Foot-and-mouth: Inquiry ordered as questions raised over lab security

Gordon Brown has ordered an independent inquiry into growing suspicions that a virus may have escaped from a private science laboratory that led to the foot-and-mouth outbreak.

Scientists from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) went into a laboratory operated by an American company, Merial Animal Health, at Pirbright, three miles from the Surrey farm where the outbreak was discovered.

They were investigating whether the virus had escaped from the private laboratory, which is licensed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) or a publicly-run laboratory of the world-renowned Institute for Animal Health (IAH). Both laboratories denied any breaches of biosecurity.

Police were on guard outside the site, underlining the fact that the HSE has the power to prosecute over breaches of safety. Reports last night suggested that human error may have been responsible for the outbreak, with the virus being transported by a person or by a car.

A separate independent inquiry, by Professor Brian Spratt of Imperial College London, was ordered by the Prime Minister into biosecurity at Pirbright but it could raise more far-reaching questions over the safety of Britain's laboratories, and whether Britain is protected from the nightmare of a potentially lethal virus escaping from a laboratory.

Defra said the disease had spread to a cow at another field owned by the same farm at Normandy near Guildford. It said that 38 cattle were known to be infected, and the cattle on the two additional sites, which together make up the same farming enterprise, were culled. The cattle on those two sites, which are both within the surveillance zone, showed no clinical signs of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) but were culled in line with normal procedure and then tested. "Results have revealed that, of the additional animals slaughtered, one tested positive for FMD," said the statement.

An additional 3km-radius protection zone and a wider 10km-radius surveillance zone were placed around the second part of the farm. In addition, as a precaution because of potentially dangerous contacts, susceptible animals on one farm located next door to the field were being culled.

The IAH Pirbright laboratory was also covered by the zone. It is the only site in the country to be allowed to use a live foot-and-mouth disease virus in its research. But 36 other laboratories are also licensed in the UK by Defra to handle other animal pathogens and officials said the location of the others on that list could not be published because it would be " dangerous". One of the fears is that such viruses could be used for "agricultural terrorism".

The Prime Minister held another meeting of Cobra, the emergency planning committee, last night to hear reports from experts checking the sites. He will hold another Cobra meeting today.

Ministers were confident that publicly run laboratories operated by the IAH on the site were not responsible. Martin Shirley, the director of the government-funded institute, said: "The IAH operates under strict biosecurity procedures licensed by Defra. In addition to general checks on biosecurity, operation of equipment, procedures and physical barriers, etc, which have shown no breaches of our procedures, we have been able to check our records specifically for use of this strain.

"Our results have shown limited use within the lab within the past four weeks."

It was found that last month, Merial had been using the same strain of the virus that was identified on the farm to manufacture vaccines at the laboratories. David Biland, the head of the UK company, said that initial checks had showed there had been no breach of Merial's biosecurity systems.

"We have been operating from this site for 15 years and produced hundreds of millions of vaccine doses. In all this time we have never had a breach in our biosecurity," he said. "We have complete confidence in the integrity of our biosecurity ... It is too early in this investigation for anyone to determine the cause of the outbreak."

The virus is highly contagious and can be spread on the wind and scientists are required to dispose of overalls and gloves when they leave the labs. Checks will be made to ensure procedures have been followed and filters on air vents from the plant were working.

Despite its world status, the IAH was heavily criticised in an official report in 2002, which said buildings, some of which date from before the Second World War, were "unsatisfactory" and "shabby". It led to a massive rebuilding programme which is under way, and the inquiry will check whether the work has compromised biosecurity.

David Cameron, the Tory leader, was accused by ministers of "playing politics" with the foot-and-mouth outbreak after raising fears highlighted in the report that the IAH had suffered from a lack of funding.

Mr Cameron said: "If it turns out that the virus was released either from the Institute for Animal Health in Pirbright or from the next-door lab at Merial ­ which, by the way, is inspected and licensed by the Government ­ it will be astonishing news, because the organisations responsible for stopping things like foot-and-mouth will effectively be responsible for starting it.

"The Government will have some serious questions to answer about the report which came out in 2002."

The Cabinet Office minister, Gillian Merron, said: "It's a shame David Cameron has chosen to pre-judge the investigations that are under way by making these unproven attacks on the Institute for Animal Health.

"While the Prime Minister, the Government, the chief vet, the civil contingencies unit, and the entire farming community is 100 per cent focused on controlling and eradicating this outbreak, people will be surprised that David Cameron is seeking to play politics with people's concerns."

Security at sensitive labs

How secure are Britain's labs?

Biosecurity is the priority for 36 labs licensed by the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs to deal with animal pathogens. But the head of the Institute for Animal Health told a select committee last year that the public labs at Pirbright were suffering from under-funding.

How could the virus have escaped?

The Health and Safety Executive went into the Pirbright labs to pin down the source of the leak. The police presence there yesterday underlined the fact that the HSE has a role in prosecuting lapses in safety. They are seeking to establish whether the virus could have escaped through an air vent or on a lab assistant's clothes. It is highly contagious, can live for several days on a surface and can be spread on the wind.

Are our biosecurity controls strong enough?

An independent inquiry by Professor Brian Spratt will establish whether negligence was involved. His investigation will raise wider questions about biosecurity, although his focus is on Pirbright. A report in 2002 said that the buildings at the next-door Institute for Animal Health were "shabby" and "unsatisfactory".

Who is to blame for the latest outbreak?

The HSE can prosecute anyone found guilty of negligence. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said yesterday : "Nothing is ruled in and nothing is ruled out." The HSE inquiry could become a criminal investigation if lapses are found. But there is also a wider political question ­ have successive governments given the labs enough priority for funding?

How serious are the consequences?

The fact that the security of a lab may have been breached raises a nightmare scenario. Foot-and-mouth disease cannot be passed to humans but other laboratories such as the Ministry of Defence germ warfare labs at Porton Down, on Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, are dealing in potentially lethal diseases such as anthrax. Pirbright is a warning that a Doomsday bug could one day escape from a lab, unless the tightest possible security is maintained.

What does this mean for biosecurity across the UK?

The consequences are potentially far-reaching, and extremely worrying. The escape of a dangerous virus from a laboratory could mean that biosecurity at all labs dealing in hazardous pathogens has to be inspected.

Interesting? Click here to explore further