Doctors havehidden agenda to Scare People into Vegetarian Diet Texas Ag Secretary wants to sue vegetarian ex-rancher over mad cow remarks
After Oprah: Cattle Future plunge on Chicago stock exchange
What Howard Lyman actually said on Oprah show of 4.16.96
Vegetarian woman in charge of Texas beef promotion campaign
Chirac: Mad Press Disease?
Deja Vu All Over Again: US press repeats UK cover-up
Bogus AP story

Hidden Agenda to Scare People into Vegetarian Diet

Letter to the editor ... Portland Oregonian ... 4.12.96

The Physicians Commitee for Responsible Medicine is an animal-rights organization that oppose the use of animals for medical research and openly advocates vegetarianism. Dr. Neal Barnard is the president and chief spokesman for the committee.

I point these facts out so that the readers of Barnard's column ("Brain Rot - Disease of the week," March 31,1996) understand the motivation of its author. The Physician's Committee was formed ... in an effort to provide credibility to the animal rights movement in the guise of a consumer and health organization

Scare-mongers such as Barnard are orchestrating a campaign to frighten consumers into a vegetarian diet by exploiting the facts surrounding Britains's bovine spongiform encephalopaythy crisis....It is an animal disease, not a human disease....

Dianne Byrne
Executive Director
Oregon Beef Council


Food producers push for laws protecting their crops from rumors

May 13, 1996 ... CNN ... Web posted at: 7:40 a.m. EDT ... From Correspondent Anthony Collings

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In some states, at least in theory, criticizing food can land an offender in jail -- and the issue has become a hot potato.

In Oklahoma, for example, it's best not to bad-mouth the cattle, or you could end up in court faster than an auctioneer's tongue.

Ranchers would like to see other states crack the whip against rumor-mongers. Cattlemen worry that beef prices are low enough and could get lower if there's any health scare like Britain's mad cow disease. "It's important to have some sort of backstop in place to penalize people for making unsubstantiated comments," said Kansas cattle rancher Jim Sartwelle.

But critics think such laws are a rotten idea. "Individuals will be hesitant to speak out on legitimate food safety concerns," said Theodore Waugh of the Pure Food Campaign.

But such concerns have not put a damper on the drive to protect food from defamation. On the East Coast, Maryland chicken farmers want their state to join the others banning bad words about food.

"This legislation will be like a scare tactic to prevent people from circulating unreliable rumors without any factual basis," said Republican state Sen. Richard Colburn.

Twelve states have laws against unfounded criticism of perishable food. In Washington state, supporters pushed for the gag law to avoid situations like the Alar health scare. Sales of apples fell after a news report linked Alar, a preservative, to cancer. Apple growers denied the allegation, but there was so much negative publicity that they stopped using the chemical spray.

State laws against food rumors have never been enforced, and critics say they're unconstitutional. "We're very concerned that these laws will prohibit free speech," said Pure Food's Waugh.

But rancher Sartwelle said he has no room for disparaging words about his livelihood. "That type of speech," Sartwelle said, "I don't feel needs to be protected." Farmers say they just want perishable food to enjoy the same kind of libel protection as processed food. But critics say the First Amendment is also perishable, and it needs protection, too.


Texas AG won't sue Howard Lyman over mad cow remarks

AUSTIN, Texas (May 2, 1996 7:11 p.m. EDT) -- Attorney General Dan Morales on Thursday rejected Agriculture Commissioner Rick Perry's request to use the state's new "veggie libel" law to go after a vegetarian who said mad cow disease could affect America's beef supply.

Though Morales labeled the comments "baloney," he said the law does not allow the state to file suit under the law approved last year by lawmakers to protect against people who make false claims about the safety of food products. Any such lawsuit would have to be filed by a private individual who feels his or her products have been unfairly disparaged, Morales said.

At issue are remarks made during an April 19 appearance on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" by Howard Lyman of Maryland, a former cattle rancher now with the Eating with Conscience Campaign, a project of the Humane Society of America. Lyman said on the show that mad cow disease "will make AIDS look like the common cold," and that the livestock industry is feeding "road kill" to cattle. A day later, cattle futures plummeted on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.

Perry was enraged, and urged Morales to file suit against Lyman.

Can't do, said Morales, who also recommended a lower-key response to Lyman.

