![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.510416666666667in"
height="1.4583333333333333in"} Release. 0187.03\
\
**Transcript of Tele-News Conference with Dr. Brian Evans, Chief
Veterinary Officer, Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Dr. Claude
Lavigne, Associate Executive Director, Animal Products, CFIA, Dr. Ron
DeHaven, Deputy Administrator of Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service**

**(APHIS), USDA and Dr. Lester Crawford, Deputy Commissioner, FDA**

**Wednesday June 4, 2003**

**DR. EVANS:** Bon jour. Thank you for joining us. I will bring you up
to date on our ongoing BSE investigation. And following the remarks of
Dr. Lavigne and our U.S. colleagues, we\'ll open the floor to questions.

Let me begin with a brief overview of what we have done and an overview
of the testing that is still ongoing. As you know, a total of 18
premises were placed under quarantine. They involve the original Alberta
case farm and one farm where the infected cow commingled on a pasture; a
total of 10 farms in Alberta and Saskatchewan, as part of our trace-back
investigations where the infected cow had come from through the course
of her life\--and these farms had been divided between a primary and
secondary line of inquiry; in addition, three Alberta farms in our
trace-forward investigation, where the cow\'s offspring may have moved;
and three locations in British Columbia that received feed derived from
the rendered BSE-infected cow and had ruminant on those premises.

We completed the sampling and testing of the three Alberta trace-forward
farms. Those tests, as you are aware, came back negative and we lifted
the quarantine on these premises, which left 15 locations under active
investigation. We have received complete test results from the case farm
and the commingled farm in Alberta and from both the Saskatchewan farms.
These have all come back negative.

Today I would like to report that we have also completed the rapid test
for one of the Alberta farms in the primary line of inquiry and for the
three quarantined locations in British Columbia. Again, they have all
come back negative.

Yesterday over 260 head of cattle, which were the extended trace-outs
from our primary line of inquiry were depopulated, bringing the total to
date to just over 1,500 animals. In keeping with the thoroughness of our
investigation, young calves, regrettably, had to be slaughtered to
ensure that they did not enter the food chain at some point in the
future. They will not be tested, however, as they are too young to have
developed the disease.\
\
These are difficult but necessary decisions. We empathize with the
farmers and their families involved in these trying circumstances.

\--More\--\
\
\
\
\
Earlier today, the first shipment of some 240 cattle from farms in the
secondary line of inquiry arrived at the abattoir. Samples will be
airlifted to our laboratories this evening. We are awaiting test results
from approximately currently 500 animals from two farms in Alberta as
part of our trace-back and trace-out investigations in the first line of
inquiry.

As part of the CFIA\'s comprehensive trace-out investigation, we have
identified the movement of five bulls to a farm in the United States.
This is not an unusual occurrence, as movement of cattle between the
countries has been common over a number of years. Representatives, as
you are aware, from the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and
the Food and Drug Administration will make a brief statement following
my and Claude\'s opening remarks.

For those of you that would be assisted by a visual demonstration of the
status of our investigation, we have updated the diagram of the
investigation activities on the CFIA website, at www.inspection.gc.ca.
Our portal there has a link to the site called \"BSE Disease
Investigation in Western Canada.\" If you scroll down, you\'ll find the
diagram of investigation activities, and there you will see the
schematic that we use to outline our investigations, the test results to
date, and the status of quarantines. Again, that\'s at
www.inspection.gc.ca.

Our investigation is ongoing and progressing as planned. We remain
committed to keeping you all informed as meaningful information becomes
available. Thank you.

**DR. LAVIGNE:** \[French spoken.\]

**MODERATOR:** I believe Dr. DeHaven has also a statement to make?

**DR. DeHAVEN**: Thank you very much. I would like to start by
expressing my appreciation to the Canadian health officials for
including us on the call today and, more importantly, for their constant
and detailed communication with us on the progress of this
investigation.

As has been reported on Tuesday, June 3, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
reported to the U.S. Department of Agriculture\'s Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service, or APHIS, that their investigation indicates
that five bulls from one of the potential source herds in Canada were
sold to a farm in Montana. Following up on this information, APHIS,
along with Montana state veterinary officials, are in the initial stages
of conducting investigation in an effort to determine the final
disposition of these five animals. This investigation is consistent with
the investigation ongoing in Canada and, we think, will contribute to
that overall investigation.

