Bird flu panic ignores and exaggerates risks
BirdLife International have warned that
hasty responses to
Avian Influenza based on incomplete or unsound data could do great damage to
birds and other
biodiversity, while actually raising the risk to
people and to the economically important
poultry industry.
BirdLife International’s Partners throughout Europe, such as the
RSPB (BirdLife in the UK ), are working or preparing to work with their governments to
monitor migratory wild bird populations and to provide
scientific data and
expert guidance.
Recent outbreaks of the highly pathogenic
H5N1 strain of avian influenza in Europe have occurred along migratory flyways (including the Danube delta, a great gathering place for migratory waterbird) during the autumn migration. There is
no concrete evidence that migratory birds have helped transmit the disease between countries or regions, but the possibility cannot be ruled out.
The spread of H5N1 within and beyond
South-east Asia appears attributable to
movements of infected poultry. The patterns of spread are not consistent with the timing and direction of movements of wild birds. It is likely that
H5N1 originated in domestic poultry through mutation of low pathogenic sub-types and was subsequently
passed from poultry to wild birds.
Transmission is promoted in domestic flocks due to the
density of birds and the consequent close contact with faecal and other
secretions through which the virus can be transmitted. Husbandry methods in SE Asia where
domestic flocks are often allowed to mix freely with wild birds, especially waterfowl will have facilitated the transmission to migratory waterbirds, leading to several reported instances of die-offs.
There is
no evidence that H5N1 infection in humans have been acquired from wild birds. Human infections have occurred in people who have been closely associated with poultry. The
risk to human health from wild birds is extremely low and can be minimised by avoiding contact with sick or dead birds. However, there is a possibility that this virus could develop into one that might be transmitted from
human to human. If this happens, then it is
most likely to happen in SE Asia, from where it could then spread rapidly around the world.
BirdLife International
strongly opposes any suggestion that wild birds should be culled as a way of controlling the spread of the disease, on grounds of
practicality and
effectiveness, as well as
conservation. Any such attempts could
spread the virus more widely, as survivors disperse to new places, and
healthy birds become stressed and more prone to infection. The
World Health Organisation,
Food and Agriculture Organisation and OIE (the World Organisation for Animal Health) agree that control of avian influenza in wild birds by
culling is not feasible, and should not be attempted.
Similarly,
attempts to drain wetlands, to keep waterbirds away are also likely to be
counterproductive as well as disastrous for the environment, the conservation of threatened species, and for vital ecosystem services such as flood control and water cleansing.
Birds will seek alternative staging places and
waterbirds forced to fly further and
endure more crowded conditions along their migration route will be
more prone to infection. Some Asian and Middle Eastern governments are reported to be already formulating proposals for draining wetlands.
The most efficient control techniques involve
improved biosecurity, to
reduce contact between poultry and wild birds or infected water sources. Further measures include stricter controls or even
bans on movements of domestic poultry, and on
wild bird markets. Countries should also
ban imports of wild-caught birds from infected areas. Such measures should be introduced worldwide.
BirdLife International therefore welcomes the recommendations by the
European Commission that
surveillance and biosecurity measures at poultry farms in the European Union should be strengthened, and that the Member States and experts have been advised to
increase resources and efforts to monitor migratory bird species.
“We would like to offer our expertise in the Member States through our Partners and invite the EU state administrations to contact our Partners in country for help especially with the wild bird monitoring programmes,” said Dr Clairie Papazoglou, BirdLife International’s Head of EU Policy,.
BirdLife International’s Director of Science, Dr Leon Bennun, stressed the importance of informed and balanced judgement in responses to the threat of avian influenza, and in the public dissemination of information about it.
“It is important that discussions of the issues relating to avian influenza should differentiate between the real problems caused by the spread of the disease within bird populations, especially within the poultry industry, and the theoretical risks of a human pandemic.”
For additional information see the following update pages from:
Birdlife International e.g. There are 144 varieties of Avian Flu, most of which are benign to humans.
World Health OrganisationFood + Agriculture Organisation