-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
H5N1 in UK (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter kas
- Start date
James Lowther said:
Absolutely agree.
We should ban the word "blame" and simply look for causes regardless of vested interests-be they industrialised poultry farming , or the international birding tourism business.
Thank goodness the real experts at WHO, EC etc who are trying to avert any potential threat to humans, keep an open mind.
Colin
MKinHK
Mike Kilburn
James Lowther said:
I'm all in favour of experts who stick to what they know and admit the limits of their knowledge. They have a huge amount to contribute. Its when they cross into a field they know know chaff all about and continue to speak as "experts"that they deserve to be nailed to the wall.
Would you take your dog to an ornithologist to be neutered? Nor would I.
So why should I believe a vet talking about wild bird migration between Britain and Eastern Europe? When he does his status shifts from "expert" to "charlatan" in a single bound.
James Lowther said:
Well yes, eventually, and only after blaming wild birds as a starting position without a single shred of evidence.
James Lowther said:
There is evidence from Hong Kong that raptors especially can contract the disease from infected birds (usually passerines that are released cagebirds).
However there is also solid proof that the outbeak in Nigeria was caused by chickens smuggled from China and this outbreak suggests the same problem - factory-farmed poultry biosafety that is a total joke! Its the huge viral loadings in factory-reared birds and the manure that is also traded internationally which need to be fully investigated.
Its also hard to explain why there are so few H5N1 positive live or dead wild birds being found if they are widespread and effective carriers.
When Government's position shifts so quickly and so often its not surprising that the public starts to ask questions about whether they a) know what they are on about and b) whether any ulterior motives are influencing their announcements.
This time, thankfully, it seems that the facts ARE getting in the way of a good story!
Last edited:
martintbird
Well-known member
Spread is by poultry industry. Period.
Simple answer: Yes. And Hong Kong wasn't necessarily source.
More re that yes: solely by the poultry industry. Including smuggling, dead birds, perhaps "silently" in vaccinated live birds, in poultry manure (within feed and as fertiliser), on dirty crates, on boots etc. FAO promoted practice of using chicken manure, bits of dead chickens as feed in fish farms helping sustain H5N1. (I've seen this happening in Indonesia; got photos and short article on my DocMartin site - don't view if it's dinnertime).
So, also saying FAO has inadvertently helped in spread of H5N1.
Re HK: known as place where H5N1 of concern identified (really, Guangong farm goose 1997). But I've seen re avian flu people reckoning there's connection (traced in DNA) with a bird flu in UK - Scotland in 1959: The price of cheap chicken is bird flu
(well worth a read; includes "The truly great ruse is that industrial poultry farms are the best way to produce chickens "). In a sense then, it's come home again.
H5N1 into wild - it dies out pretty fast, largely as it kills most birds it infects. Typically, see a few individuals, even scavengers such as crows (and, as Mike mentioned, can be birds of prey) and that's it.
Indeed saw waterbirds move west with H5N1 when eastern Europe became v cold late last winter, but then no evidence of further spread (you know of real evidence for this: tell us).
Indeed, at one site, infected swans found on pond [Romania?], where other wild birds tested didn't have H5N1.
- regular wild bird flus abound in infected waterbird faeces; H5N1 in lower amounts faeces, mainly in trachea. H5N1 suits those crowded poultry farms; it's evolved and continues to evolve in them. Also interesting it has better survival in warm water than regular wild bird flu: again, shift away from best suiting migratory northern breeding waterfowl; maybe better fit with ponds inc fishponds in southeast Asia?
H5N1 (variants of concern, that is - H5N1 can be found rarely in wild waterbirds as low pathogenic flu) has evolved in poultry farms; in the kinds of farms where birds crammed in together.
Whilst not shilly-shallying here: no wild bird species known to be able to survive and sustain and spread H5N1.
Simple answer: Yes. And Hong Kong wasn't necessarily source.
More re that yes: solely by the poultry industry. Including smuggling, dead birds, perhaps "silently" in vaccinated live birds, in poultry manure (within feed and as fertiliser), on dirty crates, on boots etc. FAO promoted practice of using chicken manure, bits of dead chickens as feed in fish farms helping sustain H5N1. (I've seen this happening in Indonesia; got photos and short article on my DocMartin site - don't view if it's dinnertime).
So, also saying FAO has inadvertently helped in spread of H5N1.
