I have many constituents email me their concerns about mRNA vaccines for cattle.

In the recent Senate Estimates I shared their concerns with Meat and Livestock Australia, who are project managing the development of mRNA vaccines for cattle in Australia.

I asked them about the project and MLA responded saying that mRNA vaccines for cattle are in the early stages of development in Canada, but not Australia.

They do not know if they will work and if they can be used without altering the health or the genetics of the animal. These are the things the MLA are watching out for.

If an mRNA vaccine is developed, then the Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicine Authority will have to put the vaccine through its own safety testing before approval.

I can also add that the stories on the internet about death of cattle after mRNA vaccines are wrong. The video being used is from other incidents, including the use of poison feed.

mRNA vaccines are not in use in cattle in Australia, and as far as I am aware, anywhere in the western world.

Although we don’t need to worry immediately about these gene shots in our cattle, we will keep an eye on how this unfolds overseas.

Transcript

Senator Roberts: Thank you for appearing tonight. I refer to questions on notice dated 28 February 2023.  Question SQ23-0002000 is going to be distributed. It is from February estimates regarding the development of mRNA vaccines. A copy will be coming. Do you agree with this answer as it was written at the time?

Mr Strong: This is a question to us and an answer we provided?

Senator Roberts: I’m not sure if you were in the room at the time. Maybe Mr Metcalfe took it.

Mr Metcalfe: Sorry, Senator. I wasn’t paying attention.

Senator Roberts: That’s alright. You undertook to take this question on notice for people who weren’t in the room. I think you did it for two or three groups last time.

Mr Strong: The highlighted piece that you are asking about on this first one?

Senator Roberts: Yes. Do you agree with this answer as it was written at the time? Has anything changed since then?

Chair: Which one are we on, Senator Roberts?

Senator Roberts: It is SQ23-000200.

Mr Metcalfe: I think MLA is being asked whether there is any update to the reference to 200, Jason. I think we are being asked about 128. Senator, I will undertake to see whether there is any update to 128. I don’t have the relevant staff here because they’ve all gone home. I am not sure whether MLA can assist you in relation to the question.

Mr Strong: Yes is the short answer, Senator. We would still agree with the answer that has been provided here. It is a research project that is still going through the research process now.

Senator Roberts: You are involved?

Mr Strong: Correct.

Senator Roberts: In supporting the development of mRNA vaccines for cattle? It’s under development at the moment, but it hasn’t been approved?

Mr Strong: So involved. I’m absolutely not trying to be cute. We are involved in the research to look at the potential use and development of mRNA vaccines. There is not the commercial use of an mRNA vaccine for a veterinary purpose at this stage.

Senator Roberts: That’s right.

Mr Strong: This research project is looking at that. Can it be done? Can it be done in a safe way? Can it be done in a way that produces a vaccine that provides a level of efficacy we need? Can it be done in a commercial way?

Senator Roberts: I think the third criteria you had was that it doesn’t contaminate the food.

Mr Strong: Of course. And it has to be commercial.

Senator Roberts: I want to unpick the whole third paragraph. Firstly, this answer indicates that a lumpy skin vaccine will undergo testing in Canada. Is it still being tested in Canada and not Australia?

Mr Strong: The research is being conducted in Canada to develop the mRNA type vaccine. For any vaccine to be approved here, it would have to go through an approval and testing process here. But the research is being done in Canada. We probably could have been clearer in the way that was written.

Senator Roberts: The TGA, which did not do live patient testing in this country, relied on the FDA. The FDA in turn did not do any testing; it relied on Pfizer. Unlike them, you will do thorough testing?

Mr Strong: We’re very confident of the standards in place and the requirements we have to comply with for veterinary medicines in Australia. We will absolutely comply with them. I think we all have a level of concern and confusion in this space from what we have seen and heard in the last few years. Luckily, in Australia, we have a very sound and detailed approval process. Absolutely we will make sure any research we do in this space is connected to that process.

Senator Roberts: I would like to get into that. The TGA admitted, in answering my questions at the last Senate estimates, that they did not do testing with live patients. They relied upon data from the FDA in America. The FDA also admitted that they didn’t do live testing. They relied upon data from Pfizer, the producers. Do our testing requirements require proper testing in this country?

Mr Strong: Yes, they do. I think there are some big differences between what we all experienced over that two or three-year period and what we are doing here. The main one is that we have more time and human lives aren’t at risk. If we don’t get positive results out of the tests with the research that is being done on these mRNA vaccines, we can stop. If there are different paths we have to take, we can do that. If we need to take more time, we can do that. I think the two examples are sufficiently different that we can have confidence that we will be able to stick to a very disciplined research and development and then testing, pre-approval and approval process for any potential new vaccine.

