Monumental TB data errors (Defra)

In January we were alerted of Defra's revelation of the fact that the vet agency AHVLA's new computer had been speewing out fictitious reports overstating the number of Herd's which had suffered bovine TB breakdowns. Despite this Defra has decided continuing the Badger Cull , but without Independent oversight.

Now, with no fanfare at all, Defra has released the latest data on bovine TB herd breakdowns.  Again admitting they found even more errors, and again they have altered the numbers for previous months and years.  The first figures for September 2013.  After two revisions to remove bad data the figures now show the first number is a whopping 45% overestimate of the (current) real figure.  The first month where things went wrong was January 2012  according to Defra.  We imagine that's roughly when the new IT system  was brought on line.  Initial figures for that month have now been revised down twice. 

The largest number of herd breakdown reported was April 2013.  This has been revised down, and then again recently by over 27% overestimated.

 What is clear is that the overestimates have been getting much bigger, more often. as the months went on.  Why did nobody notice these?  Did they want to believe herd breakdowns were really getting bigger so quickly? was this just a convenient way of justifying the Badger Cull?

  These are GB figures and will hide even larger errors at the county or regional levels.  Scotland is officially TB free.  Imagine the alarm Scottish beef and dairy farmers felt to see breakdowns increasing to 42 in September 13.  This figure has now been revised to18, less than half. That figure has apparently climbed up to 42 in September 2014 - or has it?  We can expect that figure to be revised down again.   It beggars belief that there could even be a 233% margin of error for such a small sample. 

 In England where most of the TB errors are found, the highest initial figure was in April 2013.  That has so far been reduced with an overestimate of 29%. That month is when the number of reactors peaked. The figure is lower again for May 20014.  June shows a further reduction (at GB level) from May. 

 Only 256 new incidents were recorded across GB this year and only 150 herds where TB-free status has been withdrawn.  Now for those 150 farmers, this is disastrous news.  DEFRA has been VERY MISLEADING in the way that it has portrayed the data errors in its official statistical reports, this is not helpful to the farming industry or anyone else.  We want to be able to depend upon Defra for this type of information, but at present we cannot do so as there are too many misleading statistics.  Their graph is also misleading as the larger part of their errors have been left out. 
Defra has been very misleading in the way that it has portrayed the data errors in its official statistical report.

Conclusion:(1) We obviously cannot believe anything Defra stats say about the extent of Bovine TB breakdowns, or the trend in breakdowns.

(2) Defra are trying to cover up their monumental statistical cock-up.

(3) THE VERY DATA USED TO JUSTIFY THE BADGER CULL IS SO BADLY FLAWED THAT NATURAL ENGLAND MUST CONSIDER WHETHER THE CULL CAN BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE, GIVEN THE RULES THAT DETERMINE ITS LEGALITY.

The environment Secretary Liz Truss, insisted the culls were crucial and goes on to say much the same as Paterson.  She clearly hasn't been told by her officials that the data on which they are basing their decisions is completely untrustworthy. We advise Liz Truss to look into the data herself, and then make a decision based on what she finds for herself before continuing with the same NFU Mantra. 

This report is a brief extract from information by Miles King.

http://anewnatureblog.wordpress.com/