Jiglu: Farmtalking: Discussion: Vets warn Government

Originally from: Farmtalking

http://www.farmtalking.com/news_landwriter.html

BELEAGUERED VETS WARN GOVERNMENT AGAINST MORE INTERFERENCE

Britain's vets have laid into the Government over its policies on animal disease, welfare and delivery of veterinary medicines.

Opening the British Veterinary' Association's annual congress in Edinburgh, president Peter Jinman said the industry had been under siege, not least over prescription and dispensing medicines, with vets virtually accused by the OFT of operating a complex monopoly against the public interest.

But at the same time, the Government's Animal Health and Welfare Strategy described vets as the corner stone of its future policy.

"So much for joined up Government thinking," said Mr Jinman.

"Yet who else can deliver the knowledge, understanding, integrity and skill that will be required for the delivery of such a strategy other than the dedicated, vocationally motivated, veterinary profession, whose universally recognised competencies will be the bedrock on which a strategy can be built and realised?"

On TB, Mr Jinman said: "Despite the considerable political clout of the badger we remain concerned that Government policy on Bovine TB seems to be based on tolerance and control of the disease, rather than a policy aimed ultimately at its eradication.

"Tolerance of any animal disease has never been an option as far as the veterinary profession is concerned."

Mr Jinman also questiond the absence of any mention of animals from the recent consultation on a draft Civil Contingencies bill.

"The veterinary profession has no doubt that the best way to prepare for the possibility of a bioterrorist attack is to strengthen existing surveillance in order to protect the country from bioterrorism and/or the next novel or exotic disease," he said.

He said with the future viability of large animal practice by no means assured, vets awaited the outcome of the House of Commons EFRA Committee inquiry into the provision of veterinary services in rural areas "with considerable interest" especially as a recent British Cattle Veterinary Association survey found that that nearly 40 per cent of practices currently involved in farm work "were considering their future".

"The right to practise veterinary surgery is balanced against the responsibilities of the profession to do so by acing professionally and with utmost integrity," said Mr Jinman.

"There is, however, another responsibility and that is for the public through Government to ensure that the veterinary profession is put in the position where it can properly discharge that duty.

"Unreasonable interference is in danger of turning our profession, into just another business and it is to be hoped the Government doesn't realise too late the delicate balance that exists between protection of the public interest and over-regulation that acts to the detriment of the profession, then the public and thereby the animals under our care."

Originally from: Pat Gardiner

It wasn't bioterrorists that were going round faking the results of tests during the East Anglian Swine Fever Epidemic, it was RCVS vets.

It wasn't Arabs that were threatening people in their own homes during FMD, it was RCVS vets.

It wasn't Moslems that have been placed under HMC&E control in Britain's sea and airports, it was RCVS vets.

It wasn't Yardies that supervised the incompetant culls during FMD, it was RCVS vets.

It is not the supermarkets that are under investigation for running a cartel in veterinary medicines, it is RCVS vets.

Patriotism and threats – the last refuge of a discredited profession.

Pat Gardiner

Author wrote:
http://www.farmtalking.com/news_landwriter.html
BELEAGUERED VETS WARN GOVERNMENT AGAINST MORE INTERFERENCE
Britain's vets have laid into the Government over its policies on animal disease, welfare and delivery of veterinary medicines.
Opening the British Veterinary' Association's annual congress in Edinburgh, president Peter Jinman said the industry had been under siege, not least over prescription and dispensing medicines, with vets virtually accused by the OFT of operating a complex monopoly against the public interest.
But at the same time, the Government's Animal Health and Welfare Strategy described vets as the corner stone of its future policy.
"So much for joined up Government thinking," said Mr Jinman.
"Yet who else can deliver the knowledge, understanding, integrity and skill that will be required for the delivery of such a strategy other than the dedicated, vocationally motivated, veterinary profession, whose universally recognised competencies will be the bedrock on which a strategy can be built and realised?"
On TB, Mr Jinman said: "Despite the considerable political clout of the badger we remain concerned that Government policy on Bovine TB seems to be based on tolerance and control of the disease, rather than a policy aimed ultimately at its eradication.
"Tolerance of any animal disease has never been an option as far as the veterinary profession is concerned."
Mr Jinman also questiond the absence of any mention of animals from the recent consultation on a draft Civil Contingencies bill.
"The veterinary profession has no doubt that the best way to prepare for the possibility of a bioterrorist attack is to strengthen existing surveillance in order to protect the country from bioterrorism and/or the next novel or exotic disease," he said.
He said with the future viability of large animal practice by no means assured, vets awaited the outcome of the House of Commons EFRA Committee inquiry into the provision of veterinary services in rural areas "with considerable interest" especially as a recent British Cattle Veterinary Association survey found that that nearly 40 per cent of practices currently involved in farm work "were considering their future".
"The right to practise veterinary surgery is balanced against the responsibilities of the profession to do so by acing professionally and with utmost integrity," said Mr Jinman.
"There is, however, another responsibility and that is for the public through Government to ensure that the veterinary profession is put in the position where it can properly discharge that duty.
"Unreasonable interference is in danger of turning our profession, into just another business and it is to be hoped the Government doesn't realise too late the delicate balance that exists between protection of the public interest and over-regulation that acts to the detriment of the profession, then the public and thereby the animals under our care."