"Mr. Lyman's statements should be taken for what they are -- baloney," he told Perry. "The more public attention focused upon his outrageous claims, the greater the prospects for real harm being done to our beef industry. I suggest we simply ignore this foolishness."

Perry said he was disappointed in Morales' response.

"The letters and phone calls the Texas Department of Agriculture has received from folks who make their living from the land and who are suffering from these false statements tell us that they support our efforts to stop the inaccuracies and innuendo about our $6 billion industry," he said.

Mad cow disease (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) has been detected in cattle in Great Britain, but it has not been diagnosed in Texas. Perry and other agriculture officials say there is no scientific link between mad cow disease and the human disease (Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease) that killed several Britons.

Copyright © 1996 Nando.net
Copyright © 1996 Cox News Service



WHAT'S THE BEEF?

Texas officials are considering a possible lawsuit against a man they called a "vegetarian activist" who made "disparaging comments" about beef on a recent Oprah Winfrey show. Texas Agriculture Commissioner Rick Perry asked state Attorney General Dan Morales to take action against Howard Lyman for saying mad cow disease would "make AIDS look like the common cold," said a spokeswoman for the TX Agriculture Dept. (JO. OF COMMERCE, 4/29).

Howard Lyman, an ex-rancher with extensive knowledge of the beef industry, is currently employed by the Humane Society of the United States. Here is a transcript of what Lyman actually said on the Oprah show of April 16. 1996. Transcripts can be ordered from 1-800-777-8398.

Texas ordinances are subordinate to protection of free speech under the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Daily cattle futures on CBOE are volatile in the best of times, making it hard to attribute cause to temporary swings.

Plus, Lyman's remarks seem factually on target, even an understatement!

Other Participants on the show:


Oprah: "You said this disease could make AIDS look like the common cold?"

Lyman: "Absolutely."

Oprah: "That's an extreme statement , you know."

Lyman: "Absolutely. And what we're looking at right now, is that we're following exactly the same path that they followed in England: 10 years of dealing with it as public relations rather than doing something substantial about it. On hunderd thousand cows per year in the US are fine at night, dead in the moring. The majority of those cows are rounded, ground up, turned into feed and fed back to other animals....We should have them eating grass, not other cows. We've not only turned them into carnivores, we've turned them inot cannibals.... We've had a ban in the US of feeding sheep to cows for a long time, but when they went out and looked, 25 percent of the renderers admitted that they were paying no attention to it. Voluntary bans do not work....

Oprah: "Are they feeding cattle to the cattle?"

Dr. Weber: " There is a limited amount of that done in the United States. These are very -- hang on just a second. Well...

Oprah: "Mm-hmmm."

Dr. Weber: " The - the FDA..."

Oprah: "Because I have to just tell you ... that this is alarming to me."

Dr. Weber: "Yeah"

Oprah: "Dr. Hueston, you think mad cow's a threat to US cattle?"

Dr. Hueston: "...there's no evidence at all that we have BSE in the US."

Oprah: " What else are they going to say" Are they goint to say, 'Public, you are at risk. some of you may die and the cows are going to go crazy.' They couldn't have said that."

Lyman: "Why are we skating qround this when we know that [cease feeding cows to cows] would be the safest thing to do? Why is it? Becasue we have the greedy that are getting the ear of government instead of the needy, and tha's exactly why we're doing it....

Well, what it comes down to is about half the slaughter of animals is non-salable to humans. They either have to pay to put it into the dump or they sell it for feed, they grind it up, ... add to it all of the animals that died unexpectedly, all of the road kills and the euthanized animals -- add it to them, grind it up and feed it back to other animals....

We ended up feeding downed cows to mink; the mink come down with the disease, transfer it to animals. The animals came down with it. And you're sitting here, telling everybody that it's safe. Not true."

Oprah: " Well, [E. coli is another beef risk whick will kill 500 and poison 20,000 Americans this year. We'll talk about that awhen we come back...."






Vegetarian running Texas program promoting beef

AUSTIN, Texas (May 8, 1996 6:53 p.m. EDT) -- It wouldn't be state government without stuff like this: The state official in charge of promoting beef products is a vegetarian.

