US undercounts bird flu in cattle as farmers avoid testing, by Reuters

By Leah Douglas and Tom Polansek

WASHINGTON/CHICAGO (Reuters) – The U.S. bird flu outbreak in dairy cattle is much larger than official figures suggest because of farmers’ reluctance to test their animals and risk the economic consequences of a positive result, according to Reuters interviews with experts in dairies, veterinarians and farmers in six states with known cases.

The USDA has counted bird flu in about 190 dairy herds in 13 states since March. The spread of the virus from birds to cows has raised concerns that it could adapt to spread to humans. Scientists have warned that limited surveillance could weaken the US’s ability to respond to further human spread.

Thirteen dairy and poultry farm workers have been infected with bird flu this year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Reuters spoke with more than a dozen researchers, veterinarians, farmers and livestock industry groups to understand whether the spread of bird flu in dairy cattle is being accurately tracked.

State animal and human health experts in three states who work closely with veterinarians and farmers said the government’s number is likely an undercount because farmers fear the economic hardship of a positive test, including being restricted from -sell their milk or cattle for weeks.

The virus reduces milk production in cattle. The US, the world’s second largest cheese producer after the European Union, is the only country with known infections in cows.

“Even though we have nine official positives, there are many, many, many more farms that are affected or infected that are simply not being tested,” said Joe Armstrong, a veterinarian and cattle expert at the University of Minnesota who spoke to farmers around the world. the state.

A more accurate headcount for Minnesota would be three to five times higher, Armstrong said.

A USDA spokesman said the agency has encouraged testing by requiring negative tests for cows being shipped across state lines since April and offering a voluntary program to test farmers’ milk supplies weekly. Twenty-four dairy herds participate in the program, out of about 24,000 farms nationwide that sell milk, according to agency data.

Six farmers, veterinarians and other experts said farmers were reluctant to test because they did not believe the virus was a serious concern or because government incentives for testing did not offset their expected losses.

Colorado farmer Terry Dye, 78, said his two dairies were infected this summer and he didn’t notify the state because he wanted to deal with it privately. State agriculture officials eventually heard about the infections and quarantined his animals, he said.

“Sometimes it’s more convenient not to know,” Dye said.

The USDA is offering to compensate farmers with infected animals for veterinary care and 90% of lost milk production. Forty-seven herds have signed up for the agency’s financial assistance, although the total includes non-infected farms seeking support for biosecurity costs.

The USDA tests raw milk from cows to identify the virus in herds. The Food and Drug Administration has separately tested commercial milk supplies and says pasteurization kills the virus, so the milk is safe to drink.

HARDER TESTING

Experts said ways to better track the spread include more states mandating testing of raw milk or higher compensation for farmers.

Michigan and Colorado have taken aggressive approaches to contain bird flu in cattle, though experts there still believe cases are being missed.

Phil Durst, an educator at Michigan State University who has spoken to farmers whose herds have contracted the virus, said the 27 positive herds in Michigan are likely undercounted by at least a third.

Jenna Guthmiller, an assistant professor of immunology at the University of Colorado who has studied the virus, said the 63 positive cases in Colorado are also likely undercounts.

After a series of outbreaks, Colorado on July 22 became the only state to require dairy farms to test bulk milk supplies every week. Tests revealed 10 infected herds which were quarantined.

“Once we better understand the scale and scope of the outbreak, we can put measures in place to mitigate further spread,” said Maggie Baldwin, Colorado’s state veterinarian.

Some farmers don’t test because they don’t trust government officials or information about bird flu risks to cattle and humans, four sources said.

“There are a lot of dairy farms that I hear about that I just don’t believe,” said Jason Schmidt, a dairy farmer in eastern Kansas.

In Oklahoma, a dairy suspected of being infected in April did not send stored milk samples to the USDA for testing until July, according to the state. The herd recovered by the time tests confirmed an outbreak, and Oklahoma had no other reported cases, the state said.

In states with few or no infected cows, farmers and veterinarians worry that when the virus arrives or reappears, they won’t be able to track it.

“The saying is that the cure for a fever is not to take a temperature. So if we don’t test, then we’re not positive,” said Mark Hardesty, a dairy veterinarian in Ohio who reported a milk yield. infecting the herd in April.

Wisconsin, the second largest dairy and cheese producing state, has not reported any cases of bird flu in cattle. Dairy producers probably wouldn’t test even if they suspected symptoms in their herds, said Keith Poulsen, director of the Wisconsin Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory.

“It’s still cheaper to go through a herd outbreak, recover and move on,” Poulsen said.