: Also,if deer are being added to the rendering plant mix and the conjecture
: in the Boston Globe article turn out to be true that the TSE in deer has
: jumped to humans like the BSE did from the cattle in Britian, then could
: our poultry and swine industries ???which apparently still allow
: potentially infected meat byproducts in their feeds??? be the next
: carries of a TSE to humans?
I raise the question in this article that Prions have a long incubation
period. Cattle and sheep have a longer life span than poultry. How can we
be sure they are not carriers - the answer is we cannot. In my opinion BSE
is only one of the potential risks that we simply know too little about.
The use of casualty animals that have been treated has to also be a concern.
An expert in another country has told me that the rendering industry is very
poorly regulated and he is most concerned. Common sense tells me that we
should simply avoid these things. Consumers should have the right to know
what the animals were fed when buying their meat. We owe it to the animals
we are raising to ensure they are in optimum health and fed the best rations
that we can come up with.
As you will see from the focus of this article, I am involved in the Ratite
Industry - but the principals are the same for all species. I had one US
nutritionist tell me that I should not be speaking out on these products as
they have enabled the mass public to be able to afford meat on a regular
basis. That may have been true when the practice first started 40 or 50
years ago. Soymeal as a high quality protein source was not readily
available and the APPs were sourced from healthy animals at slaughter
plants.
In all these discussions it must never be overlooked that the situation has
arisen from consumer pressure to achieve their food as cheaply as possible.
==================================
ANIMAL BY-PRODUCTS IN RATITE DIETS
There have been many writings recently by Ratite feed companies, their
employees and nutritionists, about the use of Animal By-Products in
Ratite feeds - both pro and con. Most of these articles make reference
to many topics that are of great concern to me in our efforts to achieve
a sustainable market for our meat products.
Ostrich Meat`s greatest selling point is its health benefits as a red
meat. To feed them animal protein products from any source, in the light
of current evidence, does not in my opinion allow the industry to call
it a healthy red meat. I will return to this issue later.
Reference was made to the reasons being given for inclusion of' "carcass
meal" was as a result of research done in South Africa. As an Ostrich
Farmer in South Africa maybe this is an opportunity to provide a greater
understanding on the industry here.
Until 1993 the marketing of all ostrich products could only go through
one channel. Ostrich fanning had been conducted in an atmosphere of not
wishing too many ostriches to survive in fear of flooding the market.
Therefore maximum production was not a pre-requisite to formulating
rations. Many producers outside South Africa are not aware that hide and
feathers where the primary products and the meat was sold as a
by-product to the meat processing industry. It was not considered of
good enough quality to be sold fresh. That is why we still do not have a
developed ostrich meat market here in South Africa. For this reason
South Africa is NOT the ideal pattern to follow when developing feed
rations for high quality Ostrich meat, maximum production from breeder
birds, or maximum chick survivability.
To satisfy the hide and feather market a 14mth slaughter age was
considered the ideal. With meat quality and productivity NOT a
consideration. With deregulation came a number of new entrants to
Ostrich Farming in South Africa, these farmers have been looking to the
work done OUTSIDE South Africa as they were not satisfied with the feed
performance and information available from within South Africa. It
surprises me greatly that some US feed companies are trying to follow
South African recommendations.
At the First International Ostrich Meat Congress held at Oudtshoorn 12
months ago a clear message was sent to the industry. That message - if
we were to sell our meat we MUST ensure the quality is improved, that
the meat contains no animal by-products, no growth stimulants, no
routine use of antibiotics and all other "nasties" as perceived by the
consumer - OUR CUSTOMERS.
Following that meeting a number of our feed manufacturers here in South
Africa have listened to the message and now ensure that their feeds are
free of such products. Sadly not all yet.
Reference was made to the misconception that the animal by-products
impart an off-taste to the meat. This is NO misconception! The comment
has been made to me by a South African consumer on how he had recently
eaten Ostrich Meat and could taste the Fish Meal in the meat. He did not
like it. Have you ever been in a cold store where carcasses from animals
fed Fish Meal are hanging? It is more like walking into a fish store.
In other livestock, feeding onions and garlic will flavour the meat and
odour with onion and garlic. Alfalfa and Corn are neutral and do not
have strong flavours, but the total rations still needs to be a balanced
ration or odd flavours can result. Too much IRON in the diet from other
feedstuffs and minerals will cause Ostrich meat to taste somewhat like
liver. Liver is high in iron and that is why it has its distinct
flavour.
