Why Kenyans Reject Mass Livestock Vaccination Plan

Nairobi, 

Wednesday, 11 December, 2024 

McCreadie Andias 

The Kenyan government's ambitious plan to vaccinate over 22 million livestock in 2025 has sparked widespread debate, pitting the administration against opposition leaders and pastoralist communities. 

The initiative, which aims to combat diseases such as Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) in cattle and Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR) in sheep and goats, has been lauded by government officials as a critical step in safeguarding food security. However, opponents claim the program harbors sinister motives tied to foreign interests.

Leading the opposition is Wiper Party leader Kalonzo Musyoka, who has accused President William Ruto’s administration of advancing a “sinister foreign agenda” through the vaccination program. 

Speaking at a press conference, Kalonzo questioned the government's intentions, alleging that the vaccines would genetically modify livestock, resulting in adverse environmental and health consequences.

“Scientific authorities have informed us that these vaccines will alter the genetic structure of our animals. Within one or two generations, or roughly 36 months of reproduction, we could see severe biological malformations in livestock due to this genetic manipulation,” Kalonzo claimed.

The Wiper leader also dismissed the argument that methane emissions from livestock digestion are environmentally harmful. Instead, he argued that these emissions are a natural biological process and highlighted the successful use of animal waste in biogas production as evidence of its harmlessness.

“The plan, backed by international researchers, proposes to inject gene-modifying drugs into Kenyan bovine livestock to stop them from emitting methane gas,” Kalonzo said. “Suggesting these emissions are hazardous to the environment is both misleading and unnecessary.”

Kalonzo questioned why similar vaccination programs had not been implemented in countries with larger livestock populations, such as the United States. “Why is this program being pushed on Kenya, when these researchers have not implemented it in their own countries, where livestock numbers are significantly higher?” he asked.

Pastoralist communities, who heavily depend on livestock for their livelihoods, have echoed Kalonzo’s concerns. Many fear that the vaccination program could pave the way for genetically modified foods and synthetic meat, threatening traditional livestock farming practices.

“This vaccination is just the beginning of a larger scheme to eliminate traditional livestock farming. The ultimate goal is to replace natural meat production with industrially generated synthetic alternatives,” Kalonzo warned, urging farmers to resist the program.

The government has strongly defended the initiative, dismissing the allegations as baseless. According to the State Department of Livestock, the program is essential for protecting animal health and ensuring food safety. 

Obadia Njagi, Director of Veterinary Services, emphasized the importance of vaccination in combating diseases that threaten the livelihoods of millions of Kenyans.

“As global demand for animal products continues to rise, the health and well-being of livestock are of paramount importance,” Njagi stated. “The vaccination of livestock is one of the most effective and sustainable strategies available.”

The government clarified that the vaccines, to be supplied by the Kenya Vaccine Production Institute (KEVEVAPI), meet international safety standards and are not linked to climate change agendas.

“The ultimate aim is to achieve freedom from FMD with vaccination and eradicate PPR. Together, we can ensure that vaccination remains an essential tool in building a more resilient, sustainable, and prosperous livestock sector,” said Njagi.

To counter misinformation, the government stressed the need for collaboration between veterinarians, farmers, and stakeholders. 

Public awareness campaigns are being planned to educate communities about the importance and safety of the vaccines. Senate Majority Leader Aaron Cheruiyot dismissed claims of foreign interference, asserting that the program is focused solely on animal welfare, food safety, and trade facilitation.

“The program has everything to do with food safety, animal welfare, and trade facilitation, and not climate action as purported,” Cheruiyot stated.

Despite these reassurances, skepticism among Kenyans remains high. Critics argue that the government’s messaging has failed to address the root concerns of genetic manipulation and potential health risks. Pastoralist groups continue to resist, fearing the loss of traditional practices and livelihoods.

As the government prepares to roll out the vaccination program, the success of its implementation will largely depend on its ability to address these concerns transparently and build consensus among stakeholders.

The coming months will determine whether the initiative is embraced as a step toward livestock health and economic resilience or resisted as a perceived threat to Kenya’s agricultural heritage.