Hygiene inspections on passenger ships in Europe - an overview

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hygiene inspections on passenger ships are important for the prevention of communicable diseases. The European Union (EU) countries conduct hygiene inspections on passenger ships in order to ensure that appropriate measures have been taken to eliminate potential sources of contamination which could lead to the spread of communicable diseases. This study was implemented within the framework of the EU SHIPSAN project and it investigates the legislation applied and practices of hygiene inspections of passenger ships in the EU Member States (MS) and European Free Trade Association countries.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two questionnaires were composed and disseminated to 28 countries. A total of 92 questionnaires were completed by competent authorities responsible for hygiene inspections (n = 48) and the creation of legislation (n = 44); response rates were 96%, and 75.9%, respectively.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Out of the 48 responding authorities responsible for hygiene inspections, a routine programme was used by 19 (39.6%) of these to conduct inspections of ships on national voyages and by 26 (54.2%) for ships on international voyages. Standardised inspection forms are used by 59.1% of the authorities. A scoring inspection system is applied by five (11.6%) of the 43 responding authorities. Environmental sampling is conducted by 84.1% of the authorities (37 out of 44). The inspection results are collected and analysed by 54.5% (24 out of 44) of the authorities, while 9 authorities (20.5%) declared that they publish the results. Inspections are conducted during outbreak investigations by 75% and 70.8% of the authorities, on ships on national and international voyages, respectively. A total of 31 (64.6%) and 39 (81.3%) authorities conducted inspections during complaint investigations on ships on international and on national voyages, respectively. Port-to-port communication between the national port authorities was reported by 35.4% (17 out of 48) of the responding authorities and 20.8% (10 out of 48) of the port authorities of other countries.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study revealed a diversity of approaches and practices in the conduct of inspections, differences in the qualifications/knowledge/experience of inspectors, the legislation applied during inspections, and the lack of communication and training among many EU countries. An integrated European inspection programme involving competent expert inspectors in each EU Member States and special training for ship hygiene delivered to crew members and inspectors would help to minimize the risk of communicable diseases. Common inspection tools at a European level for hygiene inspection practices and port-to-port communication are needed.</p

Christmas Economics - A Sleigh Ride

Do you believe that at Christmas time the gas prices, the economy and the number of suicides peak? Do you think that the value of presents you are giving to your beloved is of importance? We show in this paper that conventional wisdom about Christmas is often doubtful. Furthermore, we give an idea of how Santa Claus - and maybe you - is able to finance Christmas celebrations, why emergency departments are a place to especially avoid during this time of the year and why Christmas tree growers might care to explain the differences across species to you this year. We cannot clearly establish whether Christmas entails a welfare loss or gain, however, we give you an idea as to which institutional settings might reduce a potential welfare loss. Also, we give advice about which behaviours might get you more Christmas presents from Santa this year. Finally, we find that more research is needed to give conclusive reasons why Santa Claus actually brings presents to (nearly) everyone

Do I know that you know what you know? Modeling testimony in causal inference

We rely on both our own observations and on others ’ testimony when making causal inferences. To integrate these sources of information we must consider an informant’s statements about the world, her expressed level of certainty, her previous accuracy, and perhaps her apparent self-knowledge – how accurately she conveys her own certainty. It can be difficult to tease apart the contributions of all these variables simply by observing people’s causal judgments. We present a computa-tional account of how these different cues contribute to a ratio-nal causal inference, and two experiments looking at adults’ inferences from causal demonstrations and informant testi-mony, focusing on cases where these sources conflict. We find that adults are able to combine social information with their own observations, and are sensitive to the reliability of each. Adults are also sensitive to the accuracy, certainty, and self-knowledge of the informant, a result confirmed by comparing predictions from models with and without these variables

104 Administration of a DNA immunostimulant does not mitigate bovine herpesvirus-1 recrudescence in dexamethasone challenged beef cattle

