Second letter (first letter attached)
TOP GLOBAL IMPORTANCE!
Prague, 29 March 2016
Mr Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General
United
Nations Organization
1 Av.,
42-48 St.
New York, NY 10017
USA
----------------------------------
Re: Factor of humankind self-destruction - irreparable global spreading of communicable disease pathogens through international trade
Dear Sir,
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that globalization era
starting two decades ago has brought irreparable global
spreading of communicable disease pathogens through international trade. Almost
one fifth of known animal infection pathogen species are transmissible to humans.
Invisible pathogens (identifiable only by laboratory investigations) are able to reproduce and to spread
territorially as well as to the next generations. Import of pathogens is relatively easy but
their early detection and eradication are extremely difficult if not
impossible. For post-import pathogen spread it
can be sufficient to import only one infected animal or one unit of infected
animal product depending on communicability of the etiological agents and on
exposure of susceptible population. The pathogens are spreading through international trade as never before when the trade
used to be of much minor size and intensity at much shorter distances to much
lesser number of destination localities. Imported pathogens of different importance contribute to steadily
increasing incalculable numbers of suffering diseased and prematurely dead humans and
animals. Huge daily flow of exported non-pathogen-free animal commodities, not
being blocked by any effective counter-measures, conduces to permanent
deterioration of global sanitary situation in spite of having much more
scientific information than before. Global spread
of pathogens through trade has already become irreparable. The man-made global spread of pathogens with continuous multiplying
sanitary, economic, ecological and social consequences represents a disaster
contributing to shortening survival of many animal kingdom species, including
gradual self-destruction of humankind!
Sanitary requirements for international
trade in animals and their products are regulated by World Trade Organization
(WTO) (Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures –
SPS) and Office International of Epizootics (OIE) (Animal Health Codes: without
any official approval by member country governments; changed annually). None of
them requires exported animal commodities to be of full sanitary quality, i.e.
to be free of pathogens. Both inter-governmental organizations (outside UN)
support unilaterally the exporting countries at the expense of health/life in
the importing ones that are not self-sufficient in animal production (mostly
developing ones) and thus contribute to worldwide man-made global pathogen
spreads through “legal” trade. Which government responsible for national
sanitary situation would consciously and voluntarily (without pressure, threat or corruption)
agree with importing pathogens? Who would like to be voluntarily exposed to
pathogens? Both organizations trying to avoid requirements for pathogen-free
animal commodity use different “tricks”, e.g. concealing to importing country governments and public the truth about risks and consequences, disinformation,
falsely “justifying” pathogen import, abolishing reports on infection
introductions, minimizing information on infection occurrence, abusing risk
assessment method, exploiting absurd reduction of public animal health services
etc.. For example: Background information for WTO/SPS approval at ministerial
meeting in 1994 concealed risks and consequences of pathogen global spread (=
trickery); very attractive was preamble text “Desiring to improve the human
health, animal health ...” although in the document there was no one
provision leading to health improvement (= lie). Confused governments approved
it within a package of documents as a condition sine qua non for WTO
membership (= threat).
Both organizations reduced considerably sanitary conditions (“to facilitate trade”) instead of making trade standards more demanding. Former OIE Code recommendations for minimal protection of importing country health („to avoid the risk of spreading animal diseases“) were converted into maximal limits (“Import risk analysis is preferable to a zero risk approach.”). Previous principle to avoid the risk of pathogen spreading was replaced by supporting trade to the detriment of health/life in the importing countries. The WTO/SPS de facto converted OIE Code recommendations into obligatory limits not permitting importing countries to require better protection or full sanitary innocuousness without convincing “scientific justification” (= international dictate).
Both organizations, in spite of strongly
emphasizing “scientific approach”, ignore that pathogen species (types,
subtypes and strains) represent biological phenomena of immense complexity,
diversity and dynamics. They ignore pathogen reproduction/spreading/resistance
and mutation abilities. They ignore: enormous number of animal infections
mostly not notifiable, not reported and not controlled; new emerging pathogens;
subclinical pathogen carriers; diagnostic test false negative results etc.. They ignore: that
every animal commodity export/import case is different under different
conditions and that every country has different multi-etiological sanitary
situation; that real occurrence of the majority of animal infections in
exporting countries is unknown (ad hoc
reporting only); exporting country loss of motivation and ability for infection
eradications as well as for effective supervision of attest issuing non-public
veterinarians; importing country inability to detect in time and eradicate all
imported pathogens; influence of human factor etc.. They ignore conflict of interest: supranational and exporting country
traders seeking to maximize profits also at the expense of sanitary quality
c o n t r a importing country governments, consumers
and farmers requiring innocuous commodities (i.e. private contra public
sectors). They ignore irreparable consequences of their common “trade/profit over health/life” policy
conducing also to the loss of too many infection eradications achieved by previous
generations. Their policy is in full contrast to global sustainable development efforts.
Both organizations deprive the importing countries of freedom to reject commodity having no sanitary harmlessness guarantee. The main tool to “disarm” importing countries requiring better protection than indicated in reduced OIE “standards” is represented by abused „import risk assessment“. In these cases the importing countries are required to present exporting ones written convincing “scientifically documented” import risk assessment (unimaginable in any other trade commodity) according to OIE methodology. Both organizations ignore that import risk is a not quantifiable multi-factorial biological phenomenon. WTO/OIE policy does not require quality guarantee documents (unimaginable in any other commodity), i.e. to guarantee sanitary innocuousness. Veterinarians issuing “sanitary attests” do not guarantee pathogen-free status (= without responsibility) and therefore importer claims, in case of pathogen import, have no chance of success. The importers, consumers and farmers not knowing real multi-etiological sanitary status must pay as for pathogen-free commodities.
The OIE abolished global information
system on infection introductions and thus making impossible to analyze
pathogen global spreading through international trade. It reduced ad absurdum reports on the occurrence of
infections, abolished their numeric classification and grouping according to
importance and thus providing importing countries quite insufficient and
confusing information for normal multi-etiological risk assessment to avoid
pathogen import. Almost in all exporting countries a big part of
internationally reportable animal infections are not notifiable, i.e. their
occurrence is unknown. Supporting
pathogen spread is in stark contrast to the only duty of the OIE - protection
against animal infections.
Under the pressure of some global
financial organizations (e.g. World Bank, International Monetary Fund etc.) too
many governments drastically restricted their budget. Irreplaceable role of
governments in national health protection was minimized which resulted in an absurd reduction of
their animal health services (staff, laboratories, resources, etc.).
