Suchergebnisse

Biosecurity is crucial for safeguarding livestock from infectious diseases. Despite the plethora of biosecurity recommendations, published scientific evidence on the effectiveness of individual biosecurity measures is limited. The objective of this study was to assess the perception of Swiss experts about the effectiveness and importance of individual on-farm biosecurity measures for cattle and swine farms (31 and 30 measures, respectively). Using a modified Delphi method, 16 Swiss livestock disease specialists (8 for each species) were interviewed. The experts were asked to rank biosecurity measures that were written on cards, by allocating a score from 0 (lowest) to 5 (highest). Experts ranked biosecurity measures based on their importance related to Swiss legislation, feasibility, as well as the effort required for implementation and the benefit of each biosecurity measure. The experts also ranked biosecurity measures based on their effectiveness in preventing an infectious agent from entering and spreading on a farm, solely based on transmission characteristics of specific pathogens. The pathogens considered by cattle experts were those causing Bluetongue (BT), Bovine Viral Diarrhea (BVD), Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) and Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (IBR). Swine experts expressed their opinion on the pathogens causing African Swine Fever (ASF), Enzootic Pneumonia (EP), Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS), as well as FMD. For cattle farms, biosecurity measures that improve disease awareness of farmers were ranked as both most important and most effective. For swine farms, the most important and effective measures identified were those related to animal movements. Among all single measures evaluated, education of farmers was perceived by the experts to be the most important and effective for protecting both Swiss cattle and swine farms from disease. The findings of this study provide an important basis for recommendation to farmers and policy makers.

Biosecurity is crucial for safeguarding livestock from infectious diseases. Despite the plethora of biosecurity recommendations, published scientific evidence on the effectiveness of individual biosecurity measures is limited. The objective of this study was to assess the perception of Swiss experts about the effectiveness and importance of individual on-farm biosecurity measures for cattle and swine farms (31 and 30 measures, respectively). Using a modified Delphi method, 16 Swiss livestock disease specialists (8 for each species) were interviewed. The experts were asked to rank biosecurity measures that were written on cards, by allocating a score from 0 (lowest) to 5 (highest). Experts ranked biosecurity measures based on their importance related to Swiss legislation, feasibility, as well as the effort required for implementation and the benefit of each biosecurity measure. The experts also ranked biosecurity measures based on their effectiveness in preventing an infectious agent from entering and spreading on a farm, solely based on transmission characteristics of specific pathogens. The pathogens considered by cattle experts were those causing Bluetongue (BT), Bovine Viral Diarrhea (BVD), Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) and Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (IBR). Swine experts expressed their opinion on the pathogens causing African Swine Fever (ASF), Enzootic Pneumonia (EP), Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS), as well as FMD. For cattle farms, biosecurity measures that improve disease awareness of farmers were ranked as both most important and most effective. For swine farms, the most important and effective measures identified were those related to animal movements. Among all single measures evaluated, education of farmers was perceived by the experts to be the most important and effective for protecting both Swiss cattle and swine farms from disease. The findings of this study provide an important basis for recommendation to farmers and policy makers. ; ISSN:1932-6203

Decades of warnings by conservationists, epidemiologists, and virologists that the trade and consumption of wildlife could result in serious zoonotic pandemics have gone largely unheeded. Now the world is ravaged by COVID-19 that has caused tremendous loss of life and economic and societal disruption, with dire predictions of more destructive and frequent pandemics. There are now calls to tightly regulate and even enact complete wildlife trade bans, while others call for more nuanced approaches since many rural people rely on wildlife for sustenance. Given forces of political and societal expediency and limitations to enforcing bans, a response closer to the latter is more likely to unfold. But this will require monitoring and assessing trade situations for zoonotic risks. We present a framework for government authorities in the public health and wildlife sectors to assess wildlife trade situations for risks of serious zoonoses in order to inform policies to curtail or control the trade, much of which is illegal in most countries. The framework is based on available knowledge of different wildlife taxa traded in the Asia-Pacific Region, taxa known to carry highly virulent and transmissible viruses, and broad categories of market types and trade chains.

Decades of warnings by conservationists, epidemiologists, and virologists that the trade and consumption of wildlife could result in serious zoonotic pandemics have gone largely unheeded. Now the world is ravaged by COVID-19 that has caused tremendous loss of life and economic and societal disruption, with dire predictions of more destructive and frequent pandemics. There are now calls to tightly regulate and even enact complete wildlife trade bans, while others call for more nuanced approaches since many rural people rely on wildlife for sustenance. Given forces of political and societal expediency and limitations to enforcing bans, a response closer to the latter is more likely to unfold. But this will require monitoring and assessing trade situations for zoonotic risks. We present a framework for government authorities in the public health and wildlife sectors to assess wildlife trade situations for risks of serious zoonoses in order to inform policies to curtail or control the trade, much of which is illegal in most countries. The framework is based on available knowledge of different wildlife taxa traded in the Asia-Pacific Region, taxa known to carry highly virulent and transmissible viruses, and broad categories of market types and trade chains.