Re HK: known as place where H5N1 of concern identified (really, Guangong farm goose 1997). But I've seen re avian flu people reckoning there's connection (traced in DNA) with a bird flu in UK - Scotland in 1959: The price of cheap chicken is bird flu
(well worth a read; includes "The truly great ruse is that industrial poultry farms are the best way to produce chickens "). In a sense then, it's come home again.
H5N1 into wild - it dies out pretty fast, largely as it kills most birds it infects. Typically, see a few individuals, even scavengers such as crows (and, as Mike mentioned, can be birds of prey) and that's it.
Indeed saw waterbirds move west with H5N1 when eastern Europe became v cold late last winter, but then no evidence of further spread (you know of real evidence for this: tell us).
Indeed, at one site, infected swans found on pond [Romania?], where other wild birds tested didn't have H5N1.
- regular wild bird flus abound in infected waterbird faeces; H5N1 in lower amounts faeces, mainly in trachea. H5N1 suits those crowded poultry farms; it's evolved and continues to evolve in them. Also interesting it has better survival in warm water than regular wild bird flu: again, shift away from best suiting migratory northern breeding waterfowl; maybe better fit with ponds inc fishponds in southeast Asia?
H5N1 (variants of concern, that is - H5N1 can be found rarely in wild waterbirds as low pathogenic flu) has evolved in poultry farms; in the kinds of farms where birds crammed in together.
Whilst not shilly-shallying here: no wild bird species known to be able to survive and sustain and spread H5N1.
MKinHK
Mike Kilburn
A stunning example of selective application the truth from our Bootiful buddies is the Q&A on avian flu on their website here.
I especially like their answer to the question "What is Avian Flu?". While accurate in its strictest sense, it totally fails to mention that:
At what stage would the government, media or consumer groups take companies to task for such misleading and selective presentation of information?
Anybody know?
I especially like their answer to the question "What is Avian Flu?". While accurate in its strictest sense, it totally fails to mention that:
- The disease has killed several hundred people worldwide and continues to kill people
- Contact and consumption of infected poultry is responsible for all known deaths worldwide
- The disease has one of the highest proportions of death to infection of any disease
- The global factory-farmed poultry industry has been identified as a major vector for the spread of H5N1, the form that is lethal to people
- The World Health Orgaisation is concerned that H5N1 may cause the next global pandemic if it mutates into a form that can be transmitted easily from human to human
- Factory farms create the ideal conditions for high viral concentrations and mutation of the virus into new and more lethal strains
- H5N1 has been found at a Bernard Matthews facility leading to the culling and destruction of thousands of turkeys from a supposedly secure facility
At what stage would the government, media or consumer groups take companies to task for such misleading and selective presentation of information?
Anybody know?
Last edited:
bitterntwisted
Graham Howard Shortt
Martin,
Many thanks for casting such an interesting light on this whole issue. I would have laughed heartily at the Tooth Fairy Bird article had it not been so dispiriting.
For the avoidance of doubt, can you please clarify and reconcile the two statements in your post above:
I guess I am re-stating Tyke's question of whether ALL outbreaks of H5N1 can be attributed to poultry, and whether wild birds could still, on occasion, act as a vector. I am now completely convinced that H5N1 is a "poultry flu" responsible for >90% of outbreaks, but that last 1%-10% is, to me, crucial as it determines whether we can say categorically that "wild birds do not transport H5N1 and cause new outbreaks." It should also inform statements by the RSPB etc. who until now have 'conceded' that wild birds are a possible vector.
Many Thanks,
Graham
Many thanks for casting such an interesting light on this whole issue. I would have laughed heartily at the Tooth Fairy Bird article had it not been so dispiriting.
For the avoidance of doubt, can you please clarify and reconcile the two statements in your post above:
martintbird said:
martintbird said:
I guess I am re-stating Tyke's question of whether ALL outbreaks of H5N1 can be attributed to poultry, and whether wild birds could still, on occasion, act as a vector. I am now completely convinced that H5N1 is a "poultry flu" responsible for >90% of outbreaks, but that last 1%-10% is, to me, crucial as it determines whether we can say categorically that "wild birds do not transport H5N1 and cause new outbreaks." It should also inform statements by the RSPB etc. who until now have 'conceded' that wild birds are a possible vector.
Many Thanks,
Graham
martintbird
Well-known member
Hi Graham:
Briefly - and without digging thro references.
