Dear All

In my opinion, a stamping out policy for infected units with ring 
vaccination is perhaps ideal. However, I am not sure that a stamping out 
policy is necessary as there is no carrier state and little or no spread 
via fomites. Nor is there any risk to human health. The reason for 
stamping out would be to stop local spread within a village. For any 
stamping out policy to be effective, there will NEED to be a properly 
funded and functioning compensation scheme so that owners do not simply 
more animals out of an infected village, something that is easy to do 
with sheep and goats, particularly young ones. Compensation schemes have 
often not been functional and/or funded.

As animals will either die or recover and have no carrier status, 
stamping out may not be necessary and could be counter productive.

Nick Honhold
BVSc MSc PhD MRCVS DipECVPH

On 11/02/2014 14:53, Paul Rossiter wrote:
> Dear Moderator,
> Just one question to be raised:
> *Would it be easy to put PPR to an end without stamping out policy*?
> Best regards
> Wade
>
> -- 
> Dr Abel WADE (DVM, MSc, PhD in View)
> Director of National Veterinary Laboratory (LANAVET) Annex
> Head of the Laboratory
> Yaounde - Cameroon
> Consultant
> Animal Production and Health Laboratory
> Joint FAO/IAEA’S Laboratory, Seibersdorf
> Nuclear Sciences and Application
> International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
> A-1400 Vienna, Austria
> E.mail. [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (IAEA office only)
> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (personal)
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 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
>


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

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