Parallels, differences and lessons: a comparison of the management of foot-and-mouth disease and COVID-19 using UK 2001/2020 as points of reference

FMD vaccine allocation and surveillance resourcing options for a potential Australian incursion

Australian Animal Disease Spread (AADIS) epidemiological simulation modelling of potential foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks in the state of Victoria, Australia examined the targeted use of limited vaccine supplies in combination with varying surveillance resources. Updated, detailed estimates of government response costs were prepared based on state level data inputs of required and available resources. Measures of outbreak spread such as duration and numbers of animals removed through depopulation of infected and vaccinated herds from the epidemiological modelling were compared to summed government response costs. This comparison illustrated the trade-offs between targeted control strategies combining vaccination-to-remove and varying surveillance capacities and their corresponding costs. For this intensive cattle and sheep producing region: (1) Targeting vaccination toward intensive production areas or toward specialized cattle operations had outbreak control and response cost advantages similar to vaccination of all species. The median duration was reduced by 27% and response costs by 11%. (2) Adding to the pool of outbreak surveillance resources available further decreased outbreak duration and outbreak response costs. The median duration was reduced by an additional 13% and response costs declined by an additional 8%. (3) Pooling of vaccine resources overcame the very early binding constraints under proportional allocation of vaccines to individual states with similar reductions in outbreak duration to those with additional surveillance resources. However, government costs rose substantially by over 40% and introduced additional risk of a negative consumer response. Increased knowledge of the outbreak situation obtained from more surveillance led to better-informed vaccination deployment decisions in the short timeframe they needed to be made.

The role of wildlife in the epidemiology and control of Foot-and-mouth-disease And Similar Transboundary (FAST) animal diseases: A review

Transboundary Animal Diseases (TADs) are notifiable diseases which are highly transmissible and have the potential for rapid spread regardless of national borders. Many TADs are shared between domestic animals and wildlife, with the potential to affect both livestock sector and wildlife conservation and eventually, public health in the case of zoonosis. The European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease (EuFMD), a commission of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), has grouped six TADs as 'Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) And Similar Transboundary animal diseases' (FAST diseases). FAST diseases are ruminant infections caused by viruses, for which vaccination is a control option. The EuFMD hold-FAST strategy aims primarily at addressing the threat represented by FAST diseases for Europe. Prevention and control of FAST diseases might benefit from assessing the role of wildlife. We reviewed the role of wildlife as indicators, victims, bridge hosts or maintenance hosts for the six TADs included in the EuFMD hold-FAST strategy: FMD, peste des petits ruminants, lumpy skin disease, sheep and goatpox, Rift Valley fever and bovine ephemeral fever. We observed that wildlife can act as indicator species. In addition, they are occasionally victims of disease outbreaks, and they are often relevant for disease management as either bridge or maintenance hosts. Wildlife deserves to become a key component of future integrated surveillance and disease control strategies in an ever-changing world. It is advisable to increase our knowledge on wildlife roles in relevant TADs to improve our preparedness in case of an outbreak in previously disease-free regions, where wildlife may be significant for disease surveillance and control.