Originally from: coleen

Oh I am so glad that someone else wrote that – they were all my feelings exactly as I read 'Vets Warn Government'. Strange they never spoke out against the Gov during fmd, strange they never spoke out about the cruel inhumane way that animals were being killed – by their own profession. Strange they never stood by that oath they take. If they had, most of what many people witnessed during fmd might never have arisen. I know that some are asking questions now, but they still took all that lovely money first. At the end of the day they were as guilty and in many cases as corrupt as the regime that allowed it all to unfold.

I hope that they are 'under siege' they might realise what it feels like! I am glad they have lost their monopoly on supplying drugs. How terribly sad that their profession is no longer assured. What sad times we live in. I do not think that their will be many people shedding a tear for them.

Maybe they should have thought about their long term future when they went around popping off healthy animals.

Coleen

----- Original Message -----
From: ...
Originally from: <...>
To: <...>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 7:30 PM
Subject: [farmtalking] RE: Vets warn Government
It wasn't bioterrorists that were going round faking the results of tests
during the East Anglian Swine Fever Epidemic, it was RCVS vets.

It wasn't Arabs that were threatening people in their own homes during
FMD, it was RCVS vets.

It wasn't Moslems that have been placed under HMC&E control in Britain's
sea and airports, it was RCVS vets.

It wasn't Yardies that supervised the incompetant culls during FMD, it was
RCVS vets.

It is not the supermarkets that are under investigation for running a
cartel in veterinary medicines, it is RCVS vets.

Patriotism and threats – the last refuge of a discredited profession.
Pat Gardiner
Author wrote:
http://www.farmtalking.com/news_landwriter.html
BELEAGUERED VETS WARN GOVERNMENT AGAINST MORE INTERFERENCE
Britain's vets have laid into the Government over its policies on animal
disease, welfare and delivery of veterinary medicines.
Opening the British Veterinary' Association's annual congress in
Edinburgh, president Peter Jinman said the industry had been under siege, not least over prescription and dispensing medicines, with vets virtually accused by the OFT of operating a complex monopoly against the public interest.
But at the same time, the Government's Animal Health and Welfare
Strategy described vets as the corner stone of its future policy.
"So much for joined up Government thinking," said Mr Jinman.
"Yet who else can deliver the knowledge, understanding, integrity and
skill that will be required for the delivery of such a strategy other than the dedicated, vocationally motivated, veterinary profession, whose universally recognised competencies will be the bedrock on which a strategy can be built and realised?"
On TB, Mr Jinman said: "Despite the considerable political clout of the
badger we remain concerned that Government policy on Bovine TB seems to be based on tolerance and control of the disease, rather than a policy aimed ultimately at its eradication.
"Tolerance of any animal disease has never been an option as far as the
veterinary profession is concerned."
Mr Jinman also questiond the absence of any mention of animals from the
recent consultation on a draft Civil Contingencies bill.
"The veterinary profession has no doubt that the best way to prepare for
the possibility of a bioterrorist attack is to strengthen existing surveillance in order to protect the country from bioterrorism and/or the next novel or exotic disease," he said.
He said with the future viability of large animal practice by no means
assured, vets awaited the outcome of the House of Commons EFRA Committee inquiry into the provision of veterinary services in rural areas "with considerable interest" especially as a recent British Cattle Veterinary Association survey found that that nearly 40 per cent of practices currently involved in farm work "were considering their future".
"The right to practise veterinary surgery is balanced against the
responsibilities of the profession to do so by acing professionally and with utmost integrity," said Mr Jinman.
"There is, however, another responsibility and that is for the public
through Government to ensure that the veterinary profession is put in the position where it can properly discharge that duty.
"Unreasonable interference is in danger of turning our profession, into
just another business and it is to be hoped the Government doesn't realise too late the delicate balance that exists between protection of the public interest and over-regulation that acts to the detriment of the profession, then the public and thereby the animals under our care."
--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/farmtalking
To leave the group, email: ...

