The hot seat

Declan O’Brien of IFAH-Europe tackles the big issues in animal health.

The issue of animal health is one that has spilled out of purely industry circles and onto the front pages. Foot and mouth, blue tongue, avian influenza and now the growing threat of swine flu have all been sources of concern in recent memory. For Declan O'Brien, Managing Director of International Federation for Animal Health Europe (IFAH-Europe), improving understanding of the value of good animal health policy is a full time job. Next Generation Food caught up with him to hear his opinions on some of the biggest issues currently affecting the space

The impact animal health has on the safety and security of food supplies
Globally, the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) places production losses at more than 20 percent due to diseases in animals, on average. It is animal health products that prevent this figure from being much higher. With a more efficient use of them, the figure could go down in the future. Good examples are mastitis in cows that renders milk inedible. Cure the mastitis, and the milk is good for consumption. Another example is vaccination against E.coli in pullet flocks that has been shown to reduce the presence of salmonella in eggs. The connection between animal health and more secure, healthier, better food is therefore pretty clear.

The role animal health has to play in protecting the human population from diseases like swine flu
First of all 'swine flu' is not the correct term to use for the current illness spreading among the human population. It isn't swine flu. It is Influenza A H1N1, and it is a human illness, not an animal disease. The origin of the H1N1 influenza isn't as yet clear, but in any case this is a reassortant virus and they are very difficult to prevent, even with vaccines in existence for other strains.

Cases of zoonoses do happen however such as salmonella in eggs or rabies, where vaccination against rabies in animals has definitely reduced human mortality rates. There vaccination makes a clear difference.

Another example is avian influenza. If it can be controlled in chickens then the risk diminishes of it mutating into a strain that will impact humans. There is a very clear connection that in diminishing diseases in animals, human health will benefit as well.

In terms of H1N1 and animal health, all that can be done really is to work on biosecurity measures to minimise contact between humans and animals, and between different animal species. Issues will still remain, as with avian influenza and for instance wild birds which could still spread the disease, so we need to remain vigilant and realise we cannot control everything. We do need to plan as best as we can to prevent and cure diseases in animals, specifically zoonoses.

The resources devoted to animal health in Europe
There aren't enough resources devoted to animal health issues in Europe. It can always improve, but at the moment policy makers are having to look at new scenarios which require planning. They have seen what happens with the foot and mouth disease outbreak, with avian influenza and blue tongue in Europe. More planning and preparation is needed, which requires more funding.

One example of good progress is the European Technology Platform for Global Animal Health (ETPGAH). This is a multiple stakeholder initiative to encourage and accelerate the development and distribution of effective tools to control major animal diseases. ETPGAH is funded by the European Commission, who are observers on the platform. The work done includes mapping the priority diseases and what the gaps are, so that the research can then focus on filling in these gaps. It would be great to have more efficiency within research and more funding for it. The need to prepare for more diseases coming our way is necessary. The contribution and participation of all stakeholders involved in the ETPGAH is commendable though. The Member States who are involved in an initiative to collaborate on research across borders are also to be greatly commended as their pooling of resources will make the research effort much more efficient.

Consumer concerns over the use of antibiotics in animal production
There are benefits to the use of these medicines in treating animals. Animal welfare mandates that sick animals are treated effectively and no matter how much we prevent disease, animals will get sick, just as children and adults get sick. And they do have a right to be treated to the best of our ability, rather than being allowed to suffer and die or have to be killed outright. The first step is of course good management, good biosecurity measures and a good vaccination programme. But of course medicines in general, and antibiotics specifically, need to be used responsibly and only if necessary and then it should only be the right product, in the right quantity.

IFAH-Europe is also a founding member of EPRUMA, the European Platform for the Responsible Use of Medicines in Animals. The other stakeholders include representatives from among the veterinarians, farmers and feed manufacturers at European Level, as well as the European Initiative for Sustainable Development in Agriculture (EISA). EPRUMA has drawn up a framework regarding the responsible use of antibiotics in food-producing animals in which it lays down core concepts for a continued effective responsible use of antibiotics across the EU. In terms of alternatives to antibiotics, at the moment there aren't any really. Several avenues are being looked in to, but none have been found or approved.

The challenges posed by rising consumer interest in 'natural' and organic forms of food
There is an ongoing debate regarding the organic production food system and the more conventional one. In July there was a report issued by the Food Standards Agency in the UK stating that organic food 'has no health benefits and there is little difference in nutrional value' compared to the more conventional production systems. There is clearly a market for both systems to exist though. However, in terms of animal health, there is no difference to whichever system is in use. Animal health remains a prime concern irrespective of whether the production system is organic or conventional. Our focus is on providing medicines to protect animal health and welfare regardless of the production system.

The efficiency of the European regulatory framework
Europe's regulatory framework does need more work, and actually reviews are currently ongoing. At its recent annual conference, IFAH-Europe addressed this exact issue and presented its 1-1-1 concept: one dossier, one assessment, one decision. It's all in aid of lowering the administrative burden for all those involved in the process of bringing veterinary medicines to market. The conference underlined the willingness from all those involved to make the process more efficient, including the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Heads of Medicine Agencies. One example is the data protection issue when a product is extended in its use from one species to another. This needs to be addressed in the review, as data protection is needed per species and not just per product otherwise medicines will not be made available for a range of species as the development work is very expensive and necessitates data protection to justify the investment. This is another issue the ETPGAH is looking at. The review would also need to tackle medicines' availability, so the process is simpler, especially in cases of emergencies such as for instance with Blue Tongue. The option for an individual sheep is to get a vaccine or to risk becoming ill and die. But the current framework cannot deal with this type of emergency. At the moment Member States need to make these decisions, and weigh up the risks and benefits individually, rather than at a European level. So there is room for improvement, but this is currently underway and we as industry are positive about the direction the debate is taking.