I concur with the questions from Drs Taylor and Kivaria.

The word “endemic” has been mentioned several times through this forum and it seems like the assumption behind the “endemic” means high mortality. It is a mistake to think that way because a disease can be endemic with a low incidence and high morality or high incidence and low mortality or low incidence and low mortality. It is good to know that in Africa, 33 countries out of 54 have reported the disease in 2012 and I am wondering whether those countries can provide incidence information among others, but key epidemiological informations which are part of the evidences driving the decision whether we want to control or eradicate a disease. 
If in our countries there is institutional framework and strategy for prevention and control HIV/AIDS it is because there are evidences-based supporting the need to invest in prevention and control of HIV/AIDS.

About PPR, what are the epidemiological, economical and more importantly food security EVIDENCES we must provide to the policy maker in order to invest into control OR eradication of PPR?

 
Serge Nzietchueng
Adjunct Professor, Ecosystem Health Initiative
Adjunct Instructor, School of Public Health
University Technical Advisor, USAID Grantee RESPOND Project
University of Minnesota
Department of Veterinary Population Medicine

I am not sure that everyone is actually assuming high mortality when they use the term endemic.  Perhaps some of you who have contributed on this can give us your views?  What is the disease "pattern" that you see in endemic areas?
- 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