Already a subscriber? Log in
The difference with bird flu, of course, is that the potential for panic is so much greater, given that it is possible for humans to contract the illness from birds and that it is theoretically possible for the virus to mutate into a form which would allow direct human-to-human transfer of the disease. That fear could rapidly escalate during an outbreak makes us all the keener to ask: why is the government failing to take sensible precautions now, before bird flu reaches our shores?
It should not be difficult to keep poultry stocks free from H5N1. The disease is spread between birds not on the wind but mainly through contact with faeces. Moreover, contrary to some reports, the virus is not transmitted by blackbirds and common house sparrows but only by fowl, which in most parts of Britain are quite rare in the wild. It follows, therefore, that the risk of transmitting the disease to poultry stocks could virtually be eliminated by isolating them from contact with the droppings of wildfowl. All that this requires is for poultry farmers temporarily to abandon the principles of free-range farming and lock their charges indoors. Given that even free-range chickens spend much of their time in large sheds, only occasionally venturing outside to peck at the surrounding grass, it is hardly a challenge simply to chase the birds inside and shut the doors.
Indeed, just about every other European nation has already issued orders for poultry to be kept indoors. In addition, several nations have ordered birds to be vaccinated in certain circumstances: France, for example, has taken this measure in the case of domesticated birds which live near wetlands particularly rich in wildfowl. Germany and France have also banned live poultry from being bought and sold at fairs. Yet what, so far, has been the British response? Poultry farmers have merely been advised to keep their birds indoors, poultry fairs remain legal and vaccination has been ruled out by the government. Ministers argue that vaccination is not a complete cure and can mask symptoms. Perhaps, but our instincts in this instance are to trust our neighbours more than our own government. We were told at the beginning of the foot and mouth outbreak that vaccination was impractical and would damage our pork and beef industry for years to come: yet soon afterwards the Netherlands quickly snuffed out the disease through vaccination.
We do not share the doomsday vision propagated by some scientists that bird flu could evolve into a human pandemic which could kill millions around the world, like the Spanish flu of 1918–19. The world has changed rather a lot since then: palliative healthcare has improved beyond all recognition. Were such an outbreak to occur, sufferers could, in most cases, quickly be isolated. Moreover, the fact that there have so far been only about 200 human deaths from bird flu, and that many of those victims caught the disease in extreme circumstances — such as owners of cock-fighting birds giving mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to their wounded charges — suggests that H5N1 is not an especially strong virus.
Yet there is a very strong argument for taking measures to defend poultry stocks now, before the disease has the chance to reach the country and spread panic. The necessary measures have already been taken by other EU countries. The government’s position — that it probably won’t be necessary because wildfowl don’t usually migrate here from France and Germany — stinks of complacency. Much though we appreciate seeing chickens raised in a semi-natural environment compared with the battery farms which were near-universal just a few years ago, a very simple choice faces us: lock up our chickens now, or risk being locked up ourselves later.
Also in Society
Also by The Spectator
Latest
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in