Meat quality - meat with off tastes, inconsistent texture, odd colour
etc. - was discussed at our most recent monthly South African Ostrich
industry meeting, it remains a problem to the development of our
industry. A pre-requisite to good quality meat in any species is fast
growth rates. The South African formulations were geared to obtaining
210 lbs at 12-14mths. These can be reached by 7mths with a well
formulated feed and in time, improved genetics combined with well
formulated feed will produce faster gains and larger birds. It is
interesting to note the improvements made in the last 7 years by Blue
Mountain Feeds Farmers - both in weight gains and overall production,
compared to the little change in 150 years of South African farming.
Whether or not animal by-products are legally allowed in the feed, we as
farmers have a responsibility and obligation NOT to use them in any of
our Ostrich livestock rations, including Breeders, as they will go to
slaughter someday and be turned into meat for our consumer. In the
light of the evidence about the health risks of Animal By-products in
animal feeds, we cannot continue to use them. Here a few examples why :
"The critical experiment came when Marsh inoculated scrapie infected
sheep brain into US cattle. [63] If you do this in England the cows go
mad, twitching [16] and kicking into a rabid frenzy. [12] But in
America, cows instead stagger to their deaths like downer cows do [65],
supporting the notion that a form of BSE is already here in the United
States."
"BSE has been able to infect and (therefore) kill cats, antelopes, and
even ostriches from presumably eating infected protein.[l]
Experimentally, one can give BSE to monkeys [56], pigs, mice, sheep,
goats [l], and chimpanzees. [8] There is no reason to believe that BSE
will not similarly infect humans. [8] So far, BSE has proven more
infectious than most other transmissible spongiform encephalopathies.
[39] In fact 6 out of 7 attempts to transfer the disease to different
mammalian species have been successful. [39] That does not bode well
for the human race."
"Spongiform encephalopathies are invariably fatal [29] neurodegenerative
[17] diseases. There is no treatment [55] nor cure. [18] The novel [3]
infectious agents evoke no immune response [50] and consequently slowly
accumulate [14] for an incubation period of up to 30 years. [60] You
can't detect them [28], isolate them [35], nor purify them. [13] In
fact, only an autopsy can tell if you ever even had them. [45] They
aren't viruses and they aren't bacteria. [66] The consensus is that
they are prions, or infectious proteins. [60] Without detectable DNA
nor RNA [41], not only does no one know how they replicate, but the
whole concept challenges the basic tenets of biology. [45]"
Last year the Nobel Prize in Medicine or Physiology was awarded to
Stanley B. Prusiner for his pioneering discovery of an entirely new
genre of disease-causing agents and the elucidation of the underlying
principles of their mode of action. The infectious particles that
Prusiner discovered, which he named prions (PREE-ons). are made of
protein and do not contain any genes or genetic material -- a detail
that distinguishes them from all other kinds of infectious agents such
as viruses, bacteria, fungi and parasites. Prusiner began his search for
prions in 1972, after one of his patients died from dementia resulting
from Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, the human equivalent of "mad cow"
disease. He has linked the prions to other degenerative brain disorders
including Altzheimers Disease and Kuru in humans and Scrapies in sheep.
Prusiner has showed that prion diseases can sometimes be passed from one
species to another. This work has taken 25 years. How can anyone be
absolutely sure that recycling Animal By-Products back into the food
chain is not building up further problems for the future that are still
unidentified? The answer is WE CANNOT.
Comment was made that bans on animal by-products only referred to sheep
and cattle products. This as a result of the link between transmission
from sheep to cattle. It must be remembered that cattle have a very much
longer life than swine or poultry. When reading the above and the still
unknown incubation time of some of these prions, can we be sure that
they are not present in swine and poultry, who do not live long enough
for such diseases to develop? The answer is WE CANNOT.
Before moving to South Africa I was a dairy farmer in the UK. Never did
I question what I was feeding my cattle. I trusted my feed company. When
the BSE outbreak hit - it was not the feed companies that where blamed
by the press even though they where the ones formulating the Animal
By-Products in the feed. The blame was attributed to us farmers for
being greedy and putting profit before our consumers health and safety
by allowing and purchasing feed with Animal By-Products in them.
It is clearly evident that the only way feed companies call be forced to
change their practices is from pressure from the farmers. The best
producing ostriches both here in South Africa and in the US are reared
on feeds free of any animal protein products. The technology to replace
Animal by-products in feeds has existed for over 30 years - there is NO
GOOD REASON for feed companies to be using these products as superior
bird productivity and meat quality can be better achieved without them.
