Re: Do You Live Near an Infectious Human-Animal Disease Hotspot?
Mapping of poverty and likely zoonoses hotspots
Zoonoses Project 4
Report to Department for International Development, UK
The objective of this report is to present data and expert knowledge on poverty and
zoonoses hotspots to inform prioritisation of study areas on the transmission of
disease in emerging livestock systems in the developing world, where prevention of
zoonotic disease might bring greatest benefit to poor people.
Research team and co-authors
Delia Grace, International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya
Florence Mutua, International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya
Pamela Ochungo, International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya
Russ Kruska, Consultant
Kate Jones, Institute of Zoology, UK
Liam Brierley, Institute of Zoology, UK
Lucy Lapar, International Livestock Research Institute, Vietnam
Mohamed Said, International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya
Mario Herrero, International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya
Pham Duc Phuc, Hanoi School of Public Health, Vietnam
Nguyen Bich Thao, Hanoi School of Public Health, Vietnam
Isaiah Akuku, ILRI intern
Fred Ogutu, ILRI intern
Report submitted to DFID 18th June 2012
This version 2nd July 2012
...
Key points
There is a strong association between poverty, hunger, livestock keeping, and zoonoses.
Strength of evidence: strong
Zoonotic disease has many aspects and existing disease reporting systems do not adequately capture
the impact of zoonoses or identify investment opportunities. There is much unpublished information in
grey literature of developing countries.
Strength of evidence: strong
Across a range of zoonoses burden, poverty burden, and reliance on livestock, the hotspots for
poverty, emerging livestock systems and zoonoses are (in decreasing order of importance both by
region and country; countries in red appear in multiple listings):
South Asia: India > Bangladesh > Pakistan
Is higher than: East and Central Africa: Ethiopia > Nigeria > Congo DR > Tanzania > Sudan
Is higher than: South East Asia: China > Indonesia > Myanmar > Vietnam
Is higher than: West Africa: Burkina Faso > Mali > Ghana
Strength of evidence: moderate
We updated maps of poor livestock keepers (table 0.1). Around 70% of the rural poor and 10% of the
urban poor are dependent on livestock. The last decade has seen declines in density of poor livestock
keepers in South America and South East Asia and lesser declines in parts of West Africa and South
Asia. High density of poor livestock keepers is focal: around 6 hotspots and 14 countries bear the
brunt. Four countries (India > Nigeria > Ethiopia > Bangladesh) have 44% of the worlds’ poor livestock
keepers (table 0.1 and chapter 4.1).
Strength of evidence: moderate
Areas with both high livestock populations and strong rising demand for livestock products offer
highest opportunities for livestock to be a pathway out of poverty. Demand is largely driven by
urbanisation, demographic growth and increasing wealth. Monogastric (poultry and pig) production
responds more to increased demand because of their high reproduction rates and ease of
intensification. Hence total number of monogastrics and magnitude of change in monogastric
population are proxies for identifying emerging livestock systems (table 0.1 and chapter 4.3).
Countries with both high numbers and large change include: India > Myanmar > Pakistan >
Bangladesh = China
Strength of evidence: moderate
The study distinguishes between three categories of zoonoses:
Endemic zoonoses, present in many places and affecting many people and animals are
responsible for the great majority of human cases of illness (we estimate 99.9%) and deaths (we
estimate 96%) as well as the greatest reduction in livestock production. Examples are: brucellosis,
leptospirosis, and salmonellosis. Endemic zoonoses are of most concern where the objective is
lowering the burden of human disease and increasing the productivity and profitability of livestock
for poor people.
Outbreak or epidemic zoonoses are zoonoses that typically occur as outbreaks. Examples are:
anthrax, rabies, Rift Valley fever, and, leishmaniasis. They are much more sporadic in temporal
and spatial distribution than endemic zoonoses but may be more feared because of their
unpredictability and in some cases, severity. They are often present in neglected populations with
poor health services and infrastructure. Outbreak zoonoses are of concern when there is an
objective of reducing vulnerability of neglected populations.
Emerging zoonoses newly appear in a population or have existed previously but are rapidly
increasing in incidence or geographical range. Many occur as outbreaks. They are relatively rare,
around 300 events in the last 70 years. Most are of minimal impact, but historically, emerging
diseases have been responsible for massive impacts (e.g. HIV AIDS). Emerging zoonoses are of
concern when the object is foresight, and understanding disease emergence in order to try and
avert pandemics of major impact.
Strength of evidence: strong
The study assessed 56 zoonoses, together responsible for around 2.5 billion cases of human illness
and 2.7 million human deaths a year. We identified the 13 zoonoses most important to poor livestock
keepers because of their impacts on human health, livestock sector, amenability to agriculture-based
control, and other criteria (chapter 2). These were, in descending order: zoonotic gastrointestinal
disease; leptospirosis; cysticercosis; zoonotic tuberculosis; rabies; leishmaniasis; brucellosis;
echinococcosis; toxoplasmosis; Q fever; zoonotic trypanosomosis, hepatitis E; and anthrax.
Strength of evidence: moderate
The study searched for papers on zoonotic disease emergence events since 2004. Out of 43 new or
newly identified events, most are viral and originate in wild animal hosts. Although the mappable
zoonotic new events (n = 30) are globally spread across every continent, there may be clusters in
northeast US, South America, Europe and South East Asia. These trends may reflect surveillance
differences. There is a possible trend to more events in developing countries in recent years, which
may reflect increased attention over this period. Combined with existing data on zoonotic EID events
from 1940-2004 (n = 202), the clearest potential hotspots are USA and Western Europe, (this may
also reflect historical surveillance differences). Countries with most events are USA, UK, Australia,
and France (table 0.1).
Strength of evidence: weak-moderate
Massive under-reporting constrains our ability to understand and prevent disease. In sub Saharan
Africa, 99.9% of livestock losses do not appear in official reports. At least 50% of these losses are
probably due to notifiable diseases (farmers and experts rank many notifiable diseases as major
causes of mortality including Newcastle disease, African swine fever, classical swine fever,
trypanosomosis, East Coast fever, peste de petits ruminants).
Strength of evidence: moderate to strong
The study accessed information around 1,000 surveys on prevalence of endemic zoonoses, covering
over 16 million subjects. A qualitative and semi-quantitative analysis suggests a strongly spatial
distribution, with a few countries bearing most of the human and animal disease burden (chapter 3).
The study also assessed the burden of zoonoses in the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) extracting
data on 7 important zoonoses. This also shows a highly skewed distribution of human disease burden:
19 countries are responsible for 75% of the total burden in the GBD. Hotspots are: Nigeria, Ethiopia,
Tanzania, Togo, and India.
Strength of evidence: moderate
Countries appearing multiple times at the top of multiple metrics are (in descending order of
importance): India, China, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Congo DR, Indonesia,
Myanmar, and Tanzania1.
...
Full PDF at
http://mahider.ilri.org/bitstream/handle/10568/21161/ZooMap_July2012_final.pdf?sequence=4
