This is Bill Tomson with Oster Dow Jones.
"Dr. Clifford, thank you for doing this.
"Can you tell us, was it a cow? Can you tell us the age of the animal?
DR. CLIFFORD: "Again, we're not going to give out that information at this time. It's very likely this animal could be negative. We're going to wait and provide additional information after the tests are performed at our National Veterinary Services Laboratory.
MR. ROGERS: "Next question, Operator?
OPERATOR: "Michael McManus (sp), your line is open. Please state your organization.
QUESTION: "Yes. This is CNN.
"And my question has already been answered by a previous reporter. Can you just spell your first and last name and title for me?
DR. CLIFFORD: "It's John Clifford. It's JOHN CLIFFORD. And I'm the deputy administrator of USDA APHIS Veterinary Services. I'm also a DVM.
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, next question, please?
OPERATOR: "Phoebe Crouch (sp), your line is open. Please state your organization.
QUESTION: "I'm from National Public Radio.
"You didn't give an answer of whether the animal was detected at a slaughterhouse -- I mean, without being specific geographically where. At what point in the process was the animal tested?
MR. ROGERS: "Hi, everyone. This is Jim Rogers again. I'd just like to remind you that we will not be answering questions of such detail. We won't be giving a location or what the animal was destined for or anything of that nature. So, Operator, with that we'd like to move on to the next question.
OPERATOR: "Monica Conrad, your line is open.
QUESTION: "If we can just start out, why won't you tell us? Don't you think this is going to make people more confused? And whose decision was it not to give any details on this animal without giving exactly where it is and what farm it was coming from and what slaughterhouse it was at?
DR. CLIFFORD: "This is Dr. Clifford. The reason we've decided, we elected not to do that was because we don't want speculation out there with regards to a particular animal or location when it's very likely that this could be a negative animal. So we felt that it was best to wait until we had final tests before we would release that type of information if the animal was positive.
"In addition, that's the way we would deal with all of our disease screening tests. We're actually, other diseases we don't even necessarily release that type of information before because carcasses are not being held and because [audio break] and it's no risk to humans.
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, next question, please.
OPERATOR: "Michael Buchanan, please state your organization?
QUESTION: "I'm with the BBC.
"Two quick questions. One is, if this could be a negative test why give this press conference at 7:15 on a Friday. I mean, how many other cattle have come back with suspected positive tests that have turned out to be negative?
Secondly, will you be sending samples to the BSE Laboratory in England that you did back in December?
DR. CLIFFORD: "Because we want to be transparent, and we had indicated to individuals that we would be providing this kind of information.
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, next question, please?
OPERATOR: "Bob Huff (sp), please state your organization?
QUESTION: "Northwest Egg Information Network.
"I guess my question deals with since the meat is being held and won't be in the marketplace, why is it this preliminary result is publicized? So now the cattle markets are going to be in limbo for four to seven days not knowing what the impact may be.
DR. CLIFFORD: "Again, as we said, we wanted to be transparent, and we thought it was very important for the public to hear that from us versus the possibility of that information being leaked by someone else.
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, next question, please?
OPERATOR: "Wendy Kauffman, please state your organization?
QUESTION: "I'm with National Public Radio.
"I wondered if you could tell us, why was this cow tested? Was this part of routine screening, or was there a reason that this particular cow was tested?
DR. CLIFFORD: "This would fall under a larger scheme with regards to our expanded surveillance program. As we've talked about before, we're testing a high-risk population, and we are trying to collect as many animals from that population as we possibly can. We're also collecting samples from 20,000 apparently normal healthy animals as well in the U.S. as part of that expanded surveillance system for BSE.
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, next question, please?"
OPERATOR: "Monica Conrad, please state your organization."
QUESTION: "ABC News. I wanted to follow up.
"Tell us again, can you be more specific about the testing itself, to follow up on the last question? You said you were collecting animals from risk populations. What risk population was this animal in?"
DR. CLIFFORD: "As we stated in March in our expanded surveillance program, the high risk population we're talking about would be animals that would be nonambulatory, downers, animals that are showing central nervous system signs, animals that would die from unknown causes. So those are the type of animals that we're talking about.
"Also again we want to reiterate with this type of testing program this is not unexpected to have an inconclusive. This would be an expected occurrence."
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, we'll take the next question, please."
OPERATOR: "Michael Buchanan, please state your organization?"
QUESTION: "BBC again.
I just wanted to check, because I didn't hear the answer the last time, whether you will be sending samples to the laboratory in England or not."
DR. CLIFFORD: "No, we would not for this purpose. This would go to our National Veterinary Services Lab in Ames, Iowa."
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, next question, please?"
OPERATOR: "Ira Dreyfus, please state your organization?"
QUESTION: "Associated Press.
Just to be clear on it, when you're talking about the high risk animals, that indicates to me that this was not one of the healthy older animals that you also have classified for testing?"
DR. CLIFFORD: "This is to cast a wide net over all those animals as far as -- and we wouldn't be releasing information at this time with regards to what category it came from."
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, next question, please."
OPERATOR: "Sandy Dauton (sp), please state your organization?"
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, next question, please?"
OPERATOR: "Ira Dreyfus, your line is open."
QUESTION: "Looks like I'm asking all the questions here. I hate to have that happen. But I'm also curious to see if you can talk at all about how this is going to affect the ongoing negotiations to open trade with Japan. They've been insisting on testing of all animals of course, all slaughtered animals. And they have been very leery about accepting partial testing and very leery about, and somewhat leery about taking our products in again. How is this finding likely to affect our trade?"
DR. CLIFFORD: "We don't think at this point in time this would affect our trade with our trading partners. We've been in contact with our major trading partners with this issue. They understand what we're doing here with the screening tests, and so they're familiar also with these types of tests themselves."
MR. ROGERS: "Operator, at this time we have enough time for one more question, please."
OPERATOR: "Sandy Dauton (sp), your line is open."
QUESTION: "This is Sandy Dauton from the Seattle Times.
Out of your target of 220,000 or so animals that you wanted to test under the expanded program, how many false positives did you expect?"
DR. CLIFFORD: "Basically statistically we didn't want to come out with a specific number because we don't have really anything from an international standpoint where this has been widely used to draw from that matches specifically with our type of testing we're doing in the U.S. "
MR. ROGERS: "All right, Operator. Thank you very much. At this time I'm going to ask Dr. Clifford to make just a few more closing remarks. And we'll close it out from there."
DR. CLIFFORD: "I also just wanted to reiterate to everyone, this is our first inconclusive, which we do not unexpect. Actually we've tested a little over 7,000 animals so far in this program. And as we've stated before, this sample is going to our National Veterinary Services Lab. We would have those results back from NVSL within four to seven days. Thank you very much. We appreciate your participation."
MR. ROGERS: "Ladies and gentleman, that completes tonight's call. We will try to have a transcript of this session up on the website as soon as possible. Thank you very much, and have a good night."
#
|
|
|
|
|
Printable version
