Rinderpest impact and the risks posed by keeping the virus

Maintaining Global Freedom from Rinderpest International Meeting • 20-22 January 2016 • Rome, Italy

Rinderpest impact and the risks posed by Rinderpest impact and the risks posed by keeping the viruskeeping the virus

Paul RossiterPaul RossiterRinderpest Technical Officer,Rinderpest Technical Officer,Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations


Rinderpest: its impact and risk Everyone here knows about rinderpest (??)But for how much longer?


• Before control was understood there were continual, unimaginable losses Europe and West Asia (Russia/Transcaucasus)

In 18th century 200 million cattle died Holland: 1744-1765 ~1 million deadUK: 1860s ~500,000 cattle dead

Asia Japan; 1637-1642 ~500,000 cattle dead

Africa Great African Pandemic of 1887-1897

90% of Africa’s cattle and wildlife died IMPACT


Even with the concept of movement controlTranscaucasia, Central Asia and Siberia: 1884: 400,000 cattle died (Laktionov, 1967)

Mongolia: 1912-1917;average of 120,000 cattle died annually New World: 1921: Brazil infected from India (Roberts, 1921).

Even with vaccineChina: 1938-1941, >1 million cattle died.

FAO assisted China to eradicate RP between 1949-1956 India: 1931-1939, 100,000-200,000 deaths annuallyIraq: 1985: killed 50% of 30,000 buffaloes in one dairy village N. Pakistan, 1994-1995. 40,000-50,000 cattle and yaks died

IMPACT


• The costs of eradication• US$5 billion• The total cost of the PARC programme in Africa was

estimated to be €51.6 million.

• The cost-benefit of eradication.• India: BCR of 64 (!!) McNeil Jr, Donald G. (27 June 2011). "Rinderpest". New York Times.

• Chad; BCR 4-472 (depending on the virulence of the virus) FAO Animal Production and Health Working Paper No 7.

• USD 920 million in annual economic benefits in Africa alone.

• "Household income across Ethiopia rose by €38.1 million as a result of rinderpest control and eradication."

IMPACT

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/health/28rinderpest.html


Two examples of outbreaks where no cattle or buffaloes had been vaccinated

And no one was expecting rinderpest

Which is what we face today

IMPACT


• Rinderpest in Brazil.– Brazil’s famous breeds of cattle originally came from India– So did rinderpest

1920. Infamous shipment of cattle from India via Antwerp.

– Local spread– Extremely high mortality rates

One herd of 28 Holstein cattle all died in 23 days

– Eliminated by slaughter and strict movement control

IMPACT


“Cattle plague” in recent(ish) timesNorthern Areas of Pakistan, 1993/4

IMPACT


• No awareness & no early warning– Highly susceptible ‘hill’ cattle and yaks– No disease for 50 years, no vaccination for 30 years – Farmers didn’t know the disease– Veterinarians didn’t know the disease!!

• No early response– Disease finally confirmed after more than 6 months when 15,000 cattle and yaks were already dead– The vaccine laboratory sent just 15,000 doses of vaccine when 20,000

cattle were already dead– Insufficient and ineffective nationally produced vaccine – FAO imported vaccine – Disease eliminated 18 months after first diagnosis. – 40,000-50,000 cattle and yaks estimated to have died


• The socio-economic costs in Northern Pakistan.

– Financial cost > USD10-20 million?– Human costs extreme

• In one valley 8,000 of 10-12,000 cattle died• In another valley, 3,000 died in 2 months• Families were broken as breadwinners left to work in cities

thousands of kilometres away– Professional costs

• Loss of confidence in the veterinary department• veterinary department cars jeered and even stoned


IMPACT


1967-68. Epidemic rinderpest in Southern IndiaGaur severely affected90% died. Twenty years to recover numbers

“one day when the epidemic was at its worst , I had to bury my nose into my perfume-sprayed hankerchief over long stretches – so overpowering was the stench from dead gaur”. . E.R.C Davidar, 2012. “Whispers from the Wild”,Penguin.

IMPACT


• The risks of keeping rinderpest virus

RISK


The survey showed that at least 44 laboratories in at least 35 countries were storing rinderpest virus

RISK


• the risks posed by keeping the virus the risks posed by keeping the virus – The accidental use of laboratory stocks of virus was the

highest risk pathway– In-vivo work with rinderpest posed a higher biosecurity

risk than in-vitro work– Handling rinderpest virus in high-biosecure laboratories

always reduced the risks of releasing virus– Possible cross contamination of vaccines is why vaccine

production was not rated extremely low or negligible risk– Biological warfare was seen as extremely low risk– The overall median risk of a laboratory escape is very low

(1-100 to 1 in 10,000) RISK


In summaryRinderpest virus containing material is still present in all continents except S. America.

Keeping rinderpest virus is a hazard

The risk of an escape is low, but not always, and associated with a high degree of uncertainty

Only removing the hazard removes all risk

RISK


• Rinderpest has been inadvertently introduced to cattle from laboratories on several occasions– Vaccine contaminations with virulent virus– Insufficiently attenuated live vaccines– Laboratory “escapes”

RISK


A real laboratory escapeVeterinary Research Department, Muguga, Kenya, July 1980–usually 100-200 cattle or more in its fields and barns. –Cattle in a reception herd were reported ill for 1-2 days. –The clinical disease was recognised (by the Director) and confirmed in the virology division two hours later–The disease was then confirmed in other animals in the sick pen, and in other experimental groups. – All clinical cases and in-contacts were culled. –Infection contained and did not affect outside villages

RISK


A real laboratory escape:– What went wrong?

• Failure to follow standard procedures of bio-security* • Vaccination had been neglected• Serious lack of awareness about the possibility of

rinderpest amongst most veterinary staff *– Comments in the clinical record book showed that some

vets were thinking about rinderpest but did not follow up

properly, did not have clear SOPs etc. *

* These factors could play a role again today RISK


• Nobody wants this for rinderpest

Other pathogenic viruses will be eradicated:

PPRpoliomeasles?FMD?


• The legacy of rinderpest18th Century The “Enlightenment”, understanding and education

Ramazzini, Lancisi and the understanding of sanitary controlFirst veterinary schools established; Lyons 1762, etc.

19th Century national institutions and high dramaThe Indian Cattle Plague Commission, 1868British and other state veterinary services establishedRussian offer of a 100,000 roubles reward for a preventive The search for an immunological cure in South Africa

20th Century International institution buildingOIEFAOWVAIBED now AU-IBAR

21st Century. Freedom.Eradication of the virus from natural hostsOther diseases now targeted for eradicationEradication of the virus from the laboratory


• The legacy of rinderpest18th Century The “Enlightenment”, understanding and education

Ramazzini, Lancisi and the understanding of sanitary controlFirst veterinary schools established; Lyons 1762, etc.

19th Century national institutions and high dramaThe Indian Cattle Plague Commission, 1868British and other state veterinary services establishedRussian offer of a 100,000 roubles reward for a preventive The search for an immunological cure in South Africa

20th Century International institution buildingOIEFAOWVAIBED now AU-IBAR

21st Century. Freedom.Eradication of the virus from natural hostsOther diseases now targeted for eradicationEradication of the virus from the laboratory The final step


Thank You

Slaughter in a vain attempt to stop the spread of disease. Sudan, 1983

Date post:	14-Apr-2017
Category:	Education
Upload:	fao
View:	453 times
Download:	1 times

Rinderpest impact and the risks posed by keeping the virus

Education