Journal of Health Communication: International Perspectives
EDITORIALVolume 6,Number 1 Vol. 6, Num. 1: Contents | Editorial | Up Front | Abstracts
Editorial Mad Cow Crisis II – New casualties It has nearly been five years since a UK scientific advisory committee linked Mad Cow disease to a human killer. Stories of Mad Cow disease heralded it to be the AIDS epidemic the UK never had. The sequel panicked Europe again in 2000. This time the Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper compared it to the threat to the Black Death that wiped out three-quarters of the population of Europe in the Middle Ages. The theory behind this crisis is that Mad Cow disease or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)—a disease that affects cows—could be spread to humans by eating beef and cause an incurable, deadly brain-wasting disease called vCJD (variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease). This scientific announcement and political furor became the largest crisis since the Falkland War, according to then Prime Minster John Major. What is the reality of BSE and vCJD? The purported infectious agent—a prion that is smaller than a virus—has been identified. The molecular structure of the disease is similar in cows and people. Mad Cow disease and vCJD were principally thought to be confined to the UK, as over 80 human deaths have been attributed to vCJD since 1996. Four years later, with the sequel replaying with diseased cattle throughout Europe, people fear getting this disease by eating beef. Yet, we still do not know how people got vCJD in the first place. A recent House of Lords report states eating beef is the most likely culprit; yet other expert reports suggest it is not from eating beef, as BSE infectivity has never been found in muscle meat. Nonetheless, the financial losses in the billions of dollars are evident: millions of cattle have been lost, farmers livelihoods sacrificed, and the future food supply threatened. While much has been learned from BSE in the 1990s, Mad Cow Crisis II, presents a similar panic—beef has been boycotted. Even though the BSE agent has never been found in cow hides, muscle or blood (the agent is principally in nervous tissue), a “public outbreak” ensued that threatened other products that are made from or contain bovine sources such as gelatin, tallow, and even pharmaceuticals. Voilà—four years after what The Guardian termed the case that demonstrates the “perils of imperfect policymaking,” history again repeats. Politics, policy and leadership are blurred in protectionist dogma. Scientific fact has lost to the fears of a purported susceptibility to disease. This has ramifications for policymakers everywhere who often say they are basing their decisions on science, while in reality politics and public opinion are in charge. Qualifiers of the theoretical, hypothetical, negligible and incalculably small have limited meaning to politicians who become more fearful of the fearful public. The answer: policymakers make poor decisions with short-term goals (read I want to keep my job and cover my you know what) rather than long term benefits (read I want to serve the public good). Why is Mad Cow II something we should all be concerned about? The parallels for policymakers are paramount. We can point to the facts –whether it be in genetically-modified foods, fish that may have dioxin, or “syndromes’ with no known cause. Yet, in the globalized world with goods and services that know no boundaries, facts and fears are universally blurred. The recent recall in the US of genetically modified corn—despite any known evidence that it could be harmful to human health—threatens progress. The fallout of Mad Cow disease on the pharmaceutical industry and hence upon public health may be the greatest real hazard. Hidden amongst the Mad Cow headlines is the vaccine recall in England because of an “incalculable small risk” of getting vCJD by vaccination according to the UK Medicines Control Agency, the UK analog of the FDA. Today, globalization and multi-national companies provide the resources for protecting public health, as millions of doses of vaccines are manufactured in Europe and North America. Similarly, drug products and gelatin capsules are also made from bovine sources, as well as cosmetics and topical ointments. In Summer 2000, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration convened a meeting in which world experts presented the latest evidence on BSE and vaccine manufacturing. The conclusion was that risk of BSE transmission to humans was negligible and theoretical with about a one in two billion probability. Months later, in December, the FDA practiced effective risk communication with a Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report and comprehensive web site communication. The message and strategy was clear: All people need to be vaccinated and all licensed vaccine products are effective regardless of the source of the bovine derived material used in the vaccine process. What have we learned in five years? No matter where we live, our fears should not be the “mad cows” in Europe, but the policymaker’s response. We do not need a new hypothetical threshold and public outcry creating an unreliable precautionary principle for vaccines, drugs and food products. If the course of 21st Century progress convolutes science with politics, we could easily follow the suit of Europe with political tyranny superceding public health All interested in better serving the public good ought to follow the
premise of the World Health Organization embodied in the preamble of their
constitution: “Informed opinion and active cooperation of the public are
keys to advancing health.” We all must demand such informed
opinion of our policymakers to cooperate with the experts and the public
to develop ideal decisions. |
