1) British agricultural representative said that it was precautionary measure with regard to animal health and was trying to minimise consumer concerns. He referred to Scrapie not being a problem in the UK but being more so in France (I believe we have 40k+ cases a year here per annum). As ruminants do not eat one another in their natural state, and scrapie is not regarded as a major threat to human health, scrapie seems a most unlikely reason for the ban. All 3 animals mentioned are farmed (deer relatively recently in this country) and have most likely been fed contaminated feed supplements, so BSE has probably crossed from cattle into these species and they are threat to human health. What about pigs and poultry then ...... ?
2) Although France is regularly slagged off for secrecy over its BSE problems, they do seem to be way out ahead on introducing precautionary legislation. This is the second instance I have heard of this. If you have a French contact you might be able to find out more info about their recent legislation and derive some insight into the way the EC is moving on BSE.
The weather has been pretty wonderful here too the last few days!
Regards
P.S. (the following day)
The Evening Standard is very interesting, one major article details how Scrapie transferred to cattle and back again. In other words we aren't talking BSE and lamb is safe. The article stated categorically that BSE was the bovine form of Scrapie (rather than the now generally accepted view that BSE is a native bovine TSE).
The editorial casually mentions that farmers have been feeding the banned feed to sheep for SEVEN years after the ban. If this is true than it must be highly likely that sheep now harbour BSE. The UK, of course, is a major exporter of sheep to Europe.
I think you may be a trifle unkind as to the French motives. You may recall that their government was crucified over the continued use of known HIV infected blood supplies. I suspect that the French actions are to prevent a similar situation reoccurring. Sheep brains are widely consumed as a delicacy in France and banning their consumption is a prudent move if BSE contamination is suspected. Shame our government doesn't think the same way.
By the way, in an interview Hogg mentioned that he had been aware of the problem since April. Feed containing mammalian contents is still produced in this country where it is used for feed on fish farms, the French have banned this too. I wonder what other info will creep out of the woodwork?
May I compliment you on your French information, especially the very tasteful EC cover-up item! Until last night I hadn't noticed that your translated articles contained details of the additional French measures.
Regards...
These are worth a read before you post them. Hope you have a nice holiday, where are you going and how long will you be away? I will keep posting articles to you, but they are becoming a bit thin on the ground. This email is copied to Steve Dealler as he may be interested in the vertical transmission comments.
Newspaper reports suggest that the European Union is poised to ban the human consumption of brain, spinal cord, and spleen from goats, sheep, and deer. This follows publicity given to recent laboratory experiments showing that BSE is transmissible to sheep. Kenton Morgan, professor of epidemiology at Liverpool University's faculty of veterinary science, said that the possibility of transmission was not in doubt, although its clinical significance is. "We have not yet seen any change in the clinical presentation of scrapie in sheep," he said.
Accepted facts about the agent responsible for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) are rare; two of those on which there is good agreement took a knock from scientists at a meeting organised by the North West Public Health Alliance in Liverpool last week. Suspicion is increasing that the agent may not have originated from scrapie and that cows may transmit it to their calves.
Until now, BSE has been explained by the contamination of animal feed by the carcases of sheep affected by scrapie. Its appearance in the mid- 1980s was attributed to changes in the rendering process, which had previously destroyed the scrapie agent. But Kevin Taylor, deputy chief veterinary officer at the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food said the problem with this theory is that none of the 20 strains in scrapie resembles BSE.
Few researchers doubt that feeding rendered down bovine carcases to cows was an extremely efficient way of spreading disease, but the disease in question may have originated in cows rather than sheep. Strain tying on the cases found in humans of the new variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) would be available later this year and should shed more light on the situation, said Martin Zeidler, research registrar at the National CJD Surveillance Unit.
In view of this risk, the government has sought to exclude from cattle feed any material that might convey BSE. If contaminated animal feed is solely responsible for cases of BSE then this strategy should lead to its eradication. Yet two thirds of cattle with recent notifications of BSE have been born after the ruminant feed ban, said Mr Taylor. Poor compliance by farmers is one explanation, but two other possibilities exist.
The first is vertical transmission, whereby cows pass the disease on to their calves. The second is environmental contamination, a theory supported by Iceland's experience. Some Icelandic farms replaced their sheep population with new stock, yet within a few years the new stock was affected with scrapie. Unless poor compliance with the feed ban was solely to blame then BSE could remain endemic within British herds, said Professor Morgan.
