More scientific analysis has been published discrediting the idea that badger culling can contribute to control of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in cows. The new evaluation comes amid a scientific review of bTB control measures as the government develops its elimination strategy for the disease.
In 2024, researchers published an explosive study (‘Absence of effects of widespread badger culling on tuberculosis in cattle’) that interrogated decades-old analysis of Randomised Badger Cull Trial data (RBCT). The researchers included veterinary diseases expert Professor Paul Torgerson and conservation ecologist Tom Langton.
The RBCT was a pivotal badger cull field experiment carried out between 1998 and 2007. The analysis of its data, meanwhile, was published in 2006. Although dated, this analysis has proved instrumental in the present and ongoing mass slaughter of England’s badgers, as it has served as the cornerstone of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ (DEFRA) evidence base for the badger cull policy.
More than 230,000 badgers have been killed already, and more will die before the cull ends in 2029, but Torgerson’s review of the 2006 analysis found significant flaws, such as a failure to include all the relevant data about bTB in cow herds. So, his team of researchers examined the RBCT data themselves using what they considered the most statistically and biologically plausible analytical options. They found no evidence that killing badgers has an effect on bTB in cows.
Following Torgerson’s research, some of the original authors of the RBCT analysis re-evaluated the trial data too. Their findings, which were published in the Royal Society’s Open Science journal, effectively doubled down on the original conclusions.
Wide-reaching impact
Now, Torgerson and his team have produced a Comment paper on this re-evaluation, in which they outline their appraisal of it. This paper is also published in the Open Science journal. Torgerson’s team found that “substantial problems” remain with the re-evaluation and when “more plausible approaches” to data analysis are used the RBCT data strongly suggests that “there is no effect” of culling on bTB in cows.
In short, the new examination from Torgerson and his team concludes that the RBCT authors’ re-evaluation fails to adequately address the issues in the 2006 analysis. They wrote:
“The present case underlines the obligation not only for rigorous checks of statistical analysis but also for validation of the statistical models and assumptions used within submitted manuscripts to verify them.”
Research-wise, the team’s findings have ramifications beyond the 2006 analysis (and the 2024 re-evaluation) because other papers have utilised the conclusions drawn in that work. Torgerson explained:
“The significance of our findings extends to several dozen papers written since 2006 that use the 2006 findings to build a theoretical case that badger interventions are a necessary part of bovine TB control in cattle, when they are not. Much work is now needed to highlight this issue by corrections, retractions and other measures to ensure students and practitioners are no longer mislead. Bovine TB control must focus on inadequate TB testing and movement control of cattle where the problems are now well known.”
Meanwhile, Langton called for an immediate cessation of badger culling and fresh approaches in bTB policy going forward:
“The Government challenge to prevent further £1 Billion spend over the next decade on more inadequate disease control will require fresh thinking and approaches. The Labour Government has rightly labelled badger culling as ‘ineffective’ and must surely now immediately cancel all badger culling licences while an inquiry is launched, as should Government in the Republic of Ireland, where thousands of mostly healthy badgers are also culled each year with no demonstrable reward. The failures of the TB testing system are now so well established it is unfathomable why prompt government action was not taken last year.”
Findings are Timely
The publication of the researchers’ findings is timely. Not only is a scientific review of bTB control measures underway, but a badger cull debate in parliament is on the cards.
Protect the Wild secured 100,000 signatures on our petition calling for an end to the killing back in mid-May, which is the number needed to get a debate scheduled. However, we are still waiting to hear whether the Petitions Committee will permit the debate to go forward.
