#17,775
Overnight the Finnish Food Agency has added 4 more fur farms to their infected list (see below), bringing the total to 60, with 18 of those reported in the past two weeks (see FFSA:H5N1 Detected In 14 Additional Fur (Fox) Farms).
Unexpectedly, non-mink farms are testing positive at a much higher rate than mink farms. We don't currently know how many farms have been tested, but 90% of infected farms have been in foxes.
In their last update on November 10th, the Finnish Food Authority suggested:
Possibly foxes are more sensitive than minks to getting infected with bird flu, or the bird protection of fox farms has not been as good as that of mink farms, or there have been more fox farms in areas where there have been many bird flu infections of wild birds.
A little over two months ago, after nearly two months of debate, the Finnish Food Safety Authority Ordered All Animals From Bird Flu Infected Fur Farms Be Euthanized. This has led to the destruction of tens of thousands of animals.
The Finnish Food Agency is using antibody testing rather than PCR testing, in order to more quickly identify farms that have been infected. FIFUR, the Finnish Fur Breeders’ Association, has gone on record vehemently opposing this type of testing, and the culling policy.
In response, yesterday the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MMM) released the following statement:
MMM: The Food Agency's actions at fur farms are necessary to protect people
November 22, 2023
The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry disputes the view of FIFUR of the Finnish Fur Breeders' Association (bulletin 17.11.2023) that the measures to eradicate bird flu in fur animals would be unreasonable and excessive.
"The measures are based on the powers laid down for the Food Agency in the Animal Diseases Act and the use of discretion left to the authority by the legislature in a way that is considered necessary to protect human health," states the ministry's response.
The ministry emphasizes that the termination of fur animals is always a hard blow to an individual fur breeder, but on the other hand, the future of the industry is best secured if the related risk to human health can be removed.
Fur farming is increasingly viewed as presenting a legitimate pandemic risk, since these animals have a long record of being susceptible to both novel flu viruses and COVID (see That Touch of Mink Flu (2023 Edition),
Last summer, in PNAS: Mink Farming Poses Risks for Future Viral Pandemics, we looked at an excellent opinion piece penned by two well known virologists from the UK (Professor Wendy Barclay & Tom Peacock) on why fur farms - and mink farms in particular - are high risk venues for flu.
But fur farming - like live poultry markets in Asia or the bush meat trade in Africa - are long held traditions, and despite their public health risks, getting people to move away form them has been a tough sell.
While closing these types of operations won't prevent all future pandemics, it could go a long way in reducing their frequency.
Given their potential impact, the fewer we have endure, the better.
