Talk:Bovine spongiform encephalopathy/Archive 2

600 degrees Celsius ?
I don't think it is possible for any such complex organic matter to survive at 600 degrees Celsius! This is a glowing heat temperature.81.232.46.72 (talk) 00:04, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you have a question or a proposal to the article? The source is from the National Academy of Sciences. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC16254/ MartinezMD (talk) 02:08, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

That tidbit seems suggests that lowered temperatures as part of new regulations on cattle feed allowed the infectious agent to proliferate, implying that it wouldn't have survived higher temperatures. I believe this has already been shown to be false--the agent would have survived the temperatures used in the old feed processes anyway and it had showed up in the country fairly recently. I remember early news reports hypothesized this too, but we know that it's essentially a red herring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CF8F:CB70:F05E:715E:E079:1F6C (talk) 03:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

it have been in norway 2 times
once because of some kind of sheep disease making its way into the food eaten by the cows(sometimes during the 1990s i believe) and once recently but cause unknown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.213.45.196 (talk) 23:40, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Bovine spongiform encephalopathy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081216222704/http://www.uk.foedevarestyrelsen.dk/NR/rdonlyres/ewjvkzzucvuygkq42gxj6umioovybp7ro2oirh77lz4kacv72gwfhuv6gmt4g643hvuhg4t2wgmynpbco2zpem2ucte/StatusreportonBSEandscrapieinDenmarkMay20071.pdf to http://www.uk.foedevarestyrelsen.dk/NR/rdonlyres/ewjvkzzucvuygkq42gxj6umioovybp7ro2oirh77lz4kacv72gwfhuv6gmt4g643hvuhg4t2wgmynpbco2zpem2ucte/StatusreportonBSEandscrapieinDenmarkMay20071.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:27, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Bovine spongiform encephalopathy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090514152807/http://www.usmef.org/TradeLibrary/Statistics.asp to http://www.usmef.org/TradeLibrary/Statistics.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050425012159/http://premium.edition.cnn.com:80/HEALTH/library/ID/00012.html to http://premium.edition.cnn.com/HEALTH/library/ID/00012.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:46, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Bovine spongiform encephalopathy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080509164526/http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov:80/%7Ecomm/bsefaq.html to http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~comm/bsefaq.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:05, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Bovine spongiform encephalopathy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cjd.ed.ac.uk/vcjdworld.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080308030306/http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/BSEbrochure12-2006.pdf to http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/BSEbrochure12-2006.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:05, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Deleted Sentence in the Introduction
I deleted a sentence in the introductory section that stated that the BSE infectious agent's resilience to high temperatures "contributed to the spread of the disease in the United Kingdom, which had reduced the temperatures used during its rendering process." This line referred to source #9 in the References ("BSE: Disease control & eradication – Causes of BSE". Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs. March 2007.) which in fact dismisses this idea in the following statement: "The BSE Inquiry commented that it was a common misconception that a reduction in rendering temperature or a failure to prescribe minimum rendering times led to a failure of inactivation of the scrapie agent and its subsequent transmission to cattle." CedricJ (talk) 13:40, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. It's certainly a misconception I had until I saw this. Does the article mention this common misconception somewhere, though? Finog (talk) 00:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I had heard this idea countless times also, and when it came up during conversation this weekend I decided to look it up for myself. The article doesn't contain the misconception elsewheres, and does address it as such in the Epidemiology section, subsection Britain. CedricJ (talk) 03:52, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

France
The extent of the disease in France is not widely known, but under the circumstances it should be. Have added more information based on more recent scientific work. Incidentally, while not strictly relevant I'm sure I can't be the only one incensed by that third-rater Barnier wittering on about Britain cherry-picking and being in contempt of court when he was one of the French Ministers for Agriculture who ignored both a ruling to lift the ban on British beef from the ECJ and failed to pay the huge fine France accrued. Bit rich - and I speak as a Remainer and Labour voter.The Irish Question (talk) 10:43, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * The table is incorrectly totaled  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.70.216 (talk) 23:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)


 * That is since the addition last week of the French data. If there are no further revisions, we can add it to the total.MartinezMD (talk) 23:47, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