As Europe appears to be moving closer to finding a political settlement to the 'beef crisis', the European Science Foundation and the UK's Medical Research Council have brought together leading scientists from nine European countries to debate the latest developments and future research needs in the epidemiology of the transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE's) the group of diseases which include Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
During the course of two scientific meetings on consecutive days at the same venue in London on 19th and 20th June, groups of European scientists working in the fields of CJD in humans, BSE in cattle, and related animal diseases have been reviewing the current state of epidemiological knowledge about TSE's as a necessary first step in framing future scientific research priorities.
The scientists, who covered a wide range of disciplines from public health through to basic science, also reviewed the environmental and genetic factors which influence risk in these diseases, and identified a number of key research priorities.
Opening the meeting, Professor Philippe Lazar, the Chairman of the ESF Standing Committee of the European Medical Research Councils, identified fundamental questions that it was a high priority for the research community in Europe to address
He said: "There is flow widespread acceptance that transmission of BSE to humans may have occurred, but we need to assess:
the strength of the evidence associating BSE with CJD
if BSE infection of humans has occurred, the likelihood that the epidemic would remain small
what factors may influence the size of the epidemic and how knowledge of those factors can be acquired most speedily"
Professor Lazar emphasised that although we cannot yet estimate confidently the likely magnitude of any epidemic, broadly based research strategies are necessary to anticipate possible outcomes and find ways to minimise any impact on public health.
The present evidence suggesting that BSE exposure was related to the newly described variant of CJD (NV-CJD) was based only on the geographical and temporal coincidence of the two conditions, and the plausibility of the association. It is not yet known why NV-CJD has been seen only in people under the age of 45, whereas almost every previously known case of CJD has been in older age groups.
The "scientists' agreed that increased surveillance for CJD in the UK and other European countries, especially in children and the elderly, was a major research priority, and that strain-typing studies of the new variant and genetic studies may be very informative in determining the cause of the new variant of the disease.
Prediction of the future size of the problem, If the new variant cases of CJD are due to BSE, would be made much easier by the development of simple diagnostic tests. There was a general view that the number of cases of the new variant in the next year would give a very strong indication of whether any epidemic was going to be large or small. The relevant research should be put in place now to prepare for both situations.
The meeting scientific co-ordinator, Professor Peter Smith, said: "In organising these workshops at very short notice, the ESF and MRC have succeeded in bringing together leading scientists in the field from all over Europe to a meeting in the UK, the focus of the current epidemiological research. International multi-disciplinary studies will be essential in understanding disease mechanisms as well as providing effective surveillance."
The meeting agreed to strengthen networks between European scientists working on this group, of diseases.
Notes for editors:
1. The European Science Foundation is an association of 59 major national funding agencies devoted to basic scientific research in 21 countries. The ESF assists its Member Organisations in two main ways: by bringing scientists together in its Scientific Programmes, Networks and European Research Conferences, to work on topics of common concern, and through the joint study of issues of strategic importance in European science policy.
2. The UK Medical Research Council aims to improve health by promoting research into all areas of medical and related science. Established in 1913, the MRC is funded mainly by the Government, but it is independent in the choice of research it supports.
3. Professor Philippe Lazar is Director General of the French Biomedical research agency, INSERM, and the Chairman of the European Medical Research Councils, the ESF standing committee for the medical sciences.
4. Professor Peter Smith is Head of the Department of Epidemiology and Population Science at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
BSE and sheep
>From Professor Emeritus Ivor H. Mills
Sir, Today's announcement by the EU Agriculture Commissioner, Franz Fischler, that the BSE agent has infected sheep by experimental means should come as no surprise. It must, nevertheless, horrify us by its implications [letters, July 26].
Since it is most probable that BSE originated from the abnormal prions in sheep with scrapie, it seems very probable that the prion mutation which gave rise to BSE could be transmitted back to sheep. Let us have no waffle from vets that there is no evidence that this occurs in the normal situation. To differentiate in the field between scrapie, which in 200 years has not been shown to infect man, from "BSE " in sheep would obviously be nearly impossible.
