THIS IS NO LONGER THE CURRENT PAGE - please go to http://www.warmwell.com for the current site 2008 onwards
or here for all other archives

(BLUETONGUE - another nightmare in waiting for the UK. For European friends who are already living it - French, German and Dutch - who could fill out a questionnaire, please follow this link and draw attention to it. This is important. Answers are kept confidential.)

DEFRA website (foot and mouth) ~ Click Here for updates from the FMD/CSF Coordination Action website ( their website is temporarily unavailable)      Emails from the public for publication - received August 2007 Latest Reports in the Press ~ Contact Warmwell ~ The avoidable experiences of 2001 ~ Infected roe deer in Surrey?       FMDV-O1 BFS 1860/UK/67 - same strain as in 1967

Defra's Fact Sheet 3 - What will happen on my farm if disease is suspected there?   

        

Recommended - The Guardian News Blog        JonathanMiller's Top Ten        Jane's vaccination petition    Lightwater    Sheepdrove ;      

     

Foot and Mouth - UK - August 2007           emails

THIS IS NO LONGER THE CURRENT PAGE

August 10/13 ~ Dairy herd on the Pirbright estate

"Samples can be obtained by taking blood, but also non-invasively from the nose and from milk". The email from Mary Marshall below raises the important issue of testing milk. This, as she says, can be done quite easily without the need to inject into the skin.
We are now wonderering if it was being done as a matter of simple routine on Pirbright animals. It has come to our notice that the milk collection service for the dairy herd on the Pirbright estate was cancelled on Wednesday, August 1st, 24 hours before Mr. Pride on his own farm rang his vet about clinical signs in his catttle.
No mention has been made of this herd on the Pirbright estate. Is it still alive? Was FMD found in milk samples? Was a candidate animal to test supposedly inert dead vaccine found to be clinically infected, and did that alone stop the routine milk collection?
We are still wondering which was, in fact, the index case in this outbreak. But even this, interesting as it may to those of a detective bent, is not as important for disease control as the central fact: Testing milk for FMD virus is straightforward. If virus is anywhere where there is a dairy herd it can be pinpointed easily by testing the milk. Is it being done?

August 10/13 ~ "VS recognizes the value of milk as a sample for FMD surveillance, as well as the value of this test in moving milk safely inside of quarantine zones.." The United States Animal Health Association

but the USAHA document here continues: " ARS and APHIS have done proof-of-concept work using the ARS/Tetracore developed real-time PCR assay for FMDV nucleic acids in milk......Due to the loss of some crucial staff at Foreign Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory (FADDL), they have not been able to move ahead with the optimization of this assay for milk...By March 2006, FADDL should have in a place a Head for the newly formed Proficiency and Validation Services Section, which will enable them to move forward with the optimization and validation of this assay in milk....."
So, a familiar story of underfunding and frustrating difficulties. News of progress with this would be gratefully received.
( Incidentally, and as many now know, the ARS/Tetracore developed real-time PCR assay was the very machine that Sir David King turned away in 2001. Magnus Linklater when the journalist asked Professor King, UK's Chief Scientific Advisor, why it was not being considered was apparently told "I would need five hours to explain the science to you," he said. "Unfortunately I don't have that time." )

August 10/13 ~ More slaughter imminent - unless movement restrictions can be eased

Another aspect of the frozen situation in Surrey is the welfare issue. The restrictions on livestock movements are now causing problems of overcrowding. Issues of providing food, drink and temporary housing are becoming critical, particularly on intensive pig farms.
In 2001, movement restrictions led to scenes of utter misery for animals. So-called "welfare culls" killed healthy animals as much as the panicky contiguous culling did. Literally millions of animals died in horrible conditions; not just those who - in that much repeated phrase - "would have been slaughtered anyway". The loss of breeding stock was terrible but it was grim to see even meat animals consigned to such an end.
The NPA, alive to any political pressure that can be applied, is asking producers to keep a photographic record of their mounting pig welfare problems and warning that piglets will have to be killed "in-situ". This is a situation that is going to have to change urgently. Scotland and Wales, but not England, are allowing controlled welfare movements.

August 10/13 ~ " the laboratory must move into the field and test animals quickly before irreversible actions are taken." ProMed

'ProMED' means 'Program for Monitoring Emerging Diseases' and is the Internet-based reporting programme of the International Society for Infectious Diseases (ISID). The moderators are international experts in their field who screen, review, and investigate reports before posting to the network. ProMED-mail is independent and free of political constraints. To read on ProMed that diagnostic testing should now be "out of the laboratory" is very cheering. On Saturday, a ProMED moderator, in the course of a five paragraph comment about the UK situation, (www.promedmail.org)wrote:
"....In the past -- that is, pre-1980 -- when we killed "contact" herds it was not questioned and laboratory techniques then could not have handled the volumes of samples. Today all that is different and thousands of samples are run each day. This brings home the point that the laboratory must move into the field and test animals quickly before irreversible actions are taken..." (More)
For six years warmwell and others have been asking that the analysis of samples should happen at the place where samples are actually taken, using already available, ever more affordable diagnostic kits, rather than be taken by car, train or air to the reference laboratory. Results can now be obtained in the field within minutes rather than hours and days, can detect FMDv before the onset of clinical disease and the "irreversible actions" such as we saw at Hunts Hill farm can be avoided. The "prototype RT-PCR" mentioned to our correspondent seems not to have been used on the suspect pig there. It is hard for an outsider to discover much - yet we read here for example:
"...We have performed 5 minimal infectious dose experiments with FMDV type O1 Lausanne using the original "Pirbright set-up" although using updated technology ......Two diagnostic methods for very fast, sensitive and specific detection of FMD virus using real time RT-PCR has been submitted, one of them for UK Patent and the other for international patent protection. DEFRA has naturally been granted unrestricted access to testing of samples from the UK using the new assays..."
Even on a farm with a lame pig so close to an IP, it seems that precipitate action might have been avoided. Mention of patents does make one consider what the reason might be for the apparent secrecy surrounding the use of rapid diagnosis in the UK . Ironic perhaps then that we were reliably told this week that "the whole portable PCR field will be transformed with very cheap machines that are highly automated within the year".

August 10/13 ~ "The government has a responsibility to use the technologies that can identify disease before signs appear if these technologies are available. They are available, and they are being used in the lab. ."

Mary Marshall's email suggests that the present practice of testing only sheep in a high risk area is a practice that should be challenged. She asks the question that has evidently occurred to many in addition to ourselves:
"Why were samples not taken as part of the inspections, from the first day and subsequent days, from ALL of the susceptible animals on a contiguous farm, especially if Defra considers the animals on these farms to be of such high risk? "
"... If virus is detected outside the surveillance zone, vaccination should then be automatically triggered. If no virus is detected outside the surveillance zone over several days, possibly coupled with more widespread testing of milk, then an easing of movement restrictions in other regions of the UK would be justified." Read in full. Quoting the ProMed comment above, she concludes, " To implement the diagnostic policies that I suggest, the government must be committed to provide a 21st century biocontainment facility as part of a national disease control strategy and ensure that their labs have sufficient resources and funding to function effectively. "

August 10/13 2007 ~ " Whilst hoping for the best, a point source, we should have taken precaution against the worst, a plume."

Ruth Watkins, MRCP MRCPath (a specialist in Clinical Virology) in the paper written this weekend especially for warmwell and farmtalking, has given ten reasons why she is convinced that vaccination in this outbreak should have been undertaken. She also gives a fascinating insight into her field of expertise: the microscopic world of cells and how vaccine protects them from attack by wild virus. She explains, "All virus families have different characteristics, and to some we may never be able to make protective neutralising antibody at all such as Hepatitis C virus. How lucky we are to have such a good vaccine against FMD - it is theoretically possible to eliminate FMD from the world by vaccination....decades of scientific research has provided us with excellent vaccine to all the major serotypes of FMD virus.".
As she says, we are lucky too that
"...that we have these scientific and vaccine establishments in the UK, and we should be ready to take advantage of the benefits they can give us."
Her email and paper can be read here. She warns, " With global warming we may expect the incursion of a number of exotic viruses into the domestic animals of Northern Europe, which - if they are insect borne or infect a wildlife reservoir - may not be eliminated. May we have diagnostics and vaccines ready to meet them..."

August 10/13 ~ FMD - uncomfortable issues still to answer

The Lightwater site, at Worldpress.com succinctly sets out the issues that are worrying many of us. Underfunding, maladministration, government spinning that they are not to blame - particularly the leaking of information about Merials staff and their operation "aimed at deflecting criticism from Government" Read in full

August 10/13 2007 ~ the role of rapid on-site RT-PCR during this outbreak

Saturday morning saw confirmation of negative results for the Matthews calves and DEFRA's revocation of the temporary zone around Manor Farm. The Today programme (Saturday) interviewed the free-range farmer whose 362 animals were killed as a precaution. Mr Emerson at Hunts Hill farm revealed that vets had been checking with him every day but on Wednesday, one lame pig with slight lesions just above the hoof (coronary band) gave enough cause for alarm that samples were taken. After lengthy discussions with Page Street it was decided - on the strength of this one pig and because Hunts Hill farm was so close to the other two outbreaks- to kill all the animals on site, of all species, immediately. (The pig was, in fact, clear of disease as were all the other animals. Mr Emerson was quoted: "knowing now that my animals were never infected makes it worse.")
Pigs can excrete a great deal of virus early on if infected, true - but what of these samples? It would be interesting to know if they were or were not checked by rapid on-site diagnosis. We should very much like to know more about the role for all speciesof the rapid on-site RT-PCR being used by the UK as an indicator of disease in its various phases. Which species are being tested by rapid diagnosis and how often - in short, exactly how is the new technology being applied during this outbreak? Or is this - for reasons one can only guess at - information that must be kept secret? There are many others who want to know about rapid testing. One of the most recent emails to warmwell, from the Chairman of Mitchell's Auction Company in Cumbria, reminds us yet again of the UK refusal to contemplate testing real time RT-PCR back in 2001.

August 10/13 2007 ~ We fear a bad end and a wrong answer to the question of ultimate responsibility.

Our summary of the situation so far before we collapse into the weekend: Pirbright is a 'government' laboratory but it has no government power to control events. It survives at the whim of the Government and of the Treasury. It cannot criticise its paymasters. Like so much else whose usefulness ought to be taken for granted and isn't, Pirbright has been starved of funding, equipment and staffing and has suffered a loss of morale. Yet the expertise we need is still based at Pirbright. It is not Pirbright's fault if commercial considerations, including its close relationship with Merial, have had to take the place of its former "public service" ethos - and it is not Pirbright that is shaping policy; it is the politics that needs big business as its life blood. Farmers across the country are suffering for what happened in Surrey and a lot has been said about the irony that the crisis came from the very Institute set up to avert it. Perhaps live virus in a vaccine being tested somewhere on the Pirbright site failed fully to be attenuated or got out by human means. As in all walks of life, this sort of thing can happen. But we fear a bad end and a wrong answer to the question of the ultimate responsibility for what happened at Pirbright.
The jackals are gathering. Reputations and careers may be made sacrifices in the financial storm that's coming. It is, as always, the big players who will battle over big money. The drama of "who was to blame" will unfold like something on reality TV. Throughout this whole crisis mainstream journalists have missed by miles the key question, which is this:
Is it right that our disease control policy is based wholly on unfair and out-of-date "health" regulations, forcing those decent small farmers, who also need to make a profit, to fight the Goliath of the non-vaccination policy?
It is the EU's protectionist policy, enshrined in the OIE regulations that discriminate against vaccination in returning disease free status, that constantly postpones a more sane, more humane, science-based animal health policy in the UK. The Pirbright virus escape would - in a less crazy world - have been a small local irritation, quickly solved by the ability of available modern technology to cure and protect.

August 10 2007 ~" If the present policy is successful, it will be a measure of good luck in ignoring these two variables..."

Email received this afternoon from Dr Colin Fink (Clinical Virologist & Hon. Senior Lecturer in Biological Sciences University of Warwick) He says, in brief, that Debby Reynold's latest briefing was "reasonably coherent" but that the present 'no vaccination' strategy , makes no acknowledgment of the possibility of wild life vectors. (See also below) Dr Fink says
" the present policy assumes one distribution of virus by primary intent only ( ? accident ? sabotage ). Vaccination around the present areas, as I suggested earlier would prevent any further environmental virus distribution from having much clinical effect and would lower any re-excretion rates of virus into the environment. - a basic tenet of vaccination.
If the present policy is successful, it will be a measure of good luck in ignoring these two variables.
One of the more worrying aspects of the clinical presentation of the second affected animal group in this outbreak, was the profound onset of the illness simultaneously in a number of animals. This strongly suggests a high viral load within the environment that infected this group all together. That to my mind would be one reason why vaccine for this outbreak should be used sooner rather than later."
Read in full

August 10 2007 ~ Miserable news. We got so used to this in 2001...

Livestock culled on Hunts Hill farm did not have foot and mouth disease. DEFRA says that tests on the 362 cows, sheep, pigs and goats slaughtered on Wednesday, (some of which may have appeared to have initial clinical symptoms of foot and mouth), show that none of these animals were, in fact, carrying the foot and mouth virus.
Horrible news. See first paragraphs of the Telegraph article. And it casts doubt on our assumption below that they would not have been culled unless an on-site rapid diagnosis, rather than mere clinical inspection, had indicated disease. Ironically, these negative results will be seen as good news - and of course in a way, it is. But failure of rapid diagnosis - reliance on a clinical diagnosis that turns out to be wrong - this is shameful when we have access both to excellent diagnostic equipment giving results within a fraction of the time it takes in the lab and vaccines that will, as Dr Fink says above, "prevent any further environmental virus distribution from having much clinical effect and would lower any re-excretion rates of virus into the environment." Killing first and checking afterwards is something we had hoped could never happen again in a modern civilised country - and it does nothing at all to protect others.
So much for our optimism about the possible efficient deployment of on-site rapid testing. The question must remain: why were these animals killed? What machine is being used for on-site testing? What was the reason to keep paths open near infected farms? Nick Green got some distinctly odd replies to his questions today.

August 10 2007 ~ "..we could still find ourselves in the bizarre situation where the meat on the shelves is imported from countries where Foot and Mouth Disease is prevalent "

In the Scotsman, Dan Bugloss says of Brazil, "...the Irish party confirmed suspicions that the vaccination regime was haphazard at best and sometimes completely non-existent. Meanwhile, the EU continued to import Brazilian beef, allegedly from regions declared clear of the disease....
Yorkshire Dales Country News today quotes Dr Charles Trotman, CLA's Rural Economy Adviser: " "understanding between parties in the food chain is essential .... I hope that the chief executives who control the big supermarkets will instruct their meat buyers to... avoid the temptation to try and make a quick profit at the expense of those who have had to shoulder the economic burden of this disease."
Douglas Chalmers, Director CLA North told the paper that " we could still find ourselves in the bizarre situation where the meat on the shelves is imported from countries where Foot and Mouth Disease is prevalent. Not only would this compound the agony for home producers, but it would have had a longer term effect for British farmers and processors. With home produced meat now available again, it is to be hoped that no one will try to take advantage of the situation..."

August 10- 13 2007 ~ Suspect animals were to be monitored, not immediately culled on suspicion

The latest available DEFRA interim epidemiology report can be found at www.defra.gov.uk [PDF] (500 KB) (apologies. Link mended - but it is slow) or here. It shows the situation as at 10:00 am yesterday and tells us that since 3rd August 2007 suspicion of FMD has been reported on 37 holdings, in the counties shown in the table it shows.
"Five holdings are still under investigation; disease has been ruled out on the remainder."
Movements from Surrey have been traced: "para 23. Investigations have confirmed that no sheep from Surrey or from the surveillance zone that overlapped into the neighbouring county of Hampshire were moved to or sold through Bicester sheep fair at Thame market on 3rd August. 24. In summary, the risk of spread of infection out of Surrey through movements of silently infected sheep during the risk period is very low."
Within the zones, testing seems (to us) to have been very efficiently carried out.
A "dangerous contact" had been identified next to the second outbreak; a single holding that is "highly likely to have been exposed to infection through a personnel contact ... Additionally, stock on the DC premises are adjacent to the IP and only separated from it by a farm track and a lane."
However, these animals were, according to the Aug 9 report (10.00 am) , to be carefully monitored every day rather than culled on suspicion. "target=new> Read report (pdf)
All this suggests to us that a rapid on-site portable PCR test may well have found evidence of disease on the free range farm where the 362 animals were killed yesterday. However, we still wait for news of the lab test results.
UPDATE: As we say above and the Telegraph very brefly reports, all the cows, pigs, sheep and goats at Hunts Hill Farm turned out to be free of infection.

August 10 2007 ~ " it has been decided not to vaccinate at this time."

A new DEFRA statement has appeared "....In line with this decision tree and the emerging conclusions of epidemiology investigations it has been decided not to vaccinate at this time. However, this approach will be kept under constant review as the disease situation develops and the Forward Vaccination Centre will be kept in place.
As part of the evidence base for this decision Defra has today published an interim epidemiology report into the outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease in Surrey...."

August 10 2007 ~ Information about differentiation tests needs to be clearer. (Boring but very important)

Yesterday's Farmers Weekly article "Vaccine best for foot-and-mouth?" reported that Dr Tony Andrews "... believes there would be difficulty in acknowledging the difference between a vaccinated animal or infected animal and, therefore, stresses the need for clearer answers...." but Anthony Gibson of the NFU (and we remember his sense and humanity in 2001 with gratitude) said the NFU was confident there was a validated test.
Dr Andrews is right that things need to made clearer. We begin to understand his stance on vaccination (even though we do not share it). The OIE Code Commission have accepted the principle of herd based NSP serosurveillance as a basis for countries regaining FMD free status. In other words, while tests to distinguish vaccinated from unvaccinated animals are accepted in the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code
("... a serological survey is conducted to demonstrate that antibodies to the disease are as result of vaccination and not natural infection.")
- there is STILL not yet an internationally accepted NSP (non-structural protein) test for individual use in any species. The test shows whether antibodies, produced when the animal tried to fight off real live virus, are present in the blood. Such antibodies are NOT produced as a result of vaccination so differentiation can be made. Even though tests - such as those assessed in 2004 by Bruderer et al - are shown to be effective, the OIE will, at present, only accept whole herd tests for the purposes of international trade. Full validation for individual tests requires panels of seven FMD serotypes in at least three target species. Testing has to be carried out in high security accommodation - and needs to be carried out where both vaccination and exposure to virus can occur. We speculate that work has been going on recently at Pirbright. It seems to warmwell more than likely that this testing may be significant in the present crisis. Meanwhile, it is a dreadful irony that such work cannot continue. Once it is done then the last (non trade) obstacle to vaccination will be removed. And as page 37 Version 1.2 - ( Volume 2 Foot and mouth disease) of DEFRA's Exotic Animal Disease Generic Contingency Plan (Consultation Version- July 2006) makes clear:
Public opinion - Public are likely to support a vaccinate to live policy and this would be in line with FMD Inquiry recommendations. Food Standards Agency advice is that labelling of products from vaccinated animals would not be required. A shared statement (i.e:here) on the use of vaccination as part of FMD control strategies has been produced in partnership with consumer organisations.
In April we wrote about the question of "Validation" (only when it suits) "... It needs to be pointed out and repeated that the mathematical modelling that drove that discredited 2001 policy was not validated and no validation was ever attempted. As Dr Martin Hugh-Jones commented: "Any model is only as good as its ability to be validated....One of the criticisms of the Anderson FMD model was that it could not be validated. Nor, for that matter, was validation ever attempted with the very expensive result that we all witnessed."

August 10 2007 ~ NFU moves towards court case

www.thelawyer.com "South West firm Thring Townsend was instructed yesterday (9 August) by the National Farmers Union (NFU) in relation to a potential action for losses suffered by farmers as a result of last week's foot and mouth outbreak."

August 10 2007 ~ New Case is NOT foot and mouth "I just wanted to be 100% sure"

The farmer involved, Laurence Matthews, at Manor Farm, says that he had called DEFRA as a precaution when he noticed a possible problem with some of his calves - especially since it was his land that was involved in the second outbreak; John Gunner's animals. He says there has been "no traffic" between his farm (calves only) in Wotton and the second outbreak site at Normandy. The calves (3 - 5 weeks old) are all housed in the same building and any infection can spread easily. Mr Matthews is reassured that the suspect calves are now looking a lot better. Confirmatory tests will be known this afternoon - but one assumes that rapid diagnostic on-site PCR was used to ensure such confidence this morning..
There is no news yet about the test results from the 362 animals killed yesterday. 576 animals have been destroyed so far and the human misery this causes is examined by the Telegraph today. "Every animal has its own unique value to us," said the free range farmer yesterday. "We were absolutely devastated."

August 10 2007 ~ A new possible case. A New Temporary Control Zone

Late last night an announcement was made that a new control zone has been placed on a site in Surrey outside present areas. There was frustration as no further details emerged. The new 3km zone is now known to be east of the existing surveillance zone and southwest of Dorking. DEFRA's emergency response centre at Reigate is not far away. The Times is raising the spectre of sabotage again. All DEFRA would say is: "This precautionary measure follows an inconclusive assessment of clinical symptoms by Animal Health veterinary staff. The national movement ban remains in place. In addition, in the Temporary Control Zone, general licences will not apply for the movement of animals to slaughter and collection of dead animals from farms." but fears that the outbreak of foot and mouth disease had spread from the initial control zone is going to send shivers through the farming community. More as soon as we know.
There are those who have the time and interest to wait in front of television, radio and the internet for news. Farmers, whose stomachs are turning, many of whom have no representation, have to get on with the farming day. They - unlike the officials working hard in Surrey - are not able to earn overtime. Open information, given as soon as it is known, is important and we cannot see any "public good" reason why it should be withheld.
UPDATE - see above.

August 10 2007 ~ Defra can find the time and money to send us all pointless bumph that we don't need, let alone have time to read, but when the countryside is hit with something like FMD we get absolutely nothing

An ironic query sent by a farmer needs no further comment.
The NPA site too had included, just before its jokey footnote about painting pigs black and white, the sentence
"There is also a desire among the vets for an improved cascade of information from Defra in London. ..."
but we note that this sentence has now been removed.

August 9 ~ The Ministry knows best....

More on the subject of getting the science wrong, non-admission of Government mistakes, official ignorance, compensation claims side-stepped...but this is a different problem and one that spans 30 years. A document Sheep dipping - Advice for farmers and others involved in dipping sheep has appeared on the Health and Safety Executive website. It contains grim warnings about sheep dipping.
Sheep dips, (designated 'veterinary medicines') were found to eradicate scab in sheep, thirty years ago, if they contained organophospherous compounds. These had actually been developed as chemical warfare agents. Farmers themselves, such as the doughty campaigning Lancashire farmer, Brenda Sutcliffe, became aware that OPs were causing depression, brain damage and premature death and demanded their total ban. But the Ministry knew best. Until 1989, the law required compulsory dipping twice a year. By 1992, dipping for scab at last ceased to be compulsory but MAFF (now DEFRA) announced instead that it would not hesitate to prosecute sheep farmers who did not deal promptly and satisfactorily with an outbreak of scab.
Fear of compensation demands have, as often before and since, made the government very chary about any admission of responsibility. The wording of the HSE document is careful. Warnings are general and apply to all dips. However, the sentence,"Some agricultural pesticides contain OP or SP active ingredients. These products are not authorised for use as veterinary medicines and must never be used for this purpose" would seem to be incontrovertible. (The FWi article today brought our attention to the existence of the booklet.)

August 9 ~ Bad news that can't be buried

Unfortunately, the Fallen Stock relaxation is hardly making much of an improvement. For those who remember The Good Life, this is the Margo Leadbetter method of collection; picking one runner bean at a time and carrying it delicately across the garden to a sack. The Fallen Stock vehicle can go to one farm for collection - but then it must return to base for Cleaning and Disinfection (C&D). So instead of maybe 30 - 40 carcasses per day, they will be lucky to collect 4. There will be a problem with leakage and smell. A bit of a stink.
Scotland, we hear, have allowed on-farm burial at least in the short term. As one emailer writes today, "Pity the fallen stock aren't a bit closer to the minions in Page St." Yes, and pity the Fallen Stock scheme, has been clung to for fear of admitting it was a piece of "legislative madness" ( as Dan Buglass in the Scotsman put it) to begin with.

August 9 ~ "the worker bees at the local Defra office do try to be helpful, despite the insane orders they receive from headquarters..."

Jonathan Miller's top ten are now up. For the jaded, they are as refreshing as a cold beer pressed to one's forehead. Others may not be quite so refreshed. His list of the good, the bad and the ugly begins; "Never mind the disinfectant, send the whitewash..." However, as our choice for a paragraph title shows, he is very happy to give credit where it is due, and from others we have heard, the DEFRA footsoldiers in Surrey do indeed seem to have been human and kindly. Sad agreement too with the following on the subject of the internet:
"....while the networks are activating quickly, frankly we lack real political clout. We do not have a clunking great fist. The challenge is to convert our command of the facts and superb intelligence into meaningful pressure. I admit this is a tough problem when our democracy is so intangible, and note that it is a problem not unique to this issue..."
Read in full
UPDATE Even so, and although Jonathan Miller is undoubtedly right, the bloggers are uniting...( Alas, this cartoon will have to self destruct very soon)
Here, back in the fray, is the famous organic centre Sheepdrove,: "Join us in calling for the right to vaccinate now...Why not let the farmers decide? We could use our own risk assessments and make a decision on whether or not to protect our stock against FMD."

August 9 ~ Another twist - of the knife

HSE are investigating a case of Legionnaires' Disease at IAH Pirbright, thought to predate the problems with virus escape ( the escape estimated to have been in the third week of July according to Fred Landeg ( pdf ec.europa.eu) . We discover from the IAH annual report dated 2004, that the ISO10 building at Pirbright, where the person with Legionnaires disease had been working, had been built the previous year to replace SAPO-4/ACDP-2 containment level accommodation
"for work on exotic viral diseases and vaccine development."
In other words, the lab where exotic viral diseases and vaccine development has been taking place was an environment where a worker could have caught a disease. According to this HSE account of a tragedy in 2002, that case was caused the failure of biological monitoring of the ventilation system. "...Vacancies in management posts were blamed for the shortage of risk assessments and absence of in-house monitoring." Underfunding perhaps.
The BBC report tells us " Legionnaires' Disease is caused by a bacterium that causes problems if it is converted into aerosol form from a water - for instance, in showers or spas - and then inhaled."

August 9 ~ Updated questions and answers at DEFRA

Click here for Tuesday's updated "FMD disease emergency vaccination - question and answer brief" from the DEFRA site. See also DEFRA's general Question and Answer page Aug 2007 - section on vaccination Extract:
"Suppressive vaccination (to kill) might be considered where the number of animals to be culled is likely to exceed the immediately available disposal capacity. In those instances, animals in defined areas would be vaccinated first and slaughtered only as disposal capacity became available. It could also be used where there is an urgent need to reduce the amount of virus circulating in an area and reduce the risk of spread beyond that area."
This is just "stamping out" by another name. The worst of all possible worlds for the animals and for the farmer.
Killing vaccinates rather than keeping them together would seem to make no sense. Anyone who has understood Notes on Vaccination and Transmission will see why. We are depressed to see mention of "suppressive" vaccination in the brief.
We notice too from Fred Landeg's presentation to the Standing Committee on Food Chain and Animal Health (SCoFCAH), ( pdf ec.europa.eu) in Brussels yesterday made no mention of vaccination in the presentation but did give further details - for example that the first lesions were dated 26th July and the clinical symptoms- first noticed on the sick animals on 29th July- were reported the following Thursday 2nd August. FMD was confirmed the next day and it became public knowledge that Friday night.
As we know, Member States are allowed to proceed straight away with emergency vaccination. No permission needs to be sought from the EU. The updated brief may be possibly be preparing us for something.

August 9 ~ Dutch Socialist Party MP backs vaccination and calls for EU policy to be changed to make vaccination compulsory

Krista van Velzen wants to see preventative vaccination against Foot-and-Mouth Disease made compulsory. She was quoted (Tuesday) in the online edition of the SP (Dutch Socialist Party) newspaper: "The outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease in Great Britain has once again made it clear that the current EU policy is wrong" adding that there is no support in the Netherlands for such animal-unfriendly policies. The Dutch MP is calling on agriculture minister Gerta Verburg to put the argument at European level for compulsory vaccination. (Many thanks to Brent for this link)
It may be remembered that Dutch farmers, having been promised that their vaccination policy in 2001 was to allow animals to live, were then appalled to learn that all vaccinates were going to be slaughtered after all. An eminent Dutch vet from Utrecht, Peter Poll, said at the Bristol Conference in England in 2001 that he thought it very likely that the Dutch veterinary associations themselves " will no longer cooperate in an eradication programme as carried out in Spring 2001" .

August 9 ~ "Some days I've taken 12 showers" says Dr. John Copps, deputy director of the National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease in Winnepeg

From www.canada.com ".....Dr. Copps..... who is monitoring the outbreak in Britain that may have been caused by a lab breach.... "Anything they learn, we'll try learn from them." .... says the federal lab near downtown Winnipeg, which houses the only live foot-and-mouth virus in Canada, has the advantage of being much newer and farther from farms than the British lab under investigation. "Some days I've taken 12 showers," he says, as evidence of the multi-layered safety procedures at the Manitoba lab, home to some of the nastiest diseases on earth."

August 9 ~ New cull involves "suspected"cows - but also sheep, pigs and goats at a farm advertised as "free range"

From the moderator (AS) at ProMed today. "We are informed by ProMED-mail rapporteur Joe Dudley that according to local media reports, the new culling operation involves cows, sheep, pigs and goats at a farm in the village of Normandy, Surrey. The farm is advertised on the web as a producer and vendor of "free range" pork/bacon, beef/veal, lamb, and mutton products.
Culling of other susceptible species on suspected or confirmed-infected premises does not necessarily mean that these animals have been found infected; possibly, the suspicion involves bovines. Details are expected to be included in UK's follow-up report to the OIE.
All 3 outbreaks so far -- including the new one, which at this stage is regarded as suspected -- are located in the village of Normandy. An additional cattle herd was culled in Elstead, about 7 km south of Normandy, in a 2nd farm property of the owner of the index farm. There are, thus, 2 protection zones.." Read in full
Feeling sickened, we await test results. One wonders if all the susceptible animals have been killed or just the cows.

August 9 ~ EU says restrictions are to stay in place at least until 25 August.

Brussels says that the situation has not yet "stabilised" since culling at a third farm was ordered yesterday afternoon. A European Commission spokesman said it would be "premature" to alter the EU measures and EU vets will gather in Brussels on Thursday 23rd August to assess the situation. See EUobserver
It should be remembered that at this stage we do not know how the virus got into the country around the Pirbright labs and we do not even know which was the index case. We will post the results of the tests on yesterday's culled animals as soon as we can find them.

August 9 ~ Cracked Mirror

A very unpleasant article in the Mirror this morning is an example of how some journalists are tarring all farmers with the same old smear of being heartless and greedy. The Mirror is read by around one and a half million people. Yet again one feels great concern that the decent, hard-working family farmers - those that are hanging on despite terrible economic hardship - are, on top of all their other worries - being reviled as well. An extract from a private email today gives an example of a farmer who can only keep going by working at another part time job as well. And this is common now; (another reason why the RPA situation is so scandalous) :
"...tired - trying to make some hay with very tired equipment and old tractor - nothing 10 or 15 k wouldn't fix quite quickly but.... fed up with farm, fmd, overtime at work to pay for farm eqpt - most days it all seems worthwhile, others -well, lets not dwell on those. Yesterday was one of those.."
Particularly disgraceful in the article was the suggestion that the grief of the Surrey farmers was not genuine. In spite of its evident support for vaccination, we found the whole piece one of the nastiest attempts to deepen the chasm between town and country that we have seen since 2001. As Huw Rowlands, a Cheshire farmer, wrote yesterday, it is time a distinction was made in the public mind between the powerful agri-business interests who are not representative of all farmers and the real farmers who often have no representation at all.

August 8 ~ Of course vaccination should have been the immediate reaction for all susceptible animals considered to be at risk.

The EU FMD vaccine bank contained (and stilll contains?) some 5 million doses of O1 BFS 67 vaccine in the form of highly concentrated inactivated antigen stored over liquid nitrogen. In this case the vaccine has to be formulated and bottled by Merial, which will take a couple of days only. The much respected Hugh Pennington notwithstanding, talk of not using vaccination "yet" or "until things get out of control" may one day be looked back on with utter incomprehension. The CVO in her very brief press conference today did not allow the V-word to pass her lips - and nor was she asked by any of those press who could get a word in. But vaccination should have started at the perimeter of the Surveillance zone and quickly worked inwards. The first round could have been completed on day one. Contemplating the days passing without it is a bitter frustration.
Meanwhile, television shows us shimmering pictures of marksmen with their rifles (humane slaughter or medieval butchery?) walking away away from the infected area still wearing their 'protective' suits. So much for biosecurity.
It is very apparent that DEFRA is being advised and negotiated with by the big players. Their reasons for not wanting vaccination are well known and well described today by the Scotsman - but union leaders know little about infectious disease or what needs to be done to eradicate the disease beyond the crude term "stamping out". Policy is created by a powerful group at DEFRA's shoulder, while DEFRA chooses to interpret good diagnostic information from the Vet labs without using the expertise within these labs for shaping their policy.

August 8 ~ There's more at stake than paying compensation to farmers if Pirbright is found to be responsible for the leak

Part of our very wobbly translation of this Swiss report account from Tagesschau this afternoon is as follows:
"..... Veterinary experts from the 27 Member States of the European Union have met in Brussels to discuss the UK's foot and mouth situation. With EU Commission experts they discussed whether preventative measures should be intensified or eased. Independent British invsetigators ...warned of hasty assumptions. "There is no definitive answer to the question of where the virus came from" - but the likely probablity is that it came from one of two laboratories in Pirbright 60 kilometres from London.
The point whether Pirbright will be able to remain a reference laboratory of the European Union for all FMD work, bluetongue illness and vesicular illnesses, has not yet been discussed. This year the British laboratory has received (the equivalent of ) approximately 773 thousand euros towards its work."
Could we be seeing the end of Pirbright as a World Reference Laboratory? (No wonder everyone in Government circles wants Merial - whose safety report in February was satisfactory - to turn out to have been the party at fault.)
We notice today that New Zealand's director of MAF's investigation and diagnostic centres, Hugh Davies, has said that no foot-and-mouth samples are kept in New Zealand because there are kits which can diagnose the virus in other ways." radionz.co.nz And it may well be that the days of Pirbright's monopoly for FMD diagnosis is drawing to an end anyway.

August 8 ~ Restrictions eased for movement to slaughter and for fallen stock for "certain parts of the country"

We know no more detail at 3.30 pm. It sounds as though farmers may need to go on line to get the general licence but at 3.30 there were no news releases on the DEFRA site for today and nothing we could find about this - although we'd welcome information from those luckier in their searches. It has been disappointing in this crisis that mainstream reporters have often seemed favoured with information before so many people who are directly involved - very many of whom are not the sort of farmers who are represented by the agri-business unions. These unions - and especially the NFU are certainly in the loop if not actually directing the loop's curve. But there are many very anxious tenant farmers, smallholders and animal owners who are not getting official information and are not being consulted. There is a lot of speculation that this movement easing is because DEFRA has suddenly realised that farmers are going to break the regulations out of sheer necessity - so, like the footpath question - they have seen the wisdom of changing a decision that may have been ill advised. However the CVO insisted the change was due to her own veterinary assessment.
UPDATE: Debby Reynolds (with the NFU's Kevin Pearce there too ) has just given a press conference. Eased movements for everywhere outside the two zones. More bad news Slaughter on suspicion , a phrase we'd hoped never to hear again, is about to take place on "an adjacent farm" and " I cannot rule out that disease is developing on the premises." The CVO would not tell reporters any more and could not give any details of the animals that will now die. No mention of any test result for them. She referred people to the website for more information. (Which finally updated with brief notes of today's news at 5.04)

August 8 ~ Allotment is out of the picture

The Merial staff member who accompanied investigators to his allotment is said by a Merial statement to be uninvolved in any leak. There is no evidence at all to link that member of staff to any leak, they say. They add that media attention (and we can all picture what they mean) camped outside the person's house is "unhelpful". So we are left with the following possibilities.
• The wind transfer suggestion has no evidence to support it (The 1981outbreak was that was supposedly windborn was certainly an individual carrying it on the Ferry to the Isle of Wight - not windborne).
• Flood from a storm drain with material not heat inactivated before disposal is possible. - bad lab. practice
• Sabotage : indeed possible -for a variety of possible reasons

August 8 ~ Continued reliance on the NFU as an authority is perverting coverage

When one listens to such broadcasts as this (Sky) on vaccination one has to take a few deep breaths. Hugh Pennington pops up yet again saying that we'd vaccinate if the outbreak got "out of control" - whereas ring vaccination is precisely what prevents this. We are reminded again of Jonathan Miller's exasperation today
"....Another crime scene is the newsrooms of the national media who are blundering about oaf-like on this story. The word "vaccination" was banned from the BBC 6 o'clock national news program yesterday. Sky has a very pretty girl outside Pirbright who knows the square root of fuck all about FMD and would struggle to define or even spell epizootic. Sky has a medical correspondent who seems to be getting around this, but their continued reliance on the NFU as an authority is perverting their coverage and making them look ever more naive and stupid. ..."
It is time that our pundits understood one basic fact at least. That is that an animal that has been vaccinated cannot become a "carrier" (misnomer) unless it has already been be exposed to wild, live FMD virus. That is why vaccination should have begun at once, starting from the outside of the zone and working in. There has been no evidence anywhere of outbreaks having been caused by vaccinated animals acting as "carriers". (I have the authority to say this because I have been working on this subject, unpaid and unswayed by any interest, every single day for the last six years.) No vaccinated animal has ever hampered any FMD eradication efforts anywhere in the world.
As for the general chorus of praise for DEFRA one must just point out that information for local people has been very much lacking, ring vaccination is not being openly and authoritatively debated, information on the infectivity of the strain and its characteristics are woefully lacking, and secrecy seems to pervade the department even now. The usual David King response of waiting for animals to develop symptoms and then killing them has been in evidence ever since Saturday. The NFU appears next to the chief vet at Defra news conferences, and no pronouncement that would not get NFU approval seems ever to be aired except on websites such as this. We hate to say it when we'd had such hopes - but something is still rotten in the state of Defra.

August 8 ~ Culling is solely to protect our beef export industry, whilst supermarkets happily continue importing beef from FMD endemic countries

Huw Rowlands, a Cheshire farmer writes to make the distinction between agri business (represented by the NFU) and the agriculture of family farms firmly based in and contributing to the rural economy.
"....Culling infected animals is intended solely to protect our beef export industry, whilst supermarkets happily continue importing beef from countries such as Brazil, where foot-and-mouth disease is endemic. Can anyone explain the sense in this? And what about the contribution towards climate change of needlessly shipping vast quantities of meat around the globe?.." Read in full

August 8 ~ No punches pulled

The journalist, Jonathan Miller, has an outspoken (and blessedly funny) blog whose illustrations alone are worth a visit. However, he has some pungent remarks today on the opaque nature of the HSE report (which he deconstructs for us), speculation about the desk upon which the buck should finally stop, remarks that we would never have dared to make about the quality of reporting in the mainstream media, and - this is the most worrying of all perhaps - the extraordinary article written by Sir Brian Follett in the Sunday Times. It seems almost incredible that Sir Brian, who heard, in the course of the RS Inquiry, all the most pertinent remarks concerning the 2001 epidemic and was privy to the carefully reasoned arguments of the real scientists, should have written such an article unless pressure was applied. Jonathan Miller says,
".....the suspicion of spin always too close.... I am working on a list of the 10 top things about FMD..... An early candidate for the top most stupid thing is from Sir Brian Follett in The Sunday Times who sagely declares: "the reason we slaughter animals is because, in island countries, it works. We can keep the virus out."
This is pretty delusional, isn't it Sir Brian? "
As for Sir Brian's arguments, they have all been convincingly refuted and we will publish this as soon as we get the green light.

August 8 ~ " I stopped eating my cornflakes and wondered how Catlow would respond.."

On the subject of the Talking Heads wheeled in by the media, Nick Green, the Cumbrian hero of 2001, has just been watching the interview this morning with David Catlow, the BVA vet: "The BBC presenter then asked Catlow, "Why do we conduct the research into FMD vaccine in this country when that is clearly a threat to the local farming community and when we never use the FMD vaccines here in the UK?"
An excellent question. I stopped eating my cornflakes and wondered how Catlow would respond...." Read in full

August 8 ~ Vets and government officials were last night debating whether to start vaccinating

The Guardian reveals that vaccination may be a little closer. This would be emergency vaccination (to live, we hope and assume) of cattle in the exclusion area rather than contiguous culling. (Although we have seen no official report anywhere, the killing of the animals on the smallholding, see below, later showed no virus present.) The Guardian:"The consensus is that vaccination is the most effective way of halting infection if the disease spreads to other areas. This becomes more likely the more outbreaks there are."
If these outbreak really can be isolated, if rapid on-site testing really is finally being used by the government (albeit very quietly), if vaccination is going to be used at last to protect animals and farmers from the utter misery we have seen this week, warmwell can fold its tents and have a rest at last.

August 8 ~ No news is good news

In spite of a rumour that had reached our ears yesterday, there are no reports of new cases anywhere yet. Interest still focuses on how the virus could have escaped. Who actually owns the Pirbright land now seems important, particularly if drains were responsible. If Merial only rents their part then it does look as though legally the IAH - for whom we have a lot of sympathy in view of the way they have been starved of funds - may find itself responsible since Merial has said it does not release water from the shared Pirbright site. "We ensure that the water we use in our virus production is treated. We then transfer it to the IAH who treat it further and release it." (See BBC)
There is speculation too that a worker at the Pirbright site may have released virus into the countryside via his allotment. The map does show a stream passing from the allotments, through the paddock, by the nursery/compost/animal feed farm toward Willey Green and then north toward Pirbright.

August 7/8 2007 ~ A prototype on-site rapid diagnostic machine is being used in Surrey

Extraordinary news. Certainly not generally known. A very impressed Bryn Wayt has sent this email to many contacts. "... a very nice and helpful lady vet and phoned and confirmed that, "a prototype RT-PCR unit had been used on the first IP, and the VO on the second site would be using it." His email is worth reading in full. We feel the manufacturer is irrelevant - as long as rapid test results can be obtained before the long wait for lab confirmation.
As for the question about whether the strain would have been needed in order to test the cattle at Woolfords farm with a portable machine - we are told that it does not matter what sort of FMD virus is involved. One test detects them all. It appears that Pirbright has been doing quite a bit behind the scenes with portable devices. And the very good news is that the whole portable PCR field will be transformed with very cheap machines that are highly automated within the year.
We find this news exciting - but once again, it has to be teased out and we are very grateful indeed both to those who ask the searching questions - and those who give the answers.

August 7/8 ~ Was it Bill or was it Ben?

HSE initial report
".... large scale production at the Merial site (10 000 litres) and a series of small scale experiments (less than 10 millilitres in each case) at the IAH site.....We have initiated further studies intended to provide additional molecular information on the virus types in use at both organisations. ... detailed technical analysis... results are ...expected within a week.
There would have been differences between the viruses used in the two different labs. (Virus for vaccine production is modified compared to the "field virus") With recent technology it should be possible to determine the lab of origin. And the choice of lab to investigate - because of IAH's monopoly - looks likely to be limited to one. Stranger than any fiction is that the key suspect should be the only one able to carry out the forensic investigation. (The HSE have served five notices on the Institute's two labs Pirbright and Compton, for breaching safety rules in the past four years.)

August 7 2007 ~ The two farms' cleansing and disinfection is to be paid for, says Hilary Benn, "due to the exceptional circumstances"

Gordon Brown has been careful to apologise to the farmers and promise help - and to thank everyone for their cooperation. But no word at all on vaccination. No question asked on that. The revised zones can be found at DEFRA's announcement

August 7 2007 ~ HSE initial report statement released - accidental or deliberate human activity suspected

Neither lab has been pinpointed as the culprit but the balance tips towards IAH. Initial report points: Merial and IAH experiments have been mentioned. No evidence that there were breakdowns in the filters. They are still pursuing "lines of enquiry"...pipework and structure. Potential for virus to have escaped via humans, contaminated material might have travelled between the site and the farm. Very much an interim report - They have found no major gap in security. Unfortunately the SKY presenter does not realise that the Merial production of vaccine will not be posing any risk sine no live virus is used in the making of the 300,000 doses of vaccine ordered for possible use. Wind and flooding apparently virtually ruled out. The Sun this morning made rather more definite remarks claiming that decontamination rules were flouted regularly. The presence of builders on the site was not mentioned.
Peter Kendall (NFU) has appeared on television and duly made the expected angry remarks - although Pirbright does not make the bureaucratic difficulties for farmers and one feels a sympathy for the underfunded Institute, once such a hugely respected centre of excellence for foot and mouth.

August 7 ~ The Netherlands order vaccine - and are inspecting every imported animal

www.volkskrant.nl/ (Translation) 6.44 pm " The Dutch minister has ordered 265,000 doses of vaccines. And has asked the Food Safety Authority to stand by for a possible vaccination campaign. It does not however mean that a decision to start vaccinating has been taken."
No signs of FMD have yet been found in the Netherlands, "according to a spokesperson for the Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority. The VWA has been busy since Saturday carrying out checks of livestock at the 150 companies that have been involved in about 380 livestock transports between the Netherlands and Great Britain since the beginning of June. The VWA spokesperson expects that the last inspections will be carried out on Wednesday. The VWA has commissioned veterinarians to carry out the checks. The doctors are examining every animal for symptoms of the disease. They are also taking random blood tests. No symptoms of FMD have been found in the past few days." ( Source. Thanks for this link to FMD News - a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis )

August 7 ~ Media concentration on 'who is to blame' and mention of "compensation" is a red herring for decent farmers

There is controlled anger as well as the much mentioned"nervousness". Here is a West Country sheep farmer all too aware of the bitter paradoxes of the non-vaccination policy:
"As a livestock farmer myself, with cattle, sheep and goats on my farm, I am angry to find myself trapped between two contradictory policies relating to FMD.  On the one hand, I am barred by the State from protecting my animals by vaccinating them against this unpleasant but non fatal disease that only affects cloven hoofed animals (not humans).  I am allowed, even encouraged, to vaccinate my animals against a wide range of other diseases.
If my animals contract FMD, this non fatal disease, or if the livestock on a nearby farm are even suspected of having contracted this non fatal disease, they will be killed by DEFRA slaughter men, probably in circumstances far from humane.
My only defence against my animals suffering this fate is to 'exercise bio security measures'; primarily to prevent any contact with my animals from the world outside.  On the other my animals from the world outside.  On the other hand, I am told by the State, that the rural tourist industry is much more valuable than my activities as a livestock farmer; and that consequently I must not prevent persons from the outside from walking along the footpaths through my fields...." Read in full
DEFRA now (6.08 pm) finally announces that footpaths in the immediate area will now be closed off.

August 7 2007 ~ Brigadier Birtwhistle can only cite "consumer confidence" as an argument against vaccination

Regular readers will be sharing our dismay and disillusionment at the recurrence of arguments that were soundly put to rest in 2001, especially in the mouth of the respected Brigadier Birtwhistle on BBC News 24 this evening.He said vaccination would be difficult because consumers would not want to eat vaccinated products. It is simply not true.
Even in 2001, research from Taylor Nelson Sofres (TNS) showed that eight out of ten people in the UK, or 83% to be precise, said that they were not any less likely to consider buying and eating British produced meat as a result of the FMD crisis. That was then. Now we have seen far more good sense spoken about the eating of vaccinated meat - something most of us do all the time. Even Sir John Krebs is an ally here:
"The Food Standards Agency was unambiguous in its view that vaccination would not pose a food safety risk and that, since farm animals are regularly vaccinated against numerous diseases, there was no need to label products. If the industry was correct in assuming that people would not want meat and milk from vaccinated animals, there does seem to me to be a bit of a paradox." Wooldridge Lecture 2003

August 7 2007 ~ "authorities will indeed find it easier to avoid massive stamping-out strategies." Bernard Vallat, Director General of the OIE

Bernard Vallat, Director General of the OIE itself, is in favour of vaccination to treat animal disease. In his Preface to the Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 2002, 21 (3), 417-123 he writes of the OIE's "...recognition of new diagnostic tests capable of distinguishing infected animals from those that have been vaccinated (particularly when emergency ring vaccination is used to prevent the disease from spreading within a country or zone), that can be used for mass epidemiological screening of animal populations.....
The amendments to the FMD chapter in the Code ... provide alternatives to stamping-out without vaccination ....considerably reducing the period of embargo on countries that resort to emergency vaccination but do not slaughter vaccinated animals,
by using the new diagnostic tests on the herds involved, (proving) that the virus is not in circulation, means that authorities will indeed find it easier to avoid massive stamping-out strategies. "
His views - unlike ours - can hardly be discounted. Protection zones have again been extended this afternoon. We, like Director General Vallat, can only hope that there will be enough calm and reasoned arguments to overwhelm the old "cure by killing" mindset, here in the UK. The sight of weeping farmers is something we just cannot bear when the alternatives are so patently there.

August 7 2007 ~ "... the classical scenario to use vaccination successfully without, in the long term, compromising the export status of the whole of the UK."

Email today from a farmer whose experience is extensive both with livestock and with animal health matters. She is also one of the few who has a full grasp of the EU Directive. She, too, has been alarmed by the article in the Farmers Weekly mentioned below in which a vet, rather oddly dubbed "independent", claims he is "adamant the government should still refrain from vaccination". This article will have been highly influential and there were no counter-arguments made. Our correspondent points out:
"The products of vaccinated animals could easily be marketed within the area - and besides saving animals from being destroyed, the risk of transmitting the virus out of the restricted zones could be minimized.
This is still to be considered a localized outbreak and if this outbreak should spread beyond the boundaries of the protection zones it might be only controllable by measures that were already scandalous in 2001. Every additional animal that gets infected enhances the risk and by the time clinical signs are obvious the virus is already on the move to claim the next victim.
The Government should stop listening to useless "consultants" and use vaccination before it is too late.
These are arguments that should be in the public domain - especially for farmers who may be hearing only the views of the anti-vaccination talking heads.

August 7 2007 ~" These cattle do not benefit at all from all the work on FMD vaccines done on their doorstep..."

Anne Bosanquet has sent us the letter she has written to Abigail Woods, following Dr Woods' Guardian article today
Extract of her letter: "....surely the point is, these cattle, in the immediate area under threat of contracting this highly infectious disease, do not benefit at all from all the work on FMD vaccines done on their doorstep. Although they are at risk from escaped pathogens, the vaccines produced here are for the benefit of foreign beasts and not our own. I thought the improvements in the latest FMD vaccines was that tests could now discriminate between infected and vaccinated cattle -so why cannot our own cattle be afforded this protection now?"
Mrs Bosanquet very kindly writes to warmwell: "Part of the reason that vaccination is being contemplated at all, (in the teeth of economic pressures from the usual suspects) is the sheer pressure and reasoned quality of your own website. We all know that what happened last time was absolutely intolerable and that needs to be articulated to politicians again and again and again. If ever there was a case for vaccination it's this one."

August 7 2007 ~ Disposal -best scientific analysis deems it necessary to carry carcases 90 miles on roads?

Dr Iain Anderson, (Lessons Learned report) who opined on BBC 24 today that we were "in very much better shape" than last time, gave it as his view that the "best scientific analysis" must have decided the solution of taking the killed animals 90 miles by public road. He appeared somewhat surprised by the interviewer's suggestion that perhaps it was a political decision to avoid the repetition of easily photographed pyres, recalling the horrors of 2001.
On-farm burial has been asked for in the Protection Zone. It would be reassuring to know that all alternatives have been considered as per Article 3.6.6.6. of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission (Unofficial version of the Meeting in Paris 2-13 October 2006 Report)
"Decision makers, in addition to biosecurity considerations, need to understand the economic, social and aesthetic impact of various disposal technologies....A disposal option hierarchy may be incapable of fully capturing and systematizing the relevant dimensions at stake, and decision makers may be forced to consider the least preferred means. It therefore requires a comprehensive understanding of any array of dead animal disposal technologies and must reflect a balance between the scientific, economic, and social issues at stake."
(Still no mention of vaccination in the past few hours, no emails or texts are mentioning vaccination, it would seem. No interviews with vaccination experts.)

August 7 2007 ~ Report by Health and Safety on Pirbright due very soon

It has, we understand, been handed to the Ministers concerned (Correction. It was still being compiled at 5.00 pm) - and we wait to hear what its findings are. In spite of some degree of improvement in openness ( as described here) what are described as "the legal and political implications" may, it is feared, prevent details of the findings of the report being made public.
The report has been "delayed" - not altogether unexpected but this delay is "for no particular reason" we were told at about 5.00 pm.
It seems highly unfair to IAH Pirbright to be pre-empting the findings by suggesting in the media how "angry" everyone is likely to be. The Institute has been consistently deprived of funding in recent years - partly because of the RPA debacle. Neither security nor morale can be high in such circumstances. (Like many others, we find it unfortunate that journalists must sell news by finding the most dramatic way of presenting it rather than giving balanced information at such times. The BBC used to be cherished for its fair and balanced reporting.)

August 7 2007 ~ There are 75 farms with 750 cattle, 1,500 sheep and 200 pigs in the Protection Zone - they could all be vaccinated within 24 hours

We are reliably told that it should be possible to get the most-at-risk animals vaccinated within 24 hours using just 3 or 4 vaccination teams.. However, there is no debate on vaccination at the moment on BBC News 24. It may be felt odd, by many readers, that Prof. Pennington, an undoubted expert in his own field, is considered an authority in this field. He has apparently said that they might not have the right vaccine, as it is an imported virus. And to suggest that "we don't know which animals to vaccinate" is bizarre. We are astonished too by the words of "independent vet consultant Tony Andrews" quoted - without challenge- by the usually excellent Farmers' Weekly. The Uruguay experience in 2001 speaks for itself - but that was six years ago and things have moved on even further. Why are the newspapers not asking the real experts with practical experience in the field?
It is unthinkable that this is because no one knowledgeable is talking urgently about it.
It should not be forgotten that the still unlevel playing field rules that make vaccination the poor relation as far as the resumption of exports are concerned (six month wait as opposed to three months without vaccination) apply only to the carefully delineated region that has made use of emergency vaccination. It would not apply to the whole country. Does anyone dispute this? The grief and misery of both farmers involved in Surrey is very real - and the infection of this too is horribly likely to spread unless humane measure are put in place right away.
We really do hope that DEFRA is taking blood samples regularly. In the Netherlands, blood samples of 19,000 animals have already been taken - and of course it goes without saying that this is done responsibly with precautions taken to make sure that any possible virus is not carried to the next clean farm. There are less than 3,000 animals in the most-at-risk area in Surrey.

August 7 2007 ~ Consternation that Trading Standards in the Protection Zone have told farmers they may not close footpaths

Farmers in the Protection Zone immediately around the outbreaks have "begged" Hilary Benn and Gordon Brown to close paths - but according to the landowner, Lawrence Matthews, on whose grazed land the second outbreak has been confirmed told BBC News that there is no sign of closure at all. As he says, we don't even know which is the index case. Chris Huhne told News 24 that both he and Menzies Campbell had asked Gordon Brown on Saturday to close paths. He expressed himself "very concerned".

August 7 2007 ~ ".... if a veterinary risk assessment shows that measures additional to the basic slaughter policy were required...."

One wonders who is giving the veterinary risk assessment here. The line above is taken from the stock reply received by those begging the CVO to begin vaccinating Here. Can the mind-set really still the same as that in 2001? After six long years of patient argument? The case for vaccinating now is so evident - and if it were done properly and swiftly there would be no need for further talk of culling on non-infected premises. Once again, we urge a thorough and patient look at the paper vaccination and transmission which was written by a world expert now at EU FMD.

August 7 2007 ~ "Who would notice the infection in deer? Does DEFRA have a plan?"

An emailer asks some urgent questions about the effect of flooding at the Pirbright site and the likelihood that wild deer will indeed have been exposed to infection. (see also below) He asks what clearly identifiable symptoms they have - or do they, like sheep in 2001, fight off the disease without anyone noticing?
(We understand that clinical disease is mild or inapparent in the red and fallow deer but more severe in the roe deer. The appearance and distribution of the lesions are similar to those in sheep - but see the paper cited below)
"Who does DEFRA expect to inspect wild deer and report symptoms and to whom? What is their plan for containing the spread of FMD in deer?" Like many others, he expresses a wish for far more information to come from DEFRA. Many smaller farmers are starved of news and feel unrepresented - and are anyway are doing vital work on the farm and are far too busy taking advantage of the weather to be glued to the internet (if they even have it).

August 6/7 2007 ~ Not good news. Clinical signs found in another herd.
            NOW will you vaccinate?

Another herd has been identified with clinical signs within the larger protection zone. Debby Reynolds has ordered that the herd be culled as soon as practicable. As an emailer comments , if as many as 39 of the Woolfords cattle really tested positive for disease "it may be that this has rumbled around longer than a week or so. That is not good news, if this small farm is not the index case."
This is the very moment that emergency ring vaccination of all susceptible animals starting from the outside of the surveillance zone should begin. The 67 strain, now designated FMDV-O1 BFS 1860/UK/67, was particularly prone to air-borne spread and could even still be air-borne. (Rounding up the now possibly infected roe deer that roam freely in the Protection Zone and killing them all in a pen would not prove easy, either. Vaccination is now urgent and essential.)
UPDATE: Last night about fifty cows were killed at the second farm. This brings the total already slaughtered to about 150. Samples have been "taken to a laboratory" for testing.
We have had six years to get, validate and refine on-site rapid diagnostic tests. It has not been done. Clinical examination - even where symptoms are apparent - is no substitute for an efficient swift testing of all animals in the protection zone.
On the theory of spread by flooding, a map-reading emailer queries whether the virus could have been carried uphill by flood water...

August 6/7 2007 ~ CNN presenter says Vaccination hides disease -

A CNN World News Europe presenter, in covering the latest news about the FMD outbreak in the UK gave some "background information" about FMD: "the only way to stop an outbreak is by culling. Vaccination is not popular because it hides the disease". Hearing this does rather deprive one of the will to live. .. Unfortunately it is often people who direct public opinion who spout such things with such apparent authority. (Ben Bradshaw too apparently clings to this belief) - yet its repetition cannot make it any less misleading. We can only, yet again, refer to the experts on virology. When a few months ago the Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton also unwisely told the Countess of Mar (Hansard) that vaccination "could spread the disease further and thus be dangerous", Dr Colin Fink wrote
" Mary, As I am sure that you know, this is complete and utter rubbish and shows that all the 'Virologists' invented by Fred Landeg in Page Street, in answer to a question from the Countess of Mar are a myth. DEFRA cannot be allowed to go on peddling this mis-information with such arrogance and insularity. They cannot even advise their representatives properly and know nothing of how vaccines work. You may publish this comment if you wish - I am angry about this."
Read Dr Fink's email in full. It is important that an expert practising virologist's understanding about vaccination is seen. We also refer people again to the very important paper written for warmwell in 2001 on vaccination and transmission

August 6/7 2007 ~ Bio-security was "fairly relaxed"

On the question of what Professor Brian Spratt may discover at Pirbright, this extract from The Dairy Farmer of August 2001 is relevant - if the same situation still exists:
"..... Ex-Pirbright employees visited pubs at weekends, and used farm footpaths, despite a requirement of quarantine after handling viruses. They described bio-security as 'fairly relaxed'. ...
Pirbright was experimenting with FMD virus last year. Three trials were at Level 2, and considered "mainly safe", but also listed was 'Genetic Manipulation of Foot and Mouth disease', (Ref. 53trans/1) at Levels 3 & 4. (Note the Ref numbers were the same for the two projects)
I understand level 4 work is bio-weapons. .... "
while a page that has been on warmwell for five years now adds authority to the extract above.
The Western Morning News (Monday): "It seems ironic that the very institution designed to protect animal health appears to be at the centre of the latest outbreak of foot and mouth disease. We should be concerned that what has until now been seen as a world-class institution could possibly have undermined its own work. .... Brigadier Alex Birtwhistle, who was at the heart of the 2001 FMD epidemic, was right when he said that if the Government didn't get to the heart of the problem promptly 'the country will never forgive them twice'."

August 6 2007 ~ As part of Defra's contingency plan and in order to ensure full preparedness, 300,000 doses of strain-specific vaccine have been ordered from the UK's vaccine bank, to be made up from antigen. No decision has been taken on whether or not to use the vaccine.

The Defra website gives Key points set out by Debby Reynolds Vaccination teams are to move into the area but the CVO stresses that " this is not an indication that a decision has been taken to vaccinate. It has not."
Professor Brian Spratt will begin his review into biosecurity arrangements at the Pirbright site tomorrow. Included in the evidence will be the outcome of the immediate investigation currently being carried out by officials from the HSE, Defra, and the Veterinary Medicines Directorate. Production of vaccine will be carried out at the Merial laboratory "..obviously we would not be doing this without careful consideration and assessment of the risks. Producing vaccine from antigen does not involve use of live virus."

August 6 2007 ~" I am so fed up with the B...idiots who sent the FMD carcasses by road, 90 miles, when the rest of us have been told no movement."

"Somehow they don't associate risk of spread with driving 90 miles through farmland with livestock in the fields." This comment has just arrived and will, no doubt, be being echoed up and down the country - particularly along the 90 mile route from Elstead to Frome. (The Farmers' Guardian report by Alastair Driver confirmed today that the slaughtered cows had indeed been sent off to the Wessex Incineration plant, at Frome. ) Another FG report today tells us that despite varying reports on the minimum length of time the movement restrictions will be in place - no timeframe has been put in place for any lifting of them.

August 6 2007 ~ "Because the animals were infected with the very vaccine strain itself, the vaccine should be the absolute perfect match."

icWales (link mended, apologies) quotes Dr Ruth Watkins speaking today outside the Pirbright laboratory
"..Because the animals were infected with the very vaccine strain itself, the vaccine should be the absolute perfect match. The vaccine should work as well or better than any could work."
She said vaccination is "very important", and works as well as culling.
"I think the world was disgusted with us last time to see us kill so many animals and incinerate them (vaccination) is a way of controlling the infection and eliminating it while minimising the number of animals that have to be culled." And "If you get to economics it must be cheaper," she added.

August 6 2007 ~ 104 redundancies since 2005 - " a risk that we will lose critical expertise"

(Correction: This may have been misleading. The 104 redundancies were in the IAH as a whole, so this presumably included Compton and Edinburgh - but the cuts are no less damaging for that)
"Year on year, we are able to do less science or we are able to employ less people and this is an area of work that spans from foot an"d mouth through to bluetongue virus, ....We are forced to look at this whole of our activity to see where we can juggle the research, so there is a risk that we will lose critical expertise. ..." Professor Martin Shirley of Pirbright.
In November last year, Professor Shirley was answering questions about the effect of the cuts at the Institute. Thanks again to Jo Rider who draws our attention to this extract from the Research Council Institute's Fourth Report.

August 6 2007 ~ Still much to be revealed on virus escape

Although both Merial and Pirbright have been very definite in their horrified denials of possible breaches of security, such an escape is , as we say below, not unprecedented. A ProMed moderator in the Aug 3 posting (and an informed reader was able to give detail) recalled the 1960 virus escape from Pirbright which was the presumed cause of FMD infection on a farm one mile from Pirbright.
"Following this incident, disease security measures were improved and air filtration was introduced to the isolation units." (Source: Animal Health, A Centenary 1865-1965, pp 149-150.)
Rumour has also reached warmwell of air conditioning/bio security breakdowns at Merial - we think in late June this year. Depending on the ambient temperature of the facility, any 'escaped' spores would plume if it was colder outside, and could then blow miles in the wind. Anxiety remains. As for the presence of builders at the Pirbright site, Dr Paul Sutmoller, chair Animal Health Committee, ELA - European Livestock Association, has just sent us the following:
"If I remember well, the last bio-security break at Plum Island, infecting cattle in the holding area outside the laboratory occurred during a period of major constructions going on at the main laboratory. Jack Hyde may be able to comment."

August 6 ~ Fallen stock

Again, thanks to the NPA website and Pat Gardner's ever eagle eyes. This is their advice to pig producers in the light of the movement restrictions
"NPA will continue to press for burial rather than fallen stock collection. In the meantime:
• If you can delay a collection, if only until Tuesday or Wednesday, please do. The issue may be clearer by then.
• If you have someone who can pick up from an off-site collection area, this may not pose much risk - but the decision is yours.
• Don't allow collection if the collector has to come on the farm. Make whatever disposal arrangements you deem most sensible given the current need for the best possible biosecurity.

August 6 ~ Start date 29/07/2007? The Saturday before the Thursday?

There is at last a report on the OIE site Debby Reynolds has apparently reported that the "Start date" was 29/07/2007. The 29th of July? But that was the Saturday before the Thursday evening when "symptoms were reported to the local Animal Health office". Is this a mistake - or were symptoms actually noticed five days earlier? It matters.
(Update. It has been suggested that the "start date" could be an estimate based on the assumed age of the lesions. The BBC today reports that "an investigation of the cuts on the mouths of the cows suggested that they were infected sometime between 18 and 22 July")

August 6 ~ "We need to know much, much more about Pirbright."

The journalist Jonathan Miller, much in justifiably pugnacious evidence in 2001: "... If the questions are being asked at all, they are not being answered in public. .... It seems clear there were warnings - ignored - of an inherently unsatisfactory biosecurity environment. There seem to me also some commercial questions to consider ..... What exactly are these relationships? All these contracts are doubtless marked "commercially confidential". They will not want us to know....." Read in full
And an email just arrived about the cuts in funding at Pirbright suggests that builders are - or were -working on the main laboratory complex. . One wonders if they too were asked to follow rules about showering and having no contact of any kind with susceptible animals for 3/5 days.
UPDATE: We have received the following from Dr Paul Sutmoller: "If I remember well, the last bio-security break at Plum Island, infecting cattle in the holding area outside the laboratory occurred during a period of major constructions going on at the main laboratory. Jack Hyde may be able to comment. Dr Paul Sutmoller, chair Animal Health Committee, ELA - European Livestock Association"

August 6 2007 ~ "The UBI peptide-based vaccine/diagnostic system will be particularly attractive to FMD-free countries for defensive serosurveillance and for contingency plans for emergency vaccination in the event of an outbreak."

Pirbright/Merial are not alone, of course, in producing vaccines. UBI's most advanced foot and mouth vaccine for pigs is described as having "clear-cut distinction of vaccinated from unvaccinated animals (VPI tests) and clear differentiation of vaccinated from convalescent animals". Moreover, they claim "absolute safety from biohazard risk, both during manufacture and use." (See UBI site) A similar vaccine for cattle is also under development.
Intervet too produces modern inactivated FMD vaccines for cattle, buffalo, pigs, sheep and goats. Their vaccines of sufficient potency start to generate the first degree of protection after 2-3 days. More information - and useful, simply-expressed technical explanation is available from various pages on the Intervet website.
We were concerned to hear that David Drew, Vice Chairman, no less, of the EFRA Select Committee was heard saying on Radio Gloucester that FMD vaccines "needed to be developed". Perhaps he was misreported but it hardly helps to give the impression that there are not already highly developed vaccines. Even those vaccines available in 2001 successfully eradicated in Uruguay an epidemic as extensive as our own when just vaccinating cattle alone led to the extinction of virus spread.
UBI says "This growing worldwide market for FMD vaccines gives our peptide-based product potential blockbuster status" . (The suspicion is inescapable that 'potential blockbuster status' may be so coveted by UK commercial hunger that postponing UK FMD vaccination - even at a time of crisis - seems preferable to making use of a rival product.)

August 6 2007 ~ Did they shower? Did they ignore 3 or 5 day ruling?

Within minutes of each other, two separate warmwell readers raise queries about the possibility that stringent security rules may have been ignored - or not enforced - at the Pirbright site. Email forum latest. "Surely, if it is dangerous for one of them to visit a farm within 5 days, wouldn't it also be dangerous to mingle with local farmers at a pub, or in a shop?...."

August 6 2007 ~ " the case for a humane, civilised and scientifically sound policy has strengthened over the past few years to the point where it is beginning to look unassailable"

Magnus Linklater has kindly sent warmwell his article written for today's Times. He looks back shudderingly to six years ago when the "farming establishment closed ranks against any suggestion that there might be a more humane approach." On the question of vaccination, many readers will share our reaction to this gem:
" I remember asking the government's chief scientist, Sir David King, to explain to me why it was not being considered. "I would need five hours to explain the science to you," he said. "Unfortunately I don't have that time." ...."
But, " Let us not go back there, however. The fact is that there has been, since then, a sea change in attitudes within the Department ....the realisation that the science on which so many of those decisions in 2001 were based, was less sound than we were told..
..Again, there is no point in going back into that debate. What is important now is to record how far science has advanced in the meantime. There are accepted tests which can distinguish between infected and vaccinated animals....We know, too, that FMD "carriers" do not infect other animals... "pen-side" tests .. allow a vet to carry out on-the-spot checks to determine whether a herd of cattle or a flock of sheep have been infected, rather than having to send samples back to a laboratory. Rapid diagnosis of this kind means that biosecurity measures can be imposed immediately rather having to wait for the results of tests.
... vaccination can begin within that area as soon as it is available ...
.... I cannot, hand on heart, say that the battle for the vaccine has been won. There are still those in Defra and elsewhere, who will argue for slaughter as the only effective response to this disease. But the case for a humane, civilised and scientifically sound policy has strengthened over the past few years to the point where it is beginning to look unassailable..." Read in full (or on Times website)

August 6 2007 ~ "Good that the Chair took soundings from different sectors. Less good was their reluctance to elucidate clearly the position re vaccination and on-site diagnostic testing..."

Comment from a first hand report to warmwell from a key stakeholder who takes part in the telephone conferencing that has been going on behind the scenes. He spoke of a "far greater degree of openness and transparency" and is relieved that a formally constituted Expert Group (as opposed to an informal coincidental meeting of acquaintances) has minuted meetings available for public scrutiny - "all in large part due to the campaigning efforts of people who are likely to be reading this, whether in the UK, Brussels or further afield.." He adds that questions do remain unanswered, for example
1. "Where it started (ok probably Merial) or when.
2. How far it has spread by wind, water, fomites, wildlife etc
3. Whether it was an accidental escape or other - if other, then where else?
4. Vaccine efficacy presently unknown - as this has come from a vaccine escape, precisely what will best work against it? If a vaccine is used will NSP testing still be possible? If a suitable match can be found, how much of it is there?"
He commented that we are heading towards the autumn at the end of a generally very wet summer - a bad time for the disease to strike. We may be in for a long haul; encouraging noises should be regarded with some scepticism - in 2001 everything was rosy until it wasn't... However, he felt that DEFRA was to be congratulated on their speedy and appropriate responses to date. "However, these may be early days...."

August 6 2007 ~ What is the difference between surveillance and protection zones

Emails from the public now include a question from a concerned and supportive dairy farmer in the US about the difference between surveillance and protection zones. We reply that DEFRA's definition is that a "Protection Zone extends for at least 3km around the infected premises and a Surveillance Zone extends for at least 10 km around the infected premises. Within the Protection Zone all premises containing livestock will be inspected by veterinary inspectors and will be subject to restrictions. This reduces the chance of potentially infected material leaving the premises until the disease status can be determined. Within the Surveillance Zone all premises containing livestock will be subject to movement restrictions."

August 6 2007 ~ 39 animals only found positive so far. Contiguous culling instead of buffer zone vaccination is taking place

At least 80 uninfected animals have been killed. The questions being asked everywhere - about vaccination and about why contiguous culling is already going on - do not seem to be getting clear answers. Why no buffer zone vaccination? The strain is known. Appropriate vaccine has - we assume - been produced at Merial since only the Pirbright site can be the source of the strain having escaped. Creating a buffer zone - as advised by David Holden and the Soil Association, for example (see also Peter Melchett in today's Guardian - seems the obvious and urgent thing to have done as soon as the strain was known. We are not hearing in the media any valid reasons for not doing so. Again and again we hear that emergency vaccination is being "considered". Brian Follett, interviewed on Saturday morning, said that the most important thing is "to do everything we can to stop it turning into a epidemic" and that knowing the strain was very important for a vaccination to live policy Many will be wondering why "everything we can" has not yet included vaccination since we now know only too well what the strain is.
In the Farming Today interview with Debby Reynolds this morning we heard the good news that there are no new cases reported at present. The main thrust of the programme was to report the denials by both Merial and IAH Pirbright that the virus could have escaped because of any breach of security. Hardly the most burning question for farmers, one would have thought. Choosing not to vaccinate is a gamble. The public ought to be being told the economic and trade reasons why - even this time - pre-emptive contiguous culling is happening. Test results - that have to travel to the lab instead of being done on-site - are looked at only after the cattle are dead. Vaccination followed by differential tests would avoid this. We would again appreciate informed comment.

August 6 2007 ~"It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to note that terrorists of various sorts would be quick to try to take advantage of any faults or lapses in standards "

From a Leading Article in today's Independent "..... The investigations that Hilary Benn, the Secretary of State for Rural Affairs, has ordered into conditions at Pirbright and Merial will, we hope, establish whether the virus escaped from one or the other laboratory and if so, how. Possibly they will conclude that it was a freakish accident. But if they uncover lapses, the Government must act quickly to ensure that levels of biosecurity in these establishments are upgraded, and that uniform high standards are seen to prevail throughout the public and private sector. It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to note that terrorists of various sorts would be quick to try to take advantage of any faults or lapses in standards in this field.
Updating these facilities may take extra investment from the Government as well as from the commercial sector. So be it.."

August 5 2007 ~ This strain shows clinical signs quickly

Latest information - not from DEFRA but from the NPA site again, following a conference call to "key stakeholders" by Hilary Benn . Extract: "01 BFS67-like virus is virulent. It has an incubation period of two to 14 days. So if any more animals are infected the clinical signs should show very soon after infection" and "Scotland has introduced a derogation allowing livestock keepers to bury fallen stock during the current crisis. NPA has urged Defra today to introduce a derogation where necessary in England......Ian Campbell told Hilary Benn today that fallen stock collection poses an unacceptable risk, but in this hot weather fallen stock will have to be disposed of quickly."

August 5 2007 ~ "Who is actually deciding what happens?"

An email from a worried reader who evidently remembers the 1967 outbreak asks the pertinent question; "Who is actually deciding what happens?" and is confused by what seem to be conflicting media reports about vaccination and who decides. Our tentative answer can be seen here- but we welcome further informed comment.

August 5 2007 ~ New on DEFRA

There is now an amended Declaration and new amoeba-shaped map with its second nucleus to take in Pirbright - "making a new Protection Zone and extending the Surveillance Zone. The previous declaration (made at 22.00 last night) also remains in force." A news release tells us that at Woolfords farm the killing was completed yesterday. 38 of the unfortunate cattle are described as infected, and of the cattle killed on the 2 additional sites of Woolfords Farm, one gave a positive result. The release gives news of the other animals we reported yesterday as having been killed as 'dangerous contacts'
The language of the Declaration seems unfortunate - something we have mentioned before. Instead of offering clarity and support, the tone is officious: "Failure to comply with this Declaration may be an offence under section 72 or 73 of the Animal Health Act 1981". As many of us are all too aware, sections 72 and 73 of the revised Animal Health Act threaten " imprisonment for any term not exceeding 2 months" for failure to cooperate with any one deemed by DEFRA to be an "official". Rather grim. We shall be shortly posting up what you are now compelled to do if the worst happens on your farm.

August 5 2007 ~ "Competence means more than ministerial dashes and urgent meetings..lessons also include being ready to vaccinate"

A leading article in the Sunday Times: "The inquiry that followed the 2001 outbreak, chaired by Dr Iain Anderson, catalogued the government's lack of preparedness and eventual panic. Those lessons include some of the measures that have already been taken: an immediate restriction on animal movements and the closure of events where the disease could be passed on. They also include being ready to vaccinate to prevent the spread of the disease, whatever the residual objections from the farm lobby.
Farming is a tiny part of Britain's economy, just 1%. We should nurture our farmers ..."

August 5 2007 ~ Confusion about the virus strain

A strain called "O1/BFS 1860/UK/67" - which appears to be an amalgam of the two names we have heard from The DEFRA site and the IAH site that links to it - appears on this 2005 Molecular Epidemiology Report Form from Pirbright. Is this then the strain of the virus that caused the 1967 outbreak in the UK? Or is it that the 67 virus is used for comparison? Can anyone enlighten us?
UPDATE: The FMD virus which caused the 1967-8 outbreak in the UK was designated FMDV-O1 BFS 1860/UK/67; its detailed sequencing data and references are available in the table "Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus O" at IAH's website www.iah.bbsrc.ac.uk

August 5 2007 ~ "What is the function of a World Reference Laboratory... if not to advance the detection of virus infection and management of FMD epidemics?"

. The closeness - in all senses of the word - between Merial and Pirbright has suddenly been thrust into the light of day. In her Submission to the Royal Society of Edinburgh FMD EnquiryDr Ruth Watkins said, " Though funding may have delimited the equipment at Pirbright, the failure to modernise is likely to arise from the outlook in the laboratory- Pirbright has an unchallenged monopoly on FMD work in both research and diagnosis in Britain.....The normal role of a reference laboratory is to provide control materials and facilitate the setting up of routine screening and diagnostic tests in other laboratories..another important role is the validation of diagnostic tests including commercial tests and publishing the results with the collaboration of the commercial companies.
Pirbright has confined itself to in-house tests, producing the materials and developing its own protocols. It has refused to undertake validation of commercial FMD tests ..... There is no other laboratory in Britain that is allowed or could undertake to validate FMD tests.."
If Pirbright - once a public service laboratory - has been forced by its financial strait-jacket into throwing in its commercial lot with Merial this raises questions about unfair competition and the suppression of other technologies and products that could be of enormous value in UK disease control. We should welcome comments.

August 5 2007 ~ Pirbright: "... limited use of the strain at the Institute in recent weeks."

At a press conference IAH director Martin Shirley said that "...there had also been limited use of the strain at the institute in recent weeks." (BBC)
A correspondent notes that IAH conducted an experiment in 2003 where the O1 BFS 1860 strain was inoculated into 4 Standard Compton steers. This strain, he points out, is that identified by the IAH as the exact strain responsible for the Surrey outbreak.
After giving the reference for the experiment he asks, "Could this kind of experimentation be classified as "limited use"? He adds, "Unfortunately this kind of question hasn't been asked yet.."

August 5 2007 ~ Accidents Happen - Security Breaches at Biocontainment Facilities

There have been documented instances of escaping dangerous pathogens in the past few years. One remembers too the May 2001 prosecution of Imperial College (home of Prof. Roy Anderson) for its lapses in safety precautions while dealing with a modified Hepatitis C virus. Even the most "secure" biocontainment may not be as secure as all that. It is easy for complacency to creep in - and when funding is cut by those who do not understand the risks, people of lesser calibre have to be promoted to responsible positions. Low morale and sloppy procedures can easily be the result. How ironic then that, when in 2001 Dr Colin Fink offered his molecular diagnostic systems to help relieve pressure on government labs, DEFRA and the VLA refused to supply his team with the non-infectious FMD material needed to calibrate his assay. The excuse was that FMD was a Category 4 organism and therefore only to handled in absolutely bio-secure facilities. . In fact, as Dr Fink points out in a recent letter to warmwell, he did not need any infectious virus. "...this was nonsense. Once the RNA is extracted the organism has no infectious risk....The confusion was because of out-moded thinking aligning a risk in growing up organisms within the laboratory with that wrongly perceived to be similar in molecular diagnostics..."
It was a lost opportunity for rapid diagnosis during the outbreak - and the irony of yesterday's news will not have escaped those whose who felt such frustration at the time.