So far, records indicate that the animals were born in Saskatchewan in
1996, and left Canada for Montana on or about April 28, 1997. Through an
initial review of brand inspection records and interviews with the
Montana rancher, our investigators have determined that 11 bulls were
sold from this farm to three different stockyards, one in Montana and
two in South Dakota, during the period of 1999 to 2002. Presumably, the
five bulls in question were included in these 11-sold during that time
period. Montana State and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
personnel are working with the owners and will be contacting these
market operators to determine the final disposition of these bulls.

\--More\--

For several reasons, USDA believes that it is unlikely that any of these
bulls were infected with BSE. The Canadian herd that the bulls came from
was depopulated, and those cattle have tested negative for BSE,
including cattle born in the same year as the one positive cow. Research
indicates that a low dose of infection results in a longer incubation
period. As the infected cow in Canada was about seven years old, that
suggests that the infected animal received a low dose of BSE. Any
exposure to BSE to the other animals in that herd would presumably be
even lower.

In Europe, where animal exposure to BSE has been the greatest, herds
affected by BSE typically have a very low prevalence of disease and
usually do not have additional positive cows in the infected herds.

If the investigation reveals that the bulls were slaughtered, it was
after implementation of the FDA feed ban, thus ensuring that these
animals did not enter into the animal feed chain. Consistent with the
science and international standards, we know that bovine semen is not a
means of transmitting the disease, so the fact that these were breeding
bulls is not of concern, from a scientific standpoint.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to participate in the call.

**MODERATOR:** Dr. Crawford?

**DR. CRAWFORD**: Yes, thank you very much. I also want to thank the
Government of Canada for including FDA, and also thank Ron DeHaven from
APHIS for his report.

Following on to that report, let me give you the FDA response to these
most recent developments. The FDA animal feed regulations that have been
in place since 1997 will have protected cattle in the U.S. from exposure
to any rendered products from any of these five bulls that have died. By
preventing outbreaks of BSE in U.S. cattle, these regulations help
assure the safety of the U.S. food supply.

The risk to humans of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease associated with
single cases of BSE is immeasurably small. Only countries that have
experienced large outbreaks of BSE in their cattle herds have
experienced domestically acquired variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in
people.

In the U.S. there is active surveillance for both BSE in cattle and
variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in people. No BSE has been identified
in the U.S. since surveillance started in 1989, and the single case of
variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease that has been diagnosed in the U.S.
had onset of symptoms in 2002 after having lived in the United Kingdom
during the period of greatest exposure to contaminated beef in the
United Kingdom.

Thank you very much.

**MODERATOR:** Thank you very much. I\'ll take questions from the floor.

**QUESTION:** Can I just go over the\--these bulls that were then
\[inaudible\], my understanding is that they have been killed between
Montana and South Dakota, those bulls that were exported to the United
States?

\--More\--

**\
\
\
DR.** : Our investigation is\--

**DR. EVANS**: If Ron or Lester can hear the question, that that is an
investigation that is ongoing in the United States. We do not have
definitive information at this time from a Canadian perspective as to
what the status of the bulls are in the U.S. at the current time. I
believe\--Ron, are you or Lester able to hear the question and respond?\
**\
DR. DeHAVEN**: I am indeed. Thank you. Our investigation is in the very
initial stages, and we simply don\'t have that information yet. The
information we have suggests that after arriving at the farm in Montana,
they spent one to three years and have been sold. We are in the process
of trying to determine the exact disposition on those bulls, so we
don\'t have that information at this time.

**\
MODERATOR:** I have Tracy Wright from CTV.

**QUESTION:** I was just wondering if there\'s been any change from the
United States\' perspective on products from Canada crossing the border
and whether that might change in the near future, beef products?

**DR. EVANS:** I\'m not sure if Ron or Lester have heard the question
relative to any changes in the U.S. interim measures.

**DR. CRAWFORD:** Speaking for FDA, we don\'t intend any changes at this
time.

**DR. DeHAVEN:** Let me respond on behalf of USDA, and I would remind
everyone that the investigation is ongoing. We are evaluating that
information as it continues to become available to us from Canada. But
the fact of the matter is, we still have trace-backs from the index herd
pending. There are DNA test results pending, and other critical parts of
the investigation are still in progress.

So at this point it would be just not appropriate for us to make any
comment on potentially lifting restrictions at this time.

