I thought you and others might find this interesting. It's off of an email list I monitor concerning sheep and grazing.
> F & M information from UK
>
> Until MAFF and other responsible agencies begin to answer these questions,
> and until we, the general public cease to worship so unremittingly at the
> altar of conventional medical science, this crisis (as with numerous other
> iatrogenic, or doctor induced crises) will remain out of control and on
the
> rampage. For it is in researching this situation more carefully, that we
> realise the only identifiable entities out of control and on the rampage
> are our own ignorance of the facts and those official bodies conducting
the
> current slaughter. The fact that the latest news bulletins are reporting
> that 'expert' intervention may now have contained the crisis, must not
lull
> us into a false sense of security over their so-called 'expertise'. There
> was nothing to worry about in the first place. The whole thing has been an
> absolute disgrace.
> Let's take a look at those headlines.
>
> CHIEF VET WARNS OF CATASTROPHE. UK Telegraph 9.3.2001 The foot and mouth
> crisis appears in danger of racing out of control, despite assurances that
> the virus had been contained. "The disease is going to last a long time."
> Said Jim Scudamore, the chief Veterinary officerS
>
> VETS FEAR BLACK MARKET SHEEP WILL SPREAD VIRUS. UK Times, 9.3.2001
> Large tracts of the countryside may be no go areas for months as foot and
> mouth threaten to spiral out of control. There are now fears that the
virus
> could infect 19 million breeding flocks, which could carry disease
> antibodies after the outbreak is overS.
>
> NO END IN SIGHT TO FARM CRISIS. UK Guardian 9.3.2001.Britain's foot and
> mouth crisis has spread far further than originally thought and is moving
> rapidly from sheep to cattleS.
>
> What is "Foot & Mouth" and what effect does it have on your animals? Does
> it kill? Can the meat be eaten from an animal that suffers or has suffered
> from F&M?
> Below are the facts on "Foot & Mouth" .... now after taking the time to
> read this article tell me why the governments of the world are destroying
> your food supply.
> Is it to control you through your food?
> Why do governments kill infected animals if "Foot & Mouth" is nothing
> worse than "The Common cold" and the animals recover with no ill effects.
> Farmers looked at their now-normal cows in bewilderment and asked "Was
> that it? Was that trivial illness what all the fuss was about?"
> Foot and mouth is NOT the serious disease we are being led to believe by
> some of our national papers and news programmes. But you wouldn't think so
> looking at the latest headlines.
> Large tracts of the countryside may be no go areas for months as foot and
> mouth threatens to spiral out of control. There are now fears that the
> virus could infect 19 million breeding flocks, which could carry disease
> antibodies after the outbreak is overS.
> Over this last week, international television and radio news bulletins
> have brought world audiences graphic reports of an encroaching pestilence.
> The dreaded and highly infectious livestock disease known as 'foot and
> mouth' or FMD has returned to British shores. The globe is being treated
to
> round the clock reports on 'the extent of the FMD nightmare'. Mounds of
> destroyed cattle, gruesome pyres burning through the night, ashen-faced
> reporters delivering the latest outbreak statistics, people being warned
to
> stay away from the countryside. "As well as being airborne, the foot and
> mouth virus can adhere to car tyres. Do not venture into the countryside,
> unless absolutely necessary." warned the BBC Monday 26th Feb 10 o'clock
> evening news. The same feature included reports of international rugby
> matches being cancelled, a meat shortage crisis pending, pan shots of
> once-thriving but now empty cattle markets, lots of hype, lots of emotion,
> lots of TV batten-down specials...but, as we shall soon discover, no
actual
> facts.
> In truth, if the events of this last week have taught us anything, it is
> just how much we are at the mercy of today's media. As a result of this
> barrage of emotive, inaccurate hype, there are now members of the public
> who consider it genuinely irresponsible to hang out a strip of bacon for
> their garden birds, or to go for a walk in the country until this crisis
is
> over. Despite the much-trusted BBC, ITV, CH4 pronouncements, the facts
> surrounding this 'crisis' are very different to what we have so far been
> told.
> Abigail Wood is a vet and researcher into the history of FMD, based at the
> University of Manchester in the UK. She remains very down to earth over
> these latest 'rampaging vicious virus' reports. Credence Publications
> contacted her as a result of her recent UK Times article (1) which began
> thus:
> "Foot and mouth is as serious to animals as a bad cold is to human
beings.
> So why the concern?" Wood's research, when taken in conjunction with
> research carried out by Credence Publications makes it quite clear that
FMD
> is not the vicious gremlin we have been led to believe.
> So what is FMD? The current wisdom which we shall be examining a little
> later, theorises that FMD is viral in nature. Symptoms of FMD in livestock
> begin usually with a temperature, followed within 24 hours by the
> appearance of blisters and ulcerations on places such as the tongue, lips,
> gums, dental pad, interdigital skin of the feet, bulbs of the heels and
> milk teats. Occasionally, ulcerations appear inside the nostrils or on the
> muzzle or vulva. Visually, these ulcerations are the equivalent of large
> cold sores. The resultant illness and lameness causes decreased appetite,
a
> drop in milk yield, a drop in productivity, and of course, increased care
> costs. Afflicted animals almost always recover, usually within a week or
> two. Death occurs in only 5 percent of cases. (2) And the meat is fit to
> eat. (3)
> For much of the 19th century, FMD was common right the way across the UK.
> In fact, it was endemic. But it did not destroy farming. We lived with it.
> Our cattle became illS.and then they recovered. Life continued on as
> normal. So why today's scenes of mass destruction? Quite simply, it is
> because we are continuing to adhere to some woefully errant farming policy
> instituted nearly 50 years ago. Says Wood: "The instant destruction policy
> was implemented in the 1950's by the UK governing bodies, as a result of
> growing pressure over the years from pedigree herd owners, (rather than
the
> more common meat and milk producers) who wished to see the eradication of
> FMD. Continued promotion of the slaughter policy by the UK authorities as
> the most effective way of dealing with foot and mouth, eventually
persuaded
> the continent and then the rest of the world to follow suit. We instituted
> the policy, and now we have to live with the results of that policy."
> In those early years, FMD was as much a part of British farming as bad
> weather, poor harvests and other afflictions affecting livelihood. But in
> today's intensive farming climate, production and global reputation is
> everything. Because of the UK's continued and, as we shall see, unfounded
> insistence that FMD is highly infectious, and must be eradicated at all
> costs, one whiff on the global food markets that UK herds have FMD leads
> quite naturally to today's totally disproportionate scenes. If we are in a
> pit, then it is a pit of our own making. And if this latest 'outbreak' is
> to be referred to as a nightmare, then it is a nightmare brought about by
> our own political and economic policies. The early zeal for the perfect
> pedigree - a disease-free herd - is this same ideal not mirrored in
today's
> genome quest for a disease-free human race? It seems that the FMD 'instant
> destruction' policy has its roots fair and square in the mistaken belief
> that all illness and disease, even those considered minor and/or harmless,
> can eventually be eradicated.
> The cows, pigs and sheep dying today are not doing so as a result of any
> illness. They are dying entirely at the hands of man. The preliminary
> report on this latest FMD 'outbreak' submitted by Dr J.M. Scudamore, UK
> Chief Veterinary Officer, to the OIE (Office International des Epizooties)
> tells of 35 cases on three farms, no deaths occurring anywhere from the
> actual disease, but 577 animals on those farms nevertheless instantly
> destroyed. (4) Should we line up our children because they are coughing?
> With the facts to hand regarding FMD, should we not begin to ask some
> fundamental questions? Why can't our vital farming community, and the
> public at large be given the necessary facts, and then more importantly,
> the opportunity to question this instant destruction policy? But therein
> lies the difficulty folks. "It would be very difficult to change it now."
> Wood told us. "That would be to question the perceived wisdom of the last
> 100 years." It is entrenched scientific error, and intractable pride on
> behalf of the UK agricultural and governmental bodies, that is the killer
> in our midst. A spokesperson from the diagnostic department of Animal
> Health Trust who wished not to be named, stated "The hype is all out of
> proportion. If the authorities just left the animals alone to recover from
> FMD, this would make them healthy, and immune the next time around."
> Moving on from 'foot and mouth as common cold', what's all this about FMD
> being viral in nature, being airborne, and sticking to car tyres and
> Wellington boots? Apparently, the FMD virus is quite choosy, being
breathed
> out by pigs, but not breathed in by cats or dogs. It can be hosted by
> horses, but to no ill-effect, and humans too can contract the virus,
> suffering mild skin irritations. But is this pattern of disease grounded
in
> reality? Does it conform to a sensible pattern of disease? Or are we once
> again just trusting the wisdom of the day? In attempting to discover how
> these agencies arrive at a positive diagnosis of FMD, and to try and get
an
> explanation for the seemingly illogical nature of FMD proliferation, it
> soon became clear that these questions were not at all welcome, and some
of
> those well-worn tiresome conventional 'dodging' techniques very soon began
> to surface. Especially so, when questioned over the possibility of
> mis-diagnosis.
> The blood test used to determine the presence of the FMD virus is known as
> the ELISA test or enzyme linked immuno-absorbent assay test. The test
> delivers the positive reading by detecting proteins and antibodies in the
> blood, proteins and antibodies which are presumed to be there as a result
> the presence of the virus. At no time is a virus itself ever detected. No
> actual photograph exists anywhere of the FMD virus. Like so many other
> viruses in the $multi-billion virus industry, we have only innumerable
> artists' impressions to go by. As far as actual proof is concerned, there
> isn't any. We accept the virus model for FMD (and BSE for that matter)
> because that's what we're told. But there are good grounds indeed for
> questioning the validity of this whole approach to disease detection. For
> ELISA comes to us with a very chequered history.
> In the realm of human medicine, ELISA is used extensively to detect
certain
> diseases, particularly HIV. And this same test is now acknowledged to be
> responsible for delivering a very high number of 'false' positive HIV
> diagnoses. Conventional medical literature lists some 60 different
> conditions, unrelated to HIV that can elicit an HIV positive response,
> including flu! (5) It is conflict of interests, huge pharmaceutical
losses,
> entrenched error and the threat of massive litigation that has so far
> stopped this disastrous story from becoming more widely known. Back to the
> farmyard, and we discover the animal kingdom is equally susceptible to
> foreign proteins in the blood and heightened levels of antibody activity.
> The stress of confinement alone can produce an immune response in an
> animal. Kelly Sapsford, Operations Manager at Harlan Sera Labs, a serum
and
> antibody manufacturing company told us "Antibodies are not necessarily
> specific to one disease. Picture a key that fits a certain lock. The key
to
> that lock is not necessarily unique. There may well be other locks out
> there that the key will fit.." What minor illnesses are there in the
animal
> kingdom that might elicit the same immune response to FMD? And with all
> these farms being visited at such lightning speed, what are the protocols
> being adhered to? Are they being adhered to? Surely, we are allowed to
know
> these things.
> The officials at Pirbright Animal Health Laboratory responsible for
> managing this latest 'crisis', however think otherwise. No awkward
> questions are entertained. Under specific instruction from management, a
Dr
> Tom Barrett at Pirbright told us that staff were not allowed to answer any
> questions, except through the Medical Director. Numerous telephone calls
to
> MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries) produced the same
> negative response, pointing us only to their website. Repeated attempts to
> speak to somebody in authority at Pirbright finally located the Head of
> Diagnostics, John Anderson. He informed us that whilst the ELISA tests
were
> manufactured 'in-house' "..of course, they were accurate." This same pat
> answer is what was being delivered by the relevant authorities as the
> accounts of HIV misdiagnosis began to surface.
> Anderson then listed the other tests which are used in conjunction with
> ELISA to supposedly confirm the presence of the virus. Unfortunately, the
> confirmatory tests he mentioned are all equally susceptible to error. And
> the fact that the Pirbright FMD tests are manufactured in-house excludes
> them from that valuable check and balance system known as peer review.
When
> pressed on these points, Mr Anderson would not enter into discussion. But
> then extracting qualifying information from governmental bodies is never
> straightforward. Colin King, a spokesman from an independent veterinary
> diagnostics company, stated; "The protocol information and detail you seek
> will be almost impossible to come by. In peace time as well as in war,
> these government agencies won't really tell you anything." In summarising
> the current FMD 'crisis', this simple extract from Abigail Wood's account
> of the 1920's Cheshire FMD outbreak is most revealing. Trawled from
> Cheshire local newspapers available at the Cheshire Records Office we read
> "Ministry teams were so far behind in their slaughtering that on many
farms
> the cows had recovered before the slaughterers had arrived.
> Farmers looked at their now-normal cows in bewilderment and asked "Was
> that it? Was that trivial illness what all the fuss was about?" |