These governments have lost the ability to control international trade directly
on-the-spot, to investigate animal commodities to be exported and to issue
sanitary guarantee certificates themselves (instead of less reliable and more prone to corruption private veterinarians) as well as to eradicate infections. Illegal
trade is out of the control. WTO/OIE policy “model”, supporting profiting exporters
regardless of pathogen import impacts, influences the trade within individual
countries and within country blocks without controlling internal borders and
thus global consequences are significantly
multiplied. Internationally organized spread of pathogens represents global continuous biological terror (inexcusable global crime) which impacts (epidemics) multiply in place
and time. It belongs among humanity self-destruction factors contributing to gradual extinction of Homo sapiens as a biological species.
The support must
be given to international fair trade
in sanitary innocuous pathogen-free food and infection-free animals, as
required by paying importing countries, based on bilateral agreements without
any external interference, international dictate or arbitration threat. The governments responsible for national
health protection must have the right to decide on import sanitary conditions themselves.
Global trade liberalization cannot mean freedom for pathogen spreading. I hope that nobody
wants our generation to be blamed for leaving life on our
planet in a much worse sanitary state
than “inherited”.
To
start blocking global spread of pathogens through “legal” trade requires all
WTO and OIE provisions admitting and supporting their export to be immediately
abolished! The decisions on international trade sanitary
conditions (“standards”) influencing global health and life cannot be left on a small group of outside-UN-officials, originated mostly from major exporting countries
dominating both organizations. Starting
effective global anti-epizootic actions requires entire inter-governmental
agenda against animal
infections to be concentrated
without any delay at one place only
within an organization historically responsible
for the protection of global population health and
lives, i.e. United Nations Organization! Its
first purpose, as set forth in its Charter, is “to maintain international peace and security”. The global “security” means to protect health
and lives of all the inhabitants in the world, i.e. to apply “health/life
over trade/profit” policy. Therefore, the mentioned threat to the
survival of humankind requires to be included among urgent priority problems dealt with at
the highest level of the UN: Security Council.
More information in annex.
I hope that this letter will not be left without any reaction as it happened with my letter to you on the same issue dated 25 July 2008. Please confirm receipt of the letter.
Yours sincerely,
Prof. MVDr Václav Kouba, DrSc.
Formerly: Chief,
Animal Health Service, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
(FAO), Roma; Veterinary Public Health Expert, World Health Organization (WHO),
Geneva; Information System Expert, International Office of Epizootics (OIE),
Paris; Editor-in-Chief of trilingual worldwide FAO/WHO/OIE Animal Health
Yearbook; Technical Vice-Director and Chief Epizootiologist of
Czechoslovak and Czech State Veterinary Service; Professor of Epizootiology,
University of Veterinary Sciences, Brno
Address:
Haškova 7, 17000 Prague 7, Czech republic
e-mail: vaclavkouba@cbox.cz
web: http://vaclavkouba.byl.cz
Copy sent to:
Dr Margaret Chan, DG, World Health
Organization
Dr José Graziano da
Silva, DG, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
ANNEX
AGRICULTURA TROPICA ET SUBTROPICA, 48/1, 37-43, 2015
Irreparable global spread of pathogens and
international trade – facilitating factors
Abstract
The
worldwide trade in non-pathogen-free animals and their products has led to
irreparable global spread of animal infections. Among factors supporting this
spread belong: countless pathogen species able to reproduce and spread
horizontally and to the next generations causing immense number of sufferings
and premature deaths of affected animals and humans; increasing long distance
export of animals and their products due also to not requiring by relevant
international organizations healthy and innocuous pathogen-free commodities;
illegal export/import of animals and their products; deficiencies related to
diagnosis of pathogen-free status; inability to discover all imported
infections, to control and eradicate them; international sanitary certificates
without pathogen-free guarantee; inability of public animal health services to
control on the spot the international trade with animal commodities; minimum of
successful animal infection eradications and absence of information about
global spreading of pathogens to alert the countries in question. Huge daily
flow of exported non-pathogen-free animal commodities conduces to permanent
deterioration of global epizootiological situation. Irreparable man-made global
spread of invisible pathogens with continuous multiplying sanitary, economic,
social and ecological consequences represents a worldwide ecological disaster
contributing to shortening life on Earth and survival of species, including
self-destruction of humankind. Extraordinary existential significance requires
international control of epizootics to be dealt with at the highest
decision-making level of the United Nations Organization.
Full text
PDF in:
http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ats.2015.48.issue-1/ats-2015-0006/ats-2015-0006.xml
AGRICULTURA TROPICA ET SUBTROPICA, 47/4, 147-154, 2014
Irreparable
Global Spread of Pathogens and International Trade – Infection Monitoring
Abstract
There is no systematic monitoring of global spreading of pathogens through international trade carried out by any organization regulating world-wide trade in animals and their products. A critical evaluation of the impact of international trade provisions on global pathogen spread is missing as well. Data related to this kind of analysis are no more internationally collected. However, information on animal infection occurrence is of paramount importance for decision-making on animal health import conditions based on pathogen introduction risk assessment considering first of all the epizootiological situation in exporting countries. Actual international animal health information system covers just a small part of known animal infections and provides much less information on their occurrence and epizootiological characteristics than before (except for a few selected emergency infections). It provides the importing countries zero or insufficient data for objective risk assessment to avoid pathogen introduction through international trade. Illegal export/import is not recorded in any information system. The globalization era trade requires much more efficient information system, including monitoring of global spread of pathogenic microflora through trade, as the basis for more effective international preventive and control anti-epizootic measures. There is an urgent need to re-establish animal health information system within the United Nations Organization as its inseparable component for follow-up execution of animal health technical assistance and global anti-epizootic programmes.
