Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Opinion
  • Published:

The UK foot-and-mouth disease outbreak — the aftermath

Nature Reviews Microbiology volume 2, pages 675–681 (2004)Cite this article

Abstract

The 2001 epidemic of foot-and-mouth disease in the United Kingdom triggered a livestock culling campaign that involved the slaughter of more than 6.5 million animals. Three years later, management of the epidemic remains controversial. Some believe that untried control methods based on unvalidated models replaced well-established policy, motivating an unnecessary slaughter. Others hold that rigorous quantitative approaches provided the basis for new incisive policies that significantly curtailed the epidemic. Now, new and more flexible control policies have been adopted throughout Europe. For these policies to receive the full confidence of scientists, veterinarians and the general public, it is necessary that we improve both our understanding of where, how and why control measures initially failed in 2001 and how new policies should be implemented.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Past performance and implementation of traditional methods.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Correa Melo, E., Saraiva, V. & Astudillo, V. Review of the status of foot and mouth disease in countries of South America and approaches to control and eradication. Rev. Sci. Tech. 21, 429–436 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Thomson, G. R. et al. Shifting paradigms in international animal health standards: the need for comprehensive standards to enable commodity based trade. [online] <http://www.eldis.org/fulltext/shiftingparadigms.pdf> (2004).

  3. Woods, A. To vaccinate or vacillate? The British response to foot and mouth disease, 1920–2001. Hist. Res. (in the press).

  4. Northumberland. Report of the Committee of Inquiry on Foot-and-Mouth Disease. (Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1969).

  5. The Royal Society. Inquiry into Infectious Diseases in Livestock. (The Stationery Office, London, 2002) [online], <http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/inquiry/index.html> (2002).

  6. Anderson, I. Foot and Mouth Disease 2001: Lessons to be Learned Inquiry [online], <http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/inquiries/lessons/index.htm> (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  7. DEFRA. Foot and Mouth Disease — contingency plan. [online] <http://www.defra.gov.uk/footandmouth/contingency/index.htm> (2004).

  8. Tinline, R. Lee wave hypothesis for the initial pattern of spread during the 1967–68 foot and mouth epizootic. Nature 227, 860–862 (1970).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Haydon, D. T., Woolhouse, M. E. J. & Kitching, R. P. An analysis of foot-and-mouth-disease epidemics in the UK. IMA J. Math. Appl. Med. Biol. 14, 1–9 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gibbens, J. C. et al. Descriptive epidemiology of the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in Great Britain: the first five months. Vet. Rec. 149, 729–743 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Haydon, D. T. et al. The construction and analysis of epidemic trees with reference to the 2001 UK foot-and-mouth outbreak. Proc. R Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 270, 121–127 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mansley, L. M., Dunlop, P. J., Whiteside, S. M. & Smith, R. G. Early dissemination of foot-and-mouth disease virus through sheep marketing in February 2001. Vet. Rec. 153, 43–50 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Keeling, M. J. et al. Dynamics of the 2001 UK foot and mouth epidemic: stochastic dispersal in a heterogeneous landscape. Science 294, 813–817 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Gibbens, J. C. & Wilesmith, J. W. Temporal and geographical distribution of cases of foot-and-mouth disease during the early weeks of the 2001 epidemic in Great Britain. Vet. Rec. 151, 407–412 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Donaldson, A. I., Alexandersen, S., Sorensen, J. H. & Mikkelsen, T. Relative risks of the uncontrollable (airborne) spread of FMD by different species. Vet. Rec. 148, 602–604 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Fraser, C., Riley, S., Anderson, R. M. & Ferguson, N. M. Factors that make an infectious disease outbreak controllable. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 6146–6151 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Alexandersen, S. & Donaldson, A. I. Further studies to quantify the dose of natural aerosols of foot-and-mouth disease virus for pigs. Epidemiol. Infect. 128, 313–323 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Matthews, L. et al. Neighbourhood control policies and the spread of infectious diseases. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 270, 1659–1666 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Morris, R. S., Wilesmith, J. W., Stern, M. W., Sanson, R. L. & Stevenson, M. A. Predictive spatial modelling of alternative control strategies for the foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in Great Britain, 2001. Vet. Rec. 149, 137–144 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ferguson, N. M., Donnelly, C. A. & Anderson, R. M. Transmission intensity and impact of control policies on the foot and mouth epidemic in Great Britain. Nature 413, 542–548 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ferguson, N. M., Donnelly, C. A. & Anderson, R. M. The foot-and-mouth epidemic in Great Britain: pattern of spread and impact of interventions. Science 292, 1155–1160 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Phillips, N., Bridgeman, J. & Ferguson–Smith, M. Report of the Inquiry into BSE and Variant CJD in the United Kingdom. (Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kao, R. R. The role of mathematical modelling in the control of the 2001 FMD epidemic in the UK. Trends Microbiol. 10, 279–286 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Woolhouse, M. E. Foot-and-mouth disease in the UK: what should we do next time? J. Appl. Microbiol. 94, S126–S130 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Alexandersen, S., Kitching, R. P., Mansley, L. M. & Donaldson, A. I. Clinical and laboratory investigations of five outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease during the 2001 epidemic in the United Kingdom. Vet. Rec. 152, 489–496 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kao, R. R. The impact of local heterogeneity on alternative control strategies for foot-and-mouth disease. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 270, 2557–2564 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gloster, J. et al. Airborne transmission of foot-and-mouth disease virus from Burnside Farm, Heddon-on-the-Wall, Northumberland, during the 2001 epidemic in the United Kingdom. Vet. Rec. 152, 525–533 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Mikkelsen, T. et al. Investigation of airborne foot-and-mouth disease virus transmission during low-wind conditions in the early phase of the UK 2001 epidemic. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Disc. 3, 677–703 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wingfield, A. S., Middlemiss, C. H. & Eppink, L. FMD control strategies. Vet. Rec. 152, 479–480 (2003).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Taylor, N. M., Honhold, N., Paterson, A. D. & Mansley, L. M. Risk of foot-and-mouth disease associated with proximity in space and time to infected premises and the implications for control policy during the 2001 epidemic in Cumbria. Vet. Rec. 154, 617–626 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. National Audit Office. Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General: The 2001 Outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease. (The Stationery Office, London, 2002) [online], <http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/01-02/0102939part1.pdf>, <http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/01-02/0102939part2.pdf> (2002).

  32. Thompson, D. et al. Economic costs of the foot and mouth disease outbreak in the United Kingdom in 2001. Rev. Sci. Tech. 21, 675–687 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Royal Society (Edinburgh). Inquiry Into Foot and Mouth Disease in Scotland. (Royal Society of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, 2002).

  34. Sutmoller, P. & Olascoaga, R. C. in Evidence for the Temporary Committee on Foot-and–Mouth Disease of European Parliament. Meeting 2nd Sept. (European Parliament 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Bouma, A. et al. The foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in The Netherlands in 2001. Prev. Vet. Med. 57, 155–166 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Barnett, P. V. & Carabin, H. A review of emergency foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) vaccines. Vaccine 20, 1505–1514 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Donaldson, A. I. & Kitching, R. P. Transmission of foot-and-mouth disease by vaccinated cattle following natural challenge. Res. Vet. Sci. 46, 9–14 (1989).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Barnett, P. V. et al. Evidence that high potency foot-and-mouth disease vaccine inhibits local virus replication and prevents the 'carrier' state in sheep. Vaccine 22, 1221–1232 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Mackay, D. K., Forsyth, M. A., Davies, P. R. & Salt, J. S. Antibody to the nonstructural proteins of foot-and-mouth disease virus in vaccinated animals exposed to infection. Vet. Q. 20, S9–11 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. The Council of the European Union. Council Directive 2003/85/EC. Official J. European Union L 306, 1–41 (2003).

  41. Eddy, R. Vets asked valuable questions about foot-and-mouth measures. Nature 412, 477 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Haydon, D. T., Samuel, A. R. & Knowles, N. J. The generation and persistence of genetic variation in foot-and-mouth disease virus. Prev. Vet. Med. 51, 111–124 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Donaldson, A. I., Gloster, J., Harvey, L. D. & Deans, D. H. Use of prediction models to forecast and analyse airborne spread during the foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks in Brittany, Jersey and the Isle of Wight in 1981. Vet. Rec. 110, 53–57 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Donaldson, A. Foot-and-mouth disease: the principal features. Ir. Vet. J. 41, 325–327 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Alexandersen, S., Zhang, Z., Donaldson, A. I. & Garland, A. J. The pathogenesis and diagnosis of foot-and-mouth disease. J. Comp. Pathol. 129, 1–36 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Woolhouse, M. E. J., Haydon, D. T., Pearson, A. & Kitching, R. P. Failure of vaccination to prevent outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease. Epidemiol. Infect. 116, 363–371 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Hughes, G. J. et al. Serial passage of foot-and-mouth disease virus in sheep reveals declining levels of viraemia over time. J. Gen. Virol. 83, 1907–1914 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Bouma, A., Dekker, A. & de Jong, M. C. No foot-and-mouth disease virus transmission between individually housed calves. Vet. Microbiol. 98, 29–36 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Woolhouse, M. E. J. et al. Foot-and-mouth disease under control in the UK. Nature 411, 258–259 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Kao, R. R. Landscape fragmentation and foot-and-mouth disease transmission. Vet. Rec. 148, 746–747 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the anonymous referees for their helpful comments and many colleagues for advice that has greatly improved the various drafts of this manuscript. R.R.K. is funded by the Wellcome Trust.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Daniel T. Haydon, Rowland R. Kao and R. Paul Kitching: All authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Environmental and Evolutionary Biology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK

    Daniel T. Haydon

  2. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Rd, Oxford, OX1 3PS, UK

    Rowland R. Kao

  3. National Centre for Foreign Animal Diseases, 1015 Arlington Street, Winnipeg, R3E 3M4, Manitoba, Canada

    R. Paul Kitching

Authors
  1. Daniel T. Haydon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rowland R. Kao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Paul Kitching
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel T. Haydon.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Related links

Related links

FURTHER INFORMATION

DEFRA Summary report of the foot-and-mouth disease modelling workshop

Daniel T. Haydon's laboratory

Glossary

FIREBREAK CULLING

The culling of animals for the purpose of preventing spread of infection beyond an area, even though the animals are not believed to have been exposed to infection.

VACCINATION TO KILL

Or suppressive vaccination. A vaccination policy adopted within the protection zone that anticipates that vaccinated individuals will be destroyed as soon as circumstances allow.

VACCINATION TO LIVE

Or protective vaccination. A vaccination policy that anticipates that vaccinated individuals will not be prematurely slaughtered, and will enter the food chain as normal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haydon, D., Kao, R. & Kitching, R. The UK foot-and-mouth disease outbreak — the aftermath. Nat Rev Microbiol 2, 675–681 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro960

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro960

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing