Originally from: David
                        
Hi Andrew,

How are you coping with the latest milk price reductions? I don't know which is worse – last years FMD with high feed costs or a milk price reduction of almost 5p a litre. That will slash my non existent profit by £45,000 so I think that the bastards have finally got us. I don't know whether to set fire to all my silage tyres on the M5 or just finally throw the towel in quietly. It makes the whole issue of vaccination totally irrelevant to me now – I couldn't care less. – David

However, my daughter has been researching vaccination as part of her Uni Thesis and this is a draft of her work to date:

"A vaccine is actually available to combat FMD. The problem with the vaccine is that it is impossible to tell the difference between a vaccinated animal and an animal that has had the disease. This is because one of the FMD tests checks the level of antibodies in the blood, which occur either from vaccination or exposure to the disease. Therefore it has been impossible to tell if an animal is immune or is carrying the disease. In the early stages when it has contracted the virus the animal has the virus in the blood, then as the disease progresses antibodies are developed in response as the immune system fights back. FMD is actually not fatal to the animal, yet slaughter has almost always been applied in order to prevent the rapid spread. In some previous outbreaks, some farms with very valuable pedigree stock were exempted from the slaughter program and the animals quarantined. The animal can make a full recovery, the blisters gradually disappearing, and therefore allowing weight to be regained and an increase in milk production in dairy animals. In an article entitled Dithering Over Vaccines, in the Western Morning News Farming Editor Carol Trewin states, "it appears that big business, rather than science, may be winning the argument. (on vaccines) There is growing opposition to using vaccination in the food manufacturing and retail sector. Food processors are fearful that it will hamper lucrative market exports, and the National Farmers' Union is fearful that retailers will use it to create a two-tier market, paying lower prices for milk and meat from vaccinated animals." However, cattle are already routinely vaccinated against pneumonia and leptospirosis, and sheep for many diseases including anthrax and lamb dysentery. The Food Standards Agency emphasises that food from vaccinated animals poses no threat to human health. The hindrance in applying vaccinations seems to come from the government level. Vaccines according to Carol Trewin "are ready, teams have been trained, and the European Union has given it's approval." A Gloucestershire pressure Group vets4vaccination; argue that vaccination would prevent the unnecessary slaughter of thousands of healthy stock. One member Mr Richard Rowe says, "...FMD may already be endemic in sheep." This statement makes the entire policy of animal slaughter insignificant. If this is the case vaccinations surely must be utilised. Marker vaccines are very recently available, which would enable one to tell if an animal has the virus, or has been vaccinated against the virus. As with all new policies however, red tape and paper work seems to be all that stands in the way of vaccination as a method of prevention and control of FMD.
(still not sure on this but implications for prevention with new vaccines available. Then discuss ring method vaccinations/ geographic model ?? According to Abigail Woods, a Ministry of Agriculture Veterinarian, vaccine for FMD began on the European Continent "where serum was used to restrict the scope and severity of outbreaks. In Britain however, scientists paid little attention to this line of research and after experimenting upon serum in the early 1930s concluded that it was unreliable and inappropriate for use in the field". The problem with slaughter researched after the 1967–8 outbreak and outlined by Haggett in The Geographical Structure of Epidemics is that by the time FMD disease was "positively identified in a core area, and slaughter carried out, virus particles had often been carried long distances by the wind, subsequently to be redeposited by the rain, beyond the FMD slaughter area". An important argument against the use of vaccines is that in order for it to be completely effective, the vaccination method would require complete vaccinations "out to a distance of 20 kilometres from an outbreak....to construct a cordon sanitaire to contain the disease." This has been in the past very difficult to seriously consider, given the number of vaccination teams that would be required. Modern farms may have between 100–500 (?) animals in total on the premises, and a zone this large could potentially contain over a hundred farms. Blanket vaccination, according to Tinline would be required within two days of the outbreak to ensure success. He evaluated three ring vaccination schemes that might make vaccination more feasible than a blanket vaccination. Ring vaccination I............??????????????
        It is interesting to note that like Britain and the European Union (EU), the USA also has a non-vaccination policy in the event of an FMD outbreak and are therefore also vulnerable to the rapid diffusion seen just last year in Great Britain, if this virus enters the country. There are some other issues with vaccinations, however. Local DEFRA (New British Agriculture Ministry) vet; Kate Woods outlined in an email some of the problems and precautions that prevent vaccination from being the obvious choice. These include: it is imperative that they are carried out before the disease strikes, and they must be carried out twice a year in order to maintain immunity, which has important time and financial implications for farmers already weighed down with regulations and paperwork. At least 80% of the animal population must be vaccinated, which causes problems in farms and animals that have rapid turnover rates such as pigs". – Hannah Goddard