Diane Smith, the Texas Department of Agriculture's assistant commissioner for marketing and agribusiness development, has been meat-free for 14 years. "It's a personal preference," she said, declining to offer reasons for her culinary conversion. "It has nothing to do with my work or my position at the Department of Agriculture."

That's also the official word from the agency, where Agriculture Commissioner Rick Perry says Smith's job is well done. "Diane's personal eating habits have never been an issue. There is no question that Diane and her staff have done an outstanding job to promote Texas beef while with TDA," Perry said.

As assistant commissioner, Smith oversees marketing programs involving livestock, horticulture, fiber and international marketing. Livestock accounts for about two-thirds of the state's agriculture business. The raising of beef cattle is the most extensive agricultural operation in Texas, accounting for about half the total cash receipts from Texas farms and ranches.

Smith's diet raised an eyebrow among the state's major cattle organizations, but all now say they are convinced she does a good job and they don't care what she doesn't eat. Steve Munday, executive vice president of the Fort Worth-based Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, said he had no problem with Smith's diet.

"That's a personal decision. If her boss is satisfied with her performance we could care less," Munday said. Similar comments came from the Independent Cattlemen's Association, Texas Beef Council and Texas Cattle Feeders Association. Richard McDonald (no relation to Ronald), executive vice president of the cattle feeders group, sees nothing unkosher about the vegetarian beef promoter. "We had the opportunity to discuss that with the TDA last year. We feel that she continues to do a good job in her role," he said.

Smith said she sees no conflict in promoting a product she eschews. "As a former deputy commissioner once said, he didn't drink alcohol but he promoted Texas wines. I feel I can be a strong promoter of all Texas products," she said. "The vegetable and fruit industries have never complained," she added. Copyright © 1996 Nando.net
Copyright © 1996 Cox News Service


WHAT NOW POOR COW?

MAD COWS CHASED BY MAD solutions. That was the British view last week as science took a backseat to politics in the continuing cow row over the possible link between bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE, and the similar fatal human brain condition called Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. British farmers tried to come to terms with the worldwide ban on their beef, and the government continued to insist that the cows posed no danger to human health. At the same time, in a perfect somersault of logic, the government sought to restore consumer confidence by announcing that some $ 8 billion would be spent in a five-year plan to destroy and incinerate 4.7 million head of the very same cattle that are assertedly so safe.

For Britain's E.U. partners, however, the cow crisis was just plain maddening, overshadowing the launching of this year's Intergovernmental Conference that will review the Maastricht Treaty and set the E.U. compass on such key issues as enlargement and a common foreign policy. Fresh from their Turin summit, E.U. leaders found themselves facing what a German foreign-office official described as a "crisis of confidence among E.U. nations." The shroud over Turin, it might be said.

Much of the friction is between Britain and Germany, where the prevailing view is that the British brought the disaster upon themselves. Yet here was London holding out its hand to Brussels for compensation even as Euroskeptics within John Major's government rubbed salt into the beef wound by implying that the crisis was a Europlot against the island member. The German Farmers Association claimed the central problem of the BSE debacle was "the British greed for profits," which allowed the number of British cows affected by BSE to reach 160,000, possibly through the use of feed containing recycled remains of other animals, such as sheep brains. The Germans, particularly, say they have been warning about BSE for years, but claim nothing has been done because of the political clout of British farmers.

Britain was seeking a Euro-reimbursement of 80% of the cost of herd disposal, under a Common Agricultural Policy provision. But the Germans led the push to reduce the compensation to 70%, arguing that that amount was all German and Belgian farmers got when swine disease had forced them to kill their pigs. Deeper sentiments were revealed in the German press. The leading daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung said in a blistering editorial that "the chasm between London and the Continent is growing deeper." On the critical issues of European integration, the paper claimed, the British showed at Turin that they remained "outside."

The French have been less harsh--possibly because they have not been immune to the problem. On Friday the Director-General of French Health, Jean-Francois Girard, revealed that in January a 26-year-old man from Lyons died from an "atypical" version of Creutzfeld-Jakob disease, apparently the same version that 10 Britons contracted. And last week farmers in Brittany slaughtered more than 300 cattle after detection of BSE-infected cows in their herds. No wonder President Jacques Chirac said in Turin that the cow issue is "a European problem that must be financed in a European way." French official caution may have been aimed at desperately trying to hold consumer confidence in the local product and to cash in on the absence of British beef, a strategy that has at best had limited success. Such diplomacy did not in any way hinder France's leftist parliamentarian and former Health Minister Bernard Kouchner, who laid the blame squarely on the conservative Tories. "The arrival of Mrs. Thatcher [as Prime Minister] in England allowed business to assume responsibility for the public's health," Kouchner fumed.

