Dear colleagues,In my opinion the sero monotoring is the most reassuring type of follow-up of the quality of the vaccination.The sero monotoring cost will really depend of the sample size and the existance in the countries of the suitable laboratories. I also think that the stamping out is not a adapted system to our reality, especially if some vaccines exist against the illness. Dr ADYL BECHIR DIRECTEUR DES SERVICES VETERINAIRES BP 932 N'DJAMENA TCHAD TEL 0023566289689-0023599901697 Email [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask] Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:31:48 +0000 From: [log in to unmask] Subject: Seromonitoring after vaccination - how useful is it? To: [log in to unmask] 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 ######################################################################## 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