**QUESTION:** As a follow up, will the information that we have now
about these bulls delay that process or make that take a little longer
than just the investigation as it is going on in Canada?

**DR. DeHAVEN:** Dr. Evans, if I could respond? I would suggest that we
are pursuing our portion of the investigation regarding these five bulls
expeditiously. We don\'t anticipate that this investigation and our
ability to trace them to a final disposition would in any way inhibit
any future action with regard to movement of animals or product over the
border. It\'s in everyone\'s best interest that we pursue that as
quickly as possible, but at the same time making sure that we are very
thorough in doing that work as well.

**MODERATOR:** \[French spoken.\]

**QUESTION**: \[French spoken.\]

\--More\--

**\
DR. LAVIGNE:** \[French spoken.\]

**QUESTION:** \[French spoken.\]

**DR. LAVIGNE:** \[French spoken.\]

**QUESTION:** \[French spoken.\]

**DR. LAVIGNE:** \[French spoken.\]

**MODERATOR:** Jennifer Triumph, \[inaudible\].

**QUESTION:** I\'m wondering if the Americans can address if they would
consider a complete ban on ruminant feed, either in the time being or in
the future?

**DR.** : Could you repeat the question please, Dr. Evans?

**QUESTION:** Or why are you considering a complete ban on ruminant feed
to all livestock?

**\
DR.** : Could somebody repeat that? We\'re having a little trouble
hearing.

**DR. EVANS:** I\'ll do my best. The question relates to, are you, or
would you be considering an extension of your current feed restrictions
to ban the feeding of ruminant material to all species of animals?

**DR. CRAWFORD:** No, we\'re not intending that at the present time. We
have a ruminant to ruminant ban, but not a total mammalian ban at this
point.

**QUESTION:** Why wouldn\'t you consider it?

**DR. CRAWFORD:** Well, we have a BSE response plan, and it\'s
predicated on a couple of things. One is if we have BSE in this country
and it\'s diagnosed and confirmed, then we\'d consider some
modifications, including the one that you asked about. But at this time
we don\'t have BSE confirmed in the U.S. And so we\'re not making any
changes in the plan. It\'s protected us since 1989, and so we intend to
keep the plan in place.

**MODERATOR:** I\'ll now go to people on line.

**OPERATOR:** The first question comes from the line of Terry Donnelly
from CBC Radio Vancouver. Please go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you very much. I\'m just wondering what is the
status of the quarantine for the B.C. farms and when might the
quarantine status be lifted there?

**DR. EVANS:** As we reported yesterday, we had partial results on the
rapid test from B.C. Overnight we were able to conclude the balance of
the rapid test on the B.C. herd. Those are animals that were exposed to
feed for a very brief time, perhaps accidentally or inadvertently.

\--More\--

Our understanding at this time is that the additional tests, the IHCD
immuno histochemistry test results should be available to us
momentarily. With those results and with any clean up of any residual
feed on those farms that would preclude any ruminant animals having
access to that feed, those quarantines will be lifted.

**QUESTION:** In a matter of days then?

**DR. EVANS:** Again, that\'s certainly our intent at this point in
time. It will depend on the assessment of our local staff, our
investigation staff, as to the thoroughness of the clean up of any
residual feed that would be on the farm.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MODERATOR:** Next question on line.

**OPERATOR:** Our next question comes from the line of Steve Kay from
Cattle Buyers Weekly. Please go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Dr. Evans, correct me if I\'m wrong, but your various
previous statements have indicated that CFIA has found no breaches in
any rules or regulations relating to feeding practices and where you\'ve
found any uncertainty regarding possible exposure to possibly
contaminated material, you\'ve tested those carefully and they\'ve\--all
those tests have come back negative. You still have not completed, or
you\'ve not said that you\'ve completed examination of the feeding
aspect of this case.

My question is kind of two parts. What gaps therefore remain in the feed
investigation? And when will that investigation be completed? And if
indeed you find no feed link, you said yesterday that it was
very\--you\'re lucky to be able to conclusively prove that you had
no\--there was no maternal transmission, and if there\'s no bull link,
as the USDA was just now suggesting, does that leave spontaneous as the
only other possible cause, which would then mean that another case could
be found at some time in the future?

**DR. EVANS:** I guess to break the question down at levels, the feed
investigation has been operating at several levels. The first dealt with
the trace-out of the material that may have been derived from the
carcass of the animal after it was diverted from the human food chain,
and as we\'ve indicated in that circumstance, following the path of that
animal to the rendering plant, it was rendered through a dedicated line,
and went through various other sources, to feed mills.

