Abstract

A quantitative risk assessment tool was used to provide estimates of the probability that foot-and-mouth (FMD) virus-contaminated, smuggled animal products are fed to susceptible swine in Korea. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to attempt to distinguish between parameter uncertainty and variability, using different assumptions on the effect of cooking at home, the effect of the fresh meat, and the effect of heat treatment at garbage processing facility. The median risk estimate was about 20.1% with a mean value of 27.4%. In a scenario regarding all beef and pork were considered as fresh meat the estimated median risk was 3.4%. The risk was greatly dependent on the survival parameters of the FMD virus during the cooking or heat treatment at garbage processing facility. Uncertainty about the proportion of garbage that is likely contaminated with FMD had a major positive influence on the risk, whereas conversion rate representing the size of a load had a major negative effect. This model was very useful in assessing the risk explored. However, the model also requires enhancements, such as the availability of more accurate data to verify the various assumptions considered such as FMD prevalence in a specific country, proportion of garbage which is recycled as feed, proportion of food discarded as garbage. Other factors including the effect of selection of animals for slaughter, ante- and post-mortem inspection, the domestic distribution of the smuggled products, and susceptible animals other than pigs, are need to be taken into account in the future model development.

주제어

#risk assessment   #foot-and-mouth disease   #simulation   #animal product   #garbage  

저자의 다른 논문

참고문헌 (16)

1. Callis JJ. Evaluation of the presence and risk of foot and mouth disease virus by commodity in international trade. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 1996, 15, 1075-1085 
2. OIE. Terrestrial animal health code 2004. 13th ed. OIE (Office international des epizooties), Paris, France, 2003 
3. Gillespie JH, Timoney JF. Hagan and Bruner's infectious disease of domestic animals. 7th ed. pp. 595-614, Comstock publishing, London, 1988 
4. CEAH. Risk assessment of the practice of feeding recycled commodities to domesticated swine in the US. pp. 1-58, CEAH (Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health), Fort Collins, US, 1995 
5. Shahan MS. A review of current knowledge of the vesicular diseases. Can Vet J 1960, 1, 427-435 
6. CERA. VLA's risk assessment for the import of contaminated meat and meat products into Great Britain and the subsequent exposure of GB Livestock (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs), CERA (Centre for Epidemiology and Risk Analysis). pp. 1-316, Fort Collins, US, 2004 
7. Murray N. Import risk analysis: animals and animal products. pp. 1-183, Ministry of Agriculture, Wellington, New Zealand, 2002 
8. Kitching RP. A recent history of foot-and-mouth disease. J Comp Path 1998, 118, 89-108 
9. APFRAN. Animal health and production risk analysis framework. pp. 1-55, Canadian food inspection agency, Ontario, Canada, 2000 
10. DAFF. Generic import risk analysis (IRA) for pig meat: final import risk analysis report. pp. 1-767, DAFF (Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry), Australia, 2003 
11. MOE. Report on the amount of waste and its disposal. Ministry of Environment, Korea, 2004 
12. Worsfold D, Griffith C. Assessment of the standard of consumer food safety behavior. J Food Protect 1997, 60, 399-406 
13. Cleland PC, Chamnanpood P, Baldock FC, Gleeson LJ. An investigation of 11 outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in villages in northern Thailand. Prev Vet Med 1995, 22, 293-302 
14. Donaldson AI. Risks of spreading foot and mouth disease through milk and dairy products. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 1997, 16, 117-124 
15. KREI. Food supply 2002. KREI (Korea Rural Economic Institute), Seoul, Korea, 2003 
16. NVRQS. 2003 Annual report of NVRQS (National Veterinary Research and Quarantine Services). Anyang, Korea, 2004 

이 논문을 인용한 문헌 (0)

1. 이 논문을 인용한 문헌 없음