Senator Roberts: It is good to know that the mRNA technology is still new. It hasn’t been tested properly in humans at all. What makes you confident that your test will pick up any problems in cattle?

Mr Strong: Nothing is the short answer to start with. The follow-on from that is that it is exactly what you just said; it is new technology. A very important part of this research is to learn about that. If it has the utility that we think it should have and the ability to manufacture the type of vaccine which is actually safer for animals and easier to use and more effective, it provides a fantastic potential opportunity and we absolutely should explore that. But we absolutely have to do that in a way that protects the safety of the animals and the food chain and, obviously, the consumers.

Senator Roberts: Because the reputation of mRNA now has been tarnished well and truly. People will be wary about eating something that has mRNA in it and eating that meat.

Mr Strong: We will be very conscious of those consumer and community views in the space.

Senator Roberts: Will the meat be labelled?

Mr Strong: I don’t know the labelling requirements for what would happen with an animal that has been vaccinated. Like I said, that hasn’t existed previously. Labelling requirements is something that absolutely would be part of the approval process. Of course we would rely on the Australian authorities to make those rulings.

Mr Beckett: It is a bit early in the consideration. Those things will all be dressed.

Senator Roberts: What is that, Mr Beckett?

Mr Beckett: I said it is early in the consideration of the whole research. Those things will certainly be considered in the process.

Senator Roberts: Overseas experts with regard to the COVID injections for humans say this new technology should have had 15 years of testing, not 15 months or nine months, and not rely just on Pfizer itself. Now we are finding out that the efficacy is negative for these injections. It doesn’t stop transmission. The authorities have acknowledged that. It needs to be very well tested over an extended period with cattle to make sure there is efficacy and to make sure it is safe and it is safe for humans. The mRNA vaccine for foot and mouth is also being tested in Australia, though, isn’t it?

Mr Strong: No. Not yet.

Senator Roberts: No, sorry. It will be tested in Australia. The testing will be in Australia at the Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute located in the middle of a large dairy production area in Menangle. Is that right?

Mr Strong: No. Not necessarily. Before anything can come into Australia, it has to go through a very controlled and specific quarantine process. Nothing would actually be brought in and tested or released without appropriate controls.

Mr Metcalfe: Our department has to approve the import of such a virus. We would give extremely careful consideration to any application such as that for obvious reasons.

Senator Roberts: You would have to bring foot and mouth virus in?

Mr Metcalfe: Absolutely. We would probably need the chief veterinary officer and others to provide evidence to you about the management of that issue.

Senator Roberts: They are up next, I think.

Mr Metcalfe: No. I am only here because I am supporting the minister. The department is formally no longer here.

Senator Roberts: Will you be involved in that test, MLA?

Mr Strong: It’s too early to say. The research that we’re investing in is whether it is possible to produce vaccines using mRNA technology that would allow the treatment of diseases such as lumpy skin disease and foot-and-mouth disease. That is the research.

Senator Roberts: So it’s very early days?

Mr Strong: Very early days, absolutely, yes.

Senator Roberts: Are you aware that the testing on mRNA vaccines for lumpy skin disease and foot-and-mouth disease includes ensuring that the vaccine does not alter the DNA of the animal, thereby destroying generations of genetics? Australian farmers, whether dairy or beef, should be very proud of the genetics they’ve developed over the years. We don’t want the genes altered.

Mr Strong: Absolutely we don’t. Again, it’s too early in the process. I am sure those things will be part of the consideration if there’s any potential risk from that.

Senator Roberts: The answer to question SQ23-000128 precludes the precautionary use of an mRNA vaccine for foot-and-mouth disease or lumpy skin disease as it would remove our status as being disease free. Can you reassure the committee that this is still the position of Meat and Livestock Australia?

Mr Strong: I don’t think that was our position in that question. Wasn’t that a department question? Isn’t that what you were saying?

Mr Metcalfe: That was actually advice from the department to you, Senator. I have indicated that we’re happy to update. If there are any changes, we’re happy to update it. It was only provided a couple of months ago. I would be surprised if there is anything to update.

Senator Roberts: If you could just let us know.

Mr Metcalfe: We’ve taken that on notice already.

Senator Roberts: Let us know if it remains constant or if it has changed.

Mr Metcalfe: Yes.

Senator Roberts: Thank you very much.