US has found one or two ducks with H5N1 - low path, not the strains from farms. Also, if I recall correctly, one duck w low path H5N1 in Italy.
Speculation: This may be - or may be related to - the (rare) wild form of H5N1 that entered poultry some time ago, and evolved to present variants of concern.
Surviving H5N1 proving tough for any animal infected.
Said to be survivable for Anatidae, but even here, tends to be significant mortality - witness Qinghai, Europe (say).
Notions re survival based in fair part on studies with captive birds - extensive testing of apparently healthy wild birds has turned up perhaps a handful [single figures?] among tens of thousands. Hong Kong, say: over 16,000 apparently healthy wild birds tested, zero positive: surely an odd result were wild birds good vectors.
Surviving it, no wild bird population shown to be able to sustain H5N1, so it stays in the wild. Instead - even at Qinghai - seems to die out fast.
Spread: I haven't seen any good evidence that wild birds have spread it on, especially to poultry farms (surely flew with it, in Europe last winter; but then seems that birds died or recovered, and that was that for the H5N1 they carried. Yes, blamed; inc for "biosecure" farm in France, where it turned out they had journalists tramping about to see just how biosecure the place was).
Given that tends to abound in trachea, would seem spread not so easy (reported for captive birds): surely wild flu's abundance in faeces was adaptation towards spread in waterfowl. Romanian pond case, where H5N1 positive swans on pond where other birds tested (some ducks, moorhen??) negative, seems to me good evidence that spread is tough in wild birds. As other evidence: Qinghai remains an odd case, with so many birds reportedly having H5N1 [actual figures clouded? was there major cull?].
Perhaps best evidence for spread by ducks links captive ducks grazing on rice fields in Thailand with H5N1 distribution there. Even there, seemed that H5N1 died out within these ducks: so not sustained for long.
Waterbirds paper - Avian Influenza: An Ecological and Evolutionary Perspective for Waterbird Scientists, by S ABIR B IN MUZAFFAR 1,2 , RONALD C. Y DENBERG 3 AND IAN L. JONES 1
VOL . 29, N O . 3 2006 P AGES 243-406 - well worth a read if available.
Includes evolutionary biology - for some reason ignored by too many flu "experts" it seems.
Via Internet, seen a few good articles lately, inc the Observer on the grubby world of the poultry trade. Not at all bootiful.
Briefly - and without digging thro references.
US has found one or two ducks with H5N1 - low path, not the strains from farms. Also, if I recall correctly, one duck w low path H5N1 in Italy.
Speculation: This may be - or may be related to - the (rare) wild form of H5N1 that entered poultry some time ago, and evolved to present variants of concern.
Surviving H5N1 proving tough for any animal infected.
Said to be survivable for Anatidae, but even here, tends to be significant mortality - witness Qinghai, Europe (say).
Notions re survival based in fair part on studies with captive birds - extensive testing of apparently healthy wild birds has turned up perhaps a handful [single figures?] among tens of thousands. Hong Kong, say: over 16,000 apparently healthy wild birds tested, zero positive: surely an odd result were wild birds good vectors.
Surviving it, no wild bird population shown to be able to sustain H5N1, so it stays in the wild. Instead - even at Qinghai - seems to die out fast.
Spread: I haven't seen any good evidence that wild birds have spread it on, especially to poultry farms (surely flew with it, in Europe last winter; but then seems that birds died or recovered, and that was that for the H5N1 they carried. Yes, blamed; inc for "biosecure" farm in France, where it turned out they had journalists tramping about to see just how biosecure the place was).
Given that tends to abound in trachea, would seem spread not so easy (reported for captive birds): surely wild flu's abundance in faeces was adaptation towards spread in waterfowl. Romanian pond case, where H5N1 positive swans on pond where other birds tested (some ducks, moorhen??) negative, seems to me good evidence that spread is tough in wild birds. As other evidence: Qinghai remains an odd case, with so many birds reportedly having H5N1 [actual figures clouded? was there major cull?].
Perhaps best evidence for spread by ducks links captive ducks grazing on rice fields in Thailand with H5N1 distribution there. Even there, seemed that H5N1 died out within these ducks: so not sustained for long.
Waterbirds paper - Avian Influenza: An Ecological and Evolutionary Perspective for Waterbird Scientists, by S ABIR B IN MUZAFFAR 1,2 , RONALD C. Y DENBERG 3 AND IAN L. JONES 1
VOL . 29, N O . 3 2006 P AGES 243-406 - well worth a read if available.
