Jiglu: Farmtalking: Discussion: RE: Article on FMD Vaccine.

Originally from: Burkie

Dear Chris: Was reviewing old messages again last night...From August 2001 – November 2001...one thing was always consistent.....the University of Edinburgh was always opposed to vaccination policy.....which has always made me wonder "Why?"

I reached two conclusions:

Neil Ferguson was associated with the University of Edinburgh
There was so much more money to be had by insisting on a cull policy, and rather than oppose that policy, it was condoned by University of Edinburg officials

What has never been made clear is what monies and amounts of money were ever paid out, and in addition, who is still owed money (compensation for animals) to this day?

I have found no record of any accounting of all these supposed billions of pounds supposedly paid out. Have you?

All the Best,

Burkie in Kansas
and to this day , they have maintained that stand of opposition to a Common Sense vaccination policy. Author wrote:

Dear Jane,
I am forwarding this to you as I have received it from a couple of sources
to-day and debate is firing up in several channels without a central board,
perhaps compounded by Mary's holiday.
Regards, Chris.
<A HREF="http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/content_objectid=13285598_method=full_siteid=50082_headline=-Two-years-on--foot-and-mouth-breakthrough-name_page.html">http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/content_objectid=13285598_me
thod=full_siteid=50082_headline=-Two-years-on--foot-and-mouth-breakthrough-nam
e_page.html</A>
Two years on, foot-and-mouth breakthrough
Aug 13 2003
Steve Dube, The Western Mail
GERMAN scientists have made a breakthrough that could avoid the slaughter of
thousands of cattle in the event of another epidemic of foot-and-mouth disease.
Exactly two years to the day since the last reported case of FMD in Wales,
scientists at the University of T bingen have announced a cheap new test that
can tell the difference between cattle infected with foot-and-mouth disease from
those vaccinated against it.
The inability to tell the two groups apart was one of the main arguments
against vaccination during the 2001 epidemic and the test could allow future
outbreaks to be tackled by immunisation rather than by culling, said Dr Armin Saalm
ller of the university.
Similar tests already exist, but Dr Saalm ller's is quicker to use, costs
one-fifth the price of its rivals and uses synthetic reagents where others use
biological components.
The European Union has proposed a shift towards local culls and vaccination
in the event of a new epidemic.
News of the test breakthrough brought a mixed reaction. David Paton of the
Institute for Animal Health at Pirbright, thought it had great potential, b
ut FMD epidemiologist Mark Woolhouse of the University of Edinburgh said the
test was not specific or sensitive enough.
National Farmers' Union Cymru spokeswoman Leigh Roberts
said, "The major question is whether retailers and consumers would accept
meat from vaccinated animals."
The union would also be concerned at the cost of the bureaucracy that would
inevitably accompany tests and vaccination.