The British see things quite differently. A tentative connection between cow and human brain diseases is one thing, the role of Europe another. Prime Minister John Major said in Turin that British opposition to greater European integration was a matter of "principle" and "quite separate from the beef crisis." But the sovereignty-vs.-Europe question that has vexed British governments since entry into the old Common Market in 1973 has been further highlighted by the Brussels decision to make the ban on British beef sales worldwide. Many British see the extension of the prohibition by the E.U. beyond its own borders as another example of Brussels' having too much power.

Agriculture Minister Douglas Hogg told the House of Commons the measure was based on neither logic nor science, adding, "We are looking urgently at the legality of what has been done." Yet any legal challenge will have to be made before the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, one of the E.U. institutions against which Britain regularly rails. At a more visceral level, Conservative backbencher Theresa Gorman said of the E.U. move, "These people in Europe who are supposed to be our friends and allies have insulted the Prime Minister. If British people are willing to eat this kind of humble pie, they've lost their right to be a proud nation."

Humble pie, perhaps, but Europeans were becoming less prepared to eat beef of any provenance. Part of the German anger against Britain is explained by the fact that German sales of all beef have plummeted faster than elsewhere in the E.U.: up to 75% in some regions, even though last year Germany imported only 600 tons of British beef, a mere 0.5% of consumption. Agriculture Minister Jochen Borchert conceded--after posing eating a German roast-beef sandwich--"We Germans tend to panic more easily than the consumers in other nations."

A more convincing reason for panic remains the question of how much money "mad-cow" disease is going to cost. French estimates put the price of Euro-compensation to British farmers at $ 560 million in the first year alone, possibly $ 2 billion over the five-year plan. Estimates from Brussels are lower: nearly $ 205 million on doomed cattle in Year 1. The British, meanwhile, are afraid that any money they receive from Brussels will trigger a reduction in their rebate from the E.U. budget, thus diluting the real value of any compensation. The cost of incineration, perhaps a total of $ 3.6 billion, will also have to be paid by Britain, which acknowledges that its present nine livestock crematoria can handle only 1,000 carcasses a week, not the required 15,000. That shortage of capacity in turn will require cow carcasses to be held in freezer depots pending cremation, at an additional untold cost.

Even those costs are only part of the toll. Before the announcement of a possible BSE-Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease link, the British beef industry was worth $ 6 billion a year. Now, in addition to farmers, all the associated businesses-- transporters, auctioneers, slaughterhouses, makers of by-products, feed suppliers--also face ruin. On a smaller scale, the picture is grim for the industry in the rest of Europe as well.

The fact that emotion has played a bigger role than science has led to criticism of the media. As Chirac complained in Turin, "We should talk less of mad cows and more of the mad press." That feeling was echoed in London last Friday by one of the co-authors of the report that triggered the crisis in March. Dr. James Ironside said on bbc Radio there was "no scientific evidence to suggest that the widespread slaughter of cattle in this country would actually help matters." He reported that scientists were perhaps 18 months away from establishing anything definite about a cow-human disease link.

Lack of scientific proof has done nothing to help the British farmers facing bankruptcy or a beleaguered Prime Minister Major, who announced last week that the beef scare is the greatest crisis since the Falklands war. Britain eventually won that conflict, but mad-cow disease looks to be harder to beat than Argentine generals.


Reported by Bruce Crumley/Paris, Helen Gibson/London, Nina Planck/Brussels and Bruce van Voorst/Bonn


Copyright © 1996 LEXIS-NEXIS. All rights reserved.

Deja Vu All Over Again

People who have followed the unravelling cover-up in Britain will find the U.S. press using a familiar approach -- erring on the side of protecting the meat industry, not public health. The story appeared on Wednesday, 10 April 1996, under the byline of Patrick O'Neill, though the story has the AP 'imprimature'. Reading between the lines, we learn:

1: it's public hysteria, a scare with a zany name [mad cow disease], applicable to far-away Britain, not a bona fide U.S. public health concern.