It has been suggested that the new form of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease ( CJD) in young people has originated from BSE in cattle, so it must be assumed that it would be possible for "BSE" in sheep to be transmitted to man.
The question is, how could BSE infect sheep other than by experimental means? Even though we cannot answer this question we must still assume it is possible and take steps to keep such infected sheep material out of the human food chain. Is it enough, as Franz Fischler proposes, to exclude brain, spinal cord and spleen of sheep and goats from human food? Why not also exclude intestines, tonsils and thymus and restrict the use of mechanically recovered meat from such animals?
As a long-term measure surely it is time to start the complete elimination of scrapie from our flocks of sheep and goats.
Yours faithfully,
IVOR H. MILLS
University of Cambridge Clinical School, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Trumpington Road, Cambridge. July 23.
From Miss V. E. Norris
Sir, In his article today on a BSE scare in sheep, your Agriculture Correspondent states that "(sheep's) brain has a tiny market, mostly among some Muslim communities". Once again the North of England is ignored. The poor in Lancashire have been eating sheep's head brawn for centuries, as the only affordable form of animal protein.
I remember being put off eating brawn for life by watching my aunt boil down a sheep's head, price 6d, in the early Sixties. Only a couple of weeks ago I saw brawn on sale in a local supermarket and, when I expressed surprise, I was told that many older people "love their brawn". I am sure that Lancastrians are not the only people to indulge in this northern delicacy.
Yours faithfully
V. E. NORRIS
13 Whalley Grove, Leigh, Lancashire. July 24.
Financial Times ... Wednesday August 14 1996
Abattoirs are being paid far more than their actual costs for killing cattle under the government's BSE slaughter scheme, it has emerged.
Abattoirs have been paid (UK pounds) 87.50 ($136.50) per animal since the cull of cattle aged more than 30 months began in early May as part of UK government efforts to reassure consumers about the safety of beef in the wake of the crisis over mad cow disease.
But Coopers & Lybrand, the accountancy firm, is believed by abattoir executives to have put the actual cost at between (UK pounds) 35 and (UK pounds) 40 in a report for the government.
Abattoir representatives and officials from the Intervention Board, the government agency administering the cull, start negotiations today on a fee reduction.
The board refused to disclose its starting figures in the talks but said Coopers had produced a range of costs that were "considerably less than (UK pounds) 87.50".
The government's aim is to backdate a fee reduction to June 17. The (UK pounds) 87.50 fee - thrashed out in an atmosphere of "panic" in May, according to one abattoir director - was made effective until mid-June and subject to independent review.
So far 350,000 cattle have been slaughtered, of which 137,675 had been killed by mid-June. On the basis of actual costs of (UK pounds) 40, that would have cost abattoirs (UK pounds) 5.5m to mid-June. But they were paid (UK pounds) 12m - a profit of (UK pounds) 6.5m. This has been shared among about 60 abattoirs, although half a dozen are conducting the biggest share of the cull.
Mr Elliot Morley, an agriculture spokesman for the opposition Labour party, said the Commons public accounts committee should investigate the cull. "This is public money," he said. "That money should be used in the most cost-effective way. It's quite wrong for anyone to exploit this crisis to make excess profits."
Mr Paul Tyler, the centrist Liberal Democrat party's farming spokesman, said the government should have put the cull out to competitive tender from the start.
Mr Richard Cracknell, vice-president of the meat federation and managing director of ABP, one of the UK's largest abattoir groups, warned that slaughterhouses would pull out if the fees were cut too heavily.
They will argue they need extra money on top of basic costs to cover profit and "incentive" payments. Mr Cracknell said the cull involved additional costs and only abattoirs that had invested heavily in modernising could do "a proper job".
By David Brown, Agriculture Editor ... Tuesday August 13 1996
FARMERS demanded (UK pounds) 30 million in Government aid yesterday to set up a computerised national cattle tracing system to persuade Europe to lift its British beef ban.
The bill, they said, would be "cheap at the price" to rid Britain of mad cow disease and to restore world confidence in British beef.
The National Cattle Database Working Group, representing farmers, retailers and consumer groups, said Government support was essential for a system in which more than 11 million cattle would be fitted with electronic ear-tags. Such a system, it said, was essential to reassure consumers about the origin of the meat they bought in the wake of mad cow disease.
