Dear Paul

Thanks for the synthesis on multiple control or eradication options in small ruminants. I would just caution against the idea of eradication of brucellosis in much of the PPR range given the wide host spectrum and persistence (carriers) amongst non-domestic species (see Godfroid 2011). The long running debate and actions in the US on brucellosis control at the wildlife livestock interface illustrates the problem. Despite considerable investment, this is a seriously difficult issue to sort out. There is no vaccine for wildlife nor do I believe other than in exceptional conditions can we realistically vaccinate wildlife populations in the context of a control programme.

SGP is not known to be a major problem in wildlife but there has been minimal research – a paper on capripox in oryx  Greth et al and some antibody evidence Hedger etc and some Dfid work a decade ago in Zimbabwe/Edinburgh but not much came out of this in terms of concrete epidemiology of capripox in wildlife . I would think SGP is a good candidate for control eradication, if there is wildlife involvement it is only likely spill over.

Personally, I think the decision on combo-vaccination as a local issue and should not be mixed up with the progressive control policy of PPR GLOBALLY. Although the programme can be a mechanism for strengthening local veterinary services in all these countries with respect to small ruminants and all the PPR activities should orient to do that. And there is no harm in exploring the feasibility of using multiple agent vaccine combinations as long as they do not compromise the primary purpose. No harm done and some good perhaps but this should not be confused with a full blown control programme on a range of diseases.

Richard

From: Establishment of a PPR Global Research and Expertise Network (PPR-GREN) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Rossiter
Sent: 27 February 2014 16:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: From the moderator: session 4: do we want progressive control of other diseases or just control?

Dear Colleagues,

We have almost reached the last day of week four and the last day of sessions 3 and 4. We have had some inputs for session three “sub-themes for PPR-GREN” and a lot of interest in session 4 “Network to be inclusive or exclusive of other small ruminant diseases?”   Without exception all who have contributed to session 4 have been in favour of providing a broad, inclusive package of small ruminant health control rather than just PPR control alone.

Quite a wide range of diseases have been suggested for control along with PPR but, to me, these fall into two categories. The first are the diseases that have a local or regional importance – in a regional basket as Dr Chris Daborn put it. For instance, the control of RVF may be periodically important in Africa, but not in most of the Middle East and definitely not (yet) in Asia. Dr Afzal has raised the importance of enterotoxaemia in Pakistan. And there are more.  But these are diseases that we cannot at present consider for eradication- that we cannot engage with in a progressive control programme leading to elimination of the infectious agent.  In contrast PPR is eradicable – that is why we are discussing how to set up PPR-GREN to support a global strategy for the elimination of this virus following a process of progressive control.   As mentioned above small ruminant pox and small ruminant brucellosis have been highlighted by several contributors as the two diseases that are most appropriate to consider, along with PPR, in a programme designed to improve small ruminant health. Now, to me, these are diseases that are also eradicable.  Are we as a conference agreeing that this is what we want to see happen; that progressive control programmes with a view to eradication be developed for SGP and brucellosis along with PPR?   This is a serious matter because if we choose to follow this path it will mean that these two diseases are much more than just members of a regional basket. It will mean that all infected and at-risk countries will have to join in and engage with these diseases with a view to eradication. You cannot opt out just because it isn’t a big problem. It will mean that the OIE-FAO GF-TADS Strategy for progressive control of PPR will have to take on the task of developing strategies for progressive control of SGP and Brucella. We may need to learn more about these diseases and it will mean extra work and effort but it will also offer potentially much greater rewards if all these diseases can be eradicated economically within one programme.
Could we please have some feedback on whether you think SGP and Brucella (are there others too?) should be targeted for global eradication or not, and if so, whether you would agree to add another main theme to PPR-GREN which would be “Theme 5: Progressive control of SGP and Brucella”. If you don't agree with this suggestion then please suggest how you think these diseases should be targeted along with our proposed progressive pathway for PPR?
Regards,
Moderator

PS -At the start of session 4 I think I said that I would send again to everyone Dr David Ward's contribution on brucella. I forgot, but it is on the list site on 17th February and important because it shows what might be achieved with this disease.

________________________________

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

[RVC Logo - link to RVC Website]<http://www.rvc.ac.uk>    [Twitter icon - link to RVC (Official) Twitter] <http://twitter.com/RoyalVetCollege>     [Facebook icon - link to RVC (Official) Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/theRVC>     [YouTube icon - link to RVC YouTube] <http://www.youtube.com/user/RoyalVetsLondon?feature=mhee>     [Pinterest icon - link to RVC Pinterest] <http://pinterest.com/royalvetcollege/>     [Instagram icon - link to RVC Instagram] <http://instagram.com/royalvetcollege>

This message, together with any attachments, is intended for the stated addressee(s) only and may contain privileged or confidential information. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Royal Veterinary College (RVC). If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and be advised that you have received this message in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying is strictly prohibited. Unless stated expressly in this email, this email does not create, form part of, or vary any contractual or unilateral obligation. Email communication cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed, incomplete or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept liability for any such matters or their consequences. Communication with us by email will be taken as acceptance of the risks inherent in doing so.

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

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