Includes evolutionary biology - for some reason ignored by too many flu "experts" it seems.
Via Internet, seen a few good articles lately, inc the Observer on the grubby world of the poultry trade. Not at all bootiful.
martintbird said:
Thank you martinbird.
My point is and I will continue to make it is when ever an outbreak of AI occurs it is always wild birds that are given as the probable cause when in fact the opposite is true ,so why is this .
I read somewhere that scientists and I think it was in Hong Kong tried to infect pigeons with H5N1 by every means possible including injecting them with the virus and NONE became infected .
Of course it is possible for wild bird transferance but it is highly unlikely .
So please Defra and goverment tell the truth about the likelyhood of wild bird transferance it is a risk but a very very small one .
Taken from the very detailed & balanced analysis posted by Birdlife International ( link to full text given below)
"....In early 2006 wild bird outbreaks occurred across Europe, although these ended abruptly in May (with the exception of a long-dead Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus in Spain in July, presumably related to the earlier outbreaks). Nearly all incidents involved relatively few individual birds (usually fewer than 10). More than 200 wild birds, roughly 3% of the thousands that died on Rügen Island (Germany) tested positive for H5N1.
These European outbreaks show that wild birds are capable of carrying the virus to new sites after infection. How this happens is still unknown. It is possible the birds spread the disease in a ’leap-frog’ fashion by travelling for a short time and passing on infection to another group of birds before dying, and can thereby contribute to the long-distance spread of the virus. There may also be some species that are resistant to H5N1, and capable of infecting other birds without themselves showing serious illness (Feare & Yasue, Virology 3: 96–99). The initial outbreaks in Europe in February related to forced movements of birds away from the Black and Caspian Sea regions in response to unusually cold weather. These two regions had widespread and sustained H5N1 infection in poultry at the time, and limited biosecurity measures were in place."
http://www.birdlife.org/action/science/species/avian_flu/index.html#4
Colin
"....In early 2006 wild bird outbreaks occurred across Europe, although these ended abruptly in May (with the exception of a long-dead Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus in Spain in July, presumably related to the earlier outbreaks). Nearly all incidents involved relatively few individual birds (usually fewer than 10). More than 200 wild birds, roughly 3% of the thousands that died on Rügen Island (Germany) tested positive for H5N1.
These European outbreaks show that wild birds are capable of carrying the virus to new sites after infection. How this happens is still unknown. It is possible the birds spread the disease in a ’leap-frog’ fashion by travelling for a short time and passing on infection to another group of birds before dying, and can thereby contribute to the long-distance spread of the virus. There may also be some species that are resistant to H5N1, and capable of infecting other birds without themselves showing serious illness (Feare & Yasue, Virology 3: 96–99). The initial outbreaks in Europe in February related to forced movements of birds away from the Black and Caspian Sea regions in response to unusually cold weather. These two regions had widespread and sustained H5N1 infection in poultry at the time, and limited biosecurity measures were in place."
http://www.birdlife.org/action/science/species/avian_flu/index.html#4
Colin
martintbird
Well-known member
- indeed, the Tooth Fairy Bird; esp when other wild birds also not showing signs of illness. Stealth like abilities too.
martintbird said:
" There may also be some species that are resistant to H5N1, and capable of infecting other birds without themselves showing serious illness (Feare & Yasue, Virology 3: 96–99)."
The article's authors, Mai Yasue, Chris J. Feare, Leon Bennun, and Wolfgang Fiedler, made use of the Aiwatch (avian influenza watch) e-mail forum to gather information for their article from sources worldwide.
They describe several instances in which the species of an infected wild bird was incorrectly or inadequately recorded--sometimes just as "wild duck," for example--and others in which the bird's sex and age were misidentified. Likewise, reported details of the location and time of discovery of an infected bird often lack specificity, yet they are crucial for a good understanding of the virus's spread.
Information about capture and sampling methods and other species in the vicinity of an infected bird has also often been inadequately described. The authors end their article with a plea for greater involvement by ornithologists and ecologists in H5N1 research and monitoring.
.....If you really want to contribute to the science of HPAI in wild birds you might follow the advice of the virologists you have so childishly dismissed.
