The center, part of the Harvard School of Public Health, found that the risks of an outbreak of mad cow disease in America were low.

A follow-up study was released last October, when an infected cow was discovered in Canada. Led by the center’s Executive Director George M. Gray, the study assessed the hypothetical risks of a Canadian cow infecting American cattle.

The study found that even if an infected animal entered the U.S. from Canada, the risk of the disease spreading through the American herd was low as a result of the feed ban passed under Glickman.

Despite the low risks, Gray recommended that the USDA begin to test beef for traces of spinal chord tissue.

Gray added that, while Glickman focused on an identification program for live cattle, that may not be effective.

“An identity program doesn’t help in preventing the spread of disease. It is not part of a protection system. I’ve focused on reducing the spreading of the disease,” he said.

Gray said that the USDA has not asked him to study the current state of the disease, but he said he has been contacted by media organizations and major newspapers for comment on the current risks.

Though Gray said he understands the anxiety surrounding mad cow disease, he said that it is interesting to note that “mad cow has pushed the flu off the front page.”

Glickman said yesterday that the discovery of an American case of mad cow disease has had dramatic consequences for the U.S. beef industry.

Meat exports to countries such as Japan, which imports $1 billion of beef, dropped to virtually nonexistent levels.

And though American consumption of beef has remained constant, prices have dropped by 25 percent.

Here in Cambridge, however, the line at Adams House Grill was as long as ever last night as diners clamored for their burgers.

“I’ll try not to think about it while I’m eating my burger, but it’s a pretty scary thought,” said Akweley D. Ablorh ’04.