Veterinary antimicrobial consumption patterns vary considerably across Europe. These differences are not only limited to the total amount consumed but are also observed with regards to the relative proportion of the various antimicrobial classes used. Currently, most of the data on veterinary antimicrobials are reported at sales level without any information on the consumption by different animal species. This hinders a proper comparison of antimicrobial consumption at the species level between countries. However, it is imperative to improve our understanding on antimicrobial usage patterns at the species level, as well as on the drivers contributing to those differences. This will allow for development of tailored interventions with the lowest possible risk for human health, while ensuring effective treatment of diseased livestock. An important step to attain such an objective is to perform detailed comparisons of the antimicrobial consumption in each species between countries. We compared antimicrobial consumption estimates for cattle and pigs in Switzerland and Denmark, in order to distinguish species-specific patterns and trends in consumption from 2007 to 2013. Swiss data were obtained from a previous study that assessed methodologies to stratify antimicrobial sales per species; Danish antimicrobial consumption estimates were assembled from Danish Integrated Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring and Research Programme reports. A decrease in antimicrobial consumption in milligrams per kilogram of biomass was observed for both countries (4.5% in Denmark and 34.7% in Switzerland) when comparing 2013 to 2007. For pigs and cattle, the overall consumption per kilogram of biomass of most antimicrobial classes was higher in Switzerland than in Denmark. Large variations in the relative consumption of different antimicrobial classes were also evident. Sulfonamides/trimethoprim and tetracyclines were consumed in a higher proportion in Switzerland than in Denmark, whereas the relative consumption of penicillins was higher in Denmark. The differences observed in veterinary antimicrobial consumption are not solely related to animal demographic characteristics in these two countries. Other factors, such as the level of biosecurity and farming practices, veterinarians and farmers' education, or governmental/industry programs put in place might also partly explain these variations. These differences should be taken into account when aiming to implement targeted interventions to reduce antimicrobial consumption.

Decades of warnings that the trade and consumption of wildlife could result in serious zoonotic pandemics have gone largely unheeded. Now the world is ravaged by COVID-19, with tremendous loss of life, economic and societal disruption, and dire predictions of more destructive and frequent pandemics. There are now calls to tightly regulate and even enact complete wildlife trade bans, while others call for more nuanced approaches since many rural communities rely on wildlife for sustenance. Given pressures from political and societal drivers and resource limitations to enforcing bans, increased regulation is a more likely outcome rather than broad bans. But imposition of tight regulations will require monitoring and assessing trade situations for zoonotic risks. We present a tool for relevant stakeholders, including government authorities in the public health and wildlife sectors, to assess wildlife trade situations for risks of potentially serious zoonoses in order to inform policies to tightly regulate and control the trade, much of which is illegal in most countries. The tool is based on available knowledge of different wildlife taxa traded in the Asia-Pacific Region and known to carry highly virulent and transmissible viruses combined with relative risks associated with different broad categories of market types and trade chains.

Veterinary antimicrobial consumption patterns vary considerably across Europe. These differences are not only limited to the total amount consumed but are also observed with regards to the relative proportion of the various antimicrobial classes used. Currently, most of the data on veterinary antimicrobials are reported at sales level without any information on the consumption by different animal species. This hinders a proper comparison of antimicrobial consumption at the species level between countries. However, it is imperative to improve our understanding on antimicrobial usage patterns at the species level, as well as on the drivers contributing to those differences. This will allow for development of tailored interventions with the lowest possible risk for human health, while ensuring effective treatment of diseased livestock. An important step to attain such an objective is to perform detailed comparisons of the antimicrobial consumption in each species between countries. We compared antimicrobial consumption estimates for cattle and pigs in Switzerland and Denmark, in order to distinguish species-specific patterns and trends in consumption from 2007 to 2013. Swiss data were obtained from a previous study that assessed methodologies to stratify antimicrobial sales per species; Danish antimicrobial consumption estimates were assembled from Danish Integrated Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring and Research Programme reports. A decrease in antimicrobial consumption in milligrams per kilogram of biomass was observed for both countries (4.5% in Denmark and 34.7% in Switzerland) when comparing 2013 to 2007. For pigs and cattle, the overall consumption per kilogram of biomass of most antimicrobial classes was higher in Switzerland than in Denmark. Large variations in the relative consumption of different antimicrobial classes were also evident. Sulfonamides/trimethoprim and tetracyclines were consumed in a higher proportion in Switzerland than in Denmark, whereas the relative consumption of penicillins was higher in Denmark. The differences observed in veterinary antimicrobial consumption are not solely related to animal demographic characteristics in these two countries. Other factors, such as the level of biosecurity and farming practices, veterinarians and farmers' education, or governmental/industry programs put in place might also partly explain these variations. These differences should be taken into account when aiming to implement targeted interventions to reduce antimicrobial consumption.

AbstractHuman exposure to bacteria resistant to antimicrobials and transfer of related genes is a complex issue and occurs, among other pathways, via meat consumption. In a context of limited resources, the prioritization of risk management activities is essential. Since the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) situation differs substantially between countries, prioritization should be country specific. The objective of this study was to develop a systematic and transparent framework to rank combinations of bacteria species resistant to selected antimicrobial classes found in meat, based on the risk they represent for public health in Switzerland. A risk assessment model from slaughter to consumption was developed following the Codex Alimentarius guidelines for risk analysis of foodborne AMR. Using data from the Swiss AMR monitoring program, 208 combinations of animal species/bacteria/antimicrobial classes were identified as relevant hazards. Exposure assessment and hazard characterization scores were developed and combined using multicriteria decision analysis. The effect of changing weights of scores was explored with sensitivity analysis. Attributing equal weights to each score, poultry‐associated combinations represented the highest risk. In particular, contamination with extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase/plasmidic AmpC‐producing Escherichia coli in poultry meat ranked high for both exposure and hazard characterization. Tetracycline‐ or macrolide‐resistant Enterococcus spp., as well as fluoroquinolone‐ or macrolide‐resistant Campylobacter jejuni, ranked among combinations with the highest risk. This study provides a basis for prioritizing future activities to mitigate the risk associated with foodborne AMR in Switzerland. A user‐friendly version of the model was provided to risk managers; it can easily be adjusted to the constantly evolving knowledge on AMR.