Originally from: lina

I totally agree with both of you.
Lina

--- Coleen Taylor <...>

wrote:
Oh I am so glad that someone else wrote that – they
were all my feelings
exactly as I read 'Vets Warn Government'. Strange
they never spoke out
against the Gov during fmd, strange they never
spoke out about the cruel
inhumane way that animals were being killed – by
their own profession.
Strange they never stood by that oath they take. If
they had, most of what
many people witnessed during fmd might never have
arisen. I know that some
are asking questions now, but they still took all
that lovely money first.
At the end of the day they were as guilty and in
many cases as corrupt as
the regime that allowed it all to unfold.
I hope that they are 'under siege' they might
realise what it feels like! I
am glad they have lost their monopoly on supplying
drugs. How terribly sad
that their profession is no longer assured. What
sad times we live in. I
do not think that their will be many people shedding
a tear for them.
Maybe they should have thought about their long term
future when they went
around popping off healthy animals.
Coleen
Coleen
----- Original Message -----
From: <...>
To: <...>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 7:30 PM
Subject: [farmtalking] RE: Vets warn Government
It wasn't bioterrorists that were going round
faking the results of tests
during the East Anglian Swine Fever Epidemic, it was
RCVS vets.

It wasn't Arabs that were threatening people in
their own homes during
FMD, it was RCVS vets.

It wasn't Moslems that have been placed under
HMC&E control in Britain's
sea and airports, it was RCVS vets.

It wasn't Yardies that supervised the incompetant
culls during FMD, it was
RCVS vets.

It is not the supermarkets that are under
investigation for running a
cartel in veterinary medicines, it is RCVS vets.

Patriotism and threats – the last refuge of a
discredited profession.

Pat Gardiner
Author wrote:
http://www.farmtalking.com/news_landwriter.html
BELEAGUERED VETS WARN GOVERNMENT AGAINST MORE
INTERFERENCE
Britain's vets have laid into the Government
over its policies on animal
disease, welfare and delivery of veterinary
medicines.
Opening the British Veterinary' Association's
annual congress in
Edinburgh, president Peter Jinman said the industry
had been under siege,
not least over prescription and dispensing
medicines, with vets virtually
accused by the OFT of operating a complex monopoly
against the public
interest.
But at the same time, the Government's Animal
Health and Welfare
Strategy described vets as the corner stone of its
future policy.
"So much for joined up Government thinking,"
said Mr Jinman.
"Yet who else can deliver the knowledge,
understanding, integrity and
skill that will be required for the delivery of such
a strategy other than
the dedicated, vocationally motivated, veterinary
profession, whose
universally recognised competencies will be the
bedrock on which a strategy
can be built and realised?"
On TB, Mr Jinman said: "Despite the considerable
political clout of the
badger we remain concerned that Government policy on
Bovine TB seems to be
based on tolerance and control of the disease,
rather than a policy aimed
ultimately at its eradication.
"Tolerance of any animal disease has never been
an option as far as the
veterinary profession is concerned."
Mr Jinman also questiond the absence of any
mention of animals from the
recent consultation on a draft Civil Contingencies
bill.
"The veterinary profession has no doubt that the
best way to prepare for
the possibility of a bioterrorist attack is to
strengthen existing
surveillance in order to protect the country from
bioterrorism and/or the
next novel or exotic disease," he said.
He said with the future viability of large
animal practice by no means
assured, vets awaited the outcome of the House of
Commons EFRA Committee
inquiry into the provision of veterinary services in
rural areas "with
considerable interest" especially as a recent
British Cattle Veterinary
Association survey found that that nearly 40 per
cent of practices currently
involved in farm work "were considering their
future".
"The right to practise veterinary surgery is
balanced against the
responsibilities of the profession to do so by acing
professionally and with
utmost integrity," said Mr Jinman.
"There is, however, another responsibility and
that is for the public
through Government to ensure that the veterinary
profession is put in the
position where it can properly discharge that duty.
"Unreasonable interference is in danger of
turning our profession, into
just another business and it is to be hoped the
Government doesn't realise
too late the delicate balance that exists between
protection of the public
interest and over-regulation that acts to the
detriment of the profession,
then the public and thereby the animals under our
care."
--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar,
or start a vote
visit
http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/farmtalking