Thankfully BirdLife International are able to set out a balanced analysis for those who want to read one.
colonelboris
Right way up again
Apparently, Bernard has gone to the South of France for a holiday. Let's just hope he hasn't taken a packed lunch...
martintbird
Well-known member
More on problems wild birds encountering over being made scapegoats for h5n1 spread. This in Russia.
I dunno about some people - Tyke - but such things make me real angry. So, I've spent much time on H5N1, wild birds.
Tyke: you've read my piece - written with input from Nial Moores of Birds Korea - on the Tooth Fairy Bird? Seen where it's not factually incorrect?
After posting link to it on aiwatch, I received comment from professional ornithologist in Croatia:
Seems you're given to googling, posting snippets.
I'm a member of aiwatch; in there from the start. Been in touch with authors of the paper you cite. Also with various others: including flu specialists [Robert Webster, Guan Yi among them], media (been quoted in Science news; had correspondence with others inc from Nature, New Sci [oh dear]); fao (got invited to conference they held in Italy last year: no dosh for the trip [hey, Tyke, you wanna actually contribute something...]); WHO [where my contact has emailed that there is growing acceptance re wild birds not being to blame, v recently sent me Int Herald Tribune article saying this, albeit acceptance re wild bird blame for last winter]).
I emailed Birdlife re H5N1 and wild birds issue before they paid much attention to it; for a while, some of their main info on website came from me (an email I'd received from avian flu specialist in the US, Carol Cardona, whom I'd emailed in Feb 04 - before many people in conservation world seemed aware there was indeed an issue here [how about you, Tyke?]).
Snide remarks and googling not so great.
http://www.regnum.ru/news/782214.html
I dunno about some people - Tyke - but such things make me real angry. So, I've spent much time on H5N1, wild birds.
Tyke: you've read my piece - written with input from Nial Moores of Birds Korea - on the Tooth Fairy Bird? Seen where it's not factually incorrect?
After posting link to it on aiwatch, I received comment from professional ornithologist in Croatia:
You've read my forum, found errors there or lack of appreciation of info?
Seems you're given to googling, posting snippets.
I'm a member of aiwatch; in there from the start. Been in touch with authors of the paper you cite. Also with various others: including flu specialists [Robert Webster, Guan Yi among them], media (been quoted in Science news; had correspondence with others inc from Nature, New Sci [oh dear]); fao (got invited to conference they held in Italy last year: no dosh for the trip [hey, Tyke, you wanna actually contribute something...]); WHO [where my contact has emailed that there is growing acceptance re wild birds not being to blame, v recently sent me Int Herald Tribune article saying this, albeit acceptance re wild bird blame for last winter]).
I emailed Birdlife re H5N1 and wild birds issue before they paid much attention to it; for a while, some of their main info on website came from me (an email I'd received from avian flu specialist in the US, Carol Cardona, whom I'd emailed in Feb 04 - before many people in conservation world seemed aware there was indeed an issue here [how about you, Tyke?]).
Snide remarks and googling not so great.
bitterntwisted
Graham Howard Shortt
Martin,
I have no wish to impugn or malign your credentials. I appreciate the work you do and have learned immensely from reading this. However, I would like you to specifically address the statement from Birdlife that, "These European outbreaks show that wild birds are capable of carrying the virus to new sites after infection." (Whether Tyke googled his way to this quote is irrelevant - and I'm not sure what's intrinsically wrong with googling for info, btw) It appears to me that what you are saying is directly at variance with what Birdlife are saying in their official statement. Are you saying they are wrong? Although I realise you can only speculate on their motives, I would be surprised if Birdlife were prepared to posit wild birds as a proven vector without good reason. Faith in Birdlife on the part of Tyke and others may be misplaced but I hope you can see that it is understandable.
Thanks,
Graham
I have no wish to impugn or malign your credentials. I appreciate the work you do and have learned immensely from reading this. However, I would like you to specifically address the statement from Birdlife that, "These European outbreaks show that wild birds are capable of carrying the virus to new sites after infection." (Whether Tyke googled his way to this quote is irrelevant - and I'm not sure what's intrinsically wrong with googling for info, btw) It appears to me that what you are saying is directly at variance with what Birdlife are saying in their official statement. Are you saying they are wrong? Although I realise you can only speculate on their motives, I would be surprised if Birdlife were prepared to posit wild birds as a proven vector without good reason. Faith in Birdlife on the part of Tyke and others may be misplaced but I hope you can see that it is understandable.
Thanks,
Graham
John Eaton
Well-known member
Blimey. Defra have actually admitted that wild birds are probably not to blame. Also shows what cr*p procedures they had at the BM site.
From the BBC:
"Problems spotted at bird flu site
Turkeys have been arriving at the plant
A string of problems were found at the Bernard Matthews plant where the bird flu outbreak occurred.
A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs report said many gulls were seen carrying off meat waste from uncovered bins at the site.
Other problems prompted official advice from the Meat Hygiene Service.
The report said poultry imported to the UK from Hungary is the "most plausible" cause of the bird flu outbreak found at Holton in Suffolk on 3 February.
Parallel investigations found:
* Pest control workers noted last month large numbers of gulls attracted to uncovered bins full of trimmings from turkey breasts
* This had also been a problem last year
* Gulls were observed carrying turkey waste away and roosting on the roof of the turkey houses 500 metres away
* There were holes in the houses that could have allowed birds or rodents in
* Polythene bags containing residue of liquid waste could have blown around the site
* Plastic-covered bales of wood shavings used as bedding were kept outside
The MHS also revealed that it had had to offer advice on rules that were being broken a number of times over the last year.
But investigators have found all food importing and processing activities at the Bernard Matthews plant at Holton complied with European law.
The firm has now lifted a voluntary ban on poultry movement to and from Hungary.
It imposed the ban on 8 February during concern over the outbreak at its plant.
Defra said there was "little evidence" of wild birds spreading the disease to the UK.
The H5N1 strain found on the site is nearly identical to that in Hungary.
The government has now completed its interim epidemiological report into the source of the outbreak.
Original source
It said wild birds were unlikely to be the source of the outbreak as H5N1 has not been found in such birds since August last year, and surveillance at the Holton plant failed to find any infected animals.
Fred Landeg, deputy chief vet, said: "We may never be able to conclusively pinpoint the original source of the virus."
An investigation led by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) found there was no evidence of meat coming from inside the restricted zone around the outbreak in Hungary to the UK.
A parallel investigation by the Health Protection Agency found there had been little risk for workers at Holton and there was no need for antiviral treatment.
Meanwhile, officials have also lifted a ban on gatherings of birds, such as shows, sales and racing, outside the restricted zones, as well as changing rules on shooting and keeping of domestic birds within the restricted zones."
From the BBC:
"Problems spotted at bird flu site
Turkeys have been arriving at the plant
A string of problems were found at the Bernard Matthews plant where the bird flu outbreak occurred.
A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs report said many gulls were seen carrying off meat waste from uncovered bins at the site.
Other problems prompted official advice from the Meat Hygiene Service.
The report said poultry imported to the UK from Hungary is the "most plausible" cause of the bird flu outbreak found at Holton in Suffolk on 3 February.
Parallel investigations found:
* Pest control workers noted last month large numbers of gulls attracted to uncovered bins full of trimmings from turkey breasts
* This had also been a problem last year
* Gulls were observed carrying turkey waste away and roosting on the roof of the turkey houses 500 metres away
* There were holes in the houses that could have allowed birds or rodents in
* Polythene bags containing residue of liquid waste could have blown around the site
* Plastic-covered bales of wood shavings used as bedding were kept outside
The MHS also revealed that it had had to offer advice on rules that were being broken a number of times over the last year.
But investigators have found all food importing and processing activities at the Bernard Matthews plant at Holton complied with European law.
The firm has now lifted a voluntary ban on poultry movement to and from Hungary.
It imposed the ban on 8 February during concern over the outbreak at its plant.
Defra said there was "little evidence" of wild birds spreading the disease to the UK.
The H5N1 strain found on the site is nearly identical to that in Hungary.
The government has now completed its interim epidemiological report into the source of the outbreak.
Original source
It said wild birds were unlikely to be the source of the outbreak as H5N1 has not been found in such birds since August last year, and surveillance at the Holton plant failed to find any infected animals.
Fred Landeg, deputy chief vet, said: "We may never be able to conclusively pinpoint the original source of the virus."
An investigation led by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) found there was no evidence of meat coming from inside the restricted zone around the outbreak in Hungary to the UK.
A parallel investigation by the Health Protection Agency found there had been little risk for workers at Holton and there was no need for antiviral treatment.
Meanwhile, officials have also lifted a ban on gatherings of birds, such as shows, sales and racing, outside the restricted zones, as well as changing rules on shooting and keeping of domestic birds within the restricted zones."