At the food mill level we found full compliance with any of the rendered
material. The records soundly indicated that any of the product that was
processed from that material was again through dedicated lines for
poultry feed only, and so at that level. And the labeling of all the
material that left at that time was clearly labeled \"For poultry use
only. Not for use in ruminants.\" So at that level, as I say, the
investigation has shown very, very good compliance with the restrictions
in place.

\--More\--

Subsequent to that, say we did some trace-outs to farms that had
received the material as well, which led us into the circumstance in
B.C. where we could not totally exclude that some ruminant animals may
have inadvertently, through grazing or had the ability to move through
areas where there may have been some residual feed, and those were dealt
with as you\'ve indicated.

A subset of that was the targeting of 200 farms, which is still an
active investigation. We\'re reaching the midway point of those 200
farms that received material from the eight feed mills, again, to
reverify what\'s on the farm, the feed that was received, how it was
labeled and how it was handled at the farm level, and that still remains
a work in progress.

Relative to the investigations and our lines of inquiries, there has
been a feed component to that as well. Looking at what the feeding
practices were on these farms, dating back to the 1995-96 critical time
period and where feeds may have been sourced. Again, I don\'t have full
reports on all of that. That\'s still work that\'s being compiled by our
Operation Center people out in Alberta.

There was a third component to your question?

**OPERATOR:** Just one moment, and I\'ll open up that line one more
time.

**DR. EVANS:** Oh, sorry. It\'s come back to me now. It was the issue of
whether or not, as we conclude, or come to conclusions in our
investigation, whether we will come to a conclusion of spontaneous.
Well, again, as we\'ve said from the outset, and as was reiterated again
by Dr. Crawford and others, and will be reiterated by any international
expert, certainly the most probable source of expression of BSE in any
herd is related to a level of exposure to contaminated feed. Part of our
investigation obviously is looking at whether again if there was
contaminated feed, was it feed that was contaminated and fed prior to
our 1997 feed restriction, or was there some carryover or some
noncompliance that followed after 1997? And that is part of the
investigation on each of the farms that we have had under inquiry.

And again, to the level that I\'ve received information, again, we
continue to express a high level of credibility with all of the farmers
in terms of adhering to those practices. Beyond that, getting into the
issue of spontaneous, again, the issue of spontaneous BSE expression in
cattle, as we said from the outset, is considered in some quarters as
feasible, but at an extremely remote level, one in the millions of
expressions will be spontaneous.\
\
So again, we have not rushed to judgment on these. The information that
we\'ve gathered is extensive, and we\'re in the stages now of putting
that into perspective. Again, until we have completed that, we will not
speculate in any way. Our judgment will be based solely on the findings
of what we have, and the findings of our International Review Team that
will help us in that regard.

**MODERATOR:** I have someone in the room before we go back to the line.

**QUESTION:** A question for Dr. Crawford on the line if he can hear me.
You said earlier that the risk from a single case would be extremely
remote, and that unless there was a mass outbreak, there really
wouldn\'t be a tangible risk to human health. Can you explain then why
it is the import ban remains in place?

\--More\--

**\
DR. CRAWFORD:** The import ban is a standard procedure that occurs when
a country trades with a country that has a diagnosed and confirmed BSE
case. It is true that there is only one case, and the U.S. is
cooperating very closely with Canada in terms of determining what the
actual risks are. But until Canada completes its investigation\--I\'m
sure they would follow the same kinds of procedures as virtually every
other country does\--that you put in place these kinds of restrictions.

We first did that with the United Kingdom in the 1980s, and we
essentially closed down the borders to British products until we could
make some determinations, including a risk assessment. And this is the
same procedure that we\'re following here.

**QUESTION:** Can you see if in fact the reverse would be true if the
same circumstances were \[inaudible\] out on the other side of the
border now?

**DR. EVANS:** Again, I can\'t speculate. It\'s difficult to imagine
that we would have responded differently in the short term. I think that
is a fair statement by anybody. And again, it comes back to a comment
that I made previously earlier in the week, that at one level I
think\--from a regulatory perspective internationally, this disease has
been problematic at a global level, and that in my judgment, it is my
judgment that as regulatory officials and public health officials, we
don\'t discount the significant human consequences and public health
consequences that can be attributed to this disease.