August 5 2007 ~ Humane slaughter?

In 2001 there were scenes of slaughter that made the farmer's grief - already terrible in many cases - far worse. Incidences of chaos and stress during the gathering, penning, and slaughter of animals are disturbing. There was 'barbaric conduct [which] was a disgrace to humanity', as one of the EU inquiries has been told (Carnage by Computer: The Blackboard Economics of the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic by Professors David Campbell and Robert Lee)
That was then; this is now - but the Hendersons in Brecon are not the only people to have wondered about the slaughter of the 64 cattle at Woolford Farm. "....as far as I can work it out, that they could have been killed is to be shot at by people standing outside the pen....surely that does not constitute humane slaughter?"
The public is right to be concerned and want to be reassured that the Terrestrial Animal Health Code - 2006 guidelines (Appendix 3.7.6. Guidelines for the killing of animals for disease control purposes) really are are being followed to the letter.

August 5 2007 ~ Lawrence Wright notices an anomaly

A West country sheepfarmer makes a startling point - and one that we had noticed only subconsciously. See emails sent to warmwell.

August 5 2007 ~ Deer do not obey movement bans - and roe deer move between Pirbright and local farms.

"Roe deer occur widely on Surrey's commons, and were even recorded on quite small sites in relatively built-up areas": (DEFRA funded wildlife project pdf) . The A31, inside the 3km exclusion zone, had to be disinfected yesterday because a deer was hit by a car. Woolford farm is separated from Pirbright by an arable farm, a wood and a golf course. It does not take much imagination to predict that any escape of the O1 BFS 1860 virus from IAH Pirbright or the Merial laboratory could now be infecting these deer.
In their paper "Foot-and-Mouth Disease in Deer: implications for the policy of control and eradication of the disease" Paul Sutmoller and Paul Gibbs suggest that if deer are infected then
" all livestock in the area should be vaccinated or re-vaccinated, preferably within three months to obtain an optimum population immunity. Re-population of the area with vaccinated livestock does not need to wait for the infection to peter out in deer. d) The official opinion that FMD infected roe deer constitute a low risk, because sick animals hide and probably die, is not valid. Like cattle or sheep, susceptible deer are very infectious prior to the development of lesions while they still actively move and graze. Also deer with sub-clinical or minor lesions will still roam around."
In considering their next move it is to be hoped that the relevant authorites are aware of such expert advice. This paper too, written for warmwell during the last outbreak by a scientist who soon afterwards rose to a high position in the FAO, should be essential reading for those who want to know the real facts about vaccination and transmission of virus.

August 4 2007 10.26 p.m. ~ It is a vaccine strain 01 BFS 67 (Correction:it is in fact O1 BFS 1860) - one that was being used at Pirbright in July

Professor Hugh Pennington interviewed on BBC News 24 gives as his opinion that the source virus is identical to that in vaccine work being done at Pirbright and very possibly excaped from there. The latest statement by DEFRA :
"The FMD strain found in Surrey is not one currently known to be recently found in animals. It is most similar to strains used in international diagnostic laboratories and in vaccine production, including at the Pirbright site shared by the Institute of Animal Health (IAH) and Merial Animal Health Ltd, a pharmaceutical company. The present indications are that this strain is a 01 BFS67 - like virus, isolated in the 1967 Foot and Mouth Disease outbreak in Great Britain.
This strain is present at the IAH and was used in a batch manufactured in July 2007 by the Merial facility. On a precautionary basis Merial has agreed to voluntarily halt vaccine production.
In response to this new information Debby Reynolds, Chief Veterinary Officer has instructed that a new single Protection Zone be created encompassing both the infected farm premises and the Pirbright site, with a single 10km radius Surveillance Zone. ..." DEFRA site
This does rather appear to want to point the finger at Merial (see below) rather than the Government Laboratory at Pirbright as the source of the leak. ( We can only hope that this extraordinary news may allow farmers further afield to breathe a little more easily - but this is little comfort for those directly affected by what looks like an embarrassing lapse of security.)

August 4 2007 9.45 p.m. ~ "no plans for contiguous culling at present but any dangerous contacts will be dealt with robustly". Pigs, sheep and goats on an adjacent smallholding have been slaughtered as "dangerous contacts"

There is still no more news on the DEFRA site. However, NPA's Digby Scott on the news page of the NPA website: ".....NPA, BPEX and Defra will be helping me communicate all the available news that might be of use to the pig sector.
"....The infection in the beef herd at the centre of the alert is almost certainly recent. The last movement onto the farm was in early July and the last movement off was on July 10 when two animals went for slaughter....Pigs may be implicated. Next to the farm - divided only by a barbed wire fence - is a smallholding with sheep, goats and pigs. These animals have been killed as dangerous contacts...Defra is keen to free up movement when it is sensible. If no further infection is found it is possible some movements under licence will be allowed from Tuesday or Wednesday...
..There are no plans for contiguous culling at present but any dangerous contacts will be dealt with robustly."
(While we are grateful for this to the NPA, who are evidently privy to DEFRA's latest news, we do feel concern for the smallholders and others who appear to have no official source of information at this nerve-racking time. We now know that there was no FMD found on these "dangerous contact" animals on the smallholding and they were killed purely as a "precaution". Whether this was necessary or not is perhaps a matter of opinion.)

August 4 2007 9.20 p.m. ~ Intervet UK: " If requested, we will provide the government with any necessary assistance to bring the outbreak under control."

A link provided by FMD News - a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis is this from United Business Media.
Jim Hungerford, General Manager at Intervet UK, comments on the foot and mouth outbreak in Surrey: "We support the government's rapid response and hope that this prompt action will quickly quell the current outbreak. Defra has acted swiftly in identifying the disease and establishing the required restrictions, which will help to prevent any further spread of the virus. If requested, we will provide the government with any necessary assistance to bring the outbreak under control... we believe vaccination should be used if the outbreak develops further."
(It may be remembered that Jim Henderson very kindly answered warmwell's questions about bird flu vaccines a short while ago.)

August 4 2007 (5.50 pm) ~ " I must say, interviewing the chief vet I had a distinct sense of deja vu.." - Snowmail

" In 2001, they all started off telling us it was too soon to vaccinate. Then after a few days they told us it was too late. They claim the same won't happen again..." Krishnan Guru-Murthy Channel 4
The DEFRA foot and mouth page is disappointingly short of news today when so many people across the country are anxious for information about possible vaccination and answers to questions such as those below. We understand that rumours are rife that the infected cows may have come from Cumbria - and that disinfectant supplies have been sold out in Penrith - and it is precisely for such reasons that hard news should be being shared as soon as it is available.

August 4 2007 (4.50 pm) ~ Debby Reynolds has confirmed that the biosecurity arrangements at the Pirbright Laboratory are being investigated as a possible source of the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak.

A relief that it was no less a person than the CVO who mentioned this possibility.
The Farmers Guardian: "...At a Defra briefing at 3.15pm today (Saturday), Mrs Reynolds said it was too early to favour any hypothesis of where the disease might have come from over another. But she said: "Pirbright has been asked to review its biosecurity arrangements."
(Not mentioned by the FG is the fact that Merial, the pharmaceutical company whose research work into FMD etc also requires biocontainment facilities, is very close.)

August 4 2007 ~ " We are really hoping that supermarkets make sure that their buyers and supplier processors act more responsibly this time...

This is truly not a time for exploitation." An email from a sheep farmer - far from optimistic. Comments welcome.

August 4 2007 ~ The UK's refusal to use vaccination for FMD has been on economic rather than on scientific or veterinary grounds.

That vaccination and rapid on-site diagnosis works so effectively was proved in Uruguay in 2001 where an outbreak as extensive as in the UK was - without massive stamping-out - quickly brought under control. But the OIE's International Animal Health Code, adopted by the WTO as the basis for protectionism under the guise of disease control, gives countries without FMD and choosing not to vaccinate - i.e.European and North American farmers - a huge trading advantage over poorer countries. A historic reluctance in the UK to vaccinate animals against FMD was thus solidified.( page 15 of "The Foot and Mouth Outbreak 2001:Lessons Not Learned pdf by - Professor David Campbell and Professor Bob Lee explains this clearly.) The decision in 2001 to hold fast to this led to the immense costs of the mass killing policy and the knock-on effects that it entailed - all in order to protect meat exports. It is interesting then that Bernard Vallat, Director General of the OIE, has now come out so strongly in favour of vaccination.

August 4 2007 ~ EU Directive "It may be decided to introduce emergency vaccination where at least one of the following conditions applies"

The latest EU Directive specifies that vaccination is to be used as front-line tool against the disease. The language of the Directive, in the manner of these things, is hardly comprehensible. However, it is worth looking again at Annex X of the "EU COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2003/85/EC of 29 September 2003 on Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease (repealing Directive 85/511/EEC and Decisions 89/531/EEC and 91/665/EEC and amending Directive 92/46/EEC )" where, for once, the table set out is simple and clear enough for anyone in DEFRA to understand.
Where "Public reaction to total stamping out policy" is "strong", the Directive advises vaccination.

August 4 2007 3.40 pm ~ More quotes "We would not stand in any way to object to vaccination.."

Peter Kendall, president of NFU : "Certainly as an industry we would not stand in any way to object to vaccination if the scientists deem it the right way of moving forward." (Today Programme)
Chris Huhne( Liberal Democrat environment spokesman): "The Government deserves congratulation for learning the lessons of its shambolic response to the devastating 2001 crisis by stopping all animal movements and preparing for vaccination of surrounding herds as soon as the virus is identified. A clear lesson of the last outbreak was the need for speedy vaccination, so the isolation of the virus and a potential matching with banks of vaccine will be key."
Philip Lymbery, Compassion In World Farming's Chief Executive, " The Government must consider emergency vaccination of animals in affected areas to help control the disease and prevent healthy animals being slaughtered needlessly" (CIWF)
Jackie Ballard : "Everything must be done to make sure we do not see a return to the appalling mass slaughter of farm animals that occurred during the last outbreak. There was widespread public revulsion at the funeral pyres and mass killing, and animal welfare seemed to be the lowest priority for the authorities. That must not be allowed to happen again." (See The Argus)
Bernard Vallat, Director General of the OIE :"....profitability should not be a priority when vaccination policies are established. Vaccination, when available, is undoubtedly the most cost-effective means of preventing and controlling, and even eradicating, infectious diseases. .... Unfortunately, there are several barriers to the development of new vaccines: economic barriers such as ... regulatory hurdles due the stringent and non-harmonised regulations in place for vaccine registration .." (below)

August 4 2007 4.00 pm ~ EU member countries have imposed a ban on animals and animal products imported from the UK.

There is an automatically imposed ban on exports within the European Union following the discovery of FMD. In a statement, the European Commission said it would adopt an emergency decision on Monday "concerning restrictions on the movement of animals and the dispatch of products from the U.K." EU veterinary experts will meet next Wednesday to evaluate the UK foot and mouth outbreak.
The Farmers Guardian reports that Eblex head of marketing Andrew Garvey said that shipments on this side of the Channel had been recalled, but the situation was less clear for those already in transit across the water.
"It depends on the recipient country. Some may return the shipment, others may accept it," said Mr Garvey, who added there had also been live animal shipments in the past few weeks of calves and sheep and that these were now being traced to their destination country. "The action to be taken on these is not clear at the current time." The ban on exports will last for a minimum of three months from the time the UK is declared free of the disease, although Mr Garvey said it was possible that, if the outbreak at Wanborough, Surrey, proved to be an isolated incident, that the ban may be treated regionally, as had happened with the classical swine fever outbreak in 2000."

August 4 (2.20 p.m.) ~ The FMD infected carcases will be travelling to Somerset - even though there are incineration plants nearer to Guildford.

The Farmers Guardian was told on this morning that culled animals were due to be shipped to Wessex Incinerators in Frome, despite the fact there were incineration plants nearer to the Guildford Farm.
"Somerset NFU Council delegate Derek Mead said he had also heard the rumour and that it was an 'absolute disgrace' if the diseased carcases were going to be travelling across the country.' "Is Defra trying to spread the disease?," he asked. Wessex incinerators refused to confirm or deny the claim."

August 4 2007 (2.15 pm) ~ 3,000 sheep are stranded at Thame Auction Mart - precisely where the rapid on-site diagnostic kit would be so invaluable.

There are, inevitably, animals stranded at shows. All the same, executive secretary of the Livestock Auctioneers Association, Chris Dodds, has praised DEFRA's rapid response compared to last time. The Farmers Guardian: "3,000 sheep are stranded at Thame Auction Mart ... ... vets were starting to inspect the sheep this morning, ready for them to be moved off the site...." But, as we remember from last time, clinical examination is useless in most cases with sheep.
This is, as we have been trying to point out for six years now, precisely where the rapid on-site diagnostic kit would be so invaluable.
A number of shows around the country have also been caught up in the movement ban, with showing animals which arrived last night now being held for inspection. Perth Show has some Charolais cattle on site
Garstang Show, Lancashire also has beef animals being held for inspection.
Dumfries and Turriff shows are both going ahead but without ruminants or pigs.
Cockermouth and District Show, due to have been held today, has been cancelled.
Brecon Show had some sheep and cattle on site, but these have now been cleared and removed from the site.
Tockwith Show, which had moved to the Great Yorkshire Showground at Harrogate, was due to have sheep and goats present.
For stock being held for inspection, a movement licence must be issued before the stock can be removed, and the animals must then be returned to their holding and placed in quarantine." See Farmers Guardian

August 4 2007 (1.15pm) ~ "The 1.7 million tonnes of waste food that before 2001 was being recycled by swill feeders was diverted to landfill..."

Robert Persey wonders, "....Has this disease outbreak come from a landfill site or from one of the meat composting sites that the State Veterinary Service is supposed to be monitoring? The Government is diverting large amounts of category three meat into composting sites even though the risk assessment it commissioned identified that there was a risk of disease escaping from these sites. ..."

August 4 2007 (1.15pm) ~ "Once the strain has been identified, experts will check to see whether relevant vaccines are available in the British or European vaccine banks."Guardian

Some quotations today:
".....Peter Ainsworth, the shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: "It is essential the Gov-ernment acts quickly to contain this and considers all possible options, including vaccination." ..." Belfast Telegraph
Sir Menzies Campbell: "Alternatives, like vaccination, to the terrible pyres of smoke which stained the countryside last time must be actively explored, but in the end the government will have to follow the best scientific advice." BBC
Neil Parish MEP: "....Defra needs to be sure that the farmers in the area do know what's happening ..." BBC
Debby Reynolds CVO: "our response to this disease is in animal health terms, it's in farming terms..." BBC
Peter Kindersley: "Obviously we believe very strongly in vaccination. Individual farms should have the right to decide what measures to take after assessing the situation on the ground. The Government took control of the situation last time and created an absolute disaster. ...Foot-and-mouth isn't necessarily the disaster it's made out ot be - most animals recover. The Government wants to 'stamp it out' because once the last animal is slaughtered, international trade can resume. With vaccination, there's a six month delay....It's mainly spread by people who trade animals up and down the country." Newbury Today

August 4 2007 (12 .15 am) ~ Slightly revised email from CA Coordination Action

Our bare summary of the MAIN POINTS: - (but see email)
• Shouldn't Defra have a targetted alert system in place?
• Identification of the origin and of the index case, and investigation of spread urgent and vital - all the possibilities must be considered and drive the surveillance strategy.
• Can we have more details of who saw the first symptoms, when and why - routine inspection or suspicion? How old were the blisters on the sick cows?
• Farmers are being asked to inspect their animals for signs of infection. To what extent, if any, are animals being tested for virus? Can we have more details of how, when and where such testing will be taking place?
• Why are we still waiting for implementation of rapid diagnostic capability?
• Vaccination: Preparation must begin as soon as the strain has been identified. This preparation must be done even if evidence later emerges that it will not be necessary.
Read in full

August 4 2007 (10.30 am) ~ "Farmers are being asked to inspect their animals for signs of infection. To what extent, if any, are animals being tested for virus?"

CSF/FMD Coordination Action email just sent to warmwell. While remaining largely positive about DEFRA's initial actions, the email does raise important points and should be read in full
".....These issues have been discussed since 2001. Why are we still waiting for implementation of rapid diagnostic capability? See "Diagnostic testing options", paragraphs 12, 13 and 14 in the report of the 6th Meeting of the UK FMD Expert Group, 2 November 2006 at http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/diseases/fmd/pdf/fmd-expertgrp021106.pdf..".....
(While the CA website is down comments about anything posted on our holding page for them are invited - either here at warmwell or with a request that they be forwarded to the CA site.)

August 4 2007 (10.00 am) ~ Ring Vaccination and on-site diagnosis.

Given the present policy, DEFRA's actions have been efficient.
The movement history of this beef-fattening unit in the past weeks (it sends its finished stock direct to the abattoir) is not known and finding out from the records of auctions and dealers will be a priority. If it turns out that this is not, (as has occurred to many), a highly localised case of virus escape and if the virus is on the move, even the swiftly imposed animal movement bans cannot be wholly effective.
On-site rapid diagnostic testing - even with Pirbright's laboratory just up the road - would have been faster than yesterday's long wait and over optimistic assumptions. Old fashioned methods of testing are laborious and keep waiting in an agony of suspense people whose farms are around the index case - but these farms are being tested and not summarily slaughtered out. Movement bans have been swiftly imposed (as long as farmers were listening to the news) - but they do not, unfortunately, stop the movement of those roaming animals not specified - including humans. Immediate ring vaccination would be effective now, right from the start. The exact strain needs to be known of course but one hopes that preparations for ring vaccination are well under way. It would be heartbreaking to see any repetition of the mistakes of the past: ignorance of the veterinary science and available technology, lack of efficient communication with people on the ground, bureaucratic bullying by impertinent officialdom. However, we are assured that lessons have been learned, and we hope to be able to report on a swift ending to this crisis..

August 3/4 2007 ~ "Number 10 insisted contingency plans being put into place were based on lessons learnt from the 2001 outbreak..."

The Telegraph report on the present outbreak recalls the horrors of 2001, mentioning the 10 million animals killed and saying, "The aftermath of the 2001 outbreak led to huge recriminations over how the outbreak was handled, with some experts arguing for vaccination of stock to prevent the disease's spread as opposed to large-scale culling." but that in 2001 " the Government attempted to tackle it with a contiguous cull, which led to the deaths of millions of healthy animals."
We are pleased of course to hear that Number 10 insists that lessons were learnt from 2001. It would be both helpful and reassuring if DEFRA could spell out to people who fear a repeat of the nightmarish scenes of 2001 what exactly they are doing differently from 2001. For example
• How is the presence of the virus in Surrey being investigated? ( Pirbright is less than 20 kilometres from Elstead and comes under the 10 km surveillance zone)
• Does the UK now have more effective border security - an intrinsically governmental responsibility that farmers and those impacted by FMD cannot do themselves?
• Is DEFRA better positioned in terms of disease surveillance, reporting and response than it was in 2001?
• Does DEFRA have bovine and porcine vaccines for this subtype of FMD virus in its stockpile sufficient for 1 million animals?
• How well is the emergency response working compared to 2001? Are infected animals being killed and disposed of quickly and humanely?
• Have DEFRA communications improved? Will people with the requisite knowledge be available to communicate clearly and simply to those who need to know - for example - details of the emergency regulations?
• Will the independent FMD Expert Group be effective ?
( We note that a General Licence [PDF] (20 KB) has been issued to allow the movement of cows along a public highway for milking purposes - "this licence allows movements of cows along a public highway from one part of a premises to another part of the same premises, for the purposes of milking only.")

August 3 2007 ~ FMD confirmed in Surrey

In spite of David Paton's hopeful words below, it now emerges that FMD has indeed been found in the cows in Elstead. This news is grim. DEFRA says
"......In accordance with the legislation and contingency planning arrangements all the cattle on the premises will be culled. A Protection Zone of three kilometres radius and a Surveillance Zone of 10 kilometres has been placed around the premises, and a GB wide national movement ban of all ruminants and pigs has been imposed.
Nationally no animal movements are allowed except under licence, controls are in place on movement of animal carcasses, animal gatherings, shearing and dipping are restricted, and all farms must increase levels of biosecurity. In both the Protection and Surveillance Zones, there will be requirements for increased levels of biosecurity on farms, movement controls, controls on transportation of dung/manure and treatment of animal products to ensure destruction of the FMD virus.
The farm itself has been under restrictions since late on Thursday evening when symptoms were reported to the local Animal Health office. A 1km temporary restriction zone was placed around the premises earlier today whilst investigations and testing were completed, in line with domestic and EU legislation.
The European Commission has been informed."
The BBC now reports "Gordon Brown has taken part by telephone in a Cobra meeting, involving top staff at the Cabinet Office. He is returning to London on Saturday from his holiday in Dorset and Environment Secretary Hilary Benn is to break off from his vacation in Italy...."

August 3 2007 ~ Undiagnosed bovine vesicular disease in Surrey. Update "The lesions are in their mouth and this could just be something they have eaten"

According to the Surrey Advertiser (many thanks to Pat Gardner for this link) the farm in Surrey being checked for FMD and other diseases is in Elstead. David Paton of Pirbright is quoted as saying that the three cows from the unknown farm are showing symptoms that, although "somewhat suggestive" of FMD, are not likely to be foot and mouth. " ..... but they would not be the most suggestive. At this stage it's hopefully about ruling it [foot and mouth] out," he said. "The lesions are in their mouth and this could just be something they have eaten." Pirbright gets about six false alarms for FMD a year - but we await further news. (During foot and mouth in 2001, it will be remembered some unfortunate animals were diagnosed with FMD when they had merely eaten thistles and never got the benefit of a Pirbright test - so, in this case, we hope for the best.)

August 3 2007 ~ Undiagnosed bovine vesicular disease in Surrey. "No timescale for results" Could this be bluetongue?

(We can only hope it is not foot and mouth.) A 1km movement standstill zone of all ruminants has been imposed following a suspect case of vesicular disease in cattle in n only hope it is not foot and mouth.) A 1km movement standstill zone of all ruminants has been imposed following a suspect case of vesicular disease in cattle in Surrey. The DEFRA site says little more than that "samples have been submitted to the laboratory for testing " and "At the present time there is no timescale for results."
As a moderator points out in today's ProMed posting about this, "the differential diagnosis of a vesicular disease in cattle in the UK should include, in addition to foot and mouth disease (FMD), several other viral diseases such as bluetongue, vesicular stomatitis, bovine papular stomatitis, bovine virus diarrhoea/mucosal disease, malignant catarrhal fever and rinderpest. If -- hopefully -- FMD is excluded, bluetongue virus serotype 8 becomes a main suspect"

August 3 2007 ~ FMD vaccine "could be commercially viable and remove some of the hurdles in advance of any outbreak"

It is encouraging to see such news from America and to think that the US may at last be contemplating pre-emptive vaccination instead of pre-emptive slaughter. In February, the US the Department of Homeland Security signed a three-year, potential 15 million dollar contract with the pharmaceutical company GenVec to support the development and manufacture of an improved foot and mouth vaccine. Details of this can be found at Gazette.net (for which link many thanks to FMD News - a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis ) However, it is still distressing to see in articles such as this the often repeated nonsense that the UK outbreak in 2001 "necessitated the slaughter of about 4 million animals".
As we know, the outbreak necessitated no such thing - but at least 10 million animals were slaughtered as a result of the UK's mass culling policies, policies that were based on political and economic rather than veterinary or science-based reasons. ( At this very time, Uruguay was successfully eradicating FMD with vaccines administered by its own farmers, in an outbreak of very similar proportions.)
The UK Government has never acknowledged its tragic errors. It has been left to experts such as Dr Mike Thrusfield to point out, in relation to Dumfries and Galloway, "No evidence of infection was found on any pre-emptively contiguously culled premises" Indeed, in the entire country, fewer than 1500 of 2030 so-called infected premises (IPs) were confirmed as being infected on laboratory results - as this letter in the Vet Record last August by Adrian Wingfield, Hugh Miller, and Nick Honhold explained with such authority. (Their own papers are referred to in the pdf version of the letter) Luckily, some journalists are better informed than others - the Scotsman's Fordyce Maxwell, for example. Last October he wrote,
"....much research into data accumulated in 2001 has been published, including the work of Dr Michael Thrusfield at Edinburgh University and Dr Paul Kitching at the National Centre for Foreign Animal Diseases in Canada. Their work confirms that the 2001 epidemic was handled in an impractical, unscientific and inhumane way. In the words of the late Professor Fred Brown, it was "a disgrace to humanity".
Until this is properly acknowledged there seems a very real danger that it could happen again. Slaughter as a political quick fix for animal disease is still very much in evidence - and unfortunately retrospective legitimacy given by the Animal Health Act of 2002 to the wider culling policies of 2001 have given even more power to central government.
One can only hope that if the US does go for vaccination as a preventative measure the UK will at last opt for protecting animals instead of protectionism.

August 1 2007 ~ £11.5M of new research. More money. More scientific research. More progress?

A year ago, the The Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) sought proposals for "innovative multidisciplinary research that would exploit recent scientific developments" to investigate animal disease. Details of all the projects funded by the new initiative, Combating Endemic Diseases of Farmed Animals for Sustainability (CEDFAS) are available in this pdf file.
".....The initiative will improve the sustainability of UK farming by ultimately reducing the cost of treating diseases and the loss of affected livestock." pdf file
Diseases to be researched include bovine TB - which is
"estimated to cost the UK economy £31M.
The reasons for the inexorable rise in bTB are complex. One possibility is that new forms of Mycobacterium bovis (M. bovis), the bacterium that causes bTB, have evolved in the UK that are able to thwart current control measures.
Researchers at the Veterinary Laboratories Agency (VLA) and the Institute for Animal Health (IAH) will be investigating M. bovis using genomic technologies to determine whether these new strains are able to manipulate the bovine immune response to their advantage and hence be more successful bovine pathogens.
Scientists at the Roslin Institute and Queen's University Belfast will be using novel approaches to identify cattle with increased bTB resistance. DNA will be collected from 1000 bTB cases and controls, and genotyped for 50,000 gene variants"

July 28-31 2007 ~ Flood losses for farmers and landowners in affected areas could be worse than in the foot and mouth epidemic

Telegraph ".. because there is no automatic right to compensation. Some farmers will have lost every crop they have.
Livestock farmers will not have been able to make forage for the winter, not just because they can't get on the field, but also because hay must dry and even silage must be allowed to wilt or it will spoil. Silage without dry matter is no good for stock.
Some farmers' winter feed will have been flooded or contaminated by filthy water. A few will have nowhere for their cows or sheep to graze and will have to rent land or, at worst, sell their animals immediately for slaughter...."
One of the more sensible reader comments below Charles Clover's article ; "The security of both our agriculture and home grown food as well as imported supplies seem very low indeed on the political agenda of the three major parties. Is it not time for a serious risk assessment to be commissioned as to the security of food supplies to our town and cities?"

July 28- 31 2007 ~ Germany opts to request derogation from the EU's BSE slaughter regulations

The EU rule by which the UK tried to kill the pet cow Harriet - even after it had been pointed out that flexibility was allowed - is the subject of this paragraph from the EU's Summary Record of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, held in Brussels on June 19. (See pdf file) All the Member States were present, except Malta. We read:
7. Exchange of views of the Committee on a draft Commission Decision regarding a derogation of BSE eradication measures following confirmation of the presence of a TSE in certain Member States (Legal basis: Regulation (EC) No 999/2001) (SANCO/1703/2007). Based on a favourable risk assessment taking particularly into account the control measures in Germany, this proposal provides Germany with a derogation allowing the use of at risk bovine animals until the end of their productive lives, and therefore, by way of derogation from general provisions, to defer their immediate killing and complete destruction. The Commission would like to be informed whether other Member States would also request such derogation. If the inter-services consultation can be concluded, this proposal will be presented for a vote at the SCFCAH meeting on 18 July 2007.
Will ".. other Member States also request such derogation"? It will be remembered that Harriet's post mortem showed no sign of BSE. Indeed, the whole sorry business served no useful purpose at all and cost the country a great deal in wasted money and man power. It will be interesting to see whether the UK follows Germany's example.

July 28- 31 2007 ~ Not a single one of the 1543 nasal mucosal samples .... including those from the 32 reactors found to have lung lesions - proved positive for m.bovis - but this is not mentioned in the ISG report.

See bovinetb blogspot latest about DEFRA's 2000 'Pathman project' into 'Pathogenisis and diagnosis of tuberculosis in cattle - complementary field studies' - i.e. to see whether bTB is passed from cattle to cattle via the respiratory tract. The editor comments: ".....Considering the amount of emphasis placed on cattle to cattle transmission by the ISG, it is interesting to note that in the Pathman project, not a single one of the 1543 nasal mucosal samples of which 1006 proved clear of contamination - including those from the 32 reactors found to have lung lesions - proved positive for m.bovis, a point missed by the ISG when describing the project in their final report. How could John Bourne have missed that, one might ask? It was mentioned at least four times (4.6) (3.6)the executive summary and the conclusion.
"M.bovis was not detected by bacterial culture in any of the nasal mucus samples." and
"The results suggest that large concentrations of M.bovis are not present in the nasal passages, and the shedding of M.bovis, if it occurs, is rare in naturally infected GB cattle."
The editor further tells us that R.M.Q.Sainsbury and Dr. John Gallagher point out in this week's Veterinary Record that the final report of the ISG "used data somewhat inconsistent with those in the recently published 'Pathogenisis and diagnosis of tuberculosis in cattle - complementary field studies' "
"In total over 1500 nasal mucus samples were taken in order to ascertain whether tuberculosis (bTB) was passed from cattle to cattle via the respiratory tract. Micobacterium bovis was not isolated from any of these samples despite lesions being found in the lungs of 32 of the cattle . ..."...."
The bovineTB posting concludes " after £2.8 million, Professor Bourne missed the histology conclusion on those mucus samples completely. They were all negative. Every one. ....surely the negative-for-onward-transmission results of every mucosal sample taken, deserves a higher profile?"
We agree that it certainly does. Again, we should be grateful for informed comment.

July 26 2007 ~ ARC Addington Fund are trying to get water to livestock farmers

ARC Addington are putting pressure on Severn Trent Water to get water to livestock farmers devastated by the flooding and who are without water. Contact details below. Anyone knowing a farmer without water should give them these details - (ARC Addington also have small personal hardship funds for arable farmers whose crops have been lost) Contact Ian Bell, Fund Director
ARC-Addington Fund
The Red Stable Block
Stoneleigh Park
Warwickshire
CV8 2LZ
Tel: 02476 690587 or Mobile: 07909 538426
Since no compensation from the Government seems likely, the help offered by ARC Addington is vitally important - and very much appreciated.

July26 2007 ~ No compensation for farmers devastated by floods

David Fursdon, president of the Country Land and Business Association, who accused the Environment Agency of failing to prioritise flood protection and accused it of not being strong enough to ask for adequate funding from Government for flood defence ( see Telegraph) has appeared on BBC News 24 this morning to explain that farmers are not to be compensated for the widespread losses they are suffering.

July 20 2007 ~ "scientists at the labs are also working on a new test for viruses, such as rabies, bird flu and foot and mouth disease, which could cut the time taken to confirm an outbreak from up to ten days to only a few hours..."

So says this news release from the York Press Once again we are left wondering why the wheel has to be reinvented in this country when the Rapid or the SmartCycler, for example, are already being used in other parts of the world. As we saw last year in this letter from Roger Breeze to Dr James Irvine and to warmwell:
"....A RAPID PCR machine (www.idahotech.com) costs about £40,000 and the tests for exotic diseases like foot and mouth, classical swine fever, avian influenza, and Newcastle disease cost about £3 each. Of course, with other test reagents, this same machine can detect all the common animal diseases too (with the exception of BSE and scrapie)..... There are hundreds of scientists and technicians... who know how to do PCR tests (a standard lab tool) and who could learn the works of the RAPID in an afternoon. There are also plenty of labs with the necessary but minimal infrastructure to handle the analyses safely (when the sample goes into the test reagent tube any virus is inactivated so it can't cause disease)..... a lab system can be expected to give a result in less than 6 hours. .."
Detecting pathogens by such on-site rapid means would ensure that action could be taken immediately - but, as Dr Breeze pointed out a year ago, in the UK a sample would be still on its way to Weybridge or Pirbright (or waiting at the airport, or going nowhere) for confirmation by conventional, and much, much slower, means. In January 2006 an avian influenza conference in Kiev was followed by hands-on avian influenza H5N1 detection training on the RAPID for veterinary lab staff from six countries.
Ever since the foot and mouth disaster of 2001 we have felt it to be incomprehensible that the UK is not making use of available, effective systems. Strange too, when dangerous diseases can strike at any moment, that scientists at York's Central Science Laboratory, an executive agency of DEFRA, are being paid to work on a UK model for use 'sometime in the future'. Are there any comments from readers about this?

July 19 2007 ~ Forget vaccination. Soft music sells this "animal friendly, total culling concept"

An advertisement from a Netherlands gassing and electrocution equipment provider called the TCC Group (Total Culling Concept) encourages governments to pay for quietly managed mass killing. With gently tinkling music playing in the background of the website, the killing process is described as "environmental (sic) friendly, animal friendly and safe for the people doing the job". They offer 'stable gassing for a fixed price' A Final Solution offered to governments to cure the problem of bird flu.
As one correspondent to warmwell comments dryly, if the so-called competent authorities ..
".. had to go through the whole dirty process of "disease eradication" we might end up with vaccination...."
Vaccinating Birds against H5N1 - warmwell's recent postings include news from the US yesterday that their national veterinary stockpile has a total supply of 140 million doses of vaccine and also they have a contract in place that will quickly give access to another 500 million doses of live pox recombinant H5N1 vaccine to protect younger birds. While the US feels it is impractical to attempt to vaccinate all poultry, vaccines, says the White House briefing, "can be used to protect healthy birds outside the perimeter of the outbreak...
...Here domestically, the USDA and Department of Interior have launched a phenomenal surveillance program. You've seen the outputs of that. We found lots of low-path avian influenza. And it's good news that it's low-path. It's also good news that it, I think, validates, to some degree, our wild bird and domestic bird surveillance activities.."
(See also the paper from Hong Kong by Ellis et al (Avian Pathology (August 2004) 33(4), 405 /412): "after 18 days post-vaccination no more deaths from H5N1 avian influenza occurred and intensive monitoring by virus culture on these farms showed no evidence of asymptomatic shedding of the virus. This provides evidence that H5 vaccine can interrupt virus transmission in a field setting.")

July 18 2007 ~ A case of bluetongue in Belgium

According to Expatica.com the bluetongue virus "seems to have turned up at a sheep breeder in Oelegen, a submunicipality of Ranst. The results of the most recent tests will give a definite answer this afternoon, but the Federal Food Agency says that all indications are pointing to the virus at the moment...."
Last month, the Farmers' Guardian reported that "John Gloster of the Met Office, seconded to the IAH, said the risk of infected midges being carried to the UK was currently minimal, but the risk would increase if outbreaks of the virus were to be reported near the west coast of mainland Europe..." (Bluetongue page)

July 15 - 21 2007 ~ ".. the option Skanda Vale have chosen is the difficult, long and expensive path."

It is unfortunate but probably inevitable that we are now hearing indignant voices proclaiming that the Shambo ruling is, for example, "keeping this terrible pool of infection alive" and that it is "driving a coach and horses through the policy of dealing with bovine TB". It really does need to be pointed out that the policy of dealing with bovine TB is quite hopeless and also that no "pool of infection" resides in Shambo's stall. Skanda Vale is not a farm. No animal on the monastery is ever in contact with other farm animals again. No animal products are given or sold to the public. In any case, as the virologist Dr Ruth Watkins tells us, the risk of being infected from bovine TB being shed on the breath of an bovine, who is infected and shedding, is very small. Indeed, the government's only medical advice is to recommend that drinking unpasteurised milk ceases. If they are under 30 months old, cattle culled because of a positive test actually enter the human food chain . So much for the assertion that Shambo's continuing presence is a risk for both animals and humans.
Instead, many calmer commentators will see the Shambo ruling as a challenge pointing the way towards a better, more pragmatic approach to livestock policies. However, that is the future. In the present case, Dr Watkins can see the likely future for Shambo - and it is expensive. The option Skanda Vale have chosen is the "difficult, long and expensive path".
"This is in contrast to culling and taking the money..."
She says that further testing must be done in the USA - and paid for.
"Treatment is going to cost the monks at least £5000 (treating an elephant was $40000 in 2005) and will require the supervision of experienced vets. Such treatment will probably have to continue for 9 months and involve at least three different antibiotics. Shambo must then be carefully monitored.
He will be kept in isolation, even more remote than his current temple, and he'll require the attention of the monks every day for drug dosing, and general care..."
Provided that the testing proves harmless for Shambo, she understands that the Skanda Vale monks want such testing to benefit others and to benefit science. After his death she believes they will allow a detailed post mortem to determine the success of treatment.
But Shambo's reprieve does not give a licence for treating commercial farm animals. As a trading farmer herself, and one who does receive the single farm payment (Skanda Vale receives nothing from the State) Dr Watkins points out regretfully,
" I must abide by the current rules even if I think the policy could and should be improved."
Many farmers will be feeling the same, and as Judge Hickinbottom pointed out in Monday's ruling, the proportionality of the government response in its animal health policies is what needs to be examined very closely now.
Skanda Vale ( see website) now asks the Government to "enter into constructive dialogue with us" rather than waste taxpayers' money on an appeal.

July 15 - 21 2007 ~"....profitability should not be a priority when vaccination policies are established." Bernard Vallat

Two special issues of the OIE Scientific and Technical Review aim at providing useful information about animal vaccination. Bernard Vallat, Director General of the OIE, says in his Preface says that recent progress in animal genomics and in veterinary immunology will help to develop more effective and safer vaccines.
"Vaccination, when available, is undoubtedly the most cost-effective means of preventing and controlling, and even eradicating, infectious diseases. ....
Unfortunately, there are several barriers to the development of new vaccines: economic barriers such as the lack of investment incentives, especially for vaccines against diseases that only occur in developing countries; scientific obstacles, for instance, the antigenic variability of some pathogens and the ability of parasites to circumvent immune response; regulatory hurdles due the stringent and non-harmonised regulations in place for vaccine registration; deliberate withholding by some countries of strains of pathogenic agents; and, finally, public perception of the consumption of food products derived from vaccinated animals and of technologies such as genetic engineering.
... profitability should not be a priority when vaccination policies are established. The OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (Terrestrial Code) and the Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals (Terrestrial Manual) respectively provide recommendations on how to administer and how to manufacture veterinary vaccines. Veterinary Services should be encouraged to regularly consult these publications in order to improve animal health throughout the world.
Links to the various papers in Part 1: "development, production and use of vaccines "- can be seen here. The paper by P.L. Roeder & W.P. Taylor, for example, Mass vaccination and herd immunity: cattle and buffalos suggests ways to "optimise the efficiency of mass vaccination programmes."
Part 2: "scientific, economic, regulatory and socio-ethical aspects" will be available in August 2007

July 9 - 14 2007 ~ The ELA conference in October - the beginning of the first serious pan-European contribution to animal health policy development.

Later this year the EU Commission will publish its Animal Health Strategy 2007-2013 (CAHPS). In order to present the EU Parliament with a cohesive response to the EU plans before they are formalised and implemented, the European Livestock Association, formerly known as European Livestock Alliance, will hold a conference: 'Towards a Durable Global Animal Health Policy' on October 17th 2007.
The European Parliament is eager to join in the discussion; the conference will take place at the European Parliament in Brussels. ELA was founded in 2001 by a number of committed breeders and scientists concerned by the mass-slaughter policy to control the Foot and Mouth Disease outbreak in both the UK and Netherlands. It now has members in UK, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands.
ELA believes that animal health policies will have a greater chance of success if they are developed with the wide support of stakeholders - including keepers of rare breeds or endangered species, and those farmers who keep animals extensively (organic, bio-dynamic, free-range). Thijs Berman and Jan Mulder, Dutch MEPs, and Elisabeth Jeggle, German MEP, are giving their support in hosting the conference.
All interested organisations are invited to attend the conference where they will have the opportunity to share their views, thoughts, ideas and needs with a number of MEPs. Read more and/or print out an Invitation to the conference. (It is important that these are returned quickly. Help with funding may be possible.)

July 9 - 14 2007 ~ Reply to E-petition to scrap the fallen stock disposal scheme and reinstate on-farm burial as a green initiative

The government reply does not provide any acceptable reason for the monstrously wasteful law to continue. It mentions, without being specific, both "a number of scientific opinions" and "the lack of scientific information available on how persistent the prions that cause diseases such as BSE and scrapie are in soil". Once again, as below, one can't help wondering what is really being protected here. And the update on the Newburn cows, condemned by DEFRA in spite of their posing no risk whatsoever, makes us wonder even more.

July 9 - 14 2007 ~ Repeating the mistakes of the past - "no dramatic fall in cattle reactors to show for the cattle carnage ..."

In the early 1970's, the draconian Tait regime on bTb incidence in SW Cornwall - which involved not only the killing of TB reactors but also their cohorts and even whole herds - failed to reduce the numbers of reactors or affect the disease. It was interesting to see last Sunday's posting on the bovine TB blog about this failed regime. And at centre stage in any discussion of bovine TB this week stands Shambo, doomed by the new "rural development" minister for Wales, Jane Davidson. She has been telling AMs that she had "considered requests from the religious community to spare it" but that destroying Shambo " in accordance with the law" was the only way to protect 'people and other animals'.
Many would suspect that the killing of Shambo is to protect something quite different; to protect officialdom from any public acknowledgement that the present policy hasn't a hope of succeeding.
The bovine disease is accelerating. Countless farmers are hedged about with restrictions and have lost their cattle, just as in the early 70s in Cornwall, and it is doing no good now just as it did no good then. As now, it was a cattle-only policy. Available technology not available then, is still being ignored. We have the ability to target infected setts. Vaccine trials took place a whole year ago. Leaving the pools of disease in wildlife untreated, when modern technology could do so much to help the situation, has led to a vicious circle of killing, misery and anger.
What is missing, yet again, is the political will to use what the ingeniousness of modern technology has provided. And when the politicians are told by their all too ignorant advisers to trot out the old excuse of lack of validation it is time someone thundered back that the policy of using an unvalidated and erroneous mathematical model to justify the mass killing of the contiguous cull during foot and mouth was a despicable mistake unbacked by any real experts. Lack of validation can be a political excuse for inaction - or ignored when it suits. Skanda Vale's only recourse is now the law. We can only hope for the sanity and common sense shown by such as Judge Onions, allied to proper independent scientific expertise and advice, such as saved Rosemary Upton's equally prized animals in 2001. Killing Shambo will not protect people or animals.

July 9 - 14 2007 ~ "If that degree of financial mismanagement had occurred in a public limited company, the board would have been out - never mind the chief executive."

Michael Jack evidently shares the widespread frustration at the lack of accountability over the RPA fiasco. He says (Hansard)
"Our report on the single farm payment and what went wrong raises not only a series of practical observations on the execution of Government policy but some fundamental points of principle.....there has been a debacle concerning a core responsibility of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. That is why our report goes beyond the mechanics of what went wrong and explores fundamental issues to do with accountability in government..... When the wheel fell off, DEFRA had not heeded the warnings, and we now know what happened to the rural economy.....As for who was responsible and who should have accepted responsibility, the head that rolled was Mr. Johnston McNeill's - it was the agency's former chief executive who was fired. Sir Brian Bender, the former permanent secretary at the Department, whose name was on the documents about the Rural Payments Agency, the DEFRA change programme and the agreement on the path forward, and Mr. Andy Lebrecht, one of the most senior civil servants in the Department - he sat on the management boards of the Rural Payments Agency and, indeed, on DEFRA's own boards and should have been the link - were the people who effectively signed off what happened. Rachel Lomax, who was supposed to be an expert, was brought into the Department to provide advice. Despite all that, there was still failure, but only one person has paid for it with their job...."
Johnston McNeill's sacking has cost the country more than £250,000 - and he could seek further compensation. However, Margaret Beckett spoke to him only twice, the second time the day before he was dismissed. Her departure from the Cabinet can hardly be regarded as a result of 'accountability' for her mismanagement and will be of little comfort to those farmers who are still waiting for payments from 2005. Many have gone out of business as a result.
It will, according to MPs, take until 2012 and another £55m to sort out the chaos. More on RPA page. After the RPA fiasco unravelled publicly, we saw the cynical buck-passing of those who failed. The same thing happened over FMD - and involved many of the same people. If Roy Anderson were to become David King's successor we should indeed be close to despair. Accountability matters. It matters in the case of the RPA and it matters in the case of the mishandling of animal health.

June 25 2007 ~ ".... scientific experts must be accountable, not only to government ministers but also to other experts. To date, this has not occurred in the context of the 2001 epidemic. ..."

So said Kitching, Thrusfield and Taylor in their important paper "Use and abuse of mathematical models: an illustration from the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic in the United Kingdom".
We hear that Prof Sir Roy Anderson, after having been appointed Chief Scientific Advisor to the Ministry of Defence in 2004 and then, last year, knighted, ( according to Imperial College news release "... for epidemiological research, studying the spread of infectious diseases such as AIDS, BSE, foot and mouth and SARS, and providing the government with advice on how to tackle them..."), has now been named the next Rector of Imperial College, London, and will take over next summer.
Comment

June 25 2007 ~ Thursday was the sixth anniversary of MAFF v Upton, the Grunty the Pig case

In a court case brought by MAFF during the Summer of Foot and Mouth, Mr Justice Harrison ruled that Grunty and 11 prized sheep at Rosemary Upton's farm had shown no sign of disease and that it was sufficient for them to be monitored. Grunty was nine days into the incubation period with no sign of infection. The ruling can be said to have taken away the Ministry's appetite to pursue owners of healthy animals condemned by the then illegal mass cull policy into the courts. It undoubtedly contributed to the notorious amending of the 1981 Animal Health Act to ensure that killing animals on the grounds of "animal health" would from then on be declared "lawful". The Bishop of Hereford, who described the new legislation as "harsh, unjust and untimely" was just one of many eminent voices raised against it; vets and farmers too were aghast - but, in spite of all attempts to tone it down, including its temporary defeat in the House of Lords, the Act was nodded through Parliament by MPs who arrived at the almost empty House just in time to vote and who had very little understanding of what they were doing.

June 25 2007 ~ " I am forced to take action myself....I have launched a claim against Devon and Cornwall Police and DEFRA officials in the Courts"

The inflexibility and ignorance of senior DEFRA figures has been deplored by many veterinary experts in animal disease, and yet their disproportionate power over farming continues. In 2001, many anguished people who tried to stand up against intimidation and unlawful killing of animals were often treated with discourtesy and even violence. (See here). The land agent involved in the Grunty case, Tom Griffith-Jones, was also involved in one of the most unpleasant instances of unnecessary and unlawful slaughter; this time of healthy alpacas belonging to his elderly clients. Evidence shows that camelids are not even susceptible to FMD - but they were summarily condemned. The extraordinary behaviour of both police and officialdom has never been properly examined. As Tom Griffith-Jones says of the 2001 FMD policy
"... In the absence of a proper closure of this horror .. there is the inevitability that it will all occur all over again when the next outbreak of a foreign disease arrives. That may or may not be Foot and Mouth...Defra officials clearly wanted to pre-empt the role of the Courts to decide this issue. As I was an inconvenient obstruction to their unlawful intent, they enlisted the help of the police to remove me unlawfully, so that they could bully and intimidate my elderly and frail Clients..... the events at Helewood Farm were part of a much wider and more systematic pattern of behaviour."
Impertinent and callous officialdom and the illegality of the 2001 cull are features of FMD control that the Government has attempted to airbrush away. We entirely sympathise with Mr Griffith Jones' continuing frustration with DEFRA and with his wish to protect others from what happened to him and to his clients. Press release

June 22 2007 ~ "This information could only be obtained at disproportionate cost..."

Yesterday, Peter Ainsworth asked (Hansard) what proportion of DEFRA's administration costs was spent on running public consultations in 2006-07 , how many civil servants in his Department worked on public consultations in the 2006-07 financial year; and how many public consultations his Department has undertaken since its institution. Barry Gardiner's answer was that there were one hundred and eight last year and that DEFRA had undertaken 581 public consultations since its inception in 2001.
With no apparent awareness of irony he added. ".... information is not held centrally about the number of civil servants in the Department who worked on public consultations in the last financial year. This information could only be obtained at disproportionate cost."

June 22 2007 ~ "...breeding for scrapie resistance has little or no impact on a number of commercial traits."

As we reported below in February, even Mr Bradshaw now reluctantly admits that the ram genotyping scheme - as many were warning from the start - is of no use and deserves no further funding. Today, the Farmers Guardian, in a very carefully worded article, does in its later paragraphs quote Kay Boulton of the Meat and Livestock Commission : "Preliminary results from extensive research suggests breeding for scrapie resistance has little or no impact on a number of commercial traits, most importantly muscle depth, growth from birth to slaughter and reasons for death or disposal from a flock."
See "Don't miss chance to have your say on scrapie plan" " ....breeders should take ownership of any future scheme and maximise the benefits of blood testing."
It is interesting that the NSA chief executive, Peter Morris, is so circumspect in what he says about the NSP - but it is surely unlikely that sheep farmers will fail to read between the lines.
See also scrapie pages

June 22 2007 ~ Fears expressed for the future of farming in the South West of England and other hotspot areas

Alistair Driver in the Farmers' Guardian today on the TB report by the Independent Scientific Group. He quotes ISG chairman John Bourne "The ISG conclude that rigidly applied control measures targeted at cattle can reverse the rising incidence of disease, and halt its geographical spread" - but adds that John Bourne admitted that there was no cost-benefit analysis to back up the recommendations made in the report. Paul Griffith, Devon NFU county chairman, has warned of 'massive' illegal badger culling if the Government accepted the recommendations." More on bovine TB page, including the research done at Warwick on the rapid diagnostic testing to target setts that really are infected in order to avoid mass killing.

June 20 2007 ~ "a further sad fact about science in the UK and in some other countries that the scientists' career is largely dependent upon him or her not antagonising the wishes of the main source of his funding -

- government agencies or rich lobby groups. It would be easy to get a peer review of an article that was in favour of badgers, rather than cattle. Anyway, what scientist is going to stick his neck out to criticise a government appointed committee that has been deliberating for 10 years? He would have to live on Mars."
James Irvine, in his Land Care website, points the finger of common sense straight at what is going wrong in the relationship between science and politics. He does not refer only to the present controversy about control of TB in cattle when he describes "a very sad situation for both UK science and for UK animal health."
".....A clear example of this was seen in the mismanagement of the UK Foot and Mouth epidemic in 2001. The logical advice from those working with livestock was ignored in preference to that of scientists with no practical experience with livestock. The result was that the strategy that was established was based on flawed data. Epidemiological models with their persuasive but flawed graphs, so convincingly displayed by Professor Roy Anderson and his colleagues ruled the day (5). Millions of livestock were unnecessarily slaughtered. Available science was ignored. ..."
The article should be read in full at land-care.org.uk.

June 19 2007 ~DEFRA had "taken a sledgehammer to crack the wrong nut" says Judge, but only DEFRA's one-sided version is picked up by journalists

In a dramatic summing up that should have been splashed across front pages last week, a Senior Crown Court Judge called for an inquiry against DEFRA . On June 13th, at the end of a case brought by DEFRA against an independent importer of chemicals, the judge said that DEFRA, through its agent the Pesticides Safety Directorate, had "unwittingly or wittingly collaborated with chemical companies to maintain a cartel". (See news release from Hill Dickinson.)
His Honour Judge Onions also recommended that a report should be sent to the Competition Commission.
John Rawlings had been accused of bringing pesticides into the UK from Italy and the Netherlands in breach of Defra controls. Elsewhere in the EU such chemicals are permitted and the products produced with their help are legally imported into the UK.
However, what is particularly alarming about this case is the less than frank version given by DEFRA on the Government News Network. Nowhere does it mention that, found technically guilty on only three of the 14 counts, the defendant had been ordered to pay only 20% of DEFRA's costs. Nor does it mention that the judge had castigated the Department after an eight day case costing the taxpayer £10,000 a day, nor that he, in exasperation, had even threatened to "witness summons the Minister" for 10.00 a.m. the following morning if DEFRA continued to prevaricate.
DEFRA's wholly one-sided version, also posted on the Pesticides Safety Directorate website, blackens the name of John Rawlings while adopting a sanctimonious tone that threatens farmers, if they obtain products not "approved for use in the UK as part of their good agricultural practice", with losing part of their Single Farm Payment (whereupon it disappears, presumably into the PSD itself since Objective 4 of their 16 page 'business plan' is "To ... recover the full cost of our operations from the industry " and to " contribute to the government's efficiency agenda." ) Other news agencies, including www.farminguk.com and one (media.netpr.pl) even as far away as Poland, faithfully reproduce, word for word, the DEFRA version. Yet Judge Onions had said he would be writing to Kerr Wilson, the Chief Executive of the Pesticides Safety Directorate, asking why the prosecution had been brought and what lessons PSD and Defra had learned from the case. And he said he expected an answer within 21 days.

Update June 20th. It is pleasing to see that the real story is now on Farmers Weekly online. (Incredibly, Defra is reported as saying that Judge Onions' comments were "irrelevant" to the PSD and Defra.)

Update July 9 - 14 2007 ~

Private Eye takes up the story. (As Muckspreader rightly says, "don't worry if you have a bias against pesticides, that's not the point of the story.")
".... True to form, when Defra and the PSD came to report the case on their websites, they left out everything remotely detrimental to their case, including the fact that the taxpayers were being left to foot most of Defra's £42,500 bill. They presented it as if they had won a glorious victory and reminded farmers that it was a criminal offence to use pesticides not approved by the PSD, for which they could lose their EU subsidies. The chances of Defra doing anything to end the illegal cartel seem remote. After all, it is not long since Defra helped to cover up the disaster inflicted on thousands of sheep farmers by their use of OP sheep dips, which of course were manufactured by its pharmaceutical friends." Read in full
The version of the story reported in Farmers Weekly, shortly after our own, quoted a Defra spokesman as saying that Judge Onions' comments were "irrelevant" to the PSD and Defra. Such a comment is either a worryingly impertinent snub to Judge Onions or yet another example of DEFRA's apparent difficulty with understanding and writing the English language . Judge Onions' demanded an inquiry into why the prosecution had been brought and what lessons PSD and Defra had learned from the case. One wonders whether, since the 21 days allowed are now nearly up, the judge has received an answer.

June 18 2007 ~ "Agflation" - a warning

The article in today's Independent by Andreas Whittam Smith warns : "Already food costs are rising at 6 per cent per annum, twice as fast as the cost of living. ... there is worse to come." Not even dairy farmers will be able to take comfort from this. The big exception for producers remains fresh milk
"........ It is impossible to find any wholesale milk prices even though dairy farming is Britain's most important agricultural activity.......... The thing you notice is the sharp contrast between what a food giant like Nestlé is saying - "the global cost of milk is rising so fast that it is impossible to raise shelf prices fast enough to match " - and what British farmers find; persistent low prices. ..."
Using food crops as a source of energy in place of oil, gas and coal to supply the so-called biofuel industry may turn out to be a grim mistake. David Strahan sums up the case against biofuels in his new book The Last Oil Shock when he writes that they offer the prospect of "starving to death in a traffic jam". Food prices are rising fast. DEFRA's actions point to its assumption that the UK is now in a "post agricultural era" and it may soon be too late to wake up from this political fantasy.
As Professor James Lovelock says in The Revenge of Gaia: "... Unfortunately our nation is now so urbanised as to be like a large city and we have only a small acreage of agriculture and forestry. We are dependent on the trading world for sustenance; climate change will deny us regular supplies of food and fuel from overseas.. we can not rely on supplies from abroad..."
The UK now imports 40% of our food (it was 15% in 1983). Dwindling available energy supplies (see peak oil) - and the increasing demands of China and India for the high protein diet their forefathers never had are leading us into the very situation Lovelock describes - and even climate change is almost irrelevant here. When food becomes prohibitively expensive localized growing will be the only option we have. ( When Malthus first warned of the overpopulation of the Earth in 1800, there were only one billion people. Today, it stands at 6.3 billion. By 2025, it is forecast to be 8 billion, and by 2050, 9.8 billion.)

June 17 2007 ~ Scientists rule out return to badger culls

Observer ".... Environment Secretary David Miliband is expected to accept the recommendations, and make it clear that culling will not be reintroduced into Britain......" More on Bovine TB page

June 16 2007 ~ " It would be an absolute crime to put that animal down...."

A prominent member of the International Zoo Veterinary Group, David Taylor, who has examined Shambo and his quarantine arrangements at the Skanda Vale temple, is quoted in icwales: "The risk to the public or to the Welsh cattle farming community is less than zero."
Spokesmen for the opposition parties in the Welsh Assembly have called on new Welsh rural development minister, Jane Davidson, to give the order for Shambo to be culled. Something of a relief then, to see an expert comment on the case and remind people of the true nature of the "risk". See Shambo latest

June 15 2007 ~ The UK Government is still resisting the sensible amendments of the EU on BSE cohorts

Regulation (EC) No.1923/2006 allows Member States to permit the use of BSE cohorts until the end of their productive lives following such a request from a Member State. Permission is dependent upon a favourable risk assessment taking into account the control measures in that Member State. The TSE Roadmap http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/bse/roadmap_en.pdf
Point 2.6 :
".... The derogation to defer the culling would be the Member States' decision. This relaxation would not endanger the current level of consumer protection. A relaxation would not only reduce the economical impact but also the social consequences following the complete destruction of the cohorts being often one of the main reasons to object to the culling policy.
The answer (Hansard) given yesterday by Ben Bradshaw does not answer the question from David Drew about the "scientific rationale" behind the culling of cohorts.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the scientific rationale is for continuing to cull bovine spongiform encephalopathy cohort cattle.
Mr. Bradshaw: A Veterinary Risk Assessment (VRA), published on 21 May 2007, concluded that culling cohorts of cattle affected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) as soon as possible:
• supports the Government's challenging target of eradicating BSE in Great Britain by 2010;
• promotes consumer confidence in UK beef; and
• avoids the need for expensive additional control measures to monitor cohorts."
How much scientific rationale (as opposed to financial and political consideration) underpins the Veterinary Risk assessment (pdf new window) may be seen by reading the relevant pages. Indeed, the conclusions of the "risk assessment" seem to be driven more by considerations of "additional expense" and trying to prop up confidence in the government's policy (or "consumer confidence in UK beef") than on scientific veterinary risk assessment. One wonders if Ben Bradshaw has actually read any of the relevant documents in full or questioned the answers DEFRA gives him on such important issues.

15 June 2007 ~ ... the murky world of international trafficking, animal cruelty, black magic and even cannibalism..."

Aura Sabadus' article can be read in full on the illegal meat pages Extract:
..... Sophie Leney, assistant head of the county's Trading Standards Agency tried to allay fears, claiming the trade was not a "big issue" in Norfolk. She insisted the body was involved in carrying out traceability checks on meat products whose origins may not be clearly stated on labels. A spokesman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs explained: "We continue to recognise that we can only tackle the illegal imports with a combined effort across all relevant government departments and enforcement agencies and by raising public awareness and understanding the risks."
But speaking from London, Dr Teinaz is not convinced. "Unless there are more environmental health officers to enforce the law and to produce a co-ordinated approach to tackling food crime, Britain will remain exposed to all sorts of diseases and the Government could be accused of indirectly allowing this to happen," he concluded.
Professor Hugh Pennington is quoted in the article
".... Consumers are exposed to some health risks that they are not used to. The trade involves some products that are not subject to any proper checks and there is the important issue of detecting the products as well as finding the right evidence to stand the cases up in court."

15 June 2007 ~ The Tenant Farmers Association has rejected Defra's latest plans on animal health and welfare policy

According to the Farmers' Guardian the chairman of the Tenant Farmers Association, Reg Haydon,
" believes the consultation document start with completely the wrong assumption that costs are not already shared between the Government and industry. Speaking at the Royal Cornwall Show, he said:
"The costs of complying with regulations, regular testing, under-compensation for animals taken for disease control purposes and consequential loss are all borne by the industry but do not appear to be recognised by Defra. Any policy must start from the reality that there is already significant cost sharing between Government and industry and that applying further costs on the industry is not justified."
Dr Roger Breeze's paper on the same subject of cost sharing is well worth reading: ".... Industry cannot negotiate meaningfully if its "negotiation" comments are only responses to proposals and goals of the government...." and he proposes that the government should meet agreed "Performance Benchmarks" if farmers share costs for a responsibility retained by the government.

13 June 2007 ~ "We are committed to learning any lessons," says Ben Bradshaw

Yesterday, Mr Bradshaw gave a written Ministerial statement on "events since the recent case of low pathogenic avian influenza near Corwen in North Wales". He said, "..... The WAG (Welsh Assembly Government) intend to lift the restricted zone around the infected premises in Corwen on 15 June which is the required period of 21 days following the completion of preliminary cleansing and disinfection. Once we have completed our tracings and testing, we intend to publish an epidemiological report into the origins of this disease in the next month. We are also conducting a lessons learned exercise which we hope to publish in September. We are committed to learning any lessons...." Hansard.

13 June 2007 ~ "I think we had to wait too long for the results."

The suspected case of bird flu or Newcastle Disease in Chard has been given the all-clear. We reported below that the results were due on May 31st. The wait has seemed interminable to those directly concerned. The local paper quotes the mother of the owner of the suspected premises. The page on rapid diagnosis quotes John Crowther of the Joint FAO/IAEA Programme's Animal Production and Health section on the subject of rapid diagnosis:
"The genius here is that such mobile testers can be used by anyone, with the most basic training. Even farmers could do a test and the result could immediately be processed back to a central point, like a mobile phone message. Within two years, such tests could revolutionize disease diagnosis. Ultimately the tests would be done locally by people in their own countries, making schemes much more efficient in everything including speed, costs and local knowledge."
It remains to be seen when such technology, available for at least six years and used extensively by the military, will be part of our own routine armoury against animal disease.

12/ 13 June 2007 ~Rapid diagnosis via automated multiplexing platform: "we have always known that the platform's flexibility confers benefit in other markets, such as veterinary diagnostics and the monitoring of bioterror threats such as foot and mouth"

A news release from Nanogen, Inc reports on new funding and "collaborative agreement" with Canadian agencies which include the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)
".... The purpose of the funding and collaborative agreement is to develop diagnostic tools for the detection of natural or potential bioterror threats to livestock, such as foot and mouth disease and avian flu, employing the company's NanoChip® platform ... The NanoChip® 400 is the company's second generation automated multiplexing platform....the system provides a simple, fast and cost effective means for performing molecular testing.."
( Thanks for news of this link to FMD News - a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis )

12 June 2007 ~ More coverage of EFSA's positive conclusions about bird flu vaccines

On June 6th warmwell reported on the European Food Safety Authority's opinion on currently available avian accines that
"the AI vaccines meet quality standards and are safe and effective in vaccination against AI in domestic flocks in Europe......The Panel recommended the implementation of good AI vaccination practices using safe and effective EU authorized vaccines when required by the epidemiological situation but also added that their use should be defined in advance of any potential direct AI threat..."
We are grateful to Pat Gardiner for the link to an article at cordis.europa.eu published today, which comments: "as new scientific developments and vaccination data become available, vaccination is moving more and more to the forefront as a complementary tool to control and prevent the propagation of the disease."
No mention in the article of the "nonsense" we have heard recently. One reader's MP, Steve Webb, had a letter in May from Ben Bradshaw which was still saying vaccination of birds increases the risk of spreading infection. It is a relief that EFSA is putting the record straight at last.

12 June 2007 ~ A "protecting virus" used to protect from new flu strains

See Farmers' Weekly on the work of Professor Nigel Dimmock at the University of Warwick "....Prof Dimmock's new approach developed over the last 20 years overcomes this by using an entirely new method, that uses a 'protecting virus'. This virus contains genetic material that has been altered, rendering the virus harmless and unable to spread like a normal flu virus. If it is joined in the cell by another influenza virus, it starts to reproduce at a much faster rate than the new influenza virus. This fast reproduction rate - spurred by the new flu infection - means that the new invading influenza is effectively crowded out by the 'protecting virus'. Prof Dimmock explains that this slows the progress of the new infection, prevents flu symptoms and gives the body time to develop an immune response to the harmful new invader. ..."

12 June 2007 ~ "diagnostic equipment that can be used in the field and sensitive enough to detect virus in pre-clinical cases"

Over two years ago, concern was expressed by the Royal Society's Infectious Disease in Livestock Inquiry Follow-Up Review about progress after the 2001 foot and mouth disaster. Issues that were considered " fundamental work" included :
• ... The surveillance arrangements.
• The arrangements for active Parliamentary scrutiny of the contingency plans, possibly by the Environment, Food and Rural Affair Select Committee.
• The arrangements for a wider interim review of arrangements for handling infectious diseases in livestock.
• The capture and handling of data during an outbreak.
• The completion of the various projects analysing the data from the 2001 outbreak and other research to inform the decision making process on whether pre-emptive action beyond the culling of infected premises and dangerous contacts is required to control the outbreak.
• The structure of technical input into the handling of an outbreak of an infectious disease.
• Further action to ensure that emergency vaccination is a viable option for pre-emptive action, including the validation of Non Structural Protein (NSP) tests and a better understanding of the implications of vaccination by all stakeholders.
• The development of portable RT-PCR diagnostic equipment that can be used in the field and sensitive enough to detect virus in pre-clinical cases.
• The need to ensure that animal health research is given the support it requires and is co-ordinated with support provided by research councils.
• Training, especially of farm workers and an increase in the overall number of large animal veterinarians.
The review, published in December 2004, said that the crucial challenge for Defra was to ensure that it has "brought together the many strands of its work on infectious diseases in livestock into a coherent structure".

12 June 2007 ~ "The lack of a centralised, riskbased sampling and monitoring plan has compromised the import control system..."

Whether or not the disaster of foot and mouth in 2001 was caused by imports, concerns about the effectiveness of import controls have been voiced ever since. The outbreak of H5N1 at the Bernard Matthews plant in Holton also "posed questions about import controls" to many, including Richard MacDonald, of the National Farmers' Union (BBC). The report published in March this year, by the EU's Food and Veterinary Office inspectors ( pdf report), found that in the UK, "the level of official supervision and control in the application of the veterinary legislation covering intra-Community trade" in live farm animals and animal products was inadequate, " leaving the increased potential for entry into free circulation of consignments which do not comply with EU requirements."
This month, an article in the current Veterinary Record (June 9, 2007) describes the FVO report's conclusion that there were
"shortcomings in the performance of veterinary checks and the veterinary decision on the consignment to lack of clear guidance and training of Border Inspection Post staff..." These shortcomings were "potentially serious".
Read article in full
The FVO recommended that the UK should " review the transposition of Art. 4 of Directive 91/496/EEC regarding the requirement to check all live animals entering from third countries at a BIP. To also review the implementing measures for Art. 3 of Regulation (EC) No 282/2004 regarding the authorisation to issue CVEDs, and the implementing measures for Art. 5 of Decision 97/794/EC regarding the physical checks on live animals." When the risk of animal disease and zoonoses is now so great, and when the government is so voluble on the subject of other people's "biosecurity", its own progress in some of the areas above might be thought worryingly slow.

12 June 2007 ~ "Cattle are killed anyway"

Trevor Lawson of the Badger Trust on BBC Radio 4 Farming Today on June 9th. It is all too reminiscent of the excuses during 2001 for the mass killing of animals - forgetting that the majority of these animals were healthy and very many were irreplaceable breeding stock or even pets. As an emailer writes today,"We hear depressing echoes of the deafening silence from the animal rights 'agencies' during Defra's FMD carnage, excused by the self righteous air brushing of cattle as sentinel beings, because 'they will ultimately be slaughtered'. What sort of animal lovers are these people for goodness sake?" It may perhaps be remembered that the 650000 Iraqi men, women and children estimated last July by the Lancet to have been killed by the chaos in Iraq "would have died anyway" too. Not much comfort.

12 June 2007 ~ Bluetongue has re-emerged in Germany, according to the UK's Institute for Animal Health

BBC DEFRA's "Update on European situation - stakeholder note" can be read on their website "....The 1st new case of this year [2007] has been reported in the North Rhine-Westphalia region of Germany (within existing restricted area). A cattle sentinel herd was tested throughout April and May 2007, and serological tests indicate that one of the animals became infected in this season. This may suggest that virus is once again circulating in that region. Defra continues to monitor the situation...."

11 June 2007 ~ Talk of vaccine supplies when the disease arrives is of little help - Fogging of poultry houses costs around 15p/bird annually and yet it is deadly to the H5N1 virus

Last July, we reported on Nvirox^ and other bioflavonoid based products whose "....active ingredient has been tested independently by DEFRA and found to be effective against viruses such as those causing Avian Influenza and Newcastle disease..."
A Powerpoint presentation on Nvirox can be viewed here According to the (English) manufacturers, Nvirox ingredients, mainly extracted from bitter oranges during flavour manufacture, are compliant with regulations EU 2092/91. It has no harmful allergic effects and can be bought in 250ml, 1litre, 5litre and 20litre quantities. It should be used at a 2-3% dilution with water at least weekly and preferably 3 times weekly It is "safe for personnel and stock to be present without protection" - and yet it is deadly to the H5N1 virus
Fogging poultry houses costs around 15p/bird annually

June 8 2007 ~ Farmers kept in the dark over new case of Bluetongue

We hear from a trusted source that there has been confirmation of the first "new" case of Bluetongue in Germany. The farmer writes, "Although this has not been published yet I have learned Brussels and the MS have been briefed already. Why don't they tell our farmers who should in the first place have a right to know? ...."
Bluetongue page

June 8 2007 ~ The TRACES (TRAde Control and Expert System) database was " not currently functional" on June 6th

See Hansard. Information Technology in Government is not impressive. When the TRACES electronic database indicated that there were no imports of poultry or poultry products from Hungary to the UK in the early months of 2007, DEFRA relied on this erroneous information to assert that the possibility of the introduction of H5N1 from Hungary to the UK via legal trade before and after this outbreak was "negligible" As we say below, we understand that TRACES is regarded as "hopeless" in Holland and that the Dutch government does not work with it. Neither David Miliband nor Lord Rooker referred to the Hungarian imports at the start of the Bernard Matthews scare. (See letter from Peter Ainsworth to David Miliband.) Did these DEFRA Ministers not know about the imports? Were they not told or did the Department really not know? Was the omission deliberate? With such uncertainty about the level of knowledge and expertise it is hardly surprising that faith in the competence of those who formulate policies is low.

June 8 2007 ~ Not all over. More H7N2 bird flu confirmed after Chelford market.

DEFRA says that a small non-commercial smallholding in St Helen's (Merseyside) has tested positive during the extensive tracings activity for the low pathegenic strain of avian flu after the Corwen Farm, Conwy outbreak. Although it is a low risk disease and is not thought to be a threat to human health, all the birds there will be killed whether or not they have become infected. See DEFRA website
" The 1km zone restricts the movement of poultry and eggs, additional biosecurity measures must be taken and gatherings can only take place under licence from Animal Health. No national ban on bird gatherings will be put in place. Poultry keepers within the zone will not be asked to house their birds. However, good biosecurity measures are encouraged." " Birds at the holding were purchased from the same market held in Chelford on Monday 7th May associated with the recent outbreak of H7N2 low pathogenic avian influenza in Conwy, North Wales."

June 8 2007 ~ Opposition parties in the Welsh Assembly seem to want Jane Davidson, the new Welsh rural development minister, to give the order for Shambo to be killed

However, according to the BBC a Welsh Assembly statement says: "It is important to emphasise that the legal context for this case is complex and many issues have to be taken into account. In assessing this case the Welsh Assembly Government is required to consider and comply with the European Convention of Human Rights, which protects the right to freedom of religion. ..... There is currently no timetable for the slaughter of the bullock, though the slaughter notice remains in force." The BBC report concludes, "According to temple spokesman Brother Michael, a vet has visited Shambo and declared him to be in excellent health."

June 7 2007 ~ Indonesia's fear about possible mutation of the H5N1 virus has been countered by WHO's statement that they have 'seen no evidence' of this. Not surprising....

We read in CIDRAP "Wayan Teguh Wibawan, a microbiologist from Indonesia's avian flu commission, told Reuters that the suspicions are based on preliminary results of genetic tests at laboratories in Indonesia. The amino acid structure of poultry H5N1 samples is becoming increasingly similar to that seen in human H5N1 samples." (See also Reuters report)
The World Health Organisation, however, told Reuters that the WHO has not seen any evidence that the virus has become more transmissible to humans. But, as we report below, it will be remembered that Indonesia's decision between December and mid May was to withhold human bird flu virus samples from the World Health Organization. There have now been 79 human deaths from H5N1 in Indonesia and they wanted a promise from WHO that any new specimens sent would not be used (without the country's consent) in the production of commercial vaccines - likely to be too expensive for Indonesia to buy. The Lancet defended Indonesia's approach and said the World Health Organization must find a way to help poorer countries benefit more from medical research done by rich companies.
The WHO's new resolution (See article at CIDRAP for May 23) would appear to give no such undertaking. It expects that vaccine makers "should have full access to viruses from the WHO during a public health emergency". Indonesia has sent three samples since the middle of May. (Update June 8th on www.news.com.au

June 7 2007 ~"..the origin of the H7N2 avian influenza virus that initiated the outbreak in poultry in north Wales has not yet been traced further back than the market."

Health officials say that the outbreak of H7N2 has ended. The Shropshire Star reports
"The announcement was made yesterday nearly two weeks after the disease was discovered at a farm near Corwen....Dr Marion Lyons "The risk to the health of the general public was low."
But, as the ProMed moderator points out, "...The outbreak of human disease may have ended, but the origin of the H7N2 avian influenza virus that initiated the outbreak in poultry in north Wales has not yet been traced further back than the market, where the diseased birds were purchased."
Dr Ruth Watkins says in her recent email , "I hope the investigation of the small flock at the infected holding was thorough as they might be able to answer the question of whether the virus was already present there or not. It is possible that influenza viruses from wild birds infect small free range flocks, the infected birds do not become noticeably ill and the infection dies out coming to a dead end in the small flock..." - reminding us that healthy free range flocks can be less susceptible to disease with low pathogenicity influenza virus. It will be remembered that we are no nearer knowing the source of the 2001 FMD outbreak, and the source of the H5N1 outbreak at Holton has not yet been traced either. At least theEFSA press release mentioned below suggests that "the implementation of good AI vaccination practices" is at last being seriously talked about.

June 6 2007 ~ Avian Influenza " AI vaccines meet quality standards and are safe and effective in vaccination against AI in domestic flocks in Europe." EFSA.

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) has produced an opinion on currently available avian influenza (AI) vaccines for poultry, such as chickens and ducks. According to the Panel's experts,
"the AI vaccines meet quality standards and are safe and effective in vaccination against AI in domestic flocks in Europe......The Panel recommended the implementation of good AI vaccination practices using safe and effective EU authorized vaccines when required by the epidemiological situation but also added that their use should be defined in advance of any potential direct AI threat. In terms of any potential human health impact of the animal vaccines, the Panel noted that the use of authorized EU vaccines is safe and has no negative effect on poultry products for consumers..... According to the Panel, in order to be able to differentiate between vaccinated birds and those that are infected by a field virus, the DIVA[5] strategy, combined with the use of sentinel birds in order to detect possible AI transmission after vaccination, must be employed to allow the detection of a possibly circulating field strain. However, more research and (field) validation are required to optimise the DIVA strategy."
See EFSA press release today.

June 5 2007 ~ "There are many Ministers who will not envy what will, no doubt, be one of Mrs Davidson's first jobs, and that is dealing with the issue of the TB-infected Skanda Vale bullock..."

It is odd that someone of the stature of Gareth Vaughan, president of the Farmers' Union of Wales, should - in such a peremptory tone in the Western Mail today - both assume and assert that Shambo is definitely "infected" and add to the voices calling for his death. All visual evidence suggests that the bullock is very healthy indeed. The test which DEFRA used to condemn him is erratic in its accuracy. The FUW might more helpfully be calling for better testing under the supervision of experts - but Mr Vaughan writes," I have made the position of the FUW clear. We expect the animal concerned to be treated as any other would under domestic and EC law, in order to minimise all risk of bovine TB transmission. If the law is not upheld in this case, it will undermine the credibility of the entire TB control regime."
Many would argue that the credibility of the "entire TB control regime" is already in tatters. Trying to force the issue at Skanda Vale seems an illogical way to proceed. Killing a bullock, kept in isolation, is hardly going to " minimise all risk of bovine TB transmission." Mr Vaughan simply wants him to be killed so that other human victims of the policy feel better.

June 5 2007 ~ Bovine TB - the whole system needs an overhaul from people on the ground (not the centre of London) who know what they are doing - but it seems that farmers are on their own

Few would argue that, with the UK now sustaining one of the highest incidences of TB in the EU (EU data), there needs one of the highest incidences of TB in the EU (EU data), there needs to be a radical rethink - with the re-thinking done preferably by those with some knowledge of the subject and of the technology now available to help. The bovinetb.blogspot comments that "Realistic 'supervision' can only come from the experienced Wildlife team operatives, operating out of Aston Down in Glos., and Polwhele in Cornwall and under direction from local AHO offices" but that last spring Defra,
"...sacked most of the Wildlife teams capable of operating or even overseeing such a policy. Hence the veiled comment in the Times report, (aka John Bourne?) that any such policy would "involve significant cost to the farming industry". We read this that 'farmers' are on their own. And if they succeed then government will say it was preMT (Pre movement testing) wot did it. But if they fail ... well it'll be all our fault. Either way 'government' look to be on the point of handing over to individual farmers via a licensing system, control of a serious, notifiable zoonotic disease - the first country in the western world to do so.
And we call that a shameful abdication of responsibility."
Mrs Jane Davidson, the new Welsh Minister for Sustainability and Rural Development, will have to be an expert in "multi-tasking". Her brief includes climate change, sustainable development, environment, energy and planning in addition to everything to do with agriculture. Rather a plateful for a former Education and Lifelong Learning Minster.

June 5 2007 ~ WHO report on H7N2 in Wales

"Following the confirmation on 25 May 2007 by Health Authorities of the United Kingdom, of influenza A/H7N2 virus infection in four individuals (two in Wales and two in north-west England) exposed to infected poultry at smallholding, Corwen Farm, Conwy, Wales, the National Public Health Service (NPHS) for Wales is continuing with the investigation of the incident and with the implementation of public health measures. For more information .."

June 4 2007 ~ "hundreds of independent farm stores are springing up, seeking to provide an alternative and cash in on shoppers' desire to be closer to the land.."

Reuters "..."The prices of locally sourced products tend to be slightly higher than imported products, but being able to tell the provenance of food is important to consumers today," said Andrew Richards, senior policy advisor at the National Farmers' Union. "And when you twin that with the need to combat climate change, then you have a case for a local food store that cuts food miles and supports local farmers."

June 4 2007 ~ H7N2 " ... I think the authorities have behaved well over this H7N2 outbreak, the measures taken were proportionate."