MKinHK
Mike Kilburn
How's this for cheek . . .
I saw in the South China Morning Post (with credit given to Agence France Presse) in Hong Kong today that China has banned imports of chicken meat from the UK based on this outbreak!
The article also says that the UK imported 1,964 tonnes of chicken meat and offal to China between Jan and Nov last year. Another thread in the global poultry trade
I saw in the South China Morning Post (with credit given to Agence France Presse) in Hong Kong today that China has banned imports of chicken meat from the UK based on this outbreak!
The article also says that the UK imported 1,964 tonnes of chicken meat and offal to China between Jan and Nov last year. Another thread in the global poultry trade
MKinHK
Mike Kilburn
Another interesting discovery in Hong Kong. A friend of mine has reviewed the data on H5N1-infected birds in Hong Kong and found that in the last 2 years all the birds infected are either commonly kept as cagebirds, commonly released by Buddhists to gain spiritual merit, or urban raptors and scavengers which would be likely to prey on sick or dead birds.
Even more interesting . . .
Of the 10 H5N1-positive birds this year 8 (80%) were found within a 3km radius of the Mong Kok Bird Market and 7 (70%) within 1km!
Of the 15 cases last year the figures were 7 (47%)within 3 km and 4 (27%) within 1km.
During the same period not a single bird was discovered with H5N1among the thousands of birds tested at Mai Po.
Does this not suggest what the source might be to anyone?
Apparently not to our government's health officials, vets or conservation staff
Interesting facts:
1. Mong Kok is one of the most densely populated places on the planet.
2. The bird market remains open and birds continue to arrive in Hong Kong
3.Our Health Minister has publicly spoken out in defence of the livelihoods of the bird sellers and has not closed the market. (priorities a la DEFRA?)
4. UN figures suggest around 1 million birds are traded through HK every year
5. A recent HK University study suggested an additional 600,000 were coming in annually from China without regulation, inspection or quarantine
6. Our Government CITES officers monitor a paltry 40,000 imported birds per year
7. Two Silver-eared Mesias - the bird which brought H5N1 to the UK last year were found with H5N1 just 200m from the Mong Kok Bird market earlier this month.
A happy and healthy Chinese New Year to you all!
Even more interesting . . .
Of the 10 H5N1-positive birds this year 8 (80%) were found within a 3km radius of the Mong Kok Bird Market and 7 (70%) within 1km!
Of the 15 cases last year the figures were 7 (47%)within 3 km and 4 (27%) within 1km.
During the same period not a single bird was discovered with H5N1among the thousands of birds tested at Mai Po.
Does this not suggest what the source might be to anyone?
Apparently not to our government's health officials, vets or conservation staff
Interesting facts:
1. Mong Kok is one of the most densely populated places on the planet.
2. The bird market remains open and birds continue to arrive in Hong Kong
3.Our Health Minister has publicly spoken out in defence of the livelihoods of the bird sellers and has not closed the market. (priorities a la DEFRA?)
4. UN figures suggest around 1 million birds are traded through HK every year
5. A recent HK University study suggested an additional 600,000 were coming in annually from China without regulation, inspection or quarantine
6. Our Government CITES officers monitor a paltry 40,000 imported birds per year
7. Two Silver-eared Mesias - the bird which brought H5N1 to the UK last year were found with H5N1 just 200m from the Mong Kok Bird market earlier this month.
A happy and healthy Chinese New Year to you all!
Last edited:
Suppose I'm bringing up the blame factor again here, but one thing that seriously concerns me, is as to why DEFRA, MHS or whoever was responsible for previously warning mr Matthews about breaches in hygene, did not make sure that he immediately took action to rectify the problems? From where I'm sitting there doesn't appear to be much cost involved, which is often the reason given for delay in such things.
dan
dan
martintbird
Well-known member
Graham: carrying the virus to new sites differs from spreading the virus onwards: plenty of birds fleeing eastern Europe cold spell turned up and died, but after that?
Surprised me how long it took, but the virus indeed died out in the wild.
I've just posted to aiwatch:
Hungary/UK [reportedly similar to renowned "Qinhai strain"] just showing what we've known from the start: barking mad to suggest Qinghai is a wild bird form of the virus (esp given its impact at Qinghai - no way that was a strain that has evolved within birds; not unless you suspend disbelief in natural selection).