Full text PDF in:
http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ats.2014.47.issue-4/ats-2014-0021/ats-2014-0021.xml
AGRICULTURA TROPICA ET SUBTROPICA, 48/3-4, 42-51, 2015
Irreparable
Global Spread of Pathogens and International Trade – Sanitary Requirements
Abstract
Sanitary requirements for international trade in animals and their products are regulated by World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). None of them requires exported animal commodities to be of full sanitary quality, i.e. to be free of pathogens causing mass suffering and premature death of immense numbers of animals and humans. Both organizations using different methods try to avoid requirements of importing countries for pathogen-free animal commodity. They support the exporting countries at the expense of health in the importing ones that are not self-sufficient in animal production and thus contribute to worldwide man-made spreading of pathogens through “legal” trade. They ignore the global irreparable consequences of their common “trade over health” policy. They also deprive the importing countries of freedom to reject goods having no sanitary harmlessness guarantee. They ignore pathogen reproduction/spreading/resistance abilities and the fact that every case is different. Admitting pathogen spread is in stark contrast to the only duty of the OIE. It is therefore recommended: Documents and provisions supporting pathogen spread through “legal” international trade to be immediately abolished; to use and apply normal free market fair trade principles for animal commodities, i.e. full quality requirements based on demands of the importing country to avoid pathogen introduction and on bilateral agreement without any external interference. State animal health services must be significantly strengthened to be able to control international trade on-the-spot and organize infection control/eradication programmes. Modern action-oriented epizootiology methods have to be used. All intergovernmental anti-epizootic agenda should be concentrated in United Nations Organization and dealt with as a priority programme to protect global health and life.
Full text PDF in:
http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ats.2015.48.issue-3-4/ats-2015-0014/ats-2015-0014.xml?format=INT
29 March 2016
Dr Margaret Chan
Director-General
World Health
Organization
Avenue Appia 20
CH-1211 Geneva 27
SWITZERLAND
----------------------------------------------------------
Re: Factor of humankind self-destruction - irreparable global spreading of communicable disease pathogens through international trade
Dear Madam,
please find attached a copy of my letter to Mr Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General, United Nations Organization about irreparable global spread of pathogens through “legal” international trade.
The
purpose is you to be informed and to ask you for support of the proposals contained
in the letter.
Yours sincerely,
Prof. MVDr Václav Kouba, DrSc.
Formerly:
Chief,
Animal Health Service, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
(FAO), Roma, Italy
Address:
Haškova 7, 17000 Prague 7, Czech republic
e-mail: vaclavkouba@cbox.cz
web: http://vaclavkouba.byl.cz
Prague, 29 March 2016
Mr.
Dr José
Graziano da Silva
Director-General
Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations
Via delle Terme di Caracalla
00100 Roma
ITALY
----------------------------------------------------------
Re: Factor of humankind self-destruction - irreparable global spreading of communicable disease pathogens through international trade
Dear Sir,
please find attached a copy of my letter to Mr Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General, United Nations Organization about irreparable global spread of pathogens through “legal” international trade.
The
purpose is you to be informed and to ask you for support of the proposals contained
in the letter.
Yours sincerely,
Prof. MVDr Václav Kouba, DrSc.
Formerly:
Chief,
Animal Health Service, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
(FAO), Roma, Italy
Address:
Haškova 7, 17000 Prague 7, Czech republic
e-mail: vaclavkouba@cbox.cz
web: http://vaclavkouba.byl.cz
FIRST LETTER
TOP IMPORTANCE !
Mr. Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General
United Nations Organization
1 Av., 42-48 St.
N e
w Y o r k, NY 10017
U S A
------------------------------------------
Re: Internationally organized spread of infectious diseases damaging global health, biosphere and UN programmes
Dear Mr. Ban Ki-moon,
first let me to congratulate you to the Nobel Peace
Prize obtained by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World
Meteorological Organization (WMO), recognizing the United Nations Organization
very important role in global environment protection. This fact has motivated
me to write this letter conveying my serious
worries about the future of our
planet biosphere being damaged by
man-made organized long distance spread
and globalization of infectious diseases in world fauna. The pathogenic microflora
represents an integral component of the biosphere. I am writing as retired
former officer responsible for UN animal health policy.
Animal infectious diseases
1. Animal infectious disease agents being spread through international trade have serious negative impacts not only on global animal and human population health but also on global biosphere and on several UN programmes. Enormous quantity of non-infection-free animals and their products being daily transferred among the countries causes gradual irreparable colonization of our planet by dangerous pathogenic microbes and parasites devastating its fauna. The number of affected animals and persons by imported animal infectious diseases is rapidly increasing reaching frightening size.
2. From about one thousand species of animal infectious diseases, caused by invisible pathogenic virus, rickettsia, bacteria, fungus and protozoa as well as by pathogenic helminths and arthropods – pathogens, almost two hundred are transmissible to man (zoonoses). Several tens of them can cause death in humans. Some of them belong to the list of biological weapons of mass destruction. We have to expect also the appearance of many new dangerous animal infectious diseases. The pathogens are able to survive in infected beings and their populations, many also in the environment, to reproduce and spread not only territorially but also to following generations of susceptible populations (= multiplying impact). It is not supposable that imported pathogens in animal and human populations will disappear naturally. When penetrating among wild animal populations then imported infectious disease can last up to particular population species territorial extinction. In one or very few days any animal infectious disease can be exported through infected animals or their products to any part of our planet. About 130 animal infectious diseases are internationally reportable (only two tens are zoonoses, similarly as in the OIE Code disease list). Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of the reports consists in “No information available”. (infectious diseases’ active screenings have been minimized up to zero and therefore, numeric data are based on ad hoc reports only not reflecting at all the true occurrence of the infections).
3. The animal infectious diseases are spreading as never in the past when the trade used to be of much lesser size and intensity, at much shorter distances from much lesser number of localities to much lesser number of destination places, under much more demanding import sanitary conditions based on much more screening investigations, under much stricter control by much better staffed, equipped and organized government services and when the protection and recovery of population health were the priorities. On the other hand, the amount of scientific information has increased as never before. However, the mass importation of infectious diseases is not compensated by their eradication; the number of successful eradications is close to zero. “Doing nothing” policy is linked also with the fact that imported infectious diseases are discovered too late or not at all = further free mass spreading in susceptible populations. The result is that the imported infections are continuously spreading without being blocked by eradication programmes. In the world no one animal infectious disease has been eradicated yet, in spite of almost one hundred years of international efforts!
4. The exported animals and their products (meat in
particular), without any sanitary guarantee of being infection/pathogen-free,
go mostly from the major exporting developed countries to importing developing
ones, i.e. exporting also, without any penalty, the animal infectious
disease agents into often “defenceless” countries. In
any case, the imported pathogens either worsen local sanitary situation due to quite
new infections or aggravate specific infections’ occurrence, i.e. making more
difficult existing local sanitary problems.
5. Actual change in global climate - global
warming, create conditions for easier spreading of
infectious diseases and cause major negative
consequences than in the past.
