Disease Surveillance Requirements in Australia
While much has been hypothesized regarding disease surveillance, it is of the essence to note that this occurs as one of the fundamental components of animal health services. This may be attributed to the fact that disease surveillance offers a comprehensive platform that provides warning on impending disease outbreaks. On a similar note, disease surveillance offers a viable platform that allows for planning, implementation and monitoring of a wider array of disease control programs. In a nutshell, disease surveillance is important for emergency preparedness for any animal disease. A close analysis of the Australian contexts depicts the existence of a robust animal disease surveillance program, which offers an integrated surveillance system across various contexts in Australia. Notably, the Australian disease surveillance system utilizes new technological innovations, which allow for the generation of data, and management of information (Falk & Wallace, 2011, pg. 24). Overall, there are various disease surveillance requirements aimed at detecting a disease not yet present in Australia.
More importantly, disease surveillance in the Australian context calls for the availability of various activities aimed at ascertaining the current health status of livestock in Australia. As such, part of the surveillance requirements aligns with the need for the assessment of signs of a specific emergency animal disease, which may be new. Looking for the signs of a new disease does not occur in isolation nor spontaneously. Instead, it calls for the availability of an appropriate authority, preferably a surveillance coordinator (veterinary practitioner) who gives instructions to personnel carrying out assessments aimed at identifying an emerging disease (Lakoff & Collier, 2008, pg. 33). In cases where the surveillance team identifies signs of an emerging disease, suitable samples are collected, and evidence obtained to support a diagnosing as per the relevant protocols and standards. At this stage, one of the most crucial requirement is the availability of an expert who can assist in making an appropriate diagnosis of a new disease (Dobson et al. 2013, pg. 16). After an expertise had been accessed to make an appropriate diagnosis, the other requirement is the need to collects the diagnostic samples, which are then packaged and dispatched as per the existing protocols and standards (Division on Earth and Life Studies, 2010, pg. 39). This analysis demonstrates the surveillance requirement for detection of a new disease in the context of Australia.
Protocols required if a Disease is detected
In cases where the above connoted surveillance requirement result in the detection of a new disease, there certain protocols that are adhered to. More importantly, if evidence of a new disease are found and ascertained, the appropriate authority, most probably the surveillance coordinator is informed. As such, the surveillance coordinator is expected to take appropriate measures that would allow for immediate containment of the emerging disease (Salman, 2008, pg. 8). Many at times, such measures emanate from Australian disease control centres, as well as relevant guidelines. Upon execution of measures aimed at containing a new disease, information that is pertinent to the management of a new disease is gathered and given to the appropriate authority; the disease surveillance coordinator. Thereafter, persons in charge or owners of animals predisposed to the emerging disease are accorded warnings and directions pertaining the suspected emergency disease (Henzell, 2007, pg. 29). Upon information of the owners of the animal predisposed to the emerging disease, decontamination of personnel, and equipment’s is carried our as per the relevant protocols; and standards for emergency animal disease. From this analysis, it is clear that detecting new animal and containing new or emerging animal diseases in the Australian contexts calls for adherence to standards, protocols, and procedures that are relevant to the emerging disease (Wagner et al., 2006).
Monitoring to ensure that exports from Australia Continue
The above discussion offers a critical analysis on the requirements for detection of new animal or wildlife disease in the contexts of Australia. The discussion offers further analysis on protocols adhered to in cases where the disease has been detected or established. There is also a need to comprehend with the fact that monitoring is important in cases where the disease has been established. This is because monitoring allows offers an understanding of changes in the disease levels and distribution (Koontz, 2006, pg. 48). As a result, monitoring allows for Australia’s animal exports to continue. In a nutshell, monitoring allows for the detection of damages caused a new disease, which has already been established. Such damages reduce Australia’s profit emanating from the export of animals.
Monitoring offers a comprehensive platform in which animal producers become aware of a new disease condition that may be occurring in their flock. This allows the animal owners to come up with on-farm management measures, which helps mitigate losses that may be elicited by a new disease. Conclusively, monitoring in cases where a new disease has been established helps in offering information, which may be utilized by animal producer’s processors, industry groups, and governments to support continuing market access (Thrusfield, 2007, pg. 81). Certainly, this ensures that Australia’s animal exports continue. On another note, information drawn from monitoring provides desired indication on the animal health status of the Australian flock. This demonstrates the quality of Australian animal products; hence, assures sustenance of Australian exports (Sherman, 2002, pg. 17). In addition, monitoring offers critical information that allows individual producers to improve the productiveness of their flock even in cases where new animal disease has been detected. This works towards ensuring that Australia’s animal exports are sustained.
References List
Division on Earth and Life Studies (2010). Understanding Biosecurity: Protecting Against the Misuse of Science in today’s World (Pack of 5). Sydney: National Academies Press.
Dobson, A., Barker, K., Taylor, S. (2013). Biosecurity: The Socio-Politics of Invasive Species and Infectious Diseases. Boston: Routledge.
Falk, I., & Wallace, R. (2011). Managing biosecurity across borders. Dordrecht [etc.], Springer.
Henzell, T. (2007). Australian agriculture: its history and challenges. Collingwood, Vic, CSIRO Pub.
Koontz, S. R. (2006). The economics of livestock disease insurance concepts, issues and international case studies. Oxfordshire, CABI Pub.
Lakoff, A., & Collier, S. J. (2008). Biosecurity interventions: global health & security in question. New York, Columbia University Press.
Salman, M. (2008). Animal Disease Surveillance and Survey Systems Methods and Applications. Hoboken, John Wiley & Sons.
Sherman, D. M. (2002). Tending animals in the global village a guide to international veterinary medicine. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Thrusfield, M. V. (2007). Veterinary epidemiology. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Wagner, M. M., Moore, A. W., & Aryel, R. M. (2006). Handbook of Bio surveillance. Amsterdam, Academic Press.