My ideas and opinions are not intended to do damage to any livestock
industry whatsoever. In fact, my concern is to help livestock farmers
in general and ostrich ranchers in particular, by asking each to take
the RESPONSIBILITY for what your livestock is fed to protect YOUR
industry. There is enough evidence about the feeding of Animal
by-products to cause a health risk concern. It is the opinion of many
that there are FAR TOO MANY DOUBTS regarding the safe use of these
products. In the light of the evidence that is available farmers and
nutritionists have a RESPONSIBILITY and OBLIGATION NOT to use these
products in our animal feeds when the animal is used for human
consumption.
References
I . J. of Nutritional Medicine (1992) 3: 149-151
2. Animal Health Insight (1992) Autumn: 1-7
3. Moscow Indiana Daily News (1993) December 22:1A,3A
4. Consumer Policy Institute Testimony before Joint Meeting of FDA FAC
and VMAC (1993) May 6:5-6
5. J. of Agricultural Economics (1992)43(1):96-103
6. Nature (1993) 365:93
7. New Age Journal (1990) Nov/Dec:8-9
8. In These Times (1994) Jan 24:12-13
9. Biological Science 5th edition (1993) by Keeton and Gould
10. Medical Laboratory Sciences (1992) 49(3):216-7
11. Nursing Times (1993) 89(38): 19
12. Proceedings Amer. Assn. of Bovine Practitioners Convention (1992)
24:19
13. Medical Laboratony Sciences (1992) 49(4):334-9
14. Ecologist (l991l) 21(3):117-122
15. Drovers Journa1 (1994) Jan:42
16. Discover(l991) Apr:69-74
17. Dev Biol Stand (1993) 80:15-23
18. Alternatives 18(3):9-10
19. Nature (l990) 345:280
20. Nature (l990) 343:196
21. In These Times (1993) May 31:12-15
22. Economist (1990) Feb 3:89-90
23. Veterinary Record (1990) Jun 30:632
24. Lancet (1990) 335:343
25. Veterinary Record (1990) Jun 23:626
26. Lancet (1990) May 26:1252
27. New Scientist (1992) Jun 13:9
28. British Medical Journal (1990) 300:412-3
29. British Medical Journal(1988) 296:1581-2
30. New Scientist (1993) Mar 20.5
31. Nature (1990) 345:648
32. Sub-acute Spongiform Encephalopathies, edited by R. Brad1y
(1991):179-186
33. Lancet (1990) 336:1300-2
34. US News and World Report (1990) Jul 2:44
35. Scientific American (1990) May:34
36. Science (1990) 249:1492-3
37. Economist (1990) Jul 28:69
38. British Food Journal (1992) 94(9):23-6
39. British Medical Journal (1993) 95(8):22-34
40. Veterinary Record (1992) Jul 4:2
41. Economist (1991) Jun 22:92-3
42. Veterinary Record (1992) Feb 15:146
43. New Scientist (1990) Jun 9:32-4
44. Veterinary Record (1990) Nov 3:440-1
45. Lancet (1988) Sep 10:607-8
46. Bulletin of the World Health Organization (1992) 70(2): 183-190
47. Advances in Virus Research (1992) 41:257
48. Dev Biol Stand (1993) 80:157-170
49. Dev Biol Stand (1993) 80:111-8
50. Prion Diseases of Humans and Animals. edited by Bradley B. et al.
(1992):285-299
51. Wall Street Journal (1992) Jun 29
52. Dev Biol Stand (1993) 80:119-121
53. New Scientist (1993) Oct 9:50-1
54. Sub-acute Spongiform Encephalopathies edited by R. Brad1y
(1991):41-6
55. Nutrition and Health (1991) 7(3):117-134
56. Veterinary Record (1993) Apr 17:403-5
57. British Medical Journal(1992) 304:929-930
58. British Medical Journal (1992) 304:1509
59. Food Microbiology (1990) 7:253-279
60. Lancet (1993) 342:790-3
61. Sub-acute Spongiform Encephalopathies, edited by R.
Bradly(1991):195-202
62. Nature (1993) 365:386
63. Sub-acute Spongiform Encephalopathies, edited by R. Bradly
(1991):272-274
64. Nature (1993) 365:98
65. Wisconsin State Journal (1993) Sep 26:1C
66. Capital Times (1993) Sep 11:6A
67. Mosby's Medical and Nursing Dictionary 2nd Edition (1986)
Regards
Fiona Benson
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail