Ramble

[cheekbones3]

Particularly surprising recently was the Government's decision to go with actual scientific advice with regard to culling badgers to control bovine TB.

The independent study on the area originally recommended that a cull would not be effective, a couple of possible reasons being that badgers would extend their ranges if populations were reduced, therefore spreading TB further, and that there's no actual proven link between badgers and TB outbreaks in cattle.

Then came (I missed the reason why) the Government expert that recommended the opposite, and I fully expected them to go with this advice, assuming it was the usual "scientific" advice handily organised when the independent advice wasn't in line with desired policy. But actually, they've gone with the original advice saying that a cull was unjustified, which it does indeed appear to be.

Maybe, sometimes the right decision occurs? I wonder what caused that. Maybe the whinging farmers are losing political clout?

Comments

[dryriser.livejournal.com]

I suspect the reason (albeit misguided) for any scientist to support a cull is linked to this, from a vet friend of mine:

"Badgers do not spread TB, they did not have it originally BUT they can catch it off infected cows. As such, they act a a reservoir for the infection where it has previously existed and will continue to re-infect livestock placed in proximity to them.

Badgers therefore don't spread TB, they merely protract its presence where it already exists. Farmers spread TB by moving cattle which might have it all over the country in lorries.

We don't vaccinate largely because the vaccine is shit and there is no easy way of differentiating between an animal which has been vaccinated from one which has TB.

Oh, and the test for TB is also shit. It is inaccurate, not very sensetive and gives a high proportion of false positives and false negatives. There is no really good way to find out definatively if an animal has TB (without killing it), if there was, we would have it erradicated by now."

So basically, badgers store the bacteria and can re-infect a cleansed herd, plus it's bloody hard to detect. Of course, what never gets mentioned is that it's highly more likely that it's deer passing TB on than any other animal or that the badgers wouldn't be infected in the first place if farmers hadn't moved diseased cattle in...

[cheekbones3.livejournal.com]

Aye, poor badgers get all the blame when it's the usual problems that only exist due to intensive agriculture.