Consequences of imported animal infectious diseases
6. Spreading infectious diseases through international
trade has serious, up to catastrophic,
ecological, economic, public health and social consequences of different
forms, grades and size. Imported animal infection pathogens transmissible to man cause diseases conducing to different
consequences from suffering, partial and full working incapacity, partial and
full invalidity, reproduction problems, sterility up to premature deaths of enormous
number of affected persons. In the poor importing countries, with
undernourished inhabitants and with minimum or zero resources to detect and
control/eradicate imported infectious diseases, the impacts are much more
harmful. The global numbers of diseased
and dead persons
due to imported animal infectious diseases have been higher than due to recent wars and terrorism. In animal populations the imported
infectious diseases cause different consequences from suffering, reduced up to
zero utility (productivity), disturbed reproduction, sterility, premature
culling up to premature natural deaths.
The imported
infectious diseases cause enormous losses
in livestock husbandry and in production of
food of animal origin damaging seriously economic and social development, mainly in poor developing
countries, and thus contributing to
actual global food supply crisis. The imported infectious diseases can “awaken”
latent infections or pathologic changes in affected beings.
7. The imported
infectious disease consequences have very
negative impact on several United Nations programmes such as: of
sustainable development, against poverty, against hunger, against bioterrorism;
UNEP programmes of biosphere protection; WHO programmes of human health
protection and recovery as well as of human welfare and consumer protection;
FAO programmes of animal health protection and recovery, of livestock
production, reproduction and genetic development as well as of animal welfare,
etc.. The imported infectious diseases increase the requirements for the
mentioned UN programmes’ inputs, decrease their outputs and devaluate
previously achieved results. The imported infectious diseases seriously reduce relevant UN programmes’ effectiveness,
i.e. wasting international resources and government/taxpayer money.
Internationally organized infectious disease spreading is in full conflict of interest with above mentioned UN programmes.
8.
Internationally organized long distance spreading of the infectious diseases
represents a real and continuous bioterror (world public is deliberately not informed) =
international crime affecting,
including killing, enormous numbers of animals and humans. Internationally
organized spreading of the infectious diseases causing in human population mass
sufferings and premature deaths (= mass
murders) is against the United Nations Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, Article 3:
“Everyone has the right to life..” Therefore, these irresponsible activities
represent a crime against humanity.
9. Infectious disease spreading belongs among the
factors of man-made damaging our planet ecological and biological equilibrium and reducing its biodiversity. Imported infectious diseases have contributed to the extinction of
many endangered animal species and even of many human tribes and even nations. Animal species extinctions
influenced by human activities, including conscious infectious disease
spreading through international trade, have been more numerous than their natural
extinction. The artificial
colonization of our planet by animal infectious diseases transmissible to man
can contribute in the future to start gradual extinction (self-destruction) of Homo sapiens as a biological species !
Internationally
organized spread of animal infectious diseases
10. The
worse is that international long distance spread of animal infectious diseases is organized by two intergovernmental organizations
outside of the United Nations structure:
World Trade Organization (WTO) and International Office of Epizootics (OIE). The detailed provisions are published
in: WTO
“Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures”,
(hereafter WTO/SPS) coming into effect in 1995 and voluminous “OIE International
Animal Health Code” (hereafter OIE Code) for the international trade in
animals and animal products (animal commodities), being changed every year (absolute
instability) without any risk assessment and issued without necessary official clearance
at member country government level. They apply very dangerous policy “not admitting to require infection-free import” and “not
admitting to refuse non-infection-free commodity” based on tricky principle
”Import risk
analysis is preferable to a zero risk approach”. Not recognizing infection-free trade, i.e. sanitary
wholesome trade and admitting “negative trade effects”, they consciously support only profiting non-infection-free export at the expense of
the health and the biosphere in importing countries.
11. Both documents do not know even the terms „healthy animals“ or „healthy animal products“ or “foodborne-infection-free food” or “infection free animal commodity”, etc., i.e. sanitary innocuous without infectious disease agents or at least the terms “zoonoses-free animal commodity”, “internationally reportable infections’ free animal commodity”, etc. Instead of requiring the export with sanitary quality guarantee, i.e. what is sanitary guaranteed and what not, controllable by importing countries, they are imposing on them to accept „OIE international veterinary certificates“ of informative value only = guaranteeing nothing ! Both documents are trickily full of uncontrollable „measures“ calculating only with the export/import of non-infection-free animal commodities. The basic trick is represented by theoretical non-quantifiable, i.e. speculative, „risk assessment“ required only from importing countries when demanding normal infection-free commodity or better protection than the OIE Code admits. The simplest and logical requirements of importing country for full quality goods, in our case for healthy animals or innocuous animal products, i.e. free of communicable disease pathogens, need according to the WTO/SPS and the OIE Code “scientific, transparent, defensible and convincing justification” of risk assessment to be presented to exporting country”. “The risk assessment should be based on the best available information that is in accord with current scientific thinking. The assessment should be well documented and supported with references to the scientific literature and other sources, including expert opinion.”(!?). How can, for example, a poor developing country, being short of almost everything, be able to elaborate something what is absolutely out of current reality. This method serves only to cheat and discourage importing countries being pushed into defenceless position and to “facilitate import” without any guarantee of sanitary innocuousness. The OIE itself has never presented to member country governments any “scientifically justified risk assessment” neither for its Code as a whole nor for its individual provisions.
12. The same OIE risk assessment
procedure is required also in cases when importing country demands specific
infectious disease pathogen-free status additionally to very benevolent OIE
Code or to be free of infections deliberately eliminated without any risk
assessment by the OIE (leptospirosis, paratuberculosis) or to be free of infections not included
in the Code (overwhelming majority of the zoonoses
including plague, almost all salmonelloses, listeriosis, etc.). This OIE approach means in practice = free spreading through trade of the
majority of animal infectious diseases.
13. The documents confirm "anti-sanitary" policy admitting explicitly the import of commodities with pathogens transmissible to man: “ human health risks to which people voluntarily expose themselves." !? I have not any doubt that nobody, even the authors of the WTO/SPS and of the OIE Code themselves, would agree to be voluntarily infected by imported infectious disease agents causing suffering or even the death (and pay for it !). This simple example demonstrates the perversity of the WTO/SPS and of the OIE Code when requiring the importing countries to sacrifice their health and lives for the profit of exporting country business. The documents demonstrate the unscrupulousness to human health and life !
