Back to
FMD Homepage
Another
outbreak of
Foot and Mouth Disease confirmed in the UK:
is it going to be handled better than in 2001?
James Irvine
Teviot Scientific, Cultybraggan Farm, Comrie,
Perthshire
Filed 04 Aug 07
©www.land-care.org.uk
The last outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD)
in the UK was in 2001. The consequences were catastrophic. Some
10 million cattle and sheep were slaughtered. Not only was there
massive public revulsion, but the cost to the nation was estimated
to be some £8billion. Animal welfare issues were serious in
the extreme, and there was massive damage to the farming industry
and the UK's image abroad.
The manner in which the authorities handled FMD
UK2001 was severely criticised. Not only were the lessons of the
Northumberland Report ignored, but the commonsense measure of stopping
movement of livestock around the country was not put in place until
3 days after the outbreak had been confirmed, although exports were
immediately stopped (as under EU rules).
The Department of the Environment Food and Rural
Affairs (Defra) for England gave the first in inkling of the new
outbreak in its press release of 3rd August 07. It said:
"A suspect case of vesicular disease in
cattle is under investigation
at a premises in Surrey.
"Samples have been submitted to the laboratory for testing.
At the
present time there is no timescale for results.
"Following Defra's contingency plans, and under the precautionary
principle, a temporary 1km zone has been imposed. This requires
a
movement standstill of all ruminants within this zone."
Suspicion was raised on the farm on the evening
of Thursday 2nd August. By late evening on the Friday 3rd August
the cause of the vesicular disease in these cattle was confirmed
as FMD. It apparently took 24 hours to diagnose FMD from the time
samples were taken, with the specialist laboratory only a few miles
away.
Movement restrictions of cattle, sheep, goats
and pigs throughout the UK and on exports were immediately put into
effect. A 3km restriction zone and a 10 km surveillance Zone were
established around the infected farm.
That is in accord with the Contingency Plans for
FMD that were set up throughout the UK following the numerous inquires
into FMD UK2001 epidemic.
The Royal Society of Edinburgh Inquiry into the
FMD 2001 in Scotland recommended that public access to livestock
farmland should also be withdrawn until more was known about the
nature of a new outbreak. This recommendation was not accepted by
the Scottish Executive and was not implemented in other parts of
the UK. Fortunately, the new outbreak is in the south of England
where there is not the same "freedom to roam" legislation
as there is in Scotland. Nevertheless, with Comrie having its popular
festival fortnight, I am not happy that persons visiting the area
from goodness knows from where, continue to have the right to walk
through my livestock farm steading, just because a right of way
was established 100 years ago for the few local people who needed
to get to church.
The new outbreak is, as far as currently known,
confined to a farm near Guilford in Surrey. As it happens, this
is very close to where the UK's main laboratory for diagnosing FMD
is situated - namely, Pirbright. Is this coincidence, or does it
raise the recurrent worry that FMD virus way have escaped from this
high security facility? At least one advantage is that the samples
will not have far to travel, which has been a major problem in the
past when outbreaks of suspected disease have occurred in remote
parts of the UK. Indeed, it could be that the Pirbright and the
VLA laboratory may come within the surveillance zone that has been
set up.
Another lesson to be learned from UK FMD2001,
is the importance of good, well-informed communication with farmers
and with the public. There seems to be conflicting reports in the
media as to whether the cattle that are infected are cows or beef
cattle that are being prepared for the foot chain. A cow is a bovine
that has produced a calf. A beast being specifically prepared for
the food chain would not have had any calves. If it is a "finishing"
farm for beef cattle, then that farm may have bought in calves from
many other farms for the purpose.
All livestock farmers in the UK are required,
under strict penalty, to notify the British Cattle Movement Scheme
(BCMS) of all movements of their cattle, both on and off the farm.
The information is stored on the BCMS computers. It should therefore
be possible, very quickly, to establish all movements of livestock
on and off the infected farm. So far, i am not aware of any information
that is available on this subject.
It is also understood from the media, that the
farm in question only has finishing cattle and does not have any
sheep. This should be very important, as FMD is more difficult to
diagnose in sheep and sheep movements - especially of lambs - are
particularly high at this time of year.