An email from Dr Ruth Watkins (farmer and virologist) defends DEFRA's handling of the H7N2 outbreak. She has some interesting points to make:
".. the period between purchase and slaughter was 7 to 24 of May so that is 17 days. It reflects badly on farming that the man selling the birds has not come forward, but perhaps he was not a farmer.
I have seen people buying chickens out of cardboard boxes for instance at the Royal Welsh when a known poultry breeder is exhibiting and brings extra stock to sell. Of course, who they were would be known.
I think the authorities have behaved well over this H7N2 outbreak; the measures taken were proportionate. It always takes a little longer to get a negative result as on the second holding that had a connection with the market, as culture would be done as well as RT-PCR.
I hope the investigation of the small flock at the infected holding was thorough - as they might be able to answer the question of whether the virus was already present there or not.
It is possible that influenza viruses from wild birds infect small free range flocks, (but) the infected birds do not become noticeably ill and the infection dies out coming to a dead end in the small flock.
One would never know of its presence unless susceptible birds that developed disease were brought in- the Rhode Island Reds could have been in fairly poor condition and have been more susceptible to disease with the low pathogenicity influenza virus (rather reminiscent of Norfolk when it was the intensively reared birds that became ill - not the free range flock) As far as I can gather it is the brought in birds that were unwell and not the resident birds on the small holding."
More

June 4 2007 ~ " It is hoped that as these vaccines are rolled out around the world, that at last this damaging disease can be brought under control."

PMWS is now endemic in UK pigs. We hear from Mike Meredith http://www.pighealth.com of a significant breakthrough in control of the PMWS (Post-weaning Multisystemic Wasting Syndrome (aka PCVAD - "Porcine Circovirus Associated Disease"). The recent 2007 American Association of Swine Practitioners (AASP) meeting revealed that new porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) vaccines have an outstanding protective effect on reducing mortality associated with the disease.
Full review papers of these new developments, illustrated with photographs & graphs, are available now on the Octagon Services website: http://www.octagon-services.co.uk/articles/PCV2control.htm (opens in new window) and http://www.octagon-services.co.uk/articles/PCVAD.htm (new window)
"The reduction of viraemia, both in percentage of pigs affected and in viraemic levels, following vaccination were highlighted in the papers given at the AASV conference....When an animal/man is infected by that organism and the disease is caused, the proof is termed fulfilling 'Koch's postulates'. Now, the N. Americans have demonstrated a 'converse postulate', by using a vaccine against an organism and preventing the disease developing. It is hoped that as these vaccines are rolled out around the world, that at last this damaging disease can be brought under control."

June 4 2007 ~ Mass cull of badgers - healthy or not - could now be on the cards

The Telegraph reports that "Ministers are considering lifting the ban following a report by the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB, to be published on June 15, which will conclude that a mass cull over a large area could help." David Miliband is said to be in favour even though he recognises that "the public may be outraged". We see once again, as in the Shambo case, the polarised positions taken by those who are sick and tired of doing their best to protect their cows while the disease rages unchecked in wildlife - and those who understandably hate the prospect of the mass killing of a mammal who has always seemed so attractive to non-farmers.
However, there is a vaccine that has been shown to work. See below. and we are left once again wondering why - if the trials are successful and the vaccine found to be safe and effective - it has to "take at least 5 years before the vaccine could be administered to the general badger population outside the lab through microcapsules mixed with peanuts."
There are also rapid on-site diagnostic tests to determine whether badger setts are infected or not. See press release from Warwick university "without technology such as this its is very difficult to differentiate "clean" setts containing uninfected badgers from "problem setts" containing infected badgers."
Until it can be adequately explained why neither of these options is being used in the UK we will remain baffled. The irreconcilable positions of the pro- and anti- cull camps look set to continue - as does the spread of bovine TB.

June 3 2007 ~ "The new product is the first FMD vaccine produced in the U.S....it could allow the federal government to plan a strategic stockpile in case of an outbreak".

Like the UK, the US has been reluctant to make vaccination part of any prevention policy for foot and mouth. Now we read at www.heartlandcoop.com that a new vaccine, developed in the US by "Agricultural Research Service scientists, the Department of Homeland Security, and a U.S. biopharmaceutical company", is "proving effective in tests" on cattle and pigs, apparently showing effectiveness within seven days. Immunity is retained for at least 21 days and scientists expect that "more studies will shows at least the six months of immunity provided by current vaccines in cattle and swine."
ARS Administrator Edward B. Knipling is quoted: ""This signals tremendous promise. Although this is still an experimental vaccine, it has made significant developmental progress, and we are optimistic about its prospects."
See fuller report this morning (Sunday) at www.fmd-and-csf-action.org (new window)

June 3 2007 ~ "The results were due yesterday, (Thursday, May 31) but are now expected on Monday."

The suspected outbreak of bird flu or Newcastle disease in Chard is reported in Chard Minster News DEFRA is reported to have said that the long delay in diagnosis is " because laboratory officials are still stretched by a confirmed outbreak of bird flu in North Wales."
The owner concerned said "I've got about 20 hens in isolation in a barn. They are showing respiratory distress - coughing and sneezing - but they are not sick enough to be put down."
In an emergency, a wait of more than five days to diagnose disease could well be catastrophic. DEFRA policy is that until test results are available no restrictions are placed on the movement of people or animals to and from suspected premises. A DEFRA spokesman is reported as saying, "We carry out about 20 tests for suspected avian flu in the Somerset area every year. At this stage, there is nothing to raise concerns."
Those who cannot understand why rapid diagnostic equipment is not being used in the UK might not agree that there is nothing here to "raise concerns". (See also below)

June 3 2007 ~ "the basic flaw of not calculating the effects of wind on GM pollen..."

June 2 2007 ~ Bovine TB: "while we do everything to minimise the risk on our farm from cattle-to-cattle contamination, nothing is being done to eradicate the spread from wildlife to cattle.."

Yesterday's Stackyard article is sobering. So is an email from yet another closed herd farm yesterday: "....We've just gone down with TB which we are disputing after 2 inconclusives followed by a positive blood test. ... If we do turn out to have TB then this will be yet another case of a closed herd coming into contact with badgers." The Stackyard article emphasises the suffering incurred by the whole herd - and by the badgers themselves.
(Harrowing pictures below also show the real misery of TB in badgers.)
On the subject of recent badger vaccine trials, we are left once again wondering why - if the trials are successful and the vaccine found to be safe and effective - it has to "take at least 5 years before the vaccine could be administered to the general badger population outside the lab through microcapsules mixed with peanuts." Why so long when the situation is so desperate? (More today on bovine TB page)
A leaked email publicised by the Daily Mail on May 29th does make one wonder whether there could be some truth in Sean Poulter's article "The secret plans to turn us all vegetarian". Meanwhile, the voices raised from justifiably angry farmers for the death of the bullock Shambo might be more usefully raised in demands for a humane UK animal health policy - one that stops dragging its feet over available vaccination and, in the case of TB, the accurate testing of badger setts, so that a solution need not involve the random killing of healthy animals.

May 30 2007 ~ US: Rapid diagnosis mobile laboratory to offer a rapid diagnosis for animal diseases like avian influenza, foot and mouth disease

To respond more quickly to potentially dangerous animal health emergencies, the Department of Agriculture has begun using a new mobile laboratory. As part of the Pennsylvania Animal Diagnostic Laboratory System, the mobile laboratory has a bio-safety Level-3 (BSL-3) containment space, meaning its air handling system prevents the escape of any pathogens that could endanger humans or animals. In addition, it is equipped with a showering facility, bio-safety cabinets, refrigerators and freezers, and decontamination equipment. The laboratory is being fitted with other testing instruments to offer a rapid diagnosis for other animal diseases like avian influenza, foot and mouth disease or mad cow disease, among others.
( Thanks for this link to FMD News - a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis ) FULL TEXT: http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,113793.shtml

May 30 2007 ~ H7N2 outbreak. No virus at the farm on the Llyn penisular - test result took three days to appear..

CIDRAP News (Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy) reported the negative test result yesterday May 29th three days after the tests were carried out. Three days for a result to be publicised seems somewhat long - especially when, as Dr Roger Breeze noted over a year ago
"The means to detect on the farm has got even better since 2001 - it did not disappear just because responsible officials had their heads in the sand hoping it would go away..."
".....the imminent availability (2006) of a test cassette format (the machine has been on the market for some time) that will allow a sample from a single animal to be tested by real time PCR for up to 12 disease pathogens simultaneously in about 20 minutes (this is known as multiplex testing). This machine is about the size of a small loaf of bread and operates when slung over the shoulder or in a moving vehicle. It is ideally suited for investigative use on farm or at the site of the dead swan. The PCR tests, cassette format and device are state of the art for the U.S. military on land, sea or air, or underwater ...." Read in full
The latest news today from Reuters gives an example of the big devices now being tested for use in hospitals. "We detected and correctly identified 92 mammalian and avian influenza isolates, representing 30 different H and N types, including 29 avian H5N1 isolates," Reuters But there are several portable "plug and play" machines, such as those described below by Dr Breeze, to be found and viewed on the internet. This Applied Biosystems page is an interesting example. In over 30 countries, the TaqMan® Influenza A/H5 Detection Kit Version 1.0 is being used to detect the Influenza A virus and identify the H5 subtype from a variety of sample types.
When an outbreak could have such grave consequences it seems more and more irresponsible of the UK not to be telling us whether or not it is using the best possible means of testing, diagnosis and surveillance.

May 30 2007 ~ Dr. Marion Lyons : "Investigations also show that, when it spreads from person to person, the illness experienced becomes milder."

CIDRAP News quotes Dr Lyons who is the Lead Consultant in Communicable Disease Control for the National Public Health Service for Wales.
Today, a ProMed moderator said (CP) :" There is no unequivocal evidence to suggest that the H7N2 virus exhibits an enhanced ability to spread from person to person..
CIDRAP news quotes other experts, who say the focus on the H5N1 subtype's pandemic potential is justified. "We know that H7 can cause outbreaks in chickens and that it can occasionally jump the species barrier, but it has not done it nearly to the extent of the H5N1 virus," said Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
David Halvorson, DVM, a veterinarian in avian health at the University of Minnesota in St Paul, told CIDRAP News that H5 and H7 subtypes both have the ability to generate a highly pathogenic virus of the same subtype, but there's no way to project when and if such evolution will occur."

May 30 2007 ~ E-petition to scrap the fallen stock disposal scheme and reinstate on farm burial as a green initiative.

Deadline to sign up by: 17 June 2007 Signature total stood at 221 on Tuesday evening. The ban on the burial of fallen stock on farms has resulted in the expensive and compulsory to-ing and fro-ing of lorries carrying dead livestock. This is far more of a danger than the immediate burial on the farm by the farmer of animals that die there. See warmwell's fallen stock scheme pages The rationale for the ban was the fear that scrapie might mask BSE which in turn might be linked to vCJD. As we note below, the government's own spongiform encephalopathy advisory committee (SEAC) conceded that the chances of BSE being present in the sheep flock are as close to zero as it is possible to measure and this quiet admission was reported in Hansard in January. The NSP has cost taxpayers at least £100 million and the reason for the ban on on-farm burial no longer exists, and yet - ludicrously - the ban continues.

May 29 2007 ~ "a reminder that the next flu pandemic could be sparked by a virus other than the feared H5N1 strain..."

In spite of the downplaying of the H7N2 outbreak, it is good to see an Associated Press article implying that we should be using the current problem as a dry run for what could be a very serious emergency. The AP quotes World Health Organization bird flu expert Dr. Michael Perdue who says
"There may be a bit of complacency when it comes to recognizing the pandemic potential of H7 viruses. Here, we're talking about a small number of birds and yet we still have four cases. Unless there's something unusual about the contact with birds, that suggests the virus is finding new ways of getting into humans"
The UK's patchy surveillance and apparent lack of random sampling, the reluctance to use protective vaccination ( or encourage research, development and validation. see for example the potential of the findings at journals.cambridge.org ) and above all, the apparent refusal to use available rapid diagnotic technology must surely all now be urgently looked at and reviewed.
We continue to find it utterly bewildering that the very technology that can protect animal and human health is so ignored for what appears to be economic or political pressures.
As Dr Purdue says, "If you have an H7 virus causing mild symptoms, that might give the virus the chance to reassort into a more dangerous virus before anybody notices." In the very real likelihood of a pandemic - since humans simply do not have antibodies to cope with a reassorted virus strain - we should be inspiring trust and cooperation by proving that we can get on top of an outbreak such as the present one with all the tools available and with everybody concerned kept properly informed with accurate information. We have still not, for example, seen any report of the results of testing at the holding on the Llyn Peninsula, Gwynedd. Can anyone enlighten us as to the results? By Tuesday evening (Channel 4) health officials were saying that 221 people may have been in contact with the virus.

May 29 2007 ~ "It's not right these animals should be killed. They are breeding cows. They aren't to be sent for the human food chain."

The continuing sorry story of Gary Newburn's cows, doomed by DEFRA because they were sedated, apparently under Trading Standard's supervision on behalf of DEFRA, with drugs that must not enter the human food chain. DEFRA is now deaf, as it was with Harriet, to the argument that killing a healthy animal not destined for human consumption, makes no sense when the rationale for killing is that it must not enter the food chain.See today's Halifax Courier and, for the earlier report, see below.

UPDATE July 14th 2007 The row continues. The unfortunate cows remain alive. It is still contended that the drugs used were " used every day and perfectly legal" - but DEFRA continues to insist - in spite of the fact that Mr Newburn has told Defra he is prepared to have the cattle tested or mark their passports to ensure they do not enter the food chain - that the cows should be killed. The Halifax Courier has the story.

May 28 2007 ~ While officialdom is full of reassurance, the latest H7N2 bird flu outbreak does not reassure us.

ITV news quotes Dr Marion Lyons: "We believe the risk to the health of the general public is low." The human symptoms may well be mild but H7 passes more easily to humans than H5, and low pathogenicity A-type avian influenza strains of the H5 and H7 type are noted for their ability to transform into highly pathogenic counterparts. A pandemic can start when a novel A-type virus, to which almost no one has natural immunity, emerges and begins spreading. 36 people so far have been identified as being possible contacts and eleven of them have symptoms of a flu-like illness or conjunctivitis. It is looking as though infected patients may have contracted the virus from another person rather than poultry although, according to the Public Health Service for Wales, there is not yet laboratory confirmation of such human-to-human transmission.
Finding the source of potentially serious disease outbreaks is vitally important - and virtually impossible where surveillance is patchy even where it is happening and where there is no rapid on-site diagnostic testing going on. If sources and contacts can't be quickly tracked down and a vaccination policy is not in place either, transmission will flourish and the disease will spread. What's more, when testing relies on the responsibility of the owner of a dead bird to pay for a vet to arrange a test, disease is going inevitably to be missed. As Dr Ruth Watkins wrote in February, testing for avian influenza should be part of a standard protocol - but an effective active surveillance programme, with targeted sampling of poultry, should be going on anyway.
DEFRA is still perceived, by many of the very people whose willing cooperation matters most, as being weak in management skill and competence yet highly jealous of its power to control and command, hostile to criticism and capable of intimidation. It's hardly surprising that a registration system offering no incentives for cooperation is feared more than trusted ("We know where you and your animals live") but in the interests of effective surveillance this needs urgent revision ( as described below) so that the testing of both birds and humans can be quickly carried out in an emergency.

May 27 2007 ~ A 2nd possible case on the Llyn Peninsula, Gwynedd,

about 35 miles away from the Conwy smallholding, was under scrutiny on Saturday, with birds being tested because of links to the market. See ProMed posting and its moderator comment ".....The market which is regarded as their common infection origin is in Cheshire, demonstrating the potential of wide-scale spread of diseases through animal markets. And, it is reminiscent of the foot and mouth disease (FMD) virus spread through sheep traded in UK markets in February 2001." And he repeats the comment made below about private sales without identification or inspection "Seems deserving a thought" he adds.

May 26 2007 ~ misleading claim that the "source" of the H7N2 outbreak has been "destroyed" appears on Sky News

Sky News quotes Dr Marion Lyons, Consultant in Communicable Disease Control at the NPHS for Wales. She makes the extraordinary statement:
"The source of the outbreak of illness is clearly identified as the chickens on the smallholding. These have all been culled so the original source has been destroyed."
How can such an assertion pass without protest? Can Dr Lyons seriously be suggesting that the hens on the smallholding in Corwen, brought in from Chelford Market, Cheshire on 7 May, became infected in isolation; that the virus appeared in them and nowhere else and that killing these hens therefore kills the source of the infection? It is quite extraordinary that such a claim should have been made.
At least Wales's chief vet, Dr Christianne Glossop, is quoted by the BBC as saying it was a "top priority" to find the source of the disease.
Once again, as with the FMD outbreak and the H5N1 Holton outbreak, this is easier said than done. We now discover that there is no traceable paperwork about the infected birds. They were apparently bought from a private dealer at Chelford Market. One can only agree in despair with the comment that accompanies this information: " I find it quite incredible that after everything that has happened with regard to avian notifiable diseases in the past few years, auctioneers allow private sales out of the back of a van to go on at their premises on a sale day without any formal identification or inspection."
Once again, and contrary to Ben Bradshaw's complacent words below, we are witnessing a lack of leadership, failure of communication and lack of preparedness that could prove catastrophic when our luck runs out.

May 26 2007 ~ A mutually beneficial system of livestock registration is urgently needed - Four human cases of mild bird flu confirmed.

Nine people having connections with the Welsh farm where H7N2 bird flu was confirmed have been tested and four have tested positive for the H7N2 strain of the virus. The Welsh health authorities say that one of the cases may have been transmitted from person to person. Although we read (www.wtopnews.com) that "Officials are now following up all close contacts of the people who were ill as a precaution..." it is not going to be easy for other close human contacts to be traced.
The government wants a centrally controlled database, saying that it would be too costly to insist on the registration of those having fewer than 50 birds.
In the paper for the OIE Making better use of technological advances to meet stakeholder needs by Mary Marshall, Paul Roger and John Bashiruddin, (available online at: www.oie.int/eng/publicat/RT/2501/PDF/20-marshall233-251.pdf ) we read
"Currently, there is a perception amongst many livestock keepers that registration with the government will be a fast track to slaughter in the event of a disease outbreak......The authors therefore suggest a mutually beneficial system of livestock registration, in which owners could choose to register with the government or a private veterinary scheme. Those who register their livestock with the government would:
• have access to rapid diagnostic testing as soon as suspicious clinical signs are reported. If their animals test negative for the presence of antibodies against the disease, they would have the option of vaccination or quarantine, subject to further testing;
• be able to have their livestock vaccinated if vaccination is authorised (eliminating complicated schemes of rare breeds requiring a specific number of breeding males and females to be eligible for vaccination);
• be able to have their livestock slaughtered at a pre-agreed rate of compensation.
  Those who register with a private veterinary practice or group would have the option of quarantine and testing in an outbreak, but at their own expense, possibly through an annual insurance agreement," Read this section in full
The suggestions in the paper surely deserve close consideration. Easily accessed regionally kept registers of poultry would also make sense. It is not going to be easy for first response officials to take action in a real emergency if the only information is in a vast and incomplete database controlled by DEFRA. Information Technology has had a poor record at Whitehall. In 2001 for example, there was data for up to 500 foot and mouth disease infected premises still missing from the disease control system database until 18th December. (see warmwell summary)

May 25 2007 ~ "It's farcical. It makes it impossible for us farmers to even question what they are doing. They are bloodthirsty vigilantes who want rid of the cattle."

SVS ( aka Animal Health ) condemns 7 cows not intended for the human food chain. In what the farmer concerned calls "bullying tactics on the part of Defra" 7 healthy cows are now doomed to an untimely slaughter because the SVS state claim "an illegal substance" was used to sedate them. Immobilon was used on 3 cows and Rompun on the other four cows intended solely for breeding. They were sedated after four months of fending for themselves after escaping their farm. It was an operation actually overseen by Trading Standards on DEFRA's behalf . If the farmer does not slaughter the seven cows by midnight tonight (Friday) they will be killed by officials. The farmer is reported by the Halifax Courier "It's farcical. It makes it impossible for us farmers to even question what they are doing. They are bloodthirsty vigilantes who want rid of the cattle." The farmer , who says he is prepared to have the cattle tested and have their animal passports and tags marked to ensure they are never killed for meat, was told the news at 3pm on Tuesday. This gave him only four days in which to appeal - if he could afford to - to the High Court. It seems very likely that the SVS is unaware of legislation that exempts cows not destined for human consumption from this unnecessary slaughter. The new name given to the SVS vets looks as inappropriate as ever.

May 24 2007 ~ The strain identified is H7N2 low pathogenic avian influenza. Free range birds are not being moved indoors.

The 30 remaining birds on the farm are being slaughtered today. DEFRA says that "GB and Wales contingency plans have been activated .....the farm has been placed under restriction and a 1km restriction zone has been placed around the infected premises. Within this zone, birds and bird products cannot be moved, bird gatherings can only take place under licence from Animal Health..."
See latest Guardian report ".... chickens had been dying at the North Wales smallholding over the past two weeks. Fifteen 22-week-old Rhode Island chickens were bought by the smallholding two weeks ago, bringing their total number of birds to 45 chickens and two geese. But one of the birds died the day after they were taken to the site, and by May 17, 10 birds were dead, all from the new group of chickens." The Guardian quotes Dr Christine Glossop: "We are not yet asking bird keepers within the zone to bring their birds indoors."
The smallholding is north of the town of Corwen in Denbighshire but is actually in the county of Conwy.
The 15 Rhode Island Red chickens were brought onto the holding on May 8th. Samples were first sent for testing on 17 May after the tenth bird from the new hens had died.

May 24 2007 ~ Tests are being carried out on dead birds in north Wales over fears of a possible bird flu outbreak.

Latest news ( Reuters around noon) is that the Welsh assembly is saying merely
"We are investigating a notifiable disease in birds at a location in North Wales. Reports are not confirmed and tests are ongoing,"
A spokesman said the suspected outbreak was at a farm but gave no further details and declined to describe the symptoms of the sick birds or say whether they resembled bird flu.
We should be grateful to know if rapid on-site equipment is being used as a preliminary and vital first step - or whether, as before. samples are, as a first measure, being sent to the laboratory which will inevitably involve a wait of at least 24 hours. As for plans for vaccination, should a high pathogenic strain of virus be confirmed, a correspondent tells us, "the final vaccination special working party meeting is on June 21. They have been so slow ..."
We find all this incredible given Mr Bradshaw's complacent words below.
The Chief Vet (Wales) is to make a statement to the Welsh Assembly this afternoon.

May 23 2007 ~ Canada is stockpiling avian flu vaccines for poultry "vaccine would be something that might be used to be more effective and dampen down the opportunity for the disease to spread"

CTV.ca " The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has purchased five million doses apiece of poultry vaccines against H5 and H7 avian influenza viruses as a hedge against a possible outbreak of H5N1 or another highly pathogenic strain in domestic flocks. ... Dr. Jim Clark, the national manager of the agency's avian influenza working group: "If there was an inability to control the disease using traditional stamping out methods, vaccine would be something that might be used to be more effective and dampen down the opportunity for the disease to spread so that we had an opportunity to get ahead of it." Clark said..."

May 22 2007 ~ UK's unilateral decision to kill BSE cohorts - "This time they can't blame it on Brussels."

We question the scientific basis for the " veterinary"risk assessment which has chosen to endorse the continued killing BSE cohorts in spite of the fact that European regulations were amended to allow Member States to apply for derogation status. (This would permit keepers the use of cohorts until the end of their productive lives). The risk assessment appears to take more notice of convenience and economic factors than any veterinary or scientific ones - and of course allows DEFRA to continue to assert that its policy, so deplored by so many, is not flawed.
Yet Harriet's post mortem, it will be remembered, tested negative for BSE - but if DEFRA had had its way she would have been forcibly slaughtered when 22 officials descended on her field on October 9th - only to be met by the protesting mob - comprising an elderly couple, 4 middle-aged women and 2 middle-aged men - whose courage was endorsed by the Reverend Pat Pinkerton, the MP Mark Harper and many others. Even Conservative MP Anne Widdecombe signed a petition to help save Harriet and said, "If she will never enter the food chain, then it seems to me reasonable to keep her alive."
The killing of BSE cohorts would not be an issue if it had ever been proved that a) BSE really does have a link with vCJD and b) that those cattle who grew up with a cow subsequently developing BSE really were likely to be similarly infected. No such proof has ever been found.
Farmers Weekly today claims that "BSE monitoring has indicated that cohorts have a significantly higher level of BSE infection than normal healthy slaughtered cattle." Does this refer to the European Union's BSE monitoring programme between 2003 and 2005? If so the EU evidently does not share this view now.(See also the sympathetic email from Brussels received on November 22 2006 from a policy adviser at the European Parliament.) The "monitoring" has never, to our knowledge, been used as an argument to support such killing in answer to PQs. As the reader who directed us to the Farmers Weekly link remarks, "This time they can't blame it on Brussels."

May 22 2007 ~ " robust and tested disease control plans"?

In a technological age and in a country with high levels of resources, expertise and infrastructure, not to be using the benefits of technology in the fight against animal disease is simply extraordinary. We have Ben Bradshaw talking about "robust and tested disease control plans and instructions in place to address an outbreak of avian influenza" (Hansard 18th May) but what is "robust" about a plan in which the virus cannot be contained by vaccination? Its use as a preventative measure is still prohibited by the UK government. Emergency vaccination procedures are still vague - and vaccination itself still made difficult for farmers because of continuing OIE trade rules. The rapid on-site diagnostic equipment that would ensure that culling is carried out only where necessary is still not even mentioned.
"Tested" the plan may have been but it was luck rather than judgement that kept the virus contained. There are still many outstanding questions about the Bernard Matthews outbreak.
The source is still unknown and a lack of tact towards Hungary strained relations just at the time when full cooperation was needed. Questions continue to hang over the responsibility for the outbreak, many are unhappy about the £589,356.89 (sic) compensation and wondering about the reasons - possibly pressure - for the lack of any prosecution or enquiry. The difficulties endured by free-range poutry owners around Holton must not be conveniently forgotten.
EU rules continue to stipulate that the 3 kilometre quarantine zone around any infected area must be backed up by a further 10 km surveillance zone in which healthy animals including free-range poultry must be kept indoors and not be moved anywhere except to a slaughterhouse. The "absurdly unscientific misinformation about why we cannot use vaccination..." (Booker) continues to be used by Ben Bradshaw to justify the UK stance but emails from UK virologists shows this stance to be wholly unjustified.

May 21 2007 ~ "perfect efficacy result" in trials of H5N1 flu vaccine

See The Age (Australia) "Pharmaceutical company Imugene Ltd has achieved a perfect efficacy result in recent trials of its bird flu vaccine. The Australian company has on Monday announced that 100 per cent of broiler chickens included in a trial of the avian influenza drug survived exposure to the deadly H5N1 virus. The first dose of the drug was injected into the eggs of the trial group, and an oral booster was then given when the chickens were seven days old. The birds were then exposed to a highly pathogenic Asian strain of the H5N1 avian influenza virus, with all showing no signs of the disease. Seven out of eight unvaccinated chickens died when exposed to the virus as part of the trial, which took place in the United States....
".....we have proven that Imugene's vaccine works when administered orally as well as when injected into chicken eggs and that we can protect birds from a young age. ..... Dr Lamb refused to speculate as to when the drug would appear on the market, but said Imugene was looking to licence the technology to one of the major animal health companies. Imugene is developing two vaccines, one for broiler or meat producing birds, and the other for breeding and egg layer birds.... "
See more detail at www.imugene.com/products_avian_flu.asp (new window) and warmwell's bird flu vaccination pages

May 19 2007 ~ FMD continues to threaten the FMD disease-free areas of Europe.

For those who have not seen it, here is the link for the Foot & mouth disease - Worldwide: update on ProMed. Extract:
"In particular, in the past 3 months [Feb - Apr 2007] there have been separate outbreaks of 2 FMD serotypes (O and A) in Turkey close to the borders of Greece and Bulgaria. The 1st of these outbreaks (serotype A: Iran 05 lineage)...
For Europe and Asia, the issue of greatest concern is the emergence of a highly transmissible lineage of the PanAsia strain of serotype O which has spread from India to the east, north and west causing recent epidemics in a number of countries in the Middle East. This picture somewhat mirrors that seen prior to 2000-2002 when another O PanAsia strain spread into several normally FMD-free countries including Taiwan, Japan, South Africa, UK, France, Netherlands and South Korea. ..."

May 19 2007 ~In 2000 the then CVO, Jim Scudamore, wrote a warning memo about "lack of progress on contingency planning exercises", lack of staff training and his worries about the "capability of the government's agents to deal with outbreaks of disease, in particular their ability to investigate the origin and spread".

In spite of hindsight and some progress, his concerns still seem relevant today. In 2001 the contiguous cull policy was instigated after the disease was already in decline. Had Mr Scudamore's letter been taken seriously and adequate preparations made, it is unlikely that there would have been the panicky reliance on mathematic models in 2001 resulting in so much unnecessary killing, waste and heartache.
As Dr Alex Donaldson's submission to the Lessons Learned Inquiry said,
" An average infection to confirmation period of 8 days had been used by the modellers but this had been a gross over-simplification since several cycles of infection with incubation periods ranging from 2 to 14 days had been possible.The epidemic had been in decline by the time of the introduction of the contiguous cull policy on 29 March. (In a publication by Keeling and co-authors, it was stated that the epidemic peaked on 26 March with 54 outbreaks per day.).."

May 17 2007 ~ Does the Dutch research really advocate culling pigs in any FMD outbreak rather than vaccinating?

This week, Dutch research by Karin Orsel has been reported as suggesting that
"the culling of pigs at production sites is more efficient to prevent an outbreak from spreading than vaccinating when the pressure of infection is very high"
There seems to be no English translation of the CIDC-Lelystad news release but a quick skim of the Dutch suggests that the research is more concerned about dosage than with dismissing vaccination. By quoting only the first part of the statement above, the website www.pigprogress.net gives the impression that culling instead of vaccination is "better" in any outbreak. The article does at least quote Aldo Dekker, from the Dutch Central Insititute for Animal Disease Control in Lelystad, who says that the result in pigs is related to a high pressure of infection, and that "When there is a lower dosage of virus, the vaccine can protect pigs as well".
Dr Ruth Watkins makes clear in a brief email that it is in the high density intensive systems that the virus aerosol produced by pigs (greater certainly than other species) can cause such problems but when the mother sow is fully vaccinated the piglets will be protected by the mother's antibodies. They too should then be vaccinated as early as possible.
"I don't think there is anything new or any reason to be perturbed by the pig article. It is unfortunate that vaccination in intensive rearing conditions does not work so well especially in piglets...it is a bonus that a highly potent vaccine has been developed for FMD effective after one dose." Read email
In the EU, even after the catastrophe of FMD 2001, the preference for slaughter instead of vaccination seems to be hard to shift. Its rarely mentioned cause is the economic value of the "FMD-free without vaccination" status.
The justification for this trade restriction rests upon a mistaken and discredited idea: that meat from vaccinated animals is somehow different. Even the FSA and the Consumer Council agree that there is no cause for FMD vaccinated products to be labelled. Even with the present EU Directive a derogation exists to allow untreated vaccinated meat on to the domestic market if zones remain in place for more than 30 days. Protectionism is at the heart of the continuing suspicion of vaccination. There is no medical or veterinary reason why animals should not be vaccinated against FMD just as naturally as they are vaccinated against other diseases - and if they were vaccinated as a precaution there would be not even be any perceived problem, after emergency vaccination, about the time taken for immunity to kick in . Treating animal disease as if it were a mere matter of economics continues. Zoonoses are a matter of global health. Using legislation for the forced culling of animals that are merely suspected of having come into possible contact with disease will one day be seen as abhorrent - and it will scarcely be believed that the best available technology for rapid on-site diagnosis, prevention and cure were there but their use constantly shunned.

May 16th 2007 ~ "even today I meet people who comment about the livestock bereft countryside and fail utterly to make the connection...."

An unexpected article on http://technocrat.net from someone who worked for six months in 1997 as furnaceman burning cattle carcasses - most of which were killed merely for being 30 months old. He concludes, "It sounds trite, but this job with its pervading sense of wrongness is PRECISELY the reason I'd rather be unemployed during the next year or three... " and what he says deserves to be read in full as a sobering reminder (as he intends) of how easy it is to have inhumane policies carried out.
" ... As anyone who works with cattle knows, a cow is a smart as a dog, and has just as much individuality, personality and character as a dog, yet thanks to the BSE scare at 30 months it was Arbeit Macht Fry time for Buttercup..... The bureaucratic state of play was as expected; every UK cow has tags, one on the ears and so on, BSE suspected had extra tags on the anus ...
...a shift rota of MAFF bods on duty were supposed to oversee and check every animal and every operation. In the six months I was there none of them did anything except sleep in the caravan outside, after all, they had day jobs, this night shift was free extra money for them.... I can TOTALLY understand how the Nazi ovens came about, how people operated them, how people played the tallyman, how people living 2 miles away were in blissful ignorance... .."
Alan Bennett, writing about the foot and mouth slaughter (Untold Stories p293) says: "In fifty years' time I am sure that we will not handle animals the way we do now - and to succeeding generations our behaviour will seem as barbarous as bear baiting...."
As we have seen in recent years and months and days, no one has to take responsibility; not slaughtermen, not Trading Standards, not the SVS, not the enforcers, not the mathematical modellers - and Ministers least of all. All can sound regretful but justified. All are behaving "sensitively". And even when a crazy policy is quietly reversed or discredited no one of course says "Sorry. We got it disastrously wrong." ( the OTM scheme cost more than £3 billion.)

May 15th ~ Bluetongue: " It was eventually revealed that the results of the sentinel surveillance were compromised by the inclusion of old, serologically positive animals."

The latest ProMed post reports the doubts being voiced concerning the German surveillance in sentinel animals and the impression given of the possible overwintering/recurrence of the bluetongue virus. Sabine Zentis, having clarified the details with the local authorities, comments,
"...the 31 positive animals tested during routine screening and are not indicative of recent virus activity. From the sentinel animals earmarked as result of the sampling campaign so far to my knowledge no animal has tested positive for BTV. The 2 "positive" sentinel animals are the result of a mix up of eartag numbers on the holdings. As sentinel animals have been sourced on holdings with known disease history, sampling a wrong animal is likely to yield a positive result.
I refrain from commenting on the quality of the data made available ..."
For a reminder of the consequences of the extraordinary errors of a government department ( this time in Germany ) see Bluetongue page.

May 15 2007 ~ The RPA needs to pay out about another £280m over the remaining seven weeks to meet its deadline this year

Well over a year ago the Earl of Arran called the RPA situation (Hansard March 30 2006) "probably the most incompetent piece of government administration ever known in a government department. It certainly rivals that of foot-and-mouth disease. It is utterly deplorable." See RPA page.

May 14 2007 ~ Parallels between the site inspections at Heddon on the Wall just before FMD and those at the Matthews plant just before the discovery of H5N1 are inescapable.

Hungary's deputy Chief Veterinary Officer feels no hesitation in blaming Bernard Matthews for the UK avian flu outbreak (see below) because of flaws in hygiene. The word "biosecurity" is constantly on the lips of officials - but when it is evident that premises were far from being kept to the highest standards, the transparency of what was inspected, when and how, should be made quite clear. Instead, all seems obscure. Were inspections done properly, taken seriously and were breaches immediately put right - or not?
In 2001, the outbreak at Waughs foreshadowed the loss of more than ten million animals. Parallels between the site inspections at Heddon on the Wall by the unfortunate Jim Dring before FMD and those at the Matthews plant before the discovery of H5N1 are inescapable.
As Lynda Davies writes, in response to an email from Robert Persey,
"As I see it, if DEFRA enforce that section of the above order (2005 Animal By-Products Order, section 11, para 4) at the Bernard Matthews farm, or at any other farms in the future, then they would be admitting that they were responsible for the FMD outbreak for NOT enforcing that same regulation at Bobby Waugh's farm in 2001...."
Ben Bradshaw said of the Holton outbreak: ".. this episode reflects the need for constant vigilance, high levels of biosecurity and robust and well developed contingency planning in dealing with animal disease outbreaks." But questions about how far 'constant vigilance and high levels of security' are taking place when they are most needed must be asked and answers publicised if we are to learn anything at all from what happened.

May 14th 2007 ~ "In the past two decades, veterinarians have helped to slaughter more than a billion so-called diseased animals to support factory farming and the edicts of global trade. .."

Coming home to roost is an article in Canada's Globe and Mail by Andrew Nikiforuk. He is reviewing The Chickens Fight Back - Pandemic Panics and Deadly Diseases That Jump From Animals to Humans by David Waltner-Toews
"..The majority of these animals showed no evidence of infection and were simply murdered out of convenience, because nobody could cope with crowds of confined livestock during an epidemic. Some critics have called this wanton and careless slaughter "a crisis of veterinary medicine."
I would have liked a voice as moral and important as that of Waltner-Toews to address this crisis if only to support one of his most important admonitions: "We must, above all, care." You just don't hear professionals of any stripe use words like that any more."
Andrew Nikiforuk maintains that it is a real and present danger to the health of all that "small-witted men in white coats have laboured to turn animal health and human health into separate kingdoms that never visit each other " and "this gross separation of animal and human health largely explains why the chickens are valiantly fighting back with avian flu and why outbreaks and epidemics of animal diseases are running amok."
Warmwell and its readers have watched in dismay while politicians, officials and research-grant-greedy scientists have fretted impotently over BSE, Foot and Mouth, bovine TB, avian influenza, Bluetongue and all the rest - yet for all their regulations and restrictions, and for all the draconian powers of the ludicrously named "Animal Health Act" of 2002 have failed to get to the heart of the problem - the treating of animal disease as if it were separate and of only economic importance.
It was the virologist Dr Ruth Watkins who, in an article written for warmwell, in 2003 wrote, "The control of disease by killing farm animals is promoted unashamedly and no apology made for failing to apply methods in human medicine to the care of farm animals.... the advice of the Royal Society and EU inquiries have fallen on deaf ears blocked by the cotton wool of defensive self-justification."

May 13 2007 ~ Bird Flu in Suffolk - The Hungarian Connection

The Sunday Telegraph's headline is that "Hungary admits link with UK bird flu outbreak" although the actual report makes clear that Bognar Lajos, Hungary's deputy chief veterinary officer,
"... insisted that ultimately the blame for the British outbreak must lie with Bernard Matthews, which was criticised for shortfalls in its biosecurity in the wake of the scare. Mr Lajos said: "It is possible that the virus was still in an incubation period in a flock and no symptoms would have been seen. Such a flock could have been sent to slaughter and the meat transported to the UK. The problem was not with Hungary though. The problem was Bernard Matthews and its biosecurity."
See also the relevant warmwell page on the Suffolk outbreak and the UK Government's response.

May 13 2007 ~ Evidence suggests that China's farmers routinely misuse pesticides

Reuters "All agree that China needs to implement a comprehensive system to clean-up the sector...part of the problem lies in the web of agencies who share responsibility for food safety." See below for Contaminated wheat gluten - still few answers

May 11 - 13 2007 ~ Shambo - attitudes unfortunately polarised

The BCVA has chosen to support the policy that has caused its own members widespread grief. According to the BBC, the BCVA president, Graham Brooks, said: "To achieve effective control those animals testing positive [for TB] must be removed from the cattle population." Shambo has indeed been removed from the cattle population. He is being kept isolated in a shrine where, in view of the unlikely positive result, he ought at least to be retested, as should others when the results seem suspect. ( As were those of Worcestershire farmer Richard Bown last Thursday - see below)
The Telegraph quotes a Welsh farmer who is understandably bitter that public concern has centered on this one non-commercial animal when thousands die as a result of being suspected of incubating TB: "We are more used to the frustrating situation where badgers are effectively treated as sacred..." - but again, it is illogical that this attitude should also cause farmers to unite in condemning an animal considered sacred by those who consider all animal life worthy of protection.
The Hindu Forum of Britain has called for all Hindus to form a human chain around the temple, preventing the authorities from getting at Shambo - and thus some degree of confrontation looks inevitable since farmers who have had to go along with slaughter would feel justifiably outraged if the matter is dropped. Attitudes will polarise disastrously and it may well be forgotten that the inflexibility of so much UK animal health policy is really at the root of all this. It is the disease that needs to be properly tackled - and given the advances in technology and the areas of diagnosis and vaccination this sould be done without recourse to inflexible "one size fit all" regulations. It seems a great waste that the case is not being cited by all sides as another reason to push for greater independent scientific input into reviewing current policies. As for the test given to Shambo, the Guardian says that the bull " has undergone three tests for TB: two were inconclusive but the third was a reactor " This seems to many to cast doubt on the accuracy of the test. See also email from Dr Colin Fink.

May 11-13 2007 ~"another beacon lighting the Byzantium attitutudes from the government veterinary service and DEFRA "

Also in the email from Dr Colin Fink is a reminder that a human TB test now available and " which demonstrates active disease is not yet licenced for animal use and there is the usual resistance to anything new from the usual 'authorities' .."
He mentions also how long overdue is a second skin test; an interferon test and the system sold by Immunotec . Immunotec has just won Best Healthcare Innovation Award for its one-step blood test against TB.
Dr Fink says, " ... Any other improvement in diagnosis is long overdue. This hapless but apparently perfectly well animal, and attendants are another beacon lighting the Byzantium attitutudes from the government veterinary service and DEFRA." (Read email)

May 11 2007 ~ Contaminated wheat gluten - still few answers

More on the toxic imports to the US. (see below) The Los Angeles Times now reports that Xuzhou Anying, one of the two Chinese factories from which contaminated protein was exported to the US, was razed to the ground by its owner, Mao Lijun, who has now been arrested, before it could be investigated. Complaints that residues from the factory had killed crops were ignored by the Chinese Environment Protection Bureau (the equivalent, in perhaps more ways than one, of our FSA and the American FDA). Researchers now believe that cyanuric acid, which can block kidney function, was in the feed as well as the cheap melamine scrap. An estimated 4000 pets are dead and the product was fed to 6000 pigs and 3.1 million chickens. Feed for farmed fish in Canada is also affected - and has been exported into the US. (See reports on ProMed.) All this raises many questions about safety - but the transcript of yesterday's FDA-USDA Update on Adulterated Animal Feed reveals just how few questions from reporters got clear or confident answers.
We will never forget the case of the late Phil Brown in this country, whose pigfeed was contaminated bringing even more horrific consequences. Even after years of struggle there has been no redress in that case. At least the scale of the US toxic feed problem finally brought questions out into the open. Should not more be asked of ChemNutra the importer who are presenting themselves as victims? They apparently maintain offices only forty miles from the Xuzhou Anying factory. Their website speaks of "ultra-competitive pricing on high-quality chemicals and ingredients from quality-assured manufacturers in China" Among those in the US and Canada worried by all this will be at least 4000 grieving pet owners wondering just how "quality was assured" .

May 10 2007 ~ Credibility of TB tests is called into question

Farmers Guardian (Alastair Driver) ".....his experience has raised questions about the credibility of the TB testing and valuation regimes .......Roxy came within 48 hours of being culled in February after she was deemed to have reacted to a pre-movement test performed by a private vet. Two days later, Defra informed Mr Bown that the four-year-old cow was to be TB tagged the next day and slaughtered the day after that. But adamant a mistake had been made, he refused state vets permission to enter his farm.
At his own request, his whole herd was then tested by local state vets and shown to be in the clear.
He then persuaded the Department to grant a re-test of Roxy and 11 other animals tested at the same time on the grounds that the vet had not followed the correct procedures laid out by Defra in performing the tests. This took place last week and all 12 animals were negative. .."

May 10 2007 ~ Killing the bull "in the usual way..... to protect animal health" is to be done "as sensitively as possible," , say officials

The BBC reports on the death threat to the Hindu sacred bull, Shambo (see also below)
Reuters is also reporting on the case. quoting the Welsh National Assembly's spokeman ".... these measures are in place to protect public health and animal health and prevent the further spread of the disease" The spokeman , evidently unaware of the irony of the use of the adjective holistic, went on to say, "regrettably a holistic approach to the eradication of this disease is essential if we are to stop the spread of TB"
More time, resources and expertise put into DEFRA's M.Bovis TB Vaccine Steering Group might make such expressions of regret sound less hollow. The Steering Group appears to meet only every six months and, with its own Chairman's negative comments about vaccination, seems curiously hamstrung.
Britain's large Hindu community, holding as it does that killing the bull " will violate our faith, tradition and desecrate our temple. It goes against all accepted norms of our faith" is appalled. Hindus are converging on Camarthen from all over the UK - and the monk interviewed on the BBC PM programme yesterday said that even if Shambo had foot and mouth they would not allow him to be culled. None of the animals at the Skanda Vale multi-denominational monastic centre where Shanbo has been isolated is ever killed.
That DEFRA continues to be deaf to the veterinary success of vaccination was further underlined today by a warmwell reader whose MP told her that Ben Bradshaw is still saying vaccination of birds increases the risk of spreading infection. While this sort of nonsense continues to be circulated by the Minister we can feel no confidence in any claims to "a holistic approach to the eradication of disease."

May 8 2007 ~ "She feels, he says, simultaneously hungry, tired, full up and sick."

The tagged calves mentioned below remind us that pressure on milk prices in the UK has turned more than half a million healthy male calves into what a Guardian article today calls " the disposable scraps of dairy farming". They are shot as useless. As for the majority of dairy cows now, Felicity Lawrence quotes John Webster, emeritus professor of animal husbandry at the University of Bristol. He has described the modern high-yielding modern cow "as the archetypal exhausted mother".
"Her mammary glands have been bred to make more milk than her body can cope with. She feels, he says, simultaneously hungry, tired, full up and sick. Breeding for maximum milk yield has left these cows unfit for much else. As many as half of all dairy cows may go painfully lame in any one year after being made to stand on concrete, their udders too heavy for their hind legs. ..... A few decades ago, the average lifespan of a cow was 10 lactations. Today it is three. ..."
One can only hope that the voices of dismay at this situation, echoing the indefatigable CIWF - such as Molly Dineen's "lyrical and brutal documentary film about rural life, The Lie of the Land" shown on Channel 4 last week - are starting to be heard so that our remaining dairy farmers, paid properly, can get back to the sort of farming they love - and this does not include the killing of healthy young animals. As Ghandi so wisely said, "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."

May 8 2007 ~ Traceability "just a sick joke"

As for identification after slaughter, and further to the NAIS story from the US below, one farmer writes: "Tagging calves is a nightmare but on the other hand, I am attaching clips to the tags for fly/midge protection ( which are promised to last for up to 5 months) so maybe they are at least of some use. Poor little things look terrible with the plastic attached to their ears and I'd rather prefer microchips. At farm level you have to do everything strictly by law but once the hide is off traceability is just a sick joke."

May 8 2007 ~ Rapid diagnosis of FMD "Several real-time PCR instruments are available with various capabilities, such as portability and high sample volume analysis."

The paper in 1: Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation Vol. 19 Issue 1, 9-20 (See abstract)
".... real-time polymerase chain reaction has facilitated rapid detection of FMDV. .... Assay performance was compared on the LightCycler 1.2 (Roche), the SmartCycler II (Cepheid), and the SDS 7900HT (ABI). These assays successfully identified the FMDV genome and beta actin mRNA from several sources of infected nasal and oral swabs, as well as probang samples."
Yet the UK Contingency plans still won't say that such rapid diagnosis is to be deployed. And if it is not, then in an emergency we could be back with the 2001 guesswork and panicky culling of healthy animals. Roger Breeze's comment here was made over a year ago. Yet, even after the very close call at Holton, there seems no cause for optimism that things are changing.
"What's alarming about failure to deploy rapid PCR tests even to regional diagnostic labs since 2001 is that technology has moved on significantly while nothing was being done. The means to detect on the farm has got even better since 2001 - it did not disappear just because responsible officials had their heads in the sand hoping it would go away. We cannot afford to find ourselves in 2012 still waiting for officialdom to formally approve the technology..."
(Read in full)

May 7 2007 ~ "For any voluntary animal identification system to work, it must be constructed on simplicity, efficiency, compatibility, flexibility and trust...."

We have noticed that the NAIS system in the US, originally designed as a clear labelling system, soon began to raise suspicions among stockholders there. FMD News, the service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davism sends us this link to concerns now expressed by the newly-formed U.S. Cattlemen's Association
"... originally NAIS was proposed with the single goal of providing an effective animal-health trace back system. Along the way, USDA drifted far from this goal. Privatizing the animal records data base, source verification and other value-based programs were never part of the original plan, and neither was international competitiveness.
Under the current proposed plan, it's cattle producers who will be saddled with the costs and regulatory burdens. Currently, only about 25 percent of livestock premises nationwide have registered for premises numbers and most of these folks do not support a mandatory national animal identification system. The fact that producers are rejecting the proposed system should come as no surprise. ..... For any voluntary animal identification system to work, it must be constructed on simplicity, efficiency, compatibility, flexibility and trust...."
Read in full at cattlenetwork.com. Their web site is under construction and is expected to be fully operational in mid-May.

May 6 2007 ~ "...a disaster made incomparably worse by the callous incompetence of a Government which has treated our farmers like dirt."

Booker's Notebook today
".....Channel 4 broadcast another documentary, The Lie of the Land, on the disaster which has overtaken British farming in recent years. Molly Dineen reported her shock, as an outsider, at discovering just how grim life has become for many of Britain's 350,000 farmers, who see themselves being driven to extinction, not least thanks to the ever-rising tide of bureaucracy from Brussels and our own officials in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
I have chronicled the unfolding of this catastrophe for 15 years in this column. Its lowest point was the nightmare of the foot-and-mouth crisis of 2001, a disaster made incomparably worse by the callous incompetence of a Government which has treated our farmers like dirt.
In that year alone, the suicide rate of British farmers rose to more than 28 per 100,000: a rate four times that of their Indian counterparts. If what is happening in India is "a disaster of epic proportions", how should we describe what is happening nearer home?.."
See too the Times review of The Lie of the Land "We now spend just 8% of our income on food yet 30 years ago that figure was far higher. This is regarded as a triumph by the government, which worships the supermarkets who have brought the price of food down but, in doing so, have destroyed British farms. .." Worth reading in full.

May 3-6 2007 ~" If vaccination is seen as an option in contingency plans, the availability of vaccines needs to be addressed."

Paul van Aarle, writing about emergency preparedness from the point of view of those who make the vaccines, says ( pdf new window - link mended)
"..... Emergency vaccination is included in most contingency plans and the availability of a licensed vaccine would greatly facilitate the political decision to use vaccination. It is recommended that special and simplified legislation be developed for vaccines that are only used in case of emergency. Alternatively, governments should support the industry financially to fully license emergency vaccines. There is no regulatory framework in the veterinary field for a speedy update of influenza vaccine strains.
For every vaccine strain and for every update of the vaccine strain, a new registration is required. It is recommended that legislation is developed that allows, as is the case for human influenza vaccines, a speedy update of vaccine strains, should the need arise. " "Making Avian Influenza Vaccines available, an Industry Point of View"
Mr van Aarle makes an obvious but easily overlooked point: Vaccines for the appropriate strain are simply not going to be available quickly enough at time of need if no contract has been arranged when they are not needed.

May 2 2007 ~ Testing was not complete until 14 days after the Bernard Matthews plant was re-opened.

Yesterday's Parliamentary Question, its answer and the relevant part of the final epidemiological report can be read here.
Mr Bradshaw's answer reveals that the testing of live poultry within the protection and surveillance zones had not in fact been completed until 26 February whereas the Bernard Matthews slaughterhouse plant in Holton was re-opened on 12 February.
( He says that the slaughterhouse was under restrictions only while the culling was taking place while the meat processing plant had never been placed under restrictions.)
DEFRA does not seem to have realised that poultry meat was still coming in from Hungary.
Although DEFRA's Preliminary Outbreak Assessment (pdf) on January 24th, about the outbreak in southern Hungary, said:
"The TRACES electronic database indicates that there have been no imports of poultry or poultry products from Hungary to the UK for the past three months."
- as we show below, this was entirely wrong. The public health minister, Caroline Flint, revealed in early March that 93 tons of turkey meat from Hungary passed through the Bernard Matthews plant and went into the food chain between February 2 - when the outbreak was confirmed - and February 12. EU rules (Article 22) say that the "competent authority shall ensure that the transport of poultry meat from slaughterhouses, cutting plants and cold stores is prohibited unless it has been produced....at least 21 days before the estimated date of earliest infection on a holding in the protection zone and which since production has been stored and transported separately from such meat produced after that date."
All this suggests that DEFRA was not able properly to assess the risk before re-opening the plant. Meanwhile, other poultry owners were kept under restrictions until March 1st. See below)

May 2 2007 ~ "I am genuinely concerned that short term financial expediency brought about by the recent debacle within the Rural Payments Agency is what has brought this upon us."

A recent letter in the Vet Record repeats the general concern in the veterinary profession that routine brucellosis testing has ceased without consultation. The knock-on effects both for adequate disease surveillance and for young vets who had hoped to be involved in farm animal work are liekly to be far-reaching. "... this present decision adds to one's apprehension that there are going to be insufficient experienced people left to carry on this essential work." Read in full

May 2 2007 ~ The EU is sending 12.6 million euros to Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Malawi to fight foot and mouth disease

These southern african countries will receive 12.6 million euros (about 8.6 million pounds) and the project, which started on April 1 this year, will run for the next three years. The Principal Director in the Department of Veterinary Services in Zimbabwe, Stuart Hargreaves, said the lack of vaccines, equipment and other drugs had been the major factors hampering the effective control of foot and mouth there. See more

April 30 2007~ Questions must continue about the Bernard Matthews H5N1 outbreak

As we say below, a large quantity of breast meat was thrown out because it had been dropped on the floor on 15th January. 60 kilograms of it. DEFRA's interim report (pdf new window ) said
"Pest control reports from the whole premises on January 10 and 24 2007 specifically comment that there had been an ongoing problem of gulls on uncovered waste bins and of them roosting on the finishing units (turkey sheds). Similar comments had been made...in 2006."
H5N1 virus was in shed 10 and we do not yet know how. In addition to concerns that Bernard Matthews was importing meat from the Gall Foods abattoir (two or three lorries a week were travelling to the UK direct from Kecskemet) farmers in the Csongrad area of Hungary alleged that SaGa Foods had received poultry from a farm 19 miles west of the infected Hungarian goose farms. (See Telegraph Feb 11) The origin of this unique turkey/goose strain of virus is still unknown. We are not even certain of the direction of travel of the infection. The to-ing and fro-ing of an enormous quantity of meat and animal carcasses had been taking place between Bernard Matthews and Hungary. There is even a possibility that some poultry imported from Hungary was goose, subsequently packaged as turkey breast. There have been cases of meat substitution in the past. The 60 kilos of breast meat dumped into insecure bins should not be forgotten.

April 30 2007~ The mystery that still surrounds the Bernard Matthews avian flu case must continue to worry us - for several reasons

First, there seems to be a willingness to drop further exploration into the source. It is beginning to look as though Robert Persey's point about a letter sent to MPs from the Bernard Matthews factory farm plant is important and worrying. The decision not to prosecute the company could have been because of fears that details of incompetence would emerge in court.
Secondly, although the Hungarians stoutly deny the connection, the VLA at Weybridge found that the UK virus was 99.96% similar to the strain that infected birds in the outbreak in Southern Hungary. Following the analyses of the RNA genomes, the chief avian virologist at the Veterinary Laboratory Agency, Ian Brown, said that the comparison between the UK and Hungarian viruses "reveals a high level of genetic match which cannot be said of other European virus strains." The Gall Foods abattoir, at Kecskemet 30 miles from the infected farms at Szentes, slaughtered 13,000 geese from those infected farms in January and ALSO slaughtered turkeys from the Matthews farm up to 12 January 2007. To believe that there can be no connection calls for a most energetic leap of faith - and although the DEFRA's epidemiological report of April 5 makes no firm conclusions it still says that H5N1 might have got into shed 10 " by contaminated feed or other material that then entered the shed (through normal procedures or carried in by vermin)"
We have seen no answers to questions about what was put into in feed but we do know that on 15 January approximately 60kg of breast meat was discarded into waste bins, we know that there were breaches of good practice that made waste material available to wild scavengers and we also know that shed 10 was old and not very secure.
The Hungarians are annoyed with Britain. Perhaps approaches were less than tactful and it certainly seems an extraordinary lack of courtesy on the part of our own authorities that the Hungarians were not sent the epidemiological report before it appeared on the internet for all to see.
In this sort of case there can be no blame when everyone is behaving in good faith and virus is accidentally spread. What remains deeply worrying is that investigations may have closed down because of pressure being exerted - an approach that defiles both science and integrity.

April 29 2007~ The Netherlands is angry at the bluetongue mix-up and its sequel

It seems that Germany has finally confirmed that the Osnabrück sentinel cow had no Bluetongue infection. From the level of frustration apparent among farmers it looks as though farming issues are being handled in the same way all over Europe. Incompetence is at heart-breaking levels and veterinary experts are appearing to do little more than watch impotently while politicians make such a hash of animal health policies.
The consequences of this supposed BTV case - a case that was contested right from the start - have cost farmers and traders very dearly. Measures were taken (see below) within the EU as a result and were not relaxed as soon as the truth came to light. (See Agrarisch Dagblad for Dutch report)
As for the UK's ability to cope with serious diseases of which bluetongue is only one, we see that in spite of DEFRA's denials that funding for animal health and welfare research is being reduced, the Farmers Guardian quotes BVA president, David Catlow as saying
"Funding for anything to do with animal health is becoming foggy. We do not know what figures to believe as it is becoming an accountancy exercise."
When there is no understanding of the serious implications of animal disease, cost cutting can became a dangerously false economy.

April 28 2007~ ".... further evidence that DEFRA in London is not fit for purpose...." .

On April 19 http://uuptoday.org quoted MEP (N.Ireland) Jim Nicholson, speaking from Brussels on the subject of the £36 million EU fine for for late 2003 and 2004 IACS payments,
"It is disgraceful that taxpayer's money will have to be spent on paying a fine to the European Commission that could have been avoided if the UK Government wasn't so disorganized and inefficient. It is further evidence that DEFRA in London is not fit for purpose when it comes to administering farmers' payments.
The fine rubs farmers face in the dirt even more when you consider the unwillingness and reticence of the UK Government to provide match funding for a number of agri - environment and other related schemes."
This fine is only for 2003 and 2004, of course. It will still be some time before the fine on the UK for late SFP payments is known. It is likely to be substantially bigger than this latest fine and could be as much as £305 million.
Meanwhile, we read in the FT that DEFRA is at the centre of a new storm because it has been advising the buying of carbon credits that are environmentally worthless. The FT investigation found widespread instances of people and organisations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions, and being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value. Industrial companies have been profiting from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited.
The Economist comments that those at the helm ".....have so far escaped punishment. Margaret Beckett, in charge of DEFRA at the time, is now the foreign secretary; Sir Brian Bender, DEFRA's most senior civil servant, has moved over to the Department for Trade and Industry..." DEFRA's incompetence, ignorance, wastefulness, arrogance and mangling of the English language might be forgiven were it not for the fact that no one ever apologises, that so little changes, and that we have seen no evidence of accountability - quite the reverse.

April 27 2007~ "biosecurity considerations are always at the forefront of animal health and welfare policies," says Lord Rooker - but there is to be no proper risk analysis done to assess the hazards of the Fallen Stock Scheme - whose rationale is an out-of-date nonsense.

The so-called Fallen Stock scheme was designed by officialdom worried about vCJD. It was thought that leaking carcases of sheep that had died of scrapie might have been infected with BSE and - in light of the prevailing unproven theory- present a danger of vCJD. But scrapie does not mask BSE and the whole rationale of the scheme has been shown to have been misguided. Dan Buglass, in the Scotsmanlast month reminded us that the government's own spongiform encephalopathy advisory committee (SEAC)
"ever so quietly admitted that the chances of BSE being present in the sheep flock were as close to zero as one could possibly wish"
See also below
The Bansback Review (pdf) carried out last year noted that costs to farmers were higher than had been envisaged and recommended that there was a need for "articulating more strongly the need for the legislation" Most importantly, the Bansback Review recommended
"Proactively reviewing and seeking changes in the Animal By-Product Regulations. There is growing evidence that parts of this regulation are inflexible and disproportionate. Close liaison between Government and industry should result in sensible adjustments which should enable more practical and lower-cost solutions."
Last Tuesday, Lord Vinson,(Hansard) asked for just such sensible adjustments. He had already in February asked about the possibility that
" the collection of diseased sheep from farms may spread disease, bearing in mind the transmission of disease by vehicles and people during the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in 2001" ( Lord Rooker's reply (WA 211)
and his question on Tuesday was "whether they will conduct a hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP) analysis survey to assess the environmental and biosecurity impact of the collection of fallen stock; and whether, if necessary, they will amend existing legislation in the light of this analysis to reduce the cost to the farmer. [HL3270]"
Lord Rooker said "No" and that the EU Animal By-products Regulation 1774/2002/EC "already lays down rules for the safe collection, transport, storage, handling, processing and use or disposal of animal by-products, including fallen stock."
That the Fallen Stock Scheme is a counter-productive and unfairly expensive shambles has always been the opinion of many (see warmwell page), and they are unlikely to be impressed by Lord Rooker's recent answers. Dan Buglass article is a "blast at those who imposed the National Scrapie Plan (NSP) on the sheep industry and then followed up that nonsense with the fallen stock scheme." But the juggernaut of the Fallen Stock Scheme continues on its mad, ponderous way because the sane course of stopping it would entail the sort of admissions we are never likely to hear from its creators.

April 26 2007 ~ Bluetongue sentinel at Osnabrück - the wrong animal was sampled....

On 30 Mar 2007, the German veterinary authorities reported that BTV (bluetongue virus) was detected in a sentinel bovine animal in Landkreis Osnabrück in Lower Saxony. The finding suggested that the virus had managed to 'overwinter'. This new assumption of infection in the Osnabrück cow brought to an end the agreements between the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, France, and Luxembourg, and the regular bluetongue export and movement restrictions were again enforced. The Friedrich Löffler Institut (OIE Reference Laboratory) was expected to announce that the Osnabrück outbreak was, in fact, not an outbreak.
This is a rough and very free translation by ourselves of the small paragraph that appeared in yesterday's Dutch press (www.zibb.nl )
The Bluetongue "discovery" in Osnabrück was definitively a false alarm according to the Agriculture Ministry of the federal state of Nedersaksen. The wrong animal was sampled. It tested positive, but this was because of a build-up of antibodies from the previous year. In spite of this mistake, it has been decided not to overturn the measures put in place (see below) when it was thought to have been a new case and proof that the virus had overwintered (As DEFRA proclaimed in its Defra Preliminary Outbreak Assessment of April 4th.) . The Agriculture Ministry in The Hague want to consult with concerned member countries before making any decision. The Hague has not yet received any message from Hannover.
(A more accurate, full translation would be gratefully received.) UPDATE - See bluetongue page. A correct translation now appears on ProMed

April 26 2007 ~ Contaminated pet food highlights issues for human food - and the competence of official agencies

While our own FSA gets proactive about the dangers of honey and cheese (see below) , there is a genuinely frightening situation in the US raising questions about checks on imports and the willingness and speed of the US Food and Drug Administration to respond to problems. The first reports of animal deaths from contaminated pet food came to light over a month ago. Melamine, found in at least 2 imported Chinese vegetable proteins used to make pet foods, may have been used to falsify analyses of the protein content of the ingredients. The Smallholders Newsletter 194 (See Smallholders Online) contained a piece from an articulate American dog owner
Extract: ".... After repeated phone calls to Purina over a period of three days, during which I provided the date and plant codes, I noticed that Purina began recalling part of its Alpo line.... he is lying at my feet, dying, because I poisoned him. I poisoned him with Alpo Prime Cuts in Gravy that was adulterated ......The FDA stonewalled, refusing to release the name of the US distributer, ChemNutra, until a blogger found it by digging through the FDA records. Not only that, but the FDA and the manufacturers were reactive, waiting for the body count to rise before "voluntarily" recalling their product.....the US distributer refuses to release his customer list to the public...."
Yesterday, after news that some pigs and poultry, intended for human consumption, have been fed the salvaged pet food, a ProMed moderator commented:"The situation with the pet food and the swine foods highlights issues for human food as well. Cyanuric acid.... is not a product for use in food..."
The FDA has now expanded its testing to other glutens in other food sources - but one cannot but be worried by the dog owner's words written on April 8th: " It has taken the FDA two days to update its website to include the Alpo recall. It has taken the FDA over three weeks to begin to get this situation under control....... We've spent trillions upon trillions of dollars blasting terrorists in countries you and I will never set foot in. Meanwhile, we can't provide adequate hurricane relief or ensure that our dog food is safe.."
UPDATE April 26 Washington Post

April 25 2007 ~ "At least the FSA hasn't so far claimed that honey must be banned because it has discovered that bees can catch BSE. But we only need give them time."

Private Eye's Muckspreader on the continuing follies of the Food Standards Agency. Ofcom, at the FSA's behest, has included honey along with Marmite, cheese and olive oil, as 'junk foods' which can no longer be advertised to children...
"... To anyone but the officials of the FSA, this is so self-evidently absurd - honey has for millennia been regarded as one of the healthiest foods on the planet - that a campaign has been launched by the Grocer magazine, backed by the British Beekeepers Association and an array of nutritionists, to shower Ed Richards, Ofcom's chief executive, with letters of protest, asking him to withdraw this ridiculous diktat. Mr Richards should perhaps be reminded of some of the choicer examples of the FSA's previous record in grasping the realities of which foodstuffs are actually dangerous or not...." Read in full
Muckspreader mentions, as an example, the banning of traditional sausage skins when it was maintained that sheep intestines would spread BSE. We hardly need reminding. We have been following the miserable scrapie saga since 2001. There has been a deafening lack of interest at recent conclusions at EU level that scrapie does not mask BSE at all and compulsory testing is unnecessary. Even Mr Bradshaw now reluctantly admits that the ram genotyping scheme is too worthless - as many were warning from the start - to deserve further funding. It has been yet another mammoth folly involving DEFRA, the FSA and some of our most lauded and deferred-to scientific talking heads (professors Roy Anderson and Neil Ferguson et al).
Who will dare to point out that the costs, in terms of money and heartbreak, of the refusal to listen to specialist on-the-ground experts have been incalculable ? No reproaches have been reported. The recent report from the Select Committee into Science and Technology is as relevant as ever: "we have noted with concern the sidelining of scientific expertise in the civil service and highlighted the need to move towards a situation where specialist skills are once again valued in their own right."
The Grocer has launched a campaign calling for an urgent review of the so-called 'Nutrient Profiling Model'.

April 25 2007 ~ Hungary denies any connection with UK bird flu outbreak

Robert Hodgson of the Budapest Times reported on Monday that according to Hungary's Agriculture Minister, Zoltán Gögös there is "no evidence of a link" and that Hungary has not even yet received the DEFRA report of the epidemiological findings by the National Emergency Epidemiology Group from the UK into the bird flu outbreak at Bernard Matthews. He said that even if the two virus strains showed similarity, this proved nothing, as bird flu strains are often similar to each other.
".... As UK reporters flew en masse to Hungary, muddled reports began appearing in the UK press about, for example, connections between Bernard Matthews "farm" (it is a turkey meat processing plant) in "Sarkov" and the bird flu outbreaks, which were, in fact, on goose farms on the other side of the country. Suspicions deepened as reports of regular movements of unprocessed turkey meat between Hungary and the UK gradually came to light, and there was increased pressure from UK journalists eager to establish a direct link between the outbreaks in the two countries and pin the blame of Bernard Matthews Ltd. The official Hungarian position was that migrating ducks must have carried the virus into both the UK and Hungary, probably from Russia. The UK position was that the most probable route was into Hungary by duck then on to the UK in turkey meat, by truck........at a press conference held by the Hungarian Ministry of Agriculture, chief veterinarian, Miklós Süth, asked foreign, especially British, journalists to "leave our experts alone," and let them get on with their jobs. He also criticised the UK press for printing misinformation, although he did not single out any one newspaper. Eventually, as no evidence of a truckload of infected meat being illegally driven to the UK could be found, interest in the story faded. Now the slanging match between the two farming ministries is set to start again."
Could it be that the British authorities have acted in a high handed manner rather than working tactfully with their Hungarian counterparts? A "slanging match", when it is so important to establish the facts, is surely the last thing that should be happening.

April 23 2007 ~"administrators are there to serve the country, not the other way round.... why should errors of policy, that have nothing to do with animal welfare, impinge upon the profession and its work in farm animal disease control and welfare?"

We have many times deplored that purely financial considerations can lead to ill-informed animal health policies counter productive to animal health. A letter from D. N. Logue, Vice-President of the Scottish Branch of the BVA in the Veterinary Record this week is very relevant, explaining that the value of ensuring regular visits to extensive beef (and sheep) farms that may have relatively little contact with their veterinarian can put a different cost-benefit aspect to the decision to end routine brucellosis testing (see also below)
".. The fact that there was no consultation on the withdrawal of brucellosis testing ...raises many questions... For example, what is the relevance of milk testing dairy cattle to beef herds? Is it not time that we used this sort of routine surveillance exercise to test a selected population of these animals for say bluetongue or even bovine tuberculosis (TB)? What is the value of ensuring regular visits to extensive beef (and sheep) farms that may have relatively little contact with their veterinarian? These last two could put a different cost-benefit aspect to the matter. I am genuinely concerned that short term financial expediency brought about by the recent debacle within the Rural Payments Agency is what has brought this upon us. If this is so, why should errors of policy that have nothing to do with animal welfare impinge upon the profession and its work in farm animal disease control and welfare?...We admit that a properly integrated approach between practice and the others as described above has a higher cost than some in the Treasury might like, but administrators are there to serve the country, not the other way round, and costbenefit and effectiveness should be more important rules of thumb than cost alone. Surely the recent animal disease history of this country has taught us that? "
Read in full

April 23 2007 ~ "Come on, open up in the name of the cow inspector"

Heather Brooke, in today's Times, echoes Booker's Notebook yesterday. Both write about the alarming growth of the State's right to enter people's property. Both cite the bizarre action of DEFRA in sending 22 "officials" to try to kill Harriet (see Harriet page) (Sadly, the writer in the Times did not know of Harriet's untimely death.) The Times today:
".......This hit squad had erected a road block to seal off the area and used bolt-cutters to force their way into the enclosure. They had not asked permission to enter, nor did they need to..... Harriet, you see, had the misfortune to be on land where there had once been a BSE-infected cow and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) had decided that she must be destroyed as a risk to the public. Harriet's owners, David Price and Liz Davis, had argued that the nine-year-old Jersey cow was a pet, bought as a present for their son. They had documentation showing she did not have BSE nor was she ever going to be slaughtered for meat. .."
The study published yesterday by the Centre for Policy Studies, Crossing the Threshold: 266 ways the State can enter your home in which the barrister, Harry Snook, catalogues the explosive growth in the State's powers to enter private property forcefully and without permission, seems to have shocked many. Warmwell readers will not be shocked by it. Most of us merely continue to wonder why - in the years since the behaviour of "officials" in 2001 - so few voices have been raised in opposition or in Opposition to the insidious growth of the infant police state here. It is no longer an exaggeration to use such an expression - as the Times today makes clear.
" It is utterly unacceptable that the State's most invasive and arbitrary power is not even documented. ... Clearly, it's time we modernised to at least the point America reached in the 1700s. We need one law to harmonise entry powers and protect the citizen by making accountability and transparency paramount."

April 23 2007 ~ " The Blight of Beckett persists. .."

writes Dan Buglass in the Scotsman in an article that has words of praise for "more diligent women" such as Mariann Fischer Boel, Mary Coughlan, Michelle Gildernew, Fiona Dalrymple and Margaret Stewart (of Quality Meat Scotland) Dan Bugloss deplores the enduring rural legacy of Mrs Beckett - such as last week's announcement by DEFRA that it was cutting, and in some cases cancelling, funding for a wide range of research programmes into animal health, welfare and behaviour. But
" there was more to come: no longer will the government provide open-ended funding for compensation in the event of a major animal disease outbreak such as foot-and-mouth or bovine tuberculosis. Instead, Whitehall is keen to enter into some vague form of "partnership" with the industry. That, quite simply, is a coded message to the effect that a levy will be imposed on farmers to meet future costs. I accept that there were some mighty cheques paid out to farmers in the wake of the 2001 foot-and-mouth crisis, but it was not the fault of the stewards of the countryside that the awful plague arrived here. Biosecurity is supposed to have been tightened at points of entry into the UK, but there are few obvious indications of that..."
More on RPA page

April 22 - 23 2007 ~ "The virus cannot be transmitted between susceptible animals without the presence of the insect carriers...."

The Queensland Government's page on Bluetongue: "There is no justification for stamping out but some animals may need to be destroyed for welfare reasons. It is not possible to eradicate the bluetongue vectors."
The NFU's apparent wish for "aggressive" culling (Farmers' Guardian) to be a UK response to bluetongue when it arrives is very odd. They naturally fear movement restrictions if the virus strikes but all who understand bluetongue are agreed that culling is not going to help in controlling the disease. While one sympathises greatly with the NFU's "fears about Defra's commitment to partnership" (Farmers' Guardian April 20) one wonders who is advising them on Bluetongue.

April 22 - 23 2007 ~ Osnabrück sentinal cow - admission of mix-up expected on Monday - after the damage has been done. "Please tell the world. I am still so angry"

It is yet another example of a string of inflexible consequences following an assumption subsequently shown to have been wrong. On 30 Mar 2007, the German veterinary authorities reported that BTV (bluetongue virus) was detected in a sentinel bovine animal in Landkreis Osnabrück in Lower Saxony. The finding suggested that the virus had managed to 'overwinter'. This new assumption of infection in the Osnabrück cow brought to an end the agreements between the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, France, and Luxembourg, and the regular bluetongue export and movement restrictions were again enforced. We now find that the Friedrich Löffler Institut (OIE Reference Laboratory) is very likely to announce on Monday afternoon that the Osnabrück outbreak was, in fact, not an outbreak. Our German correspondent writes,
"..this was not a "false" positive but probably a mixing up of blood samples at some level. Maybe the wrong cow was sampled or the sample has somehow been mixed with others at a lab and has been allocated a wrong number....plenty of possibilities. There is now a genetic test underway to check whether the positive sample belongs to the cow in question. It is likely it doesn't. We still have PCR positive animals around but this doesn't mean they are still infective as the PCR shows traces of virus for up to 200 days. ..... this shows yet again the incompetence of our "competent authorities". Even the vets from the local government have no information about the animals in question. In addition there is, at this moment, no legislation in place in Germany how to deal with the next wave of infections. When asking the government vet she told me to stick to last year's regulation. When asking which (there have been about 11 different versions that have been changed and amended every other week) she told me : 'take your pick'..
Please tell the world. I am still so angry, why can't there be sensible measures to deal with disease ? It is either kill everything or do damage by doing nothing. ..."
As James Irvine says on LandCare,. "What is required is rapid on-farm tests that can be done within a few hours, not a few days.... blood samples taken from anywhere throughout the UK have to go to Pirbright, Surrey in the south of England for testing. While this may be fine for establishing the serotype of the first case, it is far from satisfactory when it comes to checking whether a beast on a farm is suffering from BTV or from some other condition..... There must surely have been abundant opportunity to "validate" such tests if there was a will to do so."

April 22 - 23 2007 ~ Prince Charles defends "family farmers who have been on the land for generations and have priceless experience and wisdom of the sort which cannot be taught in a classroom, but which is absorbed and inherited."

The Sunday Telegraph reports that Prince Charles, in a letter to the Arthur Rank Centre farming charity, makes a "veiled attack" on DEFRA and its handling of agricultural policies. He said that farmers were enduring "some of the toughest times in living memory" because of the fiasco over missing subsidy payments that has left many facing ruin. "There are farmers who feel they cannot cope with this new and frightening world," he said.
Many will feel immense gratitude that Prince Charles, who has been criticised for daring to engage with and challenge the government, continues to make his sympathetic voice heard.

April 22 - 23 2007 ~ Gordon Brown is to order owners of farm land and buildings to pay both council tax and business rates, ending a 78-year exemption.

"The rural tax raid would hit everyone who turns a profit on a plot of land or outbuildings and could plunge farmers into bankruptcy" says the Sunday Telegraph
"Farmers and smallholders are unlikely to be able to avoid paying by reclassifying their land as domestic. Their homes will be hit, in any case, by another aspect of the council tax review which says houses with large gardens and even country views must pay extra.
Peter Ainsworth MP, the shadow secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs, said: "Hard-pressed farmers will be horrified by the prospect of a massive increase in taxation at a time when they can ill afford it. This will further undermine the rural economy and force farmers to sell off their land to unscrupulous developers."
The article quotes Simon Hart: "The Government desperately needs to rethink their contempt for the sector."

April 20-22 2007 ~ "as with foot and mouth, the Government have failed to establish the cause of the outbreak of bird flu in Suffolk.."

On Thursday, Peter Ainsworth, asking whether it is not time to look again at the regulations concerning the importation of poultry meat, reminded the House of Commons (Hansard) that "there must have been a serious breach of bio-security at the Bernard Matthews plant", but that nobody will be held responsible and the company will receive £589,356.89 in compensation. Barry Gardener sidestepped any engagement with the serious question of what the Countess of Mar referred to in February as " DEFRA's "lack of assiduity in tracing where the virus has come from" (See below)
The Government's insistence that the cost of future animal disease outbreaks should be shared with farmers looks wholly unreasonable when, with all its resources, it cannot or will not get to the bottom of how a disease has come in and thus be better placed to protect the country.
What Barry Gardener did say was that the Government had "received many plaudits for the way in which the whole matter of avian flu has been handled". One is reminded that in April 2004 it was the Labour member, Mr. Huw Edwards, who said of Ben Bradshaw's self congratulation:
"I was rather surprised when the Minister opened his speech by applauding the fact that the foot and mouth outbreak was contained within seven months. That seemed like a bit of positive spin that was perhaps written by a special adviser. There was more than a year of absolute hell in my constituency..."
It is unfortunate that the government seems unwilling to do anything but preen itself over its handling of disease. It is yet another reminder of the disastrous policies in 2001 - from which so few real lessons for the present and for the future seem yet to have been learned.

April 20 2007 ~ Bluetongue. Moves to attack the midges would be more effective than transport restrictions

"the precautionary measures taken by the EU to contain the Bluetongue virus (BTV) in Northern Europe have had little or no effect on the spread of the disease, according to the European Food Standards Authority.....Certainly moves to attack the midges which carry the virus would be more effective than transport restrictions for animals, it seems.
It is now up to DG SANCO to decide how this EFSA advice might be reflected in policy."
For further information see www.efsa.europa.eu

April 19/20 2007 ~".. we are left with the possibility that meat products from pre-clinically infected turkeys, infected from a common source with the Hungarian outbreaks in January 2007, might have been slaughtered and exported to the Holton site"

The DEFRA report of the epidemiological findings by the National Emergency Epidemiology Group: "Our conclusion is that infection was most likely introduced to GB via the importation of turkey meat from Hungary."
Guesses about a possible common cause of "wild bird infection" are, of course, just that - mere guesses.
The Guardian quotes Jack Straw,
"All of us are uncomfortable about the reports of high levels of compensation to Mr Matthews' firm."
Peter Ainsworth said the government had "once again" failed to establish the cause of the outbreak of a serious animal disease.
"....The fact that the government cannot ascertain precisely how bird flu got to Suffolk must surely be a case for looking again at the adequacy of existing regulations dealing with imports of poultry meat. Bearing in mind that there must have been a serious failure of bio security at the Bernard Matthews plant, many people will be absolutely astonished that no one will be held responsible for the outbreak. Instead the company will receive £589,356.89 in compensation funded by the taxpayer."
We should very much like someone to be made to answer the question, "What exactly were the infected turkey poults being fed on at the time of the outbreak?"
We should also very much like to know whether an alleged document from Bernard Matthews criticising DEFRA's handling of the outbreak, claimed by Robert Persey to have been sent to MPs, ever existed and if so, whether it was the cause of DEFRA's reluctance to allow any prosecution of Bernard Matthews to take place for fear that such criticisms should come to light.

April 19 2007 ~ Ben Bradshaw: "The key to effective disease control is good surveillance, early detection and rapid response"

Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley, Labour) asked Ben Bradshaw (Hansard April 16) " what strategies his Department has in place to combat (a) avian influenza and (b) foot and mouth disease in the North West."
A short definition of strategy is "the art of distributing and applying means to fulfil the ends of policy." The Minister's given reply, along with the inevitable reference to bio-security (see below for comment), was that the key to effective disease control is good surveillance, early detection and rapid response - yet no "strategies" were outlined. Still less did the Minister mention that the surveillance needed, already inadequate, has been much decreased; for example, by the scrapping this month of routine testing for brucellosis (where vets, until April 9th 2007, were paid by the State for this service, and could have a quiet look round for signs of other disease problems). Strategies for "early detection" and "rapid response" are not helped by the UK's inexplicable reluctance to use such effective and available technologies as on-site rapid diagnostic tests and vaccination.

April 19 2007 ~ "Planning was tested by the avian influenza case in Suffolk earlier this year and it coped well..."

said Mr Bradshaw in answer to the question above. It has been suggested that Bernard Matthews has circulated a report to MP's highlighting the fact that far from 'coping well', DEFRA's work in dealing with the Avian flu outbreak was deficient, and one of the reasons that there is not to be a prosecution is that the Department was not prepared to risk these details being made public in Court. In spite of DEFRA's assumption at the beginning of the outbreak that wild birds were the cause, and even as free range birds were being unnecessarily forced indoors, there seems to have been no live sampling either of wild birds nor commercial poultry until the media highlighted this. The Bernard Matthews factory imported the virus itself as a result of the to-ing and fro-ing of carcases and meat products between the UK and Hungary - or so it would certainly seem. Dangerous practices were ignored, and the factory - in spite of all this - is not only not to be prosecuted - but compensated by taxpayers to the tune of something like £600,000.
Perhaps Mr Hoyle's question was asked in order for the draft North West Exotic Animal Disease Plan (pdf) to get a mention.
Emergency plans need plain English, and must surely be written in a way that all can immediately understand - but here is an extract:
"LDCC - SVS lead, interfaces with the Local Resilience Forum which is the recognised mechanism under CCA for multi-agency coordination at the local level. Depending upon the nature of the outbreak the LRF will convene or set up a Strategic Co-ordination Group
The LRF will decide upon the scope of consequence management and the need for a Recovery Working Group. .....
LDCC / LRF / RWG will work in tandem. A liaison officer will be appointed...."
Are we alone in being baffled? A straightforward simple working manual for use during an outbreak, drawn up after close and democratic collaboration between those involved in disease control is what is needed. Hoped for outcomes are not the same as clearly defined strategies.

April 18/19 2007 ~ "It is not enough to have the odd pop-hole in the side of a shed, even if this ticks a box on a certification scheme."

A Guardian article today, "The Price of Eggs" compares the majority of still very suspect poultry raising sytems in the UK with the situation in Switzerland where battery cages and beak tipping were both banned in 1991. Swiss flocks range without aggression. Dr Michael Appleby, a chicken expert and welfare policy adviser to the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) is quoted:
"Let's remember that these are animals and manage our farms as biological systems, not technological systems. Birds don't have hands, so how do they manipulate and investigate? With their beaks. The tip is very sensitive." Read article
Battery egg production in this country will at last be made illegal by 2012 - although the poultry "industry" is lobbying hard to get the ban postponed, justifying this by saying that cheap imports from beyond the EU will take the place of battery eggs. Such an attitude ignores the increasing awareness of consumers here who feel queasy at the unnatural lives imposed on birds even in some purportedly free-range systems. Compassion in World Farming actively works towards getting changes made. Their get involved section suggests practical ways to help.

April 18 2007 ~ Competition Commission findings into supermarket practices were expected to be made public in June, but now postponed until January 2008

Farmers are effectively subsidising consumers and supermarket giants according to Roger Williams, the Liberal Democrat spokesman for food and rural affairs . Scotsman
Speaking yesterday after the announcement that Tesco had posted record profits of £2.55 billion, Williams warned that the power of the supermarkets was destroying British farming....."Supermarkets are raking it in by keeping prices static and passing costs on to farmers. For every £1 consumers spend on food in supermarkets, just 8p goes back to the farmer." Ten years ago the average ex-farm price of milk was just short of 25p per litre. Current values are no better than 19p per litre. Supermarket practices and margins are under scrutiny by the Competition Commission. The findings were expected to be made public in June, but that date is slipping, according to Williams. He said: "The outcome has now been postponed until January 2008 because of the huge amount of information that remains to be processed."

April 17 2007 ~ End of brucellosis tests - another example of false economy?

Routine periodic blood testing for Brucellosis in beef herds ended on April 9th. The biennial brucellosis blood test was an opportunity for vets to spend time on the farm when they could carry out discreet disease surveillance. Without it, vital surveillance will be reduced - as will the number of rural veterinary practices.
Writing in the Journal the vet Iain Carrington voices several concerns about this, not least that "due to the unseemly haste with which this policy has been introduced the information which we have finally been sent is unclear."
"......a false sense of security relating to the other systems now in place to identify and stop the possible spread of disease. Also this will mean any other surveillance carried out on these blood samples (Enzootic Bovine Leucosis and Warble fly) will cease. Concerns have also been expressed that this change in policy will reduce the number of farm animal vets available in practice, thereby compromising the ability to react to any disease outbreaks that may threaten us in the future...."
Writing to warmwell, another vet, Hugh Coryn, says, "It appears from what I read from your German contact that cattle in Blue Tongue act as a reserve of infection - or at least can do so. This makes the decision to stop routine Blood Tests for Brucellosis in Beef herds even more regrettable, since the same samples could have been used for screening for the presence of undetected Blue Tongue. It only requires modification of Laboratory facilities - another example of false economy. I fear also that (concern about) climate change and the midge is again leading us to ignore traffic in animals as a serious component of the spread of disease."

April 16 2007 ~ "Mrs Beckett was arrogant beyond belief. When she became Foreign Secretary, I thought, "God help this country". ..."

Today's article in the Telegraph on "What has a decade of Tony Blair meant for you? " features a balanced and calm assessment by a farmer in Cornwall for whom farming is still "a wonderful life" . But he pulls no punches in voicing opinions about the Foot and Mouth crisis, the RPA fiasco, the fact that the UK is now far less self-sufficient in food production, the now excessive and unnecessary paperwork and the arrogant incompetence of many in politics. It reminds us that in spite of the recent misfortune of diseases, the real threats to farming can be laid at the door of those pursuing power and profits and who show so little competent understanding of the realities of UK farming.
"the amount of paperwork has exploded. My son Steve spends more time at the desk than he does farming. There are so many regulations to comply with. I am not against them, or all the inspections, but a lot of the paperwork is unnecessary. The foot and mouth epidemic was a disaster. Government departments didn't seem to pull together. ....In the last 10 years we have become accustomed to spin and deviousness. Politicians and government departments have been unreasonable and have lacked flexibility. .... Our industry is still trying to be as efficient as possible. We are an enthusiastic industry. But when you are as efficient as possible and the return is low, that is the reason so many are getting out of it...."
Telegraph article

April 14/15 2007 ~ Bluetongue. "What is required is rapid on-farm tests that can be done within a few hours, not a few days".

Those likely to be affected by Bluetongue are recommended to read the article on LandCare by James Irvine
Extract: "...According to the latest version of the UK BT Contingency Plan, blood samples taken from anywhere throughout the UK have to go to Pirbright, Surrey in the south of England for testing. While this may be fine for establishing the serotype of the first case, it is far from satisfactory when it comes to checking whether a beast on a farm is suffering from BTV or from some other condition. What is required is rapid on-farm tests that can be done within a few hours, not a few days. RT-PCR technology is available for that internationally, but for some reason the UK authorities do not wish to use it. There must surely have been abundant opportunity to "validate" such tests if there was a will to do so."
A vet reader of warmwell writes, "I am afraid I am not an expert on Blue Tongue, nor I suspect are most practitioners, hence if it does arrive it could well get missed.." The Land Care article has a section on the symptoms and signs of Bluetongue - and also quotes the email sent to warmwell by the German farmer below. See also iah.bbsrc.ac.uk for clinical symptoms.

April 13 2007 ~"Mathematical modelling must be carried out as a multi-disciplinary process involving modellers, field epidemiologists, virologists etc .."

From the EUFMD 2006 Paphos FMD - DRAFT conference report we read some important caveats about mathematical modelling.
"..... Models in general therefore require accurate data and assumption on mechanisms of spread in order to produce reliable outputs.
• Mathematical modelling must be carried out as a multi-disciplinary process involving modellers, field epidemiologists, virologists etc
• Mathematical models should not be used to produce policy directly but as a part of the process of policy formulation and decision support
• Mathematical modelling is most appropriately developed and validated in between outbreaks rather than in an emergency situation. .."
Read Draft report in full (pdf) Here (in HTML ) is the part on Contingency planning and simulation exercises

April 12 2007 ~ "Animal welfare is an issue of great importance for Europeans..."

says last month's EU Factsheet on Animal Welfare Ensuring the humane and responsible treatment of farmed animals (pdf)
"The farming of animals is no longer seen as merely a means of food production, but also as an ethical concern. Increasingly, there is a public sense of responsibility for animals which are under human care. Moreover, in consumers' minds, the well-being of farmed animals is strongly associated with the quality, and even safety, of food..."
It was Peter Melchett in the Guardian in February who reminded us that
" ...Agri-business knows that if they told the truth about the food they flog us, still less let us see the inside of one of those turkey factories, the chances are no one would ever buy the stuff again. ..."
Perhaps the message that it really does matter to people how animals are kept and looked after is starting to get through even to the most cynical. The Bernard Matthews brand, as we read in MarketingWeek, now plans organic, free-range meats in order (may they be forgiven) to be "relevant to today's consumers". One can only hope (for without irrational optimism one might despair) that this is more than a smoke screen behind which to hide the continuation of such practices as came to light in February. The fact that Bernard Matthews escaped prosecution (and Robert Persey's email is instructive here) has not put a stop to a slow awakening of public revulsion.
Peter Melchett here describes the difference in stance between Sir David King, most of the NFU and urban politicians with that of those who advocate organic farming. "....The hi-tech brigade assume world-wide trade in farm products and food is the norm..." (More)

April 12 2007 ~"We have a problem across the EU with vaccine policy. If governments do not provide a certain economic incentive [to produce the vaccines], industry won't develop them."

International Relations and Security Network (ISN) reported yesterday on a recent "closed-door gathering" in Brussels of bio-policy officials from government and industry. "Around 35 participants split equally between government and industry attended the stakeholder debate, most of which was off-record."
John Oxford was quoted as saying that Europe needed
"more policy cohesion regarding early detection of outbreaks and more investment in the sector.. ...It's better to stock a lot of low-effective vaccines that (missing) than a smaller number of high-effective ones. Some member states have grasped this; others not."
There is no " intra-EU solidarity mechanism" in place regarding vaccine stockpiles, says the article, which continues: ".... US government-funded research efforts are developing biological tools to fight foot-and-mouth disease and new technologies to secure the US food chain, from field to factory. European governments can only watch such unitary budget decision with envy..." Read in full

April 11 2007 ~ Bluetongue: " there will be multiple opportunities for it to come over"

Dr Ruth Watkins writes about bluetongue policy
" .... it could be imported midges rather than ones borne on the wind too. There are a number of midge transporting wind events that can occur from Ostend to Norfolk Kent etc. and if Bluetongue is active again this summer in that area of Europe as is expected, there will be multiple opportunities for it to come over. Should one prohibit all ruminants and cull all deer within 150 km of the English coast? I think that is just about as stupid a suggestion as culling animals in whom the disease is recognised.
We cannot spray and kill all midges either; anyway, midges may be important ecologically and the environment would be contaminated.
Things we might do is to think of strategies to decrease the amplification in midges by treating the ruminants ...vaccinating susceptible domestic ruminants, cattle sheep and goats to prevent or lower viraemia, and treating all ruminants on the farm..." Read in full
The European Food Standards Authority Report on Epidemiological analysis of the 2006 bluetongue virus serotype 8 epidemic in north-western Europe: provisional findings through 31 January 2007, updated yesterday, concludes "... changes in climatic conditions coupled with frequent travel might increase the risk in the appearance and the establishment of diseases in parts of Europe that were thus far exotic for those regions." In other words, it is most certainly on its way. Another warmwell reader suggests that there may be some mileage, in the longer term, in looking to see if we can affect the breeding of the local vectors ( Midges, mosquitos) . A vaccine will certainly ameliorate the effects of the virus infection , will lower the circulating virus in an animal and make the sheep less infectious when the next midge bites. And a West Country farmer writes, " ...We cannot control midges, so sooner or later we have to embrace a prevention policy."

April 10th 2007 ~ slaughter of the host is pointless. It is nothing to do with being "robust".

DEFRA and its chosen stakeholders group will try to "agree a national control plan" for Bluetongue by the end of April. Culling is quite clearly inappropriate for this midge-borne disease. Unfortunately DEFRA is maintaining that its reason for not culling is an economic rather than a veterinary one:. " it does not want to be landed with a large compensation bill in the event of an outbreak, and appears keen to use bluetongue as the first major test of its cost-sharing and responsibility agenda. .." (Farmer's Guardian) One can only quote Dr Roger Breeze in the paper "Industry Cost Sharing" " Industry cannot negotiate meaningfully if its "negotiation" comments are only responses to proposals and goals of the government." It is patently unjust, if the government is doing little to check on the health of the piper, not only to call all the tunes but also expect farmers to pay for them - but it would be helpful if livestock leaders were more clued up on the science when they argue with DEFRA. Thomas Binns is quoted as wanting a "robust" policy. He means killing the animals and getting compensation but he also maintains (and is listened to, alas) that it would " stop the virus getting into the midge population and spreading to other farms" One can only assume, as one reader remarks drily, that he clings to the miasma theory of disease 'much subscribed to until Pasteur and other troublesome types came up with a germ theory'. Once bluetongue is detected in an animal over here, after all the delays that recognition and diagnosis will take, it will already be in the midges. One expert correspondent :
".. in such situations slaughter of the host is pointless. It is nothing to do with being robust. See Defra Preliminary Outbreak Assessment of April 4th to understand the likelihood of infected midges crossing the channel and note that the virus appears to have overwintered in Germany -possibly in both host and vector. If it has overwintered in Germany it is highly likely it has also overwintered in other previously affected parts of Europe. "

April 10 ~ "Gluing fly swats to cattle tails didn't do the trick..."

Also on the subject of Bluetongue, we have the thoughts of a farmer actually in the thick of the disease. Sabine Zentis from Germany, who breeds purebred Longhorns:
" Finding a clinical case of BT usually is the tip of the iceberg (lots of subclinical cases shown by blood sampling during winter) so talking about infected animals or infected farms doesn't make sense. The region around the holding is "infected" and neither biosecurity nor legislation can prevent the virus from spreading once it is introduced.
As midges can't be eradicated the only sensible option to stop trom spreading is the use of a serotype specific, inactivated vaccine..."Read in full
Ironically, DEFRA justifies its non-culling stance by saying bluetongue is an 'economic disease' that affects the livestock industry, but has 'no human health implications'. (Farmer's Guardian) The 2001 policy for foot and mouth, also considered an "economic disease" and one that does not affect human health, gained acceptance from many precisely because the vast numbers of killed animals were compulsorily (and generously ) purchased - an expense to the country now precluded by the draconian powers of slaughter in the amended Animal Health Act. This actually makes illegal the refusal to agree to slaughter shown by owners in 2001 who valued their healthy stock as more than mere commodities. The Act further ensures that there can be no further possible defeat of DEFRA in the courts over this - such as we saw in the Upton Case, for example.
Sabine Zentis writes,
" I don't agree with the term "economic disease". Although the clinical signs and mortality in sheep infected with BTV 8 are not as aggressive as seen with other serotypes of BTV, cattle infected and showing clinical signs are really ill. If treated properly they will survive, but besides the short term lesions of the mouth, tongue or teats they suffer from laminitis for quite a time. The long term effects on calves born to dams infected during pregnancy have not been investigated yet nor a suspected reduction of fertility or milk yield after infection.
Concerns for animal welfare should prevent the use of the term "economic disease ......From my experience (spread of disease in our region despite movement restrictions, housing of animals and extensive use of insecticides) the only way to stop the virus from moving further is to vaccinate in and around the infected areas. There is no other way to break the cycle of infection (gluing fly swats to cattle tails didn't do the trick) "

April 6th - 8th 2007 ~ "very simplistic modelling, and very easy to understand - but bears little relation to the heterogeneity present in the real world and to practical disease control measures"

We are very grateful that the commentary below has today been added to by a second veterinary expert (comments combined). This commentary seems to us to be of major importance, should be read in full, and passed on to others where possible, particularly to those for whom disease control has been allowed to become a matter of politics.(It opens in a new page for ease of printing.)
A population grown panicky about human health "... will turn their backs to anything - and, sadly, most people still believe whatever a 'boffin' - any 'boffin' - tells them" as the writer points out - and a reliance on a mathematical model like this latest one from Imperial College could spell disaster, as did the last in 2001. Notes on vaccination and transmission on this website are also very important.

Friday April 6th ~ The truth is in the field, not in the computer

We have received several emails on the subject of the Imperial College work by Dr Tini Garske and team on HPAI bird flu. Mathematical modellers, as we found to our great cost in 2001, are not specialists in veterinary medicine nor in virology. But models, because of the apparent elegance and simplicity of the virtual world overview they project, can seem to offer certainty. It is illusory but is of immediate appeal to non-scientist politicians. The language of the Imperial College release is clean, remote and theoretical, far removed from the noise, terror and warm blooded reality of what it is suggesting:
"....we found that pre-emptive culling and de-population of nearby at-risk areas succeeded in containing the outbreak, where other less drastic measures had failed."
Any non specialist reading the LSE.co.uk article (below) might well assume that killing to cure really is "the best scientific advice"for all bird flu strains - a neat final solution that must be right since the scientists say so. But the advice of the vets and the virologists is quite otherwise. They point out that the study was only of H7 types not H5. "The problem with these modellers is that they seem unable to differentiate different virus strains" The real specialists in diseases see the danger that theoretical modelling could become embedded to the exclusion of real evidence-based medicine (time-consuming but accurate) They want to see some hard assessment of the modellers' approach. (Click here for informed - and outspoken -comment on the lse.co.uk article.)
It was the eminent ProMed moderator, Martin Hugh-Jones, who warned his students: "The truth is in the field, not in the computer" He told them that only when models are "checked and rechecked against reality" can they be "fine-tuned and may eventually become useful." As for the Imperial College modelling into Bird Flu spread among farms (looking only at H7 not H5 strains) his comment yesterday was,
" How do the Imperial College people propose that their model be validated, in the event it were implemented?"
As the commentator says of the modeller,
"..... she should talk to some real experts, carry out some field work in different parts of the world, examine different husbandry systems and carry out a systematic review of avian influenza before she thinks of 'communicating' anything further. This is dangerous and ill-informed nonsense."

Friday April 6th ~ wild birds and access to waste meat...should the law be changed?

Robert Persey writes to ask for reader comments abut the apparent absurdity in the law regarding access of wild birds to waste meat.
".......your report that Bernard Matthews is not going to be prosecuted - even though it has been identified that wild birds etc had access to waste meat at the processing plant. .... I have just been reading the Animal By Products Order 2005 and section 11 para 4 identifies that it is an offence to allow wild birds to have access to a carcase or part of a carcase 'that has not been slaughtered for human consumption'. The law is therefore saying that it is lawful for wild birds to have access to a carcase or part of a carcase that has been killed for human consumption. Please could you ask your readers to comment. Should the law be changed?"
Read email and relevant paragraph of the Statutory Instrument in full. The email also refers to a possible reason for DEFRA's reluctance to take Bernard Matthews to court.

Thursday April 5th ~ Phil Brown and his fight for justice

The obituary for Phil Brown and the story of his fight for justice can be read here. (opens in new window)

April 4 2007 ~ Harriet post mortem results BSE NEGATIVE

The rev. Patricia Pinkerton writes, ".....called Newcastle VET Lab(government) this morning, and wheedled out of the technician that Harriet's test results came back BSE NEGATIVE... another triumph against evil. It has been a long haul, but the fight has been worth while. I must say that having the news to break to the family, was the delight of the day. They had proved DEFRA not only can be wrong, they can be VERY wrong. The results have been confirmed now by a letter ....we are sorry that Harriet isn't here for the good news..." The Harriet story

April 4 2007 ~ "Validation" - only when it suits...

For the six years since the foot and mouth control policy devastated the UK countryside and caused such misery we have had to listen to objections about the available technology in terms of lack of "validation" . However, it needs to be pointed out and repeated that the mathematical modelling that drove that discredited policy was not validated and no validation was ever attempted. As Dr Martin Hugh-Jones comments today (See www.fmd-and-csf-action.org) in connection with the Imperial College research story below
"Any model is only as good as its ability to be validated. How do the Imperial College people propose that their model be validated, in the event it were implemented? One of the criticisms of the Anderson FMD model was that it could not be validated. Nor, for that matter, was validation ever attempted with the very expensive result that we all witnessed."
It would be much appreciated if those who have an opinion about this could add their comments on the FMD and CSF Coordination Action website. Alternatively, write to warmwell Referring to the Imperial College research, Dr Colin Fink writes, "Just looking at this quickly, the first obvious comment is that this is a study looking at H7 types not H5. The evidence would suggest that H5 is only carried ( so far) with human carriage and movement of birds. The problem with these modellers is that they seem unable to differentiate different virus strains and these have different infectivity and means of carriage. So they are not comparing like with like."
(Click here for informed comment on the lse.co.uk article.)

April 4 2007 ~" ...what they are saying is inhuman, stupid and Neanderthal.."

Christine Bijl, an influential stakeholder featured on the FMD and CSF Coordination Action website, reacts with deep consternation at the report from Imperial College (again) of the mathematical model (another one) into H5N1 that asserts (yet again) that killing healthy stock is the "only" method of disease control
"...standard measures to stop spreading - enhanced bio-security, movement restrictions and culling of infected birds - did not succeed in making the number drop below that threshold. Instead, "pre-emptive" culling of healthy birds on nearby farms was the only method that brought the level below one and completely eradicated the spread." lse.co.uk
It is as if the now discredited mass culling in 2001 had never happened. But mathematical modellers, whose data is not sentient, receive generous grants to model disease, and Dr Martin Hugh Jones' apt advice too often goes unheeded:
"Why should I believe you when you have a computer pallor and no mud on your shoes?" he asks. "The truth is in the field, not in the computer. When models are checked and rechecked against reality they can be fine-tuned and may eventually become useful..."
Where are the questions asking why vaccine cannot be used "pre-emptively" and why has the nonsense about silent spread, silencing opposition among the anxious but ignorant, not been contradicted? As Christine wrote a year ago in the Netherlands, people ".. have a fundamental right to protect their animals as well as themselves." /hobbydierhouder.nl

April 4 2007 ~ The Milk Development Council shows that 17 dairy farmers a week have left farming in the past year

Today's MDC survey pdf file says this means a loss of 900 million litres of home produced milk in two years as a result of
"... low morale being caused by falling profits from poorer milk prices and, particularly, higher input cost...In 2005 the Farmers Intentions Survey predicted that 11% - equivalent to 2,378 - of dairy farmers would leave the industry in the following two years. According to Defra census figures, the actual number of leavers was 2,605 - or 12% - slightly more than originally predicted."
Retailers are under investigation from a Competition Commission inquiry into allegations that supermarkets have been using their enormous buying power to keep prices down. The Telegraph: "Tesco said yesterday that it would the raise the price it pays for milk by 4p a litre ...Tesco is also launching "local choice" milk, sourced from 150 family-owned farms. This will be sold only in the county where it is produced and retail at £1.23 for a four-pint bottle ...The move follows similar initiatives by Marks and Spencer and Waitrose..."
Allowing farming in Britain to decline has unfortunately seemed to have been a 'policy by default' of the present government. Again we quote James Lovelock as he contemplates what he calls the revenge of Gaia, ( Independent), "What we need to do is sustain our civilised way of life on these islands and for this we need a safe and secure supply of electricity, and to make sure that we have enough land that can be farmed to feed us all. The important thing is to make sure that we have a secure supply of food when supplies from abroad grow scarce."

April 3 2007 ~ In order to reach the coveted "disease free without vaccination" Taiwan - free of the disease since 2001 - is halting the vaccination programme that made it disease free.

- "...The outbreak 10 years ago led to the culling of millions of hogs, and all pig farmers have since been required to have their animals vaccinated regularly. Thanks to the concerted efforts of the public and private sectors, no further cases have been reported since February 2001.." Taipei Times
Who can blame Taiwan when, because of protectionist trade rules when FMD struck, Taiwan's annual pig production value fell by nearly a half - but the concept of "FMD-free zone without vaccination" is hard to justify. The difficulty in distinguishing animals that have been infected but then recovered from those that have simply been vaccinated has been solved, for example by Intervet's ready to use Chekit-FMD-3ABC Bommeli-Intervet NSP ELISA test. As Dr Roger Breeze wrote in his 2004 article Agroterrorism: Betting Far More than the Farm (pdf)
"... The trade rules for FMD do not reflect the contemporary science and technology of disease control; they are the lowest common denominator of what is possible internationally. Specifically, the rules penalize vaccination, encourage mass slaughter,and impose antiquated standards to demonstrate freedom from disease..."

April 2 2007 ~ The FSA are not going to prosecute the Bernard Matthews factory - "insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction "

Independent
"Defra said the FSA had been investigating Bernard Matthews on its behalf. There are no outstanding inquiries into the turkey firm which could lead to a prosecution, a Defra spokeswoman said. The FSA's investigation focused on possible breaches of Animal By-Products Regulations 2005, Animal By-Products (Identification) Regulations 1995 and Food Hygiene Regulations 2006. Defra expects its own scientific investigation into the bird flu outbreak to conclude after Easter. But that probe will not lead to any legal action, spokeswoman added."
Compare this to the treatment meted out to the little firm Bowland - forced to close because of very questionable"evidence" indeed. One question that might occur to the more cynical is to ask, "Is the FSA a watchdog or a poodle?"
Insufficient evidence seems an odd conclusion to reach in the Bernard Matthews H5N1 outbreak when we look at the string of flaws revealed: holes in the turkey sheds where birds, rats and mice could get in and out, leaking roofs and uncovered bins where seagulls were seen carrying off meat waste. And no one yet seems to have asked the key question about what the turkey poults were being fed on.

April 2 2007 ~ "the BTV8 vaccine will require a temporary authorisation for exceptional circumstances. ."

Merial has launched development work on an inactivated purified vaccine designed to protect cattle and sheep against the bluetongue virus (BTV8) It is hoped to have the inactivated vaccine available for use by mid-2008. More

April 1 2007 ~ New word in GovSpeak -"exemplification". It apparently means being sacked as an example to others - (unless of course you're at the top of the greasy pole)

Whitehall officials say the Treasury is punishing DEFRA with job losses for what the Mail headline now calls "Beckett farm payment fiasco".
".......Whitehall officials claim Mr Brown is punishing staff for the blunder and say he has coined a new term for redundancies 'exemplification'...."
Because of the RPA shambles the job cuts that had been intended were forgotten as DEFRA tried to get a grip on the fiasco. Now, even bigger cuts in spending are being frantically sought for. Apart from those unfortunate enough to have a career at DEFRA, the losers are, of course, ourselves, because those agencies that were intended to work on behalf of the countryside and the environment (see below) are being diluted beyond recognition or disbanded altogether. In order to find money to replace the forfeited £500 million ( fines to the EU, "fixing" the RPA failures and interest payments to farmers last year) it seems that up to one in two staff will lose their jobs. Hardly surprising then that there are dark mutterings among the foot soldiers about the unfairness of all this when Margaret Beckett, Sir Brian Bender and Andy Lebrecht are riding high, wide and handsome. In spite of Mrs Beckett's icy assertion below, there seems enough time for those at the top to expend a great deal of spinning energy in avoiding any contact with the buck.

March 31 2007 ~ Margaret Beckett is apparently "too busy with the Iran situation" to address the concerns of the EFRA Committee. She shifts responsibility back to the civil service.

The Yorkshire Post "...There was a similar reaction from the top Whitehall mandarin who was also savaged over the botched handling of the Single Payments Scheme - suggesting that no one else would lose their jobs in the furore..." And so it goes on. The Cumberland News quotes Copeland MP Jamie Reed, whose family contains a number of local farmers,
"As a former member of the select committee I was present when the Rural Payments Agency chief executive gave evidence about his organisation's ability to pay farmers on time. He was confident in the ability of the RPA to deliver. We all know that the reality was in stark contrast to this."
Reality on the ground often turns out to be in stark contrast to many of DEFRA's 'confident' assumptions - indeed it is their very "confidence" that is so frightening to so many. If Mrs Beckett's solution to the Iran hostage crisis is on a par with her confidence about the Single Payment Scheme back in 2005 we shudder for the consequences.
(EFRA report posting)

March 30 2007 ~ Bluetongue vaccine - " Killing 'infected' holdings is utter nonsense"

Merial is working on a vaccine for BTV serotype 8 and we are hoping to get information on this as soon as possible. They have already successfully produced an inactivated vaccine for BTV 4 Information from Merial. and the Bluetongue vaccination programme in Spain has as its objective
"vaccination of all the ruminant population (sheep and cattle) within the restricted zone so that
• the viral circulation diminishes (serotype 4)
• neither clinical signs nor deaths in ovine
• allowing movements to free zone
• achieving the eradication of the disease (More in pdf or here as html )
As for the UK "solution" of slaughter, our German correspondent writes, "Killing "infected" holdings is utter nonsense as by the time the clinical signs are obvious the midges have had their field day already."
From ec.europa.eu/ Q and A section Can vaccination be carried out against Bluetongue?
"Yes - it is possible to vaccinate against Bluetongue, and EU legislation on Bluetongue contains the option of carrying out a vaccination policy using live attenuated or inactivated vaccines. The establishment of a vaccine bank by July 2000 facilitated rapid and successful intervention against Bluetongue in the Balearic Islands. The EU later supported the vaccination option whenever national authorities wished to adopt this policy. In addition, the EU modified the rules regarding financial contributions from the Community to cover not only emergency situations but also the long-term surveillance of Bluetongue and control actions (vaccination)".

March 30 2007 ~ Bluetongue - Is vaccination to kill yet again the only plan for the UK?

As long ago as September 9th 2003, a BBC report on Bluetongue said, "Veterinary experts told the British Association annual science festival that efforts were underway to develop new, more effective vaccines to protect the national flock should disease reach these shores....."
Three years later, in 2006, Bluetongue had infected animals in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and especially, Germany. There is no recognised treatment. As the Scotsman says today, "...there is nothing in terms of biosecurity that can be put in place to stop the vector midge being blown across the Channel and the balance of opinion appears to be not a case of if, but when BTV hits the UK." Both the midge species and the strain concerned are different from that affecting the Mediterranean (the midge is native to the UK) , but we understand that Britain has not applied for marketing authorisation for vaccines against Bluetongue. The most recent DEFRA Contingency Plan we can find online says that
"Vaccination could therefore only be used on a vaccinate to kill basis" (See pdf file section 10)
There are millions of doses of vaccine at the EU Bluetongue Vaccine Bank, the EU Directive permits the use of vaccination as a control measure in certain circumstances - can it really be possible that it is, yet again, to be slaughter rather than the rapid diagnosis and vaccination vital to a modern animal disease policy that is to "cure" any outbreak?
The CVO, Debby Reynolds, in the Farmers Guardian on Friday wrote rather enigmatically, "Scientific evidence and veterinary service capabilities are essential and must be flexible to ensure the surveillance and prevention measures are suitable and flexible." Is "flexibility" to include making use of available technologies, listening to all sections of those affected by plans and making sure that scientific advice is clear and independent?

March 30 2007 ~ "DEFRA and the RPA must now publish a comprehensive reply to this report, demonstrating that they have learned from their many mistakes"

It is indeed ironic that while farmers are hauled over the coals for the smallest infringements, the big players have been promoted to dizzy heights or moved to similar positions - yet it is their own catastrophic failures that are costing the country up to £500 million in fines, "fixing" the failures and interest payments. A familiar story. To offset losses, as the CLA complains, "Defra has cut funding for valuable environmental projects as diverse as the new higher level stewardship schemes, maintenance of waterways, water quality improvement, flood defences and bat conservation...It talks green and cuts Natural England funding."
Dorothy Fairburn, regional director of the Country Land and Business Association (CLA) in Yorkshire is quoted byYorkshire Dales News. She points out that
"... many of the farmers who also had to grapple with a new system and relied on RPA advice were penalised heavily for even the smallest of errors during the application process. The RPA originally said they would 'take a light touch' to minor infractions, but instead we have seen a consistently heavy-handed approach. Failure to make payments on time, poor communication, disproportionate penalties and an appeal system that remains fundamentally flawed have shattered confidence in both DEFRA and the RPA who must now publish a comprehensive reply to this report, demonstrating that they have learned from their many mistakes."

March 29 2007 ~ "Her apology is rather like a burglar who has entered the premises and run off with the swag before expressing anger that the accomplice smashed the window on the way."

The Western Morning News is emphatic about the new EFRA report and its recommendations Geoffrey Cox, Conservative MP for Torridge and West Devon is quoted: "It is an utter denial of all responsibility of Orwellian proportions. ...." Similarly, Peter Kendall, president of the NFU: " our comments fell on deaf ears. ....this saga has cost farmers about £20 million of their money and untold stress."
The article gives the inevitable DefraSpeak response, mentioning only the RPA rather than itself
".... "A new management team is in place at the RPA. We are confident that the senior management team can deliver."
(One might have thought that "confidence" could now be exchanged for humility. And since when has "deliver" been an intransitive verb? Can anyone enlighten us as to its meaning on the planet DEFRA?)

March 29 2007 ~ Hardly surprising that Devon is particularly outspoken. That county, like other rural areas, has been so badly hurt by DEFRA.

And the damage done by that inept Ministry just goes on and on. Two years on from the foot and mouth disaster, a very angry piece in the WMN thundered:
" ......Some of the casualties of MAFF ineptitude were obvious - the farming families who were subjected to bullying, brutality, bureaucracy and force majeure and saw their lives' work rotting outside their windows, then going up in smoke. Millions of others were unseen, unsung and uncompensated - the farmers isolated and starved of accurate information, unable to trade or to move stock for month after month; the animals thus stranded in mires without fodder; the children subjected to ineradicable trauma; the many, many small, struggling, agriculture-related industries. And when it was all over? It wasn't all over. It continues to this day. Hobbled businesses stagger into bankruptcy...."
How little even that writer knew of the tragical mismanagement that was to continue. Almost exactly a year ago, when the RPA edifice crumbled, Simon Jenkins wrote in his Desperate dispatches from the banana republic of Great Britain that in former times, ".... The integrity of the civil service was taken for granted and the accountability of ministers was the rock on which the constitution was built. The traditional partnership between ministers and civil servants has collapsed, destroyed by Blair's sofa government and his miasma of agencies, consultancies and private firms. These lack continuity, leadership and accountability...."
The unwonted bluntness of today's EFRA report, its lack of tactful evasion, gives us hope that patience is running out. We are tired of so much talk of "improved delivery" . Reform after reform has failed. Government Departments are not businesses, DefraSpeak notwithstanding. Their job should be simply to administrate smoothly and fairly. Difficulties, unlike Gordian Knots, cannot just be cut through from the comfort of a sofa. Mrs Beckett told the National Farmers' Union conference in February 2006 she was "bloody livid" by the RPA's failures but taking responsibility should be the price of power.

March 29 2007 ~ "The Committee very much regrets the former Secretary of State's attempts verbally to distance herself from the consequences of policies which she herself must have approved "

The EFRA report on the Rural Payments Agency, published today (pdf) and expressed in the clearest and most unequivocal English, says that Margaret Beckett, Sir Brian Bender and Andy Lebrecht have not been held "personally accountable" for delays. The EFRA chairman, Michael Jack, said: "The reason that we are calling for people to consider their positions is because of Defra's failure to carry out one of its principal core functions. Those involved should examine their consciences about the role they played in this failed venture, which could well cost Defra and farmers up to half a billion pounds." The report calls the handling of the SPS a "catastrophe" and a "serious and embarrassing failure for Defra and the RPA"
It also recommends that the Cabinet secretary reappraises the work of the past and present members of Defra's senior management team to determine whether they should remain in post.
"decisions should not be made in isolation from practical realities," says the Committee. More on RPA page and see Reuters, www.politics.co.uk and Chris Huhne's comments( in which he points out that the last "honourable resignation" took place at the time of the Falklands war), and the BBC
The RPA disaster is likely to cost the country £500 million. (RPA)

March 28 2007 ~ "A clearly articulated business model; An innovative approach to citizen engagement. .."

We are not alone in our view that the sort of language emanating from Government departments, posing as "news", is a symptom of a deeper illness. Here are some examples of DefraSpeak that would have made George Orwell sigh gloomily at his own prescience:www.defra.gov.uk/news.
• "Renew Defra - will create a department which is more responsive and innovative; where outcomes will be developed in true partnership, and policy making will be effective and consistent."
• "our refreshed strategy"
• "a clearer sense of direction"
• "a new mission of 'one planet living' "
• "delivered through high impact policies"
• "overarching strategic performance management framework" (sic)
• "a Defra Customer Intelligence Unit... a focus point for how we engage with our customers"
• "Developing closer relationships with Defra's delivery bodies through enhanced performance reporting and representation on the Departmental Management Board"
The writers of such garbage, who are neither civil nor serving, seem perversely unaware that people who give a damn about any of this want clear information. Self-congratulatory abstract nouns and high sounding adjectives are without meaning on their own - and it is contemptuous wishful-thinking to imagine that anyone who has knowledge of DEFRA is still taken in by such language. Perhaps DEFRA should learn from the failure of the £7 million campaign that might have been called "Renew Bernard Matthews". It has changed nothing because nothing there could be shown to have been changed. Marketing is no substitute for product quality.

March 28 2007 ~ The combined acronyms would form the phrase "It's civil shrewd mess"- but the new agency is, in fact, to be called "Animal Health" .

In the name of efficiency and as per the Hampton Review, a new single agency will, beginning on April 1, amalgamate the State Veterinary Service (SVS) the Dairy Hygiene Inspectorate (DHI), the Wildlife Licensing and Registration Service (WLRS) - including (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), and the Egg Marketing Inspectorate (EMI). An anagram of the acronyms would form the phrase "It's civil shrewd mess"- but the new agency is, in fact, to be called "Animal Health" .
In DefraSpeak, a contortion of the English Language that, on a bad day, deprives one of the will to live, we are told that
" the bodies have formed a consensus group to take the mergers forward as a coherent programme."
Stackyard.com quotes Glenys Stacey, new Chief Executive of "Animal Health" who, using yet another dialect of English unrecognised by homo sapiens, proclaims her plan to
"become one organisation in every sense", "We all welcome this merger", it will " deliver more comprehensively and with the customer in mind."
Although reminiscent of British Rail customer services at its most traindead, this is the authentic new voice of government; Politics become salesmanship.
Which "customers" does Glenys Stacey have "in mind", one wonders. Perhaps the animals of Britain, whose health is to be enshrined, if nowhere else, at least in the title or "single banner" of the brave new amalgam. One emailer with harrowing recollections of SVS "expertise" in the past, doubts it.
"This grisly euphemism recalls the disgraceful "Animal Health Bill", referred to in smallholding circles as the Animal Death Bill. So let's just call the new agency "Animal Death" and be done with it. Oh, and who exactly are "the industry" and "the customer"? Do smallholders feature in either category?"
Animal Health takes its first steps on April Fool's Day. We hope our cynicism turns out to be unfair and unfounded. We hope too for the return, one day, of grace, grammar and gravitas in government language.

March 27 2007 ~ "Given that a key part of the remit of the FAO is to develop international agricultural trade, reticence to accept that this trade is the main agent of global dispersal of HPAI H5N1 is perhaps unsurprising."

The full text of the paper mentioned below, "Recent expansion of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1: a critical review" is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com
"When bird densities are low, a very virulent subtype leading to high host mortality may disappear because of the impossibility of transmitting quickly to healthy birds before the death of sick ones. In Asia, densities of domestic birds are especially high. These ecological conditions favour the preservation and the fast transmission of very virulent strains.....The only wild birds in Asia found sick were victims of the virus circulating in domestic birds (FAO 2005). .......it is intriguing that the number of wild birds contaminated by the virus seems so small, and that the virus apparently passes from domestic birds to wild birds only with difficulty. ....If migrating birds mainly dispersed the virus, the virus should also spread by large jumps of thousands of kilometres, throughout the migratory stopping places of Asia and Africa....
By May 2006, an international conference in Rome had recognized that the virus was mainly spread through the poultry trade, both legal and illegal, but OIE and FAO media releases (FAO 2006b, OIE 2006b) continued to focus on the possible contribution of spread by wild birds. Given that a key part of the remit of the FAO is to develop international agricultural trade, reticence to accept that this trade is the main agent of global dispersal of HPAI H5N1 is perhaps unsurprising."
And unsurprising also is the whole attitude of EU, OIE and FAO at the Verona conference. In spite of all the evidence and in the face of common sense, the official line is still " no vaccination, unless the situation gets out of control". Mass killing and so-called "bio-security" is still the mind-set - just as it was at the time of the FMD tragedy. .
Apart from the profit motive of globalised agricultural trade, it also seems that both politicians and pundits cling to ignorance about vaccination because it has a comfortable familiarity while challenging it can even define one as an "activist" - but the consequences of this may well be fatal.

March 26 2007 ~ "Within the area around the infected premises, there were enhanced levels of surveillance of wild birds."

In view of the findings of the paper (new window) below, confining surveillance to wild birds sites around Holton alone, as Ben Bradshaw's Parliamentary Answer (March 23) admits, is likely to have been of limited usefulness.
" While the investigation in the outbreak was under way, 25 wild bird locations comprising 73 sites in the area were regularly patrolled. Laboratory tests were completed on dead wild birds found in the area as well as on live wild bird droppings from the infected premises. All results were negative.
We are currently developing our investigation into what might have caused the outbreak of avian influenza at Holton. The conclusion of the interim report is that importation from Hungary is the most plausible route. However, investigations are still ongoing and nothing can be ruled out at this time. The final epidemiological report will be published in due course."
"In due course" we shall perhaps see if the right questions, about feed at the Bernard Matthews site, for example, were asked and answered..

March 26 2007 ~ As for the reality of "surveillance"

this article from FWi called "The True Cost of Scrapie" is revealing both about the competence of parts of the SVS and about the viability of all the legislation rushed into place about scrapie.
"...once the sheep had been genotyped the SVS sent through the genotypes with incomplete identification numbers. The EID boluses used have 16-digit identification numbers, but the paperwork we received only had 15-digit numbers on. The missing digit was the last one, which meant we were unable to match up the EID numbers with our own tag numbers, making it impossible to identify ewes of different genotypes."
With only one scrapie-affected ewe out of more than 1700 sheep on the farm the farmers in the article wonder what on earth it is all for - and even whether the initial test was right. In view of the most recent research and the fact that even the government now admits that scrapie does NOT mask BSE and the ram genotyping scheme is worthless, the answer seems to be "Nothing"

March 26 2007 ~ "Paradoxically, the H5N1 virus coupled with a fear of transmission by wild birds could lead to a reversion to battery farming which increases risk of outbreaks."

Recent expansion of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1: a critical review by Gauthier-Clerc, M., Lebarbenchon, C. & Thomas, F. is to be published in April in the British Ornithologists' Union's journal, Ibis ( Ibis 2007. DOI 10.1111/j.1474-919x.2007.00699.x) Blackwell Publishing comments:
"....No evidence for long distance transmission during seasonal migration has yet been found. The evidence overwhelmingly supports the hypothesis that human movements of domestic poultry have been the main agent of global dispersal of the virus to date. The occurrence of an outbreak at a commercial turkey farm in Suffolk, England, in February 2007 fits this wider pattern." ".... .... Paradoxically, the H5N1 virus coupled with a fear of transmission by wild birds could lead to a reversion to battery farming which increases risk of outbreaks. This would stall the current trend to better animal welfare resulting from free-range agriculture. Maintaining these trends, whilst controlling disease through strong veterinary scrutiny and control of trade, is more likely to be a successful strategy."
What we find so alarming is that while rigorous research is concluding that it is the unnatural conditions of intensive production and global movement that are causing flu strains to mutate into dangerous pathogens, the political reaction of the West is still to put the trade and profits from such production first, dismiss at the technological advance that could protect both animals and people, repeat discredited nonsense about silent spread from vaccinates - and sit back and watch while poorer nations outlaw the very back yard practices that not only provide people with a livelihood but which are the hapless victims not the cause of H5N1.

March 25 2007 ~ "The conference recommended that poultry should be vaccinated against avian influenza.."

".. particularly in endemic countries and when other control measures such as stamping out, movement controls of poultry and biosecurity cannot stop the spread of the virus," says the OIE report of last week's Verona conference.
"...A successful vaccination campaign depends mainly on the use of high quality vaccines complying with OIE standards, appropriate infrastructure to ensure the rapid and safe delivery of vaccines (cold chain), monitoring of vaccinated flocks, movement control of poultry, and adequate financial resources. Efficient veterinary services complying with OIE standards on quality and evaluation is also very important for the suspension of the use of vaccination. Any vaccination policy should include an exit strategy so that countries do not rely on costly long-term vaccination campaigns. The tools differentiating infected from vaccinated animals such as DIVA strategy (i.e. by diagnostic test designed to detect antibodies against the field virus) or the use of sentinel birds ( i.e.non-vaccinated) are recommended in the field when possible.
There are no elements indicating human health implications related to the vaccination of poultry and to the consumption of poultry products from vaccinated animals.
....Participants of the Verona conference also proposed to develop communication strategies to improve the vaccination coverage, to avoid possible market shocks and to apply basic biosecurity measures."
Other recommendations

March 25 2007 ~ "Well, Harriet had the last word."

The Reverend Patricia Pinkerton writes, "The family had her euthanased by the vet this afternoon following 4 days of discomfort. Her diagnosis from the vet was kidney failure. Within a few weeks , if not before, we should have the BSE results. We will put it on the website. I am sure everyone who knows Harriet thanks all who stood by.
RIP Harriet"
Harriet's body after euthanasia was taken to an abbatoir in Devon where her brain stem was removed and taken to an independent laboratory where DEFRA has no authority. Harriet was "cremated" at 8:30 a.m. on Saturday She is still a part of a judicial enquiry. Those involved are committed to carry on the fight on Harriet's behalf and on behalf of all other healthy animals threatened by bureaucracy rather than sound risk assessment. (More on Harriet) If anyone feels able to give a donation- however small - to help Harriet's owners who are still faced with the considerable legal expenses incurred during the fight to save her from DEFRA , details of how to do so can be found on Harriet's web site at: http:www.harriet-thecow.co.uk (new window)

March 22/23 2007 ~ Richard Sanders at Verona: "Well, I think we are winning the argument..."

Richard Sanders from the Organic Research Centre, Elm Farm, is at the Verona conference and talked on the telephone to Farming Today "....There's nothing that is going to engage the minds of politicians in the developed world more than seeing that there's a linkage between vaccination in poultry and human health and human safety. "
As for the trade implications of vaccination, Mr Sanders was emphatic:
"It does seem quite ridiculous that we have seen papers where (there is ) absolutely no risk (when) vaccinated birds or vaccinated poultry products are being traded ..absolutely no human health risk - you can't find any virus dangers or any vaccine dangers as a result of vaccination.
The danger is that vaccination of poultry for avian influenza is being used as a non-tariff barrier. It is yet another excuse to interfere with trade and people to pursue political gains. .
... we're all keen, sitting in Europe and North America, to lessen the threat of emerging diseases or spreading diseases such as avian influenza coming from the likes of Vietnam. "Vaccination is good for those people," we say but then we won't use it un our own developed economies because of issues of trade or "consumer acceptance" .... ."
Warmwell transcriptand see also FAO news report on the conference. "There are no elements indicating human health implications related to the vaccination of poultry and to the consumption of poultry products from vaccinated animals."

March 22/23 2007 ~ Verona Conference - Vaccination: a tool for the control of Avian Influenza

Today's press conference, to be held at 1 pm (Italian time) will be of great interest. The OIE press report , "There are no elements indicating human health implications related to the vaccination of poultry and to the consumption of poultry products from vaccinated animals. The conference called upon the commercial poultry industry to reinforce its engagement in the control of avian influenza under the supervision of national veterinary authorities. A call to international donors for the funding of vaccination in endemic countries, with particular focus on backyard poultry, was also made."
See also (Conference website)

March 21 2007 ~ "the main device under discussion at the meeting is a $1,000 mobile test system and reader the size of a small portable television"

Animal health experts from 15 nations, including the UK, are meeting today to discuss rapid diagnosis technology. The conference, The Early and Rapid Diagnosis of Transboundary Animal Diseases: Phase I- Avian Influenza is taking place in Vienna and is part of a $500,000 coordinated research project run jointly by the FAO and the International Atomic Energy Agency ( www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa). The project aims later to field-test devices, identify areas where the kits can be used first and explore sources of funding.
John Crowther of the Joint FAO/IAEA Programme's Animal Production and Health section points out:
"The genius here is that such mobile testers can be used by anyone, with the most basic training. Even farmers could do a test and the result could immediately be processed back to a central point, like a mobile phone message. Within two years, such tests could revolutionize disease diagnosis. Ultimately the tests would be done locally by people in their own countries, making schemes much more efficient in everything including speed, costs and local knowledge."
See more at www.un.org/apps/news/story
( It was in 2001 that Professor Fred Brown first argued for the UK to field trial such a device. As it was, with neither vaccination nor on-site diagnosis, carnage by computer, ruthlessly enforced, was the result of the UK's inability to pinpoint where the disease really was.)

March 21 2007 ~ "new life to the theory that mad cow disease started out in cattle, rather than crossing over from sheep."

The new research mentioned this week in the New Scientist carried out by the Italian scientist Fabrizio Tagliavini and his colleagues at the Carlo Besta Neurological Institute in Milan, suggests that the recently discovered disease called bovine amyloidotic spongiform encephalopathy, or BASE, is a natural prion disease of older cattle, which turned into BSE - and that all the speculation about scrapie "masking" BSE or having caused BSE may now be wholly discredited .
As we say below, all attempts to duplicate BSE by deliberately giving scrapie to cows have failed - and ministers have finally accepted that a fully-funded ram-genotyping scheme (costing a great deal in money and misery) is no longer "appropriate". SEAC defended the RGS as "an appropriate disease control policy based on the available scientific evidence..." (Defra ) - but the advice of Dr Alan Dickenson - independent expert scientific advice, given in January 2001 - was certainly available. A major recommendation of the Select Committee on Science and Technology Seventh Report was that the so-called precautionary principle should "never be considered a substitute for thorough risk analysis which is always required when the science is uncertain and the risks are serious. It should not be used, in itself, to explain a decision or course of action."
(The assumption that BSE came from cows eating scrapie-infected sheep, discredited above, is very similar to the unproven conjecture that vCJD is caused by humans eating BSE-infected beef. Massive layers of legislation and bureaucracy based on that continue on their juggernaut path. See also Harriet - where the government's clinging to the precautionary principle is an evident absurdity) More comment on the New Scientist story at AllaboutFeed.net

March 2007 ~ The only innocent parties in the Dobbin story seem to have been the 583 slaughtered cattle

As more details emerge of the facts in the David Dobbin case described below, it seems that - although we continue to deplore the parking of the dairy herd on a farm which had no milking facilities, and then claiming 'welfare' to shoot them - things are more complicated than at first appeared.

March 20 2007 ~ Sainsbury's responds to consumer concern about factory farming.

Or, at any rate, it has announced that it will phase out eggs from caged birds by at least 2012. See Sky News Sainsbury's says " ...all its free range eggs were labelled with a code which can be traced back to the farm of origin." The company also says today ( good timing for the company, given the news below about egg fraud from abroad) "regular audits and checks to ensure free range standards are kept up".
At least this sort of news alerts more people to the fact that the cheapness of battery eggs carries a high price in terms of animal welfare and health and - given the ease with which factory farms like the Bernard Matthews plant can introduce and harbour pathogens - that it is no longer acceptable for such practices to be condoned.

March 19 2007 ~ "As public concern about cruelty to farm animals grows, there has been a huge surge in demand for such eggs, which can cost as much as 80p a dozen more than battery hen products." Daelnet.uk

The free-range egg swindle, said to have covered about two percent of free range egg sales in Britain, is reported on today by, among others, the Daily Telegraph, Farmer's Weekly Interactive, Reuters and the Guardian. The scandal raises even more questions about accurate labelling - and proper checks. But the fraud emphasises UK consumers' increasing reluctance to buy food from factory farms. As Daelnet.uk says, "Such has been the demand that British farmers have been unable to match the increase in production so millions of eggs are being imported from two as yet un-named European countries. ....by selling them as free range, the British egg packers and distributors will have racked up millions in fraudulent profits. There have been similar cases in the past - including prosecutions in Yorkshire several years ago - but nothing on the scale of the current investigation."
Meanwhile, it is determined individuals - such as those in the Hackney Environmental Health Services team - who are doing the real work in trying to stamp out the lucrative illegal meat trade. Such first hand work is dangerous and unpleasant - as are the criminals against whom they are fighting. (The descriptions and photos involved are not for the faint hearted.)

March 19 2007 ~ A variety of GM corn, legally imported into European Union countries since 2006, has produced signs of liver and kidney toxicity in rats

"....with the present data it cannot be concluded that GM corn MON863 is a safe product" concludes the paper Analysis of a Rat Feeding Study with MON863 Reveals Signs of Hepatorenal Toxicity MON 863 has been allowed to be legally imported into European Union countries since 2006 as a food and feed product. As its name suggests, MON 863 is a GM maize developed by Monsanto. They maintain that genetically modified feed is harmless. Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen says he found that it produced around one kilogram of poisonous substances per hectare - more than farmers would use in pesticides. According to studies by his group, CRIIGEN, the maize caused symptoms of poisoning and liver and kidney damage in rats that had been fed the product during 90 day experiments.

March 18/19 2007 ~ Electronic tagging: "The appropriate technology is simply not yet reliable"

The sanguine words of Kelvin Pate, the chairman of the NFUS livestock committee, about the approaching end of the UK derogation on EU double tagging rules for sheep, are quoted in the Scotsman
"I think it is clear that double tagging just can't work in the Scottish situation. Aside from the massive financial bill that it would entail, it would be impossible to operate on the ground, given the structure of the industry. I think common sense will prevail "
but the Scotsman says in connection to the compulsory introduction of electronic identification for all sheep, proposed for 1 January, 2008 : "The appropriate technology is simply not yet reliable" It adds that, "as ever, politics are likely to come into play" If an unreliable and unworkable system is imposed on the UK we may soon be seeing far more of the sort of disgraceful and distressing incidents described by Christopher Booker (see Sunday Telegraph story) - and that the one thing highly unlikely to prevail is common sense. On March 19, the ever-ready Ben Bradshaw said, "... We have yet to decide on what numbering system we will adopt should EID be introduced. Discussions with the devolved Governments and interested organisations in England are ongoing."

March 18/19 2007 ~ If rules could really be shown to be based on common sense there would be no argument.

But, as the Scotsman says, "as ever, politics are likely to come into play". There might be less argument about the difficulties and expense if it could be clearly shown that stapling plastic to both ears of unfortunate farm animals was helping to prevent disease, quickly pinpoint and cure disease outbreaks, or stop in its tracks the global movement of pathogens. But officials are, as is ever the way of officialdom, more concerned with the policing of the rules than with evaluating the rationale behind them and using common sense and judgement.
Of no apparent interest to officialdom is the rapid diagnosis technology to identify disease on-site. Slaughter, with no appeal allowed, is still the first response for FMD and Avian Influenza. Vaccination, which really would help, is still an issue of protectionism and not permitted in the UK. But the reams of identification rules have not been able to identify the source of the Suffolk H5N1 outbreak at Bernard Matthews factory-cum-slaughterhouse, paper trails have been shown to be more theoretical than real - while the TRACES database is a mess.
Juan Lubroth, head of the Infectious Disease group at the UN FAO, even said on Farming Today on Feb 19th
"I don't have a good idea of what percentage the informal or illegal trade represents to the world trade. I do have access to a lot of statistics through FAO on what a country exports but I don't know where they export to. I have a lot of information on which countries are importing but I don't know who they're importing from..."
As for the draconian rules on BSE that seem to have been the root cause of David Dobbin's miserable encounter with DEFRA , the Countess of Mar in a recent TSE debate pointed out: ".. all regulation in this field is based on a hypothesis - not even a theory - that none of the "establishment" scientific community can prove, despite millions of pounds of taxpayers' money being thrown at the subject.... . "

March 18 2007 ~ "His only alleged offence was "non-compliance" with complex bureaucratic procedures, to an extent which Defra still cannot specify".

The Muckspreader story that so sickened us below, about the entire dairy herd killed by DEFRA, gets fuller treatment today in the Sunday Telegraph ".... Last November, on Defra's instructions, the officials seized all Mr Dobbin's passports, making it illegal for him to move animals off his farm and all but wiping out his income. Last month, serving him with a "notice to identify", they removed his herd to another farm, stating that, under EC regulation 494/98, it was their intention to destroy all 567 animals. .... Defra has never claimed that the paperwork for most of Mr Dobbin's cows was not in order, only that the officials had found "what they believed to be an unacceptable level of non-compliance with the regulations", and that this "could have serious implications for the protection of the human food chain". ..... it had no resources to look after the cattle properly, causing severe "animal welfare" problems. The judge felt he had little option but to give the go-ahead, and on March 8 and 9 the cows were destroyed.
All Mr Dobbin can now hope for is that the judicial review may confirm that Defra acted outside the law." Judging by emails read (example), this story has distressed and worried warmwell readers more than any other since the disgraceful scenes witnessed in 2001.

March 16 2007 ~ "We have been as frivolous about food as we have been about the environment and the planet..."

The magazine Country Living has launched a campaign with Waitrose and The Farmers Guardian to raise awareness of the need for fair trade for British farmers. (More about the campaign.) It is called Fair Trade for British Farmers and will also be supporting Farms Crisis Network. There is an excellent and well-illustrated article by Lisa Sykes in the March edition of Country Living (pp.37-42), describing the problems facing British farmers, using four telling slogans: No Farms no Fields, No Cows No Countryside, No Beef No Birds and No Flocks No Flowers. The article is one of the best explanations of the interdependence of farming and the countryside. In hearing about the seminar that launched the campaign, we were particularly struck by John Gummer's view that we have failed to recognise our responsibility as a species for the stewardship of the earth's natural resources - and that we have not treated these resources with the respect they deserve. "We are all in this together and we all have to get it right together......We have been as frivolous about food as we have been about the environment and the planet."

March 16 2007 ~ Free vaccination for 95 percent of cattle in Venezuela

4 million vaccinations were administered free of charge. Venezuela plans to set up dozens of animal health laboratories in the nation. See FMD news, a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis.
Five years ago the Royal Society said, "Important advances have been made within the last year, both technical and in the attitudes of the authorities and consumers, that should allow emergency vaccination to develop porton into a prime control strategy rather than one of last resort. Emergency vaccination should therefore be considered as part of the control strategy from the start of any outbreak of FMD."
As for Diagnostic methods: "Modern diagnostic methods, including penside tests, need to be developed that can shift the burden of diagnosis to veterinarians on the farm. Rapid diagnosis, particularly before clinical signs appear, would limit the size of any epidemic and improve the strategic deployment of resources."
Yet, even after so many years and so much patient argument, the UK continues to trail behind Latin America for reasons that remain unfathomable to this website - unless those reasons merely concern potential profits for Enigma Diagnostics Ltd (Porton Down).

March 15 2007 ~ " I hate academia. Most of the scientists who work there are not free men any more and they can't speak out. That's no way to do science. "

James Lovelock is quoted at length in today's Guardian ( link now working). We consider him to be wholly admirable, extraordinarily knowledgeable - and he answers to no one. What he says is deeply alarming - but the mildness and humour with which he says it we find both refreshing and cheering. In these days of wolves high on the narcotic of power leading sheep to slaughter it is nice to see that there is a wise and benign shepherd, towering above them, telling it like it is.

March 15 2007 ~ a "key question"

Last November, the EIG ( the oddly named England Implementation Group) gave, in its report (pdf), a prescient warning: "... old habits are hard to break, and Defra will need to guard against an instinct to return to its default position of "command and control" .... Whether Government is really ready to fundamentally change its ways of working is a key question. We have been encouraged by a very different approach from that which was heavily criticized during foot and mouth.... Key players have felt much more involved and in touch with developments and the rationale for decisions. .."
Mere wishful thinking. DEFRA's old habits - here described by Muckspreader in this week's Private Eye - continue, and in their arrogant, senseless callousness, destroy lives and livelihoods - and make strong men weep.

March 15 2007 ~ Notes on the Defra FMD & CSF stakeholders' meeting on 28 February 2007

Posted up on the "Disease control: Ideas for cost sharing between industry and government - Forum and discussion" page of the the FMD/CSF website are notes by Mary Marshall. Reading between the lines of the tactfully measured language, the February 28 stakeholders meeting seems to have been a classic example of command and control, telling and not listening. Cost cutting appears, for DEFRA, to have been the one important item on the agenda. At the same time, adding yet more layers of bureaucracy and dividing participants into sub groups is a time-honoured divide and rule tactic. This is not funny. At a time of ever-accelerating global movement of dangerous pathogens, DEFRA's attitude in a meeting about disease detection and control is both frivolous and dangerous. From the notes, it is evident that:
• Really crucial points about diagnostics and testing were interrupted by the Chair. A question about treatment of vaccinated meat was deferred to a private conversation at a later date. Urgent inquiries about the accessibility of on-site diagnostics were not answered.
• Communication issues, which have so often been referred to before by these stakeholders, are still not being addressed. It particularly rankles that when DEFRA communicates with media, they are not bothering to give these most concerned stakeholders the same information.
• In spite of the time for this meeting being drastically reduced at the last minute, a great deal of it was taken up by a reading aloud of material that participants could have read for themselves - and probably already had.
• Discussion of points raised was not allowed - while DEFRA's answers to urgent and relevant questioning betrayed either a woeful lack of knowledge or else an unwillingness to engage with the subject at all.
• The role of the Expert Group and the Science Advisory Council remains unclear in spite of constant requests for clarification.
• It seems that DEFRA is only now working on a contingency plan for BlueTongue - a disease that is playing havoc in Northern Europe and will, it is feared, arrive in the UK any day now .
No business could support such serious inadequacies of management. But this centrally imposed incompetence and ignorance is putting the country, its animals and population in danger.

March 14/ 15 2007 ~ "Why are politicians so clueless when it comes to rural matters?" Magnus Linklater in the Times

Times " Why do they impose regulations that don't work, using a bureaucracy that can't implement them?"
His article highlights the most recent depths of absurdity; that subsidy entitlements can be traded and anyone can buy them. "Even if you have never ventured from behind a city desk, all you need is to be classified as a farmer, which you can do through the simple expedient of taking out a lease on less than two acres of land, and holding it for ten months. ... It is becoming big business"
We are pleased to read that he too, like us, gives a Cassandra cry for sanity - and with about as much hope, one suspects, of its being heeded.
"As oil production peaks, and reducing carbon emissions becomes a key target in the battle against global warming, the demand will be for more local production rather than the long-distance trade in cheap food from abroad that keeps our superstores supplied at present. Neither Gordon Brown nor David Cameron mentioned it when they unveiled their separate green policies this week, but encouraging "localisation" - smaller units, less trucking of long-distance food, more self-sufficiency in farm production - is vital to a successful rural economy and essential if carbon emission targets are to be met."

March 14 2007 ~ Centralisation and "top-down" policies - the decline of local responsibility, good sense, economies, post officies, local services, the spread of Ghost Town Britain and the disappearance of democracy.

There is an arresting passage in Golding's "Lord of the Flies" where the bully, whose stone throwing has never done any real damage, comes to realise that there is no one to complain, no one to prevent his grabbing power, no one to stop him aiming in deadly earnest. In the past years, we have seen political "consultation" and "Stakeholder" meetings to be little more than a contemptuous charade. Where there is no genuine organised opposition to insane policies, people power is all that is left. Local Works org has this One Page Brief of the Sustainable Communities Bill
Consider also visitingTescopoly and Asda Watch (Asda in the UK is owned by Wal-Mart) - well organised campaigns for taking back local responsibility and protesting against unethical practices.
Consider checking whether your MP has yet signed Andrew George's EDM
"That this House recognises the vital and unique role that independent locally run shops play in communities and is concerned at the continuing decline in their number; supports a sustainable UK farming sector and food supply chain whilst seeking to ensure that overseas suppliers are treated fairly; believes that the major supermarkets are now abusing the power that they have in the food supply chain ..." More
( Rebecca Solnit's article today in the Guardian on the subject of how horribly easy it is to do nothing beyond hand wringing is salutary.)

March 14 2007 ~ the five freedoms - "aspirations" rather than guarantees, it seems

So much for the RSPCA's "ethical" labelling - at least as far as the secretly filmed footage shown on 'Tonight with Trevor McDonald - The Truth about Ethical Food' is concerned. The ever more powerful RSPCA administers the Scheme - but with only 10 full-time officials to police it, farms can go up to 15 months without an inspection. The programme showed in distressing detail that life for farm animals - at any rate in the 'monitored' Freedom Food farms filmed on the programme - is as nasty, brutish and short as that for so many others in industrialised farms. Workers are so distanced from the reality of suffering that they were shown punching and kicking the animals in their charge. It was sickening. Both the ethics of industrialised food production and the newly politicised power of the RSPCA must surely now be scrutinised. It would appear that the whole thing is a scam. "Ethically produced" food can cost at least twice as much as its equivalent but people who believe that they are paying for a better life for the animals may simply be being conned. DEFRA has scornfully asserted that Britain is in a 'post agricultural' era . Such thinking ignores dangers of animal disease and zoonoses. Since labels have by recent events been shown to be worse than useless, knowing the provenance of decently produced local food and buying from local farmers and producers is more than ever necessary. We should keep our side of the bargain with the animals we use for food - if only to safeguard the health of the nation - by giving them a stress-free life and humane death.

March 14 2007 ~ UK farmers needed for window dressing

It will be interesting to see if the much respected CIWF reacts to last night's programme on their website. No one seemed to be at the end of their phone this morning.)Among reactions to last night's exposé of the ethical food scam programme above we have heard from one decent English farmer who has got out of mainstream production, who agrees with our reservations about the RSPCA's politicisation, who had (as did many others) to turn off the Tonight programme, and who has just written to say of the English countryside and farming, "we are still needed to provide a seductive window dressing for the grim reality of industrial food production."
Yes indeed. Bootiful. There is now a petition on the petitions.pm.gov.uk website (new window): " We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to hold a Public Enquiry into the polices and running of the RSPCA". There are well over a thousand signatures.

March 13/14 2007 ~ Rumours of warmwell.com's demise exaggerated...

Apologies - and many thanks for the concerned emails that have been arriving since Saturday. Warmwell's temporary absence has been due - not to a technical glitch, oversight, foul play nor Act of God - but to the sort of incompetence more often seen in a government department. However, there, the incompetence is generally followed by denials, bluster and promotion for those responsible. In the case of UK2.net, the mistake has been acknowledged. We have received an apology, token compensation - and matters have been rectified.

March 10 2007 ~ "Prevention and control of avian influenza: the need for a paradigm shift

in pandemic influenza preparedness" The current edition of the Veterinary Record carries a VIEWPOINT article by A. Martinot, J. Thomas, A. Thiermann, and N. Dasgupta. The "paradign shift" referred to refers to the need for a change in attitude towards both vaccination and diagnostics. Instead of merely preparing for an inevitable pandemic, they argue, we should instead be aiming to prevent the disease at source.
".......Controlling avian influenza, using vaccination when appropriate, is not only a mechanism to contain a potential global health crisis: it is a means to prevent income loss for both families and countries, to promote development and to protect the welfare of animals...
...The strengthening of veterinary infrastructures worldwide will not only minimise the risks of avian influenza, but will also provide the early detection and rapid response capabilities for future emerging diseases. However, this will require a shift in thinking from preparation for an inevitable pandemic to pre-emption of the pandemic through prevention among animals."
The Abstract. is free to view.
(More on Vaccinating Birds against H5N1 on this warmwell page - updated as soon and often as possible.)

March 10 2007 ~ Agriculture ministers from six South American nations have agreed on a joint policy for improved cooperation in eliminating foot-and-mouth disease in the region

China Peoples' Daily reports "In a Friday meeting in the southern Bolivian city Santa Cruz, ministers from Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay, agreed that under a framework of cooperation, the six nations will work to enhance common standards to strengthen the prevention of foot-and-mouth disease. The six nations will take control measures under the recommendations of the World Animal Health Organization. The policy will also mobilize the technical support of the Panaftosa laboratory, the Inter-American Agricultural Cooperation Agency, and the United Nations's Food and Agriculture Organization. .."

March 9 2007 ~"Together with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) we're working hard to learn all we can from this episode." Bernard Matthews

Bernard Matthews' full page advertisements in several national newspapers today carry his personal claim that "my turkey is completely safe to eat". He thanks the public for their "support" . He insists that " I've never stopped instilling my core values of quality, value and customer care into every Bernard Matthews product." The adverts say that the products have undergone "the most rigorous independent scientific tests available"
The move is as predictable as the language is breathtaking. As an example of the spinmeister's art it is extraordinary - and was probably very expensive. (We now know it cost £7 million.) Now that a spotlight has been shone on his factory methods, little wonder that Bernard Matthews is anxious to persuade people that "Our standards of hygiene and bio-security are some of the most stringent in the world" - but the claim that it was the plant's "hygiene and biosecurity" that was instrumental in "detecting the virus, containing it and eradicating it in 72 hours" is without substance and the flaws in both have been well documented Free-range poultry keepers were inconvenienced and worried for weeks as a result. On it goes... "... we will not be complacent because bird flu did strike us. Together with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) we're working hard to learn all we can from this episode " Unfortunately, in the area of animal disease, the UK's record on learning lessons is pitiful. In this outbreak, there are many unanswered questions and it is looking more and more as though as though answers are not ever going to be easy to extract. Perhaps there are those who would rather they remained unanswered. British taxes are going to be spent on paying the company its £600,000 compensation. Free range poultry owners are not going to be allowed to protect their birds because of a much repeated piece of nonsense. Intensive factory farms seem set to go on transforming the miserably short, unnatural lives of farmed poultry into vacuum packed meat products for the supermarkets. That the cost of all this is much too high must surely now be self evident.

March 9 2007 ~"I wouldn't be surprised if the last thing David Miliband wanted to do was debate the performance of his department"

The Western Morning News reporting on the fact that a full agriculture debate has not been held in the House of Commons for more than four years: "...Critics accused ministers of running scared from a catalogue of criticism on the handling of the foot and mouth crisis, tackling bovine TB and the botched new farm payments scheme.....the farming community has struggled with the aftermath of foot and mouth, faced the threat of bird flu and been hit with long delays in receiving EU grants in an administrative bungle. ......Shadow environment secretary Peter Ainsworth said: "I wouldn't be surprised if the last thing David Miliband wanted to do was debate the performance of his department. We will look for an opportunity to have a debate on exactly this soon."

March 8 2007 ~ It would be useful know for certain that the Holton chicks were not infected via feed.

The government and the FSA are at pains to say that none of 93 tons of turkey meat from Hungary had gone "near the sheds where infected birds were found and it was processed on other areas of the site" - but intensive farming tends to make use of everything in its desire for cheapness. Waste meat is put in a shredder, mixed with other "nutrients", and fed to turkeys. Both turkeys and chickens will eat meat. Even waste products from poultry are used as feed in the factory farming system. It would be useful to know both the provenance and precise contents of the feed given to the infected poults. A very obvious question is whether chicks could have been given feed that could have contained the virus. Presumably, if asked, that is a question that cannot be fobbed off with "we may never know".

March 8 2007 ~ 93 tons of turkey meat from Hungary (unrecognised apparently by the TRACES database) were being processed in Holton at the height of the outbreak

BBC and ITV report that 93 tons of turkey meat from Hungary, were being processed at Holton at the very time the H5N1 scare was at its height. Labour MP Roger Godsiff received this information from Caroline Flint the Public Health Minister - but it is absolutely at odds with DEFRA's Preliminary Outbreak Assessment (pdf) on January 24th about the outbreak in commercial geese at Csongrad in southern Hungary. The Preliminary Outbreak Assessment said:
"The TRACES electronic database indicates that there have been no imports of poultry or poultry products from Hungary to the UK for the past three months."
How could the TRAde Control and Expert System - a "system which provides automatic notification to the veterinary authority of a receiving Member State when an official veterinary health certificate is signed in a consigning Member State" have been so entirely wrong - and why was DEFRA relying on this in its assumption that the likelihood of the introduction of this disease from Hungary to the UK via legal trade before and after this outbreak is considered negligible ? We understand that TRACES is regarded as "hopeless" in Holland and that the Dutch government does not work with it. Neither David Miliband nor Lord Rooker referred to these Hungarian imports at the start of the scare. (See letter from Peter Ainsworth to David Miliband.) Did these DEFRA Ministers not know? Were they not told or did DEFRA really not know at that time? Was the omission deliberate? Trust in the veracity of government statements is not helped by this sort of uncertainty.

March 8 2007 ~ ".. vaccination. It has been decried for years, but perhaps its time has come."

As reported by FMD News, the service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis and summarising the article at www.cambridge-news.co.uk.
"Speaking to the Cambridge Society for the Application of Research, Dr. Mike Thrusfield said: "The millions of animals slaughtered last time were a tragic loss. Government scientists still claim that the episode was a success. To me it was a cull by computer....In the 1967 outbreak we slaughtered animals from infected farms - 440,000 in all. In 2001 the Government used computer models instead of vets as their source of advice. As a result they killed six-and-a half million farm animals, nearly 15 times as many, yet the epidemic subsided at the same rate. Next time there's an outbreak, we may well see the use of vaccination. It has been decried for years, but perhaps its time has come."
Dr Thrusfield's talk last Monday was called: The Eternal Triangle: Science, Propaganda and Disease Control; the facts behind the 2001 Foot and Mouth Epidemic

March 8 2007 ~ " Is it not time to abandon this Buzzword, "BIOSECURITY", so beloved by Defra and government".

An emailer writes,"It is obvious to any one with clinical experience that no agricultural premise either intensive or extensive can ever be "secure" - with the frailty of humans and the occurrence of vermin, insects and birds, not to mention human activities of every description.
One glance at ITV pictures from the Hungarian incident must make this obvious.
Please can we use a simple term like " disease control measures",which describe the situation and are not designed to give a false impression to the public of the actual situation and the risks involved. "Biosecurity" is not an accurate description of this or any other outbreak situation."

March 7 2007 ~ " it is considered acceptable for us to risk contracting bird flu from our poultry"

A British poultry farmer has written to warmwell deploring the UK vaccination policy "surely vaccination of poultry should be allowed if only to protect those working with the birds?" he writes. "....It was a letter from NHS offering free (human) flu vaccination for me and my helpers which set me thinking. NHS wanted us to be vaccinated to reduce the chances of us suffering normal flu at the same time as we meet the HP bird flu virus. .... The NHS letter stressed the vaccine offered would NOT protect us against bird flu. In other words it is considered acceptable for us to risk contracting bird flu from our poultry, but we cannot be allowed to have normal flu at the same time because that would mean everyone else would be at risk...." Read in full

March 7 2007 ~ "Certainly the Chinese can investigate what is going on in Guangdong and if their (poultry) plants there contribute to those strains, they could so something to intervene"

A genetic analysis of the virus published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by a team at the University of California Irvine claims that China's southern Guangdong Province is a source of H5N1. The researchers' maps show China's north-west Qinghai Province to be another source of bird flu's spread. The Hong Kong Standard is just one paper to report on the study but the China Daily carries a denial from the Guangdong Province that its factory farms are to blame.
Local poultry farming in Hong Kong relies on day-old chicks supplied from China and, according to this USDA report, all live poultry supplies from China to Hong Kong come from Guangdong.

March 6 2007 ~ "Figures for imports into the United Kingdom of live day-old turkey chicks from outside the EU are not currently available. All consignments of live birds are liable to documentary and identity checks." Lord Rooker ( Hansard )

The government was not able, on February 8th, to answer questions about where turkey poults from outside the EU may have come from, how many and when - and yet implied that controls were adequate.
A question that must have occurred to many is the actual provenance of the chicks that succumbed to H5N1 at the end of January in a shed containing 7000 of them at Holton. Has any reader seen an answer to that question? If cheap poults were coming in quietly from countries such as Thailand, has that information been recorded?
Angela Browning - who, as a former Agriculture Minister, was certainly in a position to know all about control inadequacies - said in 2002, "It is all very well to try to source the cheapest of the cheap, but most people are looking for the reassurances on quality and safety that come with British standards. There does not seem to be a thorough enough checking system on imports to guarantee those standards....."

March 6 2007 ~ Hansard slip...

From the PQs below
"staff were required to shower on entry to the site and change footwear on entry to any particular House of Commons."
As one emailer writes, "is this a typo, a serious description or a joke? Very wise whatever. Certainly we are having a flu A outbreak at present . Just in the last two weeks...."
(Good at any rate to know that Parliament is taking biosecurity so seriously.)

March 6 2007 ~"... what the remit is of the inquiry by his Department into the recent events at Bernard Matthews at Holton in Suffolk; and how the (a) proceedings and (b) conclusions of the inquiry will be communicated to the public"

The Parliamentary Questions from friday are at least as interesting for their content as are the officially worded answers. The fact that they are continuing is a hopeful sign. There has never been an official explanation of how the foot and mouth virus got into the UK . The widespread assumption that the Waugh farm was the index case is widely questioned and challenged. This time, the phrase "we may never know how it happened", may not so easily be allowed to stand. (Warmwell would very much welcome comments on the answers given to these PQs. They would not be published.)

March 6 2007 ~ Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London "made his name by advising government on tackling the spread of BSE and foot-and-mouth."

"He is now one of world's most influential experts on infectious diseases including pandemic flu" enthuses this BBC report on the setting up of the "Medical Research Council's new Centre for Outbreak Analysis" which will "work with international health bodies to identify dangerous new diseases and stamp them out as quickly as possible."
The reaction by many warmwell readers may well echo the final paragraphs of Private Eye's Muckspreader a year ago.