To leave the group, email:
...

--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or
start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/farmtalking
To leave the group, email:

...

Originally from: frances fish

There is VERY strong feeling here, Jane. I do NOT think that the Government would have been able to proceed as they did without the collusion of the vets. I do not think enough had the strength of character to stand up and say what they were doing was very wrong. We looked to the vets(most of us ) for advice and support. We got neither. Many turned a blind eye, some actually were seen to revel in the bloodbath(notable case in South West Scotland!) Our trust has turned to disgust. The vets are short of work, few will call them out in case, as Coleen has remarked, they are betrayed for some reason, to the powers that be.Some were, undoubtedly blackmailed with the withdrawal of lucrative Defra work e.g. T.B. tests (makes you laugh now does'nt it ? Because thats exactly what Defra are now proposing. The betrayers are now betrayed. Yes, Jane, I would be the first to admit there are good vets out there, thank the Lord for that. But, as you have said in the past, it only needs the honest, reasonable and good to keep their mouths shut for the corrupt and evil to prevail. We, personally, are still awaiting the Ombudsman report into the handling of our case, it was due out at the turn of the year, then it was the New Year, then we had been put in with other cases which were not yet complete, we are stll waiting. We get the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the reports are being deliberately slowed down in some way. They cannot be "sat-on" for ever. It is our fervent hope that there is a reason why they do not want them published, but we have been grossly misled in the past and I do not want to get my hopes too high. Yes, I also think that attempts are being made at reform within the RCVS. Alas, we might also say, too little and too late. Currently, thay have struck off one of their members, laughably for signing a false certificate for export purposes. Finally, have they realised that because they chose to ignore those who committed that self same crime in 2001, they have provided this member with the ammunition to app eal against the decision and probably win ! Not only whave they found they have few teeth, they will now prove themselves completely edentulous !!! Also, to falsify certificates within this country is one thing, but for exportation when disease might be involved ? Now, what will our foreign friends think of that one? Still fighting for justice, Frances

Originally from: Farmtalking

Hi Francis! –

Yes I understand that you have very strong feelings and in fact so do I!

At the same time I know that to constantly berate others for the mistakes they have made in the past is more likely to cause them to entrence their postition and continue to try to justify their actions.

What we desperately desire and 'must have' is a veterinary service we can trust and rely on to provide the very best care and protection for our animals.

I have had several conversations with different vets recently and have been pleased to note that they are trying to learn from and reconsider the actions of their profession in the past and seek what is best for the future.

We need the profession on our side!

I know that there are many like yourself still waiting for the Ombudsman's report and others who have not let the matter rest.

The pressure on the RCVS has not relaxed as much as one might imagine nor indeed on the Government. In fact in many subtle ways I think it could well be increasing!

We all 'reap what we sow' and it's obvious to many that the increased incidence of, for instance, TB reactors, must in part be due to the backlog of testing caused through FMD and the importtion of stock from infected areas without pre-testing the cattle prior to moving them to non-infected areas.

At the same time, it is so easy to forget that cattle can react to the test for many reasons other than a TB infection. So many farmers are unaware of this fact and TB testing vets have forgotten it!

This can be doubly tragic when the PM results are sometimes not conclusive. In those animals we will never know if they had contracted TB or not.

Because TB is a very serious disease that can affect humans, the desire to act quickly to eradicate the problem is increased and monitoring of reactors ceases to be considered.

It also seems that an unreasonable amount of fear concerning BSE and Scrapie has been instilled in the minds of so many and the measures used and proposed to eradicate both these problems is heavy-handed and lacking proven scientific facts to back them.