14. Both organizations have
been imposing on importing country to accept animal commodities without any sanitary quality guarantee and without their full sanitary
innocuousness, i.e. not respecting the health of the consumers and the needs of
animal owners. Lack of
sanitary quality grade guarantee means the differentiation of
animal commodity prices according to other than sanitary quality, i.e. the
export without regard to the health and the biosphere protection in importing
countries. The export without sanitary quality guarantee documents makes impossible
successful reclaim
in case of infectious disease introduction. Some major exporting countries even
subsidize the export of animals and their products, regardless of missing
sanitary innocuousness guarantee.
No quality guarantee = no exporting country (exporter) responsibility! No guarantee for sanitary status = no
responsibility for sanitary status of exported animals and their products !
15. Thanks to tricky provisions of the above mentioned organizations, neither the animal owners nor the food
consumers in the world have been informed that imported animals and food of
animal origin have been without any guarantee documents to confirm sanitary
quality as far as infection-free status ! In spite
of this, the importing countries and the end-users must pay as for full
sanitary quality and
cover themselves the losses caused by imported infectious diseases (mortality,
morbidity, cost of control/eradication measures – investigations, treatments,
vaccinations, sanitation, etc.)! The WTO and the OIE have been doing everything
to suppress any information for world public on its infectious disease
spreading policy causing disastrous consequences for animal and human health and life.
16. Both organizations trickily declared that normal logical import requirement for healthy animals and their products is “unjustified non-tariff trade barrier”. In reality, the trade barriers are animal infectious diseases in exporting countries ! No any importing country refuses from sanitary reasons animal commodities in case of official guarantee of being free of infectious diseases agents, i.e. when importing the health (healthy animals, pathogen-free food, incl. sterilized animal products) and not infectious diseases.
17.
Both organizations have developed a “clever” system supporting unilaterally profiting exporting countries at the expense of animal/human
life/health, biosphere and UN programmes in importing
countries through avoiding sanitary quality guarantee of exported commodities (unique exception in
international trade !) Among the actions of this “system” belong immediate
deliberate stop of regular reporting on
infectious disease import cases
to avoid their analyses and minimizing
up to zero: government sanitary on-the-spot control of food chain and of the
export (dismantling government/public services); sanitary requirements for imported
animal commodities; screening etiological investigations to avoid the risk to
discover undesirable true sanitary reality complicating the export; information
on internationally reportable animal infectious disease real occurrence in
exporting countries, making impossible importing country correct decision on
import risk and conditions for avoiding infectious disease introduction;
preventive, control and eradication measures, etc.. Instead of necessary
strengthening of government/public veterinary services, the OIE not only
supported their dismantling but in its Code has even degraded (de facto “erased”) them through not
distinguishing between state and private veterinary services not respecting
neither their quite different role and responsibility nor the natural conflict
of interest between them. The often non-reliable and practically not
controllable private services, being without financial responsibility for
sanitary quality, have been “promoted” to take over the government role in
international trade sanitary aspects. All the above mentioned “actions” have
been supported by mass global advertising not to require infection-free import.
18.
In no other commodity the quality requirement has been so degraded as in
this case. The exporting countries lost the main motivation for intensive infectious disease control and
eradication programmes.
19. In order to “facilitate unimpeded trade” the sanitary regulatory and control roles of national governments have been suppressed and the national “doors” opened to supranational exporters. The importing country government health protective “interference” is even subject to WTO sanctions, while on the contrary, infection exporting country government is without any international sanction! In the OIE publications it can be found even statements such as ”countries will be excluded of all imports if requiring zero risk importation policy” !?
20. The governments have not yet received
neither from the mentioned two organizations nor from relevant UN organization (FAO) any
analysis of man-made conscious spreading of the infectious diseases through
international trade and of the impacts of WTO/OIE trade policy, i.e. avoiding
their evaluation what could reveal the reality - catastrophic consequences.
21.
The very bad example of not guaranteeing the infection-free commodities, the
international trade “policy” is unfortunately “copied” by regional (e.g. European Union = Europeanization
of infectious diseases thanks also to missing intercountry
border control) and national legislation
in almost all the countries and thus multiplying the negative impact on
planet life due to WTO/OIE policy. The WTO/OIE provisions serve as the “tip of
the iceberg” guiding a huge “pyramid” of
mass and daily spreading infectious diseases through national and international
trade affecting, without any effective contra-measures, our planet human and animal populations = colonization
by infectious disease pathogens.
22.
Trade liberalization cannot mean the
liberalization of infectious disease spreading!
The trading countries must have the freedom to
decide on export/import conditions themselves without any WTO/OIE dictate unilaterally favorable to major exporting
countries regardless of sanitary quality
and consequences!
Role of the World Trade Organization in
infectious disease spreading
23. The WTO/SPS was adopted at GATT ministerial meeting in Marrakesh on 15 April 1994, as one of the annexes of a big package, thanks to unfair tricks such as deliberately holding back the information on negative sanitary consequences and falsely promising health improvement (in the Preamble there is a very attractive sentence: “desiring to improve the human, animal, … health in all Members;” while in the whole document there is not one provision or even one word dedicated to the health improvement!). Background information presented to the governments concealed the truth about human health, animal health, biosphere and economic negative consequences. It was a big swindle ! It confused the governments approving it (in bloc with all other documents as the condition sine qua non for the WTO membership) in good faith in GATT fairness. The official threat addressed to the governments, either to accept in full the package with all the annexes or not to be the member of the newly established WTO, was a very strong influencing factor. The main authors of WTO/SPS technical tricks were obviously the “professionals” linked with the OIE.
24. The WTO/SPS would have never been adopted: if the OIE, as professional intergovernmental organization responsible for animal health protection against infectious diseases, would have insisted on consistent protection of animal population health as required by its original constitution; if the importing country governments would have been informed about the negative sanitary consequences and about the real purpose = trade admitting disease pathogen export in their countries; if this problem would have been dealt separately and not as “stuck” annex of the big GATT package; if the consumers and animal owners of the importing countries would have had the chance to express their view and if the draft would have been subjected to scientific opponent procedure (at least as it is current in the cases of university student theses).
25. Under normal fair conditions the governments of importing countries, mainly developing ones, after being informed about negative sanitary consequences for them, would never agree with the documents imposing on them the duty to introduce infectious diseases through international trade. No any government of these countries would consciously and voluntarily accept the above mentioned documents dictating to introduce also animals and their products not being free of infectious disease agents causing suffering and deaths of animals and humans and pay for it.