March 5 ~ "... the development of highly pathogenic strains of bird flu lies at the door of factory farming."

If the experts cited by CIWF in its report last month are right and " the development of highly pathogenic strains of bird flu lies at the door of factory farming" then much of the frantic killing of domestic birds has unfairly targeted them and attention should be focused instead on the factory farms. Perfect biosecurity is a myth as was shown at the Bernard Matthews plant at Holton with its open bins of meat waste. But production and trade were given the nod to resume almost immediately. Most experts agree that it is only a matter of time before the virus mutates into something approaching the 1918 killer and this should put the bland assurances of the influential factory farmers into perspective. They like to defend both the inhumane and unnatural conditions and the to-ing and fro-ing of product parts by saying that these places produce cheap meat for those on low incomes. The irony of this is heartbreaking. The virus' human victims are the poorest. The winners are those in the huge food industries watching the demise of independent farming. If nothing is done to analyse more fully the part played in the spread of H5N1 by the massive and ever-expanding intensive poultry industry the safety of millions could - in all seriousness - be in the balance. Recommended reading for those who have time is the Agroecology website 'Agroecology' - the discipline that "provides the basic ecological principles for how to study, design, and manage sustainable agroecosystems that are both productive and natural resource conserving, and that are also culturally-sensitive, socially-just and economically viable" .

March 5 2007 ~ Avian influenza targets those without a voice - An enquiry should be conducted into the role of the global, intensive poultry industry in the spread of H5N1

One consequence beyond Britain of the assumption that domestic and wild birds are the primary cause of H5N1 is that Jakarta has banned household poultry there. There were about 1.3 million backyard birds in Jakarta. Thousands of families were given until Feb. 1 to consume, sell or kill their birds. After that, in scenes that many of us will remember with a shudder from 2001, "inspectors" went from door to door to destroy any remaining birds. The Indonesian government pledged to pay about $1.50 for each infected bird but most birds were perfectly healthy. No one knows how Jakarta's poor will replace the income they once received from chickens and other birds - the only source of income for many women and children. But Indonesia has not got the funds to compensate properly.
The NewYork Times recently published an article by a group of 24 government officials, public health experts and scientists from 11 countries who recently met in Bellagio, Italy, to call attention to how pandemic planning affects the world's disadvantaged . The article points out that industrial-scale poultry producers - and it cites Bernard Matthews - usually have the resources to absorb the losses whereas when the birds of small-scale poultry farmers are culled, "entrepreneurs who were just beginning to move up the development ladder can be plunged right back into poverty..." While many in Britain are still reeling from the news that the Bernard Matthews plant, with its known breaches of bio-security, is in line for massive compensation, the poor countries, without proper resources, really are floundering.

March 5 2007 ~ Indonesia's actions "understandable" - poorer countries need affordable vaccines

Indonesia's decision to withhold human bird flu virus samples from the World Health Organization has caused international consternation, but The Lancet has called Indonesia's actions "understandable." There have been 63 human deaths from H5N1 in Indonesia. (Globally, at least 167 of the 277 people known to be infected with bird flu since 2003 have died.) The Health Minister, Siti Fadilah Supari, says she is waiting for a promise from the U.N. agency that any new specimens sent will not be used for commercial vaccines ( likely to be too expensive for Indonesia to buy) adding that she has no problem sending viruses to be studied if they will not be used commercially. The WHO has given no such undertaking.
Last January the US and donor nations pledged more than $2 billion for Bird Flu. We don't know how much has actually been spent but last June just $286 million had been used in the fight against the disease. Both Dr. David Nabarro, senior UN system co-ordinator for avian and human influenza and Dr. Joseph Domenech, head of the FAO's animal health service deplored the shortfall of funds saying agencies were being "run ragged".
The Lancet says " To protect the global population, 6.2 billion doses of pandemic vaccine will be needed, but under current manufacturing capacity the world can only produce 500 million doses... in a pandemic, it is industrialized countries that will have access to available vaccines, whereas developing countries -- where a pandemic is likely to emerge -- will be left wanting The fairest way forward would be for WHO to seek an international agreement that would ensure that developing countries have equal access to a pandemic vaccine, at an affordable price."

March 3/4 2007 ~"The massive international movement of livestock and their products - the only possible beneficiaries of such unnecessary movements are a few powerful individuals ..The rest of us pay the price ."

Alan Beat at smallholdersonline.blogspot.com makes some worrying remarks about the export trade so often used to justify the unjustifiable. He checked the official UK statistics for the last twelve months at http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/datasets/poultrade.xls
"The Bernard Matthews fiasco has once again exposed to public gaze this massive international movement of livestock and their products. In reality the so-called "export trade" is broadly counterbalanced by matching imports, at huge cost to the environment. The only possible beneficiaries of such unnecessary movements are a few powerful individuals and corporations who exploit the financial imbalances of international markets. The rest of us pay the price in environmental degradation..."
The next update to the DEFRA statistics in the movement to and fro of chicks, turkey poults, live fowl and carcasses is due on March 29th. It will be interesting to see whether the Bernard Matthews H5N1 outbreak will have made even a small dent in these figures.

March 3/4 2007 ~ UC Davis research study aimed to protect the US from foot-and-mouth disease

The tide may at last be turning with this reference to vaccination in the news release from the Center for Animal Disease Modeling and Surveillance (CADMS) in the School of Veterinary Medicine at UC Davis. They have now launched a nationwide research study, asking american livestock producers to participate in an online survey. They will, they insist, keep confidential the vital information collected about the distribution of livestock nationwide, animal movements and husbandry practices in the US. An effective response strategy needs up to date information and, learning from the tragic inaccuracies of the UK 2001 modelling, the UC Davis team know that asking for cooperation (rather than demanding it) while at the same time assuring confidentiality and transparency is essential if modelling data is to be of any use in evaluating "alternative strategies for disease mitigation".

March 2 2007 ~ "If one cannot get to the bottom of how a disease has come in, it is not fair to expect the industry to carry the costs. "

Lord Rooker came under some pressure in the House of Lords on Tuesday Feb 22nd when repeating the DEFRA mantra that the origin of the outbreak "may never be found". The Countess of Mar spoke of DEFRA's "lack of assiduity in tracing where the virus has come from" while Baroness Byford insisted, "My Lords, will Defra be able to finalise where this disease has come from? At the moment, the Government's move within the industry is to share the costs of future animal disease outbreaks. If one cannot get to the bottom of how a disease has come in, it is not fair to expect the industry to carry the costs. ..."
Lord Dykes wanted to know of Lord Rooker; "... will the noble Lord confirm that the origin of this contamination now appears to be clear and that it was definitely not wild birds? Will he also reassure the House that the Government are coping with the worrying stories that keep coming along of very poor live-poultry care in the East Anglian turkey-processing factories, sloppy hygiene procedures and misleading origin advertising?" Read in full

March 2 2007 ~ Verona Conference. Ben Bradshaw says DEFRA "officials" will attend.

Hansard. Peter Ainsworth asked Mr Bradshaw yesterday " whom he expects to represent his Department at the Vaccination: a tool for the control of avian influenza conference in Verona on 20 to 22 March 2007" (See details below) Mr. Bradshaw's answer did not name anyone nor say how many 'officials' are going to attend this important conference on vaccination. He did however reveal that, "Officials from DEFRA's Exotic Disease Prevention and Control Division and Veterinary Exotic Diseases, Research and Official Controls Division will be attending."

March 2 2007 ~ Local Suffolk free-range poultry owners astonished by "snippet" of news announcing the end of some restrictions

Local people around Holton feel outraged by the announcement from the County Council in their Suffolk Snippet and by its tone of voice. The "snippet" wholly ignores the serious animal welfare concerns, the inconvenience and the cost to owners of having been forced to house their birds in unnatural conditions around the outbreak at the Bernard Matthews factory farm. Some restrictions were lifted yesterday. However, rather than being lectured on the need for vigilance or bio-security, many people would rather know that the origin of the outbreak is being properly pursued. As the virologist Ruth Watkins says below, " It is imperative that the highly pathogenic H5N1 is stopped from circulating round the world. It is dangerous to expose humans and wild birds to infected domestic poultry."

March 1 2007 ~ Parliamentary Question about recent imports from Hungary ignores assertion from DEFRA on January 24 2007

From Hansard we read that Bill Wiggin asked Ben Bradshaw on Tuesday " how much meat from (a) geese and (b) turkeys was imported into the UK from (i) Hungary, (ii) Europe and (iii) the rest of the world in each of the last six months" The answer gave a table showing imports from July to December 2006. Mr Bradshaw said that December 2006 figures are "currently the latest" which are available.
However, when H5N1 was discovered in domestic geese in Hungary in late January 2007, the DEFRA Preliminary Outbreak Assessment (pdf) dated January 24th, said: "The TRACES electronic database indicates that there have been no imports of poultry or poultry products from Hungary to the UK for the past three months." (TRACES means "TRAde Control and Expert System - a system which provides automatic notification to the veterinary authority of a receiving Member State when an official veterinary health certificate is signed in a consigning Member State")
Just a couple of weeks before the virus appeared in the intensive factory at Holton, DEFRA's stated view was that
" the likelihood of the introduction of this disease from Hungary to the UK via legal trade before and after this outbreak is considered negligible."

March 1 2007 ~ Why did DEFRA think that there had been no legal imports from Hungary at the time of the Hungary infection?

Why did they insist that the likelihood of the disease passing into the UK was considered "negligible"? For DEFRA at least, the assumption seems to have been that the risk was purely from wild birds - an assumption that has, at last, been challenged by David Nabarro, the UN co-ordinator for avian and human flu, who said intensive poultry production was behind the spread of the virus this year. In spite of DEFRA's assumption at the beginning of the outbreak that wild birds were the cause, and even as free range birds were being forced indoors, there was no live bird sampling or surveillance going on in Suffolk. (See also letter from Dr Lucas MEP)
It does seem a little disingenuous of Mr Bradshaw to have told Mr Wiggin that there was no current information about January imports when DEFRA seems to have been so reliant on the TRACES database. In fact, as we now all know and as DEFRA was later to admit, lorries had been passing to and fro between the Bernard Matthews plants in Suffolk and Hungary all the time. It seems highly likely that the abattoir, the Gall Food abattoir in Kecskemet, that killed his turkeys had also processed infected geese. Is it conceivable that DEFRA really did not know about the UK and Hungary operations carried out by Bernard Matthews at the time of their Preliminary Outbreak Assessment - and does this not raise serious questions both about the paper trail, current controls and the extent of DEFRA's knowledge - particularly in view of the government's haste in allowing the factory to resume operations? And if, as Mr Bradshaw also said on Tuesday,"Scientists at the VLA together with DEFRA scientists, representatives of the Science Advisory Council and scientists in the Devolved Administrations provide regular advice through the Exotic Diseases of Poultry Experts Group" are owners and farmers satisfied that they are getting up to date and valid information from these experts?

March 1 2007 ~ Yesterday "severe biosecurity shortfalls" and " poor hygiene practices" - today news of £600,000 compensation

Fred Landeg has today talked about DEFRA's lack of complacency and the necessity for poultry keepers to practice good bio-security. Bernard Matthews claimed that his factory farm "meets and in many cases exceeds Defra's bio-security measures" - but the government reports revealed what the Guardian called a "string of flaws" and the company could still face prosecution. The latest news today (Sky) is that Bernard Matthews company is to receive £600,000 compensation for its slaughtered turkeys. Meanwhile, the free-range poultry owners around the plant who want simply to be allowed to protect their birds with vaccination and are not allowed to do so, are still being forced to keep them in unnatural conditions. Not surprisingly, Chris Huhne says, "I would prefer it if Defra were talking about fines and throwing the book at Bernard Matthews for sloppy practices and risk-taking."

February 28 2007 ~ "....we can't do anything to imperil that £370 million a year export trade, can we?"

Private Eye looks at the sequence of events following the Suffolk H5N1 outbreak and seems somewhat less than impressed with the UK government's response. Read in full

February 28 2007 ~ Vaccinated animals do not go visiting unvaccinated ones

We find it quite extraordinary that the FMD page of the EU Commission's website even now, still carries the sentence, so often quoted by those who, for various non-veterinary reasons, play down the proven efficacy of vaccination: "Vaccination with the use of conventional vaccines protects from disease, but does not prevent infection and consequently a carrier state" This assertion suggests that a vaccinated animal can pass on virus to an unvaccinated one. It ignores the fact that animals are vaccinated in herds and stay on farms. Unlike people, who constantly interact over wide distances, herds stay together.
As was pointed out in 2001 by an expert now holding a very senior international post indeed, (and then evidently exasperated by those who said that vaccination only prevents disease occurring and does not interfere with transmission), vaccinates "are not mixing and milling about the countryside".
" .... vaccinated animals produce little or any virus by routes that are expected to be involved in spread by people or objects" "... Experiments by Terpstra and colleagues in Holland were conducted to determine whether a well vaccinated animal might spread infection to a NON-vaccinate stabled in the same shed -and drinking from the same bowl. They used doses of virus which are huge compared to an expected level that might occur by a vaccinated animal meeting infection "over the fence". The results show that transmission can occur, but at low rates and were only shown to occur with NON-vaccinates. In reality, if virus infection is a risk in the area, ALL animals on a farm would be advised to be vaccinated. Only ridiculous disease control strategists would advise vaccinating only a few animals on the farm (as occur in the experiments such as Terpstra's), or mixing vaccinates and non-vaccinates when there is infection in the immediate area. ..."

February 27/28 2007 ~ EU to set up emergency rapid reaction veterinary teams ready to move within 24 to 36 hours

The International Herald Tribune quotes EU Health Commissioner Markos Kyprianou who says that recent and past outbreaks of bird flu, swine fever or foot-and-mouth disease in the EU "highlighted the importance of having well-prepared, well-trained personnel available to provide their expertise in dealing with the problem." The Commission is setting up a veterinary expert team that can be deployed at short notice to respond to outbreaks of animal disease. "An EU panel of national veterinary experts approved the plan, allowing the commission to go ahead and draft a list of team members from across the EU. Experts will be drawn from the fields of laboratory testing, veterinary, virology, wildlife, risk management and other areas to be ready to move within 24 to 36 hours to affected areas ..." The European Business Guide adds that
".....The team will also collaborate closely with experts from international organisations, such as the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and International Office of Epizootics (OIE). Member States will submit lists of experts they propose for the emergency team, along with detailed profiles of these candidates, to the Commission. From these submissions, the Commission will the team members and inform Member States of its choice through the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health. The list of experts will be updated on an annual basis, and the list will be available on the Commission's website."
It will be interesting to see, on the Commission's website, which experts from the UK are selected. In the past, those advising government have too often been chosen from the ranks of ambitious researchers seeking funds or those unable to rise above narrow vested interest groups. Because of a lack of true independence, such 'experts' are unable to withstand political pressures - and politics has dominated animal health control for far too long.

February 27/28 2007 ~ Supermarket low prices spell doom for traditional dairy, beef and sheep farms

Farmers supplying the supermarkets receive around 18p per litre for milk. It is sold for 49p a litre, making milk cheaper than some bottled mineral water. The Independent : quotes NFU President Peter Kendall:
"It is encouraging that supermarkets are now falling over each other to paint themselves as the "greenest", the "most sustainable" or even the "most responsible". It is now a matter of urgency that this rhetoric becomes a reality ..."
Justin King's reported response: "We cannot and will not prop up inefficient businesses" - seems an easy quip, ignoring the unfairness of the huge mark-up. It suggests, moreover , that his supermarket at least thinks that big profits made from cheap imports are of greater importance than safeguarding British farming.
Such a views ignores the prophetic words of Professor James Lovelock in The Revenge of Gaia: "... Unfortunately our nation is now so urbanised as to be like a large city and we have only a small acreage of agriculture and forestry. We are dependent on the trading world for sustenance; climate change will deny us regular supplies of food and fuel from overseas. .. ... .. ......we need secure indigenous supplies of food and energy.... we cannot rely on supplies from abroad..."
The Independent reports (28th Feb)Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, " the television chef and champion of small producers, is fronting a new offensive against the supermarkets which he portrays as a "bullying" force destroying British food. He will denounce the supermarkets at a public meeting in Westminster tonight (Wednesday) and demand new powers to limit their growth. (More).

February 26 2007 ~ "it is timely to convene the best renowned experts to address the issue of global guidelines for vaccination"

The Verona conference, taking place in March, reflects the feeling in both the OIE and the FAO that the strategic use of vaccination is now of great importance.
".... using the DIVA approach or the frequent monitoring of sentinel birds, vaccination has successfully controlled or prevented the disease on many occasions. Nevertheless, ensuring vaccine quality control and the appropriate use of vaccines is a significant issue in many countries, and should form part of the national intervention strategies of at risk or infected countries. ... The OIE and FAO consider that it is timely to convene the best renowned experts to address the issue of global guidelines for vaccination with regard to international standards, regulations and the implementation of vaccination programmes..."
There is no reference at all, by Dr Bernard Vallat, Dr Joseph Domenech or Dr Stefano Marangon, to the often quoted DEFRA contention that " Vaccination can mask disease and therefore could spread the disease further". (See below) It may be assumed that the Director General of the OIE, the Chief Veterinary Officer of the FAO and the Director of Science IZSVe are better informed than Ben Bradshaw and the Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton. It is to be hoped that our policy makers will receive up to date information and advice straight from the conference itself.

February 25 2007 ~ Rapid Diagnosis for flu in birds: Multiplex test

From the latest report of the USDA/ARS Research Project: Development and Validation of Rapid Diagnostic Tests for Avian Influenza and Newcastle Disease
".....We have also developed an internal control to be run as a multiplex test with both the AIV and NDV tests to assure that the RRT-PCR reaction was performed correctly. The internal control should help to eliminate false-negatives. We have also developed hemagglutinin subtyping tests for most of the 16 described subtypes of AI. We remain active in the evaluation of primer sets to assure they work well with outbreak viruses from around the world. Finally, the development of dried down reagents to aid in the stability of the reagents, increased quality control, and ease of use of the test has already developed interest from a number of different diagnostic laboratories. The Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory (SEPRL) has been on the leading edge of use of real time PCR testing as a diagnostic test for viral pathogens of poultry with its work on avian influenza virus and Newcastle disease virus. Through collaborations with APHIS, the rapid diagnostic test for avian influenza and Newcastle Disease was validated and adopted by APHIS ...."

February 23 2007 ~ "Stakeholders are currently talking to DEFRA about vaccination delivery. A third meeting should eventually be held..."

Dr Chris Ashton, who represents the British Waterfowl Association on the DEFRA poultry stakeholders group, has asked warmwell to publish a document about vaccination against avian influenza and on the efficacy of vaccines. Elm Farm Research Centre produced a paper on this subject which they launched at a Parliamentary Reception in July while Dr Ashton herself gave a short presentation at a DEFRA meeting in June about the desirability of having a policy in place before the disease actually arrived. What needs to be made a lot clearer is the circumstances in which DEFRA would allow the vaccine to be used. For keepers of small numbers of birds, 'backyard birds', the question is urgent - although luckily these naturally reared birds are the ones least likely to get ill. Most of the cases - certainly in Laos and Holland - have been in industrial poultry, and it does seem to be becoming an inescapable conclusion that it is the global poultry industry and the unnatural rearing conditions which are the problem. As owners say, "Quite why our pets and pure breeds have to take the risk, we really don't know."

February 21/22 2007 ~ "There is little question that adequate vaccination will reduce shedding levels and thus the virus load.."

Dr Bernard Vallat, Dr Joseph Domenech and Dr Stefano Marangon have written the Introduction: to the Verona Conference taking place next month (20-22 March) Its title is Vaccination: a tool for the control of avian influenza. This is a scientific conference on vaccination, co-organised by the OIE, FAO and the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Venezie, and supported by the European Commission to review the current methods and recent experiences in the use of vaccination against avian influenza.
".....a control strategy that is based only on the application of sanitary measures to increase biosecurity and the culling of animals that are infected or suspected of being infected, has proven not to be sufficient to avoid the spread of infection. The OIE and FAO consider that it is timely to convene the best renowned experts to address the issue of global guidelines for vaccination...There is little question that adequate vaccination will reduce shedding levels and thus the virus load ....."

February 21/22 2007 ~ Vaccination of birds. Russia moves immediately. UK still dithers

Warmwell has recently posted several emails from leading virologists on the subject of vaccination. They are highly qualified, have no vested interests. Although the issue is complicated, the bottom line is simple.
• Vaccines protect a population against a ' wildtype' infection when sufficient number are vaccinated - a figure usually in excess of 80%.
• Vaccinees will take a given time (with current H5N1 vaccines the time is, according to Intervet, 1-2 weeks after the first injection in a course of two shots of killed vaccine) to raise a T-cell and antibody response whereupon the vaccinee will be protected. An annual booster may be required.
• The vaccine must be a close enough match in its surface proteins to the wildtype to evoke a protective response, create neutralising antibodies.
Unfortunately, what has been described as "the obsessional focus by DEFRA" is that a few individuals who have partially responded but then, before protection is complete, meet ' wildtype' virus early after vaccine may have mild clinical disease and may possibly excrete some virus in to the surroundings. This does not matter because
• the vaccinated flock puts a stop to the chain of infection. The whole exercise is to reduce spread and these hypothetical few cases, with much reduced virus shedding, would not, even if they existed, allow the virus to gain a foothold.
The earlier vaccination happens the safer for the flocks and the environment because they will have responded fully to the vaccine before their encounter with wildtype virus.
Without vaccination, one is left with the UK solution of racing after the virus, killing en masse, imposing draconian restrictions on healthy stock and trying to stop virus contamination in any local environment with disinfectant.

February 21 2007 ~ It is imperative that the highly pathogenic H5N1 is stopped from circulating round the world. It is dangerous to expose humans and wild birds to infected domestic poultry.

Although what we have seen in Suffolk seems the most economic option for the government when one poultry farm is infected, the real cost is borne by the farmers. They have been forced to take free range birds indoors, make temporary netted enclosures, buy disinfectant, and have had their production interrupted by restrictions. Their livelihood is also jeopardised by the inevitable public lack of confidence. Eventually the cost of this disease spread worldwide by trade in chicks, poultry dead or alive and its products, feathers and faeces will be borne by the world - and far more dearly than the gain of any trade in poultry. Supermarkets must accept some responsibility here and promote vaccinated poultry products without allowing a negative aura to be created or marking them down.

February 21 2007 ~ 1.1 million tonnes of foreign pork, beef and lamb was imported into the UK in 2006

The Yorkshire Postreports that foreign meat imports were 675,000 tonnes in 1995. In addition, 560,000 tonnes of poultry was imported last year. Foreign meat can be labelled British even if it was only processed in the UK - and processing could be merely smoking bacon or curing ham. Shoppers keen to buy British produce are misled by labels. The Government's refusal to introduce country of origin food labelling is not hard to understand in view of the profits involved - but when people hear (as they did in Farming Today This Week) of then extraordinary shuttling of the same turkeys, alive and dead, between England and Hungary and the present lack of adequate controls for welfare and safety, labelling is more and more urgently needed.

February 21 2007 ~ cavalier use of data in the Manchester Business School study on the environmental impact of organic farming

Letters in the Independent are forthright: " bad study, bad maths and bad conclusions.... Instead of computing meaningless comparisons between farming systems, let's engage some serious economic brains on how to feed a hungry world when we've "eaten" all the oil and all the gas" wrote Richard Sanders of Elm Farm, while Nigel Tuersley remarked dryly ".....MBS have removed at a stroke the dilemmas of policymakers as they grapple needlessly with the resolution of irreconcilable objectives. Unburdened by irrelevant externalities, agribusiness can, once again, reclaim its rightful crown as the only rational alternative. ...... Can we look forward to further groundbreaking studies from MBS demonstrating that rainforest depletion is "on balance" beneficial ....?" Read in full

February 20 2007 ~ New Meat Byproducts: Avian Flu and Global Climate Change

The Worldwatch Institute's report Vital Signs 2007 - 2008 says that sixty percent of global livestock production takes place in intensive "confined animal feedlot operations" (CAFOs) in the developing world. At least 15 nations have restricted or banned free-range and backyard production of birds in an attempt to deal with avian flu on the ground, a move that may ultimately do more harm than good, according to Danielle Nierenberg, a Worldwatch research associate:
"Locating large chicken farms near cities might make economic sense, but the close concentration of the birds to densely populated areas can help foster and spread disease. In Laos, 42 of the 45 outbreaks of avian flu in the spring of 2004 occurred on factory farms, and 38 were in the capital, Vientiane. In Nigeria, the first cases of avian flu were found in an industrial broiler operation ...then quickly to neighbouring backyard flocks.....
...where animals are concentrated by the thousands, diseases erupt and spread quickly. Trade in poultry from these operations is a culprit in spreading the disease to smallholder farmers. Experts suggest that rather than culling smaller, backyard flocks, the FAO, WHO, and other international agencies should focus the bulk of their avian flu prevention efforts on large poultry producers and on stopping disease outbreaks before they occur.
"While H5N1...may have been a product of the world's factory farms, it's small producers who have the most to lose." says Nierenberg. ( See these two articles on the upcoming report.)

February 20 2007 ~ Russia to vaccinate all birds near Moscow

Science Daily "Russian officials are set to prevent a possible outbreak of the avian flu by vaccinating at least 1 million domestic birds in an around Moscow. While all Russian poultry is typically inoculated twice a year, Russian veterinary experts informed the press agency RIA Novosti that all birds near Moscow will soon be given free vaccinations to prevent an outbreak of the virus. The move comes as five cases of the avian flu were reported near Moscow, including one Monday in which the presence of the H5N1 virus was confirmed...."

February 19/20 2007 ~ "Where has the idea that there is long term circulation of H5N1 in a fully vaccinated flock in the absence of disease in the flock come from?"

Another email from the virologist Dr Ruth Watkins, commenting on paragraph 21 from the EU Directive, should be read in full by those who do not necessarily accept the received wisdom of the government on the subject of vaccination. ".....Where has the idea that there is long term circulation of H5N1 in a fully vaccinated flock in the absence of disease in the flock come from? What is the documentary evidence for it? I would have thought that if the virus were to continue to circulate in a fully vaccinated flock there would be the evidence of diseased birds as the immune cross reactivity of the vaccine virus would be so poor as to have failed to evoke the protective antibody, neutralising antibody to H5. .." Read in full

February 19 2007 ~ David Miliband now says that poultry in the protection zone have been "sampled"

Channel 4 ".....Tests had also been completed on poultry samples from 21 premises in the protection zone and in all cases there was no evidence of infection. ...MPs have been told that the earliest time at which bird flu restriction zones in Suffolk could be lifted was the second week of March - provided there were no further outbreaks or suspect cases in the area. ..."

February 19/20 2007 ~ MEP: "PREMATURE RE-OPENING OF SUFFOK FARM BREACHES EU LAW"

We have heard this afternoon from the office of the South-East England's Green MEP Caroline Lucas. Dr Lucas has demanded that the European Commission investigate the re-opening of the Bernard Matthews plant.
".....If the government doesn't follow EU rules it is British farmers who will pay the price, as this failure means the disease is more likely to strike again - and the EU will be able to blame the UK Government and deny any compensation claims. I have today demanded the European Commission investigate the Government's decision to allow the plant to re-open so soon."
See Dr Lucas'Letter to Commissioner Kyprianou (pdf)

February 19 2007 ~ "It was a complete mess with dead birds still lying around the site - and tatty, torn, blown out buildings and made Bobby Waugh's look like the Hilton."

An emailer tells us that on Friday (16 Feb) ITV 6.30 and 10.30 news programmes both ran an extensive report "..showing the dire state of the farm in Hungary that had had bird flu in geese - it raises all sorts of questions about what the level of bio-security is in Hungary - and if birds slaughtered at the same abbatoir is the same one that dealt with this farm then it is very easy to see how the disease could be transferred. I just wonder if Defra saw the footage and is now acting upon it."
Bird flu seems quietly to be dropping out of the news. Intensive factory methods and the extraordinary to-ing and fro-ing across borders of chicks, slaughtered birds and carcasses continue. But Farming Today This Week (new window) was entirely given over to the subject of the bird flu crisis and raised some very important points about such issues as bio-security in the big plants, global movements, labelling issues and the likelihood of change. Interesting to notice the number of times Mr Fred Landeg emphasised the "humane" nature of the killing of the turkeys at Bernard Matthews, and the fact that Mr Alick Simmons said he was "perfectly happy" about the present situation.) There was even a hint that the political condoning of the always expanding multi-national poultry industry may well be at the very root of the crisis.

February 19 2007 ~ enshrined, as if in amber, is the back-covering rider that vaccinated poultry may become infected

While anxiety increases among the small free-range poultry owners, talk of "silent spread" continues to be allowed to fuel the justification for the UK's policy of non-vaccination. The EU Directive clearly says,
"Vaccination against avian influenza can be an effective tool to supplement disease control measures and to avoid massive killing and destruction of poultry or other captive birds. Current knowledge suggests that vaccination may be useful not only as a short-term measure in emergencies but also as a long-term measure to prevent disease in situations of higher risk of introduction of avian influenza viruses from wild life or other sources. Provisions should therefore be established for both emergency and preventive vaccination."
But then, enshrined as if in amber, is the back-covering rider that vaccinated poultry "may become infected and thus contribute to the further spread of the infection" No wonder many of the talking heads are repeating it. The virologists, however, who understand how vaccination works, say that it is nonsense not to vaccinate.
".... there is now good scientific evidence on the efficacy of H5 vaccines available to the EU. Once poultry have had a full vaccination course it is known when they have the full protection offered by the vaccine. I believe this is about 3 weeks after the first injection. There should be information from Vietnam about vaccine efficacy in the field as well. It is inexcusable if this has not been obtained, for instance by the WHO."
The UK shuts up free range birds and, even in an emergency, drags its feet on vaccination - but, as we see below, the Directive's rules on surveillance are not being followed by those who are so ready to quote it.

February 19 2007 ~ Of course no vaccination for any disease, animal or human, can ever be 100% but if enough individuals are vaccinated a virus infection can be eliminated.

(See below ) The Hong Kong paper cited on our H5N1 page clearly indicates that with that strain of the H5N1 virus and the vaccine used in 1997, infection could not be maintained because insufficient virus was being shed.
The infection chain was broken.
Italy has used vaccination to ring highly pathogenic H5 or H7 virus in years past with apparent success. What seems to be happening in the UK is that officials, who assume that it they say 100% success cannot be claimed for vaccination, will be justified in the public mind in warning against a near zero risk. The media seem most reluctant to point out that choosing instead to ignore the available vaccines which responsible poultry keepers are so anxious to be able to useis far more dangerous for the country .
And not only journalists. It seems that most public service scientists have a clause in their contract banning membership of outside groups that might have the courage to question current dogma. Must it always be a voice in the wilderness that cries foul?

February 19 2007 ~ UK fails to adopt minimum EU measures on avian influenza

The EU Directive says that the minimum control measures to be applied include Surveillance programmes to:
(a) detect the prevalence of infections with avian influenza virus subtypes H5 and H7 in different species of poultry;
(b) contribute, on the basis of a regularly updated risk assessment, to the knowledge on the threats posed by wild birds in relation to any influenza virus of avian origin in birds.
As we now know, no surveillance of live birds in the Protection Zone has been undertaken at all to 'detect the prevalence of infections with avian influenza virus subtypes H5 and H7 in different species of poultry'. Yet the Bernard Matthews plant has been allowed to continue as if nothing had happened. Free range poultry, however, has been forced indoors. The UK, so ready to use EU regulations to justify its sometimes coercive behaviour would appear to be reneging on its responsibility to the population. As for the Chief Veterinary Officer, Debby Reynolds, no sight or sound from her seems to have been in the media since February 3rd. Where is she? (Apologies. we hear that she is in hospital and hope she will have a speedy recovery.) The "vets" we do hear from, such as Mr Landeg and Mr Simmons, were heavily involved in overseeing the mass killing of animals in 2001, refuting the usefulness of available speedy diagnosis and vaccination. It is hardly surprising if farmers and smallholders are inclined to feel little confidence in their ability to protect the country or the countryside.

February 18 2007 ~ DEFRA "admitted late last week that they have not tested a live wild bird in Britain since the outbreak began three weeks ago."

Geoffrey Lean in the Independent on Sunday "... This appears to contradict repeated assurances from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) that "wild bird surveillance" in the area has been "enhanced"....."
And although the Department claimed that "extensive surveillance from the infected premises and the surrounding area has not isolated any trace of H5N1 in wild birds" - which implies continuing careful surveillance, Geoffrey Lean's article shows that no live bird sampling has been done in Suffolk at all - the nearest live bird sampling has been at Welney in Norfolk, 50 miles away. Peter Ainsworth called it "staggering complacency" It is feasible that gulls have picked up the virus from the "trimmings" and plastic bags 'containing meat products and residual liquid' that the reports themselves said were a threat. And now even landfill sites may be infected. We read in the Sunday Telegraph that "Animal health specialists are alarmed at the possibility that contaminated meat might have found its way on to landfill sites, which are a haven for scavenging birds."
So while the free range birds are forced into unnatural conditions around the Bernard Matthews factory farm, the officials who demand such cooperation are failing to check whether it is even remotely necessary.

February 17 2007 ~ Discrepancies

While the newspapers rush to report what Fred Landeg, Alick Simmons and spokesmen from the Bernard Matthews plant itself are saying after the publication of the two full reports, the discrepancies leap off the pages - as does the familiar, safe-place-on-the-fence, conclusion "We may never find the exact cause of the disease outbreak "
First, on how the virus got to the UK. We read that, according to Fred Landeg, importation of poultry products from Hungary was "the most plausible route of transmission" but also that "no imports of turkey meat had come from the restricted area in Hungary" How can it be both?
Next, on breaches of regulations. What continues to be referred to as "the farm" was apparently given repeated verbal warnings about "waste trimmings" including polyethylene bags containing meat products and residual liquid, left in the open. It seems, however, both that
" in each case the problem was addressed and no further enforcement action was taken"
and that
"MHS records of enforcement activity, from January 2006 to date, recorded a number of instances where verbal advice to Bernard Matthews about deficiencies and non-compliance was given". Again, how can it be both?
As for the so-called "farm" itself, it is anxious to deny any loss of sales although the Telegraph reports that " Bernard Matthews has disclosed that sales of the company's products have slumped by 40 per cent since the outbreak was discovered almost three weeks ago." Both cannot be true. The plant even claims that the official reports supported the way it ran the Suffolk plant. (Meatinfo.co.uk) and that it both will and did comply with regulations "Today's report indicates that the authorities have identified ways in which biosecurity can be enhanced and Bernard Matthews will comply with any recommendations," the firm said in a statement, and "The detailed nature of the epidemiological report also confirms that Bernard Matthews followed all of Defra's biosecurity regulations at that time."

February 17 2007 ~ "It is vital that we learn the lesson from this incident that Britain's cheap food culture comes at a high price for animal welfare and food integrity."

Compassion in World Farming's CIWF Chief Executive, Philip Lymbery: "This Avian 'Flu outbreak underlines the need for a root and branch review of food policy in the UK and Europe. Intensive poultry production provides the ideal breeding ground for new and highly virulent strains of disease. It is vital that we learn the lesson from this incident that Britain's cheap food culture comes at a high price for animal welfare and food integrity."
But, as we have seen in the past six years, lessons do not get learned when profits and powerful reputations are at stake. All the same, increasing numbers of consumers are becoming aware of the need for a "root and branch review of food policy" - as the now 550 farmers' markets in the country bear witness. They are insisting on decently produced local food and, in particular, free range meat.
In the wake of the Suffolk outbreak and even as more thousands of young birds arrive to be "processed" at Holton, DEFRA is keen to proclaim its lack of "complacency". As if the forcing of free range birds into the very conditions likely to encourage the spread of disease is cause for self-congratulation, DEFRA says, "We are not complacent and we are still making it a requirement for poultry keepers in the restricted zone to house their birds inside and be vigilant." Many might say that vigilance would be better exercised by DEFRA itself in making sure that its own Codes of Practice are followed by those who just want to make profits from animal suffering.

February 17 2007 ~ I can't see any reason for there being all this world trade in live and raw dead animals and their products.

Dr Ruth Watkins writes, " . .. The international trade: legal, illegal, legal but poorly monitored, legal but cheating on the paperwork etc is just brilliant for spreading agents which are highly infectious round the world (if not attendant mosquitoes, midges, fleas and ticks etc.). It can happen innocently and unintentionally. Only a tiny amount, even one infectious particle or virion, can be sufficient to infect a susceptible host such as a fowl with HPAI H5N1....we cannot allow H5N1 and PMWS to spread unchecked. Politics and farming interests interfere with virology sleuthing. I do commend Ian Brown ( chief avian virologist at VLA) for sticking to his guns over the recent H5N1. .... .." Read in full

February 16/17 2007 ~ "DEFRA statements on the role of vaccination in the control of virulent livestock viruses could make better informed people weep"

Dr James Irvine in this Landcare.org article
".... We were assured yet again by David Miliband, ... in an interview with Andrew Marr on TV BBC1 Sunday AM 12th February, that he had followed scientific advice from DEFRA and the Food Standards Agency (FSA), and that "he had every confidence in the high standard of that advice, and that this was also the opinion of the Chief Scientist, Professor Sir David King", who had vouched for the high standards of the scientists involved...."
"One really has to wonder who is giving the politicians so-called "excellent scientific advice".......What should have been learned is some basic immunology regarding vaccination as a front line of defence against the spread of viral diseases in livestock - or indeed in humans. ......"
Warmwell also recommends the clarity of Dr Colin Fink on the same subject: "... I am sure that vaccine would break the transmission cycle even in high density flocks. Vaccine for all the smallholders' birds would be very effective in preserving them clinically well and in lower density flocks transfer of wild type virus would be minimal or none."

February 16/17 2007 ~ DEFRA says that factory farmed animals should be free from hunger and thirst, get rapid diagnosis and treatment of disease, appropriate shelter and freedom from fear

We are told that for some, pictures of young turkeys in their overcrowded sheds, distressingly evoke the gaunt white figures of Belsen and Auschwitz. It is almost beyond belief that the DEFRA website tells us that the welfare codes, which have the approval of Parliament, take account of five basic needs: (1) freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition; (2) appropriate comfort and shelter; (3) the prevention, or rapid diagnosis and treatment of injury, disease or infestation; (4) freedom from fear; (5) freedom to display most normal patterns of behaviour. In all the wrangling about compensation and possible prosecution for lapses in "biosecurity" it might be as well to remember that according to John Webster, the highly respected professor of animal husbandry at Bristol University who first drafted the codes now appearing on the DEFRA site:
'It is absolutely not right that animals in the first few weeks of their life should be experiencing heart disease or be crippled....One quarter of the heavy strains of broiler chickens and turkey are in chronic pain for one third of their lives. Given that poultry meat consumption in the UK exceeds one million tonnes per annum, this must constitute in both magnitude and severity, the single most severe, systematic example of man's inhumanity to another sentient animal."
An article in the Observer "Ten Weeks to Live" made a huge impact on those who read it in 2002 . Little has changed in the way these unfortunate animals are treated for our convenience foods, DEFRA's so-called Five Freedoms notwithstanding. But perhaps there is some hope in the common sense of ordinary people, sickened by the thought of what really goes on behind the secure (but not necessarily bio-secure) gates and walls of factory farms.

February 16/ 17 2007 ~ "I believe we're at the beginning of major changes in our food culture which will, in turn, lead to profound changes in British farming." Peter Melchett

The Financial Times reports,
"...more consumers are shunning processed foods. Some 40 per cent buy free-range food products "whenever they can ", up from 33 per cent in 2002, according to a survey released in October by research group Mintel. Disease outbreaks on farms have also been seized on by proponents of organic farming as an example of why intensive industrial farming practices are flawed. Peter Melchett, policy director for the Soil Association, a certification organisation for organic food, said last month that outbreaks of disease were changing attitudes. "I believe we're at the beginning of major changes in our food culture which will, in turn, lead to profound changes in British farming, " he said.
Meanwhile, Chris Huhne has written to David Miliband today, asking him to make a statement to the House of Commons on Monday, and to clarify the continuing risks of infection to poultry and humans. See www.libdems.org.uk "How does he assess the Canadian and other evidence that intensive farming techniques make the spread of bird flu far easier?"

February 16 2007 ~ Sir John Krebs is one of six new non-party political peers recommended to the prime minister by the Lords Appointments Commission.

See Guardian"Internationally-renowned scientist Sir John Krebs is one of six new non-party political peers recommended..."
When appointed to the FSA Chair, Sir John said he wanted the Agency to be "a beacon of openness and a model for the best use of science". Sir John Krebs, specialist in bird behaviour, now ex Chair of the FSA, designer of the Krebs ill-fated experiment in badger culling, is on record as saying that criticisms of GM food were 'shrill, often ill-informed and dogma-driven'. As Lobbywatch comments when quoting Sir John's assertion that the FSA represented only consumers' interests:
"... it seems a little careless to have lost the confidence of both the Consumers' Association and the National Consumers' Council over his pro-GM campaigns. A review of the FSA's performance under Sir John -commissioned by the FSA itself and conducted by Baroness Dean - concluded that the 'vast majority' of people consulted felt that the FSA had 'deviated from its normal stance of making statements based solely on scientific evidence', when 'speaking against organic food and for GM food'. Baroness Dean stressed that 'This view was expressed not only by stakeholders representing organic and GM interest groups, but by those who would be regarded as supporters and natural allies of the Agency'...."
Sir John Krebs was, of course, one of the quiet but key players in the FMD crisis. "The freemasonry of the Royal Society" was described by an anonymous contributor to warmwell as an unholy alliance Certainly, the same names do keep appearing whenever one hears of "scientific advice". The relevance of their specialisms and the independence of their advice is not always apparent.

February 16 2007 ~ Experts are to reveal the interim findings of a Government investigation into the source of the bird flu outbreak.

The Guardian today tells us that "Experts" are to reveal the interim findings of a Government investigation into the source of the bird flu outbreak. They are referring to Deputy chief veterinary officer Fred Landeg and Food Standards Agency's veterinary director Alick Simmons. The full reports are now on line.

February 16 2007 ~ "we have noted with concern the sidelining of scientific expertise in the civil service"

The Select Committee on Science and Technology Seventh Report, published in October 2006, is a fascinating document and it will be interesting to see whether any moves are being made to follow its recommendations. It would be easy to quote it at length. However, an extract from Section 3 gives a flavour:
"....The introduction of Departmental Chief Scientific Advisers has been welcome but, like the Government Chief Scientific Adviser (ie Professor Sir David King), their effectiveness depends on their independence and ability to contribute to policy making at the highest level as much as on their knowledge and skills. DCSAs also need effective support from officials but we have noted with concern the sidelining of scientific expertise in the civil service and highlighted the need to move towards a situation where specialist skills are once again valued in their own right...."

February 15/16 2007 ~ "the ability of government decision makers to make better-informed decisions.."

Guidelines on the Use of Scientific Advice in Policy Making (pdf) updated in 2005, with an introduction by Professor Sir David King himself, address how "evidence should be sought and applied to enhance the ability of government decision makers to make better-informed decisions" The key messages are that departments, and the individual policy makers within them, should:
• " think ahead and identify early the issues on which they need scientific advice and early public engagement, and where the current evidence base is weak and should be strengthened
• get a wide range of advice from the best sources, particularly when there is uncertainty
• publish the evidence and analysis and all relevant papers
One can only wonder how far the Chief Scientist, Professor Sir David King, feels that GCSA's Guidelines have been applied in the current avian influenza situation. It is interesting to read what he said in oral evidence to the Select Committee for Science and Technology during their inquiry last May into scientific advice to government, how government gets its advice and whether it acts upon it, and how it assesses risk. Extract: ".... if there is an issue, such as avian flu, I will make sure that the leading scientists give me a full briefing on avian flu so that I am fully informed when I go in to give my advice."
(The recommendations of that report can be seen here.)

February 15 2007 ~ Tests on nearly 75 000 wild ducks, gulls and other birds have turned up no sign of dangerous H5N1 avian influenza in the United States

Independent online SA"The programme was unprecedented in scope in terms of the range of species of birds sampled, which included waterfowl, shorebirds, gulls and terns, among others," Hon Ip of the US Geological Survey said in an email posted to an infectious-disease message group..."

February 15 2007 ~ "this outbreak on one of my farms was immediately contained and did not spread further"

The Daily Mirror carries an article by Mr Matthews. He says, " I am eternally grateful to my hardworking and loyal staff, to the many vets and experts, to Defra and the other industry bodies that this outbreak on one of my farms was immediately contained and did not spread further."
One wonders how he can be so sure.
We have heard nothing about surveillance of the poultry in outlying districts, only some testing on wild birds. No use of the diagnostic on-site testing - the very first thing that should have been done to ensure that there was no further spread - has been mentioned. Indeed, in none of the news articles of the past days has there been any discussion of what Article 4 of the EU Directive calls Surveillance programmes.
Member States shall carry out surveillance programmes in order to: "detect the prevalence of infections with avian influenza virus subtypes H5 and H7 in different species of poultry"
If adequate surveillance is being done, where is it being done? What epidemiological risk assessment has been carried out as per the Directive and where may one read about it? These are urgent questions. Can it be that the UK will not use available technology until its own "lab on a chip" is up and running?

February 15 2007 ~ China joins Ireland, Russia, Hong Kong, South Africa, South Korea and Japan in banning UK poultry

See FT. The UK export market for poultry is worth £300m, according to the British Poultry Council. Today, Reuters reports that Bernard Matthews is saying was sorry for the scare but insisted it was not his company's fault.

February 14 2007 ~ The Netherlands is allowing its free range birds out again from Feb. 19.

. (See Alertnet) The Dutch, at least, seem to have been listening to the many concerned voices of free range poultry owners in the Netherlands - who also have the option of vaccinating. The UK has, even now, avoided putting together any workable scheme for those who urgently want to protect their birds. Increasing evidence (See e.g. International Herald Tribune Feb 12) as well as common sense indicates that H5N1 is a disease of intensively farmed poultry, spread by the intensive poultry industry. Yet in the name of public health, UK officialdom imposed on healthy hens the very conditions under which the virus can flourish and spread like wildfire - confined, stressed flocks in close proximity. Professor Sir David King in particular, is already looking at a future where "organic and free-range farming would come to an end. ...."
Little wonder that free range owners are more and more sceptical of UK disease policy being applied fairly and as a result of balanced scientific knowledge - and less and less inclined to register their birds. Woe betide the owner of any hen found pecking around in the open air near Holton, but live turkeys are again being bussed in to the Bernard Matthews site for a very nasty end to their short lives.

February 14 2007 ~ Bernard Matthews"keeping the products back because they may contain meat from a restricted zone in Hungary."

Guardian In spite of resumed "production" of live turkeys into meat products, the Food Standards Agency tells the media today that Bernard Matthews has agreed to keep certain products back for 48 hours because they may contain meat, sent in frozen form, from a restricted zone in Hungary.

February 14 2007 ~ Two entirely separated and biosecure parts to the Holton site?.

The slaughter-line at Bernard Matthews has been described as an "adjoining and completely separate factory, which employs a total of about 1,000 staff " - but it was this building that was used for the slaughter of all 159,000 turkeys - both healthy and infected - by Monday, February 5 (see EDP24 Feb 13) while several of the, supposedly wholly separate, sheds were infected. Is anyone able to explain why it was considered safe to continue production at the site - or was this purely the following of EU rules in order to reduce financial losses?
It continues to astonish that production has continued at the site and we read on EDP24 (Feb 14) that "there were one or two raised eyebrows in Strasbourg yesterday that the factory in Holton had been allowed to open so quickly."

February 14 2007 ~ " He kept deferring to something called "the science", as a medieval monarch might defer to holy mother church. . There is no such thing..... "

Simon Jenkins in the Guardian "....The motto of the expert in a risk-averse society is: "I see a risk; give me a contract."......The word risk is now so abused as to render it near useless in political discourse. I forget how many radios I have hurled across the room listening to John Humphrys or Eddie Mair demanding: "Minister, why can't you be 100% sure there is no risk?" I heard two officials debating last week the difference between an unlikely, very unlikely, small, minuscule and infinitesimal risk from H5N1. Each term was then qualified if the turkey was "properly cooked". Properly? Here were scientists who dared not use such simple concepts as "one chance in a billion" or "let's change the subject", because they might not be asked back on the programme....
...As one virologist, Ruth Watkins, said on the radio this week: ask enough questions and you will soon find "there are too many questions still unanswered". Quite so.
..... Miliband seems to have behaved exemplarily in his role as protector of the turkey industry. He made only one mistake. He kept deferring to something called "the science", as a medieval monarch might defer to holy mother church. There is no such thing. ... "

February 14 2007 ~ 99.96% similarity of the RNA sequences of the genomes of the H5N1 avian influenza viruses

ProMed comment "The 99.96% similarity of the RNA sequences of the genomes of the H5N1 avian influenza viruses isolated from turkeys in the UK and from geese in Hungary, and the absence of an obvious precursor, justifies the conclusion that these viruses are isolates of the same strain of H5N1 avian influenza virus.
Questions which remain unresolved, and which may not be resolved by sequence analysis alone, are firstly the origin of this unique turkey/goose strain of virus and secondly the direction of travel of the infection -- from Hungary to England as presently supposed or from England to Hungary. - Mod.CP"

February 14 2007 ~ H5N1 vaccination: "I am sure that vaccine would break the transmission cycle even in high density flocks"

Dr Colin Fink writes on vaccination.
"...High density of birds increases the transmission rate of the infection between individuals. If they were all vaccinated , any virus infection introduced would have low flock spread with little if any subsequent shedding into the environment.. The birds would remain clinically well. However no symptoms in the birds together with no understanding by the handlers of even small risk of infection spread outside a flock could lead to some transfer of organisms out of the flock if the biosecurity was not strictly observed. No biological system is ever absolute especially when run by staff who do not understand transfer of infection .
I am not sure what is better for these hapless creatures and their factory bosses in high density rearing. Such a devastating outbreak with much virus shedding as we saw followed by immediate culling or no virus shedding but a minimal risk of ' wild type' viral carriage for short while only?
I am sure that vaccine would break the transmission cycle even in high density flocks. ."

February 13/14 2007 ~ Selective reporting from interviews with virologists "No one is asking the right questions and they all know that they are not"

The reopening of slaughter and packing at the Holton factory farm took most people by surprise. We note with concern that news reports quote "scientists" but they are not named and we get little input from named practising virologists. Both Dr Colin Fink and Dr Ruth Watkins have been interviewed by the BBC in the last 48 hours. Both discovered that what they considered to be important information had been cut.
In essence, Dr Fink said that the virus undoubtedly was from the Hungarian outbreak and brought in. As for how, he offers this possible explanation - which was not included in the broadcast:
I believe that the carcase material brought in was infected with H5N1. One way of transfer of this infection so rapidly to the flocks would be If  the residue of the carcase meat has been ground up and fed to the new chicks as a high protein feed. That is one way the infection could be transferred into the turkey chick stock. I expect that if they wish to do this they will boil it now."
.... "There are some serious political goings on here. No one is asking the right questions and they all know that they are not. "
As for the myths about vaccination "spreading the virus" so angrily refuted here by Colin Fink, the received - and wrong - wisdom is now appearing even in such otherwise sound papers as Western Morning News (new window). Journalists must talk - and listen - to the experts in virology. This is too serious a matter for pseudo-scientific error to be treated as fact .

February 13/14 2007 ~ "The Meat Hygiene Service cleared the slaughterhouse at Holton in Suffolk. It resumes work today, having been disinfected and relicensed under European Union rules." Telegraph

"One government official called the decision "incredible". But Defra said: "The company is within its rights to begin processing again as long as the birds come from outside the zone."
However, the EU rules from the latest Directive suggest that DEFRA, in using EU legisation to justify the UK government action, may be confusing production with transport. The language of a Directive should be clear for all to understand. It is far from clear.:
Latest EU Directive on Avian Influenza Article 22 - Prohibition on the movement and transport of birds, eggs, poultry meat and carcases
1. The competent authority shall ensure that within protection zones, the movement and transport from holdings on to roads, excluding private service roads of holdings, or by rail, of poultry, other captive birds, ready-to-lay poultry, day-old chicks, eggs and carcases are prohibited.
2. The competent authority shall ensure that the transport of poultry meat from slaughterhouses, cutting plants and cold stores is prohibited unless it has been produced:
   (a) from poultry which has originated from outside the protection zones and has been stored and transported separately from the meat of poultry from within the protection zones;
   (b) on a date at least 21 days before the estimated date of earliest infection on a holding in the protection zone and which since production has been stored and transported separately from such meat produced after that date.
These EU regulations do not, surely, allow further slaughter and processing in the very plant where disease was so recently found?
(The Telegraph article also says that "leaked minutes from a meeting of Cobra" revealed that it was "by accident" that a wrapper proved that the Suffolk plant had been receiving meat from a slaughterhouse 20 miles from the outbreak in domestic geese in southern Hungary. The Daily Mail in fact reported this link on February 10th )

February 13/14 2007 ~ Whatever the Hungarian government says... the virus outbreak in Hungary and UK are linked.

Dr Watkins writes, "Today's news on the Hungarian virus and its very near identity to the Holton virus is, I am sure, made by the laboratory at Weybridge based on sequencing information on many viruses and its analysis. This type of forensic matching has been done over the last 20 years in human virology and becomes ever more sophisticated as there are more viruses sequenced and longer segments if not the whole genome sequenced, and this is combined with greater mathematical power of the analysis programmes. There may even be a unique signature change in the sequence, a duplication or deletion that points the finger even more strongly than nucleotide sequence matching alone. It has to be accepted whatever the Hungarian government says about all the paper work being above board that the virus outbreak in Hungary and that in the UK are linked.
If there were no Matthews turkey farms in Hungary and no importing of any products from Hungary to Holton it would indeed be a mystery but nevertheless linked all the same. However, raw turkey carcasses were imported from Hungary and at least some had been slaughtered at that plant near the outbreak on the two geese farms. ..." read in full

February 13/14 2007 ~ The problem of spread of H5N1 virus worldwide by industrial farming and international trade has not been addressed and has not gone away.

Dr Watkins' comments about international trade spreading the virus were broadcast on the BBC - but, interestingly, comments that the Holton turkey rearing houses at Holton should not have been reopened were cut..
Dr Watkins says that vital evidence may not have been collected if cleansing and disinfection was not correctly done. In her opinion, it was unwise to re-open the Holton premises. Issues of breakdown in safe food handling and biosecurity have not been addressed. What is urgently needed is
• a review of protocols and procedures
• structural alterations to prevent contamination between processing to bird rearing facilities are needed and
• retraining of workers seems vital. (Some seemed unaware that the risk of infection to humans was by breathing in and thought a protective coat was adequate)
  She casts doubt on the completeness of the clean-up,. Natural decay of the virus requires at least 30 days. " This was a very serious outbreak" she says.

February 12 2007 ~ "government must examine, restructure and support the infrastructure of the meat and livestock industry, so that once again it can be the main supplier of meat for the nation"

Caroline Cranbrook writes, in this email to warmwell:
"It is encouraging that the journalists are showing so much more initiative and commonsense than they did during FMD - but depressing that the government and its agencies are lagging behind..."
She includes a copy of an article she wrote for Country Life during FMD which seems even more relevant today, Importing New Risks to Man and Beast
".....government must invest in preventing illegal meat imports. At the same time, meat imports should cease from all countries currently infected ....FMD is a warning to us all. ..... Unless we impose tighter controls on imported meat, our own and our animals' health remains at risk from the risk of imported lethal infection. We must also Buy British - and Buy Local. Supermarkets must shorten their supply chains. To make this possible, government must examine, restructure and support the infrastructure of the meat and livestock industry, so that once again it can be the main supplier of meat for the nation. " Read in full
The email links to an interesting webpage showing ways in which illegal imports of bird flu-suspect poultry have been discovered. Rumania, (a neighbour of Hungary and quite close to the area where infected geese were found in January), confirmed the presence of the bird flu virus in 18 locations and detected 25 suspect cases of in eight counties last year. In May 2006, the manager of a major industrial poultry farm in Romania was arrested on charges of allowing the farm to sell chickens possibly infected with "a potentially lethal form of bird flu". As one ProMed moderator said in a recent ProMed post, ".....the temptation to import cheap replacement stock from a source which just happens to also have HPAI can be great. If such an importing country is a neighbor, many of us are at immediate risk."

February 12 2007 ~H5N1 Hungary's Agriculture Ministry denies any link

Reuters "There is indeed a turkey processing plant in Kecskemet which sent some meat to Sarvar which sent it on to various parts of western Europe," said Andras Dekany, spokesman at Hungary's Agriculture Ministry.
"This is true. But every item was checked and there were no problems reported in any other export destinations." Hungary will submit a report to the European Commission on Tuesday to prove there can be no link between the cases in Britain and Hungary.....Dekany said the virus being identical was not a convincing argument because the virus has been almost the same wherever it appeared around Europe. "The largest margin of difference has been 0.6 percent." ..."
However, the Daily Mail suggested that the slaughter house concerned did indeed slaughter both geese and turkeys. See below.

February 12 2007 ~ "The authorities have known about the situation for years, but have done nothing. There is evidence of not only negligence and utter incompetence, but cover-up, and the problem has grown unchecked."

John Vidal in the Guardian quotes Douglas Gowan, a pollution consultant who produced the first official report into the Brofiscin quarry in 1972 after nine cows on a local farm died of poisoning. The article that the UK government, which knew of the dangers of PCBs in the environment in the 1960s, allowed their production in Wales until 1977. Polychlorinated biphenyls used mainly as flame retardants and insulaters were manufactured at Monsanto's plant in Newport, south Wales, under the trade name Aroclor, and were accumulating in human milk, rivers, fish and seafood, wildlife and plants.
Meanwhile, today - as Robert Persey reveals in thisemail - increasing amounts of catering waste and Category 3 meat waste (feathers, offals etc.) are now being composted and spread on land. Mr Persey is concerned that some of the systems being authorised may not be capable always of meeting the criteria for safe use of such materials which is to treat them for 1 hour at 70^oC. "I regard the risk as being even more serious now that Avian flu is amongst us." Read email.

February 11/12 2007 ~ It is vital that advice in controlling outbreaks is given by professionally qualified clinical virologists (in human medicine and ideally veterinary medicine as well of course) in conjunction with scientists.

An email from Dr Ruth Watkins, received today, strikes us as urgent and important
"....David Milliband and officialdom in general are looking for advice from scientists for their briefing when they should be looking for advice from clinical virologists experienced in outbreak management. With respect to John Oxford he is a scientist but he is not a clinician nor is he a scientist with clinical responsibilities at The Royal London and Barts. The key to a disinterested and balanced briefing for ministers is that the advice should come from someone with clinical experience in outbreaks as well as virus expertise, and this may involve a professional group rather than COBRA. ........
As you know when I was asked to comment for BBC News 24 on the first Saturday of the Matthew's outbreak on the 3rd Feb, I said that the main cause in spread of avian flu had been via humans, trading poultry and its products legally or illegally and in using poultry manure to feed warm fish farms etc. ...... It is vital that advice in controlling outbreaks is given by professionally qualified clinical virologists (in human medicine and ideally veterinary medicine as well of course) in conjunction with scientists. This is an animal virus with important human health considerations. ...." Read in full
(A BBC page of questions on 'avian flu and Hungary' with answers by Professor John Oxford has been added today.)

February 11 2007 ~ "absurdly unscientific misinformation about why we cannot use vaccination..."

Booker's Notebook "... again we have expert virologists, such as Colin Fink of Warwick University" (see Dr Fink's email to warmwell) "staring open-mouthed as they point out how Defra could hardly be getting everything more wrong, above all in the absurdly unscientific misinformation it spreads about why we cannot use vaccination." Read in full

February 11 2007 ~ an international reappraisal of the role of factory farming and the poultry trade in the worldwide spread of the disease.

The Scotsman and the Independent are among the newspapers reporting that yesterday DEFRA admitted that it had known, since long before the crisis, that the Bernard Matthews plant regularly imported turkey meat from Hungary. David Nabarro, the UN co-ordinator for avian and human flu, has said the poultry trade is behind the spread of the virus "this year". Bernard Matthews has now confirmed that the factory did use the slaughterhouse at Kecskemet (see below)
The Sunday Telegraph says, "the British Government is to investigate claims that one farm just 30km (19 miles) from the epicentre of the Hungarian outbreak may have supplied Saga......demands for clear explanations from Bernard Matthews and the Government, grow more pressing by the hour. ....issues around who knew what, and when, and when they decided to make their knowledge public, appear disturbingly complicated "

February 10 2007 ~ the Government's handling of scientific advice, risk and evidence in policy making

Select Committee on Science and Technology Seventh Report:" The Government must have sufficient expertise to ensure that it both asks the right questions and does not become an uncritical, unquestioning consumer of the advice it receives. ..... (Paragraph 79)
It would be more honest and accurate to acknowledge the fact that while evidence plays a key role in informing policy, decisions are ultimately based on a number of factors - including political expediency. Where policy decisions are based on other such factors and do not flow from the evidence or scientific advice, this should be made clear (Paragraph 90) .... " The Select Committee on Science and Technology Seventh Report, prepared in November, into the Government's handling of scientific advice, risk and evidence in policy making, expresses some deep concerns. Its summary and recommendations would be of interest to all readers of this website and particularly any journalists who assume that "the best available scientific advice" is a phrase that has meaning. There is room only for a couple of extracts:.
It seems to us necessary that all senior officials and policy makers should have a basic understanding of the scientific method, the role and importance of peer review, the relevance of different types of evidence, and the way to evaluate it. (Paragraph 48)
On the subject of the Government Chief Scientific Adviser's remit: " it is a challenge for one individual to cover such a disparate range of subject areas and disciplines."
It recommends that "the misconception that scientists in the civil service should be 'on tap, not on top' must be laid to rest once and for all." Recommendations in full ( The recommendations can be summed up as the urgent need to end to absurd protectionist and barricade views from within DEFRA and other organisations who eschew and resent anyone in the ' commercial ' sector ( vestiges of the English Victorian prejudice against "trade") and a need to end their unwillingness to use lines of communication to people witrh real expertise outside their departments.)

February 10 2007 ~ Turkeys from the Matthews farm were transported to within only 30 km from the infected geese cases in Hungary - the Gall Food abattoir in Kecskemet - which slaughters geese...

See Daily Mail's own investigation "... Officials are trying to establish whether the abattoir also handled geese from the Szentes farms and thus infected turkey meat which was then exported to the UK. Signs outside the abattoir have pictures of both turkeys and geese, suggesting the plant is used to slaughter both species. ...290 tons of turkey breast has been exported from Kecskemet to Britain. In addition, a further 1,000 tons of turkey product has been sent to SaGa, Matthews's subsidiary in Sarvar. Slaughtered birds are understood to be transported back to Sarvar before the meat is brought to Britain in the form of turkey breasts. ...." An estimated "two or three lorries a week" travelled to the UK direct from Kecskemet. ProMed commented on Feb 8th
".... questions arise: Has Defra implemented appropriate surveillance, especially given that the government vets were unable to identify this disease on clinical inspection? Was the "contaminated food" distributed to any other sites? What route did the lorry (or lorries?) take, and have other locations and countries been alerted? Is withholding this information (or failing to alert a suspicion on an un-named premises) because Defra considered it "commercially confidential" consistent with their duty of care to livestock, livestock keepers and the general public?"

February 10 2007 ~ Turkey bites Man

One emailer writes, " Is there anyone saying, "If we treat turkeys like that what do we expect?"...? The emailer's question today comments on the fact that "... honorable people are forced to make light of their suffering, hide it wherever possible, or make jokes about it. It's as if enjoying cruelty to animals is a badge of honour." In EDP24 we read about a turkey biting a worker on the first night of culling when apparently a small group of seven workers at the factory farm were set to "catch" them. Seven factory workers? Memories of the two Bernard Matthews catchers who were filmed using a live turkey as a baseball are still fresh (Guardian). Where was the humane killing about which we were reassured by Dr John Oxford - giving people the idea that the thousands of turkeys would somehow be expertly put to sleep ("humane conditions overseen by DEFRA")? What method of killing the unfortunate turkeys once caught really was applied no one seems to know but what has really enraged people is that once bitten, the young Portuguese worker was not ordered immediately to hospital.
Meanwhile, our Scientific Adviser in Chief, Professor Sir David King, whose areas of expertise cover neither virology nor wildlife,( a combination the lack of which one might have hoped would make him a tad more cautious in his pronouncements) said it was "quite feasible" the disease had been spread from hut to hut at the Holton plant," by vermin or wild birds which had come into contacted with infected carcasses . (See Yahoo news and the Guardian) The vermin and birds which can not only catch and spread H5N1 but also go sneaking from one bio-secure Stalag into two or three more bio-secure Stalags were not specified.

February 10 2007 ~ "Large poultry companies ... have been responsible for past outbreaks "

" investigations, including those carried out by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, show quite clearly that it is the large poultry companies that have been responsible for past outbreaks..." Times
"Wild birds" can no longer be the most likely cause of the outbreak as politicians and the "experts" were saying with such confidence earlier. A Canadian study that tested more than 12,000 live and dead wild birds for avian influenza viruses turned up no cases of H5N1 viruses in 2006, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency announced yesterday. (See CTV.canada) and not one of DEFRA's 5000 tests have found H5N1 on any bird here either.

February 10 2007 ~ Vaccination: a tool for the control of avian influenza - conference 20th -22nd March 2007 - Verona, Italy

For further information and registration please see - http://www.avianfluvaccine2007.org/ Co-organised and supported by the EC with The OIE (World Organisation for Animal Health), FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations) IZSVe (Istituto Zooprofillatico Sperimentale delle Venezie, OIE reference laboratory for Avian influenza)
(Many thanks to Jane Barribal at farmtalking.com for spotting this.)

February 10 2007 ~ Bird flu, bluetongue, swine fever... CIRAD is working with major French and international research centres to develop therapeutic vaccines.

Therapeutic vaccines, as opposed to preventive vaccines, are designed for use on those already infected with disease. Therapeutic vaccines are based on using interfering RNA molecules and apply particularly to diseases ( including foot and mouth) affecting ruminants and pigs. Emmanuel Albina, immunology and microbiology researcher with CIRAD: "... This strategy completely changes all the concepts of disease control. The choice is no longer limited to eradicating the infected animal population or mass preventive vaccination. A third tool, therapeutic vaccines, could be used on infected animals."www.cirad.fr

February 9 2007 ~ "FSA confirmed today that it was investigating the possibility that turkey meat contaminated by bird flu at a Bernard Matthews poultry farm has entered the human food chain."

Guardian and 24Dash and BBC
(Warmwell's latest postings on Bird Flu can be seen in full on the Avian Influenza page )

February 9 2007 ~ "the authorities must work harder to present a balanced picture, and not allow automatic implication of wild birds as the likeliest vector every time an outbreak occurs."

statement from BirdLife International today "....In both the UK and Hungary, the media, 'expert' commentators and some officials, including Government ministers, have been quick to implicate wild birds. In the UK there were suggestions that a small wild bird could have entered the Suffolk farm through an air vent, or that faeces from infected gulls could have been tracked into the building.
If the UK outbreak is confirmed as being caused by transportation of poultry products, this will confirm just how easily this can happen. The spread of H5N1, and outbreaks of other high-pathogenicity forms in the past, have made it clear both how much movement there is of poultry and poultry products around the world, and how easily the virus can be carried in this way...."

February 9 2007 ~ "a claim without the least shred of evidence..... scientific investigation had yet to begin. But Bradnock's suggestions ran far and wide in the national media."

Jonathan Leake's excellent New Statesman article "...Peter Bradnock, chief executive of the British Poultry Council..... "The most likely source is a wild bird," he declared firmly. "Faeces on the concrete outside could have been walked in by a worker or it could have been deposited on the roof."
It was a claim without the least shred of evidence. Confirmation of the H5N1 strain had come less than two hours earlier and the scientific investigation had yet to begin. But Bradnock's suggestions ran far and wide in the national media. A hint that the real answer might be more complex comes from a survey by Defra, whose inspectors have spent five years swabbing the rectums of 5,000 wild birds to see if any were carrying H5N1 to Britain. None were..." Well worth reading in full.

February 9 2007 ~ Poultry source now thought very likely

"38 tons of turkey meat from Hungary, where there was an outbreak of the most dangerous form of bird flu last month, has been delivered by lorry every week to a processing plant close to the company's sheds in Suffolk." Telegraph
Virus is preserved in protein rich material and although Bernard Matthews' commercial director, Bart Dalla Mura, is reported (Channel 4) as saying "vets agree it is just not a source of questioning at all" (which vets? what questioning?), that there was "not a remote possibility" that the outbreaks could be linked because "our farm is about 160 miles away from the outbreak" and "there is not a remote possibility it would have happened in that way " - these protests are now sounding like the wishful thinking of a company seeing its compensation payments looking shaky and some very awkward questions being asked. Peter Ainsworth spoke yesterday of "the version of events they have told so far".
As the Grain report below suggests, it is looking likely that H5N1 is a poultry virus killing wild birds, not the other way around.
One wonders if it can possibly be legal to recycle dead turkeys from one factory farm for use in another. The public may become more aware of how their cheap meat is being produced and the dangers inherent for humans if they allow mass production of sentient creatures. The future of battery cages looks secure, unfortunately, at least until 2012 unless there is more public outrage voiced. Asked about the banning of such cages Mr Bradshaw would only commit himself on Monday on "conventional" cages being banned from 1 January 2012.

February 9 2007 ~ We are told that vaccination for a current strain does indeed work.

" our vaccine each winter tries to predict what will be current" New vaccines are on the way which will act cross strain as well - as for the excretion story after vaccination, based on research that is considered questionable, this " does not stack up virologically".

February 9 2007 ~"...There are also questions to be answered about what ministers knew and when, and if they had information last Monday, why didn't they disclose that information?" Peter Ainsworth

Times "Today's recriminations follow the news that another three of the 22 turkey sheds at the Holton farm had tested positive for H5N1, raising fears that the virus was more entrenched than originally hoped. Government scientists are now trying to establish how the virus spread from hut to hut, or whether all four huts suffered separate, independent infections from the same source."

February 8/9 2007 ~ "government officials ... no longer believe that Britain's first outbreak of bird flu was spread by wild birds"

Guardian Observer " UK poultry contamination blamed on carcasses from Matthews' Hungarian factory....'The company involved have voluntarily agreed to temporarily suspend the movement of poultry products between their outlets in the UK and Hungary until the investigation is complete"
The rumour that this is an internal infection only has been circulating for several days (see below). We hear now that traces of infection have been found in three more sheds. Wild birds do not flit from biosecure shed to biosecure shed. The implication is that the virus arrived at the factory farm - perhaps by lorry from Hungary - and was spread internally. Neil Ferguson of Roy Anderson's Imperial Epidemiological group was quoted by the Telegraph on Wednesday "There are only two ways it could have got into the Norfolk farm: people or wild birds. Both are equally feasible. This is going to require detailed investigation and we may never find out what the origin was." But the wild bird scenario is no longer looking 'feasible'. He also said recently that there would "inevitably be more outbreaks during the year" but if this was an isolated incident of contamination then the inevitability of more outbreaks can hardly be assumed - unless other factory farms are going to behave in similar ways. The Guardian Observer story says that the government "has known about the contaminated meat since Monday" - yet British health officials told the European Union last Tuesday they did not believe there was a link between the outbreak of bird flu at the Bernard Matthews farm and two recent cases in Hungary where Matthews also has poultry interests. Neither did David Miliband mention the carcasses when he made a statement to the House of Commons on Tuesday.
As for cost-sharing, such a case adds weight to the idea that government should be willing to give up its authority on disease control to an independent board - or are real farmers going to be expected to pay for the consequences of such contamination?

February 7 2007 ~ The myth of the silent spread of virus by vaccinated birds ... is just that. - utter nonsense.

Dr Fink's email ".... The obsessional focus by DEFRA is on the period after vaccination and theoretically before a complete response has been made by the vaccinees. In fact any individual ( man or beast or bird) who has partially responded and then meets ' wildtype' virus early after vaccine may have mild clinical disease and may excrete some virus in to the surroundings. That does not matter because the whole exercise is to reduce the spread of 'wildtype' and this will be a partial result in these few cases with much reduced virus shedding. As one hopes to induce so called ' herd immunity' any flock or herd which has been vaccinated ( but perhaps a bit late !! back to indecision in DEFRA) will still achieve lower excretion levels into the environment and also will have only mild clinical disease - which most us thought was the object of the exercise. The myth of the silent spread of virus by vaccinated birds flying over DEFRA offices is just that. - utter nonsense. " The email is well worth reading in full.

February 7 2007 ~ " there is a danger that reliance on avian flu vaccination for birds could spread the disease further and thus be dangerous" Mary, As I am sure that you know, this is complete and utter rubbish

Dr Colin Fink writes that he is angry. Having read in the answer given by the Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton to the Countess of Mar, (below) the comment that vaccination "could spread the disease further and thus be dangerous", he writes
" Mary, As I am sure that you know, this is complete and utter rubbish and shows that all the 'Virologists' invented by Fred Landeg in Page Street, in answer to a question from the Countess of Mar are a myth. DEFRA cannot be allowed to go on peddling this mis-information with such arrogance and insularity. They cannot even advise their representatives properly and know nothing of how vaccines work.
You may publish this comment if you wish - I am angry about this."
Read Dr Fink's email in full. It is important that an expert practising virologist's understanding about vaccination is seen.

February 5/6 2007 ~ " Is she saying that Defra has no qualified virologists at the heart of the organisation?"

Hansard On February 1st, the Countess of Mar asked "How many qualified virologists are directly employed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs?" but from the Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton received the answer:"..returns from agency chief executives show that Defra employs 116 qualified virologists who work in the field of virology.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for that reply. Is she saying that Defra has no qualified virologists at the heart of the organisation? How many of those virologists are from the veterinary, medical and scientific disciplines? In view of the importance of viral diseases to animals and humans, will Her Majesty's Government consider setting up a separate steering committee to bring together virologists and microbiologists from all the disciplines in order to give the Government proper advice and reduce their reliance on computer modellers?" Read in full
We should very much welcome comments on the extraordinary answer given of 116 virologists. If there were merely one knowledgeable and practising virologist listened to by the Department and the government there would be little further need for this website.

February 5/6 2007 ~ 10 million doses of vaccine?

See below. In fact, only 5 million are in the UK. The other 5 million are held in Spain.

February 5 2007 ~ Illegally imported chicks from Hungary?

Rumours are now rife that Bernard Matthews has been importing live chicks or eggs from Hungary. If this is so and turns out to be the source of the trouble then the outbreak will be an isolated incident from which the UK government can perhaps at last learn some lessons. Rules about illegal imports have been in place for a considerable time now - but as we have reported elsewhere ( in particular with regard to diseased meat) making rules to protect animal and human health legally enforceable, when breaking the rules can be so lucrative, is another matter. As one warmwell reader says, "Selfish greed puts farming at risk in this country and endangers the life of the farmers and the citizens."
If the rumours are true it not surprising that no one from Holton wanted to talk to Farming Today and that we have heard so little from those running the "farm".

February 5 2007 ~ Not much communication to concerned residents living near the factory

They have complained that there still had not been anyone in touch "to tell them what to do." According to the East Anglian EDP24 "...Suffolk County Council trading standards department said that it sent scores of officials into the surrounding area from Sunday morning to talk to people who may be worried and advise those with small flocks of chickens. But last night even small farms just half a mile away had not been visited by anyone from Defra or the council." We hear from someone living nearby of the "mutually self- congratulatory tone of Maff-Defra and the Suffolk District Councils"
One regular reader of warmwell writes in despair,
"One can only be astounded that the same old mistakes are being made: Government ignorance so no on-site diagnosis and no vaccination information; officials managing to sound both arrogant and complacent; negligence from the "vet" in charge of premises that no vet should countenance; delayed diagnosis; mass killing including the healthy and unaffected; lazy or hyped up journalism - including the wheeling out by the media of the dreadful old guard who know so very little about the virus and such a great deal about their own careers; leaking disposal lorries trailing across the country; lack of communication with ordinary people. As usual, it is the ordinary people and their animals who have most to fear but people are being frightened and reasssured by turns by those they have now learned to distrust. How can cooperation - vital in a crisis- exist in such circumstances?"
Another wrote this morning,
" I find it hard to believe that NOTHING has changed since 2001. Why do so few people care about animal suffering? Any sane person could see what is wrong but those whom the gods would destroy they first make mad. I would have liked to contribute to halting the madness, but I know now that no one will listen. .."
We can only hope that the voices of reason who have been quietly trying to change things in the past six years will at last be listened to.

February 5 2007 ~ " it is disturbing that our officials are so biased and self deluded"

The virologist Dr Ruth Watkins BSc Hons, BFA Oxon, MBBS, MSc, MRCP, MRCPath has written an email to warmwell. She says that a disinterested risk assessment is vitally needed. The email has much to say on biosecurity (never total outside laboratories) and she expresses her wonder that
"animal health experts support these huge unnaturally intensive flocks that are actually fundamentally a risk to health. Outbreaks such as this produce huge concentrations of the pathogen. The lorries covered with tarpaulin cannot be said to be sealed, merely covered. .."
(Aerial pictures on the news show birds being brought out of the sheds and tipped into so-called "sealed lorries" Only tarpaulins cover the lorries - and this was one lesson we thought actually had been learned from 2001 since such leaking lorries are such an obvious risk to health.)
Wild birds have not so far been shown to be spreading the virus in Western Europe, yet so often the first thing suggested by the talking heads (never practising virologists, it seems and often distressingly the same "experts" that landed us in such a mess in 2001) is that the outbreak could have been started by a "bird in the ventilation" However, says Dr Watkins, the first possibility is that someone has been breaking the rules and has somehow introduced the virus directly into the infected shed. She says, "Any rule breaking is likely to be concealed and any illegal activity hidden. However that should not affect a disinterested risk assessment..... Huge and guess-work restriction zones are not necessary and wasting everyone's money." Read in full

February 5 2007 ~ Delay in picking up the infection in the first place is shrugged off by the veterinary profession in a way it should not be. Rapid diagnostic PCR testing could be applied even if from a VLA lab with same day results faxed out.

Ruth Watkins explains that there should always be an agreed procedure for testing for pathogens from such a farm
• First the Matthews vet should be making a diagnosis based on taking samples; that might have gained 2 days.
• Each sample taken for diagnosis should have a protocol applied to it and a number of infections screened for.
• Clinical assumptions must always be tested in the laboratory particularly in intensive farming conditions where infection takes hold like wild fire.
• Even if there was E coli infection as the vet suspected, it should not preclude testing for avian influenza as part of a standard protocol as both infections could be present.
• I suspect the veterinary testing is based on the vet's request for a specific pathogen and not a screening protocol.
• This is also likely as a cost cutting device as all veterinary tests must be paid for. 
  Secondly the rapid diagnostic PCR testing could be applied even if from a VLA lab with same day results faxed out. Once there is an outbreak then on site rapid PCR testing should be applied.
Read in full

February 5 2007 ~ When bona-fide, certified, safety-and-efficacy- tested vaccines are used, the results do not disappoint.

Professor Van der Velden is quoted in this morning's Independent,"There should definitely be a debate about vaccination of poultry," said Professor Koos Van der Velden, the chairman of the European Inf luenza Surveillance Scheme.......The situation in Suffolk is expected to be top of the agenda at a meeting of the EU's veterinary experts in Brussels today". We are dismayed to see that the Independent adds, " UK scientists fear vaccination could mask the start of an epidemic because it reduces the infectiousness of birds and stops them dying but does not halt the spread of disease."
Many will find it sickening that the notion, put forward by Sir David King, that vaccination does not halt the spread of disease, seems to have been widely accepted by journalists. Such a statement is highly misleading. ProMed moderator "AS" makes clear that
"When bona-fide, certified, safety-and-efficacy- tested vaccines are used, the results do not disappoint.." ProMed
The UK does hold 10 million doses of vaccine for use in creating a buffer zone if further outbreaks occur but there are no signs yet that they are to be used and no plans at all to introduce routine vaccination.

February 5 2007 ~ possible links between the Suffolk bird flu outbreak and that in Hungary are now being investigated.

Farming Today's Mark Holdstock reported this morning, "There seems to be a genuine puzzlement about how the disease reached this plant although one villager told me that he had seen a lot of Hungarian lorries entering and leaving the site..."
The Telegraph tells us that only now are "tests to be carried out on wild bird droppings, the most likely source of the infection. Defra began a survey in which every movement of staff, food or bedding will be analysed to see whether there could be a link with the outbreak of the highly pathogenic H5N1 strain of the virus in Hungary 10 days ago."

February 5 2007 ~ The costs of failing to heed expert advice

Britain now faces the loss of £370 million in export trade in meat and live birds. DEFRA will have to compensate the Bernard Matthews farm at the value of each bird just before slaughter and this could be over £500,000 just for this one farm. Under the Animal Health Act 1981, companies will be compensated for all healthy birds slaughtered.
At the time of the Scottish scare in April Dr Breeze wrote about on-site diagnosis being used for H5N1 detection and calculated that Scotland could be the best equipped country in Europe for between £350,000 and £400,000 :
Extract ".A RAPID PCR machine (www.idahotech.com) costs about £40,000 pounds. ..the RAPID replaces procedures that previously required very costly biological high containment laboratories with enormous fixed operating costs. ..There are hundreds of scientists and technicians... who know how to do PCR tests (a standard lab tool) and who could learn the works of the RAPID in an afternoon....... In January 2006 there was an avian influenza conference in Kiev Ukraine attended by over 350 medical and veterinary officials from the US, Europe and seven countries of the former Soviet Union: this was followed by hands on avian influenza H5N1 detection training on the RAPID for veterinary lab staff from six countries. ... ....
Back in April, when the Norfolk outbreak of a mild strain of bird flu, the low pathogenic H7N3 caused the culling on suspicion of thousands of free range chickens, there were veterinary experts, Elm Farm, The Soil Association and many concerned poultry owners, all urgently trying to get their message across. (See entries from April below). Many months before, in October 2005, the Soil Association had written a personal plea to Mr Blair about fears that pressure was
"... bearing down on policy-makers and closing off options for currently viable and positive measures that science and sense suggests should be considered. . .." Read in full
The free range sector's anxious voice remains unheeded. Professor Sir David King is already looking at a future where "organic and free-range farming would come to an end. It would change farming practices...." There are thousands of people in the UK who care deeply about raising birds in a natural environment - both for the birds' health and welfare and for our own. They are now aghast. The costs of this refusal to listen may far exceed the costs feared by the government for implementing the 'currently viable and positive measures that science and sense suggests should be considered.'

February 4/5 2007 ~".... the first 71 birds died last Tuesday. But the outbreak was not reported to government vets until Thursday evening, after another 1,000 died.

It took a further two days before European Union scientists managed to conduct tests and were able to confirm that the virus at the farm, in Holton, near Halesworth, was H5N1. Even after that, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) took until yesterday evening to impose the obligatory exclusion zone because legal wrangles meant the required forms had not been signed in time...." Telegraph

February 4/5 2007 ~ "H5N1 strain of bird flu is essentially a problem of industrial poultry practices"

Speculation about the cause of this outbreak continues to focus on wild birds. The tricky fact that migration has not yet begun is explained by 'unseasonal warm weather'. However, we are reminded of the Grain report concluding that H5N1 is a poultry virus killing wild birds, not the other way around - an alternative hypothosis that got backing in an editorial in the Lancet medical journal last May. The Grain report said:
"... The deadly H5N1 strain of bird flu is essentially a problem of industrial poultry practices. ... while wild birds can carry the disease, at least for short distances - its main vector is the highly self-regulated transnational poultry industry, which sends the products and waste of its farms around the world through a multitude of channels..."
Bernard Matthews farms are an extremely intensive form of agribusiness and one wonders if it too sends products and waste of its farms ( including a very large turkey complex in Hungary operating under the SaGa Foods brand) around the world "through a multitude of channels".
In a recent ProMed post, the moderator said, ".....the temptation to import cheap replacement stock from a source which just happens to also have HPAI can be great. If such an importing country is a neighbor, many of us are at immediate risk."

February 4/5 2007 ~ question mark over where the infected birds' carcasses were taken to be disposed of

A local observer wrote today,
" The first infected birds from the original shed were sent into Norfolk and possibly into Lincolnshire, not to Staffordshire. Why?"

February 4/5 2007 ~ "I cannot help but wonder why we are slaughtering birds and then moving them many, many miles to be incinerated."

is a question asked by a free range farmer and quoted by the BBC. Elsewhere on the BBC answers to current AI questions are given by Professor John Oxford (profile) - explaining for example that "the carcasses will have to be moved in steel containers which are totally secure." It may be remembered that Professor Oxford, a leading virologist, commented after the infected dead swan was found at the end of March, that
vaccination - in conjunction with careful monitoring - would be a useful way to help to control the disease.

February 4 2007 ~ Additional Restricted Zone

DEFRA "This is in addition to the 3km Protection Zone and 10km Surveillance Zone introduced earlier today. The Restricted Zone covers east Suffolk and South East Norfolk bounded to the west and the north by the A140 and A47 respectively, and is approximately 2090sqkm. It requires the isolation of poultry from wild birds and movements to be licensed. As further information becomes available and in consultation with ornithological experts the restrictions in place may be adjusted."

February 4 2007 ~ Bird Flu: Sir David King ruled out vaccination a year ago

Like us, the Soil Association was "mystfied" and "dismayed" by the decision, given by the Chief Scientific Officer, not to vaccinate against H5N1. They called for the use of vaccination of all poultry close to any outbreak. As the BBC reported a year ago in February 2006
"They have got to bring in every weapon in their armoury," said the association's Robin Maynard. He said he had a sense of "deja vu", likening it to the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. "The end result was 11 million animals slaughtered and £8bn cost to the tax-payer. We just don't want to go down that barbaric, medieval route."
As for the deployment of on-site rapid diagnosis, Dr Roger Breeze described last March how his team was building a chain of 30 laboratories in Central Asia to provide real time PCR diagnosis of avian influenza, linked by an electronic disease reporting system to the Chief Veterinarian in Tashkent and to the United States. PCR capability for avian influenza is now in place in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Yet in the UK rapid diagnostic testing is only dimly understood, it seems, and, as far as we are aware, there are no plans to use such existing technology. The unwelcome suspicion is that this is because it is not yet made by those in the UK who can profit from it financially.

February 4 2007 ~ "Killing infected poultry flocks ad infinitum, without adjunct vaccination..is a policy that has not been successful over the last decade"

Last April we received an important email from two virologists warning that the UK still has insufficient or no H5N1 influenza vaccine stocks to protect the poultry flocks. They pointed out that it is essential to have clinical virologists working alongside Veterinarians, advising the UK government. They made it clear, back in April, that "the failure to prepare reflects a lack of understanding of viral disease in DEFRA and government and has implications for human disease risk."
"We believe that it is essential to have Clinical Virologists with an understanding of human disease and the value of vaccination, working alongside Veterinarians, advising the UK government and making decisions about preparation and limitation of the H5N1 infection in birds. Killing infected poultry flocks ad infinitum, without adjunct vaccination, as a means to control infection carried by wild birds, is a policy that has not been successful over the last decade, in eradication of this highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza. The pronouncements this week by Professor Sir David King UK Chief Scientist are not encouraging.
Vaccination is the most useful weapon we have against epidemic viral disease. Further spread of infection is halted by a vaccinated population..."
Read in full

February 4 2007 ~ CIWF has never been allowed to visit Matthews' factories

Media frenzy - driving political hot potatoes away from the front pages - is as predictable as it is dismaying. Scaremongering about human health ("public told not to panic") tends to silence protest at the mass gassing of birds. Behind the bureaucratic demands for poultry to be put indoors within a 10km protection zone and the nationwide banning of pigeon races one hears the slamming of the stable door. As we have often regretted, DEFRA has not chosen vaccination as even part of their strategy to combat this global pandemic. As Dr Ruth Watkins asked in an article written many months ago for the CLA,
"... Why not vaccinate free-range poultry and pheasants as well as hold vaccine in reserve to ring vaccinate an outbreak in a domestic flock? Vaccination may be found necessary in bio-secure flocks to prevent breakdowns of infection in intensive poultry systems. If we do not order or make any vaccine for birds then we can never use it. Are we heading for another disaster on the scale of 2001?"
Pheasants are especially vulnerable to infection from wild birds. They are reared in Spring and then released into the local habitat. Vaccinating young pheasants before release would be the sensible option. As today's Independent on Sunday says, the outbreak
"casts doubt on the adequacy of defences against the disease, which the Government had said were the best in the world."
Once again we hear of "increasing risks of it arriving through migrating birds" The Bernard Matthews farms are strictly controlled and impermeable. Not even the highly respected Compassion in World Farming has ever been allowed in to visit. One correspondent, after mentioning the Bernard Matthews farms all over Europe, including Hungary, writes, "And they are telling us that it was a little sparrow in the ventilation system? Don't make me laugh!"

February 3 2007 ~ Suffolk bird disease is H5N1

Guardian 12.28 pm
"Samples from the infected establishment were immediately sent to the Community Reference Laboratory in Weybridge, which has this morning swiftly confirmed the disease to be the H5N1 strain of avian influenza.
The EU Commission has backed calls from Euro-MEPs for a stockpile of bird flu anti-viral drugs to be set up - but only if national authorities are prepared to pay for it.
Reuters reports that "Government veterinary experts" were called out late on Thursday. A protection zone with a radius of 3 km (2 miles) and a surveillance zone of 10 km around the infected farm has been set up.

February 3 2007 ~ Bird disease in Suffolk. Bernard Matthews farm - 160,000 turkeys in close proximity

Tests for H5N1 are going on at the VLA. Meanwhile DEFRA's contingency plan involves killing all the birds. The BBC quotes Peter Jinman as saying ""I think we do have to be very cautious about this particular situation. It does seem on the face of it very surprising if it's a commercial flock which is obviously going to have high biosecurity, a considerable amount of checks going on and, as we know, predominantly the concerns have always been about wild bird spread of this disease."
See also ProMed

February 2 2007 ~ Ram Genotyping. Closure of the scheme at last?

Hansard Jan 31 Ben Bradshaw "... the prevalence of BSE in the UK sheep population is most likely zero, or very low if present at all, and consequently the current RGS would have little impact on public health.
Ministers have accepted the review's key recommendation that a fully-funded RGS is therefore no longer appropriate. Instead, Departments should consult on options for the future of the RGS - either a cost-shared genotyping scheme, or closure of the scheme...."
The rationale of the ram-genotyping scheme was to protect public health - even though the relationship between BSE, scrapie and variant CJD has always been unclear and conjectural. Dr Alan Dickinson, described by Professor Hugh Pennington as " an intellectually rigorous man who....resembles the image that the public has of the brilliant, unworldly scientist", warned over 20 years ago that measures to reduce scrapie should avoid genetical extremes. He said that from the late 1980s there had been a "plethora of research committees controlling the policy and funds, hardly any of whose members were familiar with the subject, but who were mesmerised by the hype surrounding the protein, PrP" The RSG is now in disarray. For example, sheep that showed the VRQ allele had been designated by SEAC "sheep that are highly susceptible to scrapie and should not be used for breeding" and eliminated under the NSP - yet this allele actually seemed to confer resistance to the atypical strain of the disease. A large proportion of cases with so-called atypical scrapie have the ARR/ARR genotype - that most favoured by NSP breeding programmes. (See Fwi) There is now to be yet another 'consultation' about the RGS.
SEAC has defended the RGS as "an appropriate disease control policy based on the available scientific evidence..." (Defra ) But independent expert scientific evidence was available and was ignored. The advice of Dr Dickenson was quietly given in January 2001 and can be read in full. It included the advice that
".... basic research should be funded so as to ensure its objectivity and freedom from coercion - the Research Councils, as originally created, were well conceived to achieve this.."
Such advice has never been more relevant.

January 31 2007 ~ " I think it's as likely to find infection with that protein as it is to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"

See report at science.monstersandcritics.com. Laura Manuelidis, professor and head of neuropathology at Yale University Medical School, has just published a paper supporting her theory that the most likely explanation for TSE diseases is a stealthy, slow-acting virus. Professor Manuelidis has been working on TSE's for decades. Back in 2004, she was quoted on JSonline.com at the end of a story about the researches of another scientist, Frank Bastian, a professor of neuropathology, who also challenged the prion theory.
"I don't believe protein is infectious," she said. "I think it's as likely to find infection with that protein as it is to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."
See also Newsday.com. Alternatives to the prion theory are not new and illustrate how scientists can work for years to justify their deeply held theories often in contradiction to each other. However, when the received wisdom about BSE has been challenged by alternate theories, however well argued and supported, the establishment has been quick to discount them. So much rests on the infectious prion theory being correct. But in the midst of doubt who can be sure that there is an infectious agent from "mad cows" able to cross the species barrier? If not, then there was no need for the European ban on British beef, no need for the OTMS rule, no need for the cull of so many healthy animals - and no need in short, for the mountain of regulations. (These included the demand for the killing of cohorts now amended by the EU acknowledging at last the need for flexibility). The whole thing could have been a ten year old multi-billion-pound blunder resulting in tractor-loads of extra paperwork and used to justify the draconian new powers of the 2002 Animal Health Act. The 1981 Act was amended in spite of protest, to make the FMD contiguous cull retrospecively legal and to make possible the criminalisation of anyone who stands up to forced entry and mandatory slaughter even when all common sense revolts - as in the Harriet case.

January 26-28 2007 ~ Ask Sir David King

The Independent invites readers to send questions for Sir David King, the Government's Chief Scientist - but it is doubtful whether questions on FMD 2001 will be welcome. Professor King has, in the past, made clear his policy of "not engaging in public debate with members of the group that helped me deliver scientific advice to ministers on foot and mouth disease." His answers on the Today Programme in December 2001 appear to confuse on-site rapid diagnosis with the differential test for vaccinated and infected animals and acknowledge no doubt at all about the "sound basis for policy advice".
David King's committee was responsible for government policy in the crisis. They were criticised by Dr Paul Kitching,( termed a "Neanderthal" by the establishment in 2001), who, in a Channel 4 interview early in 2001, spoke of " very seductive graphs" produced by the modellers but "such little epidemiological investigation into the outbreak that the data which the modellers really require to input their model hasn't really been available" - i.e. rubbish in : rubbish out.
In Use and abuse of mathematical models: an illustration from the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic in the United Kingdom (pdf) Kitching RP, Thrusfield MV, Taylor NM. Rev Sci Tech. 2006 Apr;25(1):293-311 we read:
"The epidemic and its control resulted in the death of approximately ten million animals, public disgust with the magnitude of the slaughter, and political resolve to adopt alternative options, notably including vaccination, to control any future epidemics. The UK experience provides a salutary warning of how models can be abused in the interests of scientific opportunism.....Modelling should only be countenanced if veterinarians and scientists agree that the design of the model and the information used to generate its results are correct (and plausible, from the known biology of the disease). Otherwise, models: 'become exercises in mathematical sophistry'" (see links to OIE papers )
See also Nick Taylor's (VEERU) Use of Models in Disease Control Policy.pdf and the succinct comment by Dr Martin Hugh Jones on ProMed "I have a phrase I use on my students and those over-enamored of their computers and models, "Why should I believe you when you have a computer pallor and no mud on your shoes? The truth is in the field, not in the computer. When models are checked and rechecked against reality they can be fine-tuned and may eventually become useful..."

January 26-28 2007 ~ Questions about independent expertise on diagnostics, practical expertise in the use of vaccines, serology and virology are not going to go away

In 2001 Professor King's committee, according to the MAFF Chief Scientist at the time, David Shannon, " . .. had enormous power with no direct responsibility..the initial modelling was done without a full understanding of the disease and the nature of the industry and its practices.... it needed more independent expertise on diagnostics, practical expertise on the use of vaccines, expertise on serology ....The absence of the full range of sciences meant that many of these issues had to be debated elsewhere and subsequently."
Prof King was so affected by Dr Shannon's criticisms that he made an exception to his policy of "not engaging in public debate.."(here) Part of his answer, however, was that the group was "fully alive to the importance of serology, not least because one of its regular participants was the head of the laboratory concerned.."
That "regular participant", wrote recently,
"... one of the main reasons why many of us at Pirbright and elsewhere argued against the contiguous cull in 2001 was that it was based on poor science and not scientifically validated, although, of course, state approved ."
It is not any wish to see heads roll that is prolonging the life of the warmwell.com website. What makes it impossible to stop is our continuing deep concern about the quality of some of the scientific advice driving UK government policy. The Harriet case, for example, is symbolic, demonstrating that lack of proper risk assessment and sound science are still an issue. Ministers continue to make extraordinary statements about risk and validation but have never acknowledged that the novel contiguous cull policy of 2001 was based on bad science, ignored risk, was never validated and resulted in misery throughout the areas where it was so rigorously carried out. Those who are still in positions of enormous influence continue to defend it - but the questions must never stop being asked.

January 26-28 2007 ~ Ben Bradshaw: "We are currently considering research proposals..."

James Paice asked yesterday when DEFRA "expects to undertake research on the use of Polymerase Chain Reaction technology to detect M. bovis in badger setts"[110858]
Unfortunately, Mr Bradshaw chose not to answer the actual question asked so we do not know when - or even if - scientific evaluation will follow up the Warwick work, reported on in March 2006. Dr Orin Courtenay from the University of Warwick's department of Biological Sciences said in the university department press release that the team did not advocate culling badgers to control bovine TB, particularly in light of the scientific results emerging from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial but that if the government did continue to cull badgers, culling should at least be targeted at diseased and infectious animals. Untargeted culling kills healthy and uninfected animals. "With some further scientific evaluation, a "sett test" based on state-of-the-art molecular technology could provide a tool towards achieving this aim," he said.
Mr Paice's question was evidently asking about progress on this further scientific evaluation. It seems evident, from Mr Bradshaw's answer, that in the past year, DEFRA has done nothing more than "consider" proposals towards bringing forward a technology that is so vitally needed in Britain.

January 26-28 2007 ~ Silence on validation

Readers of warmwell may share our bafflement about how the grail of validation is to be achieved, especially for the rapid diagnosis on-site technology for foot and mouth. Pirbright's rapid diagnostic strip test device for FMD was discussed at the 2000 conference in Bulgaria, but, after 7 years, there are no signs that it is to be used in the field - or even "considered". As for the ARS machine, offered to the UK and used successfully in Uruguay in the same year as our disaster, the US GAO ( Government Accountability Office) paper, Homeland Security: Much Is Being Done to Protect Agriculture from a Terrorist Attack, but Important Challenges Remain GAO 2005: contained lines which were on the advice of the former Associate Administrator for Special Research Programs at USDA's Agricultural Research Service
".... Importantly, the tools can detect disease before the animal shows clinical signs of infection...... rapid diagnostic tools would not only allow for a rapid diagnosis but would also permit the monitoring of nearby herds before symptoms appeared so that only infected herds would have to be killed......rapid diagnostic tools would be helpful because FMD would be detected in less than an hour, informed control measures could be implemented, and herds in the area would be under regular surveillance."
But rapid diagnosis in the field seems as far away as ever. In 2005, when the Countess of Mar was told: "tests have to be validated by the OIE. We are waiting on that" her frustration was evident. " My Lords, it is coming up to five years since the foot and mouth disease outbreak. If that has not been done, can the Minister say why not? I remember the late Fred Brown coming over from America and telling us that they were using the tests in America. Why has that not been done in this country in the past five years?"
It is now over six.

January 26 2007 ~ Harriet : Caroline Lucas, MEP, writes to Ben Bradshaw

Extract:
"..... the regulations and their inbuilt flexibility can be implemented with sensitivity and common sense. I would hope that this case can be dismissed and Harriet and her owners can continue to live their lives in peace. Alternatively, perhaps you can issue instructions to review the case in a year or twos time...."
Read in full on Harriet page.

January 24 2007 ~ "It remains to be seen whether government is willing to give up its authority on disease control to an independent board"

NBA chairman, Duff Burrell, is quoted by Stackyard.com, on the NBA 's cautious welcome to the idea of industry cost sharing. However, the proviso that the government proposal "does not automatically include taking a levy off farmers to fund the elimination of an exotic epidemic like FMD" is paramount, and "as long as a cross-UK system can be constructed and government is prepared to work seriously towards the adoption of a centralized disease control body, perhaps modeled on something like the Food Standards Agency, which can operate outside parliament and be truly independent."
" ......If a truly independent cross-UK committee could be assembled, and politics really were taken out of disease management, it would mean, for example, that a radically different approach could be taken...
It is clear that the adoption of such an initiative will call for a massive shift in outlook from both government and industry. Ministers and senior civil servants will be required to abandon their well embedded, top down, parent-pupil, approach..."
(Mr Burrell's view of the independence of the FSA is perhaps a little sanguine. Its apparent reluctance to act over the scandal of diseased meat in the food chain, its lack of teeth in the Bowland case, the involvement of Sir John Krebs in the FMD crisis, the acceptance of mathematical modelling of the "theoretical likelihood" of BSE in sheep - now happily laid to rest by the VLA, are just some examples suggesting that the Agency does not always have its hands entirely free. Untied hands - those able to demonstrate a truly independent veterinary and scientific expertise - are what is so urgently needed in UK disease control. One wonders, for example, how many practising virologists are at present employed in DEFRA or involved in advising the government. )

January 24 2007 ~ Abuse of power in the supply chain is destroying dairy farmers

The Western Morning News today, reporting on the Competition Commission's latest findings, writes that "the vice-like grip major supermarkets have over rural communities was laid bare last night after figures revealed that most people in the countryside have virtually no choice about where to shop..." Farmers and suppliers may have been intimidated into silence over practices in the supermarket sector, it suggests. The WMN also reports the words on a third generation farmer who has been receiving around 16p a litre for his milk, while supermarkets have been selling four pints (2.2 litres) for about £1.11. He says,
"If they are going to say that it is all fair and hunky dory, then I am off. The amount that farmers get at the moment means that dairy farming is like a really expensive hobby. .... Farmers look after the countryside and if we stop doing that because of what the supermarkets pay, then they are affecting the countryside through what they are doing."
Almost 1,000 dairy farmers threw in the towel last year. This government may think it is presiding over a "post agricultural era", but the warnings are there. Professor James Lovelock in The Revenge of Gaia: "... We are dependent on the trading world for sustenance; climate change will deny us regular supplies of food and fuel from overseas.. ......we need secure indigenous supplies of food and energy....our gas and oil will soon be gone and we can not rely on supplies from abroad..."

January 23 2007 ~ The real cost of the raid on Harriet, the pet cow

As one of the highly articulate supporters of Harriet has written; "I feel that Mr Bradshaw and his department are thus only antagonising the rural/farming community even further - something they cannot afford to do after the disastrous handling of FMD in 2001, and the later fiasco of the RPA/SFP. The buzz words should be cooperation and openness.... . When Ben Bradshaw in Parliamentary Answers stated that EU legislation demanded that Harriet be slaughtered but failed to mention the impending derogation, he was being less than open. This was puzzling as Mr Bradshaw was well aware of this, his department having been been involved in discussions with the EU on this very topic. "
Another, who took part in the extraordinary stand-off on January 10th, writes to warmwell to say,
"... Mr Bradshaw said that the raid cost the SVS £3,500 - that was just the 2 SVS people and the preparations.
We still don't know how much it cost to have the Police and Trading Standards there (about 20 people), plus their preparations, vehicles, etc.
We also found out later that there was a police riot van and dog handler standing by out of sight, presumably in case the protesting mob - comprising an elderly couple, 4 middle-aged women and 2 middle-aged men - got nasty."
The Jaded mainstream media are reporting on how Britain - abandoning its historical sense of fair play and tolerant decency - is now, to our shame, showing its seamier side to the world. (See, for example, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown in yesterday's Independent) The fate of Harriet is symbolic and will not pass unnoticed.

January 22 ~ The Daily Mail wades in

Daily Mail:
".... Officials discovered that Harriet - known to Defra as 'bovine animal UK OX056400177' - had lived on a farm where a calf, born five months later in a different herd, had contracted the disease. Despite written proof that Harriet had never come in contact with, or even shared food, with the infected calf, Defra insisted she must die. ..... Mr Harper, MP for the Forest of Dean, said: 'Given that I had a promise from the minister that Harriet would not be touched until the case had gone through the full legal process, I take a very dim view that this operation was planned in secret at great cost to the taxpayer.'..."
(And we like this - sent today by an American reader of warmwell.)

January 21 2007 ~ Harriet

The Booker column says it " has reported many strange confrontations between officialdom and the British public over the years, but none more bizarre than the drama which unfolded ten days ago in a field near Newent in the Forest of Dean.... Last week more details emerged of the latest twist to a barely credible story which has been unfolding for many months ....."
The article is likely to raise even further the level of public concern about this case. It ends,
"... The yellow-jacketed officials departed in their fleet of vehicles, leaving Pat Innocent, the observer on whose evidence this account is based, to muse on the famous 1960s experiments by Stanley Milgram showing how easily people can be persuaded by authority to obey foolish orders which result in inflicting unnecessary pain on others."
The Milgram experiments have been described as "a lesson in depravity, peer pressure, and the power of authority." Milgram's subjects were, of course,"just following orders" - just like the 22 officials who came to kill Harriet, who, like the millions of healthy animals before her in 2001 and since, has been sentenced not by veterinary nor scientific expertise nor even by EU inflexibility, but by a bureaucratic callousness that even now beggars belief.

January 20 2007 ~The financial cost of the raid was £3,500

The Gloucestershire Citizen quotes Mark Harper MP: "..... just looking at the costs to the taxpayer of the SVS, we are looking at £3,500 plus 72 man hours of work involved in this operation." They also make public that Harriet's case will be heard in the European courts in Brussels. Defra has agreed to "hold off until the outcome".

January 19 2007 ~ Harriet: "Given the public interest generated about this animal, the SVS informed Ministers of their intention to remove the animal on 8 January 2007. They were under no obligation to do so."

Given that officialdom felt no similar prompting to inform Harriet's owners, preferring secretly to arrive in force and destroy property in their attempt to kill the pet cow (here), we find this answer, to PQ 116111 yesterday, quite breathtaking in its unpleasant absurdity.
Public interest has indeed been generated. The case is symbolic. It has attracted the interest of the BBC's Farming Today and PM programme because it is not a straightforward case of protecting public health. Instead there is something in the case that raises public alarm about the motives of a government that cannot bear to carry out a proper risk assessment nor accept it might be wrong. Mr Bradshaw and his department contemptuously refuse even to consider the flexibility now allowed by the change in the EU rules. Protesters who, according to Mr Bradshaw in an answer to Mark Harper the day before, caused "public disorder and intentional obstruction" were, in fact, demonstrating that it is most certainly not in the public interest to stand idly by when officialdom behaves with chilling police-state tactics of the kind we saw in 2001. Many will feel that to retain the hard-won freedoms of the last century sometimes requires staunch protest.
Unnecessary cruelty is, as was proclaimed by Mr Bradshaw himself on 18 October 2006, (Hansard), an offence. Trust in the government cannot be served by attempting to smear those who, standing up for Britain's fairness and humanity, take the difficult course of turning out to protest instead of turning their backs. Killing Harriet would, to many decent-minded people, be an offence, even if the perpetrators do wear the uniforms of state officials.

January 18 2007 ~ Swill feeders to sue DEFRA

The 62 uncompensated former swill feeders who were put out of business in May 2001 by the Animal By-Products (Amendment) (England) Order 2001 have always maintained that it was Government negligence that created the conditions in which the foot and mouth outbreak became more likely. See Hansard and relevant warmwell page
The swill feeders have got tired of waiting for the Ombudsman's report into government maladministration over FMD. Robert Persey wrote to warmwell in November 2004, "The Parliamentary Ombudsman has promoted the case officer who was making good progress on the swill feeding case. Surprise, surprise, he has not been replaced and so the investigation has conveniently stopped. Is somebody pulling strings with the Ombudsman?"
Having now been told that, yet again, the Ombudsman's report has been 'delayed', the swill feeders have now decided to go ahead and sue DEFRA to beat the six year cut off point for litigation. The FWi report links to the TWO trading standards videos taken at Heddon on the Wall but there seem to be difficulties in viewing them online.
Although the conditions at the Waugh Farm were indeed distressing and squalid, the received wisdom that it was untreated and infected swill at Bobby Waugh's farm that began the FMD crisis is thought highly questionable by some and, significantly, was not one of the charges at the Waugh trial. After nearly six years, we are still waiting for the real story of the origins of FMD 2001 to emerge. As the regional director of the Countryside Alliance, Richard Dodd, is quoted as saying in the Newcastle Journal
"I'd rather they spent £40m finding out exactly what caused foot-and-mouth and making sure it can't happen again."

January 18 2007 ~ RPA ".... this is about accountability. Here we have got mounting complexity and problems.. and yet onward sailed the ship heading towards the iceberg. What I want to know is who was on the bridge?"

The uncorrected oral evidence of Johnston McNeill to the EFRA committee was put up yesterday and makes for interesting reading. The bungle has cost farmers something like £21 million, DEFRA went way over budget and is now cutting back on financing important rural agencies and research (see below.) The process of applying for the Single Farm Payment has been in many cases very stressful indeed and the whole RPA fiasco would be a laughing stock were the consequences not so serious. Mr McNeill has borne the entire burden of responsibility - but it will be remembered that it was Margaret Beckett's decision to introduce a complex hybrid system. Both the WMN and the Liberal Democrats today carry comments that might be thought rather predictable - but the oral evidence does need to be read in full before any fair judgement can be made.
As for the warning that the cuts in research, caused by the RPA overspend, could leave the UK more vulnerable to animal disease, please see the discussion on www.fmd-and-csf-action.org/forums Extract: "We need to start with a clear public statement by the Head of DEFRA on what is needed technically to respond effectively to foreign disease outbreaks in the UK, what technologies are already available in the world today, and what needs to be devised."

January 17 2007 ~ Harriet - Judicial Review. "A judge will weigh up the facts on both sides"

Farming Today had, as its first item today, an interview with David Price and Mark Harper MP. Here is the unofficial transcript made by warmwell.
"...This is one of the things that constituents frankly find so annoying - in fact very reminiscent of the Foot and Mouth debacle six years ago. They sent at least twelve police officers, eight trading standards officers, two state veterinary officials - so you had about 22 state officials trying to seize and cull one cow.
.... effectively we had a stand-off for about four and a half hours. .... until the legal process had been exhausted I didn't think it was appropriate that his officials were behaving in this way.....eventually the police recommended at the local level that DEFRA would be very sensible to back off and not try and pursue things...." Read transcript in full
A first hand account of the attempt mentioned by Farming Today and below on warmwell, can be read in full on www.harriet-thecow.co.uk.
Mark Harper mentioned the new derogation, news of which was sent to this website by an EU official who, it may be remembered, ended his email "I hope this helps. All the best, for you and Harriet."

January 2007 ~ The number of farmers still waiting to have their botched subsidy payments resolved is around ten times the latest figure given by RPA

The Western Morning News reveals that around 19,000 farmers who received incorrect subsidy payments last year are still waiting for their cases to be brought to an end. Richard Haddock is quoted: "...we are having to squeeze this information out of them instead of Defra being totally straight with us". See RPA pages.

January 2007 ~ Zero risk - but no flexibility

In answer, on January 9th, to a Parliamentary Question by Mark Harper, Mr Bradshaw admitted that the EU rules about cohort culling are changing this month. As we reported in November, slaughter is no longer required. However, Mr Bradshaw's department show no inclination to exercise flexibility; "we are required to enforce the legislation that is currently in place " they repeat through their Ministers - as if confidence in UK beef really needs to be underpinned by unnecessary cruelty to a tame Jersey cow and her distraught owners.
"... Any changes to Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy control legislation must be carried out on the basis of a thorough risk assessment, based on sound science. It is unlikely that any change could be made before 2008 at the earliest....." (read in full)
Unfortunately, the UK's record on risk assessment in the area of animal health regulations has been, frankly, a farce, while "science" underpinning legislation has sometimes been anything but sound. "Politicking" (as John Ryan says below) has somehow overridden veterinary science. We have seen "experts" threatening, in the name of risk assessment, to destroy the entire national flock of 36 million sheep because of an assumption that scrapie can mask BSE. The findings of the VLA have exploded that conjecture at last with nearly 3,000 scrapie samples having tested negative for BSE. Mr Bradshaw himself, a few days ago, being obliged to admit that
"the prevalence of BSE in the UK sheep population is most likely to be zero, or very low if present at all." (Hansard)
But who will dismantle the mountain of regulations resting on the molehill of that wrong assumption? Or even dare to report it? And who are the beef eaters who, in their right mind, could really consider a pet cow, who will never enter the food chain, to be a risk?

January 11 2007 ~ Harriet: "Just doing their job"... Just following orders again

Yesterday, there was an attempt to kill Harriet, the healthy, harmless pet Jersey cow, - and a failed attempt to ensure that no interference from protesters got in the way. We have been sent a full first hand report which gives details of names, registration numbers and quotes from Trading Standards officers and police that - after the debacle of 2001 - suggest that nothing at all has been learnt about the social and psychological effects of enforced entry and unnecessary slaughter. More detail to follow - if that is what Harriet's owners and supporters request. We are, however, able to report that for the present, Harriet is safe. The background to this extraordinary story of inflexible UK officialdom can be found on the Harriet page and, at the request of Harriet's friends and supporters, there is now a dedicated website for Harriet www.harriet-thecow.co.uk.

January 9 2007 ~ Foot and Mouth tests in Northern Ireland are clear

Samples taken from pigs at an abattoir in County Antrim have tested negative for foot-and-mouth disease and swine vesicular disease at the Institute of Animal Health. BBC See also http://www.fmd-and-csf-action.org/news-archive/fmdni07
(We note that the BBC continues to quote the wrong figure of 6.5m animals killed in the UK in 2001. The real figure was a minimum of 10 million and it is curious that journalists persist in downplaying the extent of the slaughter of animals, a huge number of which were uninfected. As Dr Alex Donaldson wrote recently, " the responsibility for diagnosis fell entirely on field veterinarians, most of whom had never seen FMD. We now know that this led to many herds and flocks being needlessly slaughtered with errors being compounded by the model-driven contiguous cull policy which meant that when disease was diagnosed the animals on five neighbouring premises, on average, were slaughtered for every infected premises diagnosed.")

January 2007 ~ Research project for most effective FMD response strategy, including vaccination, underway in America

With its accurate and up-to-date information and the fact that the modelling will be done by experts in the field of animal disease control, this model will be very different from the one that in the UK drove the infamous contiguous cull policy of 2001. Livestock producers throughout the US are being asked to take part in an on-line survey to gather data to be used in an FMD simulation model. The aim is to determine the best strategies for containing the disease - which is taken extremely seriously there and indeed is on the top of the Department of Homeland Security's list for a bio-terrorist attack.
"Our model will provide decision-makers with a valuable tool for rapid response and will help determine the best strategies, including vaccination, to contain an outbreak and minimize impact to the livestock industry" said Dr. Tim Carpenter, director of the study (see article in the Prairie Star.)
The project, based at the Center for Animal Disease Modeling and Surveillance (CADMS) in the School of Veterinary Medicine at UC-Davis in California, is being conducted in collaboration with the National Center for Foreign Animal and Zoonotic Diseases (FAZD) and is supported by USDA and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Interestingly, CADMS has guaranteed that all the information offered by participants will be kept confidential and will only be used for modeling purposes.

January 2007 ~ Aesop, and the art of good communication between Ministry and stakeholder

Warmwell's comments on the way DEFRA replied to the recommendations of the SAC committee, back in 2005 (responses and comment here) - (that DEFRA "missed the point" of several recommendations, certain replies were "pure Sir Humphrey" , some answers were "vague and woolly in the extreme" or "mere optimistic statements of intent for an indeterminate future time") - were perhaps a little harsh. We implied that DEFRA's responses showed more defensiveness than understanding. All the same, our deep concern was justifiably expressed at lack of progress in such areas as the need for independent experts to be involved; that readable, clear documents should be accessible; that inadequate IT systems did not seem to be much improved; that apparent UK ignorance of internationally accredited state of the art technologies and vaccines was not reassuring. There seemed an over-reliance on the expensive Risk Solutions analysis which, when it finally appeared, itself suggested SEVEN areas of further work to be done before any "best approach" to FMD control could be assumed. Perhaps the greatest worry and that needing urgently to be addressed was the state of the relationship between DEFRA and those most involved with the on-the-ground realities of serious animal disease.
Looking back, SAC's tactful hints (recommendations 15, 16 and 17) that a rebuilding of trust was urgently required, stand out. Actively seeking friendly engagement with people and offering incentives towards cooperation have always ensured a much more positive result than coercion - as Aesop was probably not the first to demonstrate. It is yet another lesson that those who like power to be centralised seem perversely slow to learn.
It seems that DEFRA now favours a move towards clearer and franker communication. We should very much like to hear more. What other progress has been made that can be acknowledged? What, for example, DID happen to the Exotic Disease Control System? It has now been 2 years since the SAC Committee made its recommendations. They still seem extremely important and relevant.

January 2007 ~ "Trust between Whitehall and the countryside has collapsed."

RPA page latest quotes Clive Aslet in the Telegraph. "The disasters of BSE and foot and mouth show that the Whitehall-Knows-Best approach does not work. A supervisory culture is needed: one that sets and monitors farm outcomes, but does not insist on inspecting every step of the way."

January 2007 ~ Two cheers for the new animal welfare in transport rules

The new European Union regulation on animal welfare in transport came into force on January 5th 2007. It is a start. All the same, because of the failure of the European Council of Ministers to reach a compromise, the new EU rules do not limit travelling times nor stocking densities, as had been hoped and envisaged. European Health Commissioner, Markos Kyprianou, has at least made a commitment that these two aspects of animal transport will be returned to before the end of 2009. He says "This important animal welfare legislation aims to reduce the stress and harm that animals can experience during land and sea journeys."

January 2007 ~"....Even in countries that consider themselves humane, animals can be treated as little more than objects.."

The founder of Compassion in World Farming, Peter Roberts, died a few weeks ago aged 82. The very readable Economist obituary reminds us that
"....Even in countries that consider themselves humane, animals can be treated as little more than objects...
(In 2001) Britain almost insouciantly culled about 6 million cows, sheep and pigs during an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. Bird flu now brings the prospect of the wholesale slaughter not just of poultry but of wild birds too....Yet politicians in most places are unmoved...."
Compassion may not touch our policy makers and yet we are seeing that informed and determined force of argument can have an effect - as can the economic and political threat of disease. But very, very slowly. Environment News (www.ens-newswire.com) reminds us that three years before FMD struck the UK, the FAO itself was one of the strong voices warning of the growing threat of "devastating" animal disease epidemics as a result of long distance transport of animals and increasingly dense livestock populations. More recently, the
".. opening of trade routes between Europe, the Near East and the Commonwealth of Independent States could allow animals infected with diseases such as foot-and-mouth disease to enter Central or even Western Europe if they escape detection by official border controls..."
Zoonoses are no respecters of border controls. Relying solely on existing controls, plans and policies has been shown in the past to be a grave mistake, but changing them for the better is proving to be a long, painfully slow process.

January 2007 ~ Much still to be done.

One of the reforms that Peter Roberts' influence helped bring about is that under the new EU regulation, animal welfare in transport, special attention must now be paid to young animals and the newborn during transport. Females within one week of giving birth may not be moved. It may seem extraordinary that the need for such reforms even exists - and that they still are so limited in scope. Many will never forget their despair when one of the consequences of the lack of accurate diagnosis in 2001 - the transportation and killing of heavily pregnant females and newborn or unborn lambs among the doomed animals at such sites as Great Orton - took place. This was not a humane, necessary euthanasia following proof of disease but "a messy scramble to kill terrified sheep and lambs as quickly as possible." 451,000 healthy sheep and lambs were slaughtered at Gt Orton . There were no clinical signs of disease. On only 1 of the 115 farms was there a positive test result. (It showed that 9 sheep had recovered from the virus.)

Risk Solutions. An accurate analysis of 2001 from experts is, even after six years, still needed. Risk Solutions looked at a range of possible scenarios rather than an evaluation of the actual 2001 pre-emptive ' firebreak', '3km', 'contiguous' and 'slaughter on suspicion' culls. What FMD expertise there was within Risk Solutions has yet to be identified and one wonders how (indeed, if) they validated and interrogated the FMD data. Their CBA failed to investigate the costs incurred as a result of pre-emptive slaughter. In fact, FMD costs are likely to continue for more than a decade, not least because of the poor construction of some of the burial pits and the sheer numbers of animals buried in such sites as Great Orton.

January 2007 ~ A simple working outbreak manual is needed

DEFRA's current Foot and Mouth Disease: Outbreak Management (last modified at the end of November), although containing some improvements, continues to lay heavy emphasis on slaughter, implies a government distrust of farmers that bodes ill for any proposed partnership, and there is still absence of clarity about such vital issues as the definition of dangerous contacts (see also below), accurate diagnosis and vaccination:
Example "On farm slaughter will only take place when animals cannot be licensed off the farm or when the animals cannot be transported because they are unfit for transport e.g. heavily pregnant animals or newly born calves, piglets and lambs. Each case will be evaluated to ensure that welfare standards are maintained. There will be no payment made to farmers for animals slaughtered under such a scheme. This is in line with the policy set out in the Government's response to the FMD Inquiries (November 2002). This states that "experience has shown that payments to farmers under such schemes can provide a disincentive for them to take responsibility for looking after their animals, and may also create a false market".
Reassurance that only positively diagnosed animals are to be killed is nowhere to be seen because one of the first essentials for disease control, provision for accurate diagnosis based on rapid tests performed at regional centres and/or mobile labs as well as Pirbright, has yet to be put in place. The only centre for diagnostic testing mentioned in the document is still - as in 2001 - IAH Pirbright. A straightforward simple working manual for use during an outbreak, drawn up after close and democratic collaboration between those involved in disease control, in which absolute clarity about vaccination - what will actually be vaccinated, when and where - has still to be made available. As the Countess of Mar said over a year ago, "There really is a need for a bit more lateral thinking to target the effort, both scientifically and economically..."

January 2007 ~ Ring vaccination stopped a new FMD strain in its tracks

Last February 2006 an outbreak of a new variant of FMD occurred in Turkey. An article appeared in late December on the FAO website, describing the successful vaccination programme. Keith Sumption: "FMD is a virus that propagates incredibly quickly -- when it discovers a new niche where there is no immunity among animals, it just rips through them. Europe is FMD free, and animals there aren't vaccinated against it - so they have no immunity."

Extract from article: ".. The EU's vaccine bank, one of the largest in the world, had stocks of an antigen on hand that could be rapidly turned into an effective vaccine, and production of 2.5 million doses for use in Thrace began immediately.
At the same time a team of FAO and EU experts was deployed to the field to help provincial authorities plan their counterattack... Follow-up blood monitoring conducted in May by Turkey's FMD Institute showed that vaccination had been successful, and sufficient to ensure a protective barrier against repeat invasions from infected areas to the east..."
Read in full on FAO website.

January 2007 ~ "One of the main reasons why many of us at Pirbright and elsewhere argued against the contiguous cull in 2001 was that it was based on poor science and not scientifically validated, although, of course, state approved..."

This letter to ProMed was written by the much respected Dr Alex Donaldson, Head of Pirbright from 1989 to 2002 and was sent to warmwell on December 24. Extract:
"... there is no doubt that lessons can be learnt from experiences during the epidemic of 2001.... Unfortunately, confirmatory laboratory diagnosis during the UK 2001 epidemic was largely abandoned in March 2001 when slaughter on suspicion, a policy based on clinical judgement only, came into operation. ... suggestions of more rapid methods of transport, such as the use of helicopters, fell on deaf ears.... In many cases testing was not done at all or else samples were received after animals had been culled.... We now know that this led to many herds and flocks being needlessly slaughtered with errors being compounded by the model-driven contiguous cull policy...."
Another new year. Nearly six years on from the misery of the FMD crisis - and it is still vitally important, as Dr Donaldson says, that lessons be learnt. Many at Pirbright, then, were only too aware that the "state approved" contiguous cull was based on poor science and was not scientifically validated. The responsibility for a humane animal disease policy rests on all who both care about livestock and have knowledge of disease. Those prepared to try to convince the policy makers (who tend to be far removed from the realities of both) deserve enormous thanks and very best wishes for the new year.

January 2007 ~ "Unfortunately, confirmatory laboratory diagnosis during the UK 2001 epidemic was largely abandoned in March 2001.."

This was most certainly not the impression given by a Defra submission to the OIE for Disease Free Status (now missing from the DEFRA website) that implied that all Infected and Contiguous Premises had been tested for FMD. It is a claim - by implication - that does however still exist on the internet in Mr Scudamore's Origin of the UK Foot and Mouth Disease epidemic in 2001 in which he wrote that "... each of the 2,026 FMD cases was subjected to a detailed clinical and epidemiological investigation." In fact, as Dr Donaldson points out, from March 2001 animals were killed first and only some premises were tested afterwards. The consequences of this led to such carnage as the killing in Wigtownshire, (part of Dumfries and Galloway). As we read in the answer to Parliamentary Question 2164 in Wigtownshire, 15 Premises were clinically diagnosed as having FMD. 13 only were tested; 2 only actually had FMD confirmed. The total number of animals on these 2 Premises was 1129. A further 88,446 animals were automatically slaughtered because of the infamous 15 March decision to cull all contiguous and 3 km premises.
Wigtownshire is the part of the country where Carolyn Hoffe, trying to protect her 5 uninfected pets, was subjected to treatment that made many wonder if the UK had become a police state run mad. First hand contemporary accounts - in their anguished hundreds - collected together in Fields of Fire remind us of how important it is that there should never be a repetition of such scenes. Members of the EU Temporary Committee Inquiry, including English MEPs, were visibly in tears at the end of their tour and these are human memories that must never be dismissed as irrelevant. Many of the perpetrators of FMD 2001 have been moved on or (unbelievably) up, and present incumbents may be hearing only the loudest voices. John Ryan's final recommendation (see below) that "the process of learning from disease events and the history of the disease must be institutionalised and genuinely acted upon" seems more important than ever.

January 2007 ~ "The only effective defence against such politicking is sound science, hard information, good communication and good emergency preparation "

John Ryan was the Irish veterinary scientist who, five months before the FMD disaster struck the UK, addressed a United Nations agriculture conference in Bulgaria and warned that FMD was certain to hit Europe - a warning that had already been given to Jim Scudamore by Pirbright three months earlier. The same Borovets conference reported on the rapid diagnostic strip test device developed at Pirbright that "could potentially achieve a more immediate diagnosis at the site of a suspected FMD outbreak to allow control procedures to be effected more rapidly". Bearing in mind the commercial cachet of any successful rapid diagnostic breakthrough it is perhaps not so surprising that the UK, in the person of an apparently harassed Jim Scudamore, vetoed the assistance of USDA's new rapid diagnostic technology early in the outbreak. It seems now, as it did then, extraordinarily tragic that at a time of chaos, mass slaughter and grief, any equipment offered to help rapidly identify sub-clinically infected animals should have been ignored. Instead, responsibility for the disease was left to the hastily gathered army of foreign and volunteer vets, most of whom who had never seen the disease in their lives and who were fearful of missing the slightest possible sign when they made their clinical diagnoses. The Hammond Report had warned in 2000 that the veterinary service could not cope with a serious disease outbreak, yet nothing was done to make those with power to change things sit up and take notice - and even now, of course, there remains a disastrous shortfall of farm vets.
A government memorandum to the Lessons Learned inquiry claimed that a contingency plan had been in place at the time of the outbreak but as Dr Iain Anderson said (to no outrage whatsoever): "We did not find this to be so."
After the disaster Mr Scudamore was not the only one to have said - and with so little justification, "It is easy to be wise with hindsight, but at the time there seemed no other measures that we could have taken."
There were and are other measures. We can only hope that DEFRA's apparent new policy of openness and communication means that animal health policies will depend on sound veterinary and scientific understanding - and that commercialisation and politics will no longer be allowed to intervene. Surely, one of the most powerful lessons that must be learned from the foot and mouth crisis before the next disaster strikes is that
"The provision of hard information and good science not only makes decision making easier, but has a nice side effect of de-politicising the decision-making process..... The only effective defence against such politicking is sound science, hard information, good communication and good emergency preparation where these issues have already been discussed with key stakeholders...." (FMD, Risk and Europe by John Ryan)

January 2007 ~ Test rules - and if necessary challenge and change them

David Cameron's speech at the Oxford Farming Conference will refer to the fact that many people now want to eat British food wherever possible.
"...They're not just supporting British farmers out of a sense of solidarity or a desire to limit carbon emissions. They also realise that food that has been preserved and flown or driven long distances often tastes second rate.
I know that this may raise issues with the European Union. But the role of a Government that cares about British farming is not to sit on its hands and say "there's nothing we can do", but instead to test these rules and if necessary challenge and change them..." (More)
Interestingly, the Farmers Weekly's Letter of the Week is also on the subject of food security, arguing that the proposed cost sharing 'partnership' in animal health and welfare between British agriculture and government should be (as the paper Industry Cost Sharing so cogently lays out) an equal partnership, "not an opportunity for government to shirk its responsibility for national food safety."

January 2007 ~ responsibility for national food safety

"Fuelling a Food Crisis - The impact of peak oil on food security" by Caroline Lucas MEP, Andy Jones and Colin Hines makes clear that
"... Relocalising our food systems will ultimately require a complete change in direction away from the policies of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy and the rules of the World Trade Organisation, both of which are based on ever greater international trade and globalisation of the food system. Instead, the central aim of trade and food policy should be a just and environmentally sound food security programme, for all nations, through the prioritisation of self-reliance and reduced energy use...."
There should, the report says, be a reduction in profit margins for the hugely powerful food processors and supermarkets - and a new, but this time legally enforceable Code of Conduct.

January 2007 ~ "We just can't put up with the rules, regulations and red tape any longer"

These words, quoted by the Farmers Weekly in December, were from the Managing Director of Cornwall's only abattoir licensed to slaughter older cattle, the Madron Meat Company, commenting on the fact that it has been forced to close. The welfare and food safety implications of livestock having to travel greater and greater distances to slaughter has been highlighted by popular chefs such as Gordon Ramsay who are helping to remind the public that buying fresh, humanely and locally produced foods is well worth the extra expense. Supporting local food markets and local food production results in healthier, tastier food but, even more importantly, it assists traceability and food safety as well as helping to revitalise rural communities. This matters in the UK but it matters everywhere in the world too to get rid of the wasteful and destructive globalisation of food production.

December 18 2006 ~ "...maybe it is bureaucracy gone mad..."

A farmer from Banham in Norfolk wanted to bring four of his rare-breed sheep to take part in a family Nativity procession around Norwich Cathedral. The red tape in place to protect any resident sheep, cows or pigs currently inhabiting the precincts of Norwich Cathedral certainly made itself felt. Obstacles to be overcome by the public spirited farmer included the animal movement licence, (completed in quadruplicate, with one copy sent to trading standards and another to the cathedral), the "performing animal licence" (sic), obtained through the SVS, and yet another animal movement licence needed to bring the animals back home again. We are glad to report that this did not put the farmer off his kind action and, as far as we know, the procession duly took place.
The Telegraph quotes the "community learning officer" (sic) at the cathedral who opined that "I feel maybe it is bureaucracy gone mad, but I suppose in the light of foot-and-mouth and things in the past people have to be careful."
The technology exists to pinpoint disease if and when it arrives. We can only continue to hope that the UK will soon make use of the benefits of the modern world in protecting its food and farming instead of relying on the avalanche of paperwork - not much of a bulwark against the real threat of zoonoses.

17 Dec 2006 ~ Defra placed revised contingency plans for exotic animal diseases before parliament on Wednesday

http://www.rics.org "Originally subjected to parliamentary approval in 2005, the revised plans have now been divided into separate elements consisting of a Framework Response Plan (FRP) and an Overview of Emergency Preparedness (OEP). During a disease outbreak, the FRP seeks to identify and structure roles and responsibilities, while the OEP seeks to develop a coherent response to the outbreak.
Defra's contingency plans have been developed to coordinate a response to a number of diseases, including foot and mouth disease, avian influenza and Newcastle disease."
(Many thanks to FMD News, a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis)

December 17 2006 ~ the stolen animals were obviously being taken to illegal slaughter houses, destined for the illegal meat trade

Almost 200 sheep are believed to have gone from farms in Radnorshire and Montgomeryshire this summer, including 70 ewes from the Welshpool area and also animals from land near Knighton and Rhayader. See Police plea on theft of sheep in the Shropshire Star.
Dr Yunes Teinaz tells us that the news article supports "intelligence I received that hundreds of sheep will be illegally slaughtered next week for the London market for Christmas." He adds that this is a matter of great concern not only affecting the health of the health of the nation but also the poor farmers and that he intends to make sure that the illegal meat will not enter Hackney at least. He will inform the FSA and also alert the Meat Hygiene Service and the local authorities.
Illegal slaughter can be barbaric and causes the animals great distress.

December 10 2006 ~ Bowland: "carpet-bombing" an innocent firm out of existence. "Could the Minister please tell the House why the Government have panicked and introduced emergency regulations that are specifically designed to put Bowland Dairies out of business? "

In October, warmwell tried to draw attention to an apparent spinelessness from the UK government that resulted in the killing of the English company Bowland. Bowland was condemned without evidence - apparently because the EU Commission, furious that the Court of First Instance had ruled that the EU officials withdraw damaging comments about Bowland products, sought another way of putting the boot in. The coup de grace for Bowland came from a "statutory instrument" - a piece of secondary legislation that can be passed without proper scrutiny. (We note from the November 29 debate in the House of Lords that "Since 1997, 365 Acts have been passed and there have been 32,000 statutory instruments..")
Today, in his Sunday Telegraph column, Christopher Booker tells us
"...Despite the FSA's solid support of Bowland and its insistence that no rules had been broken, the Department of Health bowed to the commission's diktat. On October 16 it rushed through a statutory instrument ...
When Lord Willoughby de Broke recounted this chilling story last week, eloquently supported by others, including Lord Greaves, a Lib Dem who lives near Mr Wright's plant, peers were visibly horrified. The only defence that Lord Warner, as junior health minister, could muster (apart from seriously misrepresenting the terms of Vesterdorf's judgment) was to plead that failure to implement the commission's decision "would constitute a serious breach of the UK's obligations under the EC Treaty". For truth, justice, the rule of law and Britain it was a black day."
(See also the Lords Hansard here)
An honourable government would seek to give protection from bullying. For over five years, warmwell.com has catalogued stories that suggest that this laudable aim is beyond the competence of the government. Instead, those who lack powerful voices are bullied by the government itself: the Bowlands of this world, the swill feeders, the hill farmers, the large body of voiceless small farmers constantly and contemptuously hedged about with paperwork - and - most powerless of all - the animals who are so much easier to slaughter than to protect. A devalued veterinary profession, an ignorance of available technology and lack of genuine scientific competence among advisers is a tragedy for British food and farming but also for democracy itself.

December 9 2006 ~ ".. the aim of seeking greater flexibility and a more common sense approach"

Under new EU "hygiene" regulations animals can only be slaughtered on the farm and still enter the food chain if they have suffered an "accident". Animals suffering from ailments or congenital defects - if slaughtered on the farm - are not permitted to enter the food chain and the farmer can claim no salvage value. The Herald (Thursday 7th Dec)
"The bureaucracy of Brussels is causing problems for livestock farmers whose animals may be subject to conditions which prevent them being transported to an abattoir for slaughter. NFU Scotland will be discussing a range of issues on Monday when it meets with the Food Standards Agency, which administers the rules, with the aim of seeking greater flexibility and a more common sense approach. ....... NFUS conducted a survey ... principal findings were that more than 95% of vets recognised the new regulations were causing some difficulties for their clients.
More than 90% of respondents said the responsibility for determining whether cattle should be slaughtered on farm should lie with the veterinary profession and, by implication, not with the rules as currently operated by the FSA. The vets believe that a more pragmatic approach is necessary. ..."
The problem with this is that there are so few large animal vets now - and the numbers are decreasing. With the majority of the 12,000 practising vets in the UK choosing the more lucrative small animal work there is an overall shortage of vets to take proper care of animals on farms and costs are so high that many farmers think twice before calling out vets. See also Royal Society Infectious Disease in Livestock Inquiry Follow-Up Review

December 7 2006 ~ Bird Flu measures "politically opportune" but "socially unjustifiable"

An online FAO report, HPAI Risk, Bio-Security and Smallholder Adversity makes some very important points about the widespread assumption that smallholder backyard flocks are inherently more risky than other types of poultry operations. This assumption was tested using published data from the 2004 HPAI epidemic and concurrent active surveillance programme in Thailand.
Extract
"....Given the much stronger political influence of commercial interests vis-à-vis smallholder producers there is a clear danger that regulators will opt for 'easy' solutions "....The confinement of large numbers of birds (as many as 50,000 in modern broiler houses in the US and Thailand), at very high densities, poses significant challenges to ensuring bio-security. ..ample evidence for the potential of pathogens to move in and out of standard, reputedly bio-secure, commercial poultry facilities, even in developed settings.
.... imposing measures to make subsistence poultry production 'safer', eg forced housing or confinement of poultry... will impose very high costs, particularly upon a marginal group of entrepreneurs and household producers and may lead to an overall reduction of HPAI outbreaks, but more as a result of the loss of household production flocks than as a result of enhanced bio-security....
...Appropriate social investments to reduce health risk locally and nationally....can have the very significant dividend of improving smallholder commercial viability.... ."
It is reassuring that the FAO has a Pro Poor livestock policy initiative (PPLPI) in progress and is stressing that "The imposition of measures which do not significantly reduce the risk of pathogen introduction and spread but place severe economic burdens on society or groups thereof may be politically opportune but is socially unjustifiable." Read report

December 7 2006 ~ EUFMD Calendar

See EUFMD website
Seventy-fourth Session of the Executive Committee of the European Commission for the Control of FMD. Rome: FAO HQ, 11 and 12 January 2007.
37th Session of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. Rome: FAO HQ, 18-20 April 2007.
Reports of all sessions held since the beginning of 1999 are available via this page of the EUFMD website.

December 6/7 2006 ~ The farming industry in Wales may have to meet the cost of future outbreaks of animal diseases such as foot-and-mouth, without any government compensation.

The BBC reports
",,,,, Farming leaders said they were worried about the implications. "We're very, very concerned because the process is snowballing somewhat," said Gareth Vaughan, president of the Farmers Union of Wales (FUW). "Initially we were talking about the cost of dealing with exotic disease only. But by today Defra are talking about the cost of dealing with animal health issues in total - and that the industry should pay for the lot....we cannot afford it without having some measure of control..."
One wonders what is the "partnership" in a situation where farmers have fewer and fewer chances to call the tune and yet are to be expected to pay the piper in full - particularly when things beyond their control go very wrong. If some payments were excessive in 2001 they had the effect of quelling protest at what was seen to be excessive, illegal and unnecessary mass slaughter. Now that the Animal Health Act has been changed to legalise entry and enforced slaughter at the Minister's decree - even making reasonable protest an offence, such payments will not be seen again. The Breeze paper Industry Cost Sharing suggests the common sense solution. The farming industry has no powers to prevent accidental or deliberate introduction of exotic diseases. If it is to pay for animal health then Performance Benchmarks should be agreed for both sides of the "partnership". Extract:
" With all Performance Benchmarks met, by government and industry, the goal is to snuff out an outbreak in two weeks after diagnosis by active commitment ....When a disease outbreak occurs during a period in which the government is not meeting its Performance Benchmarks ..... the industry shall not have to pay its share of disease control and compensation costs stemming from failure on the government's part.... " Read in full

December 5 2006 ~ a rapid, sensitive test for bird flu and its variants that occur in dogs and cats.

Following the distressing news that South Korea is forcing hundreds of people to give up their pets for slaughter for fear that these companion animals may transmit the virus to humans we read in http://biz.yahoo.com/ about the court case in the US in which CYNTEGRA,
"the developer of a revolutionary molecular pathogen diagnostic system capable of the simultaneous detection of dozens of serious disease agents in pets"
has moved for an injunction against IDEXX's practices of "exclusive dealing". CYNTEGRA maintains that IDEXX has gone so far as to prevent new products, such as the cutting-edge veterinary diagnostics developed by CYNTEGRA, from entering the market.
".... the CYNTEGRA molecular diagnostic panel includes a rapid, sensitive test for bird flu and its variants that occur in dogs and cats. ... CYNTEGRA is concerned that without a fast, cost-effective method of detection available to veterinarians, a potential bird flu pandemic in companion pets in the USA could result in the US government taking actions similar to the South Korean government, and forcing the euthanasia of millions of pets..."

December 3 2006 ~ "the scientific community has to reestablish trust. People want to trust science; they want science to be trustworthy."

Hamish McRae in the Independent on Sunday regrets the lack of scientists among politicians and the lack of knowledge in the population at large. We all need to understand risk assessment and be able to judge the wisdom of what is done when scares are rife. As Mr McRae implies here, the billions spent on BSE were not to control the disease but to control the scare about a theoretical link between BSE and vCJD.
"... Of course scientists sometimes do not help their own cause: the BSE scare, which cost several billions to control, has led to between five and 30 deaths a year from new variant CJD and much human misery. But it does not seem conceivable that it will lead to the more than 100,000 deaths once projected. So what seems to me to be needed is not just more people studying science at university but greater numeracy in the population at large and better understanding of risk - another point made by Lord Rees. ..."
( Lord Rees is president of the Royal Society, the Astronomer Royal.)
What Mr McRae fails to make clear about vCJD is that the numbers have been declining steadily. See also below from June this year and the statistics published on ProMed. "The peak number of deaths was 28 in the year 2000, followed by 20 in 2001, 17 in 2002, 18 in 2003, and 9 in 2004, 5 in 2005..." It is to be hoped that those advising government Ministers responsible for TSE legislation are themselves fully aware of the uncertainties behind the swathes of regulations that followed in the wake of the scares.

December 1 2006 ~ Harriet

The Gloucester Citizen is running a campaign and petition for Harriet which is also backed by LBC radio. More detail on Harriet page

November 29 2006 ~ cost sharing between Government and the private sector for animal disease control

Animal Disease Control Written Answers to Questions Monday 27 November Hansard (David Drew is the Labour MP for Stroud)

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps he is taking to deliver cost sharing between Government and the private sector for animal disease control; and if he will make a statement. [101414]

Mr. Bradshaw: We are committed to working in partnership with industry on finding ways to share the responsibilities and costs of animal disease.   The Government intend to publish a consultation document on the principles of responsibility and cost sharing for animal health and welfare in December. This consultation follows on from the work of the Joint Government and Industry Group which informed the debate on how to share the responsibilities and costs of exotic animal disease outbreaks.

(Warmwell recommends to anyone with an interest the paper, Industry Cost Sharing By Dr. Roger Breeze, CEO, Centaur Science Group, (formerly, Associate Administrator, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service) "Cost sharing offers industry a chance to sit at the table as a partner to make sure that when it pays what is asked, it gets what is promised...")

November 29 2006 ~ "If it is ever decided that we need more sheep to graze the hills, there may not be enough farmers left with the experience to manage the flocks.."

Yorkshire Dales Country News yesterday looks at the downturn in farming that "mirrors a slump in the industry nationally since the mid 1990's"
"....... "Ten years ago, we shared rented moorland with seven other farms, but there are now only two of us left," says Mrs Hird. "It seems that hill breeds may be in danger of dying out. Foot-and-mouth disease took a heavy toll on Swaledale breeding flocks, and the low profitability of sheep farming has meant that many have not been replaced."..
hardy breeds like the Swaledale to graze the uplands, there is a risk some areas would revert to scrubland says Mrs Hird, and as she explains, this would have a dramatic effect on the region's landscape.
"People generally visit North Yorkshire to enjoy the open spaces and walk in the hills. But the scenery would look vastly different without sheep, as the grassland would become covered in trees and bushes. That could also restrict access for ramblers."
"Spiralling costs, poor returns and price pressure because of cheap imports are posing a real threat to hill farms at the moment, " she adds." Fewer young people are choosing a career in agriculture, so shepherding skills are not being passed on by the older generation. It will not be easy to reverse this trend. If it is ever decided that we need more sheep to graze the hills, there may not be enough farmers left with the experience to manage the flocks..." ."
( Thanks for this link to FMD News - a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis.)

November 28 2006 ~ Ex-RPA chief 'still being paid'

The government is apparently still "trying to end" the employment of Mr McNeill eight months after he was replaced.
The BBC "...Since he left in March, he is thought to have cost the taxpayer £71,000. Junior minister Barry Gardiner said they were trying to end his employment "as a matter of urgency". "Johnston McNeill is currently on paid leave of absence and we are in the process of taking the appropriate action to bring his employment to an end," he said in a ministerial statement. ....Some farmers are still waiting for their 2005 payments ..." See RPA pages

November 28 2006 ~ Water Crisis - Has the government a duty to protect health?

See environment page

November 26/27 2006 ~ Papers from the 23rd November 2006 Stakeholder meeting

It is pleasing to see that DEFRA's website was updated with notes from the FMD stakeholder meeting last Thursday on the very day that it took place. This is impressive - and very helpful for people who have an interest but who, for one reason or another, are not able to attend the meetings. The Powerpoint presentation on diagnostics (by Don King of the Molecular Characterisation & Diagnostics Group at Pirbright) can be viewed, even if one does not have ppt, by visiting the Powerpoint website and downloading a free reader.
• Agenda (11 KB)
• Dangerous contact assessment - Decision support tree (195 KB)
• Overview of the FMD Modelling Excercise (62 KB)
• FMD Diagnostics (1.33 MB)

November 24 2006 ~ Old habits of 'Command and Control' are hard to break - The EIG give praise and a warning

Key documents from the England Implementation Group (the EIG) have been updated on the DEFRA website today. From the report Building a better future for England's kept animals (pdf) we read:
"....Whether Government is really ready to fundamentally change its ways of working is a key question. We have been encouraged by a very different approach from that which was heavily criticized during foot and mouth, for instance, as contingency plans were developed for Avian Influenza. Key players have felt much more involved and in touch with developments and the rationale for decisions. Setting up the EIG was, itself, an innovative and potentially risky approach! However old habits are hard to break, and Defra will need to guard against an instinct to return to its default position of "command and control" and of withholding information that could, actually, be in the public domain. The Chief Veterinary Officer's support for our commitment to openness and transparency - meeting in public for all bar the super-sensitive or boring bits, publishing minutes on our website - has been clear from the outset, and welcome..."

November 23 2006 ~ Harriet.   Evidence suggests she does not fit the "cohort" definition - but even if she did, the EU no longer demands slaughter

When Mark Harper MP debated the question of Harriet with Ben Bradshaw on November 7th, the Minister said,
"..There is no exemption under EU law or domestic law for live cattle, whether or not they are considered to be pets. In fact, the German Government have recently been taken to task for their lax implementation of the cohort rule. We would face exactly the same infraction proceedings were we to follow the position suggested by the hon. Gentleman."
But yesterday's email from Brussels clearly shows that the opposite is true. Even cattle proved to be from a BSE cohort need only to be kept under surveillance and not permitted to enter the food chain. Mr Bradshaw cited EU rules to justify the killing of the pet Jersey cow in the Forest of Dean - but these rules have been changed, as the Brussels email makes clear. It is to be hoped that DEFRA will soon be able to reassure her very anxious owners, the villagers who have given their full support and many others across the country who were moved by the Harriet item on the BBC's PM Programme.

November 22 2006 ~ Harriet. Brussels will not put restrictions on a country that doesn't kill suspect animals

We have been told today by a Policy Advisor of the European Parliament that EU legislation on TSEs is very soon going to be changed in order to allow more flexibility with regard to "cohorts" and that measures in place to keep suspect animals under surveillance and to make sure they don't enter the food chain are sufficient.
"DEFRA is well aware of this change, as they were strongly involved in all negotiations which took place form September 2005 to May 2006. ....
The future legal text was agreed by Parliament and Council in May 2006, but has not yet been finalised for technical reasons.
As regards cohort culling ( see page 21 of the attached document):
(c) after the first subparagraph, the following subparagraph shall be inserted: "At the request of a Member State and based on a favourable risk assessment taking particularly into account the control measures in that Member State, a decision may be taken in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 24(2) to allow the use of bovine animals referred to in this paragraph until the end of their productive lives."
These provisions will be in force early next year as we are doing our very best (including extraordinary meetings of our committee) in order to allow publication of the text before the end of this year."
It will be remembered that Ben Bradshaw said in the debate about Harriet, "EU legislation requires all member states to kill cohorts as soon as possible". Today's news shows that this is not in fact the case. More

November 22 2006 ~ Harriet

We are very concerned to learn that DEFRA will arrive at Harriet's field today to - as the Reverend Pinkerton puts it - "arrange the time of Harriet's demise". The case is an extraordinary example of the precautionary principle taken to senseless extremes. Please see Harriet's page where it becomes clear that the Jersey cow - a family pet and not destined for the food chain - can pose no threat to anyone and whose slaughter will cause extreme distress.

November 22 2006 ~ "Farm-industry representatives said they were not familiar with the new reports..."

A report written by researchers at the University of Iowa's Environmental Health Sciences Research Center says that the huge areas of factory farming and feed lots, in the U.S. and Europe, are "poorly regulated, pose health and ecological dangers and are responsible for a deteriorating quality of life in America's and Europe's farm regions" (Los Angeles Times) They are "contaminating water supplies with pathogens and chemicals, and polluting the air with foul-smelling compounds that can cause respiratory problems." They also warn that the livestock operations are contributing to the rise of antibiotic-resistant germs.
Their recommendations include limits on the density of animals ("hundreds, often thousands, of cattle, hogs, dairy cows or poultry are confined often in very close quarters") and mandatory extensive environmental reviews for new feedlots and a ban on the use of antibiotics to promote animal growth.
Many feel (as the leap in sales of organic food shows) that the unnatural exploitation of animals, by those who treat animals as mere protein, threatens more in society than its physical health. It will be interesting to see if the report makes any difference.

November 21 2006 ~ EUFMD Inventory of web accessible recent FMD Real-time Alert Exercises

The European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease (EUFMD) is a Commission established under the auspices of the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO). Its website links to a pdf page which is an Inventory of web accessible recent FMD Real-time Alert Exercises carried out by European and other Countries by Tom Murray, EUFMD's associate Professional Officer.
"Council Directive 2003/85/EC of 29 September 2003 states that "Member States shall draw up a contingency plan specifying the national measures required to maintain a high level of foot-and-mouth disease awareness and preparedness" and "Member States shall ensure that real-time alert exercises are carried out in accordance with their approved contingency plan". This report gives a record of European countries and others which are known to have carried out simulation exercises since 2001 and links to reports and evaluations of such exercises if they are available."
It is interesing to see that the report of the UK Hornbeam exercise (pdf) is one of the few that is available freely on the internet.

November 20 2006 ~ Technology to fight ".. the tricks of a very dirty trade"

Hot on the heels of stories about non-organic eggs being passed off as free-range and the news that Spanish imports are full of salmonella, comes an Independent article revealing what modern technology can now achieve in the way of rapid testing . DNA testing, remote sensing using satellite images and Isotope testing and now, a "reliable way of testing the provenance of "organic" pork and chicken.." - although:
".....of all the produce on the shelves at your local supermarket, the organic shelf remains the most difficult to police, requiring so many tests to determine whether so many different pesticides and fertilisers have - or have not - been used. "
There can be no doubt that massive fraud involving the meat trade is still rife in the UK. Those involved will stop at nothing to intimidate or smear those making any attempt to stop their activities. Another Independent article "Abbatoir fraud could bring BSE back to Britain" unfortunately repeats, without qualification, the journalistic assertion that "BSE can be passed to humans through the food chain in the form of variant-CJD"- a theory which, while it may well be true, has not been adequately proved to be true. However, far more seriously, the article reminds us that
"....Inspectors say... meat is entering the food chain without being properly checked. .... A union spokeswoman refused to name the plants concerned because abattoir managers "routinely attempt to intimidate inspectors for doing their job". ...."
( It seems grimly ironic that the real criminals continue to carry on their billion pound trade with impunity, while the innocent, such as poor Harriet the pet cow, are victims of legislation that takes the precautionary principle to ludicrous lengths - a blind bureaucracy concerned more with the ticking of boxes than with case by case practicalities .)

November 17 2006 ~ Mark Purdey 1953-2006

Messages of condolence and tributes are published on this page of his website - www.markpurdey.com may be sent by e-Mail to Jane Barribal info@equofax.com
He will be deeply missed by those lucky enough to have been in contact with him and to have been aware of his quite extraordinary, selfless thirst for truth. Full posting

November 17 2006 ~ "The issue of rapid diagnostic technology still needed to be looked into."

The brief report of the last FMD stakeholder meeting on September 7th ( 7 weeks before the most recent FMD scare) can be seen at http://www.defra.gov.uk We note item 4.3. At a meeting scheduled for 23rd November David Dawson, the chairman and Director of Animal Health and Welfare, has promised to answer a question about why Rapid Diagnostic technology has not been adopted in the UK .

November 16 2006 ~ DEFRA's False Alarm answers raise more questions

Thanks to a concerned member of the public, Bryn Wayt, who asked 10 questions about the recent suspected FMD outbreak in Lincolnshire, brief answers now appear on the DEFRA website.
Although the relevant DEFRA page links to photographs of animals with disease, it was apparently not thought necessary to take photographs on the suspect farm to show how the lesions there were able to give rise to concern.
Diagnostic kits giving rapid on-site results are being used around the world and have been for some years now - but no on-site rapid diagnostic testing was done at the suspect Lincolnshire farm.
Instead, samples were sent to the OIE Reference Laboratory in Pirbright in Surrey. Perhaps the Conference in Brazil, aiming to "further promote the updating and setting of standards for methodologies in the fields of diagnostics, vaccine quality and biosecurity; the improvement of links between existing Reference Laboratories, Collaborating Centres and national official and private laboratories..." will pave the way for a more modern, streamlined approach to potential disaster.

November 15 2006 ~ " no one wants to see mass slaughter, piles of carcasses, incineration " but "vaccination would prevent meat exports to third countries"

TV Link Europe describes a video feature put together by DG SANCO "showcasing concrete examples of animal disease outbreaks and the solutions put in place to control the spread of the diseases."
In the "Prevention" section, we read
" To avoid crises, lots of people are in favour of vaccination but it is not applicable everywhere. After a vaccination campaign lasting more than 15 years, a majority of EU Member States is rabies free. But in the advent (sic) of foot and mouth disease, vaccination would prevent meat exports to third countries."
It would seem that - to DG SANCO at least - FMD vaccination should be rejected because its use may be given as a reason not to export meat outside the EU. But the reason for such rejection cannot be on any scientific, veterinary or health grounds. It is protectionism - as everyone is surely aware. Mr Bradshaw, after the usual somewhat meaningless phrase that "emergency vaccination will immediately be considered" and referring vaguely to the existence of an Expert Group, did at least make clear in his answer below, there are no health reasons to reject meat vaccinated against FMD. "..we have worked with consumers and retailers to stress the message that products from animals vaccinated against FMD would not have any implications for food safety." See below

November 14 2006 ~ Parliamentary Question: Vaccination

Hansard Mr. Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what progress he is making on plans for the vaccination of stock in the event of an outbreak of foot and mouth disease in the United Kingdom. [100425]
Mr. Bradshaw: In the event of an outbreak, emergency vaccination will immediately be considered as a disease control measure for foot and mouth disease (FMD). Any decision to adopt an emergency vaccination strategy against FMD will be based upon epidemiological, logistical and other factors.
An Expert Group has been set up to advise the Government on FMD preparedness, including vaccination. We have established a vaccine bank which could be used to protect against various strains, the composition of which is reviewed regularly by the Expert Group. We have also put a contract in place to ensure we could carry out vaccination should it be needed.
Finally, we have worked with consumers and retailers to stress the message that products from animals vaccinated against FMD would not have any implications for food safety.
Further information is set out in the Government's Exotic Animal Disease Generic Contingency Plan which is available on the Defra website at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/diseases/fmd/contingency/index.htm.

November 14 2006 ~ DEFRA budget - among the cuts, an increase - 11% for the RPA

The news that DEFRA repeatedly underspent its budget (£ 750million over five years) has been called "staggering" (see RPA news)
In a Parliamentary Question Chris Huhne asked by what (a) percentage and (b) total amount DEFRA required cuts from its executive agencies. Among the cuts to agencies such as the British Waterways, Natural England, Environment Agency, Food From Britain , Marine Fisheries Agency, Meat and Livestock Commission,National Forest Company, Pesticides Safety Directorate, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, the State Veterinary Service, Veterinary Laboratories Agency, Veterinary Medicines Directorate - will be noted a £23.0 million (11 per cent.) increase to the Rural Payments Agency.
(Ben Bradshaw's written answer to the House of Commons, in reply to Mr Drew's question [100032] about what assessment the Minister had made
"..of the effect of the reduction in expenditure on the ability of the state veterinary service to deal with outbreaks of disease."
was that
"there has been no reduction in funding for the SVS, on the contrary, the SVS has received an increase of £19 million this year in its funding..." (Hansard)
One wonders if he was unaware of the £3.0 million (3 per cent.) reduction for next year or simply preferred not to answer the question.)

November 13 2006 ~ "The Conference will further promote the updating and setting of standards for methodologies in the fields of diagnostics, vaccine quality and biosecurity"

The First International Conference of the OIE Reference Laboratories and Collaborating Centres will be held in Florianopolis, Brazil, from 3 to 5 December 2006
From Dr Bernard Vallat's introduction: "The purpose of the Conference is to provide a multidisciplinary forum for strengthening scientific cooperation within the Network of OIE Reference Laboratories and Collaborating Centres as well as Veterinary Services. The Conference will further promote the updating and setting of standards for methodologies in the fields of diagnostics, vaccine quality and biosecurity; the improvement of links between existing Reference Laboratories, Collaborating Centres and national official and private laboratories; and discuss methods to support developing and in-transition countries through capacity building and training programmes."

November 11 2006 ~ In addition to its vaccination programme, Malaysia is implanting identification chips in all of its 2.5 million farm animals.

Malaysia will spend £7.2 million (RM50 million) on radio frequency identification chips for all its farm animals and later, dogs and cats and other pets. Veterinary Services Department director-general Dr Abdul Aziz Jamaluddin says Malaysia will be free of FMD in 2008 and will be able to make the official declaration in 2009, provided that there are no new cases.
The New Straits Times says:
"... it will take about a year to complete the process .... We want to ensure that only healthy animals were exported to others states while those without such identification would be sent for quarantine," he said. "Our staff will carry a handheld device that could read the information in the chip which include its breed, birthplace and owner." ...."

November 9 2006 ~ Harriet - BBC PM programme interviews the owners.

Harriet's story is far from being about one pet cow. It illustrates the "one size fits all" mentality that can impose draconian measures without taking all factors into account. Bureaucratically imposed slaughter, without proper case by case scientific justification, led to the sort of misery we saw during the foot and mouth crisis - and hoped never to see again. We have, many times. In spite of the fact that mass culling in 2001 has been revealed as having had nothing to do with either human or animal health and welfare and literally millions of healthy animals and their young unnecessarily killed, the 2002 Animal Health Act makes such killing legal and takes away the right of owners to object. As with the present Harriet case, trade, markets and an ignorance of what is scientifically and technically possible were allowed to eclipse common sense.
The UK fears another EU fine - but Harriet is healthy and - even if the facts about her feed and rearing were otherwise - could pose no risk. As her owner says, "she's such a healthy animal, it's so sad, isn't it? Just to tick their box..." (Read the Transcript)

November 9 2006 ~ "there's some super people in DEFRA who work extremely hard on our behalf"

Arthur Hill, an arable farmer in Shropshire - still waiting for some of his 2005 payments - explained the Single Payment situation and the cash-flow difficulties faced by farmers. Exasperated with the RPA he had, nevertheless, a balanced view of the difficulties and was very fair to DEFRA. See RPA latest

November 9 2006 ~ ".. what risk is there to public health from allowing Harriet to live?" asked Mark Harper

BSE debate Monday. At both the beginning and the end of the debate Mr Harper urged Mr Bradshaw to explain how Harriet's continuing to live posed a threat to human health. Mr Bradshaw's only suggestion was that Harriet - the pet cow not destined for the food chain and kept padlocked in a field with her passport seized - could infect human beings with vCJD since she might be stolen.
Even if cattle rustlers were active in Newent, widespread assumptions (including Mark Harper's) do not prove any causal link between vCJD and the eating of BSE infected meat. Dr Martin Jeffrey (Journal of Pathology 2006) is the most recent expert to have expressed doubt. The Countess of Mar asked in an earlier TSE debate this year ".. .. I want the Minister to know that I am extremely concerned that all regulation in this field is based on a hypothesis- not even a theory - that none of the "establishment" scientific community can prove, despite millions of pounds of taxpayers' money being thrown at the subject.... . "
Interestingly, the Select Committee on Science and Technology has just published a report saying that scientific evidence has been often misused or distorted to justify policy decisions. (Guardian) It is to be hoped that Harriet will not be led off to slaughter this month merely to give unnecessary reassurance and to appease the "precautionary principle" - a concept which, according to the select committee, is now widely misused.

November 2006 ~ US readers told that FMD can kill humans and that the 2001 outbreak was caused by illegal pork being fed to livestock

A report about the consequences of a future FMD outbreak in the US, made by a DHS senior adviser at the Association for Intelligence Officers' annual convention in America, was reported and evidently misrepresented in a way that could not be allowed to pass without remark. The article, appearing on November 6 at http://www.govexec.com, prompted warmwell to send this email to the journalist concerned.
(Journalists continue to misreport the UK foot and mouth crisis. One is no longer surprised, for example, to see the number of animals slaughtered - which conservative estimates put at between ten and twelve million - reported as having been as low as four million.)

November 2006 ~ "authorities were not willing to use the U.S. real time PCR test for Foot and Mouth and neither would they use the differential test that discriminates vaccinated animals"

Stephen M. Apatow, Director of Research and Development, Humanitarian University Consortium Graduate Studies Center for Medicine, Veterinary Medicine and Law, has sent a communication to colleagues
"As per our current discussion associated with molecular detection technologies, I would like to pass on the following reply by Roger Breeze to Alex Donaldson.
In 2001, British authorities were not willing to use the U.S. real time PCR test for Foot and Mouth and neither would they use the differential test that discriminates vaccinated animals from those previously infected: both were rejected .."
Dr Breeze's letter is here.

November 2006 ~ "British Intelligence had been made aware of this U.S. technology previously and they were reminded again in February 2001."

The letter, written by Dr Breeze on November 2nd as a courteous response to the letter to ProMed from Alex Donaldson (see below), aims to set the record straight about the UK's refusal to use the offered real time PCR portable kit for on-site testing for foot and mouth - a refusal that led to the " non-validated techniques of mathematical modeling and contiguous culling that resulted in the slaughter of millions of uninfected animals and made the human, animal and financial costs of the outbreak far greater than they would otherwise have been.." The letter explains that
"British Intelligence had been made aware of this U.S. technology previously and they were reminded again in February 2001.
In March 2001, my boss, the Administrator of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service (USDA ARS), the world's largest and most respected agricultural research organization, asked me to approach British Veterinary authorities to offer them the new foot and mouth PCR test with its devices and Internet technology. It was on behalf of USDA and ARS that I contacted Dr. Donaldson and Mr. Jim Scudamore, the Chief Veterinary Officer, with the intent of first making the Institute of Animal Health comfortable with the technology and its science and then taking the portable devices into the regions of the country where disease was spreading..."
The letter also examines the behaviour of those most influential in the rejection of the technology. Read.

November 2006 ~ Did British authorities imagine that the ARS would offer a test that did not exist?

Dr Breeze's letter: Extract " ..In late summer 2001, the ARS Administrator, who was personally astonished at British failure to use the best technology, took a scientific team directly to Dr. King in his Cambridge University office to demonstrate the technology and share U.S foot and mouth test data but he was uninterested and we never heard from him again..." Read in full.

November 3 2006 ~ Disease levy "preposterous"

MP Tim Farron (Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Hill Farming and Liberal Democrat MP for Westmorland & Lonsdale) has tabled an Early Day Motion protesting against plans that could result in a disease levy imposed on farmers.
"That this House believes that the economic, social and emotional costs of livestock disease fall most heavily on farmers, their families and their communities; recalls the huge cost to rural communities of the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001; notes the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' consultation which focuses on the financial cost of animal disease outbreaks; and opposes any move to place an animal disease levy on farmers as this would add insult to injury in cases of future outbreaks of the disease."
There are today 14 signatures. He says, (see Cumberland News) "As we saw during the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001, the emotional cost of these outbreaks weighs heavily on the farmers themselves, and I think it is preposterous that the government would want to burden them further. ..."
See also Dr Roger Breeze's article on Industry Cost Sharing advocating that Performance Benchmarks should be met both by government and by industry.

November 3 2006 ~ Harriet. Mark Harper has secured a Parliamentary debate

Mark Harper, MP for the Forest of Dean, has secured a Parliamentary debate with the Government on the future of Harriet. He says,
"I welcome this excellent opportunity to argue Harriet's case in Parliament with the Minister. I will now have the opportunity to put the arguments against Harriet's slaughter directly to the Minister. Harriet is a perfectly healthy cow. .. I hope the Minister will listen to the arguments .."
The debate, entitled Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy regulations and pet cows will be held in Westminster Hall on Tuesday 7th November at 1pm. The debate can be watched online at http://www.parliamentlive.tv

November 3 2006 ~ "Misinformation has led to wild birds bearing major blame for transmission of the disease"

.... the trade in caged birds and human movements may well play a far more significant role in the spread of bird flu.... in some cases, these pathways have been underestimated and do not receive proportionate media exposure." Dr Vincent Martin - UN's Food and Agriculture Organization. See Bird Flu updates.

November 3 2006 ~"How can anyone justify the continuation of this sordid trade?"

asks Joyce de Silva in this Compassion in World Farming release about the nightmare journey of British calves in the middle of October. The number of young calves exported for veal production into Europe so far this year, since exports resumed in May, is 43,358. Those that survive face either a barren indoor environment of wooden slatted floors, steel bars and concrete or will be confined alone in veal crates - a practice which has been illegal in the UK for 16 years.
As Alan Bennett says (Untold Stories p293): "In fifty years' time I am sure that we will not handle animals the way we do now and to succeeding generations our behaviour will seem as barbarous as bear baiting...."

November 2 2006 ~ Uruguay farmers vaccinate their calves

See www.espectador.com The new FMD mass vaccination campaign starting this week in Uruguay will vaccinate all calves born from January to August 2006 . Calves born between September and October will be vaccinated in February 2007. The Uruguay Ministry of Agriculture will make available 1,230,000 vaccine doses to its farmers throughout the country (who will then vaccinate the animals themselves, as in 2001).
(For sending a link to this information, Warmwell is grateful to FMD News, a service provided by the FMD Surveillance and Modeling Laboratory, University of California at Davis.)

November 1 2006 ~ "Do you know whether Defra sent a vet to the source farm?"

A Devon farmer has sent us copies of two emails sent this morning to BBC's Farming Today. We take particular note of the following question.
"Does Farming Today know whether Defra sent a vet to the source farm and if movement restrictions were imposed on it? If these elementary precautions were not taken, it seems that a repetition of the disastrous chain of events in 2001 were prevented by the luck that it was a false alarm. Can the Farming Today team shed any light on this - rather important - matter?"
Warmwell, too, would be very interested to know- from any source - if rapid on site diagnostic testing was carried out on the suspect Lincolnshire farm as soon as the suspected FMD case was discovered.

November 1 2006 ~ Disease compensation: "concerted lobbying campaign by the main UK farming unions and DEFRA in Brussels has forced a rethink"

Warmwell reported in September that EU officials had sought - under the commission's own authority, and without the involvement of the European parliament or the Council of Ministers - to cut the rate of compensation from 100% to 75% as part of a review of the rules surrounding national state aids. Payments would have been restricted to farmers who had lost at least 30% of production, and only to small- and medium-sized businesses.
Farmers Weekly reported last week
"concerted lobbying campaign by the main UK farming unions and DEFRA in Brussels has forced a rethink. A new proposal was presented to a member- state working group this week with all the restrictions removed."
FWi quotes NFU Scotland president, John Kinnaird: "Anyone who faced the horror of the foot-and-mouth outbreak in 2001 knows the impact that disease outbreaks have. Reducing aid to farmers in times like these would have been potentially disastrous."

October 28 2006 ~ The CVO, Debby Reynolds, congratulates SVS, Meat Hygiene Service and Pirbright for their swift response

See DEFRA site for CVO's message on lifted restrictions. At a time when the budgets for vital agencies are to be cut this should be a day to be remembered.
To general relief, the foot and mouth scare turned out to be a false alarm. It should be said that Debby Reynolds herself seems to have worked fast, tactfully and with genuine transparency, holding a telephone conference for stakeholders within hours. The brief report about the teleconference and its attendees was posted quickly on the DEFRA website yesterday. Dr Reynolds also said yesterday that her phone line 'door' was open. All this is encouraging and there are many who feel gratitude.

October 27 2006 ~ Initial tests negative.

Warmwell has made a transcript of the World at One interview Today's false alarm - if that is what it finally turns out to be raises worries that vaccination can take place only when a "complex range of factors" has been considered. As Paul Flynn ( Labout MP for Newport, West), commented in May 2004 about future vaccination being "considered":
" .... Only "considered," when to protect an export market of only £500 million, the taxpayer spent £9 billion slaughtering 7 million animals, many of them unnecessarily?
We now know that vaccinated animals are perfectly acceptable in the marketplace.
Should we not have a firm policy - not merely consider it - that we shall never again slaughter millions of animals without good reason? If there is another outbreak of foot and mouth, the great danger is that we shall be subject to the waste, futility and cruelty of mad cull disease. .."

October 27 2006 ~ Farming Today this morning reports a suspected case of FMD

The pig suspected of suffering from foot and mouth was at Cheales - the same Essex abattoir where FMD was discovered in 2001. Samples were sent to Pirbright for testing last night - and there is no mention of rapid diagnostic on-site testing. The provenance of the pig has not been reported. Movement restrictions have been imposed only around the abattoir.
More as soon as possible. Listen again to Farming Today It is not the first item. "The jury is still out....complex range of factors" on whether vaccination would be used in any confirmed outbreak. We also hear the phrase: "...What's still believed to be the source of the disease - Bobby Waugh's farm..." Transcript

October 26 2006 ~ RPA - The mess causing cuts to vital agencies will further damage the SVS

Defra will be raiding its veterinary research budget. in order to cover the costs and EU fines. To hamper the agencies responsible for research, diagnosis and surveillance on livestock diseases now - at this time of uncertainty and fear about bovine TB, Bluetongue, H5N1, the return of FMD - seems utterly extraordinary. As Northern Isles MP, Alistair Carmichael, says today (See Shetland News)
"The State Veterinary Service is already stretched. It is frankly hard to believe that the government is even considering cutting their budget at this time. This is one of the worst possible examples of a false economy. When you think that the 2001 foot and mouth outbreak cost the public sector over £3 billion and the private sector more than £5 billion to make these cuts simply does not make sense."
See also RPA pages

October 25 ~ DEFRA overspent by 200 million pounds - but vital agencies pay the price.

To make up for the RPA fiasco (and - says the government - "bird flu precautions"), the Treasury has ordered cuts whose effects will be serious :
• Environment Agency £23.7 million
• Natural England - £12.9 million
• British Waterways - £3.9 million
• State Veterinary Service - £3 million
• the Marine Fisheries Agency - £1.7 million
• Food From Britain - £403,000
• National Forestry Company - £300,000
• Meat and Livestock Commission - £15,000
See BBC and now, Western Morning News

October 25 ~ German H5N1 vaccination plan

There are, at present, no reported outbreaks of avian influenza in either domestic poultry or wild birds in the EU. Protection and surveillance zones around previous outbreaks have now all been lifted.
The Commission and Member States have endorsed a vaccination campaign against avian influenza that the German authorities intend to carry out on 3 commercial farms in North Rhine Westphalia over the next 2 years. "The vaccination will be carried out for research purposes only, as part of a major field study to determine the effects and results of vaccinating against avian influenza." See: http://ec.europa.eu

October 24 2006 ~ RPA: "the Germans, who applied exactly the same scheme, paid on the nail within a matter of weeks"

2,400 UK claimants have yet to receive a payment - and no one will accept responsibility The blame should not rest with politicians said Lords Bach and Whitty to the EFRA Committee. The Western Morning News reports this and quotes Anthony Gibson:
"It's an attempted whitewash. It's all there for anyone to see what happened.
It's the usual politician's trick. They will try and pin the blame on anyone except themselves...."
And in the debate in the House of Lords yesterday, Baroness Byford reminded us that, ".... the delayed English single farm payment system has cost farmers between £18 million and £22 million in interest and arrangement fees on additional bank lending, to say nothing of the human misery....."
Lord Plumb added:
"Loss of revenue is one thing, but the loss of trust and confidence, both in the Government and in the department, is considerable. Why cannot the English scheme be delivered in the declared time scale when the Germans, who applied exactly the same scheme, paid on the nail within a matter of weeks from the beginning of their scheme?"
See RPA Latest

October 23 2006 ~ Bowland Dairy. The EU assumption that only their own version of antibiotic testing is allowable has closed down Bowland, humiliated the FSA and made the UK subject of a major legal action.

An unholy row has been unfolding since June in which a small Lancashire dairy company has been forced to close, its reputation in tatters. News reports containing phrases such as "floor waste" and "antibiotic residue" have seemed to condemn the company out of hand, yet "floor waste" is the technical term for excess cheese that falls into stainless steel vats, while "residues" - if any - fell within FSA approved safety limits. Indeed, Bowland seems to have cooperated fully with the FSA, passed their milk safety tests, kept proper records and agreed at once with advice and instructions. The FSA maintain that their tests, used elsewhere in the EU, are scientifically sound. EU officials however insist that the FSA tests won't do and that only its own tests must be used. No bilateral talks with Member State scientists have been held in order to back this assertion.
In September, the Courts of First Instance ruled that the EU officials withdraw damaging comments about Bowland products. This was ignored, and very soon afterwards a Commission audit of Bowland resulted in an EU wide product recall. Bowland wants to fight in the European courts.
If Bowland obeyed all the FSA food safety rules then it would seem to have been treated more than harshly. If the FSA is right about its monitoring and testing methods then it should surely have been allowed to back Bowland and challenge the EU - but the Government has forced it to cave in. If the FSA is so wrong that the Government sees fit to override its judgement, one is left wondering what on earth the Agency is for. (See also www.nutraingredients.com )

October 21 2006 ~ "Teinaz says he and fellow environmental health officers are slowly making a difference, tracking down gangs, confiscating meat and educating the public. "

Today's Guardian tells the story of Dr Yunes Teinaz and his crusade against illegal meat and its consequences for both humans and animals
".....In Hackney, bush meat used to be openly on sale in markets; now it is nowhere to be seen - although the suspicion is there is a thriving black market.
There is, then, a sense of achievement for Teinaz, but one also of frustration with the sentencing of criminals. "Meat smugglers face sentences of up to six months and fines of up to £20,000, or both," he says. "But a few years ago I did the biggest seizure of the year - 120 illegal carcasses - but the man responsible was fined only £250."
The consequences of illegal meat are far more serious than has been generally acknowledged. All kinds of zoonoses - including Ebola - can spread to the UK via such illegal imports and slaughtering, while the cruelty involved is unspeakable. See Meat Crime pages.

October 21 2006 ~ Details of 17 new avian and pandemic flu research projects have been announced

EU memo IP/06/1413 announces 28.3 million euros (£20 million pounds) of new funding for research projects in the field of avian and pandemic influenza. Those addressing animal health will cover vaccines, better diagnosis and early warning systems, increased knowledge of the avian influenza virus itself, technology transfer to third countries and a network for monitoring migratory birds.
Intervet says
"The primary aim of this project is to develop avian influenza vaccines based on live vector vaccines which can be mass applied through spray, drinking water or eye drop instead of injection.. This would offer considerable advantages like mass applicable administration and a less labour intensive and much more animal friendly application. Furthermore, vaccination via the airways, the natural route of infection also for influenza virus will result in a more complete and faster protection, which can be very important in case of a disease outbreak..."

October 20 2006 ~ Avian Flu : "...the struggle Defra had to get enough poultry workers for the cull "

business.edp24.co.uk reports today on the very nasty reality of the UK's Bird Flu culling policy in Norfolk last March, mentioning "the grieving is probably akin to losing a relative", the lack of adequate compensation, the ostracism and - not least - the difficulties DEFRA had getting enough people to carry out the mass killing. (Any attempt to make the killing quicker by the revoltingly termed "ventilation shutdown" has been roundly condemned.)
This all suggests that when H5N1 is here there will be a miserable chaos unless policies change.
The East Anglian paper reports the words of the owner, Mr Dunn:
"......"I clearly remember the day they culled both flocks, it was my wife's birthday... ..
I have never seen my staff in tears before, we just couldn't face being on the farm that day - I think I spent the day gardening. Afterwards the grieving is probably akin to losing a relative but eventually you have to think this is here and deal with it."
"We were six months without any income.....They need to review the fairness of the compensation system." .... "You really find out who your friends are..... there were people telling us 'If you come in one door then we will walk out the other'. It was like suddenly becoming a leper."...the family also received lots of messages of sympathy and support .."
As Valerie Elliot in the Times reported in May, these free range birds "... had to be culled because H7N3 flu is a notifiable disease...." even though this was low pathoenic H7N3 and "...Birds on the free range unit... suffered only a mild form of the flu and none died from the infection." Times May 2 2006
As we never tire of saying, use of on-farm diagnosis would enable a rapid decision about the risks of disease. Vaccination (see H5N1 page) for those owners who would prefer not to suffer as Mr Dunn's family did should surely - as the EU now concedes (see also below ) - be requested.and allowed.

October 20 2006 ~ Public opposition to GM crops is being overridden by a government determined to back the industry, says Michael Meacher

Extract from today's Independent Defra accused of introducing GM through back door " "This consultation is the Government's latest attempt to back the GM industry over the wishes of the British public," Mr Meacher claimed. "Instead of paving the way for GM crops to be grown in England, David Miliband must take on board the thousands of responses rejecting the Government's GM contamination plans and put in place policies that protect GM-free food and truly promise his vision of sustainable farming." .............. Soil Association policy director Peter Melchett said: "The Government's proposals to deny organic and other farmers the choice of staying free of GM contamination break their repeated promises."........ GM Freeze director Pete Riley said: "The Government appears to be willing to rewrite EU law."

October 18 2006 ~ Killing sauce for goose is not sauce for the rare breed gander

Newcastle Disease (pigeon variant) in East Lothian. The SVS has, for the moment, finished killing. However, because Newcastle Disease struck premises containing a number of rare species "of high conservation value" it was decided to exempt them from the mass culling: "These birds will be vaccinated, tested and kept under quarantine conditionsfor 60 days under strict biosecurity." (www.scotland.gov.uk)
(Once again, we see that the reasons cited for mass culling are not based in veterinary science. They are pragmatic decisions made by those in control. Yet the reasons used so contemptuously to dismiss the pleas of owners who want to preserve their livestock so often masquerade as "best scientific advice". It is worrying that such illogicality and downright dishonesty is not being roundly and loudly challenged. )
As a moderator at ProMed says, "Details of the vaccines used, the vaccination schemes (including revaccinations and their timetable) applied in the various bird species involved, and results of the anticipated post-vaccination serological follow-up are of significant value for similar possible future disease events elsewhere and will be welcomed."

October 18 2006 ~"APHIS allowed states to use the ARS test without validation"

It may be remembered that when Newcastle disease broke out in the Southwestern U.S. in the Autumn of 2002, "USDA again chose not to deploy the real time PCR test developed and demonstrated 2 years earlier by ARS scientists in Athens, GA." - but was then minded to change its policy in the face of financial losses - and the "stated reason" for ignoring the test was suddenly found not to matter any more. See www.humanitarian.net/biodefense
" The stated reason was that this test had not been validated by APHIS - lack of APHIS validation had also been cited as a reason not to deploy the FMD test in 2001. In fact, in February 2001, APHIS had never validated any of the PCR tests it had long employed for detection of foreign animal disease agents, had never licensed any PCR test for any animal disease in the U.S., and had no protocols for how validation should be conducted.
Some weeks after the State of California developed and deployed its own real time PCR test for Newcastle disease, APHIS allowed states to use the ARS test without validation. But much critical time had been lost. "

October 18 2006 ~ " The whole afternoon was an eye opener to the complete incompetence of the body which rules farming..."

The pet Jersey cow, Harriet, still under threat for reasons that seem illogical, now has her own page on warmwell. One witness to the fiasco of "valuation" on October the 9th is wearily scathing. "......The two people who came out to "value" Harriet were there under false pretences. They admitted that neither of them were valuers...DEFRA's argument that "The Law is The Law" goes against their attitude in this case. Laws run on Evidence and Proof. They have neither..." More

October 18 2006 ~ RPA's Johnston McNeill is still being paid his £114,000 salary

The NAO report reminds us that Margaret Beckett, ( now, of course, appointed to the most important political job after PM), and Lord Bach, were both warned in June 2005 that the scheme would not work - and that was seven months before it was even due to come into action.
They made no contingency plan.
See RPA latest

October 18 2006 ~ The required double-dose Bird Flu vaccination costs around 6p a bird - but DEFRA says that EU "requirements" could make vaccination cost £2 pounds for a single bird

Ruling out any pre-outbreak vaccination programme, Defra says that any decision to vaccinate during a disease outbreak would be "risk-based on expert advice". See H5N1 page. Not surprisingly, dismay among poultry owners has been expressed at DEFRA's estimated costs when the actual vaccination costs only 6p. All this seems to make even less sense when we remember that only a few days ago, the European Commission SANCO/10103/2006 rev. 3 Discussion Paper was saying:
"... Despite the constraints that make it difficult to properly assess the risks and the benefits of using vaccination as an additional HPAI H5N1 prevention and control tool, it appears wise to further explore this option in the EU, taking also into account the valuable experience gained in recent years in Italy, where following the major outbreak of HPAI of 1999/20002, a DIVA vaccination strategy has been developed and implemented..... Further experience has also been recently gained in France and the NL, which have implemented vaccination of poultry in the framework of the new AI control Directive 2005/94/EC. .."
(See also below. )

October 17 2006 ~ Hopeful evidence for Harriet the cow

Warmwell has been told that the former owner of Harriet, the threatened healthy Jersey cow, has sent the family a fully detailed feed list together with times, amount and so on. (See covering letter) This shows quite clearly that the cow could not possibly have eaten from the same trough as an animal found later to have contracted BSE. Harriet was a mile away. Her vet has written a confirming letter. Mark Harper MP is also very concerned about this situation and the questionable principle that is driving it. Readers could contact the Reverend Patricia Pinkerton if they wish to support Harriet's very anxious owners.

October 15 2006 ~ "... let us remember that the line between too much food and too little is very thin indeed. This country must retain the ability to grow its own food.."

Extract from an email from a farmer to warmwell yesterday:
".... The ones in charge will never understand that it's not the disease that destroys all the trust one might have in "experts" but how they (the bureaucrats and supposed experts) bulldoze their way, hiding behind man made rules without understanding the relationship between animal, men and rural life...... farming : it is a very small part of the economy and it might not have an impact on the financial statistics of a country but destroying this part of the society will have a devastating effect in the long term.
I will never forget the speech the Prince of Wales made when opening the Royal Show 2002; here are some extracts :
"....I have to say that it is utterly incredible to me that farming - the basic industry of mankind - can be in such a state of crisis as it is today. It is an indicator of a society that takes its food for granted and, as I am sure all of you can testify, it shows how frighteningly detached too many people have become from the reality of how it is produced. ......
..And, Ladies and Gentlemen, let us remember that the line between too much food and too little is very thin indeed. This country must retain the ability to grow its own food. Situations can change in the world unexpectedly and there could easily come a day when the UK might be reduced to relying on its own resources once again. So let us not sacrifice long-term security for short-term convenience...."
As you can see we are not alone so I think we will do what we have always done : to fight on. And think of Edmund Burke : evil prevails etc. ..."
Read in full

October 14 2006 ~ "Be very careful what you write. Nature is illiterate and therefore does her own thing, regardless of what is published."

writes the moderator MHJ on ProMed today following a letter about the published paper by Dr Rosie Woodroffe. (See TB pages for full posting and DEFRA site for Government Veterinary Journal - Bovine TB special (Volume 16, no 1, September 2006)
The letter also describes in some detail the little-studied effects of the FMD disaster on the ecology of the UK. ".....agricultural practices which supported those 11 million dead cattle, sheep and pigs also went into a state of suspended animation for over 12 months, and the ecological balance of thousands of acres changed...."

October 2006 ~ Follow-up letter in the Scotsman links FMD trauma with that suffered by British Army

Andrew Bell wrote to the The Scotsman
"I agree wholeheartedly with Mr Tennant's comments. The policy followed during FMD 2001 was almost certainly driven by factors that had nothing to do with the risks posed by the disease itself or animal welfare considerations..... The parallels with FMD 2001 and what is currently happening in Iraq is drawn into sharp focus by the recent comments in the news of the head of the British Army Sir Richard Dannat. He is standing up for his men in a way that those in charge of the FMD epidemic completely failed to stand up for those persons in the front line fighting FMD. Many of them are still traumatised and suffering as a result. If you read 'Following Orders' you will understand why."
(link to Amazon.co.uk for "Following Orders" here)

October 2006 ~ How FMD crisis was turned into a disaster - Fordyce Maxwell in the Scotsman quotes Toby Tennant

http://business.scotsman.com/agriculture
".....Let one fact illustrate the point. The contiguous cull policy was ruthlessly applied in south-west Scotland, and the results were acclaimed by Walker, Ross Finnie and Maxwell as a great success. But of 15 so-called Infected Premises in Wigtownshire, 13 were tested in the laboratory and only two were positive. Yet on 218 farms thousands of healthy animals were culled as a result of these misdiagnoses. Success? Or disaster?
To anyone with an open mind, these facts speak for themselves. Until influential figures take the trouble to understand what happened, the public will continue to be misinformed, and policy will continue to turn crises into disasters."
The article is very well worth reading, not least for the informed comment of Anne Lambourn, which appears below it.
"...The tragedy of the wider preemptive killing of 481,000 sheep at Great Orton from an area supposedly "heavily infected" by FMD is underlined by the fact that tests on sheep from 115 farms (5786 sheep) revealed that only one farm had definitely had the disease, with positive tests on only 9 sheep. I understand that these were probably antibody positive results, showing that the sheep had had the disease in the past, but had recovered. The contiguous and 3 km culling resulted in massive overkill of healthy animals elsewhere - Gloucestershire 326 farms culled, 46 tested but ony 13 had the disease. In the Forest of Dean the culling of contiguous farms was prevented after local protest - timely, as the 34 contiguous farms all returned negative tests. The real tragedy is that the flawed science on which the contiguous and preemptive culling are based is enshrined in current legislation and disease control policy. ...."
(Read in full)

October 2006 ~ "A consortium of leading scientists is to undertake research to combat animal diseases in Scotland, using a £2.5m Executive contract over the next five years at a "centre of excellence"..."

We continue to be very worried by the fear that an elite clique at the very top of the scientific establishment is at the forefront of disease control in the UK. As we know, following the honours heaped on several of the leading lights of the tragically unnecessary policies of 2001, bad science is no bar to success and status. The Scotsman reports that Professor Mark Woolhouse of the University of Edinburgh, director of the new centre, said: "This is the kind of resource that was needed during the foot-and-mouth disease epidemic of 2001 and will be needed again." He seems to forget that the resources needed to combat the disease were indeed available in 2001 but the dissenting veterinary and expert voices urging their use were ignored. As leaders of the two modelling teams, oddly termed "independent" in 2001, Professor Woolhouse and Professor Anderson drove the contiguous culling policy with models that made false assumptions and in which the data was flawed. Supporters of the overkill policy have been anxious to dismiss any criticism of the contiguous cull as "hindsight" - but the inadequacy of the models was known from the start. This website - and the many well informed dissenting voices -can hardly be accused of hindsight when we have been wearily repeating the same dismay for nearly six years.
(See more) Was it hindsight when Dr Kitching, contemptuously termed a "Neanderthal" by the establishment in 2001, said in a Channel 4 interview early in 2001,
"Certainly there's a lot of perfectly healthy animals that are being killed, I think when this outbreak is investigated in the future, we'll get a clear idea of just how many animals were slaughtered unnecessarily."
Yet, the same establishment scientists are reaping golden research rewards and the country's animal health policies - for reasons that one can only guess at - are still not making proper use of technologies available in 2001 and which are now the gold standard for disease control.

October 2006 ~ Magnus Linklater - "false statistics, poor modelling, wrong deductions and bad science."

The Times Oct 10 2006 "We are used to politicians suppressing the truth. When scientists do it as well, we are in trouble. Not one of the government's senior advisers, from the Chief Scientist, Sir David King, downwards, has yet dared to confirm in public what most experts in private now accept, that the mass slaughter of farm animals in the 2001 Foot and Mouth outbreak was not only unnecessary and inhumane, but was based on false statistics, poor modelling, wrong deductions and bad science. ..." Read in full

(It should be noted that the figures in this article should be read in conjunction with those quoted by Anne Lambourn above in both the Times and the Scotsman.)

October 10 2006 ~ " the guidelines for the implementation of such vaccination are still hazy."

An article entitled "Supermodels - Mathematical modelling of infectious diseases " in the current newsletter of Wellcome Science ( also online at www.wellcome.ac.uk) suggests that the existing data from 2001 has at last been gathered into a useful form. Extract:
"...The data set is a list of every livestock farm in the UK..... a thorough account of which farms were hit by the disease and when. "We know reported cases to the nearest day, which is incredibly accurate compared to almost any other infection on record," says Dr Matt Keeling of the Biological Sciences Department and Mathematics Institute at the University of Warwick.
Simulations support 'ring vaccination' of farms neighbouring an affected site...
. ...findings have profound implications for how we might go about confronting another FMD crisis. In 2003, an EU directive recommended that during the early stages of a future FMD epidemic, arrangements should be made for emergency vaccination ...... But the guidelines for the implementation of such vaccination are still hazy. .."
That the guidelines for the implementation of vaccination are still "hazy" seems, after so long, quite extraordinary.

October 10 2006 ~ More on mathematical modelling exercises

As far as we understand, Prof. John Wilesmith led the modelling exercise in September (see query below) - although information is regrettably sparse and we are hoping to hear more. In a similar exercise carried out in 2002, (See FMD Modelling Workshop 23 May 2002 Summary Report ) the suave academic presentations given seemed to have little connection with the mass killings ushered in by the modellers. However, DEFRA's Sam Mansley did make the following blunt observations in 2002:
• ".....the models contained incomplete data and lacked veterinary input.
• It was indicated that greater communication between everyone involved in controlling an outbreak (e.g. vets in the field, modellers etc.) is required in the future.
• transparent easily understandable models should be developed
• improved core and field data are also required. ..."
It would be comforting to be able to feel that such recommendations from four years ago as "greater communication between everyone involved" and "more understandable and transparent models" have now been taken on board.

October 2006 ~"... using vaccination as an additional HPAI H5N1 prevention and control tool, it appears wise to further explore this option in the EU.."

DISCUSSION PAPER VACCINATION OF POULTRY AGAINST HIGHLY PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA H5N1 (DIVA STRATEGY) Read in full on Bird Flu page.
The BBC has confirmed that Newcastle Disease has indeed been found in a flock of grey partridges at a holding in Fenton Barns in Drem, East Lothian. As so often in the UK, even with a disease that poses no risk to humans, this will result in 17.000 birds being put to death. One can only hope that it will be done "humanely". ProMed comments, "According to UK's information to the OIE, prophylactic vaccination of poultry against NCD is undertaken routinely. It would be interesting to note if the suspected birds have been vaccinated."

October 7 2006 ~ DEFRA FMD "Modelling Exercise" notice on the DEFRA website is dated 20 September 2006

http://www.defra.gov.uk/footandmouth/
"FMD Modelling Exercise: Defra is holding an FMD Modelling Exercise (15 - 22 September), using the scenario of an outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease in Great Britain. The aim is to test the capabilities of the current range of FMD models as well as to improve communications with external modellers and understanding of the models, their capabilities, strengths and weaknesses. Leading independent modellers and scientific advisors will be participating with key Defra strategic and policy making groups in a table-top exercise with some "real-time" components."
This is interesting - but one wonders how many interested stakeholders were made aware of the exercise in advance or were able to take part in any way. Is any reader able to tell us which "leading independent modellers and scientific advisors" were advising?

October 5 2006 ~ In only three months, Harriet can be live-tested with a single drop of blood, with results after 30 minutes.

A rapid diagnostic live test for BSE should be validated and available within three months. When a live test is so close, and when seven years have already gone by, the killing of a healthy pet cow would seem an inflexible interpretation of a regulation that is anyway based upon EU rules that do not apply to animals not intended for the food chain. (See below) As the Rev. Patricia Pinkerton says in an email today, the Jersey cow might surely be allowed to live three months more to see if she really has BSE.
"..... because we are an EU country, they are going through the final validation for the EU and should have that done by the end of the year. The Hon. Mr Charlie Mayer and I spoke by phone call to Alberta for about 45 minutes. He used to be Minister of Agriculture in Canada, and I believe him to be an honest man, interested in stopping post mortem testing.
What a gift this will be to the agricultural industry. ...."
Mark Harper MP is also very concerned about this situation

Oct 3 ~ Professor Donaldson "...I am very familiar with the claims made by Roger Breese (sic) and Fred Brown for the rapid diagnostic method for FMD..."

The tone of Professor Donaldson's riposte on ProMed mail betrays a certain irritation. More
It may be useful, for those interested in the UK's failure to use available technology in 2001, to read an extract from the EFRA committee meeting on April 25th 2001 in which we see both David King and Alex Donaldson attempting to answer David Curry's question: "....If this machine is as accurate as Professor Brown told me, he said it is 99 per cent accurate, could it not have saved this huge, vast, expensive cull of mainly healthy animals?"
Although we feel that Professor Donaldson's recollection of the situation may not accord with that of others, we do know that many are in Professor Donaldson's debt for his attempts to change the culling policy and for his published research on the airborne spread of the 2001 strain of the virus - a paper that not only helped to win the court case for Rosemary Upton but also appeared to discourage MAFF/DEFRA from threatening other stricken farmers with court cases. With scientists of such expertise and decency trying to advise the government, how could the UK have got it all so disastrously wrong? It is highly unlikely that any of those of us who had the privilege of meeting Fred Brown would doubt his sincerity, humanity or scientific rigour, while the effect of Roger Breeze's participation in the recent Manchester Conference was described with great appreciation in the Western Morning News "Hearing someone of that calibre talk, you quickly realise that your own government has its head firmly in the sand, ostrich-mode."

Oct 1 206 ~ "I cannot emphasise enough the opposition locally to this slaughter. I am concerned that there may well be a large number of people present when your representative arrives to object to this action."

Mark Harper MP, Member of Parliament for Forest of Dean has written to the "animal welfare" minister, Ben Bradshaw, about a pet Jersey cow, not destined for the food chain, yet condemned under the Minister's interpretation of BSE control laws. Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 specifies the measures that must be taken when an animal is suspected of being affected by BSE or scrapie. However, as the Countess of Mar pointed out in her criticism of the UK regulations last March,
"EU Regulation 999/2001 clearly states that the rules apply only to animals which will enter the food chain. They do not apply to show animals, special collections of animals or anything to do with cosmetic or medical work, provided they do not enter the food chain. I am confident that this is not made clear in the statutory instrument. "
Since the sole point of the regulations to be used as justification for killing the Jersey cow is "providing protection for consumers and ensuring that potentially infected material is not recycled " one wonders how the killing of a much loved pet can make consumers feel happier or safer. Full posting including Mr Harper's letter to Ben Bradshaw and links.
See also email from the Rev. Pat Pinkerton

Sept 30 2006 ~ It is the duty of all those involved in foot and mouth to remind the next government and those thereafter that we will not tolerate short-term cost cutting policies that cost the country dearly in the long run..."

This quotation from the submission to the Royal Society of Edinburgh Inquiry by two eminent veterinary surgeons seems ever more urgent. Costs are still being cut. Pirbright, as the World Reference Center, should be a disinterested party for the evaluation of FMD technology - but how can it be when forced into commercialisation?
Because of savage cuts in funding, IAH Pirbright has become less and less a public servant over the years. The refusal to collaborate on technology that could later have prevented so much misery becomes clearer in the light of a letter to Fred Brown, dated 5 November 1997: "we have ultimately decided it is not in our interests to collaborate with a company which intends to develop a commercial diagnostic kit in direct competition to our own intentions." See full posting

Sept 29 2006 ~ Government warned against merely "re-publishing existing disease control procedures with a few minor improvements."

"previously unimaginable tools for diagnosis and detailed pathogen identification.... but the continuing dependence on paper, maps and coloured pins in many countries..." From Biological disasters of animal origin The role and preparedness of veterinary and public health services edited and collated by Dr Martin Hugh-Jones, is prefaced by a warning from Bernard Vallat, Director General of the OIE, against governments "re-publishing existing disease control procedures with a few minor improvements."
One paper in the collection, Use and abuse of mathematical models: an illustration from the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic in the United Kingdom by R.P. Kitching, M.V. Thrusfield & N.M. Taylor, will find particular resonance in those anxious for past mistakes to be acknowledged:
" The UK experience provides a salutary warning of how models can be abused in the interests of scientific opportunism."
Full posting

Sept 29 2006 ~ "Discussion focused on the use of diagnostic tests; control measures; and stakeholders' involvement in disease control."

The "Disease Control Workshop: Stakeholders' Interests in the use of Science/Technology and Decision Making" was held on 12 May 2006 by the EU-funded FMD & CSF Coordination Action. Warmwell.com has been asked by John Bashiruddin at Pirbright and the EU-funded FMD & CSF Coordination Action website to post the following Disease Control Workshop Recommendations while the CA site is temporarily out of action. Participants in the workshop included representatives from the
NFU, BVA, RCVS, RVC, VLA, Elm Farm Research Centre, COPA-COGECA, European Livestock Alliance, NBvH (Dutch Smallholders Association), European Livestock and Meat Trading Union, Federation of Veterinarians of Europe, Defra, SVS-Scotland, and the Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture.
Discussion focused on
(a) the use of diagnostic tests;
(b) control measures; and
(c) stakeholders' involvement in disease control.
Their specific (draft) recommendations can be seen here and comments are welcome on the CA Forum.
(While the CA website is out of action, any messages about the workshop and its recommendations sent to warmwell will be forwarded immediately. We find the recommendations extremely important and very much hope that real progress can now be made.)

September 28 2006 ~ " The report of the development of a field rapid test by the Institute for Animal Health, Pirbright raises a number of questions... there are still unanswered questions..." ProMed Mail

ProMED-mail yesterday FOOT & MOUTH DISEASE - UK (02): FOLLOW-UP DIAGNOSTIC METHODS Archive Number 20060927.2768 Published Date 27-SEP-2006
Date: 27 Sep 2006
From: Martin Hugh-Jones, ProMED-mail Animal Disease Assistant Moderator
The report of the development of a field rapid test by the Institute for Animal Health, Pirbright raises a number of questions: (1) there are still unanswered questions about the apparent failure of Pirbright to use the correct (i.e. USDA/Tetracore) reagents in 2001;
(2) the matter of willingness or unwillingness to use the technologies rather than the commercially developed technologies;
(3) the potential unfair role of an agency that both advises the government on which devices to use while producing their own devices; and
(4) as a consequence, unfair competition for private companies.
Please read the posting in full , particularly the links. This is the first time we have seen such a blunt expression of disquiet from such a highly respected organisation. (ProMed is a program of the International Society for Infectious Diseases http://www.isid.org) .

September 2006 ~ Not Hindsight. Dr Paul Kitching's evidence to the EU Temporary Committee shows that by May 2001 the government knew 52.76% of Pirbright tests showed absence of disease.

The evidence shows that the Science Committee were repeatedly urged to reconsider the policy. The flaws in the merely mathematical modelling driving the policy were pointed out by the Committee's only veterinary experts, Dr Kitching and Professor Donaldson. To their dismay, proper epidemiological investigation, which would have been so invaluable for the future, was made impossible by the relentless pace of the mass cull carried out after the disease had peaked. As Dr Kitching told the Committee "public perception of control programme both in the UK and abroad was severely damaged..."
"... On 1st May (i.e. 2001), I asked for a summary of results generated at Pirbright; of 1876 premises that had been slaughtered, classified as VDR, DCF and SOS; samples from 52.76% were negative on laboratory tests. This was reported to the Science Committee on 2nd May 2001..... The implementation of the rapid cull also prevented any detailed epidemiological investigations, and sometimes even the collection of any samples from "infected premises" - a concern expressed on the 6th April by the HQ Epidemiology Team.
......the question was raised that the sensitivity of the tests being used at Pirbright was not sufficient to identify all infected animals. In my opinion, samples collected... close to 100% sensitive.."
He told the EU Committee that the consequence of adopting the policy recommended by the models included excessive slaughter, the inability to remove carcasses and the necessity of transporting carcasses through uninfected areas and a " loss of confidence of local Veterinarians and farmers". (read Dr Kitching's evidence in full)

September 2006 ~"...at least there is humour! The very same test reagents and Cepheid device that Dr. Ferris manages to smear... have since been deployed across the US... after millions of dollars spent on validation!"

Roger Breeze's response to the Pirbright analysis of how many so-called "Infected Premises" were free of FMD in 2001.
"....My first thought was that if Dr. Ferris and his Pirbright team had bought the ARS/Tetracore real time PCR test reagents for Foot and mouth disease from Tetracore in 2001 and learned how to use them, he could have completed his research much more quickly and published this paper in 2002, thereby saving the British taxpayers a tidy sum and giving his team four years head start on solving a real foot and mouth problem.
My second thought was "So what?" There is nothing in the news reports or paper to indicate that DEFRA still has any idea how to use real time PCR or other rapid tests to shut down an outbreak of a foreign animal or poultry disease. ...
......The more studies are done, the bigger the mistake will be seen to be. Everyone around the world knows this. But almost everyone involved in that decision in Great Britain has retired or died - soon this will include the Prime Minister.
So can we stop pretending that the decision not to accept the US offer was based on a shrewd scientific assessment of the device and the data and not on political embarrassment at being caught unprepared for the greatest debacle in the history of British veterinary medicine? Can we have a moratorium on revising history and get on with what's important?
In the real world, people are developing multiplex PCR tests that differentiate over 20 different viral and bacterial causes of pneumonia in a single test procedure (so we can test for rare diseases at the same time as common ones at no additional cost in money or time), they are evaluating devices that simultaneously detect all microbial life, known and unknown, in a sample, and they are using microarrays that detect all human and animal viruses plus some 200 bacterial, fungal and parasitic pathogens in a single test procedure. These are just three of the hundreds of novel approaches to pathogen detection that are being studied in the US and elsewhere. I might draw attention to a microarray that not only detects foot and mouth virus but also determines some 1000 bases of the genome of the virus in the sample - thereby solving one of the issues Dr. Ferris identifies as a problem, namely the need to monitor the PCR test genome target for variation during the course of an outbreak.
So you don't need to wait five years to find out how good your PCR test is, you can monitor this in close to real time as the outbreak proceeds. This can be done now - it does not need to be rediscovered in 2011. ...."
read in full See also the posting on http://www.fmd-and-csf-action.org/forums/fmdv

September 2006 ~ "Not only is it a great read that grips you by the throat from the first paragraph, it's hugely informative about a subject people outside of the rural community know virtually nothing about ..."

A new novel "A Necessary Killing" (Amazon.co.uk synopsis) reminds us that the policy of 2001, analysed now by academics, devastated the lives of those in its path:
" I experienced first-hand the human cost of the epidemic, the fear, anguish and desolation caused by the disease and especially by its management. The epidemic may have been 'forgotten' but it had a dramatic and lasting effect on the personal lives and health of many rural people....." writes its author in this email
Read entry in full

September 2006 ~ Mr Blair assured Rural Affairs Minister Barry Gardiner that all rural concerns could be consigned "to the bottom of his in-tray"

The Western Morning News (WMN) reports that Mr Gardiner has told farmers at the Labour Party Conference that Britain's dairy industry needs "a hell of a shake-out".
He represents the London borough of Brent North. He told delegates at a meeting organised by the National Farmers' Union that he had only taken a job at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs after being assured by the Prime Minister that he could push rural concerns to the bottom of his in-tray. While this government thinks it is presiding over a "post agricultural era", it may perhaps, too late, wake up.
Professor James Lovelock in The Revenge of Gaia: "... Unfortunately our nation is now so urbanised as to be like a large city and we have only a small acreage of agriculture and forestry. We are dependent on the trading world for sustenance; climate change will deny us regular supplies of food and fuel from overseas.. ......we need secure indigenous supplies of food and energy....our gas and oil will soon be gone and we can not rely on supplies from abroad..."

September 2006 ~ The justification that mass killing was necessary to "get ahead of the disease" must at last be seriously challenged.

"You can't leave animals that may be excreting the virus while you make up your mind....I don't know whether you would say it was unnecessary because in the circumstances pertaining at the time there was perhaps no alternative." said David Paton on a Radio Gloucestershire interview on Sunday. No alternative? The UK had the choice both of effective vaccination and the offer of the newly developed on-site diagnosis kit - both of which were summarily rejected for reasons that had nothing to do with veterinary concerns - and both of which worked so well in Uruguay in the same year. As Dr Breeze says here,
"Fortunately, we were able to take the devices and test system into the field in Uruguay in November 2001, where they performed splendidly on farm in a remote area."
( Uruguay was granted Disease Free Status (with vaccination) from the OIE on 1 November 2001, just 2 months after the last outbreak on 21 August. See Uruguay pages)
It is becoming apparent now to anyone who looks at the data that the adopted policy actually made the 'epidemic' worse.
Defra's insistence on central control from Page Street, telling vets to slaughter even when the doubts were great, ignoring local veterinary skill, turning a deaf ear to all protest - all this served to create the very misdiagnosis that led to such massive overkill. Dr Paton's support for the government's insistence that such draconian policy was necessary to "get ahead of the disease" looks very thin when, as Janet Bayley reminded listeners to BBC Radio Gloucester, the disease had already peaked before the contiguous cull policy began. Test results came back again and again as negative.

September 2006 ~ Warmwell.com was updating daily from early in 2001. Our deep disquiet now is not "hindsight" after the event.

At the time, we recorded daily agonised dissent from experienced farmers, frustrated vets in the field, FMD scientists whose expertise was rejected and from concerned members of the public distressed and unbelieving at what they were seeing. (See also Fields of Fire)
The BBC interview shows that the Forest of Dean at least - and many other areas too that suffered such losses - could well be justified in calling FMD 2001 "the epidemic that never was." For the whole of Wigtownshire, for example, there were only 2 positive results, yet at least 88,446 animals there were automatically slaughtered and protest went unheeded.
In spite of warnings such as that of the Drummond Report ("Notifiable Disease Preparedness within the State Veterinary Service"), there had been no proper contingency plan. Small wonder that the contiguous cull was described by the 2001 - 2002 EFRA report as " a response to a desperate situation, not a pre-meditated response to a known, assessed risk."

September 2006 ~ "No evidence of FMD virus, antibody or nucleic acid was found in approximately 23 per cent (390 of 1730) of IPs from which samples were received, suggesting that the incidence of FMD during the outbreak may have been over-reported. "

The research in The Veterinary Record 159:373-378 (2006) refers to actual supposed Infected Premises. It would be interesting indeed to know the situation with regard to the other categories ie Dangerous Contacts, Slaughter on Suspicion and, of course, those animals culled contiguously.
Could the figures not be really appalling - as they certainly seemed to be when we published some of the county figures? If a so-called "Dangerous Contact" premises could be later termed an "Infected Premises" - as claimed - why were there so many IPs that returned negative results still referred to by the category of IPs? Similarly for dangerous contacts (DCs), Contiguous Premises (CPs) and Slaughter on Suspicion (SOSs). How were the untested "IPs" distinguished from "SOS"? By what criteria were "IPs" that were not laboratory-tested identified? It needs to be remembered that this research suggests that a third of animals killed on farms designated as INFECTED and subsequently tested have now been shown to have been free of disease. The percentage of the total number of healthy animals killed as assumed contacts or "contiguous" is therefore likely to be very much higher.
These questions continue to haunt us. Is anyone able to help?

September 2006 ~ "I am afraid a lot of animals lost their lives unnecessarily..."

The Western Morning News quotes Dick Sibley in an article that suggests that some of the main perpetrators of the slaughter policy of the FMD crisis are still anxious to defend what happened. Mark Woolhouse, it will be remembered, claimed at the time that "50% of new cases turned up in the immediate neighbourhood of previous cases." and this sort of thinking justified the contiguous cull. Disease was, in fact, incubating from contacts made before the movement ban came into operation. Moreover, very many suspected cases were simply wrongly diagnosed. Dubious vets were told by Page Street to slaughter anyway - and livestock owners who objected to this discovered that they were up against political rather than veterinary pressure. We look forward to the foot and mouth data being made public so that it is apparent at last where the disease really was - and where it was not.
The language of the WMN article is interesting:
"Vets said"
"drastic action had to be taken".
"you could not afford to miss any"
" you needed more accurate tests.".....
DEFRA even says: ".. swift action to slaughter was used to slow down the spread of foot and mouth disease" - as if even the slaughter itself was rapid. In fact, in very many cases, farmers were left waiting until long after clinicial symptoms would have been apparent, only to see their evidently healthy animals being killed. (EFRA Report "...Given that the objective was to carry out slaughter and disposal of livestock on infected premises within 24 hours of the disease being confirmed, and within 48 hours on contiguous farms, the length of time actually taken was extremely disappointing...Delays in slaughter cannot but have contributed to the spread of the disease.") All too often, this was in a manner that left otherwise tough vets and farmers in tears.
Of the millions of animals who were so killed, the number actually infected was heartbreakingly low. The Farmers Guardian quotes Ben Gill who has, perhaps, more reason than most to defend the NFU stance during the FMD crisis. He uses the flawed Pirbright rubbishing of the 2001 test as jusification for its rejection - but forgets that that piece of bizarre research failed even to use the proper reagents proprietary to ARS/Tetracore test and that were essential for it to work correctly.
A statement made by Roger Breeze of USDA explained this clearly to the Royal Society Enquiry in 2002.
"......Given the extensive validation studies in vitro and in vivo that had already taken place at Plum Island, our expectations were that after a short familiarization period (1 to 2 days) for UK colleagues at Pirbright we would be able to take the devices and tests into the field during the 2 0 0 1 FMD outbreak in cooperation with UK authorities from Pirbright or MAFF. Such studies would have provided the US and UK with valuable data under field conditions: we would have used these data to support USDA licensure and OIE test approval. ...."

September 2006 ~ "massively important" rapid diagnosis - rejected by the UK in 2001 - may at last be on the cards because there could be a UK test.

The present talk of a "new" penside test is interesting. The desire by the UK government, using its own laboratories and commercial partners, to develop and market its own rapid diagnosis tests helps explain the apparently senseless rejection of almost identical technologies that could have transformed animal health policy in 2001. Pirbright's research, suggesting that more than one-third of sheep farms and 23 per cent of all livestock premises were wrongly diagnosed as having foot-and-mouth disease, is reported in Cumbria's Times and Star which also emphasises the commercial nature of Pirbright's research into penside tests. This comes to light - not to demand accountability - but presumably to suggest the need for a rapid on-site test. Such a UK test could create state revenue if accepted for use. (See background to this issue.)
The Farmers Guardian (22 Sept) reports that Pirbright is "..... trialing a diagnostic test that will deliver an on-the-spot result in under an hour, without having to wait for results from a laboratory..."
But the article rightly reminds us that a
" similar rapid penside test, already developed in the USA, was offered to the UK during the 2001 outbreak but was rejected by the Government because it had not been validated in the UK."
DEFRA still talks of its being " inevitable that slaughter of some animals may have to be undertaken preemptively before definitive laboratory evidence is available." and the phrase "no officially validated tests" is used to justify a five year wait for a test we could have used in 2001. Roger Breeze exposed the "waffle from those insisting on "further validation" in a letter. in January this year :
"......I am not arguing in any way that diagnostic tests should not go through an independent validation process to validate the claims of their makers. Indeed, I was astonished to discover that APHIS actually did not have such a process. What happened with the FMD and other PCR tests is that "validation" became a smokescreen.... ."
John Thorley, former National Sheep Association chief executive, is also quoted in the Farmers Guardian. Unlike the defenders of the extraordinary policies of 2001, Mr Thorley is quoted as saying that the test, was "massively important" . Its use in 2001 would have ensured that Bob Michell, a former President of the RCVS, would never have had to refer to "the greatest unnecessary slaughter of healthy animals in the history of our profession".

September 2006 ~ Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?

"Defra works for the essentials of life: water, food, air, land, people, animals and plants" but this claim for itself by DEFRA has no mechanism by which anyone can judge the meaning of such a statement. The Department's performance is never measured, the NAO notwithstanding. In 2001 we really needed good management, good science and common sense. What we got - because a sound contingency plan had never been prepared - was 'cure' by mass slaughter, bullying and a refusal to listen to genuine expert advice. Billions were wasted; money and coercive legislation used to silence opposition to a policy now widely seen to have been dreadfully wrong. Five years on, one wonders whether decent and humane animal health policies are really any nearer.
The EU one-size-fits-all legislation can now hardly even be questioned, let alone voted against. Proposed change tends to be cloaked in impenetrable legalese; DEFRA's own language, rather than interpreting and guiding, is far too often florid, empty and obscure.
All this matters. Animal diseases and human diseases are increasingly interconnected and we need to work together.
This extract from a West Country farmer's email is an indication of the widespread unease now felt:
"... if farmers are penalised for reporting suspect candidate animals or poultry, then they will not do so. And an opportunity of early, decisive action to prevent endemic spread will have been lost. This is serious for two reasons; first, economically for international trade obligations and also for the effect on other species, including man, of zoonotics like Tb and avian flu."
DEFRA does not value its smaller shareholders. Even the plea below to Defra to " please post this information with the correct page and paragraph reference" has been ignored. Without cooperation from all, disease in the UK will be left to spread. Never before has genuine partnership between government and farming , complete with Performance Benchmarks to be met both by government and by industry, been so urgently needed. If there is only an arrogant laying down of the law on the one side and frustration on the other, heaven help the essentials of life in the UK, its water, food, air, land, people, animals and plants.

September 2006 ~ EU-wide disease slaughter compensation down to 75%?
Stakeholders given only days to respond - and even then - "No negotiations or vote on these issues.."

(See relevant section of European Commission's proposed exemption regulation.)
Although the EU Consultation began on August 18, a Defra email dated 8th September to stakeholders says
"We have just been made aware that they are holding a public consultation period which ends on the 17 September....."
Sunday is the deadline for comments to the European Commission Directorate General for Agriculture ( Agri-State-Aids@ec.europa.eu) on proposed changes - due to come into force next January - that will drastically cut the amounts given to livestock owners who have their animals compulsorily slaughtered (as were over 10 million in the tragically mishandled FMD crisis of 2001)
DEFRA tells stakeholders:
".. the Commission has been given the power by Member States to decide which forms of aid are to be allowed and under which conditions. There are therefore no negotiations or vote on these issues - the Commission will decide having listened to the views of the Member States and those with an interest...."
It is not clear whether other Member States have held meaningful discussions on the proposed changes.
The posting by Mary Marshall, Member, Defra's FMD, CSF, Bluetongue and Avian Influenza stakeholder groups, can be seen in full at http://www.fmd-and-csf-action.org/forums/fmdv/post200609113053373524
As Mary Marshall, points out
"The document with the proposed revised guidelines that Defra sent to stakeholders has only 24 pages, so we ask Defra to please post this information with the correct page and paragraph reference on the Defra website."
The Farmers Guardian says, " The potentially devastating proposals are contained in a far-reaching consultation on EU state aid rules for agriculture that also includes potential new restrictions on the use of public money to promote national brands."
***We recommend again the paper by Dr Roger Breeze Disease control: Ideas for cost sharing between industry and government " - which sets out a practical blueprint for genuine partnership between the government and farming. "....Cost sharing offers industry a chance to sit at the table as a partner to make sure that when it pays what is asked, it gets what is promised."

September 2006 ~ Bluetongue moves north "Globalisation, the change in weather patterns and the increase in speed and volume of international transport as well as passengers" are, hardly surprisngly, the suggested causes.

European Research "....Bluetongue cases were first confirmed on a farm in the southernmost region of the Netherlands, and then also detected across the borders in Belgium, Germany and later France. Positive cases of the insect borne virus were found in sheep in the Lihge province of Belgium and in cattle in the Aachen area of North Rhine Westphalia in Germany..
.... the virus strain detected recently in the north has been previously unknown in Europe. The Community Reference Laboratory located in Pirbright....identified the serotype responsible of the current outbreak as serotype 8. Early tests suggest it is similar to the serotype 8 found in sub-Saharan Africa. How it came to infect animals in northern Europe is under investigation. As in other emerging diseases, possible explanations for how the virus arrived in northern Europe include "globalisation, the change in weather patterns and the increase in speed and volume of international transport as well as passengers," the World organisation for animal health (OIE) says. ...."

Aug 26 2006 ~ Once again, senior scientists and health officials worldwide have called for Bird Flu data to be shared internationally.

Many leading avian influenza scientists have tentatively agreed to share data that were previously being kept behind closed doors as part of an effort called the Global Initiative on Sharing Avian Influenza Data (GISAID).
Nature " A letter outlining the agreement is published online today in Nature, signed by 70 scientists and health officials, including six Nobel laureates.
"...By storing all the sequences in a designated place and allowing more open access, the hope is that researchers will be able to carry out comparisons quickly of one new strain against many others from both animals and humans. This type of analysis can reveal whether a virus is acquiring mutations as it spreads between bird flocks, or - should the virus start spreading between people - whether it is becoming resistant to drugs."
We have mentioned several times the plea by Dr Ilaria Capua, chair of the scientific committee of OFFLU ( the bird flu network set up by the FAO and OIE)
"Most of us are paid to protect human and animal health. If publishing one more paper becomes more important, we have our priorities messed up."
The efforts of Dr Capua and others have now resulted in this GISAID agreement. Nature says that Dr Capua is very happy with the result and says that the same framework could be used to distribute data for other emerging infectious diseases in which information must be shared quickly. See also Bird Flu page

Aug 22 2006 ~ No one at DEFRA could explain what "agro-terrorism" was.

The radio programme The Silent Terrorist tonight will be available for a week on the Listen Again page. Radio 4's Simon Cox contacted DEFRA to ask what they thought about agro-terrorism but apparently and almost incredibly "they could not find anyone who knew what it was." ( It is tempting to suggest that possibly they thought any definition might be used against them in relation to the UK government's FMD policy in 2001, a form of agricultural terrorism that will never be forgotten.)
On the subject of terrorism by actual terrorists, the paper Betting Far More than the Farm, (pdf) in BIOSECURITY AND BIOTERRORISM: BIODEFENSE STRATEGY, PRACTICE, AND SCIENCE Volume 2, Number 4, 2004 by expert Roger Breeze, emphasises that
"... Traditional government responses to such an event - sweeping quarantines, mass slaughter and burning or burial of millions of carcasses under the ceaseless eye of television - together with staggering financial losses triggered by international trade embargoes are exactly what terrorists want to see and what makes these viruses potential biological weapons in the first place.. .... it is only the ways we have chosen to respond to foreign diseases in the past that allow terrorists to threaten us with them in the future.." (read in full)
The BBC, reporting that Kansas is hoping to win the contract for the new federal bio- and agro-defence facility ( see below) to replace Plum Island also quotes John Feffer, of the magazine Foreign Policy in Focus, who believes the US government is scaremongering. John Feffer says
"What does sell is a threat perception, fear is what sells, unfortunately that's what agro-terrorism feeds into."

Aug 22 2006 ~ Bluetongue "looks like Foot and Mouth"

Bluetongue, found in the Netherlands on Aug 18th has up until now been thought of as a disease of Mediterranean and Southern Europe. The Scotsman:
"Until very recently the balance of opinion among veterinary experts was that Bluetongue was unlikely to spread to northern Europe. The Netherlands outbreak is 300 miles further north than any other previous incident. .."
This is a worrying development for farming in North West Europe. Defra has announced " testing and additional surveillance" on all recent imports from affected countries into the UK.
In the Netherlands, Luxembourg and large areas of Belgium and Germany, an export ban for cows, sheep and goats now affects a radius of 150 kilometres around the infected farms. A transport ban has also been imposed - except to slaughter - within a radius of 20 kilometres.
The disease is spread by bloodsucking midges. Although it doesn't affect humans, it can be fatal to sheep. An email received today from Germany says, "....we are in the middle of BT and lots of cases in cattle are popping up. Authorities are behaving like headless chickens and until now there has been nobody able to tell us exactly what the main symptoms in cattle are. Rumours from Belgium say it looks like FMD..."
Europa.eu.int has a page of Q and A while Stackyard has a picture of the distressing symptoms in badly affected sheep.

Aug 18 2006 ~ Bovine TB a genuine drop in numbers?

In June, Debby Reynolds, the Chief Veterinary Officer, was asked by Ben Bradshaw to undertake a review of the apparent fall in the number of new TB incidents. She considered whether the switch in tuberculin supply from the VLA to that purchased from Holland ( ID Lelystad) could have caused this reduction. (The switch was made in June 2005 and the apparent decline dates from around this time.) The CVO in her report (Defra pdf) , notes a "small difference in performance" but VLA's own report refers to a but "statistically significant difference" and that "2mm difference in swelling will mean 24 % of incidents are missed, or detected later." In spite of the CVO's assumption that this is only a "small difference" the VLA says:
"....The data that we have gives some indication that there are subtle differences in performance between the Dutch and current Weybridge PPDs (suggesting that the Dutch bovine/avian PPD combination is not so good at detecting infection)..."
Dr Reynolds does say " it is highly unlikely that it will be possible to explain the decline with any precision."
See also http://bovinetb.blogspot.com/2006/08/going-dutch-2mm-difference.html which goes on to examine the significance of the new TB 64 Interpretation Chart revised by Defra in February.

Aug 17 2006 ~ Once again, the "carrier" argument rears its head in the UK as a reason for not implementing Bird Flu vaccination.

A paper in Nature suggests that it is very hard to protect more than about of 90% of the birds in any given flock although, the authors concede, the use of unvaccinated sentinels can "mitigate the problem". Using computer modelling rather than field studies as evidence, the paper suggests that incomplete vaccination of flocks can contribute to the "undetected spread of the disease".
Reporting on this, the Herald's article by James Morgan today uses the attention grabbing headline "Bird flu vaccination can 'worsen spread' " It says the "..... UK government's fears appear to be borne out by the new study."
A letter in the Veterinary Record Sept. 3rd, 2005, detailing the vaccination strategy at the Singapore Zoological Gardens (an actual field study, and where all birds that are exposed to the public are vaccinated against bird flu), says
"assuming a 1/16 titre is protective this implies only a one in five chance of infection in one bird and a one in twenty five chance of it spreading to another bird in the same premises."
Would "unseen spread" be able to happen with such odds? We remember the wise words of ProMed's Martin Hugh Jones
"I have a phrase I use on my students and those over-enamored of their computers and models, "Why should I believe you when you have a computer pallor and no mud on your shoes?" The truth is in the field, not in the computer. When models are checked and rechecked against reality they can be fine-tuned and may eventually become useful. .."

Aug 16 2006 ~ Remaining small abattoirs under threat (again)

Small local abattoirs in the UK - those that still remain after questionnable regulations have closed three quarters of UK slaughterhouses in the past 15 years - provide jobs in rural communities, minimise animal welfare problems and shorten the distances that animals are sent by lorry on their last journey. Smaller abattoirs are central to the drive to get people to buy locally-reared and locally processed meat. What is more, the existence of local abattoirs make the illegal trade in "dirty meat" far less likely. However, Foodproductiondaily.com reports today that proposed increases in vets' inspection fees could bring an end to small abattoirs in the UK . It quotes FPB spokesman Matt Hardman:
"The problem is the interpretation of the EU legislation where they [the UK government] basically gold-plated the situation," said Hardman. "Instead of a literal translation, where the EU asks for veterinarians, we have veterinary surgeons which are more costly."
"..... Full rates for a veterinarian surgeon are usually around £90 ( 133) an hour. Currently, small abattoirs pay a fixed fee for the inspection of individual animals. This would be a significant setback for the 230-odd small abattoirs across the UK. ..."
Mr Hardman goes on to say, if the standards are to be changed it should be to the benefit of all. If that means lightening the load on larger abattoirs then it should be done for the survival of smaller abattoirs.
As Muckspreader said back in 2004 : "... Some of the best-quality meat still on the market will no longer be there to buy. And the only people rejoicing will be the supermarkets, who will have knocked out yet another tranche of their smaller competitors; and of course the regulators....." (read in full)

Email received on Aug 16th

Aug 15 2006 ~ Will Cockbain: "It is totally unacceptable as we approach the autumn sales period that many farmers are still awaiting HFA payments"

Some hill farmers in Cumbria, Lancashire and Cheshire STILL have not received payment from the RPA. (RPA latest)

Aug 15 2006 ~ US Homeland Security say that "state-of-the-art technology" is needed to combat zoonoses. The future of Plum Island is uncertain.

The Department of Homeland Security's new National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility is going to cost 450 million US dollars (or about 238 million pounds). This suggests that the US at least is taking very seriously the need to investigate infectious diseases properly and swiftly from whatever sources they may arise.
The existing Plum Island Animal Disease Center in New York is not being considered for the location of the new facility and its future is in some doubt. The Department does not say it intends to close Plum Island, but what seems to be assumed is that the new facility will be "replacing" some or all of its present work.
The Associated Press reported a Homeland Security spokesman last week who said
"..... the new facility probably won't be completed for years, and in the meantime $35 million is being spent on infrastructure, equipment and security upgrades to Plum Island.
"We anticipate shifting some responsibilities from Plum Island to the new facility but that's another seven years down the line. What we are going to do soon is a full study examining Plum Island" and its possible future uses.".....".
A 2003 congressional study found security flaws at the site but Homeland Security officials have since said those concerns have been addressed....."
(It may be remembered that the whistleblower at Plum Island, James McKoy, was fired when he raised concerns about security. Some cattle and pigs not involved in a vaccine trial showed symptoms of foot and mouth. When he was reinstated Mr McKoy said, "The guys who work there are working in a safer place, the community has a safer facility near it, and the country has taken steps to prevent bioterrorism. If I don't see a plugged nickel out of the whole thing, I did the right thing and I'm proud I was in a position to do it." See warmwell pages on the concerns about security at Plum Island. )

Aug 10 2006 ~ Foot and Mouth in Vietnam: Europe to provide 2 million doses of vaccine

FMD has flared up in some southern provinces of Vietnam and vaccine is to be imported from Europe.
".....Authorities in these areas are now tightening control over transport and trade of cattle, disinfecting affected areas, and vaccinating animals.
The Vietnamese government has provided the provinces with tens of thousands of doses of FMD vaccine. It plans to import 2 million doses worth VND 36 billion [USD 2.3 million] from France and the Netherlands for the national reserve...." See ProMed

Aug 9 2006 ~ Consultation for DEFRA's draft Statutory Instrument, (SI) for the Zoonoses (Monitoring) Regulations 2006

( Statutory Instruments can amend, update or enforce existing primary legislation The Courts can question whether a Minister, when issuing an SI, is using a power he has actually been given in the parent Act, whereas they cannot question the validity of the Act itself.)
The Consultation package includes
• A consultation document containing a summary of the consultation issues, background to the legislation and draft of "the Monitoring SI"
• A partial Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA)
  The deadline for responses is Friday 27 October 2006.
  • Letter to consultees
  • List of organisations consulted
  • Consultation document (including partial RIA) (261 KB)
The relevant DEFRA website page is http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/zoonoses-monitoring/index.htm

Aug 6 2006 ~ " learning the practical lessons of 2001 and embracing the potential advantages offered by modern diagnostic technologies and data handling systems ."

A letter by Adrian Wingfield, Hugh Miller and Nick Honhold, FMD control strategies, in the current Veterinary Record, expresses disappointment that "the body of work cited by Keeling and colleagues as evidence for the beneficial effects of automatic compulsory contiguous culling" consists almost entirely of mathematical modelling papers, which are "by their own definition approximations to reality."
The letter draws attention to "the extensive post hoc evidence that compulsory contiguous culling was as unnecessary as it was ineffective " and makes a plea for a
"return to a more reasoned approach to infectious animal disease control based on solid science and sound veterinary epidemiological principles.."
The letter concludes
" ".......There now seems to be no reason why DEFRA should not abandon wider culling policies (compulsory contiguous, 'firebreak' and area culling) and the enabling legislation (Animal Health Act 2002), revert to the tried and tested conventional control methodology as the cornerstone of FMD control, and refine future policy by learning the practical lessons of 2001 and embracing the potential advantages offered by modern diagnostic technologies and data handling systems."
Read letter in full

Aug 6 2006 ~ " we don't encourage this sort of dramatic culling"

Reacting to the mass killing of all dogs except those useful to the state (Military guard dogs and police canine units) in the Chinese province of Shandong province (see below) the World Health Organisation says
"Rabies is a big problem for China and it is one that is probably under-reported," said Roy Wadia of the UN agency's Beijing office. "But we don't encourage this sort of dramatic culling. There would be no need for it if adequate vaccination and surveillance measures were in place." (See Guardian)
ProMed comments, " To properly assess the (apparently excessive) control measures applied by the Shandong authorities, it would help to obtain data on the number of owned dogs vs. stray or abandoned dogs. In a rabies-stricken area, dogs are expected to be vaccinated, muzzled and leashed."

Aug 5 2006 ~ "After the public outrage at the killings in Yunnan, officials in eastern Jining have ordered a media blackout on the cull

giving permission only to one local newspaper to send its reporters to write about the slaughter. .." A distressing report from the Times on the Chinese city where rabies has killed 16 people. The destruction of dogs has been ordered.
It "could kill hundreds of thousands of pets"
Officials said that 16 people had died of rabies following dog bites in the eastern city of Jining in the past eight months and all dogs living within three miles of areas where rabies had been found would be killed.
".....Zhang Luping, founder of the Beijing Human and Animal Environmental Education Centre, said the culling should stop: "This really damages our national image and sets a really bad example to show how lazy and inconsiderate those local government officials are"
Military guard dogs and police canine units are being spared - which raises questions about the need to slaughter rather than vaccinate.
Warmwell readers are likely to find that the article brings back vivid and upsetting memories of anguish when animals and pets were seized and killed in Britain while the protests of their owners - who knew that they were no threat - were, often arrogantly, ignored. The availability and efficacy of modern technologies including vaccination means that the argument "it's the animals or it's us" has no validity. It will seem to many thoughtful people that the strange but continuing mindset of killing to cure has consequences that go far beyond any supposed pragmatism.

Aug 2 2006 ~ "unexpected costs" leading to DEFRA's slashed budget have included "preparations for avian flu"

Even less money for DEFRA could have very serious consequences for animal health policies.
The Guardian says such preparations as have been made to prepare for avian flu "are believed to have cost more than £50million" They still have not, as far as we are aware, included the ordering of H5N1 vaccines the free-range sector. Caroline Lucas MEP, in her report (pdf new window) quotes
"... Patrick Holden, Soil Association Director, who sees direct comparisons with the outbreak of Foot and Mouth: "This gives me an awful sense of déjà vu. In the early days of the Foot and Mouth outbreak, the Soil Association met with the Prime Minister and urged him to adopt a vaccination policy to control the spread of the disease - our views were overruled by those putting their export trade ahead of science and animal welfare. The economic, human and welfare costs of that error of judgement are well known. Vaccination is now the adopted method of control for Foot and Mouth - it should also play a key role in any strategy to control an outbreak of bird 'flu ... action is required now to build up a vaccine bank."

Aug 2 2006 ~ DEFRA Budget to be cut by £200 million

The Guardian reports today that DEFRA
"....was in financial crisis last night after being told to cut its budget by nearly £200m over the next six months. The Guardian has learned that the 7% savings are expected to bite deeply into flood defence work, nature conservation and canal repair schemes as well as a host of scientific bodies and research groups..."
Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat shadow environment secretary, evidently aghast that the environment is to suffer for the bungling of the RPA, said, "This cock-up by Margaret Beckett should be met from the contingency reserve not key budget lines for environmental spending."
See also RPA page. It looks as though these cuts are a direct result of the RPA bungle. A further £12m is being cut from "Natural England" the organisation for conservation that is to take over from the Countryside Agency in October. Sir Martin Doughty, its new chairman, is reported to have written to David Miliband,
"the scale of these cuts risks the wheels coming off the organisation even before it reaches October's launchpad".
As well as the dire consequences for "Natural England" and flood defences, the Drinking Water Inspectorate, the Central Science Laboratory, the National Forest Company are among those bodies to be affected.

July 30 /Aug 1 2006 ~ "we need the technology brought up to date and we need it fast."

James Irvine's (FRCP(Ed)FRCPathDscFRS(Ed)FID FIBiol), recent article on landcare.org about the Royal Highland Show, laments the apparent lack of interest shown by government and other influential bodies in updating their contingency plans for the control of Foot and Mouth Disease.
".......My attempt to raise any enthusiasm about the key importance of rapid diagnostic tests which would facilitate the early use of vaccination as a front line measure (as recommended by EU Directive) drew a blank. As far as this SVS officer was concerned it did not seem to have much priority. It would be a lot of slaughter all over again, was the impression I gained. And of course the Executive now have a revised Animal Welfare (Scotland) Act to help them enforce it. .."
In this latest article Basic mistakes in the control of FMD UK2001 which must not be repeated he again emphasises how negligent it would be for the authorities not to make use of the ever advancing technologies in their contingency planning.
".....What is now urgently needed is a radical change in outlook by the authorities particularly within the UK and by some of the lobby groups, such as NFU, NFU Scotland, the National Beef Association and certain of the veterinary bodies. ..
Clearly vaccination is a powerful potential weapon in breaking the line of transmission, rather than simply following it. But to use vaccination effectively, speed in diagnosis and in defining the virus's specific characteristics is essential. For that we need the technology brought up to date and we need it fast.,," Read article
Dr Irvine's article cites "Use and abuse of mathematical models: illustration from the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic in the United Kingdom" (See abstract) Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 25:293-311. Kitching, R.P., Thrusfield, M.V. & Taylor, N.M. (2006).

July 29 2006 ~ Avian Flu - "Mild in the Wild, Benign in the Backyard, Fatal in the Factory."

As the Vice President of the European Parliament's Temporary Committee of Inquiry into the handling of Foot and Mouth, Dr Caroline Lucas witnessed at first hand " the extraordinary devastation that was wrought on the British countryside by this government's failure to consider vaccination. It is vital that the lessons of this experience are learnt, and that adequate supplies of vaccine are made available". But her report goes further. It examines the root causes of high pathogenic bird flu and makes serious and timely recommendations. . Extract from Dr Lucas' report:
".. .. The Government's Chief Scientist, Professor Sir David King, the man whose presided over the Government's rejection of vaccination during the Foot and Mouth outbreak of 2001, is already looking at a future for poultry where the official response would mean that "organic and free-range farming would come to an end. It would change farming practices."
The vaccination and quarantining of poultry is an important protection, especially for free range and organic poultry. However, it can never be a long-term solution for the intensive chicken sector, since they are too prone to becoming "viral factories," and risk becoming the route for H5N1 to mutate and hence spread resistance to available vaccines. .
.....it would appear that chickens are shipped from Europe, used for breeding in Thailand, then cooked chicken is sent back again to Europe.
And this from a country that is Asia's biggest producer of poultry and poultry feed for exports. Day old chicks, exported to Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam, are already thought to have brought avian flu to these countries. ..." The Role of Intensive Poultry Farming and International Trade in the Spread of Avian Flu ( pdf file opens in new window) .

July 29 2006 ~ Avian Flu - "these bodies are using the avian flu crisis to push for a further increase in the industrialisation of the poultry sector"

Once loaded, Dr Lucas' very readable report can be read in full and printed out. Its importance can't be overestimated particularly in view ofthe fact that
"Governments, the European Union, and international agencies like the FAO appear to be doing nothing to investigate how the factory farms and their by-products, such as animal feed and manure, spread the avian flu virus. Indeed some of these bodies are using the avian flu crisis to push for a further increase in the industrialisation of the poultry sector." (page 10)

July 29 2006 ~ "What the U.S. veterinarians who went to England really wanted was a test for confirming FMD with a quick turnaround"

... and five years later, now that Homeland Security, awake to the dangers of FMD, has funded the efforts to develop the assay, Colorado State University's Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory is now demonstrating its rapid diagnostic test for seven animal diseases, including FMD.
"....The concept of an assay that could test for multiple livestock diseases grew out of the 2001 outbreak of FMD in the United Kingdom that caused about $5 billion in losses to the food and agriculture sector and even greater losses to tourism. Up to 10 million sheep, pigs and cows were slaughtered.... ..... Simultaneous testing for these diseases has not been possible in the past. ....
"This new diagnostic assay will significantly enhance the future security of U.S. agriculture by providing improved technology for animal disease diagnostics," said Tammy Beckham, deputy director of science for the DHS at the Plum Island Animal Disease Center......."
While this is very good news, we remember that - unknown to the vets who were so frustrated during the crisis - similar technology was actually available in 2001. What was not available, either in the UK or the US, was the political will to use such tests. (The convenience of using animal disease and supposed concern about vaccination to justify protectionism was also a tragic and continuing disgrace.) The excuse that rapid on-site tests had not been "validated" looks very thin, given that..
" ...APHIS was at that time (Feb 2001) diagnosing FMD and other diseases in its own labs using APHIS-derived PCR tests - none of these PCR tests had been validated, they were developed with far less stringency than the ARS tests, there was no validation protocol, and the Head of Veterinary Service stated that his agency was exempt from APHIS licensing rules and did not need to do any validation. Ironically, USDA Secretary Veneman was being advised by the California State Veterinarian, who was also opposed to providing the new FMD test and equipment to the states..." (Dr Breeze's letter to warmwell)
It seems a tragic error that animal health policies have been so closely confined and controlled by political rather than veterinary interests.