For these reasons it is so important that we remain or become 'friends' with out vets and encourage them to question their actions, the advice they receive and seek the scientific and medical truth for the benefit of us all.

I guess at times it seems from the postings I make as if I'm not on your side but that's far from the truth! I'm still convinced that 'a problem shared can be a problem solved' and that 'he who gives up never wins'!

I bettr dash now as I have been asked to judge the paintings and photos at Ellemford Show today – so I better not be late!

Take care – Jane

Author wrote:
There is VERY strong feeling here, Jane. I do NOT think that the Government would have been able to proceed as they did without the collusion of the vets. I do not think enough had the strength of character to stand up and say what they were doing was very wrong. We looked to the vets(most of us ) for advice and support. We got neither. Many turned a blind eye, some actually were seen to revel in the bloodbath(notable case in South West Scotland!) Our trust has turned to disgust. The vets are short of work, few will call them out in case, as Coleen has remarked, they are betrayed for some reason, to the powers that be.Some were, undoubtedly blackmailed with the withdrawal of lucrative Defra work e.g. T.B. tests (makes you laugh now does'nt it ? Because thats exactly what Defra are now proposing. The betrayers are now betrayed. Yes, Jane, I would be the first to admit there are good vets out there, thank the Lord for that. But, as you have said in the past, it only needs the honest, reasonable and good to keep their mouths shut for the corrupt and evil to prevail. We, personally, are still awaiting the Ombudsman report into the handling of our case, it was due out at the turn of the year, then it was the New Year, then we had been put in with other cases which were not yet complete, we are stll waiting. We get the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the reports are being deliberately slowed down in some way. They cannot be "sat-on" for ever. It is our fervent hope that there is a reason why they do not want them published, but we have been grossly misled in the past and I do not want to get my hopes too high. Yes, I also think that attempts are being made at reform within the RCVS. Alas, we might also say, too little and too late. Currently, thay have struck off one of their members, laughably for signing a false certificate for export purposes. Finally, have they realised that because they chose to ignore those who committed that self same crime in 2001, they have provided this member with the ammunition to a

ppeal against the decision and probably win ! Not only whave they found they have few teeth, they will now prove themselves completely edentulous !!! Also, to falsify certificates within this country is one thing, but for exportation when disease might be involved ? Now, what will our foreign friends think of that one?

Originally from: Burkie

Dear Francis and Jane: Good comments from both of you...and exactly why I sent you the APHIS pictorials on lesions of different diseases. Just because an animal may have a lesion doesn't automatically mean it's been caused by FMD. I think you all had some other problems with some of these vesicular diseases in your country, at the same time you were all fighting FMD in the U.K. That problem was then compounded with little or no training of your own vets, as well as using inexperienced foreign vets (TVI's) who had never even seen or only read of these diseases in a textbook on animal pathology.

This problem was never observed nor admitted to by those involved with your situation in 2001.

Instead of admitting to weaknesses, or lack of training or proper education in these fields....the "kill 'em all" policy was adopted, instead. Moreover, Real-Time PCR, or vaccination programs were pooh-pooed from that time forward by all the supposed "experts."

BUT, this problem WAS NEVER ADMITTED TO!

I think there was a relase of Type O from IAH-Pirbright, and I think they covered it up...but then that is only my personal opinion.

The "cat" was let out of the bag, ie, Serotype O, and once it got out, it was "Tally Ho" to catch it and kill it.

