Just watching Countryfile. On the farm they're testing for Bovine TB, and it looks like they're going to have to destroy some cattle who have tested positive. Also, the question of a badger cull to try and prevent it spreading comes up again.
Why can't (or why don't) they inoculate against bovine TB like they do with human TB?
Not certain, but I think I remember someone saying that it's because they wouldn't be able to export the beef because the animals wouldn't be classed as disease free?
I think there will be a badger cull/slaughter, which farmers will get a grant for, then, in several years, farmers will get a grant to re-introduce badgers onto their land when some other disaster in the eco-system happens because of the removal of badgers.
Maybe if we stopped transporting animals all over the place, the risk of disease would be reduced.
A lot of farmers are already culling badgers 
A lot of farmers are already culling badgers
Firstly there is no effective vaccine against bovine tb!!
Secondly, the cattle who test positive are ALWAYS destroyed! Farmers get 'market value' as compensation, but nothing for all effort and cost of rearing the animal!
Very emotive subject down here in the South West!!
jumpupanddown - Membermainly as they Tb the badgers carry kills the cows
Evidence for this is shaky at best... But testing suggests that the amount of TB in badgers follows the amount of TB in cattle. ie, the badgers get it from infected herds, rather than the badgers infecting cattle.
gunnagofasta - MemberFarmers get 'market value' as compensation, but nothing for all effort and cost of rearing the animal!
Whereas if they sold the animal, they'd get market value plus something extra for the effort and cost of rearing the animal? Or not.
Evidence for this is shaky at best... But testing suggests that the amount of TB in badgers follows the amount of TB in cattle. ie, the badgers get it from infected herds, rather than the badgers infecting cattle.
The badgers infect the cattle, no badgers no TB
jumpupanddown - MemberThe badgers infect the cattle, no badgers no TB
No truth to this whatsoever. Defra say that cattle-to-cattle transmission is probably the primary cause but I've never seen a reliable claim that badgers are the sole cause.
When TB testing was suspended during foot-and-mouth, TB in cattle rose. Following this, TB in badgers rose. Badgers seem to be effectively a disease reservoir, so culling them is useful to prevent the disease returning to cattle but if you killed every badger in the country, cattle would still spread TB to cattle.
Reminds me, I need a new shaving brush.....
Whereas if they sold the animal, they'd get market value plus something extra for the effort and cost of rearing the animal? Or not.
They certainly don't seem to be happy about loosing all their cattle, so I'm sure there is more too it than just the money. I guess getting the market value for a good breading bull or cow won't compensate them either for all future revenue for those animals.
jon1973 - MemberI guess getting the market value for a good breading bull or cow won't compensate them either for all future revenue for those animals.
Should do, if it's done right- market price for a breeder should anticipate that. Big if though.
Its a fairly complex disease cycle, but the logic of badger control is quite simple
You've got infected cattle, and infected badgers, on the same land - you don't know which, originally, infected which, but its immaterial, you are where you are, both populations are infected, and both can successfully infect each other...
You get positive screening tests back, showing that some of your cattle are infected, you take the correct action, and cull the infected cattle - Hell, you could even cull the entire cattle population, and recolonise from another source that is known (and tested) to be clear.
problem is, you've still got a reservoir of disease on your farm, and unless you remove that - you're "sterile" population of cattle is going to become infected, as the remaining infected badgers will continue going round leaving urine trails packed with TB on the grass that the cattle eat.
unless you tackle both ends of the cycle of the disease, you'll never get rid of it.
The second issue, would be the biosecurity angle - if you've got clean cattle on one farm, and infected cattle on a nearbly farm, and never the twain shall meet, then the disease should not spread. However, if you've got your friendly neighbourhood badgers happily wandering between the two farms, then there's a problem...
mainly as they Tb the badgers carry kills the cows
does TB kill many cows, I'm not sure it does you know, its the vets what kill em. Cull vets I say.
the logic of badger control is quite simple
but the reality isnt, its not been shown to have any affect thus far
if you've got clean cattle on one farm, and infected cattle on a nearbly farm, and never the twain shall meet, then the disease should not spread
this is the flaw in your plan, cattle are moved all the time and spread the disease round the country.
Should do, if it's done right- market price for a breeder should anticipate that. Big if though.
I really have no idea, tbh. But they do talk about any sort of infection on their farm as an unmitigated disaster. I'm sure that wouldn't be the case if they got the market value, without having to go to the trouble of feeding them or looking after them any more, or selling the cattle at market.
