The IAH Pirbright Submission to the Royal Society

Alicia Eykyn writes:

I am so angry I can hardly speak. What is this?

Where is the acknowledgement of existing science and scientists? This submission reads to me like a straight forward proposal for funding - a blatant PR exercise for the promotion of Pirbright. A total subversion of the truth with no one to contradict or point out the discrepancies as in so much of what has gone on in this UK FMD outbreak.

It is, I believe, an absolute disgrace.

They claim they were ONLY asked to look at the economics. Animal welfare of course doesn't feature in this any more than it did in Roy Anderson's appalling model.It is dismissed at a stroke as a 'political problem' Any cost of looking after them, any consideration given to them does not even enter into the equation when adding up the economics. HOW can this be allowed.

In these days of so called 'caring' society, with endless laws on racial equality and human rights - how is it that the nerves of sentient animals are never entered into any of the calculations.

Yet the talk is endless about the need for ear tags and tattoos and more vets to examine them, prod them around and generally terrify them. But NOT to vaccinate them. What sort of people write such stuff and more particularly how can they be so dismissive in the light of the agony of this last outbreak?

No wonder Brian Follett said the things he said in Cumbria - what are these 'know all, know nothing people' supposed to believe - the World Reference Library headed by the illustrious Dr Alex Donaldson Scientist and Vet and world expert on Foot and mouth - why look any further?

They clearly have no soul. I have already reported that these were the very same people who stood out when they attended the Brussels Conference in December. Along with our government ministers and their officials, the Irish contingent. They were all in the same mould, intransigent and self-congratulatory, with an impervious disregard for anyone else's opinion. Even for their the speeches of their counterparts in other countries.

It struck many of us at the time as extraordinary.

The unnerving part was that it was like we are led to believe it would have been to confront a group of sadistic SS Officers in the Officers mess - others might criticise if they chose but they knew it would not change a thing - and it might even endanger them.

I use this analogy on purpose, because we in Britain are told that we are not capable of producing such monsters.