FAO-ANIMALHEALTH-L Archives

Establishment of a PPR Global Research and Expertise Network (PPR-GREN)

FAO-AnimalHealth-L@LISTSERV.FAO.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Paul Rossiter <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paul Rossiter <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:31:48 +0000
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1299 bytes) , text/html (1917 bytes)
Dear Colleagues, 
 
Although mentioned once or twice in passing we haven't heard much about seromonitoring during the conference.
 
As some participants know I am not greatly in favour of seromonitoring as a general follow-up to vaccination campaigns.  It is expensive, the results usually arrive too late to be of use, and when they do arrive in time there are insufficient resources for a re-vaccination.  I know it has an important role in disease investigation where vaccine failure is a possibility and is obviously needed for epidemiological studies but as a routine accompaniment  to vaccination.....mmm?  In rinderpest eradication we did a lot of sero-monitoring but I reckon that the most useful thing to come out of it was to train the laboratories to high levels of competence for the much more important sero-surveillance when vaccination ceased.   Money saved on seromonitoring can be used for extra epidemiology such as disease search etc. 
 
Would anyone care to put me right on this?
regards,- Moderator.

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the FAO-AnimalHealth-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=FAO-AnimalHealth-L&A=1

ATOM RSS1 RSS2