When British medical researchers revealed earlier this year that they had identified what seemed like a new variant of Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease (now known as nvCJD) and argued that this degenerative brain disorder could have been contracted as a result of eating certain beef products, they were discussing a possibility. Yesterday's revelation in the journal Nature from Professor John Collinge and his colleagues at the Imperial College School of Medecine - that there is a demonstrable molecular link between nvCJD and Bovine Spongiform Encephalthy (BSE) - turns that possibility into a probability. They have been able to identify the same aberrant prion protein in cases of BSE and in nvCJD, proving that molecular transfer has taken place.
Neither they nor the earlier researchers are able to predict the degree of "infectivity" of such a transfer to offer any estimate of the likely number of cases of nvCJD that may develop. Another year or two should give a better estimate of the likely size of any outbreak if it is assumed that such cases would have been contracted before the late 80s when controls over suspect animal feedstuffs were imposed. Meanwhile, the Imperial College research seems likely to lead to the development of hitherto unavailable diagnostic tests to detect the presence of nvCJD and could subsequently lead to the first possibilities of treatment for what is now a fatal disease in humans.
But before such benefits accrue, the new research findings are bound to prolong and probably increase consumers' anxiety about beef products. It seems certain to bring extra pressure on the British to complete the massive cull of cattle which they promised the EU they would undertake and then reneged on that promise. Even if the cull has no appreciable effect on the incidence of BSE, and little scientific justification in itself, it will now seem more necessary to restore public confidence and re open British beef export markets.
The restoration of consumer confidence throughout the world is of paramount importance to the Irish beef industry and the Irish economy. Given the controls that were imposed in the late 80s (here more stringently than in the UK) there should be virtually no risk of further infections as long as those controls are strictly enforced. The greatest risk might come from rogue farmers who may try to feed bone meal to their cattle, and there is a case to be made for destroying such stocks of bone meal as might find their way into those farmers' hands. An effective quality assurance scheme must be put in place rapidly which might enable consumers to identify the origin of the beef products they buy and, in this context, there is much to be said for a lessening of cattle movements between farms.
There is also a need for less political uncertainty. It was British government fumbling that sparked the real crisis last March. But Mr Ivan Yates has done neither the Irish beef industry nor himself any good with the damnable silliness possibly fuelled by some fantasy macho image of himself as the man in the gap with the Russian gun to his head of the contradictory versions of whether he was at Dublin airport to sign on the Russian line. When questioned in the Dail, he had to admit that he was not there. The question should never have needed to be raised. An erosion of credibility is the last thing either the Minister or the Irish beef industry needs at this critical time.