2: unnamed experts say BSE has never been documented in the U.S. Actually, the disease is called 'downer cow syndrome' n the U.S.and as many as 300,000 cattle a year die from it [and enter the food chain as byproduct.] Not to mention sheep scrapie. What does the average farmer do with a valuable animal just starting to show signs of an always-fatal disease? {Ans: sell it while it is still worth something.] No mention here of the FDA crackdown in April 1996 of imports of infections agent from Britain, in the form of cattle protein supplements, cosmetics, and dietary supplements. No mention of Dr. Marsh's 1993 study of transmission from rendered Wisconsin dairy cattle to ranched mink.

3: not to worry, incidence of rare CJD in humans is 1 in 1,000,000. Oops, they forget to say that's per year, folks -- and it translates, given the long latency, to 1 in 10,000 having it at time of death according to National Institute of Mental Health. But what would NIMH know compared to the Cattlemen's Association? And who advertises more in the Oregonian? Don't forget, only 6% of patients exhibiting symptoms of the disease are ever autopsied. [CJD can only be conirmed at autopsy -- pathologists avoid these bodies like the plague -- several have died from it]. Some 7% of Alzheimer PMs exhibit spongiform cerebral lesions. The Alzheimer Society is a major donor to CJD research because of these similarities.

4: "anxiety about the remote possibility of a link" between bovine spongiform encephalopathy and human Creutzfeldt-Jacob Disease. Actually, the scientific evidence is ovewelming for variant-CJD. No quote here of Dr. Richard Lacey, a distinguished English professor of microbiology, calls the situation in England "worse that AIDS," with perhaps a hundred million people exposed globally to tainted meat over 15 years, with 12 documented deaths, and an incipient epidemic.

5 :" Oregon health officials are searching computer records," as if this is going to find anything given the rarity of diagnosis and autopsy and the lack of reporting requirements.

6. only "3 Oregonians a year died of the illness -- well within the worldwide average." Actually, there is no worldwide average, only a few industrial countries have any data at all. The disease is frequently overlooked, individuals die in nursing homes, doctors do not put it on the death certificate at the family's request, and no one wants to do the confirming autopsy. CJD deaths from corneal transplants, pituitary extracts, growth hormone, blood transfusions, and rabies vaccines are called "friendly fire" by one physician.

10: now, patronizingly, we are "fielding an increasing number of phone calls from [Oops, skip to page 10] anxious people."

12. silly "worried" people are assured by deputy state epidemiologist that there is no evidence justifying a switch to a vegetarian diet.

13 Oregon Health Division, USDA, and Everett Koop "are trying to rein in public concern." Last sentence of paragraph: emotionally over-wrought "people who have lost loved ones aren't sure there is not a connection."

14-17. a highly personalized account of a 47-year old Corvallis man who died in his prime from CJD. His widow describes him as a frequent patron of fast-food hamburger establishments. No mention of the age anomaly -- the deaths of young people was what set off the panic in Britain. For months we have been hearing -- not to worry -- that nobody died of this below age 65. Last week, AP changed this to mid-50's being normal. (Two days earlier, Margie Boule of the Oregonian ran a story about a 53 year-old man, a frequent lamb-eater, who died of CJD.)

18-22. Factual information reviewed, presented with no particular bias.

23-24. The article closes with reassuring quotes from authority figures: more studies need to be done to establish any [far-fetched] link, neurologist anecdote about not having seen any increase in CJD lately. No balancing quotes from opposing views in the scientific or medical community; no mention of the "epidemic alert" issued yesterday by the World Health Organization. No quotes from Nobel laureate Dr. Stanley Prusiner.



Research by Richard Marsh of the University of Madison, Wisconsin, strongly suggests that outbreaks of encephalopathy in mink during recent decades (there have been 20 in all) were caused by feeding them meat from infected sheep or cows. Dr Marsh also thinks that some cases in America were spread to mink from cows that died on the hoof in the 1960s; if so, then very low levels of BSE could have long existed in America--though that has never been officially accepted. Most, if not all, encephalopathies also seem able to move to a new species if an animal gets a large enough dose.

