Login Register

'Cull will spare just five herds' Labour warns

By Western Morning News  |  Posted: October 14, 2011

Badger
Comments (0)

Controversial Government plans to tackle TB in cattle by culling badgers will reduce herd breakdowns by just 2.5 per cent but cost farmers "hundreds of thousands of pounds", Labour has claimed.

Shadow environment secretary Mary Creagh said official figures showed just five herd breakdowns a year would be prevented in each cull area.

The Government plans to allow farmers and landowners to cull badgers at their own expense in a bid to tackle the disease in herds, which led to the slaughter of 25,000 cattle in England last year.

Further consultations will be held before a widespread cull is brought in, but the Government plans to pilot culling in two areas, one of which is expected to be in the Westcountry, to test "controlled shooting" of free-running badgers.

Ms Creagh said: "You said the science showed your badger cull would lead to five fewer herd breakdowns per year in each cull area. Last year there were over 2,025 confirmed herd breakdowns in England.

"So even with 10 cull areas after 2013, the cull would prevent just 50 herd breakdowns a year, a reduction of just 2.5 per cent in actual herd breakdowns."

But Jim Paice, Minister for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, told her: "The farming community is anxious to do something after the 13 years of neglect of you party.

"The fact is this is one part of a large package of measures, the rest of which the Government is doing."

Meanwhile, conservationists' claims that vaccinating badgers is an "affordable alternative" to a cull have been dismissed by leading vets.

The British Veterinary Association said conclusions drawn from a pilot vaccination carried out by Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust were "unrealistic at best and spin at worst."

Read more from Western Morning News

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters
  • TheodoreV  |  October 18 2011, 11:15PM

    You're very welcome "2ladybugs". Hope it answered your question.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • 2ladybugs  |  October 18 2011, 8:21PM

    @TheodoreV Thank you.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • TheodoreV  |  October 18 2011, 7:02PM

    At "Charlespk Tuesday, October 18 2011, 4:47PM "Theodore V; you are the epitome of the ignorance of all the tuberculosis causing genus of bacteria. Rarely have I read greater drivel on the subject than you've just posted." You are so funny Charles I nearly laughed 'till I CRIED! Big long quote from a doctor who dealt with TB which tells us nothing new. We know TB was the biggest killer at the end of the 19th Century. We know that "fresh air treatment" was introduced at the beginning of the 20th as rates fell but perhaps you are too dull to get the point I made, generally accepted by the medical profession by the way, that the majority of the decrease in death rate PRECEDED any effective treatment by sulphonamide drugs or the "miraculous"antibiotics after the war. In other words the fall in rates was brought about by those extraneous factors I referred to. Now, as I have said before, rates have been seen to rise again in the last twenty years (nothing of course compared to those of the Victorian era) owing to factors COMPLETELY UNCONNECTED WITH TB IN CATTLE. It has got something to do with people sleeping rough; it has got something to do with people suffering from other infections particularly those affecting the immune system such as AIDS; it has got something to do with abuse of drugs and alcohol; it has got something to do with people entering the country from the African and Indian sub-continents already suffering from the disease. Resistance to anti-biotics, which you keep harping on about as if it was the badgers fault, is a very real problem today caused largely, and ironically, by doctors with the support and encouragement of drug companies. It is belatedly being addressed in the west but still largely ignored where the disease is most common in "developing countries". Incidentally my mother had TB. She attended a sanatorium. She recovered with no other treatment than fresh air and exercise. I was not immunised, nor did I receive treatment. I did NOT contract TB and have (touch wood) been physically healthy all my life which hopefully might reassure anyone out there affected by your incessant scare-mongering.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • Charlespk  |  October 18 2011, 4:47PM

    Dr. Richard M. Krause, was born in Marietta, Ohio 1925. He was a NIAID Director 1975-1984 is a physician, an immunologist and a microbiologist noted for his research on bacteria that trigger the body's immune system. He is an advocate of the application of new technology to prevent disease. He was on the faculty of Rockefeller University, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dean of Emory University School of Medicine and is now Senior Scientific Advisor to the Fogarty International Centre, NIH. He is the author of "Restless Tide: The Persistent Challenge of the Microbial World.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • Charlespk  |  October 18 2011, 4:47PM