There must be a bigger impact on the future of the farm in terms of their ability to sell their good stock subsequently, if their farm has had some infection. That was my point really. A bit like running a shop and it burning down, you get the insurance, but it doesn't reflect the true loss. Business, reputation etc.
Also, lets not forget where that compensation money comes from. Farmers are tax payers too.
But they're tested, normally prior to and after moving A_A.
There's a fair number of farmers running closed herds that have had BTB infections, so cannot be entirely down to infected movements.
amazing it hasnt been stopped in its tracks then 
why would they test after moving if they were tested before? maybe its the lorry drivers?
I think Zulu Eleven sums it up nicely - nothing they've tried yet has solved the problem, sometimes unpleasant decisions have to be made, life is like that for those people who are DIRECTLY affected by the problem, rather than those of us who are not faced with the harsh reality as part of our daily lives.
"When I grow up, I'm going to Booooovine University!"
No-one has answered my original question on the other thread: what is the problem? Is bTB transferrable to humans? If not, why is this all kicking off?
EDIT: OK, so Mrs Toast partially answered that one.
What is the situation on the continent? Are we doing things differently here?
but the reality isnt, its not been shown to have any affect thus farof cause it hasn't, there has only been one trial cull before and that was massively flawed. Hence the need to try it again.
Is bTB transferrable to humans?yes, if you consume products from infected cattle.
Is bTB transferrable to humans? If not, why is this all kicking off?
Maybe they don't really understand the impact of releasing it in to the food chain. Do you really want a disease like they going unchecked?
Could well be, jon1973.
And on the continent?
And on the continent?
I have no idea really. All I know I learn from Coutryfile on a Sunday night. I can't believe it's not an issue abroad though.
Why can't (or why don't) they inoculate against bovine TB like they do with human TB?
The BCG vaccine, surprisingly has poor protection for human TB (it does however protect against leprosy). Bovine vaccinations are possible, however the problem with vaccination is that you lose the ability to see whether someone has been exposed - hence it's hard to estimate real incidence. This could have implications for transfer of bTB to the human food chain.
Vaccination for foot and mouth should however have been the UK policy, as it was elsewhere.
It's not really only just kicking off. It's something that has been argued for years. It's only recently that the government agreed to a new trial cull which is why it is being talked about more in the main stream media.
And I believe if it was more widley reported how much the problem cost* the tax payer each year there would have been more pressure to do something sooner.
*about £100m a year.
Hey jon, no worries. I should just like to know how this issue is being dealt with on the other side of the ditch channel, as they have ways of dealing with things there...
That clip on Countryfile was from about 6 months ago, and iirc this same conversation happened then too
Badger culling will never work there are too many of them.
And on the continent?
After some Googling...
It doesn't seem to be so prevalent in France, although I don't know why that should be - it certainly doesn't seem to be by design. It seems to be something they're getting increasingly concerned over though.
and the TB in deer, wild boar etc, lets just exterminate everything and be done with it.
Remove the Badgers and TB will still be there, it is in the Cattle it is in the environment stop moving cattle and a large part of the problem goes away.
Badger culling will amke it worse - the DEFRA report confirms this. Especially piecemeal culling that the latest proposal is.
Its a stupid idea. cattle give badger TB, cattle transport and cattle to cattle infection is the source of the infection.
Its stupid, immoral and wrong
The ISG’s work – most of which has already been published in peer-reviewed scientific
journals – has reached two key conclusions. First, while badgers are clearly a source of
cattle TB, careful evaluation of our own and others’ data indicates that badger culling can
make no meaningful contribution to cattle TB control in Britain. Indeed, some policies under
consideration are likely to make matters worse rather than better. Second, weaknesses in
cattle testing regimes mean that cattle themselves contribute significantly to the persistence
and spread of disease in all areas where TB occurs, and in some parts of Britain are likely
to be the main source of infection. Scientific findings indicate that the rising incidence of
disease can be reversed, and geographical spread contained, by the rigid application of
cattle-based control measures alone.
From Final Report of the
Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB
Presented to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
The Rt Hon David Miliband MP, June 2007
http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/diseases/atoz/tb/isg/report/final_report.pdf
TandemJeremy than man that knows **** every thing apart from how to ride a bike.
TB's known as JCB disease in French farming circles. I'll let you figure out why!
I can ride a bike as well 
jon1973 - MemberI really have no idea, tbh. But they do talk about any sort of infection on their farm as an unmitigated disaster.
Well they would, wouldn't they. But many farmers also treat attempts to stop infection as a disaster too. Which is why the badger cull's so popular but effective disease control in terms of cattle movement isn't, even though badger culling alone will achieve practically nothing.
PS testing also shows that TJ can ride a bike
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement