Originally from: Mary Critchley
                        
http://www.warmwell.com

Wednesday 27th February

Feb 27 ~ Harnby: Results negative
"Initial results of tests on a suspected case of foot-and-mouth at a north Yorkshire farm are negative but final results will not be known for 96 hours, Defra say."Ananova at 8.00 a.m.

Feb 27 ~ THE Government's handling of the foot and mouth crisis was ineffective, inadequate, "lacking in common sense" and hampered by an "over-centralised and apparently chaotic command structure"
The Telegraph reports on the findings of the Northumberland Inquiry: MAFF "did not have an effective system of overall management . . . identifying burial sites on or near farms....might have avoided the delays and costs, not to mention the risk of the spread of infection, implicit in the alternatives which the Government preferred and which caused such devastating impact." ....... the Government's strict policy of culling on farms within three kilometres of infected premises led to "the slaughter of substantially more animals than was needed in order to eradicate the disease". ..... Due to a lack of "common sense" implementation of policy by experts on the ground, "more farms were chosen for culling than was needed" and "a very high proportion of the stock killed were shown to be clean of the disease". The report ........ also severely criticised Maff and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs officials, and the advice, information and guidance that they offered.

Feb 27 ~Long-term impact on groundwater from the burial of carcasses and pyre ash?
In its report on the environmental impact of the foot and mouth crisis, also published yesterday, the Environment Agency said it could not be sure that there would be no long-term impact on groundwater from the burial of carcasses and pyre ash. The Environment Agency is carrying out an an urgent investigation to identify farms where dangerous materials were illegally buried during the foot-and-mouth epidemic to save on cleansing and disinfecting costs.

Feb 27 ~" in future, the British people – once aware that such amazing and proven science is available from our friends across the water – will not tolerate the little Englander attitude and medieval approach, adopted for the control of this outbreak "
The article sent to us (part of a submission sent to the Royal Society) shows that the real time PCR fmd test is "now so well developed for high-consequence pathogen detection in defence, public health, law enforcement and agriculture in the United States (U.S.) that it is clear that those indifferent results (reported by Pirbright in the Veterinary Record) can be explained entirely by the inappropriate choice of reagents and assay conditions. Furthermore, the caveats raised about potential limitations on applicability of the technology have not been found valid in experienced hands."

Feb 27 ~
Q. Why is the Real Time PCR FMD not being adopted immediately?
A. It gives a negative result too quickly?
The Real Time PCR FMD test detects active virus within approximately 40 minutes on the farm. There is no question of cross contamination. This is the equipment offered to the British Government ( and rejected for reasons that remain unclear ) in March. It has now been extensively tested and we understand that Pirbright are "pleased with it". A contact in the US writes: The S. America testing went very well on the Tetracore Real Time PCR FMD test using the Smart Cycler platform. The paper on this has been accepted for publishing after being peer reviewed. I am awaiting word on the release date and will let everyone know asap upon receiving word. I should also be able to send you a copy of the document via email once it is "released" as I will have it right away. Hope this can do us all some good..."

Feb 27 ~ From today's Scotsman "Mr Morley would not be drawn last night on how DEFRA would deal with the situation if foot-and-mouth disease was confirmed.
Ministers will be forced to choose to either re-instate the policy of mass culls, or accept the argument for vaccination against the disease to prevent any further potential spread."
(We ask..) Why? Why will this DEFRA Minister not be "drawn"? Does he not know? Can he not share the knowledge if he does know? Does Mr Morley's comment sound like that of a Minister genuinely concerned for the intense worries and uncertainty that have been put in place by the now sudden widespread and hyped-up interest in FMD? Or does it sound like a Minister rather hoping that smoke without fire can usefully cloud other issues?