Search

International audience; Importance: Since the accidental introduction of the yellow-legged hornet (Vespa velutina nigrithorax) in France in 2004, there have been reports of this insect unexpectedly projecting a liquid toward the human face, but ocular morbidity associated with this is unknown, to our knowledge.Objective: To describe a case series of ocular lesions after exposure to a liquid projection emitted by a hornet.Design, setting, and participants: This was an analysis of all cases of ocular exposure to a projection by a yellow-legged hornet (excluding stings in the eye) collected by French poison control centers between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2019.Main outcomes and measures: Symptoms were evaluated, and a fluorescein eye stain test was used.Results: Twenty-nine cases were recorded (24 in male and 5 in female patients; median age, 40 [interquartile range, 11] years); the first occurred in 2009. Most cases (20 [80%]) were occupational exposure among professionals dealing with hornet nests (eg, firefighters, wasp exterminators). Symptoms consistent with conjunctivitis often resolved quickly after ocular decontamination, but 5 patients developed a periorbital edema, 2 experienced radiating neuropathic pain, and 2 experienced keratitis.Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that the projection of a liquid into the eyes by the yellow-legged hornet presents a new risk to human health, but its precise nature remains to be determined. Ocular lesions had a favorable outcome. For professionals who deal with these insects, adaptation of the usual protections designed for native hymenopterans may be warranted.

This assessment was conducted by a multidisciplinary task force of experts, “Emergency Collective Expertise Group—Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown on dengue surveillance and vector control interventions” of the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES).; International audience; The concurrent circulation of dengue and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may produce many unfavourable outcomes-such as co-infections; delays in diagnosis, treatment, and mitigation measures; overwhelming of the healthcare system; underreporting of cases; deterioration in surveillance and control interventions; and exacerbation of social inequalities. Indeed, lockdown is greatly compromising the effectiveness of vector control, especially social mobilization campaigns and preventive insecticide spraying in private spaces (indoor and peridomestic spraying). Thus, failure to appropriately implement the full range of vector control interventions can lead to a reduction in their overall effectiveness and an increasing risk of vector-borne diseases circulating. Consequently, the health community and policy makers should develop proactive policies and allocate adequate resources to prevent and manage the resurgence of dengue and other vector-borne diseases in the new era of COVID-19.

Bubonic is the most prevalent plague form in Madagascar. Indoor ground application of insecticide dust is the conventional method used to control potentially infected rodent fleas that transmit the plague bacterium from rodents to humans. The use of bait stations is an alternative approach for vector control during plague epidemics, as well as a preventive control method during non-epidemic seasons. Bait stations have many advantages, principally by reducing the amount of insecticide used, lowering the cost of the treatment and minimizing insecticide exposure in the environment. A previous study reported promising results on controlling simultaneously the reservoir and vectors, when slow-acting rodenticide was incorporated in bait stations called “Boîtes de Kartman”. However, little evidence of an effective control of the fleas prior to the elimination of rodents was found. In this study, we evaluated bait stations containing insecticide powder and non-toxic attractive rodent bait for their potential to control rat fleas. Its efficacy was compared to the standard method. The impact of both methods on indoor and outdoor rodent fleas, as well as the human household flea Pulex irritans were analyzed at different time points after treatments. Bait stations did not cause any significant immediate or delayed reduction of rat fleas and increasing the number of operational bait stations per household did not significantly improve their efficacy. Insecticide ground dusting appeared to be the most efficient method to control indoor rat fleas. Both methods appeared to have little impact on the density of outdoor rat fleas and human fleas. These results demonstrate limited effectiveness for bait stations and encourage the maintenance of insecticide dusting as a first-line control strategy in case of epidemic emergence of plague, when immediate effect on rodent fleas is needed. Recommendations are given to improve the efficacy of the bait station method., Author summary Insecticide ground dusting inside houses is the recommended measure to control rat fleas responsible for bubonic plague transmission. The main inconvenience of this method is the direct contact of houseowners to the toxic insecticide dust and spillage in environment. A bait station approach, where the insecticide is confined in a box or tunnel containing rodent attractant, seems to be a valuable complementary or alternative vector control tool. However currently, little is known about its real efficacy on reducing or eliminating fleas harbored by rats. Guidelines regarding its implementation (density and duration of use) as vector control tool are lacking. Those questions were addressed during a field trial study, where bait stations were deployed at different densities per household and followed up at different time points. The efficacy of bait station was compared to the standard method. The present study allowed to demonstrate that bait station approach requires more improvements to be efficient. Meanwhile, insecticide ground dusting is still recommended for to control rat fleas during epidemics.

Stephen Young describes an alternative or complementary emerging strategy for controlling pests in agriculture: the use of artificial intelligence and robotic machines to physically destroy individual pests [1]. He emphasizes that, while genetics focuses on internal modifications of pests, such technological approaches rely on external manipulation. Robotic technology seems an attractive approach to eliminate pests given that it should have fewer long‐term effects on the environment compared to pesticides or CRISPR‐based gene drive (GD). We note, however, that robots might have a hard time dealing with rugged landscapes, small insects, burrowed eggs, or flying pests. The range of pest species that could potentially be targeted with GD is larger …