1. Albert I. Ugochukwu and Peter W.B. Phillips
Livestock Industry Responsiveness and Farmers’ Attitude Towards Animal Vaccines
Albert I. Ugochukwu and Peter W.B. Phillips
Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Saskatchewan
Acknowledgement:
This research was supported by Genome Canada, Genome Prairie, Genome British Columbia [225RVA], University of Saskatchewan and Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture
ICABR, University of California, Berkeley: May 31 – June 2, 2017

2. Scenario
The Livestock industry plays a vital role in every nation’s economy
The success of the industry is contingent on the health conditions of the animals
Faced with the challenge of emerging and reemerging infectious diseases
Pose human health risk
International trade restrictions
Reduced demand
Erode producers’ profit, competitiveness and public confidence
Affects industry-wide collective reputation

3. Adoption of a wide range of strategies aimed a reducing disease spread and cost burdens for farmers
Vaccination is one the control mechanisms but has not been widely used
Some vaccines have not been effective, socially acceptable and denied approval from designated regulatory bodies at different levels
Results in excessive use of antibiotics and, cull and kill strategies to manage animal health

4. Research Objectives The paper examines:
The Global prevalence of two most reemerging endemic animal diseases in bovine populations - bovine tuberculosis (bTB) and Johne’s disease (paratuberculosis)
Industry responsiveness and farmers’ attitude towards animal vaccines
The potential for an alternate strategy of a subunit vaccine for bTB and JD (paratuberculosis) complemented with ‘companion diagnostics’ as being proposed and developed in Canada

5. Why JD and bTB?
Identified as the most neglected endemic diseases with increasing prevalence rates in cattle globally (OIE, 2009)
Both have implications for human health
Have caused huge economic losses in beef and dairy industries
Treatment cost
Reduction in production (e.g. milk, fertility) efficiency
Reduced slaughter value
Restricts market access
No current vaccination strategy for bTB while other control methods are expensive and disruptive (Moiane, et al. 2014)
Existing JD vaccines interfere with bTB tests, hence not licensed in many countries (Alvarez et al. 2009)

6. Methodology
The Data
Secondary data on global, regional and country-level confirmed cases of JD and bTB were sourced from the OIE website
Primary data were collected from beef and dairy farmers in Canada to determine their attitude towards animal vaccines

7. Global Prevalence of JD and bTB
Data source: OIE-WAHIS website:

8. Global Prevalence of JD and bTB Cont’d
Global JD occurrence, 2010
Global bTB occurrence, 2013
Data source:
Map Credit: Savannah Gleim

9. Global Prevalence of JD and bTB Cont’d
Highest incidence (confirmed cases) of JD and bTB occurred in 2010 and 2013 respectively
UK recorded the highest number of JD cases (5,412 or 59.81% of global cases) in 2010; followed by Spain (2,594 or 26.67%)
Ireland had the highest number of confirmed bTB cases (8,860 or 35.35%) in 2013, followed by Chile (4,546 or 18.14%)

10. Existing Surveillance and Control MeasuresJD
The Australian JD Market Assurance Program launched in 1996
Netherlands National Voluntary JD Control Program launched in 1991
The U.S. National Voluntary Program launched in 2002
Canadian JD Control Program Initiative launched in 2006
Danish National JD Control Program
bTB
Tuberculin test
Pre-export and movement skin test
Inspection of meat at the slaughter houses
Culling, movement restriction and vaccination

11. Farmers’ WTP for a new vaccine for JD and bTB
Potential of disease transmission through wildlife
Response
Frequency
% frequency
Yes
169
73.48 No 61
26.52
Total
230
100.00
Information pathways for cattle vaccination
Source of Advice
Frequency
% frequency
Producer Associations 25
10.82
Veterinarian
186
80.52
Regulatory Agencies 3
1.30
Opinion Leaders
Neighbour 10
4.33
Others (specify) 4
1.73
Total
231
100.00
Source: Survey data, 2016/2017

12. Farmers’ WTP for a new vaccine for JD and bTB Cont’d
Reasons for vaccination
Reason
Frequency
% frequency
Disease control 39
16.96
Disease Prevention
120
52.17
Disease Elimination 13
5.65
Buyer Recommendation 11
4.78
Recom. From my Vet 40
17.40
Other (specify) 7
3.04
Total
230
100.00
Source: Survey data, 2016/2017

13. Farmers’ WTP for a new vaccine for JD and bTB Cont’d
Participation in on-farm food safety and quality Assurance programs
Response
Frequency
% frequency
Yes
183
78.88 No 49
21.12
Total
232
100.00
Amount willing to pay for a new vaccine/animal/year
Annual cost of vaccine per animal per year ($) JD
bTB
Frequency
% Frequency
< 5 18
12.0 21
25.6
5 – 10 74
49.3 36
43.9
11 – 20 43
28.7 19
23.2
>20 15
10.0 6
7.3
Total
150
100.0 82
Source: Survey data, 2016/2017

14. Implications for a Subunit Vaccine
The inability to protect bovine ruminants from wildlife has been a major obstacle in eradicating JD and bTB
For JD, MAP infection occurs in 3 stages while the animal only shows clinical signs at the 3rd stage
Suggests that
testing, culling and pre-emptive slaughter are effective for animals that are shedding MAP (at the 3rd stage of infection)
Prevention can only be possible if all infected animals are dictated, especially during the early (first) stage of infection
Immune response for existing JD vaccines interfere with serological diagnosis of bTB (Muskens et al. 2002)
Existing MAP vaccines have been found to cause tissue damage (granuloma) at the injection sites (Petterson et al. 1988)

15. Conclusions
JD and bTB have caused huge economic losses to livestock farmers
Farmers are anxious and willing to pay for a new subunit vaccine for JD and bTB that will avert the limitations of existing whole-cell based vaccines
Vaccination against JD has been reported to be cost-effective and reduced annual losses (e.g. in Australia)
A combination of vaccination and test-and-cull strategies has more positive effect in reducing annual losses against JD
Complementing the proposed subunit vaccine with a “companion diagnostic” would help overcome the regulatory difficulty of distinguishing between infected and vaccinated animals, and enhance market access

16. Thank You!
Google Images