Contrary
to basic principles of fair international trade
26. The WTO/SPS and the OIE Code have neither
respected, nor applied, nor required to be applied, nor
admitted to apply the current
principles of fair trade such as:
- Freedom of exporting and importing countries to agree bilaterally on trade conditions without any external interference or dictate to importing country to accept offered goods.
- Freedom of paying importing country to select exporting country and to identify the conditions to avoid postimport undesirable problems.
- Full true and transparent information on the exporting commodity quality (what is guaranteed and what not, possible side effects) to be available to importing country to can asses the risks before its decision on the given import and prepare adequate postimport measures (including information for the end-users).
- Freedom of paying importing country to refuse the offered commodities without any duty to present to exporting country written justification in a form of scientific, convincing and well documented risk assessment and to let foreign experts to evaluate national animal health services.
- Exporting country to present commodity quality guarantee documents (including guarantee period) well justified, convincingly documented (not only a simple information document without legal value) and fully controllable after the import.
- Declaring legibly (labelling, marking) the true quality of the exported commodity in order the importing country and the end-users to be fully informed on the commodity quality and on eventual risks (side effects).
- Paying importing country to have decisive final word about the import permission and conditions without external dictate.
- The price to be adequate to quality grade of the imported commodity.
- The trade contract to include the procedure for the reclaim in case when the commodity doesn’t meet import conditions (incl. covering losses caused by this commodity).
- International standards according to commodity type.
- Effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties for infringement of fair international commercial practices.
Role of the International Office of
Epizootics in infectious disease spreading
27. The OIE was founded in 1924 and up to 1994 represented an organization producing useful recommendations and closely cooperated with the FAO-UN complementing mutually their animal health programmes. The turning point came in 1994/1995. The OIE contributed, from sanitary point of view, to the WTO/SPS document „to facilitate export“ at the expense of importing country health. It took over global FAO animal health information system, abolished common FAO/WHO/OIE Animal Health Yearbook programme minimizing up to zero the role of the FAO and the WHO, significantly reduced regular information on internationally reportable animal infectious disease occurrence (less than before computer era), stopped regular collecting data on animal infectious disease import cases and changed its neutral policy into unilateral in service of major exporting countries. The OIE, again without any justification, logic and replacement, abolished extremely useful numeric classification of animal infections diseases, several times changed and delayed (up to 3 years) global regular animal health information system, overcomplicated it and even eliminated the most useful data on animal infectious disease occurrence and measures and thus confusing importing country decision-making. The OIE has not applied scientific approach based on objective analyses of real sanitary situation and member country governments’ needs as well as has not respected biological laws and particularities.
More information in: http://vaclavkouba.byl.cz/globsurveillance.htm
(“Global crisis of communicable animal infections' monitoring and surveillance:
less information on their occurrence than before computer era = facilitating infections/pathogens
spreading through international trade !”)
28. The OIE Code contains detailed sanitary import conditions for the trade in animals and
animal products referring to the WTO/SPS. About animal and human health and life
decides, instead of the UN and governments themselves, the OIE through a very
problematic “consensus” of only a group of
Chief Veterinary Officers (some obviously influenced or corrupt by exporting
lobby) dominated by the representants of the major exporting countries. These representants
push through the sanitary conditions for the importing country limited protection
without any scientific, convincing and well documented “risk assessment” not
respecting at all the interest to import commodities of full sanitary quality,
i.e. without postimport problems. The OIE dominating
group has been able to push through their proposals thanks to not democratic
system of adoption. The OIE refers (pretends) to the WTO/SPS as being given a
“mandate” for the Code provisions. However, nobody has given to the OIE any
“mandate” for causing
sufferings and deaths of animals and humans.
29. History doesn’t know any official international document requiring that purchaser must “scientifically justify” in written the commodity refuse or his import conditions for full sanitary quality. On the contrary, in any fair trade the seller must try to convince the purchaser about the merchandise quality. Reverse logic and unfair intentions represent the characteristics of the WTO/SPS and the OIE Code.
30. The WTO/SPS converted former useful
recommendations of minimal import conditions of the OIE Code into obligatory
maximal limit for protective measures not permitting necessary protection
without so called "scientific convincing justification"
using nonsense speculative “risk
assessment” method. The tragedy is that the Code import conditions (limits)
for the importing country health protection have been illogically elaborated
and push through (dictated) by the OIE dominating major exporting countries and
not logically vice versa by importing countries to decide themselves on import
sanitary conditions to protect the health and lives of their populations. The
exporting countries decide through the OIE Code on importing countries’ health
protection level !?
31. The main new objective of the OIE is according to
its Code, “ to facilitate international trade”, “the unimpeded flow of international trade
in animals and animal products…”. For the OIE the trading profit of the
major and most influential exporting countries, at the expense of importing
country animal and human welfare, health and life, is the first and almost the
only priority.
32. One of the confusing components of the OIE Code is
represented by so called “International veterinary certificate”
for export consisting in superficial information without any official guarantee as far as sanitary status is
concerned. The veterinarians, mostly from private service, are usually without
government on-the-spot control. The reliability of their signatures can be
problematic, similarly as the reliability of their government signatures on
international agreements,
resolutions and conventions when not respecting them.
The OIE Code is avoiding the “international veterinary certificate” to be issued by the officers being materially (financially) responsible for guaranteeing sanitary status and for eventual sanitary deficiency = making impossible successful reclaim procedure. According to the OIE Code, the export document issuing “accredited” private veterinarian is not responsible for real sanitary status and has to sign only what he knows (no investigation = no knowledge about existing infection = “fit for export” or “fit for human consumption” !). He can sign what he wants ! According to OIE Code, nobody is responsible for sanitary guarantee of exported animal commodities ! Similar approach can be found in the local trade of the majority of the member countries following the “OIE example”.
Example of the OIE Code texts: “They should not require a
veterinarian to certify matters that are outside his-her knowledge or which
he-she cannot ascertain and verify.” “Certifying veterinarians should only certify
matters that are within their own knowledge;”
33. Other OIE Code text: “Certifying veterinarians should have no conflict of interest in the commercial aspects.” Export business and demanding sanitary conditions are normally in conflict of interest what is for the OIE obviously an unknown phenomenon. The OIE, in spite of being intergovernmental organization paid by member country governments, has degraded government veterinary services (defending animal and human population health) not respecting that private veterinarians have entirely opposite interest and motivation. The OIE Code reflects serious weakness of major exporting country government veterinary services having very limited staff working mainly in offices and spending a lot of time by administrative work, i.e. being not able to control the trade in animals and their products effectively or at all.
