MENUAnimal
Health/ Economic/ Political
|
 |
15 April 2003Rabies and Bats:
|
|
20 November 2002 Dear Sir/Madam In confirmation of my telephone call this morning I would be grateful if you would be so good as to provide full and detailed references to support the following statement that is on your website
Please provide details of what treatment the affected persons received, at what time interval after the bite and what complications they experienced (especially if anti-rabies immunoglobulin was used). Had all these persons previously received rabies vaccination? What are the details of these 180 persons - were they all bat conservation workers or under what other circumstances did they get bitten? If treatment was so successful in the Netherlands how come that the volunteer bat worker currently in Ninewells Hospital is stated to be so critically ill? This bat worker would appear to have been working in conjunction with SNH who should have been well aware of the risk of rabies in bats and of the DEFRA warning issued earlier this year. I would be most grateful if you could kindly reply ASAP as articles are being written on the subject by our organisation and we are anxious to get the facts right and to provide as full references as possible for statements made. It is indeed sad, not only for the present victim and his family, but also that the UK has lost its rabies free status after 100 years of being rabies free. It is probably that the risk to persons whose houses have been infested with bats is much higher than your website suggests in view of the extreme difficulty some people have experienced in getting rid of bats in their houses in view of the conservation orders that are in place. Also reference to international authorities through the WEB clearly indicates that persons do not have to be bitten by a bat to become infected with rabies virus from a bat, although that is the usual route. I would put it to you that a bat infested house is a real risk both physically and psychologically as of 2002 (and probably for some time previously). Yours Dr James Irvine FRSE DSc FRCPEd FRCPath |
Response from Dr Colin Catto
20 November 2002
|
Dear Dr Irvine, Thank you for your enquiry. In response to your direct question on a ‘full and detailed reference’ to our website I feel you should contact Peter Lina in the Netherlands as he deals with rabies incidents in the Netherlands and can give you the best information. His e-mail is phc.lina@tiscali.nl In response to your question about the bat worker working in conjunction with SNH you should request information from SNH directly. You could try contacting Robert Raynor who is the bat contact for SNH. His e-mail is robert.raynor@snh.gov.uk. In respone to your last paragraph ‘It is probably that the risk to persons whose houses have been infested with bats is much higher than your website suggests in view of the extreme difficulty some people have experienced in getting rid of bats in their houses in view of the conservation orders that are in place. Also reference to international authorities through the WEB clearly indicates that persons do not have to be bitten by a bat to become infected with rabies virus from a bat, although that is the usual route. I would put it to you that a bat infested house is a real risk both physically and psychologically as of 2002 (and probably for some time previously).’ The word infest is an emotive word and indicates bias against bats that is at odds with your desire for factual information. I suggest you contact a rabies expert to confirm your reference that you don’t not need to be bitten by a bat (or for there to be saliva to blood contact) to contract EBLV. I feel you are suggesting that householders with bat roosts are at risk from contracting EBLV without direct contact with the bats and there is absolutely no evidence for this. I recommend you contact the Veterinary Laboratory Authority to back your statement up - you can e-mail Tony Fooks for advice t.fooks@vla.defra.gsi.gov.uk Re the issue of bats in houses. In europe it has been known that bats have had the EBLV in their population since 1985 and probably for a lot longer. In that time there has not been a single death of a householder who have bats roosting in their house from EBLV so I would put it to you that there is a negligble physical risk. Householders who are aware of the facts can live with ‘their’ colony without a significant health risk. I agree that a psychological risk is an issue and this is exacerbated by inaccurate facts and speculation . Conservation orders are in place to protect bats and their roosts because many bat populations have undergone documented declines. Bats make an important contribution to mammalian biodiversity in the UK and we will continue to campaign for their conservation. I hope this information is of use to you, sincerely Dr Colin Catto |