The article (as of Jan 4, 2018) is not accurate. The article says that 300 000 cases were "identified" in France, but in the relevant articles ("The unrecognised French BSE epidemic" by Supervie and Costagliola) there is an "estimation" that around 300 000 cattle were infected using a back-calculation method. These were not identified cases. In the same article, there is an reference to another paper where it is estimated that 4 million British cows were infected ("In their last study, [Anderson and his team] estimated that 4 000 000 animals  were  BSE-infected  but the  number  of  late-stage  animals  slaughtered for consumption was not specified.") So I have taken out the sentence in the introduction that suggests that France was the most affected country. KBry (talk) 21:17, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately KBry using the same methodology 8 million French cows are believed to have been infected. The 305,000 is only the official figure now generally accepted. So by any measure France was the country worst affected. THis was doubly significant of course as they didn't take even the pretty basic precaustions the British did to prevent offal entering the food chain. HAve reverted your removal.90.254.82.255 (talk) 19:12, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

What is your source for that number? Considering there were 174 human cases of vCJD in the UK and 26 in France, according to https://ecdc.europa.eu/en/vcjd/facts it is completely illogical to believe that France was the most affected country. KBry (talk) 19:04, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Number of cattle that entered the human food chain.
"It is believed that a few million cattle with the condition likely entered the food supply during the outbreak" (para. 4).

I remember reading this article months earlier and it repeated the commonly reported figure of 460,000 - 482,000 infected cattle that had entered the food chain before 1990. Any specific reason to go with the disturbingly high "few million" figure instead?


 * Because there's a reliable source attributing that figure. See WP:RS. MartinezMD (talk) 20:27, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

France
Claims that France had many cases needs much much better references than: "News Medical" (popular press), The Standard (more popular press).

This is not pubmed indexed https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232804619_The_unrecognized_French_BSE_epidemic

We need sources that qualify per WP:MEDRS. And this is not a review article.

Why was this "In 1992, sources in France reported to the MCA "that BSE had now been reported in France and there were some licensed surgical sutures derived from French bovine material." Concerns were also raised at a CSM meeting "regarding a possible risk of transmission of the BSE agent in gelatin products."" included twice?

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:39, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * We still need good quality references for a statement as controversial as this. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 01:49, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Specifically this is a primary source published in a journal that is not pubmed indexed. This well pubmed indexed is a primary source. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:21, 18 January 2019 (UTC)


 * "pubmed indexed" is not the standard to which wikipedia is held. The use of WP:MEDRS indicates that some editors think that this article deals with human medicine, when in fact it deals only with disease in cattle. To exclude references based on MEDRS is irregular and improper. Comptes Rendus Biologiques might not be in pubmed because pubmed cannot be expected to index foreign language publications. CRB is in fact the French equivalent of PNAS; a more reputable source is hard to imagine. Magnoffiq (talk) 02:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The requirement is for high quality secondary sources or position statements from well respected organizations like OIE.
 * These are better sources
 * The popular press and primary sources are not sufficient. The OIE takes the primary sources into account.
 * Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:40, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You just moved the goalposts. First you said that they need to be pubmed indexed. Then you found the CRB article in pubmed. That caused you to move the goalposts. Now it's "high quality secondary sources or position statements from well respected organizations like OIE". What is Inserm if not a "high quality source" and "well respected organization"?? Magnoffiq (talk) 02:46, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * When making an assertion that literally could reflect on food safety in an entire nation, you need a proper reliable source. Read WP:RS. The items on researchgate are typically not reliable. MartinezMD (talk) 02:54, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Our goal is to use the best avaliable sources. Agree with User:MartinezMD Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 02:55, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * We're talking about an article in CRB which was indexed by pubmed. It doesn't get any better than that. What occurred twenty years ago literally has nothing to do with "could reflect on food safety in an entire nation". That French scientists at the national research lab tried in 2006 to redress gaping hole omissions from the 20th century is the definition of good wikipedia. Magnoffiq (talk) 03:15, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

table and map
The map has no date and there is no source provided to date it, so this is not OK per WP:RELTIME

This table is a work of original research, assembling a bunch of stuff here and adding them up. That is not what we do. This can go in Wikiversity or something.

-- Jytdog (talk) 06:37, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Yup agree it is an issue.
 * Here are the actual numbers from a better source
 * Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:15, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Source
This source looks quite relevant. Unfortunately, I am not able to read it. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 04:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Need more information!
Section: epidemiology Subsection: United States Halfway through the second paragraph:

"Compliance with the regulations was shown to be extremely poor before the discovery of the cow in Washington infected with BSE in 2003, but industry representatives report that compliance is total. Even so, critics call the partial prohibitions insufficient."

If the compliance was shown, could you please share this with us. The industry representatives' report might be a good place to start, could you please direct us toward that. Critics of this article say that it needs work to increase its quality. But seriously, could you please share where the critics called the prohibitions insufficient.

Thank you Satyris410 (talk) 22:08, 21 June 2019 (UTC)