    Theodore V; you are the epitome of the ignorance of all the tuberculosis causing genus of bacteria. Rarely have I read greater drivel on the subject than you've just posted. "explain the decline of infections and particularly TB well before the widespread introduction of anti-biotics after the second world war." Well now you know know people. . If you eat healthily, never go out without a coat or mix with other people and get plenty of sea or mountain air, with luck you'll never ever catch cold. Prior to Streptomycin there were only the Sulfpha drugs and Palliative care. . Of course the developed world had found ways to reduce the problem of cross infection. I'm not going to waste any more time with a "Richard" like you Theodore V. . People can make up their own minds. . My assertions have ALWAYS been fully attributed to top scientists from around the world. Treatment of TB before antibiotics was a protracted affair consisting of bed rest in a sanitarium. A young tubercular physician recalls his experience: His case was detected early by clinical and laboratory tests. The cure, however, was non-specific since no medication to combat the tubercle bacillus existed. It was accomplished by special sanitarium treatment, consisting of plenty of fresh air, rest, regular exercise and a simple diet. Companionship also was considered important. After nine months the young man recovered sufficiently to be asked to stay on as a physician. His elation was understandable. The rehabilitation was complete. The physician-novelist, the late Walker Percy, commented on these matters from his own experience as a patient at the Trudeau Sanitarium at Saranac Lake, New York. With early detection of TB followed by sanitarium treatment, the mortality rate for tuberculosis in New York City dropped from 350 deaths per 100,000 in 1885 to 100 in 1920. At that time, there were 10,000 hospital beds for tuberculosis patients in New York City. Everyone thought the introduction of antibiotics in the mid- 1940s would end the occurrence of tuberculosis. As a medical student in the late 1940s as antibiotics were being introduced, I witnessed the afterglow of the TB epidemic while working in the two TB hospitals left in Cleveland. Many patients had advanced TB, and the antibiotics had not entirely replaced the old drastic treatment for advanced disease. In such cases the advanced state of pulmonary infection required surgery to remove diseased tissue. In addition, several procedures were used to "rest" the lung to enhance-it was believed-the healing process. In one procedure air was injected into the peritoneum. This pushed up the diaphragm and decreased the extent of expansion and contraction of the lungs during breathing. It put the lungs to rest as much as possible so they could heal naturally. In the decade after the introduction of antibiotics the two hospitals in Cleveland and elsewhere were closed. A medical specialty and research which dealt solely with tuberculosis virtually disappeared. Everyone was convinced the battle had been won. The U.S. death rate from TB of 50 per 100,000 in 1940 fell to 22 per 100,000 in 1950, a decline which continued until the recent resurgence. It is to the factors that have fueled this resurgence that we now turn. The Resurgence of Tuberculosis In 1984 the decline in the rate of tuberculosis reversed and it began to increase. By 1992 there were 28,000 cases per year in the United States If the prior declining trend had continued, it is anticipated there would have been only 17,000, or less than one case per 100,000. . Dr.Richard M. Krause

    Rate 0
    Report
  • GRIBBLE666  |  October 18 2011, 3:58PM

    @2ladybugs what you need is a large glass of wine and a large roll up and chill girl.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • 2ladybugs  |  October 18 2011, 3:32PM

    @GRIBBLE666 Yes I'll agree with you there. Can't do anything else. This cull is killing me I don't know about the badgers.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • GRIBBLE666  |  October 18 2011, 3:26PM

    @ 2Ladybugs well i am not going to argue with an idiot as i will drop down to your level and you will surely beat me with experiance. Meooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow

    Rate 0
    Report
  • 2ladybugs  |  October 18 2011, 3:26PM

    @GRIBBLE666 I seem to be having trouble with the word your today.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • 2ladybugs  |  October 18 2011, 3:23PM

    @GRIBBLE666 Let us hope you cynicism is wrong. Him above will have a lot to answer to otherwise.

    Rate 0
    Report

      YOUR COMMENTS AWAITING MODERATION

       
       

      MORE NEWS HEADLINES