Human consequences of foot and mouth disease are more than described

Editor—The article by Prempeh et al on the implications of foot and mouth on human health has considered only the disease itself.¹ Some of your respondents have made reference to mental health effects as a result of the outbreak, but I see no mention of the wider implications for health resulting from the method of controlling the disease. Cumbria seems to have been sitting under a pall of smoke. Have the local hospitals reported an increased intake of respiratory illnesses which coincide with the appearance of “animal bonfires”? Will they monitor for this possibility? The burning of straw and stubble has been illegal for some years, yet this is the very fuel being used to maintain the burning of the carcasses.

There are guidelines for the widespread use of disinfectant to help prevent the spread of the disease; given the quantities involved, what human health implications are there from absorption or inhalation of the products in use? It is likely that there will be an environmental cost to watercourses from the disinfectant as it reaches the waterways from run off. Will there be extra surveillance of human health for the possibility of ill health resulting from contaminated water? Foot and mouth disease may not affect human health, but the way in which we deal with it certainly will.