The Road Not Traveled: Bovine Tuberculosis in England, Wales, and Michigan, USA

Daniel J. O’Brien, Rowland R. Kao, Ruth A. Little, Gareth Enticott, Shawn J. Riley
{"title":"The Road Not Traveled: Bovine Tuberculosis in England, Wales, and Michigan, USA","authors":"Daniel J. O’Brien, Rowland R. Kao, Ruth A. Little, Gareth Enticott, Shawn J. Riley","doi":"10.1079/onehealthcases.2023.0028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One Health as a concept now enjoys broad and enthusiastic support. However, One Health as a potential strategy for disease management has struggled with the many varying interpretations of what the concept means in practice. This ambiguity obfuscates what the practical goals of One Health are in a disease management context. Opportunities exist to examine how the practical management of well-studied, multihost zoonotic diseases under different locales and governance systems may shed light on what the concept of One Health looks like in application. The case studies of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in Michigan, USA and in the United Kingdom provide such an opportunity. To date, management of bTB in the US and UK has had mixed success. Elimination of the disease is hampered by the conflicting interests and priorities of stakeholders, disease managers, and policy makers. This polarization poses a fundamental challenge to the One Health approach. In this retrospective, we reflect on how a One Health approach adopted prior to the onset of bTB in both countries might (or might not) have changed the course of the outbreaks and subsequent effectiveness of management. While recognizing the positive potential of One Health, we also point out where evolution will be necessary to turn concepts into effective practice. We discuss how the effectiveness of One Health generally, and management of bTB specifically, is limited by lack of knowledge from the social sciences and the application of these insights in the governance of a One Health approach. © The Authors 2023","PeriodicalId":415773,"journal":{"name":"One Health Cases","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"One Health Cases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1079/onehealthcases.2023.0028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One Health as a concept now enjoys broad and enthusiastic support. However, One Health as a potential strategy for disease management has struggled with the many varying interpretations of what the concept means in practice. This ambiguity obfuscates what the practical goals of One Health are in a disease management context. Opportunities exist to examine how the practical management of well-studied, multihost zoonotic diseases under different locales and governance systems may shed light on what the concept of One Health looks like in application. The case studies of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in Michigan, USA and in the United Kingdom provide such an opportunity. To date, management of bTB in the US and UK has had mixed success. Elimination of the disease is hampered by the conflicting interests and priorities of stakeholders, disease managers, and policy makers. This polarization poses a fundamental challenge to the One Health approach. In this retrospective, we reflect on how a One Health approach adopted prior to the onset of bTB in both countries might (or might not) have changed the course of the outbreaks and subsequent effectiveness of management. While recognizing the positive potential of One Health, we also point out where evolution will be necessary to turn concepts into effective practice. We discuss how the effectiveness of One Health generally, and management of bTB specifically, is limited by lack of knowledge from the social sciences and the application of these insights in the governance of a One Health approach. © The Authors 2023
没有走过的路:英格兰、威尔士和美国密歇根州的牛结核病
一体健康 "作为一个概念,现在得到了广泛而热烈的支持。然而,"一体健康 "作为一种潜在的疾病管理策略,在实践中却因对这一概念的不同理解而举步维艰。这种模糊性模糊了 "一体健康 "在疾病管理中的实际目标。我们有机会研究在不同地区和管理体制下,如何对研究充分的多宿主人畜共患病进行实际管理,从而揭示 "一体健康 "概念在应用中的含义。美国密歇根州和英国的牛结核病(bTB)案例研究提供了这样一个机会。迄今为止,美国和英国对牛结核病的管理喜忧参半。利益相关者、疾病管理者和政策制定者的利益和优先事项相互冲突,阻碍了疾病的根除。这种两极分化给 "统一健康 "方法带来了根本性的挑战。 在这篇回顾性文章中,我们将反思在这两个国家出现牛结核病之前采取的 "一体健康 "方法可能(或不可能)如何改变疫情的进程和随后的管理效果。在认识到 "一体健康 "的积极潜力的同时,我们也指出了将概念转化为有效实践所需的发展方向。我们讨论了 "一体健康 "的有效性,特别是对牛结核病的管理,如何因缺乏社会科学知识而受到限制,以及如何在 "一体健康 "方法的管理中应用这些见解。 作者 2023
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信