UK scientists urge livestock vaccination
The UK government, which last year slaughtered millions of animals in an attempt to eradicate the country’s foot and mouth epidemic, should in future vaccinate livestock to curb the spread of the disease, a scientific report has urged.
Issued yesterday by the Royal Society, the official report advocated a ‘vaccinate-to-live’ policy in the event of a future outbreak, where an emergency programme of ‘ring’ vaccination is immediately implemented on farms surrounding affected premises. And while the report was supportive of the culling of animals both on infected farms and where dangerous contact has occurred, it said that without vaccination, the measures were not enough to contain an outbreak during its critical early stages.
At the same time, the report called for a change of attitude among consumers and farmers towards vaccinated meat. Though officials had prepared a plan on the possible use of vaccination last year, they were faced with opposition from farmers who feared meat from vaccinated animals would be less attractive to the consumer, and who in any case considered vaccination ineffective. This was in contrast to the action taken in the Netherlands where animals were both vaccinated and slaughtered, enabling the country to get back on track to the 'disease free status' it needed for European exports, without delay. "This will necessitate clear acceptance by all concerned that meat and meat products from vaccinated animals may enter the food chain normally," the Royal Society said in a news release.
The scientific panel also urged better planning by the government, whose Ministry of Agriculture Farms and Fisheries (MAFF – now known as DEFRA [Department of Food and Rural Affairs]) has repeatedly come under heavy fire for its handling of the crisis. (See leatherbiz.com story: Report scathing of DEFRA's handling of foot and mouth crisis - 21.6.02)
"Better contingency planning is vital. The government must be empowered to act decisively during an outbreak," it said. "This requires prior debate about the control measures to be adopted. The government contingency plans should therefore be brought before parliament for debate and approval. The terms should be subject to a practical rehearsal each year and should be formally reviewed triennially to ensure they take account of the latest information," the statement concluded.
