The debate over vaccinating birds against avian flu
February 2025
In an article published on NPR.org by journalist Kate Wells, the reasons behind the reluctance to use vaccines against avian influenza are becoming increasingly apparent.
The first expert quoted is Dr. Swayne, a globally recognized researcher in the field of avian influenza. Dr. Swayne, an avian influenza expert and poultry veterinarian affiliated with the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), emphasizes that most of his colleagues in the animal and public health sectors "see vaccination of poultry as a positive tool in controlling this panzootic in animals." He also highlights vaccination as a strategy to reduce the risk of human infection and curb viral mutations that could make the virus more transmissible to humans.
However, it is crucial to acknowledge that vaccination might jeopardize the financial interests of poultry meat exporters. These exporters rely on birds with lower genetic susceptibility to H5N1 compared to laying hens, and vaccination could potentially lead to losses amounting to billions of dollars in international trade agreements.
Dr. John Clifford, former Chief Veterinary Officer for the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and an advisor for the USA Poultry and Egg Export Council, echoes these concerns. He states, “If we vaccinate, we not only lose $6 billion potentially in exports a year. If they shut us off, that product comes back on the U.S. market. Our economists looked at this and said we would lose $18 billion domestically.” He further elaborates that such a situation could result in the loss of "over 200,000 agricultural jobs."
The conclusion drawn from this analysis suggests that the primary considerations at play are economic rather than professional. It is regrettable that financial calculations are not being weighed against the broader consequences of avian influenza. These include its impact on wildlife, surging egg prices, significant environmental damage from the disposal of millions of birds and carcasses, disruptions to hundreds of dairy farms, the rapid evolution of the virus, and the increasing zoonotic risks it poses.
The current approach - allowing animals to succumb to the disease and culling millions of them as a means of control - appears deeply flawed. The veterinarians shaping this policy in the United States seem to have strayed from their professional responsibilities. Perhaps, in this instance, they are acting as... poorly equipped economists.
Nati Elkin
