On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 06:00:53PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Redvers Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > http://www.maff.gov.uk/animalh/int-trde/misc/foot/flyer.pdf
> >
> > About that flyer... "FMD presents no risks to humans but is a serious
> > threat to animal health".
> >
> > That is not strictly true... FMD is not a threat to animal health,
> > the MAFF slaughters are.
>
> Well, up to a point. Dramatic reduction in yield + high chance of
> infertility == significant (indirect) risk to animal's health.
Reduction in yield is not a threat to the animal's health.
The infertility is temporary.
It's interesting that farmers in north wales were getting ten quid a
head for lambs las tyear, but are getting a hundred and twenty quid a
head from the govt when they;re slaughtered now. Makes you think
doesn't it. Who has a vested interest in the disease spreading?
--
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/
Rip, Mix, Burn, unless you're using our "most advanced operating system
in the world" which we decided to release incomplete just for a laugh
