1,149,304 research outputs found

    Small animal disease surveillance: respiratory disease 2017

    Get PDF
    This report focuses on surveillance for respiratory disease in companion animals. It begins with an analysis of data from 392 veterinary practices contributing to the Small Animal Veterinary Surveillance Network (SAVSNET) between January and December 2017. The following section describes canine respiratory coronavirus infections in dogs, presenting results from laboratory-confirmed cases across the country between January 2010 and December 2017. This is followed by an update on the temporal trends of three important syndromes in companion animals, namely gastroenteritis, pruritus and respiratory disease, from 2014 to 2017. A fourth section presents a brief update on Streptococcus equi subspecies zooepidemicus in companion animals. The final section summarises some recent developments pertinent to companion animal health, namely eyeworm (Thelazzia callipaeda) infestations in dogs imported to the UK and canine influenza virus in the USA and Canada

    ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF ANIMAL TRACING IN THE CATTLE PRODUCTION SECTOR

    Get PDF
    One of the options to prepare for a potential outbreak of an infectious livestock disease is to initiate an animal tracking system, which would provide information on animal movements and facilitate disease management. This article examines the benefits of implementing an animal tracking system in the context of a simulated cattle disease outbreak with and without animal tracking. Estimates are provided for some of the losses that would be avoided with an animal tracking system if an infectious animal disease were introduced. The results show that the economic efficiency of an animal tracking system depends on such factors as inter herd contact rates, effectiveness of animal disease response actions, and the extent to which an animal tracking system decreases the time of tracing animal movements. In case of a highly infectious animal disease outbreak substantial economic losses could be avoided if an effective animal tracking system is implemented.Livestock Production/Industries,

    South Dakota Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Laboratory: Annual Report 2007

    Get PDF
    This document is the 2007 annual report of the South Dakota Veterinary and Biomedical Science Department Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Laboratory

    South Dakota Animal Disease Research & Diagnostic Laboratory: Annual Report 2014

    Get PDF
    This document is the 2014 annual report of the South Dakota Veterinary and Biomedical Science Department Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Laboratory

    South Dakota Animal Disease Research & Diagnostic Laboratory User\u27s Guide

    Get PDF
    The ADRDL is an accredited AAVLD laboratory and a member of the USDA National Animal Health Network. This document is user\u27s guide for the services provided by the Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Laboratory

    South Dakota Animal Disease Research & Diagnostic Laboratory: Annual Report 2013

    Get PDF
    This document is the 2013 annual report of the South Dakota Veterinary and Biomedical Science Department Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Laboratory

    South Dakota Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Laboratory: Annual Report 2008

    Get PDF
    This document is the 2008 annual report of the South Dakota Veterinary and Biomedical Science Department Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Laboratory

    Beyond the Prevention of Harm: Animal Disease Policy as a Moral Question

    Get PDF
    European animal disease policy seems to find its justification in a “harm to other” principle. Limiting the freedom of animal keepers—e.g., by culling their animals—is justified by the aim to prevent harm, i.e., the spreading of the disease. The picture, however, is more complicated. Both during the control of outbreaks and in the prevention of notifiable, animal diseases the government is confronted with conflicting claims of stakeholders who anticipate running a risk to be harmed by each other, and who ask for government intervention. In this paper, we first argue that in a policy that aims to prevent animal diseases, the focus shifts from limiting “harm” to weighing conflicting claims with respect to “risks of harm.” Therefore, we claim that the harm principle is no longer a sufficient justification for governmental intervention in animal disease prevention. A policy that has to deal with and distribute conflicting risks of harm needs additional value assumptions that guide this process of assessment and distribution. We show that currently, policies are based on assumptions that are mainly economic considerations. In order to show the limitations of these considerations, we use the interests and position of keepers of backyard animals as an example. Based on the problems they faced during and after the recent outbreaks, we defend the thesis that in order to develop a sustainable animal disease policy other than economic assumptions need to be taken into accoun
    corecore