I don't know anything about camelids, but when a reactor bovine doesn't show lesions, it doesn't mean it was a false positive.I think they did that with reactors that didn't have visible lesions and they did find it
Its zoonotic, and if any animal is going to transfer it to a person its a special one that gets lots of close contact with devoted peopleCan someone tell me how putting down geronimo and all the fuss it has entailed ..... has had any kind of positive impact on the uk TB situation ?
A bit like that bull Shambo - cow lived an isolated life, cow wasn’t going to be sold, eaten or moved and not going to come into contact with other cows outside the temple ....... so what was the issue ?
Ok I accept that to a point, but tens of thousands of cattle being killed every year with TB, TB in badgers, TB in deer, TB rife in camelids...... and yet there is f*ck all TB seen in the rural community really and the vast majority of the (I think) 7000 cases a year are within the immigrant population within London and a few other major cities. And you’re not telling me they have been cuddling camelids or cows ?Its zoonotic, and if any animal is going to transfer it to a person its a special one that gets lots of close contact with devoted people
Tb is rife in some countries the immigrants have come from and pasteurisation isn't, added to cramped living conditions they then occupy and poorer than average general health and you have an opportunity for spread.. I can't back an arguement for leaving known infected animals around in the UK, I could certainly back one for leaving less around. Tactics should be changed.Ok I accept that to a point, but tens of thousands of cattle being killed every year with TB, TB in badgers, TB in deer, TB rife in camelids...... and yet there is f*ck all TB seen in the rural community really and the vast majority of the (I think) 7000 cases a year are within the immigrant population within London and a few other major cities. And you’re not telling me they have been cuddling camelids or cows ?
It is a massive money spinning exercise and con. Culling livestock, be they camelids or cows, is doing nowt for stopping the spread..... so why not change tactics ?
Tb is rife in some countries the immigrants have come from and pasteurisation isn't, added to cramped living conditions they then occupy and poorer than average general health and you have an opportunity for spread.. I can't back an arguement for leaving known infected animals around in the UK, I could certainly back one for leaving less around. Tactics should be changed.
Can someone tell me how putting down geronimo and all the fuss it has entailed ..... has had any kind of positive impact on the uk TB situation ?
A bit like that bull Shambo - cow lived an isolated life, cow wasn’t going to be sold, eaten or moved and not going to come into contact with other cows outside the temple ....... so what was the issue ?
That is precisely my point.
Most folk don’t have any clue at all about how many cows are culled for TB. They think a small number are culled to protect us all etc.
Instead of obsessing about killing the alpaca “because they need to have as sh*t a time as we are having” perhaps it would have been an ideal opportunity to question the mass killing of cows for just about zero positive impact on the TB situation .......
Ya get me ?
I actually know of two families who cought tb from drinking milk out the tank and of 2 hunt servants who got itGenuinely though ...... how many cases of TB in the Uk do you think have been picked up from cattle etc? How many cattle farmers have TB?
Is mass culling of cows positively effecting the TB levels in this country year on year (other than obviously removing individual animals).
And how much money is being made by certain people and bodies with the current system in place ?
I actually know of two families who cought tb from drinking milk out the tank and of 2 hunt servants who got it
I was told TB in cattle is only infectious in the latter stages, and with testing we are picking them up before they get really infectious, badgers on the other hand are not only really infectious but TB is allowed to get to the latter stages in them too. Point of interest, I have heard of a suckler producer who caught TB off the cattle by the way.Ok I accept that to a point, but tens of thousands of cattle being killed every year with TB, TB in badgers, TB in deer, TB rife in camelids...... and yet there is f*ck all TB seen in the rural community really and the vast majority of the (I think) 7000 cases a year are within the immigrant population within London and a few other major cities. And you’re not telling me they have been cuddling camelids or cows ?
It is a massive money spinning exercise and con. Culling livestock, be they camelids or cows, is doing nowt for stopping the spread..... so why not change tactics ?
What do you think I am a walking TB Statscyclopedia?Genuinely though ...... how many cases of TB in the Uk do you think have been picked up from cattle etc? How many cattle farmers have TB?
Is mass culling of cows positively effecting the TB levels in this country year on year (other than obviously removing individual animals).
And how much money is being made by certain people and bodies with the current system in place ?
Try reading WHO TB website , zoonotic tb is an important part of the battle against tb, we in UK cannot ignore it and expect the third world to deal with it. Pre Covid TB was the biggest killer of all infectious diseases in man. That is in spite of BCG being the worlds most used vaccine, again pre covid.Ok I accept that to a point, but tens of thousands of cattle being killed every year with TB, TB in badgers, TB in deer, TB rife in camelids...... and yet there is f*ck all TB seen in the rural community really and the vast majority of the (I think) 7000 cases a year are within the immigrant population within London and a few other major cities. And you’re not telling me they have been cuddling camelids or cows ?
It is a massive money spinning exercise and con. Culling livestock, be they camelids or cows, is doing nowt for stopping the spread..... so why not change tactics ?
Yes.So the grand plan is to just keep on testing and culling cows forever whilst watching the TB problem grow. Sounds about right
some serious money being made, it’s basically now an industry. Most the cows end up in the food chain anyway.
this is a load of rollocks, cannot possibly true, because the 'antis' have decided so.Went looking for an explanation of the enferplex test and found this interesting...
when TB becomes resistant to A/B, and starts spreading in the human population, as it is already, there will be a groundswell of opinion, to get rid of it, in the animal population. Absolutely certain, most of the anti cull people, would have a drastic change of opinion, if they, or their nearest, were threatened by it.In 2019 there was a 2.4% increase in human TB cases. Mostly in London for well-known reasons.
The map makes interesting viewing though with a bias towards the South/South West.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...nt_data/file/943356/TB_Annual_Report_2020.pdf
Bovine TB cattle is different from the usually seen in humans. Its usually seen in people who have close contact with cattle, like vets and farm workers as milk is now pasteurised and raw milk tested.Genuinely though ...... how many cases of TB in the Uk do you think have been picked up from cattle etc? How many cattle farmers have TB?
Is mass culling of cows positively effecting the TB levels in this country year on year (other than obviously removing individual animals).
And how much money is being made by certain people and bodies with the current system in place ?