return to www.warmwell.com Extract from http://www.promedmail.org/pls/apex/f?p=2400:1001:1124612475168219::NO::F2400_P1001_BACK_PAGE,F2400_P1001_PUB_MAIL_ID:1000,86393
---------------------------------
When an FMD outbreak or FMDV
infection occurs in an FMD free country
or zone where vaccination is not
practised, one of the following
waiting periods is required to regain the
status of FMD free country
or zone where vaccination is not
practised:
"3 months after the last case where a stamping-out policy
and
serological surveillance are applied in accordance with
Articles
8.5.42. to 8.5.48.; or
"3 months after the slaughter of all
vaccinated animals where a
stamping-out policy, emergency vaccination, and
serological
surveillance are applied in accordance with Articles 8.5.42. to
8.5.48.; or
"6 months after the last case or the last vaccination
(according to
the event that occurs the latest), where a stamping-out
policy,
emergency vaccination not followed by the slaughtering of
all
vaccinated animals, and serological surveillance are applied
in
accordance with Articles 8.5.42. to 8.5.48., provided that
a
serological survey based on the detection of antibodies to
nonstructural
proteins of FMDV demonstrates the absence of infection
in the remaining
vaccinated population.
"Where a stamping-out policy is not practised, the
above waiting
periods do not apply, and Article 8.5.2. or 8.5.4. applies [see
at
<http://oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/en_chapitre_1.8.5.htm>].
"When an FMD outbreak or FMDV
infection occurs in an FMD free country
or zone where vaccination is
practised, one of the following waiting
periods is required to regain the
status of FMD free country or zone
where vaccination is practised:
"6
months after the last case where a stamping-out policy,
emergency
vaccination, and serological surveillance in accordance with
Articles
8.5.42. to 8.5.48. are applied, provided that the
serological
surveillance based on the detection of antibodies to
nonstructural
proteins of FMDV demonstrates the absence of virus circulation;
or
"18 months after the last case where a stamping-out policy is
not
applied, but emergency vaccination and serological surveillance
in
accordance with Articles 8.5.42. to 8.5.48. are applied, provided
that
the serological surveillance based on the detection of
antibodies to
nonstructural proteins of FMDV demonstrates the absence
of virus
circulation."
A decision of an FMD-free country to apply emergency FMD
vaccination
(in order to control an outbreak), deserves to be seen also in
light
of that country's international trade figures. In other words,
the
effect upon export (and the possible delay of its renewal) should
be
weighted vis-a-vis potential losses to the animal breeders/owners
and
to the local market, on top of other issues such as animal welfare
and
collateral damage to the countryside, agri-business, tourism etc.
Korea
is predominantly an importer, not exporter, of animals (cattle
and pigs)
and/or their products. According to the statistical data
provided by FAOSTAT
(database of the Food and Agriculture
Organisation of the UN), the
imports/exports of the Republic of Korea
during 2008 (=most recent available
data) were the following:
Live cattle (heads): import - 208; export -
0.
Live pigs (heads): import - 1451; export - 629.
Cattle meat (including
boneless meat and veal; in metric tons):
import - 210 644 (value USD 959 993
000). Export - 4 tons.
Pork (in metric tons): import - 322 851 (value USD 821
560 000);
export - 8249 (value USD 14 487 000).
Countries (OIE
Members) which are officially recognised by the OIE as
free of FMD, maintain
a privileged status in relation to the
certification and veterinary
requirements when exporting animals
(relevant species) and animal products,
worldwide. Explanation of the
official procedures for members wishing to
apply for recognition of
animal disease status is available
at
<http://www.oie.int/eng/Status/en_procedures.htm>.
There are 2 categories of recognised
Members, in relation to FMD:
1. FMD free where vaccination is not
practised
2. FMD free where vaccination is practised
The updated list
of FMD free countries, of both categories, is
available at <http://www.oie.int/eng/Status/FMD/en_fmd_free.htm>. The
Republic of Korea was suspended of
its status as "FMD free Member
without vaccination" on 29 Nov 2010, following
the notification of
FMD in Andong city. The timetable ("waiting periods") for
the
recovery of FMD-free status is addressed in Article 8.5.9. of
OIE's
Terrestrial Animal Health Code. The text of the said article is as
follows:
"Article 8.5.9. Recovery of free status
-
----------------------------------------
When an FMD outbreak or FMDV
infection occurs in an FMD free country
or zone where vaccination is not
practised, one of the following
waiting periods is required to regain the
status of FMD free country
or zone where vaccination is not
practised:
"3 months after the last case where a stamping-out policy
and
serological surveillance are applied in accordance with
Articles
8.5.42. to 8.5.48.; or
"3 months after the slaughter of all
vaccinated animals where a
stamping-out policy, emergency vaccination, and
serological
surveillance are applied in accordance with Articles 8.5.42. to
8.5.48.; or
"6 months after the last case or the last vaccination
(according to
the event that occurs the latest), where a stamping-out
policy,
emergency vaccination not followed by the slaughtering of
all
vaccinated animals, and serological surveillance are applied
in
accordance with Articles 8.5.42. to 8.5.48., provided that
a
serological survey based on the detection of antibodies to
nonstructural
proteins of FMDV demonstrates the absence of infection
in the remaining
vaccinated population.
"Where a stamping-out policy is not practised, the
above waiting
periods do not apply, and Article 8.5.2. or 8.5.4. applies [see
at
<http://oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/en_chapitre_1.8.5.htm>].
"When an FMD outbreak or FMDV
infection occurs in an FMD free country
or zone where vaccination is
practised, one of the following waiting
periods is required to regain the
status of FMD free country or zone
where vaccination is practised:
"6
months after the last case where a stamping-out policy,
emergency
vaccination, and serological surveillance in accordance with
Articles
8.5.42. to 8.5.48. are applied, provided that the
serological
surveillance based on the detection of antibodies to
nonstructural
proteins of FMDV demonstrates the absence of virus circulation;
or
"18 months after the last case where a stamping-out policy is
not
applied, but emergency vaccination and serological surveillance
in
accordance with Articles 8.5.42. to 8.5.48. are applied, provided
that
the serological surveillance based on the detection of
antibodies to
nonstructural proteins of FMDV demonstrates the absence
of virus
circulation."
A decision of an FMD-free country to apply emergency FMD
vaccination
(in order to control an outbreak), deserves to be seen also in
light
of that country's international trade figures. In other words,
the
effect upon export (and the possible delay of its renewal) should
be
weighted vis-a-vis potential losses to the animal breeders/owners
and
to the local market, on top of other issues such as animal welfare
and
collateral damage to the countryside, agri-business, tourism etc.
Korea
is predominantly an importer, not exporter, of animals (cattle
and pigs)
and/or their products. According to the statistical data
provided by FAOSTAT
(database of the Food and Agriculture
Organisation of the UN), the
imports/exports of the Republic of Korea
during 2008 (=most recent available
data) were the following:
Live cattle (heads): import - 208; export -
0.
Live pigs (heads): import - 1451; export - 629.
Cattle meat (including
boneless meat and veal; in metric tons):
import - 210 644 (value USD 959 993
000). Export - 4 tons.
Pork (in metric tons): import - 322 851 (value USD 821
560 000);
export - 8249 (value USD 14 487 000).
The decision of the
authorities to resort, eventually, to emergency
vaccination may have been
taken while considering, inter alia, the
export statistics. It will be
interesting to obtain more details on
the envisaged vaccination, its scope
(quantitatively and
geographically), type(s) and age of animals to be
vaccinated, and the
vaccine to be applied. -
Mod.AS]