July 24 2006 ~ " By striving to protect the planet and maintain animal health we are also protecting human health, and vice versa.

To succeed we have to share knowledge and resources, and improve international interactions to build the required trust for a promising future. "
The conclusions of Martin Hugh Jones' paper Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 2006, 25 (1), 421-427 - which itself rounds off the thought-provoking collection of papers of the recent OIE publication: Biological disasters of animal origin The role and preparedness of veterinary and public health services remind us of the interconnectedness of everything to do with animal and human health. Now that countries are so globally connected, now that there is an ever increasing threat from zoonoses, now that the knowledge and technology to combat disease is ever more available and the political willingness to embrace them more and more urgently needed - all this makes a new open preparedness vitally important. Some points we consider key from the paper (which can be read in full) appear below.

July 24 2006 ~ " To defend ourselves against the possibility of new outbreaks, of transboundary disease spread, the first defence is information, fast and accurate information ..."

From Martin Hugh Jones' paper Conclusions (Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 2006, 25 (1), 421-427) "..And in this day of molecular testing we need to be routinely fingerprinting these pathogenic agents. For those doing this, a way must be found to have this information promptly available on the web, because a small sequence change may be meaningless in one laboratory but explain all to investigators in another country...
More extracts
• "...... Making definite claims about the source of infection in an outbreak without scientific backup indicates incompetence, and/or bureaucratic shuffling, and how then can we trust anything else that country reports? Similarly, the OIE and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) need to be less gentlemanly and more aggressive in obtaining information
• ... there is a deep need for improved epidemiological training of veterinary officers. If they are incompetent, the system collapses. Various advanced countries now spend more time on molecular analyses and mathematical model building. But the truth is in the farmyard and that can only be determined by skilled investigators. Genomics and models assist them but cannot replace them. ...
• ...Animal-side field tests and remote sample analyses are becoming available and validated. They can only become more common with time, and even more reliable and cheaper. They are particularly important in the initial phase of an outbreak or epidemic, especially if movement controls are to be quickly invoked and tracing started.....
• ...Stakeholders, major and minor, must be included in disease control. Efforts must be made to get their input and to keep them informed before events occur. Uninformed stakeholders are most unlikely to support government actions, especially when their doubts, either through ignorance or from disagreement, are ignored and disregarded. Transparent stakeholder involvement and participation - tiresome though it may be to the traditionalists - pays off, especially when navigating the questions of slaughter, vaccination, and post-vaccination policy and strategies.
• ..... the vital conclusion is that we live on one globe. There is only one health that we should strive for, that of wildlife and domestic animals, humans, and the environment. By striving to protect the planet and maintain animal health we are also protecting human health, and vice versa. To succeed we have to share knowledge and resources, and improve international interactions to build the required trust for a promising future.
A full list of the papers in the OIE publication (available to order) may be found here at www.oie.int/eng/publicat/rt/A_RT25_1.htm

21 July 2006 - "A truly rational government would acknowledge that preventive vaccination is the most effective method of combating AI (avian flu) in the modern world..

and would now be preparing to vaccinate all outdoor and organic flocks."..
Reuters reports
".... "Bio-security measures are an essential element of any strategy but the slaughter element is as outdated as British imperialism," the Elm Farm Research Centre said in a report. "A truly rational government would acknowledge that preventive vaccination is the most effective method of combating AI (avian flu) in the modern world and would now be preparing to vaccinate all outdoor and organic flocks," the report added."....... Britain currently plans to house all birds for a limited period in areas where the bird flu virus has been found and slaughter affected flocks. If the disease became endemic in an area, flocks could be kept indoors indefinitely.
"This is an apparent willingness amongst politicians and officials to ignore animal welfare by permanently housing outdoor birds thereby destroying the free-range and organic markets in an attempt to maintain an outmoded disease free status for the nation," the report said...."
However, to the surprise and dismay of many, the Soil Association has "... distanced itself from the report, issuing a statement supporting "strategic" but "not preventative" use of vaccination. " - perhaps forgetting, like the politicians and officials, that keeping free range birds under nets for protracted periods is impossible for many owners and causes deep distress for birds that are so kept. As Joanna Blythe in the Guardian wrote in June "Unless the vaccination lobby prevails.... then consumers may lose the option of choosing more ethical and humane outdoor-reared poultry products" See also below.

21 July 2006 - The Annual Review of Controls on Imports of Animal Products: April 2005 - March 2006

(1.84 MB - pdf (28 pages)
"..... The number of seizures of illegal imports of POAO totalled 32,795, a 28% increase on 2004/05. 86% of seizures are made from higher designated risk countries of origin. HMRC accounts for 99% of all UK seizures. .......Since assuming responsibility for anti-smuggling controls on POAO at the frontier in 2003, HMRC have prosecuted nine people for illegal imports offences under the POAO Regulations. Fines issued by magistrates have varied with the maximum to date being £400.
Of the two successful prosecutions in 2005/06........"
The Annual Review is to be laid before Parliament today.

July 19 - Britain should opt to vaccinate poultry rather than slaughter flocks in order to tackle the threat of the lethal H5N1 strain of bird flu

(Reuters) - http://mobile.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L19603856.htm See Elm Farm Research Centre's full report 'Vaccination Nation' [this file is 2 mb]

July 19 2006 ~ 1080 poison. "There is a very real danger the residue from 1080 could be in exports"

1080 is a poison that is broadcast by air over much of New Zealand, killing "pests" - and many other creatures against whom it is not targeted - including pets.
The website www.stop1080poison.com aims to spread the word to other countries, as overseas opinion will be the most effective way to convince the NZ government to stop this sort of killing in the name of "animal health" There is no antidote. Animals may take from 20 minutes to several hours to die. As the campaigners say
"The 1080 National Network consists of a growing number of New Zealand citizens concerned about the continued bombardment of aerial 1080 poison over vast tracks of our "clean, green" country with complete disregard to the harmful effects of this lethal poison on both our environment and human health. Our members' biggest concerns are the unknown long-term effects of 1080 on our environment, the indiscriminate killing of non-target species, birds, deer, dogs, water supplies, and its effect on future NZ exports, tourism and the destruction of our clean, green image..."
See also an email from the owner of a sanctuary in New Zealand whose rare goats have, she strongly suspects, been affected by such indiscriminate air drops.

July 18 2006 ~ DEFRA has made moves to order large stocks of an avian influenza vaccine

Friday's Farmers' Guardian reported that this is " a cautious step towards using vaccination in the event of an outbreak."
".....Defra said last Tuesday it had invited tenders to supply 10 million doses of avian influenza vaccine for potential use in poultry and other captive birds. Ben Bradshaw said the vaccine would "only be used if a risk assessment and scientific evidence indicated it would help to prevent disease spread........The Soil Association welcomed Defra's decision and claimed it was a significant change of emphasis from the Government in dealing with disease outbreaks. Poultry adviser, Anna Bassett, said: "This latest positive announcement will be a great relief to our poultry farmers; hopefully confirming the Government is taking a more sophisticated and strategic approach to bird 'flu than it did with foot-and-mouth." ....".
We now await news of the meeting held this week at the House of Commons (see below) (Defra ordered 2.3 million doses of vaccine for zoo birds earlier this year from Intervet UK.)

July 16 2006 ~ "If, as Defra says, farmers will have to pick up the bill for disease control, they should have a say over what is allowed in to this country.."

NFU South West spokesman Ian Johnson , commenting on the call for the banning of Brazilian beef - about 270,000 tonnes of which comes into Europe each year. The demand for a ban comes from the MEP Neil Parish. The Western Morning News says that his call follows "a report by the European Union's Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) which revealed a catalogue of concerns over the quality, safety and traceability of Brazilian beef. The FVO voiced similar concerns about Brazilian pork, honey and eggs. .."

July 14 2006 ~ " One must accept that only a fraction of illegally imported meats are intercepted..."

The ProMed moderator MHJ draws attention today in the most tactful terms to the " inter-agency non-collaboration blocking situation" in countries including the UK .
"It seems to be a fact of life that the customs agencies work independently of the health and veterinary services. Thus the latter are unintentionally kept in the dark over which pathogens are coming in illegally from wherever. One must accept that only a fraction of illegally imported meats are intercepted. In spite of the sampling problems it would be valuable to know what is coming in over the transom. The same inter-agency non-collaboration blocking situation occurs in the UK and I am sure in many other countries."
Another moderator points out the danger of smuggled meat: ".......in the 2005 Taiwan incident H5N1 virus was actually identified in smuggled meat.......The extent in which the illegal movement of contaminated poultry products has contributed to the spread of global H5N1 in poultry populations is unknown but should not be discounted........ The really unfortunate thing, over and above the greed and illegality involved, is that smuggling just adds another wrinkle that really shouldn't be there to the already complicated epidemiology surrounding the global spread of the H5N1 virus"
Read ProMed comments in full on the relevant page of the website.

July 14 2006 ~ The UK Government is not going to request special EU support if H5N1 destroys consumer confidence. The poultry industry is on its own.

Mr Salmond asked what special EU support is offered to poultry farmers and what assessment the Secretary of State had made of the impact of such support on the poultry industry in the UK . Ian Pearson replied
".... "It is a long established Government policy that accommodating market fluctuations is something for the industry to manage. It is principally for this reason that we do not propose to exercise the EC provision to provide these exceptional market support measures."
Hansard

July 13 2006 ~ Bioflavonoid based products - "....active ingredient has been tested independently by DEFRA and found to be effective against viruses such as those causing Avian Influenza and Newcastle disease..."

An article in www.foodsafety.eu.com suggests that bioflavonoid based products - and in particular the "EnviroCyte", and "Nvirox" - are highly effective in killing pathogens. The active ingredient in Nvirox, Citrox MDC, has been tested against H5N1 virus at the Retroscreen Laboratories and shown to be 99.9998 percent effective.
".... Laboratory tests carried out by Prof John Oxford at Retroscreen Laboratories, University of London, have shown the product ("EnviroCyte") to be effective against viruses...... the active ingredient has been tested independently by DEFRA and found to be effective against viruses such as those causing Avian Influenza and Newcastle disease...."
"...Nvirox can be used as a preventative measure destroying the virus before it is even discovered. The spread of disease can then be contained and the threat deactivated. ."
The whole article can be read on the www.foodsafety.eu.com website.

July 12.13 2006 ~ "Millions of gallons of leachate still seep into our water supplies from the hundreds of FMD burial sites around Cumbria & Dumfries & Galloway"

This is, according to the government, "being monitored & is perfectly safe." However, an email from Cumbria today suggests a link between this and the disappearance of the sea trout population of the Solway Firth and its many rivers.
".....The "Half-Netters" - professional Solway fishermen - have noticed their nets now remain a horrible brown colour and the number of Sea Trout being caught has fallen to a trickle...."
See email.
More on Great Orton
July 13 It has been pointed out to us that these problems are not confined to Cumbria. The Virodor Landfill site in Devon has been shown to contain - among other harmful compounds - Benzene, Methyl mercaptan and Hydrogen sulphide. These are included in the AERC 'Top Ten compounds in LFG as being most significant in terms of their health implications. (AERC p8-9). (email )

July 11 2006 ~"At all costs, in combating H5N1, we must avoid the vaccine-free zone that the catastrophic 2001 foot and mouth outbreak became.." Lawrence Woodward

Avian Flu and the vaccination issue - A House of Commons Reception on 19th July
Elm Farm and its Research Centre - familiar to many warmwell readers - will be presenting a report at the reception at the House of Commons next Wednesday (19th July 2006 4 p.m. to 6 p.m) sponsored by the MP for Newbury, Richard Benyon. Their report - Vaccination Nation? - is a study of the arguments surrounding the use of preventive vaccination for the control of H5N1 avian flu in poultry
To attend - or merely to find out more information - you are invited to contact Elm Farm. Email Pam.t@efrc.com with name and your full postal address in order to request a personalised invitation. (These are required for HoC security.) The page of Background information should, we feel, be read in full. Extract:
"At all costs, in combating H5N1, we must avoid the vaccine-free zone that the catastrophic 2001 foot and mouth outbreak became," says Elm Farm Research Centre's Director Lawrence Woodward. "We must show that we have all learned the lesson that planned, timely, preventive vaccination is the scientifically proven, politically acceptable route for controlling such serious diseases."
( Elm Farm Research Centre is the UK's leading organic farming research and advisory body based near Newbury in Berkshire. It is grateful for the help it has received from like-minded farming and poultry organisations in the preparation of the report).

July 10 2006 ~ H5N1 vaccination plan "None of the stakeholders dissented"

We reproduce, with permission, an article (pdf) in the Ranger which is the official magazine of the British Free Range Egg Producers Association. The title: "Bird flu threat - housing flocks not always an option. DEFRA urged to put in place vaccine plan."
Extract:
"Small scale poultry keepers have joined forces to lobby Defra for the establishment of a preventive vaccination policy for avian influenza.
The 14-strong group of organisations - including the British Waterfowl Association, the Poultry Club of GB and the Henkeepers Association - is urging the government to put in place a plan now in case vaccination is deemed necessary in the future.
"What bird keepers want is a policy. We are not asking for vaccination now," says Dr Chris Ashton of the British Waterfowl Association. "But our organisations are poorly represented at meetings with Defra and not in a significant proportion when faced with the demands of the commercial poultry industry."......
Defra confirmed at the meeting that it currently holds no vaccine bank. "
The html file of the whole article may be read here.

July 10 2006 ~ PowderMed's DNA vaccine against avian flu tested in animals, "stops the infection entirely"

In the Guardian report by its science correspondent, Ian Sample, about the H5N1 vaccine, made by PowderMed, that is ready for human testing, we read that the DNA vaccine has been entirely successful in animals.
"Our tests have shown that it stops the infection entirely, to the point that we can't even measure the virus in the animals afterwards," said John Beadle, chief medical officer of the Oxford-based company PowderMed......The company has listed details of the trial on the government's website, Clinicaltrials.gov where it states it is seeking 75 volunteers for the trial at Guy's drug research unit in London..."
(PowderMed's development facility is located in the former PowderJect development laboratories in Oxford. It will be remembered that PowderJect has been in the news in the past. Mr Blair ran into a cronyism row over the initial £32 million contract awarded without normal tendering to Powderject, formerly run by the Labour donor Paul Drayson. See report about smallpox vaccine.)

July 9 - 10 2006 ~ Article on bTB at Food Solutions Europe

Peter King, the Executive Committee Chair at the European Livestock Association is quoted by Food Solutions
"....The present testing system in the UK is widely acknowledged to be inaccurate - it's like taking a shotgun to the problem and hoping they hit something. I will mention one farmer that had six pure pedigree Herefords killed because they reacted to the UK TB test. When they hung them up and studied them, none of them showed any clinical evidence whatsoever of having TB. That farmer has lost those animals forever from a herd that has been established for 50-60 years, the slaughtered cattle included rare bloodlines. DEFRA now have no credibility with him. And that is a significant factor, because if they want support and cooperation from producers to beat the problem, they need a credible way of going about it. Right now, it is a national joke as well as a national disgrace."
On the subect of vaccination, the article quotes DEFRA:spokesman Matt Conway
"The department has invested more than £10 million in vaccine research over the last seven years. A field trial has been approved for a TB vaccine for badgers and the initial survey work required to underpin the trial is almost complete. Work on improved diagnostics and oral delivery of vaccine in badgers is continuing. In relation to cattle vaccine our laboratories began work in January on new vaccine candidates and delivery protocols in a natural transmission study." Read article
It presently costs Britain an estimated £90 million a year to tackle bTB and the NFU forecasts that this will more than double in the next five years.

(The article unfortunately says that the FMD crisis in the UK "left thousands of premises infected". This sort of reporting is all too common. While it is true that 10,509 premises lost animals to the killing, we know for certain that on only 1324 of the 2,056 farms actually designated as Infected Premises, foot and mouth disease had been positively identified. (401 were negative and 301 were untested.)
Killing took place on 9185 other premises, certainly - but to assert that they were necessarily "infected" is, alas, nonsense. Anyone seriously interested may consult Understanding the 2001 UK foot and mouth epidemic)

July 8 2006 ~ Spanish H5N1 case. Was the dead bird found six weeks ago?

Bird Life International says "we hope that ornithologists will be allowed to examine the corpse " "......Dr Richard Thomas of BirdLife International. "Too often, invaluable information as to the source of the virus in wild birds has been wasted because appropriate experts have not been called in."
On the question of the possibility that the dead bird was found as loing ago as six weeks, the ProMed moderator says,
"For one such report, attributed to Reuters ...... It is quite strange that this key detail has been omitted from most media versions of the report, as it totally alters the epidemiological interpretation of the event, as stated above. - Mod.JW]
See also warmwell's H5N1 page

July 7 2006 ~ " It would be interesting to obtain expert analysis of the possible contribution to this improvement of the mass vaccination policy implemented "

Commenting of the latest FAO avian influenza update by Joseph Domenech (See H5N1 page) the ProMed moderator (AS) says,
".....2 subjects seem to deserve special attention: First, the worldwide decreased prevalence of the disease since April 2006. It remains to be seen if this is a repeated seasonal decrease, as observed also in 2004 and 2005, or an indication of the pandemic having peaked. .."
A 2nd point of interest is the improvement in the Vietnamese situation, both on the public- as well as animal-health fronts....... It would be interesting to obtain expert analysis of the possible contribution to this improvement of the mass vaccination policy implemented "
We read in the FAO report that in Vietnam ".... A total of 117.9 million doses of vaccines have been used. Post-vaccination surveillance has been implemented. Except for the finding during the border control, there has been no new case reported since the last case which was detected in Cao Bang on 17 Dec 2005." (See H5N1 page)

July 6 2006 ~ Intervet International completed the acquisition of the FMD vaccine factory in Cologne on July 4th

The Intervet press release says,
" The site in Cologne will become Intervet's international competence center for FMD vaccine research, development and production. The factory -in combination with Intervet's expertise in vaccine production- will significantly contribute to the needs of the market for safe and efficacious FMD vaccines. In addition, this factory will provide an antigen bank, which -under government contracts- can guarantee emergency supply of FMD vaccines..."
Good news if there were a new outbreak since no one could pretend again there there would 'not be enough vaccine'. ( Keith Sumption, in 2001 a senior lecturer in international health at Edinburgh University, but now Secretary, EUFMD at the FAO, told the European Parliament that there had been five million doses in the EU vaccine bank. He told the meeting that if blanket vaccination had been used, "following typical epidemiology patterns after vaccination, the last case would have taken place around one month after vaccination began". Telegraph )

July 5 2006 ~ "Sooner or later we will need it back again."

The concluding paragraph of Magnus Linklater's article in the Times on the state of British farming compared to the situation in France (" a net exporter of food") and the "myth" that small-time agriculture is holding France back. Policies there are changing in favour of the small producer. France is indeed beginning " to assess the cost of centralised production, not just in economic terms but also as a factor that contributes to global warming."
".....We cannot forever continue to jet in fruit and vegetables from improbable places in the name of choice and cheapness. If we are serious about the environment, we cannot turn a blind eye to the ranching conditions or the deforestation in countries like Brazil or Argentina, which supply our beef. Above all, we cannot simply allow our farming heritage to melt away because it is out of fashion. Sooner or later we will need it back again. .."

July 3 2006 ~ " The origins of the 2001 epidemic, which cost £8 billion, remain a mystery"

A Telegraph article today says that when David Miliband and David Cameron visit the Royal Show they will come under pressure. Cheaper imports that do not meet European animal health standards and, in Brazil, are produced by human workers in conditions that could be described as slave labour.
"....Brazilian beef imports are cheaper than British beef but an official European Union mission to Brazil last year found that there was no system in place to trace where meat products had originated. A further EU inspection will take place this month. The origins of the 2001 epidemic, which cost £8 billion, remain a mystery..... The National Farmers' Union has written to Markos Kyprianou, the European health and consumer protection commissioner, demanding a total ban. Thomas Binns, the NFU livestock board chairman, said: "We're still seeking assurances about the measures implemented to prevent foot and mouth disease entering Europe and that fresh beef from Brazil is not placing the EU at an unnecessary risk."

July 3 2006 ~ New Zealand offers the power of the internet to those trying to control TB infected possums

In New Zealand the scourge of bTB is spread not by badgers but by infected possums.
Massey University News today:
"Possums are major carriers of bovine tuberculosis and infect domestic cattle and deer herds. The Animal Health Board is a local government and farming body responsible for implementing the national pest management strategy for Bovine Tb. It has a goal to wipe-out Tb by 2013....
".....the system will ensure people involved in possum control have ready access to expert knowledge. ......Many control contractors are Internet savvy, and use technology such as laptops and global positioning systems routinely..... With this system they can now go and check any concerns they may have on their planned approach from a large database of information. They can use it like a book." ...." (Massey University News)
The Possum Control Decision Support System is free and can be accessed at: http://possumdss.landcareresearch.co.nz/ Written in clear plain English, checklists cover the biological and technical constraints managers or contractors need to consider when planning a control operation. It recommends tools and techniques for a range of conditions. The database answers specific queries, and features an "encyclopaedia" of information sheets linked through key words.

July 2 2006 ~ Outbreaks of the H5N1 avian virus have now been confirmed in 53 countries

The Bangkok Post reports that
"...... The USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service's Avian Influenza Coordinated Agriculture Project will conduct surveillance on migratory birds in Alaska, California, Washington state and Utah, and test about 7,000 birds this year at a total cost of $19 million, the USDA report states.
The department said it plans to spend $28 million on domestic poultry surveillance this year and another $21 million to coordinate international avian flu projects. This international effort includes the establishment of USDA offices in China, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand and Indonesia that will focus solely on avian flu."
See also warmwell bird flu page with news of the new outbreak in China

June 30 2006 ~ Europe will soon unveil a task force for fighting bird flu

Albert Osterhaus told AFP that details of the initiative were still being worked out, but the task force would probably gather scientists, doctors and animal health experts who would assess the latest information about bird flu in order to advise policymakers. It would operate under aegis of the new European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) based in Stockholm, he said. The two-day conference on bird flu, which opened at Pasteur Institute in Paris on Thursday, focuses on the risk of a human pandemic. See AFP report
The ECDC's website has a link to the report of June 5th in which a panel of independent scientific experts answer a series of eight scientific questions concerning H5N1 avian influenza and pandemic influenza. (pdf opens in new window)

June 29 2006 ~ " vital that we work in partnership with countries outside of the EU so that our future animal health strategy .... cannot be cited as a defensive tool designed primarily to protect our borders."

From the speech given in Brussels yesterday by Markos Kyprianou, at the opening of the International Federation for Animal Health Conference, which he described as an "important event on research and innovation in the animal health sector."
( We do rather wonder who was representing UK stakeholders. We can find no-one who knew anything at all about the conference before it took place.)
Mr Kyprianou spoke warmly of "innovative spirit" of a "high degree of efficient stakeholder collaboration" and said that the conference brought together "key partners in the animal health arena (agricultural sector, governments, veterinarians and international institutions)".
"......Many of you have made very interesting and challenging proposals regarding issues such as the simplification of legislation; the prevention of animal diseases; the development of biosecurity concepts; and the sharing of costs and responsibilities.
Many have also identified "innovation gaps" highlighting weaknesses in areas such as availability of funding; links between research and industry; the delivery of patents; medicines to treat all species and conditions (even where some of these represent only a small market sector).
..... It is also vital that we work in partnership with countries outside of the EU so that our future animal health strategy sits comfortably in a worldwide context, and cannot be cited as a defensive tool designed primarily to protect our borders.... ."
The OIE's webpage about the International Federation for Animal Health was last updated on 29/11/2005.

June 29 2006 ~ "The SmartCycler System is a leading real-time PCR testing platform for hospitals, university research labs and government agencies".

It is interesting that Cepheid has announced the European release of the Smart CMV(TM) (cytomegalovirus) Assay for clinical diagnostic use on the SmartCycler System. Now authorised for use on human patients and used worldwide to detect viruses, it seems quite extraordinary that in Contingency Plans for animal health control, there still appears no mention of such rapid diagnostic technology. (See also below and warmwell's page on rapid diagnostics.)
"....By automating the amplification and detection process, the SmartCycler(R) System can deliver highly accurate and consistent test results from prepared biological samples in approximately 30-40 minutes. With up to 96 independently programmable reaction sites, the SmartCycler(R) System can simultaneously run different tests with different protocols and at different times. This eliminates complex advanced scheduling on larger, more costly systems as well as the need to transport samples to central facilities for analysis...."

June 29 2006 ~ Running the market weekly will restore Stroud to its original tradition of being a true market town

Stroud's Saturday farmers' market will be held every week instead of every fortnight from the beginning of August. It attracts around 6,000 people each time it is held. Philip Booth, the spokesperson for Stroud District Green party said that a survey last year showed that is what people wanted. ".... over 130 organisations take part and these extra days will hopefully increase turnover from £900,000 to £2 million a year - all local businesses and it has a huge knock on effect in terms of trade to other businesses." According to www.glosgreenparty.org.uk the market organiser said,
"Running the market weekly will restore Stroud to its original tradition of being a true market town, and make it much easier for customers. We are hoping the new weekly market will open up space for some of the many farmers and growers who are on a waiting list to attend the market, which now has 60 stalls every week."
Anything that weakens the grip of the soulless supermarkets is of vital importance for the country . More such news would be gratefully received

June 28 2006 ~ Hill Farming - The Duchy of Cornwall's new initiative will attempt to raise public awareness of the link between farming and landscape preservation

".....The Prince of Wales is to back a major new initiative to promote hill farming in the Westcountry - amid growing fears that controversial Government farm reforms could see some of the region's finest landscapes turned to scrub...." Western Morning News
The article emphasises that many of the uplands' most valued landscapes are the result of sustainable grazing by livestock. However, since the profitability of hill livestock production is now so low, there is a real concern that there will soon be too few cattle and sheep to maintain the integrity of the landscape. In its annual report this week the Duchy of Cornwall warns that "the Single Farm Payment Scheme in 2005 has 'decoupled' financial support from production for UK farmers".

June 26 2006 ~ East Suffolk's experience of a thriving local food network should inspire action across the country

CHOICE IF WE WANT IT - SUPERSTORES IF WE DON'T (apologies. Link, now mended, opens on new page) is the name of a new book published by CPRE and Plunkett Foundation is based on surveys by Caroline Cranbrook over eight years monitoring a broad area of towns and villages in East Suffolk. It reveals that local foods are flourishing and growing since a planned superstore was turned down.
The latest survey found the number of local and regional food suppliers in the area had risen from 300 to 370 with a wider range of local products being sold. The overall number of shops had stayed constant at 81 - bucking the national trend of decline - and the local market towns had retained their butchers, bakers, fish shops and fresh vegetable outlets. Numbers of farm shops and farmers' markets had grown. It has happened in Suffolk: it can happen elsewhere. Six leading chefs, including Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, have endorsed The Real Choice: How local foods can survive the supermarket onslaught: More

June 24 2006 ~ Latest vCJD scare-fest - " this iceberg is in a very shallow pond"

(See also Magnus Linklater's article in the Scotsman June 25 2006)
Close on the heels of the recent stories about "atypical" scrapie and the dramatic headlines of the 'Silent killer vCJD is more widespread than thought' variety back in March, we now have a fresh crop of vCJD scare stories featuring slow incubation and kuru ( Six years ago, a Telegraph article which was itself entitled: "After years of inquiry no-one knows how many lives nvCJD will claim" made many of the same points.)
The New York Times, however, does at least sound a note of scepticism over the latest report in the Lancet.
As yesterday's NYT said:
"Guesses as to how many people will eventually die of mad cow disease have varied wildly. In 2001, two groups of eminent British scientists argued over whether it would kill 136,000 Britons or only a few thousand. Recently some scientists have predicted that it will die out in a decade, while others have argued that it is still incubating in many people and will be transmitted by blood transfusions.
No one expects no more deaths, Dr. Major said, but to any suggestion that the 160 known now are merely the tip of an iceberg, he said, "I think this iceberg is in a very shallow pond."
The many unanswered questions about the nature of TSEs are less newsworthy - and much harder to write about - than doom scenarios written without scientific rigour. Mark Purdey, meanwhile - who, in pursuit of the real causes behind free radical based illnesses, shows that exposures to sonic shock waves will "activate the metal micro-crystallised piezoelectic prion contaminants in mammalian brain" (see his website) He has challenged the BSE orthodoxy for years with extraordinary results. He explains, for example, the Queniborough cluster. He remains not only unfunded and unsung but sneered at. A hero nonetheless. (new window)

June 23 2006 ~ Why did we have to find out about the new trials from the BBC? asked Daniel Kawczynski , MP

The MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham, Daniel Kawczynski, asked
" The Conservatives, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Wells (Mr. Heathcoat-Amory) said, have been calling for a very long time for action on bovine tuberculosis. Yesterday, on the news, we were informed that major trials were taking place on the immunisation of badgers. Why did we have to find out about the new trials from the BBC? Why did the Minister not inform the House first?"
Hansard.
Mr Bradshaw's replies to the several questions asked may appear to some readers to have been less than helpful.

June 23 2006 ~ Million pound Badger vaccine trial in Gloucestershire "could lead to more than 100 000 badgers being vaccinated nationwide"

ProMed gives detailsof this work by the Central Science Laboratory. Its trials involve catching about 250 badgers in baited traps. The moderator's comments are, as usual, well worth reading in full. Extract
"...The Randomised Badger Culling Trials demonstrated that if you do not achieve culling targets above 60 percent (and sometimes these were no more than 20 percent), you will only make matters worse -- Bovine TB was practically eradicated in the UK by 1986 by proactive badger culling along with tuberculin testing of cattle when only 84 herd breakdowns were recorded in that year. ...... as the UK Government acknowledges in their report of 2004, if the present policy of inaction continues there is no way but up!
....... Culling, when done efficiently, i.e. when delineated areas are free of badgers for at least 12 months, has an immediate disease control benefit. In the UK there is a stark dichotomy between the demands for culling by the farming community, including wildlife veterinarians, and the extreme reluctance on the part of the government. We have yet to see what the impact of badger vaccination will be. - Mod.MHJ"
However good this news may seem, we are left once again wondering why - if the trials are successful and the vaccine found to be safe and effective - it has to "take at least 5 years before the vaccine could be administered to the general badger population outside the lab through microcapsules mixed with peanuts." Why so long when the situation is so desperate? Some may remember the reasons given by Defra against allowing vaccination against H5N1 in the UK involved the argument about "market authorisation"- even though European legislation permits "Market Authorisation" to be bypassed in exceptional, objective and verifiable circumstances.

June 21 2006 ~ Intervet has developed a prototype for a new generation dual vaccine against both avian influenza and Newcastle Disease which can be mass applied by spraying

instead of injecting. It can also be used on large numbers of birds as an efficient marker vaccine to help differentiate between infected and vaccinated birds. The new vaccine will be given field trials "next year" (press release here).
One must assume that DEFRA, in its desire to reflect the current status of scientific understanding in its planning to protect against avian influenza, is aware of such developments.
All the "protection" we ever seem to hear about, however, is killing.
In its six page 34th Report of Session 2005-06, the "Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee" refers to Statutory Instrument SI 2006/1200 which allows ventilation shutdown and quotes from its "Explanatory Note" that "VSD" (sic)
" will kill birds over a period of 30-60 minutes"
It will take some birds an hour to die?
"VSD" as it is eerily called, was hastily prepared and passed - because
"the Department saw the need to breach the 21-day rule because of an outbreak of avian influenza in the most densely poultry-populated part of England, which meant that VSD had to be available without delay "to enable a rapid cull if necessary"....."
It strikes us as extraordinary that such a killing method can be made permissible within a day while effective state-of-the-art means to avoid mass culling can languish literally for years. As we have pointed out over and over again, both vaccination and on-site rapid diagnostic kits were available but ignored by the UK in the FMD crisis of 2001 - yet were shown to be wholly effective in Uruguay's own foot and mouth outbreak. More than five years seems a long time to wait for the emergence of a more science-based, independently reviewed and ethical set of animal health policies in Britain.

June 19 2006 ~ bTB. Mr Bradshaw's further investigation "currently under way"

When Ben Bradshaw, with no apparent understanding of the undertow of his words, proclaimed last week, in relation to the killing of badgers:
"My Department undertook a desk study of possible culling methods and identified shooting, snaring and gassing as the methods most worthy of further investigation. This research is currently under way. .."
one wonders, and not for the first time, about the methods and ethics of the sort of research needed to decide on ways of mass killing. We wonder too, as we did in April, why animal health policy always seems to be driven by politics, bureaucracy and budgets instead of by science, technology and veterinary skill. No one really wants an untargetted mass cull of badgers and the Government, surely, has within its grasp a Middle Way. The tools to avoid such a politically unpopular, ethically questionable and scientifically unnecessary move are documented. The research below using UK built rapid RT-PCR diagnosis in badger setts and latrines shows which badgers are infected;
"we would prefer that culling is targeted at diseased and infectious animals"
said the researchers.
Have Mr Bradshaw and "his Department" really not seen the importance of the work from Warwick University?

June 19 2006 ~ "ventilation shutdown"

No one has defended the mass suffocation of hens, euphemistically called "ventilation shutdown" in response to the request below. This authorisation to carry out mass suffocation was very quietly introduced over the May Bank Holiday. Closing the air vents in poultry sheds and shutting off the ventilation system would undoubtedly lead to a situation one can hardly bear even to contemplate. If the birds are infected the virus would, in the ensuing panic, be spread by faeces and blood that would then put the human cleaners at risk. If the birds were not infected with high pathogenicity virus (as they were not in Norfolk) then such killing is not only barbaric but unnecessary.
An early day motion ( 2314 David Taylor) was laid in parliament in early May by Conservative MPs - including party leader David Cameron and agriculture spokesman Jim Paice - demanding that the new provision for "ventilation shutdown" in poultry houses be annulled. As James Paice said, " It flies in the face of anything to do with animal welfare and is totally unacceptable."
We should be most grateful for any information about the progress of this EDM.

June 19 2006 ~ The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) has called on the government to introduce a labelling system covering welfare measures taken for animal products.

Farmers' Weekly says, ".....Prof Reiss said he was "encouraged" that on a European and International level, labelling was moving up the political agenda and becoming more feasible. Christopher Wathes, chairman of FAWC, said: "Consumers are increasingly concerned about the welfare characteristics of the products that they purchase."

June 18 2006 ~ China "..the acceleration of national veterinary management reform"

Concerned about its hitherto weak veterinary management system, China has established a complete state-level animal disease control system. According to China's Peoples Daily, the centre, which opened on Friday, is capable of diagnosing 64 kinds of animal diseases, including foot-and-mouth.
".....About 645,000 epidemic observers from villages across China have registered with the CADC to provide the center with timely reports from any corner of the country...
The spread of infectious diseases among animals, especially bird flu across the world, has exerted great pressure on China's weak veterinary management system. China's State Council issued a circular in May last year, urging the acceleration of national veterinary management reform. Officials with the Ministry of Agriculture told Xinhua that currently the central-level reform of the veterinary system is to end soon, and the next target will be local governments. By the end of last month, 19 provinces had submitted their reform plans on local veterinary systems to the central government..."
Meanwhile, the Washington Post reports that the authorities in Hong Kong are stepping up customs checks to stamp out poultry smuggling. A truck driver from Mainland China (not a migratory bird) has been found to have been infected by H5N1

June 17 2006 ~ A consortium of veterinary virologists will share samples of the H5N1 with researchers worldwide

In early March we reported Dr Ilaria Capua's plea that researchers, in the interest of shared knowledge, no longer restrict access to data, and warmwell linked to ProMed's support for her proposal for global cooperation.
It is encouraging that Dr Ian Brown, from the VLA at Weybridge, has signed Dr Capua's letter to Science (June 16) which concludes; "We are convinced that this initiative will contribute substantially to the efforts that are being carried out worldwide, and we invite other medical and veterinary virologists to join us. " Bird Flu latest

June 16 2006 ~ "If this risk were real, we would have had reports (plural) from Europe of infected domestic cats..."

In its thread "AVIAN INFLUENZA, POULTRY VS MIGRATORY BIRDS (28)" a ProMed moderator comments on a story from San Francisco Chronicle by Bernadette Tansey which - rather in the manner of the FSA and Valerie Elliott below - draws dramatic attention to a hypothetical risk for which there is little or no evidence. In this case, the journalist has followed the somewhat wild speculation of someone from the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine that cats who happened to come across H5N1 infected birds, if the virus happenend to reach America, might, if they were to eat such birds, bring it into the house.
"So far, most experts think the risk is very low that pets could pass the disease to humans. But they can't say for sure."
The placing of the last sentence on its own of course gives it an added significance. So it is reassuring to see from such a respected moderator as MHJ the drily worded comment: " It is clear that the UC Davis faculty found a ready listener in Ms Tansey and it is now summertime...."

June 15 2006 ~ "Killing capacity has been progressively increased over the last two years" says Mr Bradshaw. Methods of mass extermination include the maceration of day old chicks and the euphemistically termed "ventilation shutdown"

Bill Wiggin asked "what the agreed levels of poultry culling capability are; when these levels were agreed; what methods of poultry culling have been agreed; and what the poultry culling capacity was in each month since January 2001.(Hansard) Mr Bradshaw's reply
"There are no formally agreed levels of poultry culling capability. However, there are a range of culling methods available to the state veterinary service.
These include maceration (for day old chicks only), lethal injection, neck dislocation, percussion killers, gassing in containers, whole house gassing and, as a last resort when no other method is practicable, ventilation shutdown.
Killing capacity has been progressively increased over the last two years through the establishment of contingency contracts with catchers and equipment suppliers. Capacity has been further increased since January 2006 through the development of a system based on the gassing of poultry in containers using a mixture of argon and carbon dioxide; the Department has commissioned 50 of these units, each capable of killing 2,000 chickens per hour. In addition, we have purchased a number of percussion killers for use on larger birds and plan to further increase our capability to gas poultry in their sheds.
However, it is not possible to state the total killing capacity per month because this figure depends on a variety of factors. These include the age and species of poultry, the housing system, the size, location, quantity and geographic spread of the affected holdings, and the availability of catchers, gas and resources.".(Hansard)
One can hardly believe what one is reading. We have both vaccination that works and the ability rapidly to detect where the virus is and where it is not - but modern methods are ignored and instead we are looking at preparations for mass extermination that would include methods not even recognised for disease control by the OIE guidelines..
We want to hear from anyone who truly believes these "contingency contracts" are ethical and we would, without comment, publish their view.

June 15 2006 ~ "How many RPA employees does it take to change a lightbulb?"..

.. was not quite the question asked by Andrew George yesterday - but the answer sounds like a joke anyway. RPA latest

June 15 2006 ~ "Farmers yesterday accused the Food Standards Agency of threatening the future of sheep farming

by overplaying the risk to humans posed by a previously unidentified form of scrapie..." Telegraph ".... Both forms of the disease can be experimentally transmitted to mice and other sheep but there is no evidence that either disease has ever been caught by humans."

June 14 2006 ~ "....a message of this kind will create serious difficulties for sheep farmers at a time when they least need further problems from government agencies"

It is with dismay that we see Valerie Elliot's article in today's Times on so-called "atypical" scrapie in which she is virtually telling people that avoiding
"mutton, goat and some sausages is the only way to reduce the risks from a new animal brain disease"
as if the existence of such a "new animal disease" had been proven. "The advice from the Food Standards Agency," she asserts, "raises the most serious concern about the safety of the meat since the discovery of "mad cow" disease in cattle."
What, again?
As in the past, the Food Standards Agency has apparently thought fit to tell consumers that it "could not rule out" a risk to human health from "the brain disease atypical scrapie, which is similar to BSE."
What sort of journalism is this? What does the FSA imagine will be the effect of their warning? As we report elsewhere, the uncertainties about "atypical scrapie" are legion, as are the uncertainties about the very nature of spongiform encephalopathies and the route of infection of vCJD - the bogey behind all the millions in research grants, mounds of regulation and wasted animal lives.
During the past five years that this website has been running we have become aware of what seems an ongoing attempt to use the threat of vCJD to make a deep impression on consumers - eagerly taken up by the press. Questions about the literally thousands of millions spent "guarding" against vCJD may perhaps be quelled by such articles - but exploiting people's ignorance and fear without giving the whole picture is a disgraceful state of affairs. vCJD is a very nasty and heartbreaking disease but it is also one in which the number of confirmed deaths in the UK - ever - is 111.
The fells are being quietly but inexorably depopulated of sheep, rare breeds are threatened and diminished, the National Scrapie Plan is turning out to be creating as many problems as its extermination clauses set out to "cure" - perhaps it would be a great deal simpler for those responsible if the population no longer want sheep either. Those such as the Prince of Wales who are trying to bring about a renaissance in mutton eating are once again stymied by preudo-scientific scaremongering by the Food Standards Agency - and the nation's sheep farmers are, once again, likely to be filled with the deepest gloom.
" Peter Ainsworth, the Conservative rural affairs spokesman, said: "We need to be cautious about any threat to human health. But there is a real danger that a message of this kind will create serious difficulties for sheep farmers at a time when they least need further problems from government agencies. It's incredibly important that the FSA behaves in a measured and appropriate manner."
See Times website for the article by Valerie Elliot. See also New Zealand's concern /www.stuff.co.nz

June 13 2006 ~ " All it takes is one break in the chain and chaos ensues, with rotting carcasses lying uncollected for days"

Farmers Weekly interactive reports that both Welsh farming unions want a rethink of the current system for dealing with fallen stock, especially sheep and quotes a spokeman for the Farmers Union of Wales
" The closure has shown how fragile the current system is. All it takes is one break in the chain and chaos ensues, with rotting carcasses lying uncollected for days. Many members of the public have expressed concern about the smell, and amazement at the madness of the burial ban."
Also in today's FWi, in an article by Andrew Watts, we read:
"A review of the national fallen stock scheme and the company that administers it has found huge disparities in the prices charged to farmers, a lack of competition in some areas and reluctance by collectors to invest in their business. The report, written for DEFRA by Bob Bansback, a former strategy director at the Meat and Livestock Commission, found that enforcing the burial ban is most difficult in the sheep sector....many producers simply do not accept the burial ban. For a typical English lowland sheep breeding flock, the cost of compliance is equivalent to about 64% of the enterprise net margin. ......... Most alarming is the huge disparity charged for collecting dead lambs, which is 2200% higher in the south east than in Northern Ireland.
Measures recommended in the report include implementing best practice from other EU states."
(See fallen stock page)

June 13 2006 ~Complaints of scandalous and time-wasting behaviour by staff at RPA

The Western Morning News reports
".... Several staff at the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) head office in Newcastle are facing disciplinary procedures over claims that they leapt naked from filing cabinets, held break-dancing competitions during work hours and vomited into cups .... .....
The chairman of the Regional Dairy Board for Devon, John Daw, a farmer who is still waiting for up to £15,000 in farm payments from the RPA, said he was not surprised by the mischief. "With such a high turnover of staff they are bound to get the people nobody else wants and we farmers suffer as a result," he said. ..." WMN story
See RPA page for more detail

June 11 2006 ~ Bovine TB policy and badgers " joint and cooperative approach" needed - Letter in the Vet Record

Mr Swarbrick wrote:
"...... Like many others, Bourne and colleagues appear to be ignoring several important factors and offering no real solutions.
Over 25 years there does not appear to have been any concerted national action to control, let alone eradicate, the relentless spread of bovine TB. We have an EU obligation to eradicate bovine TB. Given that there are no vaccines, prophylaxis or therapy for bovine TB, we can only adopt the long-established medical and veterinary principles for infectious disease control by removing all infected, and more especially diseased, individuals from any contact with healthy populations.............
We need a veterinary consensus as to what to do and how to do it, and veterinarians must also find consensus with the ecologists, who have an important contribution. ...... We also need to persuade the pro-badger lobby that some of their comments are incorrect. Time is not on our side and veterinarians, farmers and the UK as a whole cannot allow the perceived difficulties to be an excuse for inaction.
Will the ISG please now put forward its strategy and protocols for the eradication of bovine TB from the UK and also for preventing diseased badgers from infecting cattle, badgers and all the other animals, bearing in mind that there is a potentially important human dimension." Read in full

June 9 2006 ~ A disease being termed "atypical BSE" is being found in older cattle in both USA and Europe

At an international conference on what are described as "prion diseases" in domestic livestock, French and Italian scientists have described how a TSE has been found in a small number of cattle ranging from 5 to 15 years old. One French researcher has revealed that the BSE cases in Texas last year 2005 and Alabama last spring 2006 were identical to "atypical" cases of BSE found in France. We read on ProMed's quoting of Farmers Weekly that "Marion Simmons of the Veterinary Laboratory Agency at Weybridge urged caution, saying there are not yet sufficient supporting data to suggest that the disease is a new strain of BSE."
A moderator comments, "It has long been debated whether this atypical form is sporadic or whether the sporadic appearance was an atypical form. There does not seem to be a good explanation, which simply highlights the need for more research and understanding of this disease. "
We have tried for some years to highlight the uncertainties. Although scientific reputations, massive regulation and huge amounts of money depend on certainties - those challenging the received wisdom seem to be considered contemptible by the establishment - there are indeed many more questions than answers about so-called Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies. See also previous ProMed posting

June 9 2006 ~ Bovine TB "as the vets have now comprehensively exposed, the Krebs trials were only a pseudo-scientific charade, never designed to work."

Muckspreader in Private Eye last week. "Even Defra admits that the percentage of badgers culled was sometimes as low as 20 percent. Prof.Bourne has admitted in the Veterinary Record that his staff were not allowed into a third of the land chosen for study. Meanwhile the tragedy rolls on: for farmers, for cattle, for taxpayers, and for all those sick badgers, condemned to a lingering death, only because humans became so blinded by sentimentality that they allowed badger numbers to explode to a level nature could no longer tolerate.."

June 8 2006 ~"Unless the vaccination lobby prevails.... then consumers may lose the option of choosing more ethical and humane outdoor-reared poultry products"

"Multiple cracks are beginning to show in the supposed scientific consensus on the origins of avian flu..." If anyone missed the article by Joanna Blythe in yesterday's Guardian, it opens on the Guardian website, here. Extract:
"... ..... The Washington Post has reported that as recently as the late 90s, in an unsuccessful attempt to keep the lid on less virulent strains of bird flu, intensive poultry farms in China were using, with the full approval of their government, an anti-viral drug called Amantadine. This drug is intended for humans and its use to treat birds would be a violation of international poultry regulations. Such misuse could have caused the avian flu virus to evolve into the drug-resistant H5N1 strain.
.... In Britain, this February, the day after the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) minister Ben Bradshaw assured the public that the British poultry industry was "very well prepared" for avian flu and had "extremely high levels of biosecurity", the animal welfare organisation Animal Aid photographed tonnes of poultry-shed waste containing body parts and feathers that had been dumped on farm land in West Yorkshire. ....
When H5N1 turned up in a remote village in eastern Turkey in January, this was initially blamed on migratory birds. Then when villagers gave their side of the story, it emerged that their diseased birds were intimately connected with a large factory farm nearby. ....
Worldwide, intensive poultry production has exploded and this growth seems to be mirrored by an increase in avian flu. In the south-east Asian countries where most of the H5N1 outbreaks are concentrated - Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam - production has jumped eightfold in just three decades as cheap chicken meat has become an international commodity. Conversely, certain other countries in Asia, such as Laos, have experienced relatively few bird flu outbreaks. In Laos, H5N1 has been restricted mainly to the country's few factory farms.
.... Despite all the evidence now emerging that wild birds may not be the prime carrier of H5N1, governments are panicking.....
..... Unless the vaccination lobby prevails - and going on Britain's track record with foot and mouth disease, the odds are not promising - then consumers may lose the option of choosing more ethical and humane outdoor-reared poultry products...."
ProMed's thread "Avian Influenza, poultry v. migratory birds" now has 27 entries. See the latest entry which quotes the Financial Express: Industry caused the flu; why blame wild birds? It would seem that the voices of Bird International and Grain (see warmwell's H5N1 pages) are beginning to be heard and amplified.

June 8 2006 ~ Charoen Pokphand "source of a bird flu outbreak" - the protein-rich chicken feathers were recycled to make chicken feed; the innards of the chickens were recycled into fish feed.. company dominates the feed industry."

According to the Financial Express article quoted in the latest ProMed report on "Avian Influenza, poultry v. migratory birds" we read
"...In September 2004, Cambodian authorities noted that the source of a bird flu outbreak was chicks supplied by the Thai company, Charoen Pokphand. This company dominates the feed industry and is the biggest supplier of chicks to China, Indonesia, Viet Nam and Turkey, which have witnessed bird flu outbreaks. Ukraine, where bird flu occurred, imported 12 million live birds in 2004."
The ProMed moderator (see ProMed website) notes that "Vertical integration was highly developed at Charoen Pokphand; reportedly, nothing went to waste at the group companies. For instance, the protein-rich chicken feathers were recycled to make chicken feed; the innards of the chickens were recycled into fish feed; and the carcasses of chickens were fed to crocodiles on the group's crocodile farms"
The moderator gives a link to a profile of the company, adding " For a profile of Charoen Pokphand (India) that claims that their flocks are healthy, go to: http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/mp/2002/12/19/stories/2002121900900300.htm and http://icmr.icfai.org/casestudies/catalogue/Business%20Strategy2/Charoen%20Pokphand.htm "

June 6 2006 ~ "dumping manure and carcasses into ponds and having them eaten by fish possibly results in ponds that can be reservoirs for flu virus .."

Dr Martin Williams' letter to ProMed receives informed comment by two moderators:
"[Martin William's website is worth visiting for his photographs of floating poultry carcasses in a family fish pond in Indonesia. These photographs better illustrate the risk than our 3 reports on the same topic. - Mod.MHJ]
[Scholtissek & Naylor indicated in 1988: "Global developments in aquaculture -- the so-called 'Blue Revolution' -- will mean increased colocation of people, ducks and pigs". (Fish farming and influenza pandemics; Nature 331, 215).
See also "Chicken dung used to feed fish may help spread bird flu" in 20051228.3697, as well as Mod. MHJ's commentary in 20060518.1396: "...depositing poultry faeces into the pond water would put any wildfowl swimming in those waters at a real risk of becoming infected...Birds faeces repeatedly trucked in for fish food would act in the same way as a constant risk to birds flying into and out of the fish pond areas".
Situations resembling the one described in Indonesia may prevail in other countries as well. Aquaculture's potential hazard in HPAI epidemiology deserves serious consideration and attention, not red herringing the role of migratory birds in spreading the virus to longer distances. - Mod.AS]
The letter from Simon M. Shane FRCVS, PhD. MBL. dip ACPV who is apparently: ".. concerned that ProMED is being "used" by the ornithological fraternity to absolve their feathered constituency of any involvement in dissemination of H5N1 HPAI. ..." is also published but without moderator comment.

June 5 2006 ~ "severe funding shortfalls in fight against bird flu". Agencies "are being run ragged" . No coordinated effort to mobilize grant support

The Canadian Press reports today that the WHO and FAO are facing a dire funding shortfall, with little in the way of flexible money that can be used to respond to unpredictable outbreaks. Dr. David Nabarro, senior UN system co-ordinator for avian and human influenza is quoted:
"It's not just WHO and FAO . . . the whole (UN) family needs a bit of cash "They really have done poorly on the money but FAO hasn't got much. either...The system is currently not designed to easily open the hoppers. And what folks tend to say is: 'Well, WHO ought to shift money from other programs. But that's easier said than done, because none of the other programs are well funded. . . Somebody squeals, wherever you find money from..."
and Dr. Joseph Domenech, head of the FAO's animal health service, is reported as saying:
"The demands since last September have increased tremendously when the disease came into the Caucuses, Eastern Europe and the Middle East and Africa Every week it's a different pattern.... most of the time we will have a country which is suddenly facing the outbreaks and there is nothing that is pledged."
Meanwhile, a Reuters article by Lesley Wroughton and Maggie Fox today reveals that a World Bank report prepared for the meeting in Vienna on June 7th shows that of the nearly $1.9 billion pledged last January by nations and organizations that said they wanted to make a "massive effort" against the virus, just $286 million has actually been spent to fight bird flu.
"... The money is supposed be used to upgrade veterinary systems, launch vaccination drives and help educate people about hygienic ways to raise animals...... The European Commission is the largest single donor, with $178 million pledged but none yet disbursed. ..."

June 4 2006 ~ "governments worldwide and in some states are recommending restrictions or closure of backyard and free-range poultry production"

"As food citizens," writes Jennifer Wilkins, Food and Society Policy Fellow at Cornell University, in the Albany Times Union,"we must think critically about what is at stake when regulators restrict how poultry can be raised. We can use purchasing power to support all farmers and keep production systems that are good for the environment and us. We need to resist losing our heads and jumping on the blame-the-wild-bird-and-roaming- chicken bandwagon.
It is vital that global and domestic regulation does not thwart backyard and pastured poultry production. Not only have these systems shown a resilience against disease, they enhance biodiversity, provide environmental and health benefits, increase food security and keep farm families on the land."

June 2 2006 ~ Rome conference - "H5N1 virus in eight African countries appeared to be poultry-related and chiefly based on trade... including illegal trade"

In spite of the headline from the FAO newsroom, scientists at the 2 day FAO/OIE bird flu conference in Rome have admitted they are unable to resolve the question of one of the key issues at the conference, which was the role of wild birds in the spread of HPAI to more than 50 countries on three continents, and whether wild birds should now be considered a permanent reservoir of the virus.
"..... If they are such a reservoir, there is a strong likelihood they will carry the virus with them in subsequent migrations. Alternately H5N1 may subside naturally as infected animals die off, or it may mutate to a less aggressive form.
... The conference noted that the current outbreaks of H5N1 virus in eight African countries appeared to be poultry-related and chiefly based on trade in poultry for human consumption, including illegal trade. However, it called for further analysis for a more complete understanding of how the virus was introduced. ............... It called for the establishment of a global tracking and monitoring facility involving all relevant institutions across the world, including scientific centres and farmers' organizations, hunters, bird watchers, and wetland and wildlife conservation societies.
The participants rejected any suggestion of trying to stop the spread of HPAI by killing wild birds. "Destruction of wild bird habitats or indiscriminate hunting of wildlife is scientifically and ethically unjustified as a response," one of the conference recommendations said."

June 2 2006 ~ "we will inevitably see land abandonment in upland areas of Wales"

The decision to cut payments to upland farmers in Wales is the subject of an article by Steve Dube in the Western Mail. In Wales, almost 80% of the land is designated Less Favoured - and has been eligible for Tir Mynydd payments.
"Llangurig sheep farmer Derek Morgan, who chairs the FUW's Hill Farming and Marginal Land Committee, pointed out that the cuts were announced just days after publication of a study into English upland farms which highlighted the damage that cutting such payments would cause to the financial viability of hill farms.......the Minister had also announced plans to scrap Element Two of the scheme, which delivers on environmental conditions such as stocking density, and on animal welfare.
North Wales Conservative AM Brynle Williams said, "The Minister has dealt yet another blow to the agricultural industry. This move may prove to be the final straw for upland and hill farming in Wales. "Tir Mynydd is both a social and economic subsidy, without which we will inevitably see land abandonment in upland areas of Wales, as it becomes financially unviable to farm in these isolated areas." ."

June 1 2006 ~ "ventilation shutdown" is not one of the methods recognised for disease control by the OIE guidelines.

We were pleased to see this press release by Compassion in World Farming, one of the few organisations to declare unequivocally that mistreating farm animals is unacceptable. In a civilised society, animal disease should be treated according to ethically acceptable methods based on independent and scientifically validated knowledge - not, as in the foot and mouth tragedy, on agro-economic or political considerations.
CIWF says"... This method appears to breach these internationally agreed guidelines, by failing to ensure induction of unconsciousness is immediate: it also fails to avoid anxiety, pain, distress and suffering. Philip Lymbery CIWF's Chief Executive said: "Compassion in World Farming believes that death through ventilation shutdown is likely to be protracted and cause terrible suffering. 3It is possible that many birds will die in shocking circumstances, and we could be faced with scenes in which piles of dead birds culled in this fashion become a common sight - comparable to the shocking scenes at the height of the Foot and Mouth Disease crisis. " We believe that this method is potentially so inhumane that it should not be used even as a last resort."
It was encouraging too to hear the voice of French veterinarians on the You and Yours (Thursday), explaining how the precautionary principle taken to extremes is counter-productive and that hens indoors show distress (if they have space to do so) and will fight each other in desperation. Even Bob McCracken seemed to be seeing the need to allow vaccination for free range hens.

May 31 2006 ~ Prusiner challenged at last - and dismay that the "good work of others trashed by the traditional weapon of choice in scientific disputes - anonymous peer review"

The Telegraph today, in an article by Roger Highfield, reports on the Jeffrey research (see entry for March 30 below)and says "almost a decade after Prusiner's Nobel prize, findings still challenge his hypothesis so that, at best, it seems incomplete and, at worst, it may even be wrong."
".....findings once again raise the possibility that the abnormal proteins are a consequence of the disease process, rather than a cause. ....
Prusiner's idea does not fulfil the classic criteria formulated by Robert Koch in 1884 to link an agent to a disease, says Prof Manuelidis. "Not a single one of Koch's proven postulates of infection are fulfilled by prion proteins." ....."It has also been obvious for a long time that abnormal prion protein is the consequence of infection, but not the causal agent," she says. "You might say that abnormal prion protein lacks the dynamite for weapons of mass destruction, though it certainly has a lot of rhetoric inside it. Those natural truths are not defined by popular vote or cabal."
She is also disturbed by the hostility faced by those who question the prion idea and says she has seen the good work of others trashed by the traditional weapon of choice in scientific disputes - anonymous peer review. "At issue, unfortunately, is public health."
(Read article in the Telegraph - and see warmwell's TSE pages)

May 31 2006 ~ Wild bird role in flu 'unclear' and "an impassioned plea for the use of vaccines to control the disease in domestic poultry."

BBC today
"..International researchers are in Rome for a two-day conference to discuss the spread of avian flu.
Poultry vaccination and a greater emphasis on Africa .... called for by the delegates. ....
Dr Domenech, FAO "We have to be careful that..... all the explanations of how the virus is spreading are not placed at the swans' door. They're one part of a complicated web."
The scientists also heard an impassioned plea for the use of vaccines to control the disease in domestic poultry.
Dr Robert Webster, from St Jude's Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, said that it was absurd that vaccines were not used. "The global poultry industry is the main spreader of H5N1, but migratory birds have certainly played a role. A main issue in my mind is the use of vaccines at agricultural level to control this thing," he said. According to the chief veterinary officer of the FAO, Dr Joseph Domenech, if the disease becomes endemic on the continent, it could re-infect the rest of the world for years to come. .......
Many delegates spoke of the need for better information to help target their research. There was a growing understanding that while there was excellent research being done on the ground with wild birds, there was a lack of global perspective. "

May 30 2006 ~ RPA Latest

WMN "Farmers awaiting crucial farm subsidies are receiving cheques for as little as 1p each from the Government's Rural Payments Agency - while another farmer expecting £35,000 received one for more than £2 million. Thousands of farmers face financial crisis because of bureaucratic delays by the RPA.."

May 30 2006 ~ H5N1 is spreading more through commercial husbandry and the humans that are moving poultry around says Juan Lubroth (FAO)

See Bloomberg
"... In Nigeria, which is on so-called migratory flyways, evidence has emerged that the virus was introduced there in February through trade in infected chicks, the FAO said. "I've been stumped by this virus for the last two years," Lubroth said. "Certain things we thought would happen didn't, and then things we didn't think would happen did." It's possible, Lubroth said, that wild birds are being infected by poultry. Several countries may be wasting resources targeting the wild fowl, said Thomas of BirdLife International... " (Read in full)

May 29 2006 ~ Member states must have suitable arrangements in place for the possible use of emergency vaccination.

With foot and mouth circulating around the globe it is only a matter of time before the next outbreak in the UK. To anyone who is not sure about the latest Directive, or about the effectiveness of modern vaccines, the Intervet website www.foot-and-mouth-disease.com gives details of the development of new marker vaccines and test kits allowing for the differentiation of vaccinated and infected animals. The site is worth a good look. It makes it very clear that vaccination of animals is not causing any health risk to consumers.

May 27 2006 ~ Rapid Diagnosis no longer to be ignored - but a further wait of three years is envisaged

Any warmwell reader who listened to Farming Today on Wednesday morning might well have wondered at the apparent lack of knowledge about state of the art technology in the field of on-site rapid diagnosis. The chip being developed at the Central Science Laboratory near York, with funding from DEFRA "offers the possibility of spotting a disease outbreak in hours rather than days" The talk was all about how, at long last, the wait for lab results of several days will be able to be avoided (although a wait of a further three years, it seems, is going to be necessary). No mention was made by the interviewer of the fact that such technology has already been available for at least 5 years now.
DEFRA has announced a "pioneering" lab on a chip to test for multiple viruses - ( we note the insistence on the inevitable adjective "deadly".)
One wonders why the UK has doggedly preferred to use pre-emptive slaughter of animals merely suspected of disease, with all its resulting trauma and distress, as the UK disease control method of choice, instead of investing in the available methods of rapid detection. It is not easy to forget that confirmation of the Cellardyke swan H5N1 virus took a week.
At a time when international cooperation over disease is absolutely vital, the desire of the UK to wait for its own exclusive diagnostic tests is almost incomprehensible. The reason seems to be that any technology that has to be bought in rather than being of direct financial benefit to the UK government is not to be contemplated - and such an attitude seems more deplorable than can be easily expressed.
The establishment of an International Task Force for surveillance should have been considered long ago. Disease nowadays knows no borders. International good-will and cooperation is needed to identify, control and eradicate reservoirs of disease. As an example, Cepheid announced a few days ago that it is to collaborate with the non-profit making Foundation for Innovative Diagnostics (FIND) to develop a new, rapid molecular diagnostic test for TB in developing countries. FIND is dedicated to developing affordable diagnostic tests for diseases affecting underprivileged populations. (See http://www.prnewswire.com)

May 27 2006 ~new waste management regulations came into force on May 15.

Muckspreader this week writes, " On pain of fines up to £ 20,000 for each offence, farmers must now comply with rules governing every conceivable aspect of what Brussels defines as waste, from the manure heap in the yard to clippings when they cut back their hedges; from the sprout stalks they leave to rot down in their fields to the rubble needed to repair farm tracks. All this now comes under the eagle eye of officials of the Environment Agency; and woe betide any farmer caught out not filling in all the necessary paper work and asking for all the necessary permissions. ..."

May 21 2006 ~ " the old Research Council institutes..... are withering on the vine"

In Thursday's Lords debate, the Earl of Selborne :
"If you accept my thesis that the agricultural sector, above all, has to be seen to be embracing new technology, taking on the fundamentals of environmental considerations, nutrition, linkages with other biological sciences and contributing to some of the wider objectives of the National Health Service - all of which I believe the research councils are undertaking in a co-ordinated way - you will find that the old Research Council institutes, such as Rothamsted Research, the Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research at Aberystwyth and North Wyke in Devon and the Institute of Animal Health, are withering on the vine - and they are withering on the vine because Defra has withdrawn support..."
This is particularly worrying when one sees the (literally) millions funnelled into vCJD research. The latest wave of fear over vCJD raised by "British scientists" and Professor James Ironside in particular is being repeated in the world's press. But as Professor Hugh Pennington says, "No one really knows...." See also below and warmwell's TSE pages.

May 21 2006 ~".. they are repulsed by the prospect of further mass killing - euphemistically called culling by Defra - of healthy livestock in the event of avian flu or some other infectious disease"

Thursday's Lords debate on Agriculture. Highly readable both for Lord Vinson's opening remarks and for much else, it deserves to be read in full. Here is an extract from the always excellent Countess of Mar
".......It should be remembered that the majority of farmers have an empathy with their livestock - a fact that seems not to be readily appreciated by those sitting in Whitehall. In the aftermath of BSE and the foot and mouth epidemic, they are repulsed by the prospect of further mass killing - euphemistically called culling by Defra - of healthy livestock in the event of avian flu or some other infectious disease. They find it impossible to equate the propensity for Defra to kill healthy animals whilst diseased and sick badgers and other wildlife are allowed to continue to spread bovine TB across our countryside. ..."
It was an excellent debate - and should have had more time. It is hard to pick out any one speaker because there is very much indeed of interest -the urgency expressed about the state of crisis was palpable - and warmwell readers will like the fact that many, such as Lord Marlesford, did not mince their words - but they will be encouraged too by what he had to say about the new team and his tribute to the unfairly dismissed Lord Bach.
"... Defra has been an unmitigated disaster. The Rural Payments Agency has been a scandal. It deceived its Ministers, who then misled the whole farming industry. I believe that Mrs Beckett should have resigned; instead, she has been promoted. We understand the reason: the Prime Minister wants to be his own Foreign Secretary and she will be a compliant tool to that end...... The noble Lord, Lord Rooker, has heavy boots. I have respected him for years..... I believe that he will get a grip on Defra.
David Miliband is one of the best in the Government and is perhaps a future leader of his party. He will need to get some mud on his boots, which Mrs Beckett, from the shelter of her caravan with her pre-packaged Tesco food, never really did.... "
He also said,
" I do not believe that we have had anyone who has really stood up for farmers since my noble friend Lord Plumb. As an article in the current issue of Arable Farming by the current NFU president Peter Kendall makes clear, the present regime prefers to lie snugly in bed with Defra officials and encourages its leader to bask like a schoolboy in a photo opportunity with the Prime Minister and Mrs Beckett on the steps of Downing Street and to express his deep appreciation to the Prime Minister for sparing him the time of day. ..." Read in full
See also RPA latest

May 21 2006 ~ " a draught of common sense." from Lord Rooker

Lord Rooker's words were, as Lord Vinson said at the end of the debate, " a draught of commonsense." Extracts from Lord Rooker's closing speech:
"....dissecting Hansard will provide a checklist for action for Ministers in Defra and in other parts of the Government. I will make sure that it is done that way. ...I was stopped in the corridor of the other place a few days before by colleagues and they said, "Hey! What right have you got to debate rural communities? That's our turf". I said, "I don't think you're doing it well enough".
....I apologise on behalf of the Government for the deep distress that has been caused by the constant promises given in good faith for the money that never arrived. But as people now know, a little more than 85 per cent of the money has been paid. It is already in bank accounts, not just cheques in the post. However, I again apologise for the distress that has been caused.
.... I refer to the issue of whether the vast majority of the population know where their food comes from. The degree of ignorance is enormous in that regard. We need to devote more attention to that issue in as positive a manner as possible.
....People and families who work on the farms have physical contact with those cattle every day and suffer enormous distress if the cattle become ill. I understand that and have seen it at first hand in Gloucestershire and on a farm that I visited in Staffordshire where there was a very severe outbreak.
....I do not want to preside over the demise of the small abattoirs
....... If anyone can find a regulation that we are operating that we do not need to operate, or somewhere we have gone way beyond the rules in a way that we do not need to, tell me what it is and I will get it changed.
.....I make the offer genuinely; I can take a fresh look and a fresh start.
.....We need to get gold in food production for the whole of the food chain - for the producers, the retailers and everyone working in it. They deserve the gold, not us putting gold into regulations. ..." Read in full
Lord Vinson speaks for many when he said to Lord Rooker that "if this is the way that he has started, by God, he has set a wonderful precedent to continue."

May 20 2006 ~ Avian Influenza. Illogical and inconsistent government reactions .

Since Thursday's Guardian news that "Government scientists found evidence of bird flu in poultry in October but did not report their concerns to the public" one is left wondering how many other suspicious cases have been kept quiet. Yesterday's FWi quotes a DEFRA spokesman: "If we publicised every case when it happened, it would be considered by some as a waste of time." It was only when the CVO report ( in which Dr Reynolds talks of the "huge achievements of the past year") was examined that it became known that 13 free-range geese had been exposed to bird flu at a sanctuary just after the "more by luck than judgement" (see Independent Nov 2005) discovery of H5N1 among mesia finches at the Quarantine facility in Essex last October. Although Debby Reynolds said at the time that the case showed that "Britain's quarantine system worked" it quite evidently was only the death of the valuable parrot that set proper testing in motion. Dr Reynolds did not even know that the parrot itself was not infected. It was yet another chapter of incompetence, cover-up, and worrying complacency.
The Guardian story of the government decision to lie low over the discovery of virus highlights the illogicality of the culling of poultry with the far milder H7N3 strain in Norfolk in early May - a case that was reported publicly. It looks very much as if the killing on the "free-range" farm (which suffered only a mild form of the flu and where no birds died from the infection) was as much to suggest that action was being taken as anything else. As a sinister bonus, it also tried out test methods of mass extermination.
It is sickening for concerned owners of birds at risk of such callous killing to remember that available and effective vaccine is denied those in the UK who want to use it. Highly efficient diagnostic tests for use on-site, the results of which can be centrally collected via the internet, have been available since 2001. But animal health funding remains low in spite of the ever escalating danger of zoonoses to human health. An unethical area of the livestock industry is being pandered to because money talks more loudly than concern about health - and the veterinary profession appear, as before, to be happy to collude in this illogical and dangerous policy.

May 19 2006 ~ "a new theory is gaining ground that the outbreak in wild birds near Qinghai Lake may be linked to fish farms around the lake"

says this Phayul.com report. It is hardly a "new" theory, however. The practice of feeding commercial fish with chicken faeces is just one of the unpublicised aspects of modern industrial food production and its use was suspected as a cause for the infection of wild birds very early on. The virologist Ruth Watkins mentioned it with concern last year and soon afterwards we read, in Grain's Fowl play: The poultry industry's central role in the bird flu crisis
"......BirdLife International pointed out that Qinghai Lake has many surrounding poultry operations. They also noted that there is a fish farm in the area that the FAO helped construct, and that chicken faeces are commonly used as food and fertiliser in integrated fish farms in China.[14] Furthermore, many trains and roads connect the Qinghai Lake area to areas of bird flu outbreaks, like Lanzhou, the source of infected poultry that caused an earlier outbreak of H5N1 in Tibet, 1,500 miles away.[15] However, none of these alternative scenarios drew much attention from the FAO or other major international authorities. ..."
The FAO itself actively promotes commercial aquaculture according to the Phayul.com report, notably around Qinghai Lake, where new cases have been found. The ProMed moderator commented yesterday
".... Birds faeces repeatedly trucked in for fish food would act in the same way as a constant risk to birds flying into and out of the fish pond areas. While wild birds would feed in these ponds, I very much doubt that they roost/sleep while floating on them. By flying away to sleep, they then would carry the virus to surrounding areas and pass on the infections to separate populations of wild birds."

May 19 2006 ~ Vets should be able to charge more for their services and rely less on profits on animal drugs

The Scotsman's Vic Robertson reports that Debby Reynolds has referred in the CVO's 2005 report to " the huge achievements of the past year".
"2006 will be yet another challenging year but I am confident we are well equipped to meet these challenges effectively and efficiently."
Freda Scott-Park of the British Veterinary Association (BVA) however, says the Scotsman, "expressed alarm at the continuing "atrocious treatment" of local veterinary inspectors (LVIs) - mainly from the private sector - in areas such as TB testing in cattle and scrapie elimination in sheep" and the article also quotes Sandy Clark, the Thurso-based Scottish Agricultural College veterinary surgery chief and former president of the Scottish branch of the BVA who pointed out, (as did the Marsh report of the Independent Review of Dispensing by Veterinary. Surgeons of Prescription Only Medicines published in May 2001), that vets should be able to charge more for their services and rely less on profits on animal drugs for their income.

May 19 2006 ~ Apologies again for lack of updates

. ..and thank you to those who have sent messages of concern. I am hoping to be back on line properly by the beginning of June

May 16 2006 ~ Poultry vaccine manufacturers/suppliers and their vaccines

This updated FAO/EMPRES international list shows avian influenza vaccine producers from 8 countries, including France (mainly Merial), Netherlands (Intervet) and China (Harbin Institute most recently). It might be useful for those who have swallowed at face value the objections that have been made against vaccination to read about these modern vaccines. One continues to wonder why - since properly vaccinated birds do not spread virus, since those vaccinated can be differentiated from infected birds and since there exist affordable rapid on-site diagnostic tests - private owners do not have the right to protect their own birds, even if, what is now referred to as "the UK chicken industry" sees no financial advantage in doing so.
Since the beginning of 2006 at least 455 wild birds in 16 European countries have been detected with high pathogen avian influenza; it is surely only a matter of time before the UK's free range and other much valued birds are again under threat of being killed in order to protect the market. There should be a straightforward process for those who want vaccines for their birds to obtain them, as exists in the Netherlands. Reuters warns that Romania looks set to cull another million birds, now that one case has been found again on a chicken farm.

May 15 2006 ~ "strong political leadership, excellent work by government officials, and an intensive engagement of people at community level "

Food Consumer.org reports that "Dr. David Nabarro, chief pandemic flu coordinator for the United Nations was full of praise for the way Asia has handled a difficult crisis. He singled out Thailand and Vietnam for the way the governments have responded to the crisis.
"These are two countries where there has been very strong political leadership, excellent work by government officials, and an intensive engagement of people at community level," he said. "They show that with the right level of engagement, we can reduce the threats posed by bird flu, and I'd like to see the same energy carried through to fruition in other countries as well."
......Dr Nabarro pointed out that the two countries had adopted different ways to fight the disease. In Vietnam, vaccination of the poultry was undertaken on a massive scale and all its 220 million chickens were vaccinated last summer. Thailand with its large poultry export industry could not afford a vaccination program since it would have led to a widespread ban on its exports."

May 15 2006 ~"far more attention needs to be given to monitoring and controlling the transport of poultry and other live birds and bird products"

says Ward Hagemeijer of Wetlands International. Spring migration of waterbirds from Africa has not brought H5N1 to Europe. Scientists from Wetlands International tested 5,000 wild birds in countries including Tunisia, Egypt, Burkina Faso, Sudan, Senegal, Malawi and Kenya, but have not found the virus. Their website says,
"While there is a need to stay alert on the situation in wild birds, far more attention needs to be given to monitoring and controlling the transport of poultry and other live birds and bird products."

May 13 2006 ~ Thunderstorm puts paid to warmwell.com

The Warmwell laptop has weathered many storms recently - but last night's lightning has crashed the computer's operating system and ADSL link - perhaps fatally. Apologies for much reduced ability to update at present - no broadband link and old machine.

May 13 2006 ~ Emailers solve mystery of the missing link (Ben Bradshaw...see below)

Grateful thanks to Bob, who wrote,
"http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/diseases/control/avianquarantine/independentreview/index.htm
Found this page by searching the defra website.  It has a link to pdf file of independent review. "
And to John of the interesting new blog Loonmusings who tells us,
"The correct link to their response should read http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/diseases/control/avianquarantine/gov-strategy/index.htm In other words someone managed to change a "g" to a "p"!
Their response is at http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/diseases/pdf/avianquarantine-govnresponse.pdf    Hope this is helpful"
Yes it is. Many thanks to both.

May 12 2006 ~ Ben Bradshaw's non-answer includes a link that doesn't work

In reply to a question by Bill Wiggin about which recommendations from the report of the Independent Review of Avian Quarantine have been implemented, Mr Bradshaw was less than helpful.
"The Government and the Devolved Administrations published their response to the Independent Review of UK Avian Quarantine on 19 April. This is available on the Defra website:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/diseases/control/avianquarantine/pov-strategy/index.htm . .."
Alas, it is anything but "available on the Defra website" - since the link leads to an error message. Mr Wiggin will be unable to find out even now which "29 of the 32 recommendations" the Government and the Devolved Administrations "either accept, or accept in principle" nor which "recommendation regarding pet birds" has been rejected. One is left wondering why a Government Minister cannot give his colleagues a link that works - and whether anyone can forward to us the link that does. See also bovine TB page latest and a timely PQ about the Plain English Campaign (RPA page)

May 12 2006 ~ The Tate Welcomes Britain's Farmers

A Cultural Strategy for Rural England is the name of a Rural Cultural Summit to take place at the Clore Auditorium, Tate Britain, London, Tuesday May 23rd 2006. It is supported by the Arts Council and the National Lottery and shares the same quotation - Give us the Tools and we will finish the Job' (Winston Churchill, 1941) - as that in Roger Breeze's talk at Manchester when he said that " The most important outcome of the 2001 FMD outbreak would be for members of the public who are not farmers to take up the cause of eliminating these diseases that are so important to pastoral and small farmers all over the world ...."
"This is a unique event, where for the first time the leaders of the main rural and farming cultural communities, speaking as partner members of the coalition -The Rural Cultural Forum - will come together with the lead stake holders for the urban arts and culture sector to discuss the aims and objectives, proposed funding, implementation mechanisms and outputs for a rural cultural strategy."
One of the speakers in the afternoon will be Michael Hart, Small Family Farms Alliance on " a proposed European network and partnership for Rural and Farming Culture"
If you would like to attend the Rural Cultural Summit - and warmwell readers would be warmly welcomed - please register your name, address, and contact number to rcforum@btconnect.com no later than next Wednesday, May 18th. Entry (including lunch) is free.

May 12 2006 ~ Risks negligible....

The BBC reports that the Welsh anthrax farm (comment) expects the all-clear on friday. " The risk to users of the local river was described as "negligible," while the danger to walkers and their paths after restrictions were lifted would be "minimal". ..."
An expert ProMed moderator said on April 29th that "While it is not reported one might presume that the herd has been vaccinated." With anthrax, the reality of the risks is examined by the same ProMed moderator who says,
"the number of verified cases of human anthrax from direct access to contaminated soil can be counted on the fingers of one hand, clenched." but that "surface-soil contamination would remain a risk for between 3 months and 3 years, which is why it is a good idea to annually vaccinate such exposed herds for 2-3 years after an outbreak.."Read in full
It might be thought illogical that minimal and negligible risks associated with anthrax can be set aside so easily while those virtually zero risks associated with so-called vaccinated "carriers" of FMD virus have resulted in EU regulations of such complexity and impracticality that there are few at DEFRA who understand them. ( See below for a scientific examination of the "risks" of FMD vaccinates) Most of the stakeholders ever consulted by DEFRA are still quietly opposing vaccination - perhaps in the erroneous belief that such measures are necessary to save them from a two-tier system so should not be challenged. What we have learned, over the past five long years, is that policy is determined by those with political and financial clout, not as a result of sound scientific reasoning.

May 12 2006 ~ FMD is raging across Vietnam

"The government has supplied provinces and cities with 640,000 doses of vaccines. The deputy prime minister also held a ministerial meeting Thursday and decided to extend financial assistance to farmers whose (infected) animals are culled. ..".thanhniennews.com

May 11th 2006 ~ "Despite Predictions, Migrating Birds Didn't Carry Deadly Flu" says the New York Times

NYT "International health officials had feared that the disease was likely to spread to Africa during the southward migration and return to Europe with a vengeance during the reverse migration this spring. That has not happened - a significant finding for Europe, because it is far easier to monitor a virus that exists domestically on farms but not in the wild..."

May 10th 2006 ~ "botched reshuffle last night threatened to overshadow a rare sliver of good news emerging from the RPA"