Many moons ago, I queried [HK based disease expert] Guan Yi re this and Poyang virus, and he replied they indeed lacked info on H5N1 in viruses in poultry in n China - even near Poyang, let alone Qinghai. potential Lanzhou link could explain much: but who is really investigating that?.
Received the following from Prof John Oxford - who as earlier pointed out, is UK flu expert who said some daft things on BBC website.
Oxford had said - on beeb: "We know that H5N1 is transmitted silently by migrating birds. The warm weather will have affected their migration patterns. So the chances are that is how it has reached Suffolk. ... A very small bird could have made it through the ventilation system."
I sent him email; reply just in:
" Thank you for the 2 papers [Tooth Fairy Bird hardly a paper! other was Waterbirds paper]. Obviously it is still not clear how virus entered the sheds but we know that small birds such as sparrows can enter ventilation shafts and so could carry virus contaminated fomites.
*
Alternatively staff could break regulations and carry virus fomites into the unit. Influenza*certainly killed terns in SA in the 60's but still the evidence is that most of the subtypes are circulating between moving waterfowl as an enteric infection. This does not seem to affect migration. "
I've responded: inc that if he is referring to sub-types of H5N1, the evidence is powerfully against wild birds carrying it (as real vector).
Seems the Prof is indeed somewhat isolated from reality in the glory of his ivory tower.
Sadly, he is hardly alone in evident confusion between natural bird flus and H5N1 - and figuring that what applies with natural wild bird flus must also apply to H5N1, never mind glaring evidence to the contrary. [How can anyone really believe that a virus known to have caused significant mortality in wild birds is "transmitted silently" by them? Surely a profoundly stupid notion.]
On lighter note, just noticed on beeb site that Prof O also said:
"I don't believe last year's incident was overstated. It was a huge educational exercise: people know now that a dead swan is potentially dangerous."
- something of Monty Python like hilarity here. A dead swan, washed up on a beach, and everyone supposed to leap about in fear. But, we know it's potentially dangerous, don't we; lots of people have been savaged by dead swans...
Surprised me how long it took, but the virus indeed died out in the wild.
I've just posted to aiwatch:
Hungary/UK [reportedly similar to renowned "Qinhai strain"] just showing what we've known from the start: barking mad to suggest Qinghai is a wild bird form of the virus (esp given its impact at Qinghai - no way that was a strain that has evolved within birds; not unless you suspend disbelief in natural selection).
Many moons ago, I queried [HK based disease expert] Guan Yi re this and Poyang virus, and he replied they indeed lacked info on H5N1 in viruses in poultry in n China - even near Poyang, let alone Qinghai. potential Lanzhou link could explain much: but who is really investigating that?.
Received the following from Prof John Oxford - who as earlier pointed out, is UK flu expert who said some daft things on BBC website.
Oxford had said - on beeb: "We know that H5N1 is transmitted silently by migrating birds. The warm weather will have affected their migration patterns. So the chances are that is how it has reached Suffolk. ... A very small bird could have made it through the ventilation system."
I sent him email; reply just in:
" Thank you for the 2 papers [Tooth Fairy Bird hardly a paper! other was Waterbirds paper]. Obviously it is still not clear how virus entered the sheds but we know that small birds such as sparrows can enter ventilation shafts and so could carry virus contaminated fomites.
*
Alternatively staff could break regulations and carry virus fomites into the unit. Influenza*certainly killed terns in SA in the 60's but still the evidence is that most of the subtypes are circulating between moving waterfowl as an enteric infection. This does not seem to affect migration. "
I've responded: inc that if he is referring to sub-types of H5N1, the evidence is powerfully against wild birds carrying it (as real vector).
Seems the Prof is indeed somewhat isolated from reality in the glory of his ivory tower.
Sadly, he is hardly alone in evident confusion between natural bird flus and H5N1 - and figuring that what applies with natural wild bird flus must also apply to H5N1, never mind glaring evidence to the contrary. [How can anyone really believe that a virus known to have caused significant mortality in wild birds is "transmitted silently" by them? Surely a profoundly stupid notion.]
On lighter note, just noticed on beeb site that Prof O also said:
"I don't believe last year's incident was overstated. It was a huge educational exercise: people know now that a dead swan is potentially dangerous."
- something of Monty Python like hilarity here. A dead swan, washed up on a beach, and everyone supposed to leap about in fear. But, we know it's potentially dangerous, don't we; lots of people have been savaged by dead swans...
Similar threads