Burkie in Kansas

Author wrote:
Hi Francis! –
Yes I understand that you have very strong feelings and in fact so do I!
At the same time I know that to constantly berate others for the mistakes they have made in the past is more likely to cause them to entrence their postition and continue to try to justify their actions.
What we desperately desire and 'must have' is a veterinary service we can trust and rely on to provide the very best care and protection for our animals.
I have had several conversations with different vets recently and have been pleased to note that they are trying to learn from and reconsider the actions of their profession in the past and seek what is best for the future.
We need the profession on our side!
I know that there are many like yourself still waiting for the Ombudsman's report and others who have not let the matter rest.
The pressure on the RCVS has not relaxed as much as one might imagine nor indeed on the Government. In fact in many subtle ways I think it could well be increasing!
We all 'reap what we sow' and it's obvious to many that the increased incidence of, for instance, TB reactors, must in part be due to the backlog of testing caused through FMD and the importtion of stock from infected areas without pre-testing the cattle prior to moving them to non-infected areas.
At the same time, it is so easy to forget that cattle can react to the test for many reasons other than a TB infection. So many farmers are unaware of this fact and TB testing vets have forgotten it!
This can be doubly tragic when the PM results are sometimes not conclusive. In those animals we will never know if they had contracted TB or not.
Because TB is a very serious disease that can affect humans, the desire to act quickly to eradicate the problem is increased and monitoring of reactors ceases to be considered.
It also seems that an unreasonable amount of fear concerning BSE and Scrapie has been instilled in the minds of so many and the measures used and proposed to eradicate both these problems is heavy-handed and lacking proven scientific facts to back them.
For these reasons it is so important that we remain or become 'friends' with out vets and encourage them to question their actions, the advice they receive and seek the scientific and medical truth for the benefit of us all.
I guess at times it seems from the postings I make as if I'm not on your side but that's far from the truth! I'm still convinced that 'a problem shared can be a problem solved' and that 'he who gives up never wins'!
I bettr dash now as I have been asked to judge the paintings and photos at Ellemford Show today – so I better not be late!
Take care – Jane
Author wrote:
There is VERY strong feeling here, Jane. I do NOT think that the Government would have been able to proceed as they did without the collusion of the vets. I do not think enough had the strength of character to stand up and say what they were doing was very wrong. We looked to the vets(most of us ) for advice and support. We got neither. Many turned a blind eye, some actually were seen to revel in the bloodbath(notable case in South West Scotland!) Our trust has turned to disgust. The vets are short of work, few will call them out in case, as Coleen has remarked, they are betrayed for some reason, to the powers that be.Some were, undoubtedly blackmailed with the withdrawal of lucrative Defra work e.g. T.B. tests (makes you laugh now does'nt it ? Because thats exactly what Defra are now proposing. The betrayers are now betrayed. Yes, Jane, I would be the first to admit there are good vets out there, thank the Lord for that. But, as you have said in the past, it only needs the honest, reasonable and good to keep their mouths shut for the corrupt and evil to prevail. We, personally, are still awaiting the Ombudsman report into the handling of our case, it was due out at the turn of the year, then it was the New Year, then we had been put in with other cases which were not yet complete, we are stll waiting. We get the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the reports are being deliberately slowed down in some way. They cannot be "sat-on" for ever. It is our fervent hope that there is a reason why they do not want them published, but we have been grossly misled in the past and I do not want to get my hopes too high. Yes, I also think that attempts are being made at reform within the RCVS. Alas, we might also say, too little and too late. Currently, thay have struck off one of their members, laughably for signing a false certificate for export purposes. Finally, have they realised that because they chose to ignore those who committed that self same crime in 2001, they have provided this member with the ammunition to

appeal against the decision and probably win ! Not only whave they found they have few teeth, they will now prove themselves completely edentulous !!! Also, to falsify certificates within this country is one thing, but for exportation when disease might be involved ? Now, what will our foreign friends think of that one?

Originally from: coleen

Exactly Francis. I also wonder how a body that was not held to any account, so therefore in the eyes of the LAW and the body that governs it – it did NO wrong, is going to be regulated and made accountable when the next blood bath occurs. The very fact that they write 40% of jobs are going in this profession makes you think they would relish the next round! Piles more money to be had. It makes me so angry. Seven years studying to amount to what? To become this Governments hench men.

What is happening (or rather going to happen with the sheep is utter madness) can anyone hear the Vets echoing that view. Not the odd one or two, I mean the Veterinary profession as a whole.
44 million sheep that's four times as many as fmd. If they are going to do it, the plans and who they will call in, MUST be in place. They learnt from fmd, that PLANS are vital. Brigadier Bertwhistle taught them that.

The Government is know locked into this theoretical 'saving the publics health'. Why leak any of this information if they have NO intention of carrying out the dirty deed.

Joyce and a few others know from another message board (a Labour one) that some people choose to accept that ALL our farm animals are diseased, dirty and kept in squalid conditions. There would be NO outcry from these people – in fact they would see it as the saviour of these animals. I do believe that some of the people on that group who hold these views ran/run for local Government. The myth and hype is working! We cannot continue to kid ourselves that the 'truth will out' not unless more people with power speak out and halt this spread of lies.

