Relevance of One Health

RE: Relevance of One Health

Sarah McGurk — Fri, 03 Mar 2023 20:11:10 GMT

The One Health tabletop exercise I attended was funded by the Arctic Council. While the group I was in used OH-SMART (One Health Systems Mapping and Analysis Resource Toolkit https://oh-smart.umn.edu/ ) to look at avian influenza, the other group were looking at a far more complex scenario with an unknown disease spreading in «domesticated» reindeer (they are herded, but nomadic). There were no papers written, but it was a much wider question, with input from representatives of the reindeer herders and laboratory veterinarians, and people working with the environment.

This was an initiative started in 2017, I think. It was just beginning to accelerate when Covid arrived, which prevented meetings going ahead, then the war in Ukraine (Russia is a part of the Arctic Council, which complicates the situation, particularly, for example, when reindeer herders who traditionally crossed borders are now not allowed through to collect their reindeer.

So while it probably wasn’t very visible, except to those involved, there are other aspects of One Health being explored and some fairly diverse groups being drawn in.

RE: Relevance of One Health

Charlotte French — Thu, 02 Mar 2023 15:05:37 GMT

Just as an FYI my interest in One Health stems from the WSAVA course which I completed. I have worked on and am promoting the recent One Health Focus Programme just launched by Improve International ...in case anyone wants to take a look

https://improveinternational.com/uk/coursedate/one-health/

RE: Relevance of One Health

Chris Walster — Wed, 01 Mar 2023 19:05:59 GMT

One Health should have more importance placed on it. The tripartite agreement between FAO, WHO and WOAH is a step forward, as are the monthly newsletters from the One Health Commission.

To me One Health is all about human health and welfare, animal health and welfare, and environmental health and welfare and getting the balance right.

Undoubtedly the current issue is engaging the medical profession more, and moving on from epidemiology and zoonoses (which any trawl of One Health papers will show are most frequently published). One Health is wider than that, but funding clearly only exists in this area. Even worse, the One Health concept appears to be already fragmenting so you have Eco Health and Planetary Health which appear to focus more on biodiversity. Possibly an indication that folk are retreating back in to their silos?

One Health is complex and requires input from not only vets and medics but ecologists, archeologists, economists, social scientists etc. to get anything really meaningful. You need to know what happened in the past as well as where we are now and what might happen in the future. One Health provides a framework to obtain that knowledge.

RE: Relevance of One Health

Bob Russell — Wed, 22 Feb 2023 10:03:40 GMT

Years ago I did meat hygiene work as part of our practice.

The first week at one factory spent hens arrived with horrific numbers of broken limbs. This seemed to be considered 'normal'! I did not accept it and threatened to leave if something was not done about it.

To my surprise my greatest supporter turned out to be the business owner. Everything that could be investigated, was.

It turned out that the last period in the birds life was on almost starvation rations and very poor calcium intake was the result.

Injury levels dropped and everyone in the factory started to view the numbers with interest and concern. Probably the thing that might just get me through the 'Pearly Gates'!

Now in the hands of one company as far as I am aware. They undercut those with years of experience!

RE: Relevance of One Health

Sarah McGurk — Tue, 21 Feb 2023 21:57:20 GMT

That’s really sad, Bob. I’ve recently shifted my job focus to work slightly more hours in an abattoir and slightly less out in the field. This was because I could see that the abattoir was a kind of hub, where animals come in from the surrounding area (8 hours circumferance, give or take). I can pick up on both health and welfare issues via the animals that are sent in and I feed that information back to those who are responsible out in the field. I am working hard to build up those links because it seems really important. It’s only possible because we are all linked up and working for the government and I am honestly astonished at my own enthusiasm.

Recently meat inspectors way down in the south of Norway picked up on the fact that there was TB in a herd there. Now the teams out in the field are working hard to trace all movements on and off the farm in the past five years. I really hope they manage to stamp it out because I can see how devastating it is in the UK now.

I realise it’s small scale here, but the principle still stands. If you separate out antemortem controls and meat inspection from the state veterinary service, you run the risk of losing huge swathes of information.

RE: Relevance of One Health

Charlotte French — Tue, 21 Feb 2023 09:52:44 GMT

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/f/misc-clinical-discussions/30586/relevance-of-one-health/240853#240853"]

The profession used to be at the centre of any animal-related emergencies but has largely been sidelined as of little importance.

This may reflect the move to companion medicine as a whole but also reflects the lack of financial support and cost cutting by government.

Meat hygiene work has been put into the hands of one company. TB testing contracted out to a few.

Farm practice is now only viable for a limited number of practices. Years of experience has been lost.

I complained that human doctors were using set antibiotic doses for people, yet we worried whether a 20Kg or 23Kg dose was right. It was a medical doctor interviewed on the Today programme!

[/quote]

Agreed- I also don't understand how human nurse practitioners can prescribe yet vet nurses have so little autonomy- let's hope the move towards 'professionalism' for nurses gains more momentum, having been involved in the teaching and training of vet nurses I am a great advocate!

RE: Relevance of One Health

Charlotte French — Tue, 21 Feb 2023 09:48:49 GMT

[quote userid="4037" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/f/misc-clinical-discussions/30586/relevance-of-one-health/240846#240846"]I do work for the Norwegian equivalent of the FSA though[/quote]

Wow looks like an amazing place to live-beautiful

RE: Relevance of One Health

Bob Russell — Tue, 21 Feb 2023 09:46:03 GMT

The profession used to be at the centre of any animal-related emergencies but has largely been sidelined as of little importance.

This may reflect the move to companion medicine as a whole but also reflects the lack of financial support and cost cutting by government.

Meat hygiene work has been put into the hands of one company. TB testing contracted out to a few.

Farm practice is now only viable for a limited number of practices. Years of experience has been lost.

I complained that human doctors were using set antibiotic doses for people, yet we worried whether a 20Kg or 23Kg dose was right. It was a medical doctor interviewed on the Today programme!

RE: Relevance of One Health

Sarah McGurk — Mon, 20 Feb 2023 16:32:57 GMT

I think it’s a fascinating initiative. I was recently at a tabletop exercise looking at the intersections between environmental agencies, laboratories and human and animal public health. I do work for the Norwegian equivalent of the FSA though, so public health and emergency preparedness is integral to my job. I was in a group looking at the processes around bird flu.

I think interprofessional training at university could be useful, though perhaps building up links between professions works better once career choices have been made. I could already see that I was on too low a rung to give the most useful input and that my boss would have been better placed to interact at an appropriate level. An introduction to the idea at university would be a great primer though, especially for those interested.