Abstract The study objective was to determine the effect of a DNA immunostimulant on recrudescence of bovine herpesvirus-1 (BHV-1) after dexamethasone challenge in beef cattle. It was hypothesized that the DNA immunostimulant would mitigate stress-induced immunosuppression; thereby, reducing the incidence of BHV-1 recrudescence. Steers (n=10) and heifers (n=10; initial BW = 489 kg ± 57 kg) were stratified by pre-existing BHV-1 antibody titer, sex and initial BW and randomly assigned to treatment (n=4 pens/treatment; 2 or 3 animals/pen). All calves were administered 40 mg of dexamethasone i.v. at 0600 h from d 0 to 2, 166-d subsequent to BHV-1 challenge with 1.0 × 108 plaque-forming units per nostril. On d 1, calves were administered treatments consisting of 2 mL i.m. of DNA immunostimulant (Zelnate; ZEL) or sterile saline (CON). Once daily (0600) from d 0 to 12, a whole blood was obtained via jugular venipuncture for complete blood count (CBC) analysis and nasal swabs were collected to determine BHV-1 prevalence via virus isolation testing. A repeated measures mixed model was used to test the effect of treatment, day and their interaction for CBC variables. There was a treatment × day interaction for eosinophils (P = 0.02) and percent eosinophils (P = 0.03). Eosinophils were greater (P &lt; 0.01) for ZEL on d 3 and 6 post-dexamethasone challenge. On d 11 and 12, eosinophils for CON rebounded such that their concentration was greater than ZEL (P &lt; 0.01). Lymphocytes, neutrophil and monocyte concentration did not differ (P ≥ 0.44); however, a day effect (P ≤ 0.01) existed such that each variable increased transiently after dexamethasone challenge. All cattle had BHV-1 present in a nasal swab sample on at least one sample day, with prevalence of BHV-1 in nasal swab samples being greatest on d 5 (80% positive; P = 0.01). However, no treatment differences were detected for BHV-1 prevalence in this study. The DNA immunostimulant altered eosinophil concentrations but did not mitigate BHV-1 recrudesce after dexamethasone challenge</jats:p

3 Administration of a DNA immunostimulant does not mitigate bovine herpesvirus-1 recrudescence in dexamethasone challenged beef cattle

Abstract The study objective was to determine the effect of a DNA immunostimulant on recrudescence of bovine herpesvirus-1 (BHV-1) after dexamethasone challenge in beef cattle. It was hypothesized that the DNA immunostimulant would mitigate stress-induced immunosuppression; thereby, reducing the incidence of BHV-1 recrudescence. Steers (n = 10) and heifers (n = 10; initial BW = 489 kg ± 57 kg) were stratified by pre-existing BHV-1 antibody titer, sex and initial BW and randomly assigned to treatment (n = 4 pens/treatment; 2 or 3 animals/pen). All calves were administered 40 mg of dexamethasone i.v. at 0600 h from d 0 to 2, 166-d subsequent to BHV-1 challenge with 1.0 × 108 plaque-forming units per nostril. On d 1, calves were administered treatments consisting of 2 mL i.m. of DNA immunostimulant (Zelnate; ZEL) or sterile saline (CON). Once daily (0600) from d 0 to 12, a whole blood was obtained via jugular venipuncture for complete blood count (CBC) analysis and nasal swabs were collected to determine BHV-1 prevalence via virus isolation testing. A repeated measures mixed model was used to test the effect of treatment, day and their interaction for CBC variables. There was a treatment × day interaction for eosinophils (P = 0.02) and percent eosinophils (P = 0.03). Eosinophils were greater (P &lt; 0.01) for ZEL on d 3 and 6 post-dexamethasone challenge. On d 11 and 12, eosinophils for CON rebounded such that their concentration was greater than ZEL (P &lt; 0.01). Lymphocytes, neutrophil and monocyte concentration did not differ (P ≥ 0.44); however, a day effect (P ≤ 0.01) existed such that each variable increased transiently after dexamethasone challenge. All cattle had BHV-1 present in a nasal swab sample on at least one sample day, with prevalence of BHV-1 in nasal swab samples being greatest on d 5 (80% positive; P = 0.01). However, no treatment differences were detected for BHV-1 prevalence in this study. The DNA immunostimulant altered eosinophil concentrations but did not mitigate BHV-1 recrudesce after dexamethasone challenge</jats:p