Animal disease and human trauma: the psychosocial implications of the 2001 UK foot and mouth disease disaster.

The 2001 UK foot and mouth disease (FMD) crisis is commonly understood to have been a nonhuman animal problem, an economic industrial crisis that was resolved after eradication. By using a different lens, a longitudinal ethnographic study of the health and social consequences of the epidemic, the research reported here indicates that 2001 was a human tragedy as well as an animal one. In a diary-based study, it can be seen that life after the FMD crisis was accompanied by distress, feelings of bereavement, fear of a new disaster, loss of trust in authority and systems of control, and the undermining of the value of local knowledge. Diverse groups experienced distress well beyond the farming community. Such distress remained largely invisible to the range of "official" inquiries into the disaster. That an FMD epidemic of the scale of 2001 could happen again in a developed country is a deeply worrying prospect, but it is to be hoped that contingency plans are evolving along with enhanced understanding of the human, animal, and financial cost.

Different public health geographies of the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic: 'citizen' versus 'professional' epidemiology.

Recently, there have been calls for health geographers to add critical and theoretical debate to 'post-medical' geographies, whilst at the same time informing 'new' public health strategies (Soc. Sci. Med. 50(9)1273; Area 33(4) (2002) 361). In this paper we reflect on how, alongside 'professional epidemiologies', 'citizen epidemiologies' can have credibility in informing public health policy and practice. We do this by drawing on mixed method and participatory research that used a citizens' panel to articulate the health and social outcomes of the 2001 foot and mouth disease disaster. We consider the difficulties of creating dialogue between on the one hand, time-limited, discrete, theoretical, visible and by implication legitimate, 'professional' knowledge and on the other, ongoing, holistic, experiential and often hidden 'citizen' knowledge of the foot and mouth disease epidemic. Despite significant evidence that in disaster and crisis situations, people need to be actively involved in key 'recovery' decisions (see for example At Risk Natural Hazards, People's Vulnerability, and Disasters, Routledge, London; A New Species of Trouble, Norton, New York), lay accounts, which may in themselves provide valuable evidence about the impact of the disaster, are often ignored. If health geographers are to critically inform 'new' public health policy then we need to consider research approaches that give voice to citizens' understanding of health outcomes as well as those of professionals. If 'new' public health is concerned with the material character of health inequalities, with fostering 'healthy' living and working environments, the promotion of community participation and individual empowerment (Area 33(4) (2002) 361), then we argue that situated, negotiated, everyday geographies of lay epidemiologies can and should inform public health policy.

Psychosocial effects of the 2001 UK foot and mouth disease epidemic in a rural population: qualitative diary based study.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the health and social consequences of the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic for a rural population. DESIGN: Longitudinal qualitative analysis. SETTING: North Cumbria, the worst affected area in Britain. SAMPLE: Purposive sample of 54 respondents divided in six demographically balanced rural occupational and population groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 3071 weekly diaries contributed over 18 months; 72 semistructured interviews (with the 54 diarists and 18 others); 12 group discussions with diarists RESULTS: The disease epidemic was a human tragedy, not just an animal one. Respondents' reports showed that life after the foot and mouth disease epidemic was accompanied by distress, feelings of bereavement, fear of a new disaster, loss of trust in authority and systems of control, and the undermining of the value of local knowledge. Distress was experienced across diverse groups well beyond the farming community. Many of these effects continued to feature in the diaries throughout the 18 month period. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a rural citizens' panel allowed data capture from a wide spectrum of the rural population and showed that a greater number of workers and residents had traumatic experiences than has previously been reported. Recommendations for future disaster management include joint service reviews of what counts as a disaster, regular NHS and voluntary sector sharing of intelligence, debriefing and peer support for front line workers, increased community involvement in disposal site or disaster management, and wider, more flexible access to regeneration funding and rural health outreach work.