If the Government acted swiftly, the system could be running by January and fully operational by 1998.
Difficulties in tracking down many cattle most at risk of carrying BSE, including offspring of BSE victims, have baulked efforts to end the EU restrictions. Bill Madders, a Staffordshire dairy farmer who chairs the group, said members were unanimous about the urgent need for an efficient identification and tracing system.
"Ultimately all food animals, including sheep and pigs, will need to be covered," he said. The cost "paled into insignificance" compared with current emergency measures to wipe out mad cow disease and restore confidence.
The emergency destruction scheme for cattle more than 30 months old will cost the taxpayer about (UK pounds) 2.5 billion over three years. It would cost up to (UK pounds) 5 million to establish the database and about (UK pounds) 30 million more to fit cattle with the extra ear-tags and install scanning equipment in abattoirs and markets. Metal ear tags would cost 25p-35p each and electronic ones about (UK pounds) 1 more.
Bulk purchase, under a Government programme, would cut the costs.
"In the long run, this will save the Government money," Mr Madders said.
Under the scheme, all cattle would have to be fitted with two ear-tags, not one as at present. Older cattle would be fitted with a coded metal tag but each new-born calf would be fitted with a plastic, electronic tag which would enable the animal's unique 12-digit identity number to be read easily by scanners on the farm and at markets. Eventually, all cattle would be fitted with electronic tags and the animals would be scanned at markets by simply walking through a frame, similar to security scanners at airports.
An advantage of the numerical electronic system was that a farmer could register his cattle by using telephone push-buttons and would only need to tap into the database again to amend the information if they sold an animal or an animal died.
Mr Madders said the system should be linked to food labelling to give retailers accurate information about the origin of meat they sold.
The National Farmers' Union backed the report but, while the ministry agreed that a database was needed urgently, senior officials refused to be drawn on who would foot the bill.
While the EU Commission in Brussels wants to see such a system in place, it favours the alterative idea of implanting electronic "chips" behind the ears of cattle and is carrying out Europe-wide trials. But critics, including many vets, argue that the technology is imperfect and there were dangers of the chips moving inside the animals and turning up in meat.
Ear-tags would provide a faster and more effective solution, they say, if they can be produced to acceptable international standards.
Stores face charges as mix is found in packs of 'pure lamb'
A NATIONWIDE hunt for BSE "cheats" was demanded today as two supermarket chains were threatened with prosecution for selling beef disguised as lamb. Trading standards officers say shops are off-loading their unwanted beef onto unsuspecting customers who are trying to avoid it because of fears about mad cow disease. The meat is sold as pure lamb or pork mince - but in fact has a beef content of up to 10 per cent. Random checks by local authorities hundreds of miles apart suggest consumers are being deceived on a large scale by outlets ranging from small independent butchers to big supermarket chains.
Hounslow Council, whose inspectors found beef in lamb mince from two small shops and two supermarkets, called for a nationwide investigation to establish the extent of the problem. However, food minister Angela Browning ruled out a national Government inspection programme. If the inspectors had identified anything dangerous it would be a different matter, she said. "There is nothing that has been purchased that was unfit for human consumption."
Hounslow's environmental services chairman, Bob Whatley, said he was "horrified" by what inspectors found. "The Government needs to take this problem very seriously," he said. "In some cases it may be due to staff failing to clean the mincing machine before changing from one product to another, but I refuse to believe it's all down to sloppiness. Some stores must be doing this as a way of selling beef that nobody wants to buy."
John Morris of the British Retail Consortium, said: "This is something that should not be happening and I am very concerned."" Roger Pope, a trading standards officer in Bath, where contaminated meat was also discovered, said: "It is outrageous and very distressing for consumers." Millions of families have been trying to cut beef out of their diet in recent months. Beef consumption in Britain dropped by 20 per cent between January and March, while sales of lamb and mutton rose by 16 per cent.
Hounslow's head of business regulation, Ken George, said: "We have asked to interview the supermarket chains about the results but so far they have declined. "If the manufacturer of the lamb mince is distributing from a central point, it is possible that other supermarkets are being supplied throughout the country." Officials refused to name the supermarket chains involved pending possible legal action against them.
Labour agriculture spokesman Gavin Strang said: "All products, particularly meat at this time, should be accurately labelled."