Defra should surely be able to be much more informative
on its website as to the actual circumstances of the new outbreak.
As it is, the information they provide is spartan in the extreme.
Speed of diagnostic Testing
What is of fundamental importance in the efficient
control of an outbreak of FMD, or any such viral disease, is the
speed at which diagnostic tests can be done and the results known.
it should not take as long as 24hrs from the time of taking samples
to make a diagnosis.
There was intense criticism of the management
of UK FMD2001 that modern technology that was available was not
employed. There remains the serious question as to whether Pirbright
and/or the VLA Laboratories have adopted the most efficient test
technology, or whether they are still in a state of some denial
as to its existence, possibly for financial considerations regarding
patents, etc.
When I visited Pirbright in 2006 it appeared that
it might take about a week to establish what type of FMD virus may
be involved in any new outbreak. And that it is necessary to wait
that long before considering how vaccination may be employed as
a possible defence. But by that time much of the benefit fro vaccination
- which is aimed at preventing disease spread - would be lost.
Possible use of vaccination against FMD
There was so much delay and dithering about the
possible use of vaccination in relation to UK FMD2001 - exacerbated
by the failure to impose livestock movement restrictions for 3 days
- that the potential benefits form using FMD vaccination were lost.
They could be lost again if it takes too long to identify the strain
and subtype of FMD virus that is involved in the current outbreak.
Security surveillance at UK borders: its efficiency has been repeatedly
questioned
Security surveillance at the sea ports and airports
of the UK has been repeatedly questioned with little convincing
assurance. Indeed, it has been labelled as scandalously lax.
The political correctness of the EU states that
there must be freedom of movement within EU Member States. But with
the number of EU Member States now up to 27, there is clearly a
highly porous security,especially at the new eastern borders of
the EU.
Not only that, but imports have been pouring in
from South America countries, such as Brazil, where the levels of
biosecurity are alleged to be below requirements, but permitted
by our Government in the interests of providing the Uk with cheap
food.
Imports of illegal meat products are also alleged
to be widespread, with little control by the authorities.
Overuse of epidemiological modelling from academics with little
practical livestock experience that was relevant
The management of UK FMD2001 was justifiably highly
criticised for the overuse of epidemiological modelling, with its
superficially convincing graphics. It was based on flawed and seriously
inadequate data.It made assumptions that were not justified.
Hopefully, on this occasion the input of those
who have practical livestock experience will be sought, and the
iniquities of such maneuvers as the contiguous cull will be avoided.
Has the Food Standards Agency (FSA) done enough to convince the
public that vaccinated meat is safe
to eat?
During UK FMS2001 there was much extraordinary
controversy as to whether meat from livestock that had been vaccinated
for FMD - or indeed for anything else - was safe to eat. Poorly
informed lobby groups were making a meal of it. Some supermarkets,
and other large commercial marketeers, were allegedly trying to
seek advantage for themselves based on engendering fear rather than
well established scientific facts.
The FSA are notorious for issuing statements that
protect itself, rather than making issues clear to the public when
there is abundant evidence for them to make the clearest of statements.
The EU can also be blamed for insisting that meat
from cattle vaccinated for FMD has to be labelled in some way. Why
should it be? Much meat comes from cattle that have been vaccinated
for something or other, simply as an important component of competent
animal welfare.
Do we have confidence in those who are managing the outbreak?
Professor Sir David King is still in office as
Chief Scientist to the Westminster government. Many thought his
handling of the crisis to be poorly informed.
Debbie Reynolds is the Chief Veterinary Officer
to the Westminster government. many thought that her handling of
the case of avian flu was less than satisfactory.
The Westminster Minister for Defra is Hilary Benn.
Would you believe it: he is a vegetarian.
Perhaps steady Gordon Brown, with his clunking
fist, will see through any nonsense that his advisors may be up
to.
Conclusion
It is highly disappointing that a fresh outbreak
of FMD has occurred in the UK, only 6 years after the last. Although
the key lesson of immediately stopping livestock movements throughout
the UK has clearly been learned, it is questionable whether other
important lessons have been heeded. No doubt we will soon find out:
but hopefully not to our severe cost.
©www.land-care.org.uk
|