Contrary
to basic principles of international protection of animal population health
34. The OIE has neither respected, nor applied, nor
required to be applied in its “trade” policy the current principles of international protection of animal population
health such as:
- First, do not harm! Prevention is preferable to fire-brigade approach and to cure.
- The priority of international animal health policy is to protect consistently healthy animals and their herds/populations against the introduction of infections from abroad.
- Basic principle/requirement is to export infection-free animals and their products.
- To require intensive infectious disease control and eradication activities in exporting countries to be able to export infection-free animal commodities and thus avoiding the “delivery” of infectious disease pathogens into importing countries.
- To support local (national) animal production to maximize the self-sufficiency and thus to avoid or minimize the need for risky import of animals and their products.
- Not to import risky animal commodities without any guarantee of full sanitary quality (= without sanitary innocuousness – avoiding all infectious diseases) or without acceptable sanitary guarantee (e.g. avoiding all internationally reportable infections only or avoiding all zoonotic infections only, etc.).
- Not to import animal commodities from countries known as the exporters of infectious diseases.
- To prefer and support animal commodity import from the shortest possible distances (principle of nearness), from one or minimal possible places of origin, to one or minimal possible places of destination and distribution as well as stable export/import relations to minimize the spread of eventually imported infections.
- To prefer and support import from specific infectious disease free countries, territories, localities and herds/flocks without any duty of importing country to apply OIE risk assessment method in case of import conditions complementary to the Code.
- Not to accept animal commodity without official document on sanitary status guarantee issued by independent investigative officers, preferably of government service.
- To respect that every case is different and that there are not two countries, territories and localities with identical animal population health/disease situation (even as far as specific diseases are concerned – types, subtypes, stage of development, etc.) and sanitary measures requiring different import conditions.
- To respect that animal infectious disease agents are live biological phenomena with their dynamics and variability behaving differently under different conditions requiring flexible import conditions – scientific and practical approach and not rigid stereotypes not respecting biological particularities.
- To understand the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACPP) as a method for only avoiding animal products contaminations (no any filter of pathogens in animal products) not replacing at all the decisive sanitary status and measures at farm level to avoid delivery of infected products.
- To use for etiological investigations of animals and their products the highest possible reliable samplings to avoid the export of pathogens.
More information in my text “The
International Office of Epizootics (OIE) – World Organization for Animal
Infection Globalization (not admitting to require infection-free import)” in http://vaclavkouba.byl.cz/orgglobalization.htm.
35. The OIE doesn’t apply normal international legal rules. Without any official high level clearance by member country governments, “new” OIE “dropped” illegally its original official name «International Office of Epizootics» by self-nominating as ”World Organization for Animal Health”, changed its original duty and priority of the health protection into non-infection-free trade support. Its documents falsely pretend “improving global animal health” in spite of applying exactly the opposite policy. Its legal culture is low confusing even normal terminology, e.g. calling a “questionnaire” as a “standard” or “agreement” as a “law”, etc..
36. The OIE has not been interested at all in the
catastrophic consequences of its policy – spread and globalization
of animal infectious disease. The OIE has not analysed the causes and has done
practically nothing to bloc the long distance
spreading. On the contrary, it supports without any
hesitation the WTO/SPS as its obvious
co-initiator and co-author. Actual OIE activities and staff are de facto in service of business and not
of health. It seems that there is not the
chance to reform this organization. Any cosmetic “corrections” of its
policy cannot convert actual OIE into normal organization in full service to
animal health. The professional staff rotation is minimal. (Director General
post has been occupied from the beginning in 1924 always by a representant of the same major exporting country belonging
to OIE dominating ones - historical exception !).
37. The OIE has consciously betrayed its original anti-epizootic duty and basic medical ethical code giving priority to export business over the protection of life and health as well as of biosphere in importing countries. A question arises about the “raison d’être” of this dangerous organization acting against the UN programmes and being paid by the same governments and taxpayers as the UN. The question is why to have beside the FAO-UN other intergovernmental organization for the same subject when it acts antagonistically (not complementary as before) and not respecting the UN programmes? The OIE, after the WTO/SPS, almost excluded the UN, i.e. the FAO and the WHO from necessary influence on sanitary conditions for international trade in animals and their products and on global animal health information system.
More information, including a list of relevant texts and statistics, can be found in attached copy of the letter sent to Dr Achim
Steiner, UNEP Executive Director. Detailed information
and examples can be found in: http://vaclavkouba.byl.cz.html.
Conclusion
38. Thank to
immense size of exported
non-infection-free animals and their products, supported by the mentioned
intergovernmental organizations, the global health situation of animal and human populations is becoming every day
worse, damaging more and more our planet biosphere and relevant UN programmes. The world is slowly
heading towards man-made global ecological and sanitary irreparable disasters
without any global contra-measures. Continuing worldwide man-made long-distance
(incl. inter-continental) mass spreading of infectious diseases through trade,
not being blocked by effective measures, represents serious threat to our planet biosphere future. The WTO/OIE policy
has caused incalculable
millions of sufferings and deaths of animals and humans due to imported infectious disease
agents.
39. To support profiting export of animals and
animal products regardless of
their sanitary quality, the WTO has “sacrificed” in its WTO/SPS the principles
of fair international trade. The WTO/SPS began the “new” trade anti-sanitary, anti-biosphere and
anti-UN policy that has caused catastrophic consequences. Therefore, it must be
abolished as soon as possible! In
this context, there
is an urgent need for international revision of the WTO/SPS and declare it
without any delay as nullified ! It should be useful to analyze the circumstances
under which it was adopted to avoid similar criminal tricks in the future.
Note: Justification of the abolition of the WTO/SPS "Agreement on the Application of
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" was sent to Dr Mike Moore, Director-General, World Trade
Organization on
40. The OIE, similarly, to support profiting export of animals
and animal products regardless of their sanitary quality, has sacrificed basic principles of international protection of animal
population health and principles of medical ethical code, instead of applying
much more demanding import sanitary provisions corresponding to new trade
globalization conditions. Every organization is evaluated according to the
impacts of its activities in practice and not according to number of documents,
theoretical papers, meetings and missions. The
OIE, not
fulfilling its original anti-epizootic duty, is professionally and
morally responsible for internationally and consciously organized spread of infectious diseases
damaging seriously global animal and human health, biosphere and several UN programmes, i.e. for actual catastrophic irreparable
colonization of our planet populations by animal infectious diseases pathogens.