Dr. Joseph Gibbs of the National Institutes of Health in the U.S. believes that a cattle TSE may exist in the US already. Dr. Gibbs has speculated transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE) in many species may occur spontaneously at an extremely low level world wide.

New York Times 4.10.96 : 13 cattle quarantined on 3 farms in New York State. page 13 local news digest paragraph. Actually, the several hundred cattle imported from Britain since the 1989 ban now being hunted down are utterly insignificant in view of widespread sheep scrapie and 300,000 'downer cows' annually in the US, and use of imported British protein supplements from infected animals. Cattle in US definitely have BSE and it has been transmitted to mink farms, as per U. Wisconsin veterinary scientist RF Marsh.


Eugene Register Guard: circle the wagon, boys -- no coverage at all: making families of victims aware of the issue might cause them to report the case to statistic collectors.
Colorado Springs paper: Colorado Fish and Game Vet says it is "ok to eat tainted meat from elk and deer" that have contracted 'chronic wasting disease' [spongiform disease probably from contact with scrapie-infected sheep of BSE cattle.]



Bogus AP Story
Here's a hard-hitting AP news story -- or is it a press release from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce?. Supposedly a report on public opinion, the article is actually an all-out attempt to shape public opinion. Try 'deconstructing' the story sentence by sentence -- don't you feel soothed after 18 repititions?

"Most U.S. consumers trust beef to be safe"

DENVER -- As Europeans try to contain a growing panic that mad cow disease in Britain can cause grave human illness, Americans seem to be staying calm and confident that the beef in their burgers is safe.

Cattle ranchers, packing houses and retailers say they've fielded only a few questions about the disease. And most consumers buttonholed Thursday insist they trust federal safety guidelines on beef processing.

"I think the people in this country are on top of what's going on with the beef and the meat," Earl Headley, 48, a visiting New Yorker said Thursday outside a downtown Chicago Burger King. "There are enough safeguards."

U.S. beef sales and prices have remained steady since March 20, when the British government said there may be a link between mad cow disease and the human equivalent, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, which is fatal.

The United States has not imported British beef since 1985. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has found no sign of the disease in American cattle, but says it will increase cattle testing as a precaution.

Representatives of Wendy's and McDonald's said they have not seen any effect in the United States. Grocers and beef producers say customers are not concerned about American beef, but whether the United States has imported any beef from Britain.

Employees at Cincinnati-based Kroger, the nation's largest supermarket operator, have handled about four consumer calls, said Jack Partridge, a group vice president.

"Really, the inquiries have just been, 'Do we import beef from England?' The answer is no," Partridge said.

Tom Schilder, a Kroger meat department manager in Columbus, Ohio, said he hasn't heard any questions from customers. "In fact, our sales have been steadily increasing the past few days," he said.

Rick McCarty of the Englewood, Colo.-based National Cattlemen's Beef Association said, "We just don't see any consumer reaction, nor do we see a reaction in the cattle market or from producers.

"Any time you have a tremendous amount of media coverage on some issue related to food, there is always going to be a period where there is a ripple of nervousness.

"I think it's always the case that people go, 'Ooh, that's kind of scary,' then good sense takes over and they say, 'Well, not really,"' McCarty said.

Mad cow disease, officially known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, first appeared in Britain's herds about 10 years ago. It is an extremely rare degenerative disease that affects the brains and central nervous systems of cattle.

Scientists believe cattle got the disease by eating feed that contained sheep tissue added as a protein supplement. Sheep are susceptible to a similar brain disease called scrapie.

The U.S. livestock industry voluntarily stopped using cattle feed made from sheep several years ago, although sheep protein is used in some items, such as pet food. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is considering a ban on that feed now.

Beef parts also are used in dozens of other American products, from cosmetics to candy to gelatins to drugs for diabetes, hay fever and arthritis. But scientists say the disease scare should affect none of them.

"The public health risk is about as close to zero as you can get," Russell Cross, director of the Institute of Food Science and Engineering at Texas A&M University, said Thursday.

At a downtown Denver food court, the Thursday lunchtime crowd dined on a variety of foods with beef ingredients. One casually dressed man in his 30s, who refused to give his name, said, "I've heard about it, and I hope to God this hamburger isn't affected."

Then he bit into a Whopper.

Copyright The Associated Press 3.28.96