Of course we cannot say or do anything a second time round can we. We will just be arrested until the deed is done.
The sheep did not have fmd, neither do they have bse yet their days are numbered. The virus is in Westminster not the hills and valleys of this Land.

Coleen

----- Original Message -----
From: ...
Originally from: <...>
To: <...>
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 7:17
----- Original Message -----
From: ...
Originally from: <...>
To: <...>
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 7:17 AM
Subject: [farmtalking] RE:Vets warn Government
There is VERY strong feeling here, Jane. I do NOT think that the Government would have been able to proceed as they did without the collusion of the vets. I do not think enough had the strength of character to stand up and say what they were doing was very wrong. We looked to the vets(most of us ) for advice and support. We got neither. Many turned a blind eye, some actually were seen to revel in the bloodbath(notable case in South West Scotland!) Our trust has turned to disgust. The vets are short of work, few will call them out in case, as Coleen has remarked, they are betrayed for some reason, to the powers that be.Some were, undoubtedly blackmailed with the withdrawal of lucrative Defra work e.g. T.B. tests (makes you laugh now does'nt it ? Because thats exactly what Defra are now proposing. The betrayers are now betrayed. Yes, Jane, I would be the first to admit there are good vets out there, thank the Lord for that. But, as you have said in the past, it only needs the honest, reasonable and good to keep their mouths shut for the corrupt and evil to prevail. We, personally, are still awaiting the Ombudsman report into the handling of our case, it was due out at the turn of the year, then it was the New Year, then we had been put in with other cases which were not yet complete, we are stll waiting. We get the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the reports are being deliberately slowed down in some way. They cannot be "sat-on" for ever. It is our fervent hope that there is a reason why they do not want them published, but we have been grossly misled in the past and I do not want to get my hopes too high. Yes, I also think that attempts are being made at reform within the RCVS. Alas, we might also say, too little and too late. Currently, thay have struck off one of their members, laughably for signing a false certificate for export purposes. Finally, have they realised that because they chose to ignore those who committed that self same crime in 2001, they have provided this member with the ammunition to appeal against the decision and probably win ! Not only whave they found they have few teeth, they will now prove themselves completely edentulous !!! Also, to falsify certificates within this country is one thing, but for exportation when disease might be involved ? Now, what will our foreign friends think of that one?
Still fighting for justice, Frances
—If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/farmtalking
To leave the group, email: ...

Originally from: David

Hi Burkie,

The problem caused frustration with ministry vets – enough for at least one of them to write to Page Street to question what disease the animals were suffering from when the results came back negative for FMD.

Of course the testing was stopped when the "slaughter on suspicion" policy came in.

The point was that it was never establish what was causing the FMD like leisions.

David

PS – Off list emails to you are now getting bounced back – what's up?

"Just because an animal may have a lesion doesn't automatically mean it's been caused by FMD. I think you all had some other problems with some of these vesicular diseases in your country, at the same time you were all fighting FMD in the U.K. That problem was then compounded with little or no training of your own vets, as well as using inexperienced foreign vets (TVI's) who had never even seen or only read of these diseases in a textbook on animal pathology.

This problem was never observed nor admitted to by those involved with your situation in 2001".

Originally from: Burkie

Dear David: You are "catching on," for sure!

Excellent point!

I am going to post up a reply to both Joyce and Lina in a few minutes....under my own name....will be interested to see what you think of it. "FMD Theory from Kansas – The Un-named Benefactor"

Burkie

Originally from: Burkie

Dear David: My apologies to you and to everyone else on the Smartgroups websites.....I am now using a new e-mail server, instead of my old one....so I now have a new e-mail address.

I didn't really think this would cause anyone any problems, but I have not notified so many of you, my friends, of this change. Also, didn't realize this would cause your posts to me to "bounce" back to you, depending on your Smartgroups e-mail retrieval settings......so, I've just made the change on both the Farmtalking and FMDNew websites, using my new address.

I was getting so much SPAM using my old address, that something had to be done.

My apologies to anyone of you that this has caused problems for.

Best Regards,

Burkie in Kansas