Unifying international
animal health agenda,
under only one intergovernmental organization within the UN structure, will
improve international coordination, trade control and anti-epizootic actions.
Additionally to this, it will save government/taxpayer
money.
41. Both mentioned international organizations have given up the basic duties of their constitutions in the interest of a small group of very influential major exporting countries and supranational business. The historically incredible policy based on dirty tricks and pressure on importing country governments is even secured by WTO sanctions in the cases when applying normal fair trade and health protection principles and not the WTO/OIE infectious disease spreading dictate!
42. The best solution will be the United Nations to take over in full the international protection of biosphere and health, i.e. also against animal infectious disease spreading and globalization through international trade. This so important global role cannot be left with any irresponsible organization, acting contra global population health and contra United Nations efforts, having not any intention, is spite of warnings, to stop their unacceptable biosphere destructive policy and being without any effective international control.
43. The FAO has the responsibility for global animal health protection within the UN system. Therefore, it should be logical the FAO to cover all the spectrum of global animal health policy in the context with other UN programmes, i.e. including sanitary problems of international trade in animals and animal products to avoid long distance (not only local transboundary) spreading of animal infectious diseases. The FAO animal health agenda must, unlike actual OIE, fully respect the principles of fair international trade and the principles of consistent international protection of animal population health. Unifying animal health international policy under the FAO will contribute to necessary coordination of international organizations dealing with animal health. It will contribute to more effective animal health protection management, to the transparency of information on infectious disease occurrence and measures, to better international control giving priority to the qualitative aspects guaranteeing sanitary innocuousness of animal commodity export, supporting biosphere protection and to stop wasting government/taxpayer money for second - doubling - intergovernmental organization dealing with animal health.
44. The FAO, to meet the requirements of the first duty according to its Constitution, Article I “Functions of the Organization”, paragraph 1. “The Organization shall collect, analyse, interpret and disseminate information related to nutrition, food and agriculture.”, must take back the global animal health information system lost in 1996 under very strange circumstances and adjust it to actual reality and to member country government needs.
45. The world public and
all governments to be informed on the above described unacceptable situation,
conducing to animal infectious disease spread and globalization through
international trade, damaging our planet biosphere and several UN programmes! The importing country governments and the end-users must be fully and truly informed
about officially guaranteed sanitary status of imported animals and their
products, i.e. what is guaranteed and what not (free of all or of only some
infectious disease agents). The quality
requirement is absolutely normal in any other commodity! The sanitary
guarantee has been illogically eliminated by the WTO and the OIE establishing the policy “guaranteeing nothing” the users
not to be informed on sanitary quality of imported animals and animal products.
This has been one of the tricks to “facilitate export” at the expense of the
health in importing countries.
46.
It must not be allowed that the WTO and OIE documents and provisions supporting
animal infectious disease spreading through trade, causing incalculable numbers
of sufferings and deaths of animals and humans, to continue to be valid. This
is the first precondition to stop
organizing international spread of infectious diseases through trade.
47.
The man-made spread of the zoonoses through the trade can in the future
significantly contribute to the situation when among endangered biological species will appear even Homo sapiens.
Recommendations for your
consideration
In the interest of our planet life protection,
including mankind surviving, there is an urgent need to stop without any delay internationally organized spread of infectious diseases damaging global
health, biosphere and several UN
programmes. Therefore,
I would like to recommend to you, as to the highest officer of the UN,
following actions:
a) To suggest UN Security Council and General
Assembly relevant international measures against invisible biological
danger of infectious diseases’ global colonization for our planet health, biosphere and mankind surviving.
a) To write a letter to Director General, World Trade Organization (WTO) asking him to abolish (to declare as nullified) without any delay the WTO/SPS "Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" representing the start and backbone of internationally organized spread of infectious diseases damaging seriously global animal and human health, biosphere and several UN programmes. It doesn’t respect at all basic principles of fair international trade (e.g. historical exception not admitting trade in full quality commodities). This document was adopted by the governments thanks only to several GATT/WTO tricks such as concealed key background information on the risk for health and biosphere in importing countries. Normal principles of fair trade should be sufficient also for international trade in animals and their products.
b) To
write a letter to Director General, Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO), who is responsible also for UN animal health policy, to cover his duty in full, i.e. to cover
all intergovernmental animal health agenda, including sanitary aspects of
international trade in animals and their products (import conditions) and reestablish
global animal health information system. It is supposed that the FAO, unlike the
OIE, will respect fully international fair trade principles and will apply
consequently the principles of international protection of human and animal
population health (first of all to avoid infectious disease man-made long
distance transmissions).
c) To ask Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to take over the problems related to pathogenic microflora as an integral component of the biosphere and to establish adequate infrastructure and programme starting with monitoring infectious disease spreading and globalization as the basis for follow-up control actions in cooperation with the FAO and the WHO.
d) To ask UN Department of
Public Information (DPI) to inform
world public through international mass media about the health risk
represented by animals and their products imported without necessary reliable
sanitary guarantee and to recommend the end-users, consumers
and animal owners, to
require imported animal commodities to be accompanied by documents or marked/labelled confirming their
sanitary status.
e) To
recommend member country governments to strengthen significantly the
government animal health services to
be able to cope effectively with the problems related to infectious disease
spreading through trade, i.e. to protect consistently the biosphere and
human/animal population health and life against these diseases.
The health and the biosphere are
serious
matters touching all inhabitants of our
planet. I am convinced that the United Nations Organization doesn’t want to
be blamed by the next generations for letting global biosphere and population health/life
to be irreparably damaged by conscious
man-made spreading of the infectious diseases.
“Real security of our planet is closely
associated with the protection of the biosphere” (Al Gore)
Primum non nocere !
Please, could you
acknowledge receipt of this letter? Thanks.
Yours sincerely,
Prof. MVDr Václav K o u b a, DrSc.
Former
Chief, Animal
Health Service,
Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations
Address:
P.B. 516, 17000 Praha 7,
Copy:
Dr
Achim Steiner,
UNEP Executive Director
Dr Al Gore,
Former US Vice President
Attachment: Copy of my
letter sent to Dr Achim Steiner, UNEP Executive Director