The Daily Telegraph ... Tuesday August 13 1996
SMALL shareholders protesting about pay and performance at Aberdeen Steak Houses walked out of the annual meeting in London yesterday, after a motion was passed to increase chairman Ali Salih's pay next year by 82pc to (UK pounds) 450,000.
>From Mr David C. Taylor
Sir, The Assistant Chief Veterinary Officer is wrong to state that BSE cannot be transmitted through milk "because the calves of dairy cows do not drink their mothers' milk" (report, August 2). Calves do drink their mother's milk, at least for the first day or so, when they receive the protein-rich (prion-protein-rich?) colostrum, first milk, which is important for their survival and never sold as milk to the public.
Yours faithfully, DAVID C. TAYLOR,
International Zoo Veterinary Group, Keighley Business Centre, South Street, Keighley, West Yorkshire.
Financial Times ... Saturday August 10 1996
It was beef, now it is lamb, soon it will be chicken and pork. You cannot gloss over it, intensive farming is to blame: cheap meat for the punters, with big profit margins for the producers. Now we all need to think about the future and decide if there isn't a little silver lining to this big, black cloud.
I am prepared to believe that the authorities have tried to steer us through the minefield of what is safe and what is not, but no one could suggest that they have done anything other than create confusion.
If the risk was chiefly from old dairy cattle minced up into hamburgers and industrially prepared food, why was this not made clear from the outset? Was there ever any real danger from prime cut beef?
A few months ago in these pages I suggested that what we needed were effective guarantees as to the origins of the beef (and other meats) which we buy, and I threatened to go on the barricades for British beef. I thought I might pull in a few like-minded souls, but the response was derisory. I retired, sulking, to my tent.
That was before the storm broke. Now I am more adamant than ever: consumers need to know more about the meat they buy from the shops.
It is an opportunity for quality-conscious farmers to clean up. It is also the moment for the poor butchers, squeezed by the supermarkets at one end and vegetarians at the other, to demonstrate that they are far better equipped to reassure the shopper than the supermarket.
These thoughts occurred to me in Kincardineshire in Scotland, where I had gone to Glenbervie to see Stewart Macphie. Macphie has a closed herd of 100 per cent Angus cattle, from which he produces the sort of meat Britons were reared on: well-hung cuts of beef with pronounced subcutaneous marbling which keeps it sweet and moist in the oven; no Brobdingnag steaks from scrawny Tuscan beasts, and no fat-free fillets from quick-growing French heavyweights either.
Macphie's idea of opening his own butchery unit has come to fruition; he can now be certain of the quality of his meat right down to the minute it leaves his premises to be delivered to a hotel, restaurant or butcher's shop.
The (UK pounds) 1m unit - (UK pounds) 200,000 of which came from the EU - opened on July 12. Egon Ronay, the Hungarian-born gastronome, was there to do the honours. Instead of the usual cake, he carved a slice from a rib of beef and, holding it aloft, declared "Bring back hanging!" - thereby addressing an issue central to the revival of proper beef production in Britain.
I have long been convinced that the downward turn in consumption is in part to do with the relative freshness of meat offered in the supermarkets. A generation ago all British flesh - from chicken to beef and game - was hung for a few days.
As a Swedish biochemist once explained to me, meat needs to be hung to break down the acids which multiply in the flesh after slaughter. Meat eaten before it is ready is unhealthy and hard to digest.
>From now on, all Macphie beef will be hung for between 14 and 20 days, like the magnificent carcasses I saw in the new butchery unit. And taking an idea which is dear to my heart, all his beef will now be transported in boxes bearing a "kite-mark", assuring the recipient that it is 100 per cent Angus (for beef from the grass-fed, suckler herd at Glenbervie), or 75 per cent Angus (for local farmers who want to come in on the scheme).
These farmers must assure Macphie that their bulls are pedigree Aberdeen Angus, and their cows no less than 50 per cent Angus and 50 per cent from another prime beef herd. As Macphie's stockman told me, where confusion exists over how BSE got into beef herds, it normally occurred when the farmer had bought a replacement cow which was partly of dairy stock.
I should have liked him to do even better, at least as far as the meat destined for butchers' shops was concerned, and actually supply the meat with a 100 per cent Glenbervie Angus tag. In France top butchers use tags such as these for their best veal, for example. This way, consumers have ocular proof of the quality of the meat they are buying.
I should also like to see a better policing of the meat in butchers' shops by disinterested panels or committees. The Q-Guild of butchers is one small group with a reputation for offering meat of the best quality, but they are thin on the ground.
Butchers who could prove the origin and quality of their meat would be eligible to membership of a wider chain which would offer further reassurance to the consumer.
Macphie has made a splendid counter-attack which would be the envy of all good tacticians.
It is high time to fight for meat. No one can decently expect it to be cheaper than it was in the bad old days, but with any luck it will be much, much better.
Glenbervie Aberdeen Angus, Glenbervie, Kincardine AB3 2YB. Glenbervie beef is available in London from W.A. Lidgate, 110 Holland Park Road, London W11 (Tel: 0171-727 8243)
The Position Statement version that you saw in the British Food Journal was out of date. In a subject as fast-moving as BSE, one of the great problems is that any review on the subject in a journal is long out of date before it appears in print. I'm sure you have encountered the same difficulty. The December issue of IFST's own quarterly journal "Food Science & Technology Today", was held up so that the BSE Position Statement of 14 September could be replaced at the proof stage by that of 29 October. Between the time that it went to press and its publication in early December, we had issued the update of 22 November, so despite our efforts, what appeared in print was out of date. And that is our own journal where we have a large measure of control over timing. Over the past months we have acceded to requests from a number of editors for permission to reproduce our BSE Position Statement in their journals, and what appears is always out of date, sometimes by two versions! I think we shall have to reconsider that policy.
To see what IFST currently says at any given time, your safe bet
is to
visit the IFST Web site at
Like the other Statements, the BSE Statement is promptly updated whenever new information necessitates it. How is that possible? By the use of Editorial Footnotes. Before issue, IFST draft Position Statements go through a vetting procedure by the Technical & Legislative Committee and the Public Affairs Committee, to ensure that the contents are scientifically valid, entirely objective and suitable to be issued in the name of the Institute. As this work is being done by volunteer members as a spare-time activity, there are obvious limitations on the frequency with which such procedure can be invoked. New events may render Position Statements rapidly out-of-date. As an interim means of providing additional up-to-date information, "Editorial Footnotes" are used, written by the IFST Web Editor (that's me), in phone consultation with colleagues of the drafting team for that particular topic. (As it happens, in the case of BSE, I am one of the members of the drafting team, so there I function in a dual volunteer capacity). The Editor accepts sole responsibility for the accuracy and objectivity of the footnote(s), which are, in due course, embodied in the draft for the next Position Statement update.
The morning after the Horizon TV programme in which John Wilesmith announced that calf assay could detect one-thousandth of the level of BSE infectivity that the mouse assay could detect, that information, plus more that did not get mentioned in the Horizon programme, appeared on the IFST Web site as an Editorial Footnote to the BSE Position Statement, and I also posted it on BSE-L. It was subsequently embodied in the BSE Position Statement of 22 November, the current version -- which, however, now itself has three Editorial Footnotes all dated 17 December.
The extra information, not mentioned in the Horizon TV programme, came from my phone call to John Wilesmith early on the morning after the show, to seek some clarification about what he had said on TV (including how he had ensured that the calves were not incubating BSE anyway -- he said they came from the managed herds). He said that these experiments were part of a programme of long term feeding trials and inoculation trials over about seven years. The programme also included parallel intracerebral inoculation, into calves, of lymph tissue and spleen, respectively, from BSE-infected cows, resulting in none of the calves succumbing to BSE, i.e. no infectivity being detected in either lymph tissue or spleen by this more sensitive method.
If any of the tissues or secretions (other than brain, spinal cord and retina) contained infectivity at levels lower than could be detected in the mouse assay, lymph tissue and spleen must be prime candidates; and the fact that infectivity has not been found in them by the more sensitive calf assay is encouraging. Nevertheless, SEAC is right (as stated by John Pattison on the Horizon programme) to call for testing of other tissues, particularly muscle meat and milk, by the calf assay.
It is important that we know who wants information about BSE and what you think about what is here. If you would like regular information mailed to you on the mailing list or the internet journal please tell us. No responsibility is accepted for the validity of the information sent and it must be remembered that anyone can gain access to the data on these pages