But as Dr. Crawford has indicated, and as we have come to learn from
experiences in other countries over the past 14 years with the
advancements in science that have come forward, I don\'t think we\'ve
done a very effective job as regulators in trying to debunk some of the
myths and some of the horrors that people attach to this disease. I
think it needs to be kept in some level of perspective.

But again, I would certainly expect that if the circumstances had been
reversed, Canada\'s initial response would have been to apply interim
measures to allow the U.S. time to assess and report on the
circumstance, and again, I would have expected that we would have the
same level of collaboration and communication as we\'re currently
having.

Again, I think everybody\'s been very open about this, that both
countries would like to have this border issue dealt with, and dealt
with on a scientific basis as expeditiously as possible. That\'s
certainly our intent, through our investigation, is to be expeditious
but to be thorough, because again, the public health and food safety
realities demand that we are accountable at the end of the day for what
we have done.

So again, we\'re working hard on this investigation. I mean I can\'t say
enough about the provincial brand inspectors, about our staff in the
field, the laboratory people. This has been a tremendous team effort
across the board to try to get where we are. I know it seems difficult
for people on the outside to realize that, again, we\'re only 2, 2-1/2
weeks since the confirmation, and I think we\'ve done extraordinary
work.

But nevertheless, people are demanding of more answers, and we\'re
determined to get them.

**MODERATOR**: Thank you. Can we go back to the lines first?

\--More\--

**OPERATOR:** Absolutely. Our next question. \[French spoken.\]

**QUESTION**: \[French spoken.\]

**DR. LAVIGNE:** \[French spoken.\]

**MODERATOR:** Next person on line?

**OPERATOR:** Our next question comes from the line of Nicholas Reed,
Vancouver Sun. Please go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Hello. I want more information about the BC situation,
please. You say once the quarantine is lifted on these three farms\--and
as I understand it, that could be within a period of days\--are there
any plans to investigate other BC farms?

**DR. EVANS:** I can\'t comment at this point in time. I\'ll just say I
know there was a selection made of 200 farms that had purchased feed
from the eight feedmills that were in that line of inquiry. I don\'t
currently have the details of where those farms are located, but would
certainly be prepared to try and get that information put together. I
don\'t have it at that level of detail at this point.

**QUESTION:** And how certain are you, after the rapid test, that there
is no BSE on those three BC farms? Is that a conclusive test?

**DR. EVANS:** Yes, it is. The Prionics test that we\'re using for rapid
diagnostics is a test that has been validated internationally. It\'s
used in 11 of the countries of the European Union, by Australia and
others as stand-alone tests. It is a methodology that has come into very
active use internationally over the last 18 months. We have a high
degree of confidence in the test, and the quality-assurance components
of this test have been performing extremely well and have been further
corroborated by the additional testing that we\'ve done using other test
methods\--the immuno-histo-chemistry and direct microscopy, which have
been the tests that had been used prior to this test becoming available
internationally. And again, these have been consistently negative across
the board as well.

**MODERATOR:** Operator, do we still someone on line, because we have
time for one more question.

**OPERATOR:** Absolutely. Our next question comes from the line of Mike
Raym \[ph\], Western Producer. Please go ahead.

**QUESTION:** A question for Dr. Crawford or Dr. DeHaven. Are there any
quarantines being placed on any U.S. farms at this time? And which DNA
results are you waiting for at this time from the Canadian side?

> \--More\--
>
> **\
> **
>
> **DR. DeHAVEN:** There have been no quarantines placed on the U.S.
> side, mainly because the animals in question, the five bulls, are no
> longer on the farm and, because this is not a disease that is
> transmitted by casual contact, there would be no purpose in imposing a
> quarantine at this point. Our main focus is clearly to see if we can
> determine the final disposition of those animals, tracing them
> through, potentially, stockyards and perhaps to slaughter.

While the DNA results, as I understand them and as reported to me by Dr.
Evans, thus far have not been able to conclusively determine the birth
herd for the infected cow, there is still, as I understand, some DNA
test results that may be pending. That is clearly just one component,
and perhaps a small component, of the overall investigation and some of
the information that is still forthcoming. So we will proceed as if this
potentially was the source herd from which these bulls came, but as yet
we don\'t know that for sure. And perhaps yet some of the DNA test
results may be able to determine that more conclusively.

**MODERATOR:** Thank you very much.

\[End of briefing.\]

\- - -

\#