A little remarked upon piece of research was published last week, and commented on in the
Torygraph on BSE and links to nCJD, raw data can be found
here.A relatively right wing commentator and blogger
Iain Murry has written a piece in the really right wing, generally,
National ReviewIts an interesting exercise in the way people read scientific data and information. I'm an engineer by training and, obviously, an SF Fan. I've also never been particularly convinced by the link between eating infected product and nCJD. However, that's not to say I agree with the idea that too much was done to deal with BSE.
When reading data you need to keep your mind open to the whole picture. The key phrase is;
The primary vCJD epidemic in the known susceptible genotype in the UK appears to be in decline. - indeed. However, assuming that the nCJD infection follows the same pattern as the infections in people treated with CJD infected human growth hormone, that it far from saying we are out of the woods. There have been at least 4 sets of genetic markers identified for subseptability to CJD infection, and with the case of HGH infection, the first relatively small wave was followed by a larger one, then a larger still and then a final one we're just seeing. I doubt this will happen with BSE.
However, given the potential cost for being wrong, the crime is not that too much was done, but that it was done at the wrong time. When a pathogen is observed to make the species jump and is know to have an unknown transmission vector and a long incubation period. Its not sensible to stand around to see what happens next.
I find it ludicrous that a person can write the National Review argument who supported a war to remove a potential threat when they complain that a campaign to make food safe cost billions. A double standard. What price do we put on people again? Are they worth more than cattle?
It would seem that in some quarters, the answer is no.