USDA Mad Cow Coverup Unravels

[CVX]

By Robert Cohen

Not Milk.com



I now realize that there may never again be a confirmed case of Mad Cow Disease during the George Bush Administration. Oh, the diseased animals are out there, but in the name of homeland security, we are being "protected" in this Orwell-like twenty first century by rulers who think we need sheltering. We may never know the true reason that Ann Veneman resigned her post as USDA's boss the day after the latest Mad Cow incident began. Shortly before her (forced?) resignation, she remarked that her intention was to serve through a second term. Did she leave because she was ordered to fudge the Mad Cow results? I've discovered new evidence that is quite suggestive of a continuing coverup. You be the judge, as I reveal disturbing new information in this column.



The problem with lying, is that many lies have to be told to cover up the original lie, so that the liar often forgets to protect the original lie.



Records show that after USDA concluded that the pre-Thanksgiving cow was not a Mad Cow, they then began to test an unprecedented number of other cows. Had the test come back negative, USDA would logically have gone back to previous test levels. Instead, significantly more animals were tested.



During that ten week period prior to the discovery of America's latest case of Mad Cow Disease, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) examined the brains of 60,655 slaughtered creatures. That's an average of 6,066 per week.



During that one week period of discovery (11/15-11/21), USDA tested 7,900 cows, an increase of 1,835 over the previous ten week average. Such a dramatic increase makes sense, of course, but what followed after USDA's "safe" conclusion contradicts USDA's lie.



Once USDA fudged the results, I anxiously awaited the following week's data. Was USDA telling the truth? If so, it would have been logical to return to the previous test level of 6,066 tested animals per week. If USDA officials were more concerned than they let on, the test numbers would be close or would exceed the key week's 7,900 level.



Here are the results.



During the Thanksgiving week of November 22-November 28, how many cows were tested for Mad Cow Disease? Most of America enjoyed two weekdays days off of work, plus a weekend. A shortened four day work week had to have resulted in fewer animals being tested, particularly after USDA's big lie. So, from 11/22-11/28, just 5,878 animals were tested. If USDA had been telling the truth, the following week's testing would have reverted to the running 6,000 average or lower. If USDA had fudged the test data, the following week's data would have jumped through the roof. So I waited. And watched.



Here's the surprise. Last week, from 11/29 through 12/3, USDA tested 9,110 animals. See their test history:



http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/

issues/bse_testing/test_results.html



Tiny URL: http://tinyurl.com/5f2qu



The numbers do not lie. They expose USDA's lie. Over 9,000 cows were tested last week by concerned USDA regulators. An increase of fifty-five percent! Had there been no mad cow, the numbers would have been much lower, not 55% higher. More cows were tested because the cow was positive for Mad Cow. USDA lied to America to protect cattlemen.



Only USDA's Department of Enlightenment (Propaganda) lies. Mad Cow is here, and in order to do damage control, insiders are in a panic, testing more animals to prevent the coming plague. Why test more animals? Because USDA confirmed that the original animal tested positive. Had it not, USDA most certainly would have returned to routine testing. They are now in an accelerated testing mode for good reason. It's here...



Mad Cow Testing Timeline



During that ten week period prior to November 18th, 2004, USDA tested 60,660 cows for Mad Cow Disease, or an average of 6,066 per week, or an average of 867 cows per day.



_________________

November 15, 2004-Oklahoma Cow suspected of Mad Cow Disease

November 16, 2004-USDA Secretary Ann Veneman Resigns

November 17, 2004

November 18, 2004-USDA First announces positive Mad Cow Test

November 19, 2004 November 20, 2004**(X=1129 cows tested each day this week)

November 21, 2004

_________________

November 22, 2004

November 23, 2004-USDA Announces 7900 Cows Tested 11/15-11/21

November 24, 2004-USDA Announces no Mad Cow Disease

November 25, 2004-Traditional Day Off Before Thanksgiving

November 26, 2004-Thanksgiving Day

November 27, 2004

November 28, 2004**(X=839 cows tested each day this week)

_________________

November 29, 2004

November 30, 2004-USDA Announces 5878 Cows Tested 11/22-11/28

December 01, 2004

December 02, 2004

December 03, 2004**(X=1301 cows tested each day this week)

December 04, 2004

December 05, 2004

_________________

December 06, 2004

December 07, 2004-USDA Announces 9110 Cows Tested 11/29-12/5



Had the original cow tested negative, USDA would have shifted their testing procedures into neutral, or into a lower gear. Instead, they now have their accelerator to the floor in the highest gear in their history. That's because they know the truth, and it's panic time at USDA. Now that the truth be known, do not expect future numbers to be true. They will fudge their future results. This time atound they were caught with their pants down. How can you be sure? Do not drink the milk. Do not eat the meat.



Bottom line: After lying to America, USDA increased their testing from 839 cows per day to 1301 cows per day, an increase of 55%! Such an increase reflects extremely concerned bureaucrats. The numbers do not lie.



Robert Cohen

http://www.notmilk.com



Forward this message to your milk-drinking friends:



MILK from A to Z: http://www.notmilk.com/milkatoz.html



2O QUESTIONS: http://www.notmilk.com/notmilkfaq.html

[Bill Sikes]

CVX wrote: (BSE)


I wouldn't be surprised if BSE is discovered that it's covered up... the only country that has had wide disclosure of BSE cases is the UK. Cases *have* occurred elsewhere, but apparently these have been isolated, and "probably caused by stock being fed on imported (British) feed" - this is rather a surprise to me, as farming practices in this area are very similar in developed countries worldwide. If someone says otherwise, quite frankly I'd disbelieve it. However, the flip side is that there's no evidence that BSE is easily transferrable to people, so it might not matter too much anyway.

[gmc]

posted by bill sikes

I wouldn't be surprised if BSE is discovered that it's covered up... the only country that has had wide disclosure of BSE cases is the UK. Cases *have* occurred elsewhere, but apparently these have been isolated, and "probably caused by stock being fed on imported (British) feed" - this is rather a surprise to me, as farming practices in this area are very similar in developed countries worldwide. If someone says otherwise, quite frankly I'd disbelieve it. However, the flip side is that there's no evidence that BSE is easily transferrable to people, so it might not matter too much anyway.


even more remarkable when you consider that the cattle ffed deemed respobsible was used throughout europe.. Le's hiope the pessimists are wrong.

[minks]

I would like to contribute my canadian bit here

That attack on Canada regarding Mad Cow, was very deep cutting and did nothing to aid in the US Canada relations. We are just now recovering from it and even to date the border isn't fully opened to Alberta beef.

How many more times is Bush going to kick Canadians in the teeth.

1 cow and it crippled the canadian beef industry so badly.

[Bill Sikes]

minks wrote: IThat attack on Canada regarding Mad Cow, was very deep cutting and did nothing to aid in the US Canada relations. We are just now recovering from it and even to date the border isn't fully opened to Alberta beef.

How many more times is Bush going to kick Canadians in the teeth.

1 cow and it crippled the canadian beef industry so badly.


It seems a good excuse for protectionism... the same thing happened to Britain WRT Europe. Unfortunately, when cases of BSE were discovered in Europe, our craven Govt. din not issue a reciprocal ban.

[A Karenina]

Lying is such a rough word to use. I don't think the USDA has much power to do anything about contaminated meat even though that is it's function. From what I've read that power wasn't stripped away during Bush's term, but in Clinton's...although it hasn't been strong in decades.



It's ridiculous to think we don't have Mad Cow here. So, same refrain - use organics whenever possible.